M&P compact 2.0 vs Sig p320 compact.
- Thread starter JP7678
- Start date
Register to hide this ad
Philadelphia Patriot
Member
I have a full sized m&p 2.0 and the p320 carry. I like the m&p 2.0 full size better. The trigger and ergonomics on the m&p 2.0 feel better to me and I'm a trigger snob. That being said, the p320 isn't a bad gun either.
bronco45
Member
Have owned both, prefer the 2.0c for the grip and trigger is a skosh better than the 320. Tossup on the sights and capacity. Accuracy a little better for me with the 2.0c.
Still shoot and enjoy the Smith.
Still shoot and enjoy the Smith.
Trailryder50
Member
I was all set to buy a P320, then this thing about the recall hit and I decided to hold off. Bought the 2.0 compact instead. No regrets. May still buy a P320 after Sig gets the reworked units back out on the market.
IMO the trigger on the P320 is a little better, but the grip is way too slippery for me. The fact that you have to go buy an entire new polymer frame just to change the grip size is also a huge turnoff for me. The S&W comes with a total of four backstraps to change the grip and it takes but 10 seconds to do.
Ray1970
Member
I have the full size 2.0 and had a P320. I no longer have the Sig but still own the 2.0.
I'm weird about the mechanics of stuff and I didn't like the way that they engineered the sear to reset on the pull of the trigger. Not sure if that makes sense the way I said it but most striker fired pistols use the rearward movement of the slide to reset the sear so that the striker catches it when the slide returns forward. I could induce failures of the striker to reset on the one I owned. There are a few YouTube videos of people with the same failures I'm talking about. Basically if you don't pull the trigger back far enough after the shot breaks the sear will stay down and the striker will not catch the sear as the slide returns to battery. I'm probably not explaining any of this to where it makes sense but for me the mechanics of the action just bothered me to the point where I didn't want to own the 320.
I'm weird about the mechanics of stuff and I didn't like the way that they engineered the sear to reset on the pull of the trigger. Not sure if that makes sense the way I said it but most striker fired pistols use the rearward movement of the slide to reset the sear so that the striker catches it when the slide returns forward. I could induce failures of the striker to reset on the one I owned. There are a few YouTube videos of people with the same failures I'm talking about. Basically if you don't pull the trigger back far enough after the shot breaks the sear will stay down and the striker will not catch the sear as the slide returns to battery. I'm probably not explaining any of this to where it makes sense but for me the mechanics of the action just bothered me to the point where I didn't want to own the 320.
- Joined
- Aug 21, 2005
- Messages
- 8,020
- Reaction score
- 7,102
The M&P2.0 Compact was introduced to compete directly with the Glock 19.
The biggest difference between the M&P2.0 Compact and the SIG P320 Compact is that the SIG P320 is a little taller, and a little fatter, and it does make a difference. I tried the P320 Compact, and it is noticeably harder to conceal than a G19. Small differences really do add up. The G19 hits a "sweet spot" of size, capacity, and shootability that no other make has been able to match. The P320 Compact is simply not as concealable as the G19.
The M&P2.0 Compact, on the other hand, is the same size as the G19. That said, the sandpaper grip on the M&P2.0 Series is just not good for concealed carry for me, and I have seen others make the same criticism.
So, were it me, I would opt for the G19 over both the M&P2.0 Compact and the P320 Compact.
In addition, the SIG P320 is under a "voluntary upgrade" now as a result of the pistols discharging when dropped. If you get the P320, be sure you get an upgraded one. I am still not confident that the fix by SIG will prevent such discharges, and I am waiting for the You Tube tests of the "upgraded" P320 which I am sure people will do at some point. SIG, of course, had a bunch of people out to their facility to let them observe testing of the P320 after retrofit, but the drops were not from a very great distance, and they only did 3 drops, if I recall. I hope it works for them, but I'm skeptical.
The biggest difference between the M&P2.0 Compact and the SIG P320 Compact is that the SIG P320 is a little taller, and a little fatter, and it does make a difference. I tried the P320 Compact, and it is noticeably harder to conceal than a G19. Small differences really do add up. The G19 hits a "sweet spot" of size, capacity, and shootability that no other make has been able to match. The P320 Compact is simply not as concealable as the G19.
The M&P2.0 Compact, on the other hand, is the same size as the G19. That said, the sandpaper grip on the M&P2.0 Series is just not good for concealed carry for me, and I have seen others make the same criticism.
So, were it me, I would opt for the G19 over both the M&P2.0 Compact and the P320 Compact.
In addition, the SIG P320 is under a "voluntary upgrade" now as a result of the pistols discharging when dropped. If you get the P320, be sure you get an upgraded one. I am still not confident that the fix by SIG will prevent such discharges, and I am waiting for the You Tube tests of the "upgraded" P320 which I am sure people will do at some point. SIG, of course, had a bunch of people out to their facility to let them observe testing of the P320 after retrofit, but the drops were not from a very great distance, and they only did 3 drops, if I recall. I hope it works for them, but I'm skeptical.
Nicefish
Member
- Joined
- Oct 26, 2017
- Messages
- 93
- Reaction score
- 17
In my opinion: Sig P320 - better trigger, front slide serrations, easier take down, readily available night sights, more color options, ambidextrous slide releases that work with out tons of break in, modularity. S&W 2.0 compact - true 4" barrel, a bit smaller, lower bore access, American company, and don't have to deal with all "up grade/misfire" stuff. I think the p320 is a great gun with a bright future ahead of it. For what is worth I sold mine and bought the 2.0 compact. Love it too.
Ray1970
Member
The issue with the discharge when dropped I believe is caused by the lack of any sort of trigger safety and the actual trigger itself being rather large and heavy. If the pistol was dropped and landed at just the right angle the inertia of the trigger would cause it to move rearward just as if it had been pulled. I think Sig's fix is to install a lighter trigger.
A lot of people like the P320 and it did pass extensive testing by the military when it was selected to replace the Beretta M9 so it's not like it's a bad pistol. Just not my cup of tea.
Also, like a previous poster mentioned, it does seem a little chunky compared to something like the Glock 19 or the M&P.
I own or have owned examples of just about every plastic, striker fired handgun you can imagine. Depending on your intended use my personal top three would be the Glock 19, the HK VP9, and the M&P 2.0. Your mileage may vary.
A lot of people like the P320 and it did pass extensive testing by the military when it was selected to replace the Beretta M9 so it's not like it's a bad pistol. Just not my cup of tea.
Also, like a previous poster mentioned, it does seem a little chunky compared to something like the Glock 19 or the M&P.
I own or have owned examples of just about every plastic, striker fired handgun you can imagine. Depending on your intended use my personal top three would be the Glock 19, the HK VP9, and the M&P 2.0. Your mileage may vary.
I own the M&P 9 2.0 full size and a M&P 9c 12rd version. My brother in law purchased a Sig 320c and I was giving the chance to shoot it over the forth of July weekend.
I was impressed with the Sig fit and finish was good and it shot well and the size is just right. Other then the trigger problem I would love to own one. But I would buy the M&P 9c 2.0.
I was impressed with the Sig fit and finish was good and it shot well and the size is just right. Other then the trigger problem I would love to own one. But I would buy the M&P 9c 2.0.
Nicefish
Member
- Joined
- Oct 26, 2017
- Messages
- 93
- Reaction score
- 17
With the p320 they are putting a lighter trigger in it, but the are doing something to the slide also. I put the Sig flat trigger in mine, but that apparently was not enough. Sig said to put the original curved trigger back in and send it back for a full upgrade.
Tanners Owner
US Veteran
I have the upgraded 320 & must say am impressed. For me, the trigger pull is better than before.
In comparison to my M&P FS 1.0, I prefer the ergos of the M&P by far. Out of the box trigger goes to the 320, but with the apex trigger in my M&P, it goes to the m&p. I also prefer the finish on the m&p.
I like the grip modules, as with my compact slide I can use three different grip sizes - subcompact (12 rd) compact (15rd) and carry (17 rd)
Both good guns, backed by solid company's warranty. Go with what works/ fits you best.
In comparison to my M&P FS 1.0, I prefer the ergos of the M&P by far. Out of the box trigger goes to the 320, but with the apex trigger in my M&P, it goes to the m&p. I also prefer the finish on the m&p.
I like the grip modules, as with my compact slide I can use three different grip sizes - subcompact (12 rd) compact (15rd) and carry (17 rd)
Both good guns, backed by solid company's warranty. Go with what works/ fits you best.
Last edited:
When the P320 first came out and I looked at one I couldn't understand how SIG managed to get away with not having a "dingus" on the trigger like everyone else to prevent the trigger moving without the shooter's finger on it. I guess the drop issues answered that question. My only other question now is why the military pistols aren't affected and what is different on those.
Ray1970
Member
I just picked up the M&P9 M2.0 Compact and I love it. Posted a video of my first shots here: Smith & Wesson M&P9 M2.0 Compact - Range Time - YouTube
I just got my P320c FDE back from Sig (recall) and I love it
.My Glock 19 Gen 4 is starting to wonder if a rif (reduction in force) is coming...
Seriously, to me, the P320c is wider/bigger as someone else mentioned. I like both the P320c and the M2.0 triggers equally, but I personally LOVE the grip on the M2.0.
I'd recommend the M2.0 Compact over the P320c for conceal carry, but really, get them both, just pick which one you buy first
Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
Last edited:
presspics
Member
I've owned both. Actually I've pretty much owned every handgun made at one point or another over 30 years. The M&P 2.0 Compact is a superior gun to the P320. I sold my last P320 to get the 2.0 Compact. Now every handgun that I own is an M&P....S&W has finally hit every category with their M&P line and it has everything I want and need..
I know they have a thumb safety, but I guess on a battlefield with bullets zipping past everywhere they don't care if you drop your gun and it goes off.
They help me, I have them on everything I carry. I have regular HD's on the compacts, and XR's on full size and competition guns. Thanks!
Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
I have several M&P's and several P320's (of all sizes). They are both excellent guns with their own personal strengths. They are both well made, very accurate, perfectly reliable, and will serve you well. After that it is all about preference.
I use the small back straps in my M&P and the small grip module on my P320's. There is a pretty substantial change in ergos by going to the small, even though I prefer the trigger reach of the medium. The factory trigger on the P320 is better than the M&P M1.0, a little better than the M2.0 and not quite as good as the PC. The big difference for me is concealability. The P320C is almost the same overall height as a full size M&P. The M2.0 Compact has a much smaller feel to it and it conceals better IMO. At the same time I like the P320SC better than the original M&P 9C.
If someone threatened to have Hillary Clinton kiss me if I didn't choose one gun, I would go with the M2.0 Compact. But otherwise I will happily keep, rotate and carry both my M&P's and my P320's.
I use the small back straps in my M&P and the small grip module on my P320's. There is a pretty substantial change in ergos by going to the small, even though I prefer the trigger reach of the medium. The factory trigger on the P320 is better than the M&P M1.0, a little better than the M2.0 and not quite as good as the PC. The big difference for me is concealability. The P320C is almost the same overall height as a full size M&P. The M2.0 Compact has a much smaller feel to it and it conceals better IMO. At the same time I like the P320SC better than the original M&P 9C.
If someone threatened to have Hillary Clinton kiss me if I didn't choose one gun, I would go with the M2.0 Compact. But otherwise I will happily keep, rotate and carry both my M&P's and my P320's.
Somehow, I'm not at all surprised. (I mean, it ain't like there was an infamous fatality from a dropped pistol on the deck of a battleship in in WWII, that resulted in S&W forever altering their revolvers to prevent exactly this. Yeah, I can see how the military trials geniuses could overlook any sort of drop test
).
Ray1970
Member
I know they have a thumb safety, but I guess on a battlefield with bullets zipping past everywhere they don't care if you drop your gun and it goes off.
If you're in a battle and bullets are flying all around and you've somehow found yourself drawing a handgun then dropping it and possibly having it discharge are the least of your worries.
Doug M.
Member
The problems with the P320 are well documented, and Sig's horrible response when called on it is even worse than the original problem. Friends in the industry have reported major flaws in the pistol, in Sig's response, and in the military testing. This is not uncommon with Sig, which is a darned shame, but I can't see any reason to buy the 320 in any variant, or much of anything else from them.
They have a well known and long history of poor QC and even worse responses to being called on that. I can recall reading a long report of such problems with LE issued pistols and poor response from Sig at least 10 years ago. NJSP is in litigation with them right now over defective pistols delivered for an order. When there are so many better options with far better histories and far better response to proven problems, why on earth would anyone subject themselves to the crud with Sig?
They have a well known and long history of poor QC and even worse responses to being called on that. I can recall reading a long report of such problems with LE issued pistols and poor response from Sig at least 10 years ago. NJSP is in litigation with them right now over defective pistols delivered for an order. When there are so many better options with far better histories and far better response to proven problems, why on earth would anyone subject themselves to the crud with Sig?
catcus-jack
Member
And you can honestly say S&W pistols have not had problems. Lol
Since you are in Denver, it shouldn't be difficult to find a range that rents both pistols. Shoot them back-to-back for at least 100 rounds each. By then any positives and negatives should emerge. Forum members can relate their own experiences (and biases), but it is how these guns work in your hands that should be the main determining factor of your purchase.
Good Shooting!
Doug M.
Member
*
Oh heck no. However, the response from Sig is so dishonest and well documented as such that they are in a class by themselves. People I have known and respected for a long time have been directly involved in the issues of both the LE and military purchases, and the situation is far worse than generally known. Even the publicly released information is scary and would justify any reasonable person in refusing to carry one. It's been pretty heavily discussed on LF.
dipperdave
Member
I bought a 320 shortly after they were introduced. It shot way high, but Sig replaced the sights under warranty and they returned it to me in 10 days. Shot fine after that.
I kept that gun about 18 months and shot it 1500+ rounds. It worked perfectly for me every shot. However, over time I just didn't especially like it so I sold it. Nothing against the gun, except that the plastic frame felt a little on the cheap and flimsy side. To me. It was mostly that it felt like a Sig and I've never kept any Sig for more than a couple of years.
Just personal preference and nothing more.
I've owned three M&P in the past and they were all okay but were gradually sold off. I've owned over three dozen striker fired handguns and only keep the ones I really like.
Last week I bought the 2.0 compact. It was down to it and the Gen 5 Glock 19 and I chose the Smith. I already have two Gen 4 19s which I like, but am not a Glock fanboy.
I really like the feel of the 2.0 compact and the trigger, even new, is better than any of my old M&Ps. Unfortunately, the recoil spring broke during the first box of ammo and is off to Smith for a replacement.
I don't think there is any doubt that I'm going to like this 2.0 compact better than my Sig 320. But, that's just me.
I had seen something on another forum that the 2.0 compacts were having problems with broken recoil springs. Anyone else heard of that or had problems with their own? Hope mine was just a fluke.
I kept that gun about 18 months and shot it 1500+ rounds. It worked perfectly for me every shot. However, over time I just didn't especially like it so I sold it. Nothing against the gun, except that the plastic frame felt a little on the cheap and flimsy side. To me. It was mostly that it felt like a Sig and I've never kept any Sig for more than a couple of years.
Just personal preference and nothing more.
I've owned three M&P in the past and they were all okay but were gradually sold off. I've owned over three dozen striker fired handguns and only keep the ones I really like.
Last week I bought the 2.0 compact. It was down to it and the Gen 5 Glock 19 and I chose the Smith. I already have two Gen 4 19s which I like, but am not a Glock fanboy.
I really like the feel of the 2.0 compact and the trigger, even new, is better than any of my old M&Ps. Unfortunately, the recoil spring broke during the first box of ammo and is off to Smith for a replacement.
I don't think there is any doubt that I'm going to like this 2.0 compact better than my Sig 320. But, that's just me.
I had seen something on another forum that the 2.0 compacts were having problems with broken recoil springs. Anyone else heard of that or had problems with their own? Hope mine was just a fluke.
Similar threads
- Locked
Expired/Withdrawn
SIG SAUER P320/P250 magazines or trade for S&W, Ruger mags
- Locked
