S&W M&P 9's vs Glock 9's

[GlockSpock]

I thought I had already created a thread for this a month or two ago, but 30 minutes of searching turned up nothing.

 

I have an inkling to switch over to the M&P 9's from the Glockside.

 

M&P Pro's

• USA
• LCI
• Ergonomics (arguably)
• Rifled Barrel (better for reloading)
• Better Supported Chamber (I think)
• 9c (compared to G26) Has A Rail

Glock Pro's

 

• Cheaper Magazines
• 33 Round Magazines
• Slightly Simpler Takedown/Internals
• Parts/Accessories Availibility

Now, I talked myself out of it a few months ago, but I have an even bigger itch now. I'm getting started on reloading, and although arguably minor issues I have reservations about reloading Glocks due to the "unsupported chamber" issues as well as the polygonal rifling. Now, I'm well aware that I could get a Lone Wolf barrel that would solve those issues, and I'm open to doing so. But if I "switch" to M&P and like them just as much, I avoid having to purchase the barrel altogether.

 

However, some research has shown that if I stick to plated bullets in my Glock 19 Gen 3, I will be fine. Supposedly the chamber support issue is better than in earlier Gen 2's and 1's. Stay away from trying to develop maximum loads, and the brass should be ok. Is this the case?

 

Still, I have a desire to give the S&W's a shot. I know this is sorta like a Ford vs. Toyota argument, but help me out. It would just have to be attempted to see if it works out, but I think I could sale my G19/G26 with all accessories/holsters and then purchase the equivalents of M&P9/9c and still have a few dollars cash left over. Thoughts?

 

Also I have to consider this. The M&P9 is about the size of a Glock 17. I currently carry a Glock 19 with a Surefire X300 Ultra in a Raven Phantom LC. Obviously the M&P9 will be a bit longer, but is it still capable of comfortably being carried?

 

Ultimately, I need to shoot an M&P 9 and 9c in order to fully make the decision. I'd love to meet someone in Cleveland/Chattanooga and give it a shot if you own them. If you have a Raven Concealment LC holster for it, that would be even better.

[mikegideon]

I have owned both. Can't go wrong with either. My biggest problem with the M&P line is that they don't have anything that's the size of a G19, which is the perfect size. So, currently, I'm hanging with Glocks. 

[PolePosition]

Don't overthink it. Shoot them and see if you like them. I've owned both and currently only carry the M&P's. But your pros and cons are overthought. The three questions should be 1) Do you shoot well with it? 2) Will you carry it? 3) Do you feel completely comfortable and confident in shooting it and carrying it?

 

If your answer is yes to all three questions for BOTH platforms (which was the case in mine), then go with the one you enjoy more (in my case, I enjoyed the M&P more due to ergonomics). One cannot truly make an objective argument for one over the other. They are both excellent platforms and I wouldn't hesitate to trust my life with either in a self defense situation, and barring the use of a 1911, I wouldn't hesitate using either in a competitive environment either.

[chances R]

M&P fan, from the Shield to the 5" Pro.  The only thing is the Glock trigger is better than M&P, but not a big deal, plus it can be re-worked.

[jhc77]

M&P fan, from the Shield to the 5" Pro.  The only thing is the Glock trigger is better than M&P, but not a big deal, plus it can be re-worked.

I like the Glock trigger better myself. I owned a full size M&P 40 for a better part of 6 years and seemed over half a magazine I was anticipating the trigger break. Bought a Glock 26 (due to size and concealment) and I learned the break in a few magazines. Could have gone with an Apex set up, but was ready to try something else. Have since picked up a 23.

All M&P's are fine pistols, just wish the trigger was improved vs spending another $80-100 for a good trigger on an already +-$500 gun.

Rent/shoot one, if possible like you said, before you buy.

[graycrait]

Not a big deal but went to both armorer courses and have owned multiple copies of each, too many some might say.

 

M&P:

Pros  1) ergonomics  Cons: 1) too many internal parts vs Glock 2) Have to use a roll pin punch and hammer to detail strip

 

Glock:  

Pros 1) ease of dissassembly 2) availability of parts and accessories 3) Very few internal parts  Cons: brick-like ergonomics compared to the M&P (unless you reduce or reshape the grip)   

[CQB Elite]

I just sold my M&P 9C because I found myself carrying my G19 more. Also didn't care for the trigger on the M&P. One disclaimer- I've been carrying Glocks for a very long time and have fired an untold number of rounds thru them. I'm just more comfortable with their operation & ergonomics. I've shot them so much that I've developed a sense for their natural pointability. That makes me a better shooter. Like others have said- shoot'em both before you decide.

[hipower]

Personal opinion only. Owning several of both Glock and M&P products; I'm more partial to the Glock.

[GlockSpock]

Reloading comments for the stock Glock? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Superman]

I have been reloading for my Glock 9mms for a few years. No problems and mine are Gen2. I have been debating this same thing with myself for a while now, but havent made the jump to the M&P. The mag cost/availability and needing tools to take the gun apart are probly the 2 biggest reasons. Glocks have just spoiled me I guess.

Edited February 26, 2014 by Superman

[MphsTiger1981]

I shoot plated reloads through my 3rd generation G19, no problems and good accuracy. I have owned a few M&Ps and they are a fine gun. I just always come back to the Glock. As it has been said, you can't go wrong with either one. Both seem to hold their value. Both do well in the used market.

[Ropin4gold]

I have both.  Strongly prefer the Glock trigger, not impressed with the M&P trigger at all.  I know I can put an APEX in but......

[SonnyCrockett]

glock  over M&Ps all day long in my eyes

 

Better trigger,the barrels are supported,what you are referring to is gen2 glocks which lacked some case support

I actually own one of those gen 2s and it too rocks..Ergos are fine for me with either brand

 

the list of after market accys is monumentis for a glock  ,sights,triggers,holsters,mags u name it 

[TnShooter83]

Most people that switch Glock to M&P's hate the trigger.

How ever, most people that are not coming from Glocks like it or are fine with it.

I have owned both and both are fine for me. I did kind of hate the trigger because I was expecting it to be like the glock.

It's not and that's fine, Shoot it enough and it seems normal, just as the Glock.

As far as easier to take down the Glock wins.

 

I'll take both. they both run fine. Flip a coin. I'll take which ever.

Edited February 26, 2014 by TnShooter83

[GlockSpock]

So last night I took my Glock 19 barrel and a 9mm round and inspected just how much "chamber support" there is (or isn't). On a Glock 19 Gen 3, in my opinion, it supports nearly the entire case. There is a very small amount of the case wall that isn't supported, but I suspect many modern service pistols would be quite similar in this regard.

 

I suppose it comes down to two points: Not trying to see how much powder you can put in a round before it blows up and inspecting each and every casing for warning signs before reloading.

 

My verdict is that I'll be find in regards to the brass. I'll probably get a Lone Wolf barrel someday just so I can shoot the lead bullets for targets and what not.

 

Suppose this one is decided for now. I think everyone gets "itches" to try something new sometimes....it is just hard to move from something that generally just works.

[Patton]

I followed debates on using lead in polygonal rifling when discussed on other sites. I do have about 1k rounds of hard cast lead through my G23, I have since put several hundred jacketed through it, but I cleaned it often. One time I was able to see and shave out a piece of a lead shard that was about an inch long and the thickness of dental floss. Other than that every brush came out with only little loose pieces of unburnt powder and the usual. Maybe it was the type lead I was using but I wouldn't have a concern about going several thousand rounds of lead in a polygonal barrel, frequently cleaning it of course. I believe the thought was that polygonal rifling created excessive pressures because of fouling. I haven't messed with reloading 40 anymore since it is the easiest to find ammo, scarce reloading supplies go towards harder to find calibers and those more expensive to buy.
I have a 2nd gen Glock 19 that has less chamber support than my Gen4 23, I recall my old Gen3 and Gen4 9mm having adequate chamber support though.

One of my only complaints about M&Ps is the very inconsistent trigger, one gun will be smooth and the other will have a very noticeable breaking point. Edited February 26, 2014 by Patton

[MiddTennTaco]

I would beg to differ Patton. Having own 5 or 6 M&P's I would have to say they're very consistent. If you have any gun with an inconsistent trigger it's probably broken. Now I would say that the trigger isn't all that great but it's very consistently not that great. Having owned the same number of Glocks I would have to say that personally they are not for me.

 

The thing that sticks out to me is the universal finger grooves that were designed for a 12 year old girl. I work with my hands and they simply don't fit. For me they are comfortable enough to hold but uncomfortable to shoot - hence the mistake of me buying that many Glocks. With their reputation of reliability I wouldn't be a very wise man if I didn't give them a fair shot.

 

Secondly, they have the ergonomics of a... well they don't have any. They are a solid workhorse of a gun that will always go bang - I respect that. But to be honest with whats available out there the Glock is just about the least ergonomic gun there is (without modification). If you REALLY look at a Glock you'll find that everything is square. However, they did round off all the edges because they didn't want to get accused of not trying.

 

Lastly, I understand the appeal of a service gun and I do appreciate the beauty of simplicity. I respect it. I own a lot of tools and I use them all - I look at guns the same way. However, the Glock is an ugly gun. I don't like it when people use "it's a service gun" as an excuse for Glock not putting any pride into it. The only pride they put into the Glock was 30 years ago and that was to make a reliable functioning polymer handgun that was cheap to sell. It sold because it was a novelty and it worked extremely well. (note no finger grooves at the time, lol)

 

I don't have a problem with plastic and I don't have any undue hate for the Glock. I don't hate them at all in fact I respect them greatly especially in their extensive application in law enforcement throughout the US. However when people say a Glock doesn't have a soul I think they are actually referring to #2 & 3 above. There's a lot more to this sport than just performance. I'm not saying performance isn't important but Glock kind of represents an era in the gun world of settling for whatever works. There was a time when automatics were not to be trusted but you don't have to settle for a Glock anymore. There are other polymer options out there.

[tercel89]

Not a big deal but went to both armorer courses and have owned multiple copies of each, too many some might say.

 

M&P:

Pros  1) ergonomics  Cons: 1) too many internal parts vs Glock 2) Have to use a roll pin punch and hammer to detail strip

 

Glock:  

Pros 1) ease of dissassembly 2) availability of parts and accessories 3) Very few internal parts  Cons: brick-like ergonomics compared to the M&P (unless you reduce or reshape the grip)   

You hit the nail on the head . This is my thoughts exactly especially with having to use a  roll pin punch and hammer  on the M&P . 

Edited March 3, 2014 by tercel89

[MiddTennTaco]

You hit the nail on the head. This is my thoughts exactly especially with having to use a roll pin punch and hammer on the M&P .

*gasp* I need to sell mine right away! Lol.

Speaking of pins I could have sworn I have seen at some point in time a guys pins worked their way out of his glock while he was shooting. Maybe he didn't assemble the pin right, I don't know. But maybe there is a reason S&W went with roll pins and I'm sure they could be replaced with solid pins if its such an issue. I'd rather keep the pins IN my gun while I'm shooting and use a roll pin punch to detail strip should I EVER feel the need to do so.

Regardless I wouldn't "especially" base my buying decision on ease of pin removal, lol.

[Patton]

Wolfattack, I was referring to one gun compared to the next. Almost every Glock unless it has been modified feels about the same. M&Ps feel different one gun to the next.

My first M&P was one of the smoothest I had ever felt. The one I have now has an obvious break. It doesn't worry me since it isn't a range gun but an occasional carry piece, the trigger if pulled will probably be yanked in high stress. Edited March 3, 2014 by Patton