FS P320 vs FS M&P 2.0 9mm.

[lmacrichter]

If you have both( or have shot both) which do you prefer and why?

 

[dabull1463]

I have both the compacts. M2.0C and 320C....the M&P works better for me.

Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk

 

[Okie21]

I have an M&P 2.0 9mm and I love it. The grip, the trigger, it all just seems to work well for me. I recently got a free rental at the local gun range and chose a P320. To me, it felt just as good, if not a little better. The trigger was much nicer. But as much as I liked it, I'll stick with my M&P's. Just my opinion.

Sent from my Moto G (5S) Plus using Tapatalk

 

[CQB60]

The P320 is no doubt an accurate Pistol. I didn’t care for the density of the polymer grips frame. Felt somewhat hollow so I sold it. I also think that Sig failed on the promise which was the concept of the P320,its modularity. Caliber Exchange kit prices were jinked shortly after release and became obscure or hard to find and there prices put them close to a new pistol.
I find the balance of the M&P 2.0 better suited to my needs, it’s ergonomics simply superb.

 

[Mahalo_.32]

SIGS are very nice however, my personal feelings are that they all have too high of a bore axis for me.

 

[Barbasnoo]

I own both and really enjoy shooting both of them.

As far as preference. It a pretty easy decision for me personally. The M&P 2.0 Compact. The feel of it in my hand is just rock solid. I can grip that gun like no other. The ergonomics are the best I’ve ever felt in a handgun, personally. Therefore my groupings are better with it than my P320.

However there are merits of the P320 that make it good for me as well. For instance I have both the full size and compact slides. And at any time I can pop one off and slide on the other to change what gun I have, without actually “changing guns”. Pretty neat feature. I do get more muzzle flip with the P320. But I’m sure I can shave that down with more practice. The M&P however is easy to tame muzzle flip.

 

[seebee62]

First time S&W poster here.
I plan on picking up a M&P 2.0 Compact next week. I have a P320 Compact that’s a good shooter.
Looking forward to getting the M&P.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[triaxle]

I have both and I think the Smith is a more solid plat form , or duty type gun .

 

[dabull1463]

I bought the M2.0C for Christmas. Had the P320C for about a year. Liking the M2.0 more. Better grip, balance and I'm a lot more accurate with it. The 320 slide is notably bulkier.

Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk

 

[jejb]

I have both in the full size that the OP is asking about. They are both very nice guns. Accurate and fun to shoot. But the trigger is better on the P320. I don't mind the extra take up on the 2.0 compared to the Sig, and the reset is great on both. But the break is much crisper on the Sig. When you hit the wall on the 2.0, it takes more effort/trigger movement to make it break. It's like it has a "thick wall", if you will. I put an Apex flat faced kit in the 2.0 and that brought it around. I'd say the triggers are very close to even now. I got a smoking deal on the 2.0, so with the addition of the $165 trigger kit, they are fairly close in price now. But the Sig came with very nice night sights, so it's probably the better value in the end for me.

 

[fallhunter]

The P320 is by far a nicer firearm. Put the small grip module on it and its the perfect combination. I do not like the looks of the actual trigger in the P320 as it comes out of the box, however, the updated trigger looks a lot nicer. The muzzle end of the P320 is also kind of ugly, but the light felt recoil and ease of follow up shots are far outweighed by the other benefits. The grip texture is a tad nicer on the M2.0, however, thats the only place that the M2.0 stands out, however, that grip texture tears up clothing if you carry it.

Sent from my LG-H932 using Tapatalk

 

[Doug M.]

If one looks into the performance failings of the 320, and how Sig lived down to its reputation in how they addressed those, the correct answer is to run far, and fast. There is a real chance that the Army's adoption is going to be a career ender for those involved, and should be. I know someone who has been heavily involved in the secondary analysis, and it's going to be ugly - far uglier than it already is.

 

[jejb]

If one looks into the performance failings of the 320, and how Sig lived down to its reputation in how they addressed those,

Like what, for example? I have a couple of P320's, updated before I bought them. They have been flawless guns. And I hang out on some Sig forums, too. Very low complaint factor about the 320's.

 

[Old_Cop]

I have both a P320 and a S&W M&P 2.0C. The M&P is the gun which I occasionally carry and sits ready on the night stand.

 

[dutch686]

Sig lived up to it's responsibility. Found a fault, provided a fix, and required no money from the consumer. What fault? Sig owners are a tough crowd, and complaints are yet to be coming forth.

 

[stavey]

M&P hands down.

 

[BE Mike]

Good decision to ask only those who own both. There is way too much trashing going on about the Sig P 320, X-17 & X18 on the internet. Most of it is undeserved. Both are good guns. Only listen to those who own both and have shot both extensively, then, if possible, rent or borrow both and shoot them.

 

[LVSteve]

Does the chunky slide on the Sig result in a lighter recoil spring making it easier to rack? Sig seems to have gone that way with their .380 designs like the P250 and 290RS.

My wife and her friends have appointed me their gun expert and slide rack difficulty is the first question I get from all of them.

 

[Doug M.]

The flaws in the P320/M17/M18 were concealed and denied by Sig when discovered. The Army finagled the testing to make it win, including having several changes made during the testing and cutting the length of the test to avoid the manner in which the Sig failed the FBI reliability testing. This has been heavily discussed and well documented on another forum, and the external review of the testing has been referred to higher authority for possible discipline and criminal investigation. LE agencies known to a friend (not to me) had serious problems with them and at least one rejected them after purchase; he's seen the flaws and state publicly that they exist and what they are.

 

[BE Mike]

The flaws in the P320/M17/M18 were concealed and denied by Sig when discovered. The Army finagled the testing to make it win, including having several changes made during the testing and cutting the length of the test to avoid the manner in which the Sig failed the FBI reliability testing. This has been heavily discussed and well documented on another forum, and the external review of the testing has been referred to higher authority for possible discipline and criminal investigation. LE agencies known to a friend (not to me) had serious problems with them and at least one rejected them after purchase; he's seen the flaws and state publicly that they exist and what they are.

Too much he said/ she said. Same kind of stuff came down the pike when the Beretta M-9 was selected. Now back to the subject, i.e. comparing the Sig P 320 Compact to the S&W M&P Compact.