perceived improvements of S&W M&P over Glocks

[30 cal slob]

recently i've come across several S&W M&P owners who have expressed great satisfaction with their pistols. they have referred to it as "an improved Glock."

while it's kinda hard to beat a Glock 17/19 for a 9mm gun, i'd be curious to hear from M&P owners on what sets the M&P apart.

is it the trigger, accuracy, ergonomics?

i've never been a huge fan of the older S&W autoloaders (my first carry piece was a 3914 and then a 4506, what pieces of junk now that I think about it). and i have a broken walther p-22.

thanks in advance for your comments.

 

[goon]

I owned two Glocks.
Both were reliable and accurate enough that I didn't have any complaints but for me the ergonomics, while not bad, were not ideal.
The M&P fixes that by being modular.
It also has steel novak sights standard as opposed to Glock's plastic sights (plastic is OK for some things but not for sights IMO).
It's also American made - this is something I prefer when at all possible.
None of these things are really across the board improvements IMO, but they work for me.
I bought my M&P to replace an unreliable SIG P-226 and I have no regrets.

Mostly, my M&P just seems to work. No BS, no whining about how you can't use cast bullets or your gun will blow up, nothing of that sort.
That's why I like it.

 

[MachIVshooter]

i've never been a huge fan of the older S&W autoloaders (my first carry piece was a 3914 and then a 4506, what pieces of junk now that I think about it).

THe 3rd gen Smiths, albeit a bit heavy in all stainless trim, are arguably the most durable autoloaders around. My 5906, 4006, 4506 and 1006 are the test platforms for all my +p and +p+ handloads and have never let me down. I also carry a S&W 4516, which handles my +p 240 grain JHC handloads like a champ.

As for the original question, the M&P is simply far more ergonomic than a glock, and offers several safety configurations. The lower bore axis really enhances controllability.

 

[Koblenz]

I tried a full size .40 M&P at a range in comparison to my .40 Glock 23. I really couldn't detect any difference between the two. Both had about the same accuracy, recoil and muzzle flip.

I too prefer the Third Gen S&Ws to the newer plastic guns. They handle recoil far better.

 

[DougDubya]

I like the trigger reach, and the grip more readily conforms to my hand than a Glock. The stippling also beats the "grenade" checkering. I also like the steel sights.

No flies on the Glock however. I'd love to see an M&P that matches the dimensions and balance of a Glock 19.

 

[The Lone Haranguer]

recently i've come across several S&W M&P owners who have expressed great satisfaction with their pistols. they have referred to it as "an improved Glock."

I may be one of them. I've often referred to it as a "better-feeling Glock."

is it the trigger, accuracy, ergonomics?

Two out of three. The accuracy is a wash, virtually a dead heat, but the trigger has a shorter crisper pull, and the grip shape/feel/fit in the hand is better, with less tendency to point high. Reliability is also a dead heat.

I'd love to see an M&P that matches the dimensions and balance of a Glock 19.

Agreed.

 

[CountGlockula]

Customer service is key.

I'd add customer service concerns regarding any semi-auto brand. So far Glocks have the best customer service.

 

[Boats]

The Sigma was the Glock clone and it showed.

The M&P is the better mousetrap and it shows too.

Glocks are "one size fits some." I like the concept of the G20, but the execution sucks, so I never buy one. The grip angle is aberrant. The finger bumpers on the front strap are abominable. The squared off one side only mag release blows.

The M&P allows meaningful grip adjustments via back strap changes that can be accomplished without tools in seconds. The front strap is inoffensive, and the mag release is reversible PDQ. Also, there are slide release levers on both sides, which allow for better administrative handling.

The M&P-9 is the best polymer automatic I have shot, a list that includes the:

Beretta 9000
Beretta PX-4
CZ-100
G17
G19
G20
G21
HK USP 45c
HK P2000
Ruger P345
Springfield XD9
Springfield XD45
Taurus 24/7
Walther P99

There is an entire gunsmithing subculture dedicated to making Glock ergonomics less sucky. That alone should say something powerful about a company getting by on inertia.

After false starts, Smith, Ruger, Beretta, Springfield, SIG, H&K, and others are beginning to show up the fact that the Glocks are getting too long in the tooth.

 

[GVMan]

Glock for me!

I rented both before buying the G26.

The M&P felt the best in my hand. However, I was very disappointed with the trigger reset. I couldn't hear a click and I couldn't feel it either. I had to guess where it was on each shot. Sometimes I guessed wrong resulting in no "Bang".

The Glock grip didn't feel as nice in my hand. But I was more accurate with it (by a little) and the reset was amazing, an audible click and a felt click on every shot. I felt very "in control" with the Glock and kept loading up its magazine instead of the M&P.

The after market options for the Glock are outstanding.

 

[NG VI]

does anybody else notice that the M&P is just a re-done Sigma? seriously, I have a Sigma 9VE, and I think it's funny hearing about the M&P, because I haven't seen anyone acknowledge the fact that the M&P is a Sigma with better grip material, FAR better looking slide, and changeable straps. If I'm wrong let me know.

 

[MachIVshooter]

does anybody else notice that the M&P is just a re-done Sigma? seriously, I have a Sigma 9VE, and I think it's funny hearing about the M&P, because I haven't seen anyone acknowledge the fact that the M&P is a Sigma with better grip material, FAR better looking slide, and changeable straps. If I'm wrong let me know.

You're wrong.

 

[GearHead_1]

There is an entire gunsmithing subculture dedicated to making Glock ergonomics less sucky. That alone should say something powerful about a company getting by on inertia.

I've got one of each and like them both but I don't buy this argument. The same could be said about AR 15's, AK 47's, 1911's, S&W revolvers and the list goes on. The only "inertia" involved is that Glock keeps selling a lot of pistols. The reason the large after market exists is simply because there are so many of these guns in consumers hands. Many owners like the personalized nature of customizing. I'm one of these guys, nothing from the factory is "good enough" for me. It doesn't matter whether it's a car, motorcycle or a gun, I modify it for a higher level of performance or better fit. It's not that these pistols come broken from the factory or they wouldn't be so popular. In short, there is a market ready made that exists to support after market parts development and sales. It's all about money.

 

[FieroCDSP]

NG VI.....seriously, they're nothing alike, and I own both. About the only similarities between the M&P and the Sigma are that they're both striker fired pistols (so are the Glock and XD), they have near identical grip angles (not too far from a 1911) and it's made by Smith & Wesson (100+ years of making guns, and possibly the best Customer Service in the business).

The M&P was designed from the ground up to be a different gun. They looked at everything they've had good and bad about other guns they've made (especially the Sigma) and took the best.

The poster up above that complained about the trigger reset is entitled to his personal tastes, but I have never had a problem knowing where my trigger reset is. So it's not audible. Really, is that necessary? Once you learn a gun's characteristics, you'll know where it's trigger reset is. To expect every gun to have the same reset is a bit much, isn't it?

Anyway, the only way to decide is to shoot one for yourself. With it's popularity, most ranges have at least one to rent.

 

[Charles Morse]

I'm one of those guys you've heard bragging about my M&P 9, I call it "a prettier Glock." It gives me the same feeling at the range that my Glocks do: confidence based on performance.

 

[Mac45]

The M&P fits my hand, the Glock doesn't.
That's what did it for me.

 

[JBP55]

NV GI, You are wrong.

 

[NG VI]

looks like i'll have to look at them a little closer, sorry guys!

 

[basicblur]

does anybody else notice that the M&P is just a re-done Sigma? seriously, I have a Sigma 9VE, and I think it's funny hearing about the M&P, because I haven't seen anyone acknowledge the fact that the M&P is a Sigma with better grip material, FAR better looking slide, and changeable straps. If I'm wrong let me know.

I agree…I’ve got a couple of Sigmas, and after hearing ‘bout how great the M&P was I went to the gun shop and looked/handled…damn…looks like nothing more than a “gussied up” Sigma to me (not that there’s anything wrong with that)!
Everybody keeps yakkin’ ‘bout how great/how much better the M&P is, but so far I’ve not come across an article that points out any great improvements. Actually, I don’t like the serrations on the slide (don’t care for the “wave” style), don’t need the interchangeable grips (the Sigma fits me without ‘em), so I’m at a loss AFA why everyone thinks the M&P is better?
‘Course, I know the early Sigmas had problems (although no more than a lot of other guns I’ve seen), but supposedly they’ve fixed ‘em all with the “E” models.
Anybody got links to articles showing why the M&P is supposed to be such an improvement?

 

[Jason_G]

Anybody got links to articles showing why the M&P is supposed to be such an improvement?

You just need to shoot one.

I don't own or plan to own either pistol anytime soon, so I have no "mine is better" agenda. I think the M&P is hands down more comfortable to shoot than the G-17, and although I think both triggers could be better, I like the M&P's better. Now all of that being said, I don't think there's anything special that either pistol does. They are just "no-frills" striker fired duty guns. I'm a fan of hammers and manual safeties (or at least decockers), so I won't be rushing out to buy either one, but as that category of guns goes, the M&P is the one I would pick. Obviously it's all subjective. Everyone has their opinion, but there's mine.

Jason

 

[Mastiff4570]

i shot both the M&P in .40 and the glock 23 i loved them both but i personally was more comfortable and just happier with the 23 but my father can shoot glocks and really likes the M&P both great guns i think it ends the same as most of the conversations about similar guns made by two great companies that is shoot it and see what you like

 

[FieroCDSP]

BasicBlur, those serrations are incredible to have in actual use. I've fondled my share of guns, but I've yet to run into another one that I can rack the slide on as easily as the M&P. It takes hardly any hand-strength to grip it effectively, obviously a plus for those shooters who don't have the grip they used to. I've had days where they've actually skinned my finger-tips a bit. Point is, when you grab the slide to rack it, you know it's not going to slip out of your grasp, be it oily, sweaty, wet, or cold.

So, the list of differences from a Sigma:
1:Better slide serrations for better grip.
2:Fully supported chamber.
3:Better trigger (factory is about 6 pounds)
4:Better gripping surface on the frame (soft rubber vs hard checker on the Sigma)
5:Changable back-straps (because one size doesn't fit all)
6:Truly Abidextrious(I spelled that wrong): switchable mag-release+slide-release both sides.
7:Lower bore-axis
8:Incredibly simple to lighten the trigger down to 3.5 pounds, no part swapping. (On a Sigma, just to get it down near 8lb, you have to use a weaker striker spring, which can result in light primer strikes.)

Really, need I go on?

Upon reflection i realize this has turned into a M&P or Sigma argument, and I appologise if I've fueled that a bit, and helping to force the subject from the original M&P vs Glock thread. I'm just tryint to get people to realize the Sigma and M&P are nothing alike.

 

[simpleguy]

M&P just a better pistol. My only gripe about my .40 M&P is trigger pull.

I have had a trigger job done and I'm still not quite satisfied, but the reset after the trigger job is awesome! I may be in the market for another/lighter trigger job soon......but alas, it's off to the range on Saturday to check out my new Crimson Trace LG-660 grips for my M&P.

 

[tinygnat219]

Shoot I call the Glock my "Pretty Hi-Point".

 

[skwab]

Is the Smith the better GLock? I think it is hard to compete with Glock's legacy - reputation for dependability, servicability, etc - The Glock IMO is like the 1911 as far as the uniqueness of the design, and the similarly cult like status it has developed over the years. People who love 1911s love them no matter what comes out - same with with the Glock

And I don't think that the availability of aftermarket pieces for the Glock means it is bad by any means - again look at the 1911 - look at the AR platform - you can build these weapons strictly from aftermarket pieces


The MP is a great polymer pistol hands down - and we are fortunate as consumers to have a ton of really great choices in the polymer market and they seem to just get better and better.

But a Glock will always be a Glock.

 

[Cron]

I don't have any experience with the Glock. I've owned both the Sigma and the M&P. My Sigma 40 was hands down the most reliable semi auto I've ever owned. NEVER had a failure. However the trigger was terrible and I was never able to shoot it well as a result. The M&P fixes the trigger problem very nicely.