What is the point of the M & P anyway?

[CPshooter]

The point of the M&P being created was to cut into Glock's market share. Plain and simple. Do I like the M&P? No. Do I like the Glock? Only the 9mm models. Was this thread created for trolling purposes? I think so.

 

[David E]

With the Glock and P99 being proven, reliable, accurate designs for much longer time and with arguably better build quality,

Nothing wrong with S&W quality or reliability.

what does the M & P really do any better or differently?

Ergonomics.

What does it do different than Glock? They don't ka-BOOM.

considering the dud they made with other polymers like the Sigma?

Dud? They've sold a boatload of those guns and its descendant. It's still a very strong seller.

Why did S&W come out with the M&P? To make money.

 

[fastbolt]

With the Glock and P99 being proven, reliable, accurate designs for much longer time and with arguably better build quality, what does the M & P really do any better or differently? Can S & W even build something to the reliability level of either of those guns, considering the dud they made with other polymers like the Sigma?

Really?

Why is there more than one brand of cars, trucks, motorcycles, scooters, boats, etc?

Why more than one type of cell phone, computer, tablet, etc?

Why more than one brand of shoes, bluejeans, t-shirts, etc?

FWIW, I'm an owner, user and armorer for Glock, P99 and the M&P pistols (among others).

There are features of all 3 which I find advantageous, and some not-so-advantageous. I'd only own ONE of them if I didn't think the others also offered features making them worth owning/using. I've had to repair examples of all 3 designs.

The M&P pistol series is a fine, reliable & serviceable product.

 

[SIGfiend]

The most obvious advantage that the M&P has over the small frame Glock line is that it was designed to function optimally with the .40...whereas the Glock was adapted from the 9mm.

The M&P introduced to the LE market the interchangeable backstraps to fit different hand sizes. This was sus a huge improvement that Glock needed to respond with their Gen4 models

Your title is about the M&P line, why do you keep bringing up the Sigma to find shortcomings?

I said Glock and P99.

The P99 is in .40 and had changeable backstraps before the S & W did.

The Sigma was brought up to show that they don't have a good record of making polymers. The Glock's been around and proved over decades. The P99 is nearly as old, maybe 10 yrs difference. It has many more features than the M & P.....

 

[SIGfiend]

For the people think I'm just saying <deleted> for fun and incite argument, go read the update I put at the end of post #1.

 

[kcshooter]

For the people think I'm just saying --deleted-- for fun and incite argument

What then, exactly, is your reason for posting --deleted--?

 

[2wheels]

To answer your edit (seems like you haven't read many of the responses), we get choices if we decide we want a poly striker fired handgun, that's what we get. S&W gets the chance to make money and recapture some of the market they lost to Glock, that's what they get.

Is there something so wrong with that? Even YOU admit that you hate Glocks, do you really object to someone offering some competition? There are a lot of people out there who will eagerly choose an M&P over a Glock, and that alone is reason for the M&P to exist.

Whatever you think about the Sigma has no bearing on the M&P, it has proven to be a solid performer that is arguably every bit the equal of the Glock.

 

[TennJed]

What advantages does a Glock have over the Ruger SR series? This may be the most absurd thread I have seen on here and that is saying a lot.

 

[Hangingrock]

I have both Glock (Gen-3) and S&W-MP. It’s fair to say that this is S&W 3rd design rendition of the Polymer framed striker fired pistol. (Renditions being the Sigma, 99 hybrid S&W/Walther series, and the current M&P) Mean while Glock is at Gen-4.

I’m not going to rid myself of the Glock pistols that I have. As for the S&W-MP I have less experience with that series pistol but my limited experience has been positive.

Glock or S&W-MP either one would be satisfactory dependent on your selection criteria.

 

[justice06rr]

So trading away reliability is worth saving a few bucks, like what say a $100?

WHAT RELIABILITY? Glocks? Pshhh.... don't even.

No firearm is perfect, although Glock may try to market themselves that way. I have handled Glocks that had issues, and i'm sure some of us have heard the Glock Kaboom. And the M&P pistols are actually the same price as Glocks, about $500.

The M&P line offers so much more than Glocks (I don't know about P99's as I've never owned or fired one).

Btw the Sigma isn't a dud. The only downside to that pistol is the heavy trigger.

 

[highorder]

The Sigma was brought up to show that they don't have a good record of making polymers

That is simply absurd.

The Sigma is an excellent low cost option. The trigger is heavy.

 

[SIGfiend]

To answer your edit (seems like you haven't read many of the responses), we get choices if we decide we want a poly striker fired handgun, that's what we get. S&W gets the chance to make money and recapture some of the market they lost to Glock, that's what they get.

Is there something so wrong with that? Even YOU admit that you hate Glocks, do you really object to someone offering some competition? There are a lot of people out there who will eagerly choose an M&P over a Glock, and that alone is reason for the M&P to exist.

Whatever you think about the Sigma has no bearing on the M&P, it has proven to be a solid performer that is arguably every bit the equal of the Glock.

Of course I know it's a cash grab by S&W. My objection was what benefit does introducing such a product offer to buyers? I'm hoping to find an answer here how it does anything different or better than already well-established polymers.

 

[FireInCairo]

No doubt. I just made a thread (I didn't know this one was here) about how the S&W M&P took the blocky Glock design and made it better ergonomically.

 

[FireInCairo]

It appears the M&P's can be had cheaper than your average Glock, too. So there's a second point of improvement.

 

[StrikeFire83]

I love Glocks, check my signature. That said, this thread is insufferably stupid.

 

[shootniron]

I'm hoping to find an answer here how it does anything different or better than already well-established polymers.

It fits my hand much different, therefore I shoot it more accurately.

 

[SIGfiend]

No doubt. I just made a thread (I didn't know this one was here) about how the S&W M&P took the blocky Glock design and made it better ergonomically.

Thanks for bein a supporter. I am as lost as you. And as a heads up, the P-99 improved the ergonomics of the Glock about 12 years before the M & P came out so I still don't see what the M & P did different.

 

[SIGfiend]

It fits my hand much different, therefore I shoot it more accurately.

Ok so you are taking the ergonomics angle, but I mentioned the P99 in the first post and that gun made the improvement you speak of long before the M & P came out

 

[FMF Doc]

With the Glock and P99 being proven, reliable, accurate designs for much longer time and with arguably better build quality, what does the M & P really do any better or differently? Can S & W even build something to the reliability level of either of those guns, considering the dud they made with other polymers like the Sigma?

Update:

For the record, I hate Glocks. Used to own a G19 and sold it due to its poor ergonomics and uncomfortable serrated trigger. I do like the P99 much better though. The point of this thread is to ask is how the customer benefits from another polymer Glock clone. What better do we get? Anything?! Yes, I know it's a cash grab by S&W, but what do we get?

Because I hate the P99, with its stupid triggerguard-mag release, and the M&P has better ergos (for some) than glocks.

 

[Skribs]

The P99 does not have the same ergonomics as the M&P. The P99 has more ambi controls, but I will not consider it because I don't like the placement of those controls. I much prefer the style on the M&P.

If you question is "what is different about it?" it has already been answered. Each company puts their own flavor on the gun. The controls are slightly different and the grip is a bit different, some have more or less ammunition than the "standard" amount for that size gun.

However, in the grand scheme of things, no, the M&P is not very much different from all of the others. It still is a polymer-framed striker-fired pistol with a trigger safety. I would not agree with you on your theories about their other guns being a dud, or about this being less reliable than a Glock. But it's not a "better" gun than the others, just like the others aren't a "better" gun than the M&P.

 

[Byrd666]

Without trying to be rude or pour more gas on Any fire, there's always a better mouse trap being built by someone, somewhere. Not saying any one is better than the other, or worse than the other. Just saying that for this application, this mousetrap might be better overall.

 

[Frank Ettin]

...My objection was what benefit does introducing such a product offer to buyers? I'm hoping to find an answer here how it does anything different or better than already well-established polymers....

Your question is pointless. It's a matter of "free market" and "competition." Whether or not there's a benefit to buyers will be decided in the market place by buyers who choose to buy or not buy the pistol. Whether or not there's a benefit for Smith & Wesson will also be decided by the market place.

If you don't see any utility in the M&P, don't buy one. But Smith & Wesson is free to enter the market with the pistol, if it thinks people will buy it; and Smith & Wesson doesn't have to justify its business decision to you (or anyone else, except perhaps its shareholders).

Of course I know it's a cash grab by S&W...

Now that's just a silly statement. Smith & Wesson is a business, and its purpose is to make money. It makes money by manufacturing things and selling them. It's perfectly proper and appropriate for Smith & Wesson to manufacture something and put it into the stream of commerce for people to buy.

People who like the gun and consider it to be useful and worth having, will buy it. People who don't won't. Neither have to justify their respective decisions. If enough people like it and buy, Smith & Wesson will make money and be able to pay its employees for their labor; and its employees will be able to pay their bills.

If enough people don't buy the gun, Smith & Wesson will lose money on it. And if Smith & Wesson makes too many bad business decision like that, it will go out of business, and its employees will lose their jobs and incomes.

It's all economics 101. How can it possibly be called a "cash grab."

 

[TennJed]

Of course I know it's a cash grab by S&W. My objection was what benefit does introducing such a product offer to buyers? I'm hoping to find an answer here how it does anything different or better than already well-established polymers.

You do understand that m&ps can usually be found cheaper and many find the ergos are better. That is to obvious things offered to buyers. They are just as reliable. To many a cheaper better product is something "offered"

Care to address that point.

Oh yeah they look better to boot

 

[SIGfiend]

The P99 does not have the same ergonomics as the M&P. The P99 has more ambi controls, but I will not consider it because I don't like the placement of those controls. I much prefer the style on the M&P.

If you question is "what is different about it?" it has already been answered. Each company puts their own flavor on the gun. The controls are slightly different and the grip is a bit different, some have more or less ammunition than the "standard" amount for that size gun.

However, in the grand scheme of things, no, the M&P is not very much different from all of the others. It still is a polymer-framed striker-fired pistol with a trigger safety. I would not agree with you on your theories about their other guns being a dud, or about this being less reliable than a Glock. But it's not a "better" gun than the others, just like the others aren't a "better" gun than the M&P.

Sounds like a lousy deal. The P99 did a lot, it got to the ergonomics point first, then it added a cocked indicator, ambi mag release.

I was hoping to uncover some sort of major changes like that, but I guess there are really none then?

 

[EddieNFL]

Did you just say that the M&P is unreliable?
Care to back that up?

It's on the internet so it must be true.