M&P trigger vs Sigma

[Glockorama]

I am interested in the S&W M&P pistol, probably in .40. I have yet to shoot one or really get a good "feel" for it. Is the trigger different than those on the sigma? They look the same. I shot a Sigma years ago and was VERY unimpressed, but I have heard good things about the M&P.

 

[Coronach]

The more I think about it, the more S&W would have benefitted from going with a different trigger (and by "trigger" I mean that curved part that sticks out of the gun), since the M&P trigger looks exactly like the Sigma trigger, and no one wants that.

If that's not a testament to just how horrible the Sigma was, I dunno what is.

No, the triggers are not the same. Or, rather, the curved part that sticks out of the gun is the same, but the little metal bits to which it is attached are completely different. The M&P trigger is a million times better than the Sigma trigger.

Mike

PS Oh, also, the M&P trigger, out of the box, is kinda gritty and creepy. It's not bad, but it is also not great. It cleans up nicely through simple use, though. After about 2k rounds, mine is quite smooth. If you get a gunsmith to work on it, you can make it very nice indeed.

 

[SBD]

I've fired both at the S&W Shooting Sports Center range (so both were well-used, not new).

In my opinion, the two guns are nothing alike, even though the triggers "look" the same (and I agree with you--they do actually look the same). They pull quite differently.

I tried the 9mm version of the Sigma and was unable to double-tap with it. I liked everything about the gun except for that--it felt fine in my hands, I could shoot accurately with it, etc.. Maybe I wasn't trying hard enough, but I just couldn't fire two rounds off in rapid succession, and I really thought it was because of trigger of that particular pistol I was using. After doing quite a bit of research on forums though it looks as if this characteristic is somewhat inherent to the Sigma family.

The M&P series (I have worked with the 9c, 40c, and 40 full-sized) is quite nice though. The guns are ergonomic, pretty rugged, and shoot well, I think. I was considering getting a Sigma but for the extra $100-$150, an M&P is well worth it.

 

[rbernie]

The M&P trigger is a million times better than the Sigma trigger.

That's actually an understatement.

 

[The Lone Haranguer]

I've never shot the Sigma. It is reported to have about a 8-9-lb. trigger pull, whereas the M&P's is about 6 lbs. - a noticeable difference. My M&P had a somewhat "scratchy" or "gritty" break when new, but after shooting and dry-firing it this smoothed out considerably. Bottom line: it is nothing like the Sigma, despite the similarity in appearance of the triggers. I think this is giving it a "Sigma stigma."

 

[TomN]

I hated the trigger on the one Sigma I had the pleasure of firing. The trigger on my M&P 45 is sooooo much better!

 

[cbsbyte]

They may look the same but they are mechanically different with the M&P a step above the Sigma trigger.

 

[George Hill]

They also have the same style Witness Hole on the top for seeing if the chamber is loaded.
I picked the word, "style" because that is all that it is. Bad styling carry overs. Much like Pontiac's continued grill shape even though everyone universaly thinks it is ugly. But Pontiac sees it as brand identification.
I can understand that, but who wants their brand identified with crap?

My next auto will be the M&P 45 Compact. Due out later this year.

 

[Coronach]

I dunno. I don't mind the witness hole or the trigger's look, beyond the fact that they have Sigma Stigma.

Mike

PS I really wish I had thought that term up.

 

[Wayne G.]

My first thoughts when I saw the M&P were, "Oh, just another S&W Sigma 10 years later. No thanks!" That is, until I researched it, held it, dry-fired it. LOTS better than a Sigma. And the trigger is night and day different. I don't regret buying the M&P. Everything my glock is plus some. OK, ducking now.