M&P Compact 9mm?s why

[C.S.63]

OK which an M&P 9mm compact, Glock 19 or Beretta 92 compact?

Convince me on the M&P compact?

Leaning towards the Beretta 92 compact,

This will not be my first auto but will end up being a regular daily carry
Moving away from 640 as a regular carry.


Carl

 

[ColbyBruce]

There is NOTHING compact about a Beretta 92. Even the compact is large and bulky. I am now on my fourth Beretta 92, a FS Inox model. I love it, but it is best concealed in a wheelbarrow, not inside a waistband or under a arm. Here is a photo in a Don Hume JIT belt slide holster.

I have shot a neighbor's S&W M&Pc .357 Sig and like it, however I do not care for the accessory rail on the model. I would like to own one of those myself.

Glock 19, everything you need in a CCW and nothing that you don't. I am fortunate enough to live about 35 miles from Glock, Inc. in Smyrna, GA so I take my Glocks back to the mothership for service. I bought or traded for 10 in three years. I prefer the Gen. 2 frames with no finger grooves or rails. I own two Glock 19's and a 17. Also two Gen. 2.5 Glock 26's. Gen. 3 Glock 31 & 32. Gave my son a Glock 19 & 17. Just sold a Gen. 2 Glock 22.

A Glock is affordable, dependable, reliable, inexpensive, available, and replaceable. IF they suit you, go for it. Personally, the customer service at Glock, Inc. impresses me more than the product itself.

I had a Galco CM202 belt holster with my first Beretta 92F. It rode high and concealed well enough under a London Fog raincoat.

 

[SoCalDep]

My current off-duty carry gun is an M&P9C. I have owned three Beretta 92F series compacts (A regular 92FS Compact-L, Custom Carry, and Compact-L Type M) and I am very familiar with Glocks.

If you are looking for the best power/size ratio I'd go with Glock or the M&P. The Beretta is a nice gun, but it is indeed big. It's wide and has a thick grip. The barrel, while shorter than the 4.9" full size 92FS, is 4.3", which is longer than the Glock or S&W, so it's longer also. It has a 13rd magazine capacity, which while not bad, is two rounds less than the glock and only one round more than the S&W at great sacrifice in size.

I think the Glock is a good gun, and I enjoy shooting them, but I prefer the M&P for ergonomics and reliability. It's a little thicker than the Glock, but the grip is shorter. I don't remember how the barrel lengths and overall lengths compare, but I think they are close.

 

[AZ115]

I will suggest the versatile M&P 40C...

Well I did a good amount of research before I went with the 40c. It's really well balanced for a so called "Compact". Very accurate, 10+1 and it will accept full size .40 magazine to make it 15+1.

I regularly CCW the 40c with the 10 round magazine. I have absolutly no problem concealing it. Jeans, shorts and even with those nice snug shirts I have. I come home and switch it to the 15 round magazine, plus I install a Streamlight TLR-4 laser/light combo and it becomes my nightime home defender.

I also picked up a S&W factory 9mm barrel and a few 9mm magazines and Presto! It's transformed to a 9c. I have fired about 800 9mm rounds without a single hiccup from it. I can see why the 9c is so popular. I have put about 500 S&W.40 through it as well. This thing pretty much shoots like a full size M&P, 5, 10, 15 yards out with ease and confidence. I really can't tell or feel a difference between the 2 different calibers anymore. My accuracy and follow up shots are almost identical now. Which is awesome for me!

In Smith and Wesson I trust! Go with the .40!

And one last thing, You can also purchase a .357Sig barrel for the 40c as well. Can't do any barrel swaps with the 9c!

 

[C.S.63]

Thank you for all the info exactly what I was looking for,
yes the Beretta is the largest, and the smith the smallest. the Beretta is also a bit more expensive a friend that is a LEO and long time glock owner
is going to let me shoot an M&P9c so I will be able to make an informed decision, He has also been swayed to the M&P. Thanks again

carl

 

[melonehead]

There is NOTHING compact about a Beretta 92. Even the compact is large and bulky. I am now on my fourth Beretta 92, a FS Inox model. I love it, but it is best concealed in a wheelbarrow, not inside a waistband or under a arm. Here is a photo in a Don Hume JIT belt slide holster.

I have shot a neighbor's S&W M&Pc .357 Sig and like it, however I do not care for the accessory rail on the model. I would like to own one of those myself.

Glock 19, everything you need in a CCW and nothing that you don't. I am fortunate enough to live about 35 miles from Glock, Inc. in Smyrna, GA so I take my Glocks back to the mothership for service. I bought or traded for 10 in three years. I prefer the Gen. 2 frames with no finger grooves or rails. I own two Glock 19's and a 17. Also two Gen. 2.5 Glock 26's. Gen. 3 Glock 31 & 32. Gave my son a Glock 19 & 17. Just sold a Gen. 2 Glock 22.

A Glock is affordable, dependable, reliable, inexpensive, available, and replaceable. IF they suit you, go for it. Personally, the customer service at Glock, Inc. impresses me more than the product itself.

I had a Galco CM202 belt holster with my first Beretta 92F. It rode high and concealed well enough under a London Fog raincoat.

I must be one of the few not impressed by Glocks. Had a Glock 36 that was anything but realiable. Would FTE the second to last round out of the mag. Every single time. Tried numerous mags, different ammo, etc. I sold it pretty quick.

I have a Kahr CW45 now that I carry that has never had any issues.

I just picked up a M&P 9c that may become my carry gun since the CW45 does not fit my hand real well. I have not shot this yet, so cannot comment on the gun as far as reliablility yet. It does pass the eye test on fit & finish, and size. Looks like a real fine carry gun. Of course, will have to put a few hundred rounds through it first to determine. I really do not care if it has the acc. rail or not. There is no safety or auto lock on this model, which is preferred.

I agree on the Beretta. That is alot of gun to carry.

 

[Fastbolt]

While S&W calls their M&P 9c a 'compact", it's virtually the same overall size as the Glock G26 (which Glock calls a subcompact), which ism small than a G19. Don't gun company model size names and designations ... compare the actual sizes.

M&P 40c & G27 (same sizes as the equivalent 9mm models in both lines). The M&P is a bit taller at the backstrap.

I typically suggest prospective owners try to rent representative models of whatever interests them, using good quality ammunition (preferably of the type they anticipate using as an owner), and then decide for themselves.

It's one thing to handle a pistol at the gun shop counter, but it's another to feel how it acts in the hand under the actual recoil forces of live-fire.

A pistol or revolver that "feels good" in the hand when just holding it (at the counter) might take on an entirely different aspect when it's being fired. Depends on the shooter.

While I don't own a M&P 9c, I've used 3 of them belonging to other shooters. Notwithstanding the nice ergonomics and revolver-type curved trigger (which I prefer), I was pleasantly surprised by the recoil management characteristics and controllability of the 9c's compared to my pair of G26's.

If I'd known then what I knew now, I'd have bought the 9c instead of the 40c.

Try to test-fire examples of what interests you, and then decide for yourself.

Just my thoughts.

 

[Linejudgemick]

Well... why do you want anyone to "talk you into" something? I say choose the one that you like best and poo poo what everyone else thinks. Now, on the other hand if you have specific questions about an M&P9C on this forum, that would make sense to me.

I don't own either of the other two so I won't comment on them. I do own an M&P9C and the only thing I'd have done different is to buy an M&P40C instead. That way I could convert it to a 9 and have the best of both. The conversion doesn't work the other way from what I understand.

I assume you want extra capacity and that's part of the reason for your choices. Personally, I'm more likely to carry my single-stack 9mm, but I do carry the 9C on occasion.

 

[stimpee]

Just bought myself a 9c. Also have a single stack Walther PPS.

The 9c is actually smaller but thicker.

My fingers are too short to properly reach the trigger and trigger safety on the Glocks. The 9c is perfect for me. I will be augmenting it with a FS or maybe even a PRO for trying out some USPSA shooting, and will likely consider a Shield to replace my walther for an "identical" single stack option.

It shoots VERY nicely for me, and the aftermarket is nearly as good as the Glock if you so choose. Also quite affordable.

 

[ColbyBruce]

Here is a photo of Glock models 26, 32, 17 to show the difference in size between the fullsize, compact, and subcompacts. About a thumbs width of difference between each one.

 

[grif684]

I carry an issued Glock 17 on duty.....for off duty and concealed carry, I used to carry a G19, in fact I carried it for a LONG time. A couple years ago I switched to a G26....went back to the G19 shortly afterwards (myriad of reasons). Being a huge S&W fan, I started looking into a S&W compact auto (have also carried J & K frame Smiths, and still do), and after much research tried out the M&P compact. Handled 'em, shot 'em, loved the ergonomics, then bought an M&P9c. Love it, period. Here is a comparison of my now retired G19 and my most often carried M&P. AND it's made in the U.S.A. ........

 

[remat457]

9c is noticeably smaller than the 19 and even more so than the Beretta. As mentioned by Fastbolt the 9c a tad bit bigger than a 26 both oal and height. So, if size is the major criteria..

 

[Gryff]

First and foremost, it's about what your preference is. The right gun for one guy isn't the right gun for every guy.

I had a Glock 23 as my LTC gun, but hated the block-of-wood feel to it. Sold it and got an M&Pc in .40. That was the right decision for me. The M&Pc is smaller than the G19/G23, but feels larger in the hand than the G26/G27.

 

[18DAI]

I vote for the Beretta 92 compact. Better trigger than your other two choices. Far more accurate than any M&P 9mm. Hammer fired. Reliable. Looks good doing all that too.

Any you can use it right out of the box without any expense for Apex aftermarket parts! Good luck with your decision. Regards 18DAI

 

[D Rock]

I own all three and shoot them equally well.

Just for an all around smooth shooting pistol I pick my 92 Compact L. It is heavy, 37.55 oz with 13 + 1 Rem Golden Saber.

Glock 19 with 15 + 1 Golden Saber 30.25 oz.

M&P 9c with 12 + 1 Golden Saber 29.35 oz,

Pic what round count you want, but make sure to try and shoot each one, as has been mentioned.

One thing to bear in mind. Magazines for the Beretta Compact are hard to come by for a reasonable price. Beretta is selling them currently for about $44. When I bought mine last year CDNN was selling them for $19.99. CDNN only has 10 round Compact mags now.

Dave

 

[Wee Hooker]

Nice comparison. I've owned all discussed here ( as well as a brief two week stint with a Shield.) I still own the 9c and Glock 26. IMHO, the 9c and 26 are the closest in comparison and the best suited to carry.
The 26 has a slight edge in compactness and quality of the factory trigger while the 9c has better ergonomics and lower felt recoil. (The trigger is easy to fix anyway.) Both are very nice carry guns that are more likely to be in your belt when you need them vs resting in the safe due to weight and bulk. .

FWIW, I don't think it's fair to put the 92c in the same race. While pretty, it's a brick by comparison ( as are many older design , all steel designs from 20 years ago.)

While S&W calls their M&P 9c a 'compact", it's virtually the same overall size as the Glock G26 (which Glock calls a subcompact), which ism small than a G19. Don't gun company model size names and designations ... compare the actual sizes.

M&P 40c & G27 (same sizes as the equivalent 9mm models in both lines). The M&P is a bit taller at the backstrap.

I typically suggest prospective owners try to rent representative models of whatever interests them, using good quality ammunition (preferably of the type they anticipate using as an owner), and then decide for themselves.

It's one thing to handle a pistol at the gun shop counter, but it's another to feel how it acts in the hand under the actual recoil forces of live-fire.

A pistol or revolver that "feels good" in the hand when just holding it (at the counter) might take on an entirely different aspect when it's being fired. Depends on the shooter.

While I don't own a M&P 9c, I've used 3 of them belonging to other shooters. Notwithstanding the nice ergonomics and revolver-type curved trigger (which I prefer), I was pleasantly surprised by the recoil management characteristics and controllability of the 9c's compared to my pair of G26's.

If I'd known then what I knew now, I'd have bought the 9c instead of the 40c.

Try to test-fire examples of what interests you, and then decide for yourself.

Just my thoughts.

 

[C.S.63]

Back to square 1?
A little bit of an update Still have not bought anything?
The 92C is out, sold! The M&P9c's are selling pretty quick around here.
I made the mistake of looking at a H&K p30 and wow hands down I would have left with it if for not the sticker price. Yes it is big for CCW but best feeling pistol in quite some time.
I have also decided that I may jump to the 40 or also 45acp
The 40 in the M&P can be converted to 9mm so that is a plus and local dealer has a few H&Ks p2000 and USP compacts and 2- p30s The right deal will come along,
Carl