M&P9c vs 6906


September 13, 2008, 10:25 AM
Apples vs oranges? Maybe, but they are both S&W fruit, hold 12+1 rounds of 9mm, and are meant to be compact guns. Neither is stainless, so you can argue plastic vs aluminum alloy. And no lifetime warranty on a used, vs new. No adjustable grips on the 6906.

Of course, you can only get used 6906 around $300 where M&P9c are new at around $520.

Which would you rather have, and why?

If you enjoyed reading about "M&P9c vs 6906" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
September 13, 2008, 10:46 AM

I bought a NIB 6906 from CDNN a few weeks ago. $399.99 w/one mag, Lifetime warranty.

The M&P9c is one of the few 9mm pistols I've never held, and know nothing about them.

I have owned a 3rd generation Smith & Wesson 3913 for 13 years and it (so far) has never failed in any way. In fact the 3rd generation Smiths have a decades old reputation for reliability and RELIABILITY is job one for any self defense firearm I own.

FWIW you can use the 15 round mags of the 5906 in the 6906. (Use the S&W "grip+2" filler) and the mag looks like it was standard issue but increases your capacity to 15+1 should you care for such a thing.

I can't criticize or praise the M&P9c for lack of personal experience, but I can certainly praise the 3rd generation Smith & Wesson pistols... I love 'em.

Just personal opinion.

Best Wishes,


P.S. The photo below shows my 5906 & 6906. (Both bought NIB from CDNN for $399.99 ea.)


September 13, 2008, 03:36 PM
Depends on what the potential customer/user wants to a large degree.

I've always liked the 6906. Nice size. Nice grip dimensions. I like the balance. I definitely like the TDA trigger. Probably withstand whatever reasonable service life I'd normally need to get out of a dedicated defensive weapon. I pushed one to an estimated 45K+ round count one time. I remember running a bit over 3,500 rounds through it just during the course of a 2 month period toward the end of my use of it (before retiring it).

The M&P design is a good one. I prefer a TDA trigger, but I've adjusted to the M&P trigger and can certainly make it work for me. Great ergonomics and balance. The magazine catch can be switched to either side by the owner. (The 6906 magazine catch can't be changed.) Also, the M&P slide stop levers are a nice touch.

Both designs can be relatively easily maintained by the owner/user.

As an armorer, the 6906 requires hand-fitting of the extractor and sear release lever. The M&P only has a fitted extractor. The M&P extractor, however, is a very large and robust design. I like it a lot.

Also, when it comes to the traditional metal-framed pistols the hammers, sears and drawbars aren't exactly inexpensive parts to replace if they wear to the point where they may require replacement. Having them replaced under warranty is certainly painless, but if you have to pay for them it may run upwards to about half the cost of some inexpensively priced used models. Just depends.

Off hand, I'd think it reasonable to consider that the polymer frame of the M&P would probably make for a longer potential service life than an alloy frame ... notwithstanding replacement of perhaps a locking block, but that's one of the good things about such designs ... but it's going to cost the owner a lot of money to afford the amount of ammunition it might take to actually wear out an aluminum frame (presuming the owner takes reasonable care it, especially lubricating it and replacing recoil springs as recommended).

Me? I'd like to own one of each.

If you enjoyed reading about "M&P9c vs 6906" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!