MrG5122
Member
From what I hear the G43 is on the way. Ergonomics are different for different folks. MrsG loves her Glocks. She has a 34 and 35. They dont point naturally for me so I carry Springfield plastic pistols.
M&P 9 vs Glock 19
- Thread starter Rastoff
- Start date
bulldogman
Member
- Joined
- May 28, 2013
- Messages
- 196
- Reaction score
- 51
Hmmm, I always thought the grip on the g19 was the same as the grip on the g17., except for length. I was having a problem with width.
I think you're right, though. The g19 just looks much better as well ( duff as it is)
Actually, I believe the backstrap on the 17 G3 has quite a bit more of a swell than the 19.
Arik
Member
Could that be because it sits lower in your hand?
Strictly speaking polymer framed guns, I've owned several different brands. Glock, M&P, Kahr, FN, and others.
As far as Glock vs M&P, I choose the G19. Specifically the Gen 4.
Nothing wrong with the M&P. But if I need something Glock related, a quick trip to my LGS and they have what I need and can install them while I wait. No ordering Apex trigger kits, or sights. Magazines are easy to find as well as holsters etc......
Break a spring? They got it. Recoil spring wore out? They got it. Magazine spring or follower worn out? They got it.
I shoot both guns equally well. But the availability of OEM and aftermarket parts for Glock is undeniably better than almost any other gun.
As far as Glock vs M&P, I choose the G19. Specifically the Gen 4.
Nothing wrong with the M&P. But if I need something Glock related, a quick trip to my LGS and they have what I need and can install them while I wait. No ordering Apex trigger kits, or sights. Magazines are easy to find as well as holsters etc......
Break a spring? They got it. Recoil spring wore out? They got it. Magazine spring or follower worn out? They got it.
I shoot both guns equally well. But the availability of OEM and aftermarket parts for Glock is undeniably better than almost any other gun.
Last edited:
OP
Rastoff
US Veteran
OK, what about their design is better than the Glock?
For a carry gun, this is all that matters; which do you shoot better. Because both are equally reliable.
In this particular set of research, I'm not looking for a carry gun. This is just something to round out my interests. No one has yet given me a reason to exclude it so, I will probably add one later this year.
Thanks for all the responses.
Alisdad
Member
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2014
- Messages
- 26
- Reaction score
- 28
I carry a glock on duty and a smith off duty (either a mp40c or a 40 shield). I can safely say I carry a glock or smith with 100% confidence. I just prefer the smith to a glock off duty. Neither is better or worse and I shoot both just about the same. I like how the smith carries off duty and don't have to worry about the glock on duty. I have apex kits in all my smith mps (shield,40c,and 45c) and talon grips. Can't beat the smith for ccw.
kbm6893
Member
I never got the whole "parts are more plentiful for Glocks"' I've been shooting a long time. I've never had to replace anything in any of my guns other than recoil and magazine springs. And an order to Wolff takes care of that. It's just something I would never even consider when choosing a gun.
The average person will never change any parts on their guns. I guess competitive shooters will, but that ain't me.
The average person will never change any parts on their guns. I guess competitive shooters will, but that ain't me.
Arik
Member
I don't know if you can get a hold of one in CA but if you can try it out.
Basically the Sig 250 was a failure. Yes there are people who never had a problem with them but there are also people who never had problems with British cars and Yugos. Overall the 250 was a failure. Now the 320 is the 250 but without all the problems. The gun part is the trigger pack. That is what you're getting a background check on. The S# is on that pack. The rest of the gun is just a shell with a barrel and sights. This makes it highly customizable. Frames cost $50 from Sig and I'm sure soon other companies will make them too. So you can now have a full size, compact and sub compact for an extra $100 (2 frames). The grips don't have interchangeable straps but you can get any frame (shell) in small, medium or large grips. If you prefer the trigger safety like Glock has you can get one too. It takes the old 250 mags. And most importantly so far it's had rave reviews on reliability. The trigger is also amazing for a striker fire. Short and crisp. Better than the PPQ and probably THE BEST striker trigger on the market today. I forget what my dealer had them priced at but it was under $600 with night sights or about $100 less with standard sights. If Sig does this right the 320 has the potential to be the AR of handguns
Arik
Member
Parts don't have to wear out. They can also break prematurely
For the umtheenth time. Most, (not all), LEO's weapons are issued. In most, (not all), cases, these are provided by the lowest bidder. When Gaston was trying to enter the U.S. police market, he supplied pistols free of charge. He's not alone, S&W did the same thing when the M&P came on the scene. No slam on Glocks, they're a proven commodity, but to base your choice on "LEO's carry them." Come on.
Ofc.JL
Member
Rastoff; you and I know that Glock was 1st. They were the 1st successful Police transition pistol because they are so easy to use. And they have very good engineering in them. Just brilliant in many cases. They have also not been "perfect" by a long shot. How many extractor designs has the 9mm series of guns gone thru by now. Several, last I checked. And the roolout of the Gen4's w/ their recoil spring asmb'ys not working correctly. It happens to every product. Of course that really not a problem as all manufacturers PI their products as they go along. S&W has been doing the same for years.
My main problem w/ a Glock is the dang triggers. And even Glock noticed it as the Gen4 trigger are much improved over the older models. IMHO, anyway. And you and I both know that for carry, there is only so much you can do w/ a Glock trigger before it affects the reliability of the gun. Size and grip wise, a G19 is nice. All things being pretty much equal between the 2 pistols, for me it's an M&P, due to the trigger. I can shoot both well to survive, but I can shoot an M&P w/ much more accuracy at speed due to the 1911 style trigger(Carried 1911's for years, love 'em. I just don't carry one anymore for numerous reasons.) Just thought I would say.
Both will serve you well. Bon Chaunce.
Stay safe, Ofc.JL
My main problem w/ a Glock is the dang triggers. And even Glock noticed it as the Gen4 trigger are much improved over the older models. IMHO, anyway. And you and I both know that for carry, there is only so much you can do w/ a Glock trigger before it affects the reliability of the gun. Size and grip wise, a G19 is nice. All things being pretty much equal between the 2 pistols, for me it's an M&P, due to the trigger. I can shoot both well to survive, but I can shoot an M&P w/ much more accuracy at speed due to the 1911 style trigger(Carried 1911's for years, love 'em. I just don't carry one anymore for numerous reasons.) Just thought I would say.
Both will serve you well. Bon Chaunce.
Stay safe, Ofc.JL
I guess you haven't seen any of the Hundreds threads discussing 'Apex Trigger Kits', or people looking for Extended Slide Locks, Extended Mag Releases, Conversion Barrels for the M&Ps (among other various 'Modification' threads)?
Seems like every page of threads has at least a couple threads where someone says "Why are there no parts for the M&P, like there are for Glocks?"
Most of my pistols are stock, but Many like to customize their pistols. Not necessarily because they NEED to, but because they like to tinker and WANT to.
Motorsporting
Member
I'm not sure there is much I have to add, but since you asked the question ... When I first started shooting pistols, a Glock 26, 22, and 23 were my second, third, and fourth (in that order) pistols purchased. Perhaps because they're what I "started" with (my first was a HK USP - which I sold when I bought the 22), I've always shot them well. Then someone introduced me to 1911's, and I thought I was never going to look back. And I didn't for more than a decade - sold all my Glocks (still really regret the 22 - I shot it wonderfully) and dedicated to absorbing as much 1911 as possible. A few years ago I was convinced by more than one person and more than one piece of evidence that 9mm's were "back" and extremely effective. When I started doing the math, it seemed very logical to switch to a polymer, SFA, 9mm. Having successfully shot Glocks for years, they were my first choice, until I picked one up after a decade of not ... Now you know the first reason I did not return to Glock - the ergonomics just felt weird (angle and thick/square grip). As someone above me posted, I also wanted as much as possible to stick to "American", so torn between liking the XD and M&P feel much better, the M&Ps were my logical choice (felt good, good quality, made in America). Here I am more than 2 years later still convincing myself I don't need to carry my 1911's, but I'm firmly convinced I picked another good platform to "master."
Last edited:
kbm6893
Member
I have seen the threads. Written by hardcore gun enthusiasts with an urge to tinker. They certainly represent a small fraction of the gun buying public. Somebody who picks up an M&P and a Glock in a shop isn't generally thinking about replacing parts. They're feeling the gun and making their choice.
Yeah, there are whole companies who supply aftermarket parts for Glocks. Just like the Ruger 10/22 and the AR-15. I guess aftermarket parts for those platforms are nice, but the groundhog I shot last spring with my 10/22 didn't know that I was shooting a pretty much bone stock rifle.
And if we wanna talk about aftermarket necessities, how about Glock still shipping guns with cheesey plastic sights? That is the ONLY thing I ever changed on the Glocks I owned.
Hey... I LIKE those cheesy sights!!
My Gen2 G19 has cheesy adjustable rear sights, which earned them more BATF Import Points.
Both my G41 and G42 are Austrian made. There is no 3rd gen option on either of these pistols. Going to pick up another Austrian made G41 this afternoon.
Arik
Member
I forgot about those two. Truth be told I don't consider the 380 to begin with. And you also forgot the G40. That being said Glock 42 is a 380 and cannot be imported into the US due to the Gun control act of 1968. It does not meet enough points to be considered for sporting purposes. Penalizing features are ....short barrels, small caliber, short overall length, no adjustable sights...etc. This defines a "Saturday Night Special".Otherwise Glock would have imported their 25, compact and 28, subcompact long time ago. The reason Glock is making 42 in the US is to get around that import ban.
From Glocks own website. .
" The new GLOCK 42, in .380 AUTO, is a slimline subcompact pistol engineered with the GLOCK Perfection promise and able to withstand the rigors of routine training. Made in the USA, the G42 is the smallest pistol GLOCK has ever introduced,.........."
http://us.glock.com/products/model/g42
Last edited:
I've shot a few Glocks over the years. 9mm, .45 and even 10mm. Meh... (OK, the G20 was pretty awesome!)
When I went to buy my 1st handgun, I tried out quite a few and shot most of them as rentals. Ruled out a Glock 19 pretty quickly. Just "blocky" to hold, didn't care for the grip angle and has that fat serrated trigger. I chose a Sig.
Fast forward a few handguns and reconsidered a G19 but ruled it out in favor of an M&P FS9. I liked the grip angle, changeable backstraps and it appealed to me more.
Flash forward again, several times. I have a 9C, a Shield, P320, VP9 and several PPQs. Still no Glocks.
Glock is a fine weapon, just not my weapon.
When I went to buy my 1st handgun, I tried out quite a few and shot most of them as rentals. Ruled out a Glock 19 pretty quickly. Just "blocky" to hold, didn't care for the grip angle and has that fat serrated trigger. I chose a Sig.
Fast forward a few handguns and reconsidered a G19 but ruled it out in favor of an M&P FS9. I liked the grip angle, changeable backstraps and it appealed to me more.
Flash forward again, several times. I have a 9C, a Shield, P320, VP9 and several PPQs. Still no Glocks.
Glock is a fine weapon, just not my weapon.
gunny4053
US Veteran
Rastoff, I can't, nor will I try to dissuade you from buying a Glock. I'm not a fanatic about them, but I do respect them. The 19 is a great firearm, and if you're looking specifically for a 9mm, would be my choice, but since 1911's seem to make you happy, here's one to consider. Take a look at the 30 SF. Comparable in size to the 19, extremely accurate for a .45 with a short barrel, an unbelievably soft shooter, and 10 +1 ain't bad.
Good Luck and good shooting.
Good Luck and good shooting.
