perfectcircle1
Member
Mcdonalds vs Burger king?
Glock vs. M&P-yup. I'm askin' it.
- Thread starter heekma
- Start date
i have several glocks 19,26.23.27.32 30,36. i guess you could consider me a gloclaholic. the glocks have been retired and replaced by M&P 40c and 45 midsize, it seems S&W upped on on glock, more rounds in the mag, better sights and grip feel. I like the idea of steel mags (although i never ever had a problem with glock mags). The S&W just feels better in my hand. These are just my thoughts. ( i will NOT give up my glocks)
Almost like owning a certain brand of car, I am on my 3rd Nissan Pathfinder Last one had 210,000 miles ran tight as hell. I have an 2006 with over 100,000 i will always but a nissan pathfinder, COmes down to what your comfortable with
That is all
Carry on
1SG
Almost like owning a certain brand of car, I am on my 3rd Nissan Pathfinder Last one had 210,000 miles ran tight as hell. I have an 2006 with over 100,000 i will always but a nissan pathfinder, COmes down to what your comfortable with
That is all
Carry on
1SG
Last edited:
Does the M&P have an external safety bar/switch/lever. If so I would never own one simply for that fact. Only safety I want to be concerned about is finger off the Trigger unless someone needs to be stopped doing the bad act they are doing. I have A Sig Pro 2340 I bought simply for the reason of no safety lever. Would not own a gun with one except my AR's, no choice there.
To each their own
To each their own
Texas Solo
Member
I have both G17 and M&P9. There's things I like & dislike about each. My G17 has never failed in any way...not once! I have Dawson Precision sights and a 3.5# connector in it. I shoot it well and have 100% confidence in it.
I actually shoot the M&P better & faster due to the grip angle. I struggle to keep the G17 sights on plane, but the M&P comes up to a natural POA for me. Love that, and the ergonomics of the grip are second to none.
I like my G17 trigger better for all the aforementioned reasons, but honestly haven't done the Apex tricks to the M&P yet.
The deciding factor for me today would be reliability.
G17 is 100% after 1000's of rounds. The M&P is new (200 rounds so far) and has had a fairly high failure rate with some ammo. Even the ammo that does feed does not do so smoothly. Hand cycling with any ammo is about a 75% failure rate. I have two more brands of ammo to try, then it's off to S&W for repair. If they fix it so I can rely on it, then I would probably pick the M&P over the G17 due to it's "shootability" factor for me.
I actually shoot the M&P better & faster due to the grip angle. I struggle to keep the G17 sights on plane, but the M&P comes up to a natural POA for me. Love that, and the ergonomics of the grip are second to none.
I like my G17 trigger better for all the aforementioned reasons, but honestly haven't done the Apex tricks to the M&P yet.
The deciding factor for me today would be reliability.
G17 is 100% after 1000's of rounds. The M&P is new (200 rounds so far) and has had a fairly high failure rate with some ammo. Even the ammo that does feed does not do so smoothly. Hand cycling with any ammo is about a 75% failure rate. I have two more brands of ammo to try, then it's off to S&W for repair. If they fix it so I can rely on it, then I would probably pick the M&P over the G17 due to it's "shootability" factor for me.
Pretty much. I had a G23, but sold it. I have a M&P9c and like it better. Part of that is that I like shooting 9mm more than .40 S&W, but part of that is how the M&P feels and points in my hand.
That being said, I'd definitely consider selling or trading the M&P if a nice 3G Smith semi auto came along and called out to me.
I carry either a CS9 or the M&P most of the time and both are comfortable to carry. I just like the 3Gs a bit more.
Hand guns are like most other products, it's all about how they feel to the individual.
I have a G19 that has been my EDC for 5 years it has 25,000+ rounds through it, has been through several classes and I have shot several matches with it. It is stock besides the Ameriglow idot pro sights. I carry it every day all day and it has never let me down. It has little finish left on it but no rust and it almost never gets wiped down.
I also have a M&Ppro9 the second one I have owned. I enjoy shooting it and shoot it no differently then my Glock. Just line the sights up and squeeze. They both shoot point of aim for the most part. I only have 1000 rounds or so through the M&P. I detest the trigger! The way it bends in the middle it makes my trigger finger ride on the bottom of the trigger guard. There is no noticeable reset and the travel seems much longer than my G19. I have grip tape on the front and back of the grip to keep it from sliding in my grip. It has never been an issue before with other guns I have fired extensively. I have had to replace on of the $40 magazines because of dropping it half full on the deck. I have 5 year old Glock magazines that have been dropped for years and only had one that I had to trash.
I do like the feel of the grip on the M&P and I do enjoy shooting it and don't shoot it badly even fast. It has been reliable and the cost was less than a Glock. I will continue to carry my G19 daily but will run the M&P this year in IDPA and maybe take a class with it. I want to like it, I do like it. But it will not replace a Glock in my stable yet. But it is just 3 weeks old.
I say give each of them a try and see which you like best. Everyone is going to be different. To be honest you really cannot go wrong with either.
I also have a M&Ppro9 the second one I have owned. I enjoy shooting it and shoot it no differently then my Glock. Just line the sights up and squeeze. They both shoot point of aim for the most part. I only have 1000 rounds or so through the M&P. I detest the trigger! The way it bends in the middle it makes my trigger finger ride on the bottom of the trigger guard. There is no noticeable reset and the travel seems much longer than my G19. I have grip tape on the front and back of the grip to keep it from sliding in my grip. It has never been an issue before with other guns I have fired extensively. I have had to replace on of the $40 magazines because of dropping it half full on the deck. I have 5 year old Glock magazines that have been dropped for years and only had one that I had to trash.
I do like the feel of the grip on the M&P and I do enjoy shooting it and don't shoot it badly even fast. It has been reliable and the cost was less than a Glock. I will continue to carry my G19 daily but will run the M&P this year in IDPA and maybe take a class with it. I want to like it, I do like it. But it will not replace a Glock in my stable yet. But it is just 3 weeks old.
I say give each of them a try and see which you like best. Everyone is going to be different. To be honest you really cannot go wrong with either.
StatesRightist
Member
M&P's are offered with or w/o external safeties.
Coke vs. Pepsi
I own an MP 40 Pro Series, my son is a LEO and his carry is a Glock 21. He also owns a Glock 22. The MP just sits in my hand better. He likes the Glock.
The Made in U.S.A. part plays into my thoughts too.
I own an MP 40 Pro Series, my son is a LEO and his carry is a Glock 21. He also owns a Glock 22. The MP just sits in my hand better. He likes the Glock.
The Made in U.S.A. part plays into my thoughts too.
Rangel
Member
My primary shooter for the longest time was a Glock 17 and after more than two decades, if I'm going deep into the woods alone, that stalwart companion's coming along--I trust it intrinsically. I have a very sweet Glock 27 that came with with a nickel boron slide and barrel at no extra cost that I've come to like--it's very low maintainance and quite accurate for its size.
All that said, my primary shooter/carry pistol around town is now an M&P 40c. Maybe over time, it will prove as reliable as the Glocks--so far, so good. I think I got a slightly better than normal trigger out of the box, but my Glock's still have smoother triggers overall.
Personally, I can work around the difference in triggers and as said, I prefer the M&P and that's because it just feels a bit better (ergonomically) in my hands than do the Glocks. I can carry it and draw an M&P easier--it feels more like a natural extension of my body than do Glocks. The Glocks feel a bit cold and blocky in comparison, even though I'm used to them.
As I shoot the M&P more and more, the trigger is breaking in a bit but I've never been much for 'trigger jobs'. I knew it wasn't a Sig or HK going in and didn't want to make it into such.
I feel that in a way, a gun to an experienced shooter is like a musicial instrument to a practiced musician--if you learn to work well with what's in your hands with good fundamental skills, you can get good results with a variety of equipment. Some of the greatest musicians, as well as photographers (Ansel Adams for one) spoke very strongly on how you don't need expensive equipment to get wonderful results--it's how you sense things--how you work with what's in your hands. I feel that way about guns.
From when I was old enough to hold a rifle--a Daisy BB gun that I was able to shoot down clothes lines or shooting from the hip, take out frogs with (bad, I know)--I have felt that a lot of times, it's more the user than the equipment itself that determines results. I'm glad I came up poor and had some real low budget guns, as it taught me to work with and appreciate what I had, then as well as now.
All that said, my primary shooter/carry pistol around town is now an M&P 40c. Maybe over time, it will prove as reliable as the Glocks--so far, so good. I think I got a slightly better than normal trigger out of the box, but my Glock's still have smoother triggers overall.
Personally, I can work around the difference in triggers and as said, I prefer the M&P and that's because it just feels a bit better (ergonomically) in my hands than do the Glocks. I can carry it and draw an M&P easier--it feels more like a natural extension of my body than do Glocks. The Glocks feel a bit cold and blocky in comparison, even though I'm used to them.
As I shoot the M&P more and more, the trigger is breaking in a bit but I've never been much for 'trigger jobs'. I knew it wasn't a Sig or HK going in and didn't want to make it into such.
I feel that in a way, a gun to an experienced shooter is like a musicial instrument to a practiced musician--if you learn to work well with what's in your hands with good fundamental skills, you can get good results with a variety of equipment. Some of the greatest musicians, as well as photographers (Ansel Adams for one) spoke very strongly on how you don't need expensive equipment to get wonderful results--it's how you sense things--how you work with what's in your hands. I feel that way about guns.
From when I was old enough to hold a rifle--a Daisy BB gun that I was able to shoot down clothes lines or shooting from the hip, take out frogs with (bad, I know)--I have felt that a lot of times, it's more the user than the equipment itself that determines results. I'm glad I came up poor and had some real low budget guns, as it taught me to work with and appreciate what I had, then as well as now.
clcdawg
Member
Both are good guns. I have a M&P 9 and a Glock30sf. Not to mention that I had a G17 & a G22. If I had to have only one I believe my choice would be the M&P mainly because of the ergonomics.
chief63
Member
- Joined
- Oct 28, 2011
- Messages
- 137
- Reaction score
- 91
I have a M&P9 Pro and a Gen4 G17. I shoot both well, but I do shoot the M&P better. I also shoot the M&P 9c better than the G26, even though the 26 has a better stock trigger. No contest with an APEX trigger upgrade.
I don't think the Glock has better recoil characteristics as mentioned above. Nor is that famous Glock reliability up to par. My Gen4 17 has needed a new RSA and still needs a new ejector and extractor.
You really can't talk to the Glock guys about it, but IMO Glock is falling behind. S&W and Walther putting out better comparable products.
I don't think the Glock has better recoil characteristics as mentioned above. Nor is that famous Glock reliability up to par. My Gen4 17 has needed a new RSA and still needs a new ejector and extractor.
You really can't talk to the Glock guys about it, but IMO Glock is falling behind. S&W and Walther putting out better comparable products.
junior1954
Member
I shot the Glock 21 and the full size M&P 45 before choosing the M&P 45. I agree with everyone about the Glock's stock trigger being superior to the M&P's. I have installed the APEX tactical kit in my M&P, but left the (weaker) stock trigger spring in. According to an APEX tech. I spoke with, this gives me a trigger pull of between 4-4 1/2lbs. (instead of the 5 1/2lbs. the APEX spring produces). I have chosen not to install the replacement short take-up trigger as I use this gun for personal defense, as well as target shooting. The smoothness and decreased pull make this pistol nicer than the Glock, IMHO. I have also installed a set of green Truglo tritium/fiber optics sights (my eyes don't work as well as they used to). They're huge, but I can see them in any light. The way this gun shoots makes me look good.
I personally think Smith and Wesson could make their M&P auto's triggers smoother with less pull for little or nothing more than it costs them to make the stock (crappy) ones. Maybe they feel that this is an entry level gun and want to make sure no one pulls the trigger unless they want to or maybe they want people to move up to their "Pro" line of guns, but if an $80. kit (APEX) can make a good gun into a great gun, why not install it? The quality of the APEX kits meet or exceed the quality of the stock parts, so I expect reliability to be as good or better than a stock gun. Installing an APEX kit takes nothing away from the gun, only adds.
I personally think Smith and Wesson could make their M&P auto's triggers smoother with less pull for little or nothing more than it costs them to make the stock (crappy) ones. Maybe they feel that this is an entry level gun and want to make sure no one pulls the trigger unless they want to or maybe they want people to move up to their "Pro" line of guns, but if an $80. kit (APEX) can make a good gun into a great gun, why not install it? The quality of the APEX kits meet or exceed the quality of the stock parts, so I expect reliability to be as good or better than a stock gun. Installing an APEX kit takes nothing away from the gun, only adds.
Last edited:
TSQUARED
Member
Both the Glock and S&W M&P line are reliable pistols. It boils down to the ergonomics. I shoot two Glocks and 3 S&W M&P's. I perefer the egonomics of the S&W M&P line and have a fondness for the older S&W99 with it's unique ambidextrous mag release.
junior1954
Member
I agree-I'm a lefty and gravitated to both Glock and M&P because they're nearly ambidextrous. The M&P was first with different size interchangeable back straps in its' class-Glock followed suit with their Gen 4, but the Gen 4 grips still don't fit me as well as the M&P's.
hberttmank
Member
I have both, and they are both quality pistols. I just prefer the grip angle of the M&P. But, I had to add the Apex parts to get the trigger to my liking. And just to throw a monkey wrench into the works here, another couple of polymer striker fired pistols that I'm real fond of are the Springfield XDM and the new Walther PPQ.
chief63
Member
- Joined
- Oct 28, 2011
- Messages
- 137
- Reaction score
- 91
Plus 1 on the PPQ. XDM, eh, maybe if the price drops.
vstromrider
Member
Had a G20. glocks do not point well for me, do not sit well in my hand.
M&ps are the first poly pistols I have liked. I have carried others due to lite weight for my CCw. the M&Ps feel like a well made weapon, shoot very well, are backed by a good company. I have 3 full size and 3 compact M&Ps and not one malfunction among them. Now if they would make a 10...........
M&ps are the first poly pistols I have liked. I have carried others due to lite weight for my CCw. the M&Ps feel like a well made weapon, shoot very well, are backed by a good company. I have 3 full size and 3 compact M&Ps and not one malfunction among them. Now if they would make a 10...........
I agree. It is hard to talk about what makes a pistol "feel" well-made, but there is a distinct difference between the two, IMO. Glocks always seem "cheesy" to me.
Both are good guns for their intended purpose. The stock Glock trigger is better. The S&W ergonomics are better. I can fix the trigger. (Shouldn't have to, but I can.) Can't do anything about the horrid grip-angle. I also object to the blocky slide of the Glock and prefer the more streamlined M&P, which I think makes the gun carry better.
I too hope that someday S&W will manufacture an M&P10. Waiting patiently...
Similar threads
