Hey guys, should I get a Glock or an S&W MP ??

@ basicblur

I agree - just trying to be nice.

Maybe the grip angle that is disliked are the 4 90 degree ones that make up the grip. Maybe what is comfortable is preferable to what is livable. Maybe I haven't seen enough proof that the M&P is less reliable than a Glock. Maybe believing that a Glock is infallable, unbreakable and unstoppable makes it the only choice for some, that and it never needs cleaning or lubrication AND shoots lead.

Here are my list of Glock dislikes. If they were addressed at the same price level as the M&P I would happily surrender my hard earned:

1. Poor customer service.
2. Poor ergonomics, addressed by later versions but at the expense of reliability (I hear).
3. Plastic sights.
4. Plastic magazines.
5. Trigger. What can I say, it has nothing I like.

Here are my list of Glock dislikes. If they were addressed at the same price level as the M&P I would happily surrender my hard earned:

1. Poor customer service.

Click to expand...

I've never heard anything negative about Glock's customer service.
Can you explain further?

2. Poor ergonomics, addressed by later versions but at the expense of reliability (I hear).

Click to expand...

There's nothing wrong with the ergonomics of the Glock.
I suppose if one has tiny hands then some models might be a big too thick for you however.

3. Plastic sights.

Click to expand...

Well, there's no denying that metal sights are more durable than plastic sights.
But the average gun owner will never wear out or damage the standard plastic Glock sights.
And the sight design works just fine....the dot front sight combined with the rear open box sight makes for quick and easy target alignment.

4. Plastic magazines.

Click to expand...

The magazines are actually steel and plastic mixed, and they are some of the most durable magazine in the shooting world.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with Glock magazines.

5. Trigger.

Click to expand...

There is also absolutely nothing wrong with the Glock trigger.
It is a nice consistant trigger-pull from the very first shot to the very last shot.
A light trigger-pull with no grittiness and a very short reset.

What can I say, it has nothing I like.

Click to expand...

Yes, I see....

The Glock has excellent accuracy, outstanding reliability that sets the standard for all autoloaders, extreme ease of maintenance and DIY gunsmithing, rugged beyond belief, and all at an affordable price....

Yes, certainly nothing that you would like in a handgun.

Gander Mountain had a decent sale on their Gen 3 Glocks so I went out looking yesterday.

Before I just up and bought a Glock due to the sale, I decides I wanted to try out several other different guns. I held and dry fired a Glock, a Ruger SR40 a Ruger SR40c and a S&W M&P45 (I wish I had thought to try the xD as well and wish one of the three places I went had a Walther PPQ.)

As far as dry firing, I didn't notice a bit of difference between the triggers. I've heard the M&P's trigger is horrible, I've heard the Ruger's trigger is better than the Glock or the M&P, I've heard the SRc models have a better trigger than the full size models. I didn't notice any difference. I wish I had tried a Sigma as well to see if it is as horrible as people say.

I ended up getting the Glock 19 and hope to get a M&P 40 and an SR9c in the future. I thought all of them had triggers maybe a tiny bit harder than my FNP-40 or 1911 in single action mode. None of them was even close to my FNP-40, P38 or Ruger Single Six in double action...all of those are looooooong hard pulls.


I didn't have any problem with the feel of the Glock grip either. My FNP is a little more comfortable, but I don't find the Glock objectionable.

I have never fired a striker gun in my life however, I will try out my new Glock Friday however.

Having had both in .45, GLOCK is the choice. I still have it. the M&P is long gone, traded for a nice S&W 681. Glad to see that one gone.

I've got both, and I like both. The M&P feels a bit better in my hand, but it's a compact 9 and my Glock is a full size .45. Both guns are more accurate than I am. Everyone gripes about the M&P trigger pull, but it feels no worse than the Glock to me. Dang Glock feels like a stapler to me. I turn to my 1911s if I'm looking for a sweet trigger feel. Both these polymer guns serve their purpose well. Shoot both and pick one....or just get one of each!

easyg, in response to your kool-ade approach to MY dislikes:

1. If you've not heard grumblings over Glock's customer service you aren't looking, they litter every forum EXCEPT glocktalk where they are erased.

2. I don't have "tiny hands" as you suggest, mine vary, depending on glove manufacturer, between XL and XXL. If Glocks are tools as people suggest feel free to show us the square handle grip of your hammer/screwdriver/drill. Ergonomics as I said.

3. Don't counter with "the average gun owner" when your mantra is all about a run it ragged and carry it daily pistol. That does not change the plastic sights to more durable ones instantly. It should come with steel sights standard.

4. Look up the number of "Glock mags are cheap, I just replace 'em" responses some time. Nobody chose to "copy" that design, not S&W, not Springfield, not Kahr, not Ruger, not CZ, not H&K.

5. If there's nothing wrong with Glock's trigger in your book, congratulations, you win. I'll keep my 1911s and my modified M&Ps and my DA revolvers and my SA revolvers and my tuned rifle triggers. I don't care for it but that must be subjective. I must be a poor shooter to blame my tools.

Glocks may have excellent accuracy with their oversized and optimized for reliability chambers, though those things are generally considered mutually exclusive. Glocks may set the standard for reliability for you. If you can't work on the M&P which has fewer parts than a Glock, then you shouldn't tackle the Glock, the M&P seems every bit as rugged- though I'm sure you'll disagree and the M&P costs less.

Again, hooray for Glock, I would buy one if it was more like the one I preferred, the M&P. Aside from the lousy factory trigger which can be fixed for free, what does the M&P have against it in your book?

It may often be that a poor carpenter blames his tools but when a better tool is available it is a blind carpenter who can't see it.

Here it is again

It's like should I get a Ford, Chevy, or Dodge pickup

Your hand is quite an adaptable tool, handle something enough times and it just feels right

I put a M&P9c in my hand and it felt kinda like I had a Wheeler in my hand because the grip felt slim to me more like a revolver

I put a Block G26 in my hand and it felt like I really had something in my hand

I put the M&P9c in my cargo shorts pocket and it didn't fit very well and printed too much < it's a little longer and a bit higher then a Block G26

I put the Block G26 in my cargo shorts pocket and it felt right at home < it's a little shorter and not as high as an M&P9c

So I got the Block ... I carry it in my cargo shorts daily and no one is non the wiser and I have 11 rounds of self preservation if need be

The Block G27/.40 is the same size as the G26/9mm as the M&P40c/.40 is the same size as the M&P9c/9mm so there is my comparative results

Same results when I compared the G30 to the M&P45c YMMV but I got what felt was right to fill my void

jfrey said:

My vote is for the G23. Same size as the g19 and good for concealed carry.

Click to expand...

Give the G 23 a try. Some people don't like it,
but I'm not one of them.

Before you purchase either I suggest you try the Walther PPQ in either 9mm or 40. The PPQ's trigger is different from the Glock and FAR SUPERIOR to the horrible trigger on those M&P's.

If not the PPQ then I would go Glock - on trigger alone!

I like the PPQ 9mm so much that I traded in a Glock 19 on it. I've not missed the Glock. Good luck with your decision! TJ

1. If you've not heard grumblings over Glock's customer service you aren't looking, they litter every forum EXCEPT glocktalk where they are erased.

Click to expand...

I haven't noticed an unusual high number of complaints about Glock's customer service on the various internet forums.
Sure, there are some, but no more than there are about any other gun manufactuer, certainly no more than S&W.

2. I don't have "tiny hands" as you suggest, mine vary, depending on glove manufacturer, between XL and XXL. If Glocks are tools as people suggest feel free to show us the square handle grip of your hammer/screwdriver/drill. Ergonomics as I said.

Click to expand...

I'm sorry if you thought that I was implying that you had tiny hands.
It's just that most of the folks I have heard complaining about Glock's ergonomics have tiny hands.
And for what it's worth, I do have screwdrivers that are somewhat squared off.

3. Don't counter with "the average gun owner" when your mantra is all about a run it ragged and carry it daily pistol. That does not change the plastic sights to more durable ones instantly. It should come with steel sights standard.

Click to expand...

Have you ever broken or worn off the stock sights of a Glock?
Does your holster not protect your sights?
How many times a day do you holster and unholster your pistol?
I carry a G26 daily, and I shoot at the range once a week, and have done so for many years, and the sights on mine are just fine.
I still have the stock plastic sights because they work just fine and I have no reason to replace them.
And I personally know plenty of other guys who carry Glocks daily and they have no problems with their sights.
It's really a non-issue.

4. Look up the number of "Glock mags are cheap, I just replace 'em" responses some time. Nobody chose to "copy" that design, not S&W, not Springfield, not Kahr, not Ruger, not CZ, not H&K.

Click to expand...

Have you ever had a Glock magazine fail on you?
And if so, how long did you have the magazine and how many rounds did you shoot with that magazine before it failed?

Fact is that Glock magazines are just as durable as any magazine from any handgun maker.

5. If there's nothing wrong with Glock's trigger in your book, congratulations, you win. I'll keep my 1911s and my modified M&Ps....

Click to expand...

So you had to modifiy your M&P trigger....

Glocks may have excellent accuracy with their oversized and optimized for reliability chambers, though those things are generally considered mutually exclusive. Glocks may set the standard for reliability for you.

Click to expand...

Every other gun maker makes claims such as "just as reliable as a Glock".
No one makes claims such as "just as reliable as a S&W M&P".

Glock sets the standard to which other autoloaders are measured.

If you can't work on the M&P which has fewer parts than a Glock, then you shouldn't tackle the Glock,

Click to expand...

Yes, one can work on an M&P (after all, they copied much from Glock) IF you can fine the parts.
There are tons of after market parts for Glocks.
And Glock has always been more than willing to sell parts to owners.

IIRC, S&W does not recommend that the owner detail strip the M&P.
But Glock conducts an armorer course where they show owners how to detail strip Glocks and repair them.

the M&P seems every bit as rugged- though I'm sure you'll disagree and the M&P costs less.

Click to expand...

I'm sure that the M&P is rugged enough.
But again, Glock sets the standard to which others are measured.
People say "as tough as a Glock" or "as rugged as a Glock".
No one says "as tough as an M&P" or "as rugged as an M&P".

Glock sets the standard.

Aside from the lousy factory trigger which can be fixed for free, what does the M&P have against it in your book?

Click to expand...

I don't hate the M&P, but why get a knock off when you can get the real product?
Why get a pistol that is "as good as a Glock" when you can get a Glock for nearly the same price (around here the Glock and the M&P are very close in price)?
And why get a pistol that you know has a poor trigger right out of the box?

It may often be that a poor carpenter blames his tools but when a better tool is available it is a blind carpenter who can't see it.

Click to expand...

I agree 100%.
Only the M&P isn't a better tool.
And with the crappy trigger it's actually a poorer tool.

I have a GenIV Glock 22 and a SW M&P .40. I like the M&P over the GenIII glocks bc of the grip adaptor advantage but with the GenIV Glocks this is no longer an issue. Both are tough as nails and have a 15 round capacity magazine. For the Glock though there are also high cap mags available. The glock can also be used with certain carbine conversion kits and the mags are popular with pistol caliber carbines. This may however be of no use to you. The Glock also has slightly more features available but this is likely to change over time. Aside from that i find them both to be close enough in accuracy that it doesn't matter. So as others have said try them both out and go from there. If you rent or try someone elses make sure you try the different grip sizes for a more informed decision.

I prefer Glock. I could never warm up to the trigger on the M&P.

Every other gun maker makes claims such as "just as reliable as a Glock".

Glock sets the standard to which other autoloaders are measured.

Click to expand...

What a completely ridiculous statement. No one with any credibility has ever referenced the reliability of a SIG P226 or a Beretta 92FS as defined against a Glock.

Might a Glock serve as a referent against other striker fired poly guns? Sure. As the benchmark for ALL autoloading pistols? Patently stupid.

If you have no previous pistol experience, then it really doesn't matter which one you get.

Me, I do, and 99% of my handguns point differently than a Glock. It points high until you thoroughly train yourself to compensate for the Glock grip angle.

Were it me, I'd get the M&P. Mainly for the grip angle issue, but the M&P has a little more going for it.

easyg said:

Every other gun maker makes claims such as "just as reliable as a Glock".

Click to expand...

I have missed the ads from "every other gun maker" that makes that statement, nor can I find any online.

Do these ads say something like: "Sig; just as reliable as Glock!"

Please be so kind as to post one or a dozen such ads here.

Thanks!

It doesn't matter. Assuming you don't get a lemon (BOTH Glock and S&W, like any other factory, let out the occasional one), both are equally likely to be 100% reliable. I have owned a Glock 19 and two M&Ps, and none of those guns has ever malfunctioned.

The only two dings I have on the Glock are the plastic sights (Which I did manage to seriously ding up when I accidentally dropped the slide during disassembly, and which are more prone to wear and tear than steel) and the ergonomics. For some people, the ergonomics on a Glock are fine. Great for them. I find the grip to be squarish and something akin to holding a 1x4.

The grip angle on either is irrelevant. Learn to aim the gun proper, and you won't have a problem.

Get whichever one you find more comfortable and which points more naturally to you.

Madcap_Magician said:

The grip angle on either is irrelevant. Learn to aim the gun proper, and you won't have a problem.

Get whichever one you find more comfortable and which points more naturally to you.

Click to expand...

First you say grip angle doesn't matter, then say get the one that points more naturally.

How a gun points has much to do with grip angle.

How to "proper" aim a gun isn't the same as pointing it. Going slow and purposefully, it's easy to navigate and overcome deficiencies in design, but that doesn't make them go away.

Few people think a gun feels good that doesn't also point well for them.

If it's the first handgun, then there is nothing to unlearn, pointing-wise. But it's silly to fight your own equipment when you don't have to.

The grip angle doesn't matter, objectively, because you can learn to shoot with an aggressive forward grip like on a Glock or with a more traditional grip like an M&P, and because there are lots of shooters in each camp. All I am saying is that one grip angle is not objectively superior to the other.

I say pick whichever one points best for you (being the OP) because I don't know what grip comes more naturally to the OP, or if he has the training and experience to shoot both ways equally, or if he has a personal preference.

The reference to aiming the gun "proper," (Yes, believe it or not, I am aware that to be grammatically correct, the form of the word should be the adverb "properly") is from the type-to-video YouTube clip of a person asking nearly the same question- whether the Glock or the XD is superior. The answer to that question is the same as the OP's question. They are equal, and any amount of preference a given shooter has for one or the other is subjective.

The main problem with "significantly different" grip angles is that it's best to only have that brand or none at all because switching from one to another in a panic situation could cause bad aim. Just MHO.

4. Plastic magazines.

Click to expand...

Huh? Never got that argument. They are metal encased in plastic...no offense, but take a closer look.

4. Look up the number of "Glock mags are cheap, I just replace 'em" responses some time. Nobody chose to "copy" that design, not S&W, not Springfield, not Kahr, not Ruger, not CZ, not H&K.

Click to expand...

I've got several other pistols other than glocks.

That being said I do feel that I should speak up for glock magazines. The area where I shoot on my property is always either muddy, sandy or rocky (and one small concrete pad). When I run drills, I drop magazines and don't baby them. My glock mags will still endure a 200+ round session easily despite being dropped in all sorts of goop. Could I cram enough mud in there to make them fail? Yep. Same is true of any mags. But of all the mags I've used in this environment, the glocks ran the longest without needing to be cleaned (read: fail).

Say whatever negatives you want about the rest of the handgun as it is pretty much subjective...but I see no reason why the mags are a bad design.

the M&P is a pretty good comparison to the glock. the slide finishes are both pretty hard, melonite being 68 rc and the tenifer being 69rc. the mp is stainless and the glock is not, but history has shown the glock is very corrosion resistant. the slide rails on a glock appear to be much less robust than the M&P, but history has also shown that to be a non issue when determining durability. the M&P has more chamber support, if you buy into that issue. I am pretty sure the glock has less parts, but i do not own an M&P to compare it to. USA made stands for a lot, but how much of it is USA made? I do not know.

Buying one of the other, or both, because you read a review in a gun magazine or on the internet in a forum like this one is a bad reason to buy, IMO. Go to a range that rents pistols. Take along some friends who own pistols, and encourage them to bring their firearms along. Bring plenty of ammo. Then take the guns, one after the next, out for a test-drive. Before long, you'll find the right one that best fits your hand and eye. That's the one to buy, and that's all the reason you need to buy it: because it fits you.