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

[JR24]

Good points above, I'm not going to bother quoting.

I guess on my first post I was unclear. So I will make it maybe more simple so I'll note all these observations are for me; not for anyone else. That has to be key, shooting, ergos, triggers, sights, recoil are all subjective in my opinion, and no one can tell another how it will work for them.

For me:

- Can I shoot Glocks? Yes, I have and can be very accurate (for me) when I work at it.
- While shooting Glocks; do the sights come on target from rest/draw easily and quickly? No, can I work at it and make it so? Sure, if I spend time and $$ (ammo cost).
- Do I enjoy shooting Glocks? Not particularly, the grip is uncomfortable after a few mags (Gen 3 17 and 19 is what I've shot, maybe Gen 4 is better, I don't know).
- Could I become "proficient" with a Glock? Sure, once again, range time and money. I personally believe that would take much longer than a mag or two to make sure that gun points where I want it right away every time, but maybe my hands are slow learners.

For me its simple, I choose not to spend my limited range time and ammo to learn a weapon I don't particularly enjoy shooting. I also don't much care for little airweight .357's or pocket .380's, so I don't own/shoot them either. I stick with what I like to shoot for fun or for protection, especially when we have such a wealth of different options out there. For me, I wanted a carry polymer. I tried the Glock, I tried the M&P, I tried the XD, I tried a Walther. I decided on a Ruger SR9c, what fit me best.

I expressed my opinion, it might be right, it might be wrong.

 

[Mike1234567]

Oooh... JR24... yer gonna get Glock-clocked. I'm gonna hafta overt my eyes cuz I can't stand watching the blodshed.

 

[JR24]

I've got my helmet on.

 

[David E]

Ahhh David E, David E, David E...
You do realize you're arguing with a "first time glock holder and second time shooter"?

Carry on....

Yeah, but maybe he's fired a Glock 2, maybe 3 more times since then!

Kind of reminds me of the just classified "D" class shooter telling the Grand Master what he's doing wrong.......and means it!

 

[1SOW]

Kind of reminds me of the just classified "D" class shooter telling the Grand Master what he's doing wrong.......and means it!

There is no humility anymore.

 

[RatherNotSay]

No, you just call them unskilled and illogical and irrational. Who advises you on your non-offending comments, Joe Biden?

You know I joined this forum because of what it was supposed to stand for. I guess some of it's members are in shallow waters in the mater with clear comments like that.

Who has "denounced" Glocks? Hell, I own 13 of them. Won more than one match with them, too, but thanks for jumping to conclusions....

People are swearing they would rather not use a glock. In your somewhat educated opinion and vast years of experience would you call that? Jumping to conclusions? Did I ever mention you specifically?

As a matter of record, the 1911 pre-dates the Glock by 75 years. Becoming skilled with a gun before the other existed is "dangerous and irrational?"

Has anyone here shot a gun for 75 years? If you had read, and UNDERSTOOD, my argument you would have concluded that the statement was aimed at the ability to adapt to something so simple and not at a particular weapon.

You do recall the OP was simply asking which one of TWO guns he should buy, right? He wasn't seeking advice about which two dozen guns he should master first.

I understand that and if you look at my FIRST post I clearly answered that question to the best of my abilities. However, my response is clearly attending to those who commented on the grip "issue."

And beyond the purview of the OP.

But to address it briefly, I've won State and/or Regional titles using revolvers, 1911's, snubbies, S&W 3914, M&P and even Glocks.

This is only proving my point that you CAN do what children do and adapt to situations. Really how much brain power does it take to adapt to grip? I might not have won oodles of competitions or fired every firearm under the sun but from my short experience it takes a little getting used to and time. If a High Point .45 had the perfect grip would you use it to defend yourself or a glock?

It seems I've hurt some peoples DELICATE feelings and have had my words misinterpreted but that I can not help. Peoples inferiority complexes are their own demons.

@basicblur - I'm not to sure how that arrogant comment was supposed to contribute to the discussion but...carry on.

Back on subject...The glock is a great firearm however it is not "perfect" as the motto claims. As I said before both will do the job and do them well. I think the best advise came when one said to try both of them out and make a calculated and educated decision. To the OP, I apologize for the pissing contest this has become. This went from an informative thread to a "my chevy will kick your fords ass" thread.

 

[basicblur]

Peoples inferiority complexes are their own demons.

True...and after reading some of the posts in here, I've decided the 'Net has still not evolved enough to require me to change my signature!

 

[David E]

However, my response is clearly attending to those who commented on the grip "issue."

As I have said, if doing slowfire (such as how you shot your "first time Glock, second time gun") then one can address, navigate and accommodate flaws in any given gun. A new or beginning shooter may not consciously ID these flaws.

There is a big difference between casual shooting and shooting fast and accurately, such as for matches or possibly defending your life. Most know the difference, but obviously not everyone.

For example, making a draw from the holster and making a hit on target in less than a second does not allow time to "correct" how the gun points if you have 500,000+ draws under your belt with a gun(s) having a different grip angle.

In contrast, going to the range and shooting a casual group at a leisurely pace using your buddies Glock is.....(wait for it)........not the same thing.

Rathernotsay, I've listed some of my handgun experience, perhaps you could do the same. (How many rounds thru a handgun total have you fired thus far? Do you carry your G-21? Is it an "SF" version?)

 

[Madcap_Magician]

The pointability issue of the Glock is legendary. It created a cottage industry of folks making the Glock point "right" for countless people.

So the "legendary pointability issue" of the Glock makes it objectively superior, even for someone to whom it's not instinctively pointable?

I see.

The XD, M&P, and Glock all exist to fill the same niche. I am interested in seeing your objective list of qualities that make one better than the others.

 

[freespirt]

I went with the M&P for the SmithWesson pride. Apparently a made mistake as now (4yrs later) the frame is starting to warp downward at the barrell end. The gap between the slide and frame is a noticably curved taper. Just modest finger pressure will close the gap. Contacted S&W and got some smart-arsed answer that it was normal. I haven't pressed the issue with them but I'll think twice before buying a polymer S&W next time.

 

[Mike1234567]

People's inferiority complexes are their own demons.

Oh... you make me feel so... feel so... so... inadequate.

 

[Ben86]

I have both a Glock 17 and M&P9 for HD and occasional CC and often switch back and forth because I can't decide which one I like more. They both have their strong points. At the moment I feel I like shooting the M&P9 more so it's my "chosen one" at the moment.

You can't go wrong with either. Pick the one you shoot the best, or think you will shoot the best if you must buy before you try.

Skylerbone, that needs to be put on a t-shirt.....or maybe not.

 

[basicblur]

the frame is starting to warp downward at the barrell end

Are you sure it's (just now) 'warping', or have you just noticed it?

When I bought my first polymer gun many years ago, while doing my research lots of folks (you know which ones) made fun of the gap at the front of the Sigma slide/frame point. I read in a write-up on the Sigma S&W said it was designed to have a larger gap at the forward end as a certain polymer gun they tested (guess which?), when shot enough to (excessively?) heat up, the metal slide and polymer frame expanded at different rates, causing contact/friction between the two, resulting in stoppages.

Been quite a while since I looked, but I once heard the same complaint 'bout the M&P (people making fun of the droopy dust cover), and when I checked out a picture, it looked like the M&P in the pix I was looking at had the same gap they claim was designed into the Sigma.

True or not, I can't say.

BTW-after reading the above, over the years I tended to notice the gap at the front of a certain polymer brand-darned if it didn't look like a number of 'em (maybe older ones?) had a smaller gap at the forward slide/frame point than they did along the rest of the gap.

EDIT: If you look at the ZOOM view here, it looks to me like the frame/slide gap running the length of the M&P gets wider at the front end-possibly from the 'droopy' dust cover?

 

[Pizzagunner]

Honestly if you have to call it a "Skill" then maybe shooting isn't for you. The first time I picked up a glock this is what I shot at 25m. Not the greatest grouping but for a first time glock holder and second time shooter I had absolutely no issues with the grip.

That looks like it was hit by shotgun blasts.

Was someone poor mouthing handgun skills?

 

[David E]

So the "legendary pointability issue" of the Glock makes it objectively superior, even for someone to whom it's not instinctively pointable?

You misinterpreted what I said. You even cut and pasted my comment, which I thought was clear. By "legendary," I meant that its propensity to point high for most people is legendary. So much so that $1000's and $1000's of dollars have been spent to correct it. I've always maintained that if Herr Glock had duplicated the 1911 grip angle (and without that damn backstrap hump) it would've been at least twice as popular as it was.

The XD, M&P, and Glock all exist to fill the same niche. I am interested in seeing your objective list of qualities that make one better than the others.

In Post #2, I said "both are reliable. Go rent and shoot both to decide." I'm sticking with that advice, at least for a new shooter.

But let's see about the highlights of an objective list. It is by no means all-inclusive.

XD. PRO

Very shootable/pointable for most people

Ambi mag release.

All metal mag

Easy to check loaded status

XDM

As above, plus backstrap inserts

19 rd mag

Triggerless field stripping.

Trigger pull can be made very nice on both.

CON

parts availability (must return gun to factory for some parts)

Improved trigger pull costs $100 or more.

Detail strip not advised and requires roll pin punch.

M&P PRO

Very pointable for most people

Interchangeable backstraps

Ambi slide release

Reversible mag catch

Trigger pull can be made very nice at little cost if you do it yourself

Parts availability. S&W will sell you every internal part. (handy if you screw up your trigger job)

Durable finish

Metal mags

CON

Some parts are VERY small.

Detail strip rates a 5-6 on the difficulty scale.

Glock PRO

Rugged, simple design. Can replace parts using a rusty nail for takedown while sitting on a flat rock in the rain.

Parts availability unmatched in the industry. Most common parts are cheap.

Fast trigger reset.

Finish is very durable, rust resistant

Low bore axis

SF design cures the high pointing of the large frame glocks for many.

Mag is fairly well sealed from dirt.

33 rd mag available

CON

Points high for most people. Gen 4 was a 1/2 baked attempt to address this issue.

Some find grip frame blocky.

Fixing/correcting the grip angle costs $100+ and disqualifies the gun from some competition divisions.

Plastic sights should be replaced immediately with metal ones.



It's up to the shooter to determine which of these pro/con items matter the most.

 

[basicblur]

That looks like it was hit by shotgun blasts.
Was someone poor mouthing handgun skills?

Aw c'mon guys...cut him a little slack! Sometimes new shooter exuberence/enthusiam does get the better of 'em.
Besides...it sounds like as a new shooter his only frame of reference is his Glock.
What's the old Funkadelic lyric...fish don't know he's wet?

Besides...I see he's also started futzing with his trigger with less than 500 rounds (and a new shooter to boot!) through the gun!
Am I the only one that sees a dead cat/TV in someone's future?

Does anyone in here remember the new Glock owner that in his first post said he had his trigger down to slightly under a one pound pull, with the only problem being it had gone off a few 'extra' times at the range without a second pull of the trigger.
I was so looking forward to reading 'bout his future exploits, but he never made it to his second post! I'm sure someone sent him a PM 'splaining a few legalities to him...

Here's a freebie for a new shooter (from Ayoob):
A light trigger pull is, more than anything else, a crutch for bad trigger technique.

 

[WaltonS]

Glock makes a good gun, but I'll probably never own one. Forget all that "grip angle" nonsense.

My hands are just too small for the fat grips on most models!

 

[David E]

The funny part is, the standard grip reduction, usually done to fix the grip angle, would probably still make it fit your hand better, unless you're the guy from the Burger King commercial with abnormally small hands.

 

[RatherNotSay]

As I have said, if doing slowfire (such as how you shot your "first time Glock, second time gun") then one can address, navigate and accommodate flaws in any given gun. A new or beginning shooter may not consciously ID these flaws.

There is a big difference between casual shooting and shooting fast and accurately, such as for matches or possibly defending your life. Most know the difference, but obviously not everyone.

For example, making a draw from the holster and making a hit on target in less than a second does not allow time to "correct" how the gun points if you have 500,000+ draws under your belt with a gun(s) having a different grip angle.

In contrast, going to the range and shooting a casual group at a leisurely pace using your buddies Glock is.....(wait for it)........not the same thing.

Rathernotsay, I've listed some of my handgun experience, perhaps you could do the same. (How many rounds thru a handgun total have you fired thus far? Do you carry your G-21? Is it an "SF" version?)

Actually I didn't know what the hell I was trying to ID. All I was trying to do was concentrate on the sights with the target in the background. As far as grip all I knew at the time was to point thumbs in direction of aim and pressure should only be at the front and rear of the grip.

I understand what your saying but you obviously do not get what I am saying. The inability to adapt to a grip is a matter of unwillingness. Either subconscious or conscious you are unwilling to open your mind to any other grip angle. The OP asked a question about which one to get and automatically people dismissed the glock because of this "issue." Why would you suggest against a firearm that might "feel right" in the OP's hands just because it doesn't feel right in YOUR hands.

Did you not read my earlier post? I clearly stated that I was a beginner shooter with what looks like I will end up shooting my 2,000round in my G21 this year. No I don't have any shooting trophies or competitions under my belt but unfortunately I DID have to draw my gun in fear of my life. Call it dumb luck but I had no issues drawing. And yes I do carry my G21 in a blackhawk serpa holster and no it's not the slim frame. However, I do plan on getting a G20sf soon.

@pizzagunner - Can I see a pic of your second time handling a pistol @ 25m with a quick reset? Unless you shot 1" groups in that pic your condescending comments are childish at best.

@basicblur - I haven't shot many but the frames I am familiar with are glock, sig 226&229, M&P, high point (not proud of that one), a couple of rugs, spring xd and....oh I had the pleasure of shooting s&w 500. I also had the pleasure of shooting a colt 1911. I liked it a lot cause if you run out of ammo you can still beat the fear of God into the rest of the attackers.

Are you assuming I will have an AD or ND because of my WHOLE 2 POUNDS shaved off trigger pull? I read the cardinal rules

 

[JR24]

Well, the question in the OP was "which would you trust for concealed carry and why". I don't think any of the opinions expressed for, or against, the grip angle/fat grips/what have you are invalid in regards to that post.

For some, the naturally high (and different) pointing angle of a Glock (or fat grips, I didn't mention that problem for my small stubby fingers) is a concern. Since OP asked opinions, mentioning that is vaild.

Does that write off Glocks for me for concealed carry? Yes.

And I hadn't wanted to mention, but my stating my personal prefrence for not spending the time to learn to modify my shooting stylefor defensive purposes as per the OP to suit the Glock resulted in you questioning whether or not I should even bother shooting anymore, nevermind 15 years of shooting, then complaining of others not taking the high road comes across as farily hypocritical.

Once again, these are my opinions; YMMV

 

[basicblur]

Are you assuming I will have an AD or ND because of my WHOLE 2 POUNDS shaved off trigger pull?

It has happened to those better than us.

Iff'n you've done some research, you'll find a number of experienced folks are installing NY triggers on Glocks-it might be wise to peruse their writings and mull over why they're going in a different direction than you?

I'd also think most folks with some experience would tell you to put a '1,000 round trigger job' on your new toy before you even think about working on the trigger-maybe double or triple that round count for new shooters?

I don't really think it would be a bad 'thang for new shooters to all learn on DA revolvers-they'd learn trigger discipline by mastering 'em.

Fer myself, my old bed gun is a Sigma-trigger never bothered me, as I'm not really trigger sensitive. I have a SIG SP2022 that's going to replace it-one reason being the SIG is so easy to practice dry firing since it requires no slide rack for each trigger pull-the 12 pound pull doesn't bother me a bit as I learned on DA revolvers.
Based on your target pattern, proper dry fire practice should really help you tighten up those groups-I've heard some pros state as high as 80% of their practice these days is dry-firing. I've always thought folks overlook this easy/cheap/effective training/practice tool.

Fer myself, my guns are primarily for SD-as such, I've always practiced like I think they'll be employed should that time ever come. I prefer to use a 'controlled slap' on the trigger (which I know of at least one school now teaching) as should I be in a fight for my life, I kinda doubt I'm going to be worried 'bout trigger creep, stacking, reset, etc (not that I can't appreciate a good trigger).
Mebbe a controlled slap is not all that great for a beginner, but after one masters trigger pull, it might be time to consider the next step if one of your primary goals is SD. Might want to Google trigger slap or controlled trigger slap for a little reading?

 

[David E]

Actually I didn't know what the hell I was trying to ID.

I believe you.

All I was trying to do was concentrate on the sights with the target in the background.

Right, doing s-l-o-w-f-i-r-e......where you can accommodate deficiencies, consciously or not. You make my point.

As far as grip all I knew at the time was to point thumbs in direction of aim and pressure should only be at the front and rear of the grip.

This is not how the good shooters do it. I hope you've progressed.

I understand what your saying

Clearly you do not.

but you obviously do not get what I am saying. The inability to adapt to a grip is a matter of unwillingness. Either subconscious or conscious you are unwilling to open your mind to any other grip angle.

I understand what you're saying, but it's utter BS. I'm so "unwilling" to "open my mind to any other grip angle" (or action type) that I have trophies and plaques that prove that I not only "opened my mind," I excelled with them, including revolvers using moon clips and .357 with magnum ammo using speedloaders, snub nose .38's including a lowlight stage, DA/SA semi-autos, Condition One 1911's and even Glocks.

So tell me again about my "inability to adapt to a grip" and my "unwillingness" to "open my mind to any other grip angle" and specify any fact you're basing it on.

The OP asked a question about which one to get and automatically people dismissed the glock because of this "issue." Why would you suggest against a firearm that might "feel right" in the OP's hands just because it doesn't feel right in YOUR hands.

Reread Post #2, then tell me I suggested against a Glock. All my other posts say that a new shooter won't have trouble with the Glock grip angle, only those that have significant time with guns utilizing a different angle and THEN only if going fast.

I clearly stated that I was a beginner shooter......

You are exactly the kind of shooter that should do well with a Glock.

With all due respect, since you apparently own just one handgun that you've put only 2000 rds thru, you have taken neither the gun or yourself to the high levels possible. To be blunt, you don't know what you're talking about, beyond the most basic tenets of handgun shooting. Maybe you should make fewer pronouncements and try and learn something instead.

That said, I'm glad you had enough practice that you were able to draw your gun in time for your encounter.

 

[RatherNotSay]

@basicblur - For legal purposes I have thought about the ny trigger. Everyone keeps telling me that a DA will "tear me a new one" in court for having a 3.5lbs connector. I have grown quite comfortable with it and occasionally reinstall the 5.5lbs connector when I go to the range. I honestly do not feel the "pull" any lighter but the trigger is a bit smoother.

When I first started practicing for CHL all I did was dry fire. I thought it would be pretty stupid to draw the gun in a "hasty" pattern with a live round and do it wrong which would end up with my leg stitched up or my foot in a cast....or worse. Sometimes when I watch tv I dry fire at the people on the tv...I find it therapeutic when I watch "sons of guns" to pull the trigger on some of them

@David E - I honestly am not trying to contest you or your experience. I'm sure as I go along and have questions you'll be a useful source of knowledge. However, from what your stating it just sounds like your saying "experience breeds complacency." At least that's how I am taking in and regurgitating your words.

Recently I've felt more comfortable keeping an equal amount of contact on all four corners of my glock it's a bit odd but my follow up shots after a quick reset are getting tighter which makes me happier. I would ask you to point out other techniques but I'll save that for my own thread.

I meant YOU as a general ID not YOU in particular. Notice I said PEOPLE dismiss it. Out of context but I take responsibility for it.

I am not trying to take myself or my glock to the "highest lever"...yet. I'm taking it step by step and figuring things out on my own from the forums like this and asking the "old timers" at my range. I have no doubt you are a competent and successful shooter. However, throwing words out like muscle memory and such. I maybe new to guns but I am not new to golf. I know they are apples and oranges but hitting a golf ball with a sweet spot of about 1.5" at 120mph and still getting it dead center down the fairway is no easy task either. We have to change grips, stance, club length, club angle, stance angle, club head angle, speed of swing, angle of swing, follow through angle and such...again I'm not saying they are the same as shooting a gun however in my experience with both it's not a good idea to get used to one grip, swing, angle of everything and such.

Do you by chance do 3 gun competitions?

 

[Apocalypse-Now]

i owned several m&p's in the past. i still own my glocks

 

[Inebriated]

Ah yes, the "grip angle" argument...

I just don't get it.
I can shoot an M&P just fine.
I can shoot a Glock just fine.
I can shoot a 1911 just fine.
i can shoot a Beretta just fine.
I can shoot a Ruger GP100 just fine.
I can shoot a S&W 686 just fine.
In fact, I can shoot just about any handgun just fine regardless of the grip angle.

And I can use any power drill (cordless or not) just fine too regardless of the grip angle.

What's my secret?

No secret at all....the human hand is an amazing thing as it's very adaptable and can adjust to just about any grip angle.
Unless the bones in your hand and wrist have been somehow fused in some manner, you should have no problem with any handgun grip angle.


To be blunt, I think the grip angle argument is just BS.

No need to be a smart ass... Just because some people have personal preferences doesn't mean you can call BS on their reasoning for not owning one. Plenty of people just don't mesh well with some guns, and it's absolutely ridiculous to expect someone to force themselves to like something when they can get the same flavor from another brand.