RugerSR9c vs Smith and Wesson M&P9c

[The_Armed_Therapist]

I like the M&P better, but the SR9c fits my hand better. Also, I hate thumb safeties, but like the other safety features of the SR9c. M&P is better for carry if you don't chamber a round (my opinion), but the SR9c would be OK with a round in the chamber. Lastly, the Ruger may be a better choice if you have young children unless you have a full-proof alternative plan for keeping everyone safe.

if I may... why? I thought the whole purpose of carrying, was to carry loaded.

Just my opinion. It's what I'm comfortable with. There have been times where I have chambered a round in anticipation of increased risk, but I usually don't. I'm simply just rarely in circumstances in which the split second it takes to chamber a round won't be allowed. I've been criticized for it a lot, though I don't really understand why.

The main reason for my opinion is that I have a 4-year old, a 3-year old, and a 1-year old and I can tend to be absent-minded. I would hate to accidentally leave it on the counter in the bathroom with one in the chamber and no safety.

 

[Ben86]

As many as 6 of 10 guns were returned by more than one department for literally spraying rounds all over the place.

Literally spraying rounds all over the place?

 

[allaroundhunter]

As many as 6 of 10 guns were returned by more than one department for literally spraying rounds all over the place.

Literally spraying rounds all over the place?

......This confuses me as well.....I know some people aren't a fan of the triggers, but out of the 4 M&P's I have shot, none of them "sprayed" rounds all over the place....

And we all know that all police officers are expert marksmen

 

[keeplivnthedream]

I don't understand how Spraying rounds all over the place is even a possibility. It sounds to me like this was a made up bump on the M&P9c. Does anyone have an explanation as to why any handgun would "Spray rounds all over the place". It would be the shooters fault. But im seriously doubting that a gun in the modern times would miss a target that badly. That makes no sense what so ever.

 

[crracer_712]

Don't let a bunch of strangers on the internet decide what gun you buy.

WRONG!!! That is what the internet is for. Don't believe me? Ask this guy!

Choosing Your Carry Gun: A Gun Expert's Guide

 

[crracer_712]

Just my opinion. It's what I'm comfortable with. There have been times where I have chambered a round in anticipation of increased risk, but I usually don't. I'm simply just rarely in circumstances in which the split second it takes to chamber a round won't be allowed. I've been criticized for it a lot, though I don't really understand why.

The main reason for my opinion is that I have a 4-year old, a 3-year old, and a 1-year old and I can tend to be absent-minded. I would hate to accidentally leave it on the counter in the bathroom with one in the chamber and no safety.

Yep, that answers that. And no, no ridicule here, just wondered what your particular reason was. People need to do what they are comfortable with.

 

[Psa1m144]

SR9c is an incredible firearm but I advise you to pick the one that feels best in your hand.

 

[burk]

......This confuses me as well.....I know some people aren't a fan of the triggers, but out of the 4 M&P's I have shot, none of them "sprayed" rounds all over the place....

And we all know that all police officers are expert marksmen

I would call 6" groups at 25 yards off the bench "spraying rounds all over the place" and clearly unacceptable for a service sized weapon. Most of the guys posting on 10-8 about this problem are Police trainers or armorers. And for the record they have not encountered the same problems in the .45 or the .40. In fact they have reviewed the .45 and consider it one of the best .45s on the market.

1) M&P 9 FS, no TS, DCAEK trigger, HD sights. 8 inch group, as well centered as an 8 inch group can be, repeated twice. At that point, I started doubting my trigger control this morning, and shot a Glock 19 with HD sights I had with me. Shot two sub 3 inch groups with the 19 and HD sights. Followed up with old M&P 9 and shot two sub 3.5 inch groups.

2) M&P 9 FS, TS, stock sights and trigger. Both groups were 3.5 inches or better.

3) M&P 9 FS, TS, stock sights and trigger. Both groups were 3.5 inches or better.

4) M&P Pro. Both groups were larger than 6 inches.

5) M&P Pro. Both groups were 3.5 inches or better.

6) M&P 9 C, TS, stock sights and trigger. Group was 6 inches or larger. Elevation was good, dispersion was all in windage. Took another 9C upper I had, put it on the lower, and shot two groups 3.5 inches or smaller.

7) M&P 9 FS, no TS. Both groups were about six inches.

I bought a full size M&P in 9mm on a promotional purchase program when they first came out. It was a tack driver...just unbelievably accurate...punching tiny little groups with little work from my end. I shot it for a while and stupidly sold it to a smooth talking buddy of mine. Missing it, I bought another one NIB last year. The new one didn't shoot worth a damn. I thought it was me but I let several other shooters, including a few high level competitive shooters, shoot it and I couldn't get it to shoot any better than about 5-6" at 25yds. Several other friends reported similar issues with accuracy...back to Glocks for me. Damn shame though, the M&P is such a nice feeling, ergonomically friendly pistol.

I Went to the range a few days ago with my M&P9, I too found accuracy issues. Mine shot 6"+ at 25 yards supported, I'm seruously contemplating selling it and going back to my Glock 17 for duty use which shoots 3.5" groups at 25 yards. One thing stopping me is, I have a lot of $ in it with the Boresight Solution work I had done. Btw, this is only an issue wioth my 9mm, my M&P45 shoots great at all ranges

"I received the pistols back from S&W today. They put a new barrel in the full size gun. The Pro Series gun they sent a test target with a 5 shot group fired a 10 yards. It shot about a 2"'group at that distance. Letter with it says the gun meets factory specs and does not need service. I guess it is only intended to be used at close range as when I benched it at 25 yards the best 10 shot group I had was 6" while a stock Glock 17 with the same ammo at 25 yards was shooting groups the size of the 10 yard group they sent."

This is absurd. Can S&W say, with a straight face, that a "Pro" is acceptable shooting six inch groups at 25 yards?

Little more data. My buddy in UT got his new FS 9 w/TS yesterday, took it immediately to 25 yards, and it is off the paper ugly.

A CT buddy took his Pro and FS 9 to 25 yards today, and the FS 9 is fine, but the Pro is ugly.

It is so frustrating because the ergos of the FS 9 and Pro are great, but Smith really needs to solve this accuracy problem with the 9's, or it is hard to rely on them, as the odds of getting a good one seem 50/50 at best.

http://www.10-8forums.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=98784&page=1

 

[Stasher1]

It's my understanding that there have been some issues with barrel lockup in some of the M&P9's, but the issues seem to be much more common in the full-size models than the compacts from what I've read.

I held both guns (M&P9c and SR9c) a couple weeks ago, and while I loved the nice slim grip of the SR9c, the safeties and magazines that come with the SR9c were deal-breakers for me.

1) I don't want a thumb safety or mag-disconnect on my carry gun. I want to be able to draw, point, and shoot without having to think about any extra crap.

2) Who was the genius that decided to include one compact and one full-size mag with the SR9c instead of two compact mags? If I'm going to have a spare mag, I want it to be identical to the one in the gun.

My local dealer had the SR9c for $409 and the M&P9c (LE package with 3 mags) for $399. The M&P had everything I wanted, nothing I didn't want, came with three mags, and was $10 cheaper. I walked out with a new M&P9c.

 

[Ben86]

I would call 6" groups at 25 yards off the bench "spraying rounds all over the place" and clearly unacceptable for a service sized weapon.

I guess that would suck. But, of the 4 M&P pistols I own they all can hold close to 2" groups at 25 yards in a rest. That's about as accurate as a non custom defensive pistol is going to get. Lemons do happen though, that includes all brands.

WRONG!!! That is what the internet is for. Don't believe me? Ask this guy!

OK. I stand corrected. I guess the best thing is to go on the internet and let complete strangers tell you how to spend $500+ on something that you want to use to defend your life.

 

[crracer_712]

OK. I stand corrected. I guess the best thing is to go on the internet and let complete strangers tell you how to spend $500+ on something that you want to use to defend your life.

What?? 500 bucks? You certainly aren't showing much confidence and it's not going to buy a gun large enough to show others your manlyhood

Spend more, buy bigger. It's the only way to gain respect....

 

[Smokey in PHX]

I have and like both. Both are accurate for me and shoot everything that I use. No complaints with either one. The Ruger fits my hand the best so if I had to pick just one I'd keep the Ruger.

 

[keeplivnthedream]

Burk, I am a bit baffled by what the LEOs have found. But it seems to me like its a pretty niche thing. Especially since this is happening (from what i have found) to a very small group of people in a small amount of time. I.E. 6 People in about 15 days on 1 forum by a bunch of glock lovers. No other problems have been reported from what i have found accept for the problems on this one forum. I hate to say it, but i cant believe this is an actual statistical problem because there isn't a large enough group involved over a long enough period of time. I mean the M&P has been out since 2005 and just now people are realizing its not accurate? I refuse to believe that this gun is not accurate because 6 people had a problem with it. And i don't think its possible for a gun that has been shooting reliably for 7 years to all of a sudden in 15 days be so bad as to fly rounds 6-8 inches apart. I'm not calling anyone a lier per say i just dont think its possible that a gun in this day and age is inaccurate at 25 yards. I think your reading a heavily glock biased review

 

[Ben86]

I.E. 6 People in about 15 days on 1 forum by a bunch of glock lovers.

That's certainly something that should be taken with a grain of salt. I think Glocks and M&Ps are great. But, I hate to see people miss out on a gun they might really like (whichever one that is) just because they put to much confidence in what they read on the internet, or some other form of hearsay.

 

[keeplivnthedream]

you speak words of wisdom Ben. And i understand completely what your point is. They are both great guns. I have come to the conclusion to not buy a glock because of the lack of safety in them. While this is the case i dont completely understand why so many people with glocks tend to say they own the best gun in the world. I asked a simple question (this or that) and i get No buy something else. I dont completely despise it. however i question it.

 

[burk]

Don't know if I'd call them "Glock lovers" they were also the first forum to point out these issues with Glocks:

1) Glock is recalling the springs on gen 4 9mm because many 9mm rounds can't compress the double springs enough to go return the slide into battery/

2) Gen 3 Glock 22's and 23's have issues with the spring not returning to battery with a weapons light attached. This is the reason Glock changed the springs in the first place.

3) Some second and third gen Glock 23's and 22's have had a tendency to have semi-catastrophic failures (blowing out thru the mags) with reloads because thier chambers on the tight side for 40 S & W and some reload cases are expanded and don't seat properly.

In other words they've been as hard on Glocks as anyone, and like I said before they love the S & W M & P in a .45.

 

[keeplivnthedream]

All glock lovers stuff aside. Its been out for 7 years and hasnt had a problem and all of a sudden they arent accurate? How does that get explained? Im just saying these guys prolly werent the first to test a m&p9mm from 25 yards. And how can they say this- "I think i can shoot straighter than this gun does?"

 

[StrikeFire83]

Just my opinion. It's what I'm comfortable with. There have been times where I have chambered a round in anticipation of increased risk, but I usually don't. I'm simply just rarely in circumstances in which the split second it takes to chamber a round won't be allowed. I've been criticized for it a lot, though I don't really understand why.

The main reason for my opinion is that I have a 4-year old, a 3-year old, and a 1-year old and I can tend to be absent-minded. I would hate to accidentally leave it on the counter in the bathroom with one in the chamber and no safety.

Okay, I'll be the first one to say it...WHAT?!?!?!?!?!?

If you're too "absent-minded" not to leave guns lying around with loaded magazines in the midst of 3 young children, I'd say you either need get less "absent-minded" or revaluate this whole "I'm gonna carry guns" thing.

 

[keeplivnthedream]

hahahah.

 

[Fishman777]

The M&P has been adopted by over 800 police departments in a relatively short time. These pistols also won an equal share (with Glock) of a $50 million contract with the Department of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms. The M&P 40 and M&P40c along with the 40 caliber Glock pistols passed the ATF pistol trial. It was a non-biased test that involved pumping about 20,000 rounds through each brand of gun. Both of these brands of guns were deemed to be reliable. I really want to like the SR9s, but I don't think that the SR9 is in the same class. I'm not aware of even one Police Department or military unit that has adopted the SR9. I think that they feel good in the hand and are accurate, but to me, that is just not enough. I just don't see SR9s as serious duty weapons. In a relatively short time, the M&P pistols have really proven to be exceptional. I like the SR9s, but I just don't think that they are in the same class as M&Ps and Glocks.

 

[Tcruse]

All glock lovers stuff aside. Its been out for 7 years and hasnt had a problem and all of a sudden they arent accurate? How does that get explained? Im just saying these guys prolly werent the first to test a m&p9mm from 25 yards. And how can they say this- "I think i can shoot straighter than this gun does?"

I would probably agree that the problem with M&P, based on the evidence given is at worst a QA problem and not a basic design problem (assuming that no process or design change has happend recently). Also, like many problems most people will just assume that it was their shooting or that is is normal, until one person documents and then everyone will notice and report.

I suspect that much of the Glock Gen 4 issues could also be attributed to this condition. On this forum like others, there are people that seem to have strong feelings either "for" or "against" certain brands.

 

[TarDevil]

I really want to like the SR9s, but I don't think that the SR9 is in the same class... I think that they feel good in the hand and are accurate, but to me, that is just not enough. I just don't see SR9s as serious duty weapons.

Why? Reliable, accurate, good ergonomics. You must have at least one good reason why the SR9 is not in the same class.

 

[easyg]

Both of these brands of guns were deemed to be reliable. I really want to like the SR9s, but I don't think that the SR9 is in the same class. I'm not aware of even one Police Department or military unit that has adopted the SR9. I think that they feel good in the hand and are accurate, but to me, that is just not enough. I just don't see SR9s as serious duty weapons. In a relatively short time, the M&P pistols have really proven to be exceptional. I like the SR9s, but I just don't think that they are in the same class as M&Ps and Glocks.

I have a Glock 26 and a Ruger SR9c and a M&P45c and they are all definitely in the same "class".

It might just be that Ruger has chosen to not pursue law enforcement contracts as aggressively as Glock and S&W.

As for which gun to get...

Both are fine quality firearms.
And both are accurate and reliable.
There are a few differences however...

The Ruger definitely has a better trigger.

I prefer the sights of the M&P a little more.

The Ruger polymer frame does not feel quite as robust as the M&P frame (probably because Ruger tried to make the pistol a bit thinner).

Good luck,
Easy

 

[cwl1862]

Bought the SR9, then came the SR9c, and now the SR40c! Love the design! My vote is SR9/9c

 

[JR24]

I like the SR9s, but I just don't think that they are in the same class as M&Ps and Glocks.

Based on police contracts? I prefer to base my opinions on personal use and performance, but that's just me.