Glock rules!!! Lol just kidden. But for the most part i have been a glock fanboy. Im here looking for reasons why you all love the M&P so much more. I did hold one once and hate to admit but it did feel more comfortable in hand than a glock.
Ok I've watcher the argument of glock or m&p for a bit now. Sorry to say it guys but Steyr m9 or L9 beats both hands down. I have a glock 19 and a first gen m&p both in 9mm. They both suck compared to a steyr m9. I also have 2 m9 and performance wise hands down better. Looks are not as appealing yes the steyr looks bulky but when you go to start really using it you won't care.
Well i wont disagree with you that earlier M&P triggers sucked, BUT, when you buy a glock, and have to get rid of the elcheapo plastic sights for real sights, that will cost you $125, and or change the glock barrel out so you can shoot reloads, theres $200, then usually have to fix the later gen 3 & gen 4 ejection problems, AND chamfer that GLOCK squared trigger guard so it dosent rub your middle finger raw, the M&P`s win the race, and by a huge margin when it comes down to cost of owning. Not to mention, the M&P frames are farrrrrrrrrr more comfortable to hold. They even have a REAL grip insert that looks far better, option of a palm swell built in, more effective, than glocks design.
Oh yeahhhhh, and the apex trigger is NOT $125 dollars either. You can find them all day long on ebay for $39 (polymer) and $75 (aluminum)
At least S&W is trying to give the customers what they`re asking for,
glock dosent even listen to their customer base.
The only thing i`ve seen in the last few years coming from glock,
is more quality issues & problems. The G43 was and is, the last glock i`ll ever buy.
Just not impressed with glock anymore... they havent done anything NEW that impresses me.
Spot on! Not to mention that while I was working in Alaska, and had to carry a glock, glock had to replace 400+ frames on our and other LEO's G22's. Like I said the only thing glock is better at is marketing, and sell 'cheap' guns to LE!
No, not really Boss... i own a few glocks, they are just paper punchers for me. Lately when i come across a gun i like, the few glocks i do have left, are the first to leave my gun safe towards the trade.
In my own personal opinion, glocks are way over rated. There ARE far better guns out there than glock. If a person thinks that glocks are the only perfect gun out there, then that one person is surely a one sided individual.
Many years have gone by, and what i gathered from the handgun crowd, was this stale statement of: Well if you aint got a glock... you aint sh!t. Sorry Boss, i`m not a fanboy of any brand. I buy what fits and shoots well without function and fit issues. For me, glock dosent have that "perfection".
If you like your glock, then you can keep your glock. (lol)
Well said Kenny...!!! Thats exactly how everyone should see it. Your gun fits you, my gun fits me. Brands should never matter, your brand works for you, my brand works for me. Now if we can get ALL the fanboys to agree...
Amen. There's no question on witch is better. There all good guns. The question really is are you good for the gun. Or are you just a fan boy who has a gun be it a glock s&w hk fn steyr hi point () etc. and never uses it. Never practices. The only good gun for you is the one you have and know
People have different bone and muscle structures. Which leads to different grips, and grip angles suiting different people.
To select the "best" pistol for you grip them, and operate the mag and slide release, and the safety. Once you do that, aim at a fixed point about ten feet away, drop the pistol to your thigh, and do it again a few times. Then with your eyes closed do it again, and open your eyes. If you're pointing where close to where you were, the pistol fits you.
If it is not pointing where you were try another pistol. If you are pointing high you need less grip angle, low you need more.
For me Beretta 92s, and PX4s, come to hand well. I spent an entire afternoon, trying more than thirty different guns, when I bought my first semiauto. They fit my hand better than any others I tried.
Similarly, S&W K, L, and N Frame revolvers fit my hand, and the Ruger and other SA revolvers don't.
When I got my CPL, I went to the LGS fully intending to buy a Glock 26. I'd never fired one, but a couple guys in my VVA chapter had them, said good things. After handling both, I left with an M&P Compact 9. Felt better in my hand. No slam on Glock, M&P fit me better.
I had to carry a Glock for 6 years in AK and I did not not like it simply becasue I did not shoot it as well as others guns (hit probability). I could shoot my old 59 series S&W and score 10+ points higher on quals, but I was REQUIRED to carry the Glock! Enter the M&P, I shot it as good or better than the 5906/03's so I used it here for several years but I went back to the 5903 duty and the 3913 off duty about a year ago (all metal), BUT when I read the reviews of the M&P 2.0 compact by several Glock guys who said they liked it BETTER THAN THE GLOCK I nearly carped my britches!!! To have a Glock worshiper say that it must be good. I got one (IPO sale, 3 mags and night sites) and I am here to tell you it is the best hand gun I have ever used in 40+ years of LE. Nuff said.
What about the M&P has changed in the 2.0 that makes you feel so strongly? I have a shield and an M&P Pro series...good pistols and I shoot them well. Sounds like the 2.0 may have improved in some significant way?
There are several things, but they are cumulative. I comes with 4 grip adapters rather than 3, the texturing is more aggressive on the grip, the trigger (out of the box) is very good, the over all size and weight is good for both duty and most off duty carry, and it just shoots well for me. What I like for a combat/defense zero on a hand gun is to put a 4 inch circle at 10 yd/30 ft use a 6 o'clock hold from a standing two handed hold and put all my shoots inside the 4 inch circle (as near the center as possible) and this gun does it all. I have a shield with NS I use for most of my off duty as well.
Makes sense...the M&P series is a time proven design and many of the manufacturers are making ergonomics a top priority (Springfield's Mod 2) and trigger quality, imo, is really improving...the VP series from HK and then the Walther PPQ set the bar and looks like Smith is jumping aboard too....for my money, trigger quality is my #1 feature in terms of importance.
Yes...Glock too! I own a 19 and 35 and enjoy them though their design is pretty proven and the Gen 5 seems to be at a point where they are picking the fly sh** out of the pepper...really not a bad place to be imo
Would choose the m&p. Nothing against the glock, I carry a gen 4 model 21 for work but the grip angle is not something I like. The m&p has a optimum grip angle that most pistols use while the glock is different. If your used to the glock then you would be fine but if not it takes getting used to. Also it seems that while glock was a innovator years ago that has changed. Other companies are beating them at there own game by improving on the striker fired polymer design while glock seems to be slow to change.
This does not make glock bad but it may make other companies and better value as they offer more features for a similar price as well as the durability you would want.
Would choose the m&p. Nothing against the glock, I carry a gen 4 model 21 for work but the grip angle is not something I like. The m&p has a optimum grip angle that most pistols use while the glock is different. If your used to the glock then you would be fine but if not it takes getting used to. Also it seems that while glock was a innovator years ago that has changed. Other companies are beating them at there own game by improving on the striker fired polymer design while glock seems to be slow to change.
This does not make glock bad but it may make other companies and better value as they offer more features for a similar price as well as the durability you would want.
Well, back in March I posted about my new carry.
The moment I picked up the MP Shield in .45acp I knew it was the one. It felt natural in my hand. I purchased one with a thumb safety. Good trigger, shoots great and reliable.
As for Glock, I have three of them 34, 26, and 41. Use the 34 for IDPA shooting.
I have a Glock 19 and 23 both gen 4's. I also have the Alpha Wolf 357 Sig barrel for the model 23....They are not the best ergo's in my hand, but IMHO: when you compare the size, weight, capacity, reliability and simplicity, of the Glocks, you can not beat them. With that said, I do have several Shields (9, 40 and 45) and several M&P's 2.0 FS and compacts and they feel very natural in my hand. They also match Glocks reliability, capacity, size and comparable in weight to the Glocks. While I will not part with my Glocks, my Shields are my summer carry, and the M&P's will be my winter carry. I will most likely carry the Compact 2.0 in 40 until someone comes out with a 357 Sig conversion barrel.
Well, this aint no glock forum, though i own several glocks, and glock "was" my main carry, until the Shield 45 came out. The Shield 45 carry`s so much easier, shoots nicer (for me) than any of my glocks, fits my hand better, conceals easier. I have yet to have a failure with any of my M&P`s, the M&P`s are just as worthy as any glock, if not more. The only thing glock has over most other guns in its class, is sales numbers due to early arrival of the plastic gun market. But it surly dosen`t make glock any better of a gun than anything else. Actually, i`ve had more issues with glocks than any other plastic gun i`ve owned.
How many other guns have you shot side by side with the glock? I have shot MANY of them and of them all I shot lower scores with the glock as do most of those who I have given the chance to shoot other platforms side by side, except those who shot VERY good or VERY poor, to them the 'gun' don't matter much. As far as reliability, ALL of the new platforms are extremely reliable unless you get a 'lemon'! Just a little reality and common sense.
I know the following statement will cause Glock fan boys and Glock Armorer's to have a cow. I have found from personal experience that the Ghost trigger to be a huge improvement in My G 17, G 20 and G 22. There were no problems. They all functioned perfectly. I felt I had to post my experience because many problems with function are blamed on after market parts. I was going to take the class and become a certified Glock armorer until I realized if I were to install any after market part(s) I would lose my certification. To each his own.
I carried the Glock 19 (Gen 2) for 4 years and was pleased with it as a duty weapon. I then bought my Colt because I always wanted one. carried it for roughly 6 yrs. When the 2.0 came out, I thought well just another Glock imitator, then a co worker bought one as his duty weapon. He was a Glockhead and said he LOVED the 2.0. I picked it up and fired a few mags through it. The Next day I bought one, a holster, and a streamlight TLR-1 for it and it has been on my belt since. They really impressed me with the smooth, crisp trigger improvements. And it is more accurate than ANY Glock I have ever fired.
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Related Threads
?
?
?
?
?
Firearms Talk
2.3M posts
61.6K members
Since 2007
A forum community dedicated to all firearm owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about optics, hunting, gunsmithing, styles, reviews, accessories, classifieds, and more!