Posted: 12/5/2008 2:44:56 AM EDT
|
I have read a couple of threads and didn't want to steal one so thought I'd start this and ask my question.
I notice Glock seems to be the gun of choice by those on the board. What make the Glock a better gun than say S&W? I have looked at the S&W compact for a CCW and had decided on it but maybe I need to look at the Glock? Alot of questions  but I have 9mm's but the concensus here seems to be the 40S&W be the better caliber for CCW? Looking for alot of input so I get the best for the purpose.
Thanks |
|
Prepare for this thread to be flooded with "get the glock" posts
Both are good guns. What you really need to do is rent them both and shoot them and see which one you like more. For concealed carry, I would personally prefer the M&P especially since it has interchangeable back straps, making it a little more customizable to your hand. But rent them both if you can and see which one you like more. |
|
While I favor Glocks, I also own M&P's and XD's. I see it as the Ford-Chevy-Dodge argument. There's a lot of brand loyalty and pissing contests, but all three are solid platforms.
For anyone new to plastic striker-fired guns, take them out for a test drive and see which one fits you best. The one quantifiable edge I can give to Glock is availability of parts, accessories and mags. Glock parts companies abounds (TopGlock, Glockmeister, Lone Wolf, etc), whereas M&P and XD parts are harder to find. Prior to the "Obama rush," I was buying Glock mags for as little as $10, but was thrilled to find XD mags at $22. |
|
Quoted:
Alot of questions but I have 9mm's but the concensus here seems to be the 40S&W be the better caliber for CCW? I always got the feeling here that most leaned either toward 9mm or 45acp. Maybe that's because it is how I feel, so those are the threads I read. I'll be the first to say it, "Get both!" (I prefer the Glock for easy detail stripping and cheap abundant parts availability, BTW.) |
|
The Glock and M&P are mostly identical.
They both take down the same way (assuming an M&P with no mag safety), both use the Sig short recoil locking at the ejection port with linkless locking, and both have a Melonite finish (though S&W additionally uses all Stainless Steel parts, Tennifer is the particular trade name for the Glock finish). The real differences are in ergonomics, mags, and trigger. It's hard to argue that the Glock has better ergonomics, but it is a personal preference –– or an acquired taste. If you've been shooting Glocks for 15 years, the M&P ergonomics may not be likeable seeing as you've gotten used to the Glock. The M&P also has an ambidextrous slide release and an easily reversable mag release. The mag capacity of the M&P was sacrificed for ergonomics. You can get an extra round or two out of a similarly sized Glock. Whether Glock mags are more durable than M&P mags, I don't know. I doubt any significant difference in either direction. The trigger is really the biggest difference. My understanding with the M&P stock trigger is that its supposed to be long and smooth like a good DA revolver. It is definitely long and smooth. The stock reset isn't as "good" as on a stock Glock. You can, of course, modify both triggers and anyone saying that a modified M&P can't be good is blowing out their ass. There's another area that is hard to quanify as anything else but standards compliant. The M&P uses a standard rail and standard Novak dovetail cuts for the sights. Since the Glock has been around so long, it is a moot point, but it means the M&P already had a series of sights available out of the box before the sights became M&P specific. The only thing Glock really has over S&W is the years of existence. This means any parts that were regularly out of spec are no longer out of spec. Any problem areas have likely been fixed. It also means a plethora of spare parts out there. That right there is worth a lot as it means the Glock has a known history of performance. The glock also has a bigger aftermarket set of parts. Replacement match barrels for the M&P, for example, are a pain in the ass to find. At least, they have been for me. However, thus far, S&W has gotten it right. Some very early M&P's had problems with the firing pin breaking after 10k rounds or so, but that seems to have resolved itself. There were also rust problems with early models, but I haven't seen anything recently about that. It was most likely problems with the Melonite application systems. Mine certainly hasn't rusted and I don't wipe it down after touching it. |
|
Quoted:
I can buy the SW for $399 right now locally in 9 or 40 and get either a $50 rebate or 2 additional mags. That is one reason I am looking that way. WTF?! Freaking go to the gun store RIGHT NOW and buy it. Even if you don't like it you can sell it for a nice profit later. (Get the 2 mags, btw). |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
I can buy the SW for $399 right now locally in 9 or 40 and get either a $50 rebate or 2 additional mags. That is one reason I am looking that way. WTF?! Freaking go to the gun store RIGHT NOW and buy it. Even if you don't like it you can sell it for a nice profit later. (Get the 2 mags, btw). Now that I think about, buy 2 M&Ps at that price. 
|
|
I have both. They are indeed almost identical.
- Glock is probably slightly more reliable with reloads because of the oversize chamber. - For me, and anyone else with a 1911 background, the full-sze Glocks point high, and so an M&P might be the better choice. My full size Glock has been modified to give a 1911 grip angle. My CCW gun, a Glock 27, did not need to be modified because it already points like a 1911 in my hands: 
- The M&P grip can be slimmer. This has been great for my wife and kids. Glock can be too fat for some. - The Glock trigger is, IMHO, potentially smoother. Even with a trigger job and a lot of work, the M&P is still not as smooth as a well-used Glocki trigger. This is to do with how the striker block uis disabled, and cannot be fixed without a redesign of the M&P trigger system. - The M&P comes with better sights out of the box. - The M&P mags drop free reliably... not true for the Glock in my experience. Personally, I have relegated the M&P to use by my son in IPSC matches. I'll stick with my STI double-stack 1911 for IPSC (better trigger than either the above pistols), and a Glock 27 for CCW. However, you would not be undergunned with the M&P, and it sure is a pretty gun .
|
|
Quoted:
I can buy the SW for $399 right now locally in 9 or 40 and get either a $50 rebate or 2 additional mags. That is one reason I am looking that way. That price is VERY aggressive for an M&P... double check that its not actually an S&W Sigma that you are being offered. M&P: Sigma: 
|
|
Never have owning either I went to the range and shot both. After an hour I determined I hated the way the glock felt. Dont get me wrong, it was a nice gun that shot well, but I just didnt like the way it fit in my hand.
Went with the M&P9, but thats just personal preference after shooting both.... |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
I can buy the SW for $399 right now locally in 9 or 40 and get either a $50 rebate or 2 additional mags. That is one reason I am looking that way. WTF?! Freaking go to the gun store RIGHT NOW and buy it. Even if you don't like it you can sell it for a nice profit later. (Get the 2 mags, btw). THIS!!!!! AHHHHHH GO RIGHT NOW!!! |
|
They are comperable in every aspect. I chose the M&P the deciding factors for me were:
-M&P's are a hell of alot more attractive than a glock -The M&P compacts have larger capacity than the comperable G27 or G26 -The ergonomics of the M&P and the adjustable backstraps that come with it make it a much more naturally aiming and comfortable gun then the 2x4 handled Glock -The M&P is made in America! -The M&P is made with stainless steel and then treated with melonite (same as glocks Tennifer finish) - The M&P was significantly cheaper and came with 4 magazines Therefore i went with the M&p and have been very happy with my purchase! |
|
Overall, I feel the Glock is the better choice. Why?
1. A long proven track record. So far the M&P's are looking good but the Glock design has 20 hard years backing up its reputation. The M&P has what, 2-3? 2. The Glock has a very short, positive reset, which is very nice for fast follow up shots. The M&P's reset is not near as positive or as short. 3. The Glock is easier to field strip and detail strip and has fewer parts. Anybody who's not a complete retard can completely field strip a Glock and reassembly it in less then 1/2 hour. Any part you could ever possible need for a Glock is cheap and easy to get. This is important to me because I don't like having to rely on gunsmiths or the factory should I have an issue with my weapon. The S&W is not as easy to strip and parts are not as available. 4. Glock mags are easier to find and cheaper. Even now during Obamamania, Glock mags are easier to find and cost at least $5-10 less per mag. 5. Accessories like sights and holsters are plentiful for the Glock. Not so much for the M&P. If the M&P keeps gaining in popularity, they may eventually catch up in this category but that doesn't help you now. There are probably some other things too that I'm just not thinking of but that list above is enough for me. That said, I realize that the Glock, particularly the grip, is not for everybody. For those people my second recommendation is the M&P. Looking past the short comings I listed above, I do think the M&P is the second best service pistol available today and does have some advantages over the Glock such has the better, customizable grip, better sights and a trigger then can be worked into something nicer then the Glock trigger can be tuned to (smoothness and break wise). Honestlty, I think you would be fine with either one. If you can, try them both and see which on you shoot and like better? If they are similar for you, I think the Glock is the smarter choice but if not, the M&P should do you fine. |
|
I looked long and hard at both a few years ago when I was buying a small 9 mm for my first dedicated CCW handgun. I ran across many of the same issues/opinions that others have mentioned. I think both are fine weapons with their own strengths/weaknesses, but I don't think you can go wrong with either. Ultimately what got me to go with the M&P 9 Compact in 9 mm was:
1) Trigger/grip: I could not get used to the Glock and that first moment you grip it or pull the trigger. it just didn't feel right to me. after holding one for a bit then it seemed OK, but the trigger feel just wasn't doing it for me. The S&W, once I had the medium grip swell in place, felt near perfect each time I picked it up. The trigger, while not perfect, was a better feel to me. My point of comparison for the feel and trigger was my Sig P220. The M&P felt closest overall. 2) Price: The M&P was somewhere in the high 400's, $489 if I remember right and the Glock was running close to $540-$550. Plus the made in USA was nice. The current $50 off or 2 free mags is a great deal. Smart on their part to get some market share. 3) No question Glock had more availability with the mags, holsters, etc. That has gotten better in the past year or so, but still not that of Glock. I am sure there are more, but I am happy with the M&P 9c so far, no regrets, in fact I just purchased a full size M&P 9 right before the election (finally timed something right!). Price was $509. Right now all of my weapons purchases are based around a systems approach as to maximize my investment and get all of my basic bases covered. Once that happens, including ammo, I will branch out and buy some other firearms, and I'd certainly consider a Glock. |
| I just cannot use the large frame Glocks so I did buy an M&P in .45 but that is a range toy. For serious work, my G19 or G17 wins out every time. The S&W trigger and reset sucks balls and the sights are no better...but admittedly just as 'good' (or bad)...as the Glocks' out of the box, but maybe some of my prejudice is because the G19 / G17 fit my hand just fine as-is. The M&P is certainly not a bad pistol...I just feel the Glock is better and has a far more proven track record. |
|
I'm getting rid of all my Glocks in favor of M&P's.
In time, the M&P should prove itself, just like Glock who's had a 20 year head start, and nearly gives them away to LE agencies. I agree the trigger on the M&P out of the box blows, but is very easily home-smithed to much better than a Glock trigger, even with a 3.5# connector. I can't imagine who would think the Glock has better sights 
Awful plastic sights vs steel Novaks? There's a tough choice. I'll still hang onto my last Glock––a G19 with NS and modified trigger guard for a while, but I think it's days are numbered. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
S&W M&P, much better ergonomics. Subjective, I prefer the Glock in every way.... The S&W has a grip angle suited to a wider range of shooters as well as a modular grip allowing it to properly fit a wider range of hand sizes. For a wide variety of shooters the ergonomics of the glock suck, even if it is your preference. |
| We tested the Glock 22 to replace the aging S&W's we were carrying. We would repeatedly melt the guide rods on them. We never had any of the problems with the M&P 40. The extra security on the weapon helped make the decision for the Dept. FYI, I own several Glocks, and I enjoy them as well. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
S&W M&P, much better ergonomics. Subjective, I prefer the Glock in every way.... The S&W has a grip angle suited to a wider range of shooters as well as a modular grip allowing it to properly fit a wider range of hand sizes. For a wide variety of shooters the ergonomics of the glock suck, even if it is your preference. Ummm, he said subjective. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
S&W M&P, much better ergonomics. Subjective, I prefer the Glock in every way.... The S&W has a grip angle suited to a wider range of shooters as well as a modular grip allowing it to properly fit a wider range of hand sizes. For a wide variety of shooters the ergonomics of the glock suck, even if it is your preference. Ummm, he said subjective. What isn't? |
|
Quoted:
I have read a couple of threads and didn't want to steal one so thought I'd start this and ask my question. I notice Glock seems to be the gun of choice by those on the board. What make the Glock a better gun than say S&W? I have looked at the S&W compact for a CCW and had decided on it but maybe I need to look at the Glock? Alot of questions but I have 9mm's but the concensus here seems to be the 40S&W be the better caliber for CCW? Looking for alot of input so I get the best for the purpose.
Thanks look, you will get a million diff opinions and perspectives... that said, they are BOTH great platforms that will serve you well... for me, i would take the glock, what makes it better for ME: -cost effectiveness (of both parts, mags, accessories, etc)––its cheaper and more available -reliability (esp under adverse conditions): while the MP is very reliable in on its own, imo, the glock system is THE simplist, most consistantly reliable HG auto platform -longevity the MP h/w, has great ergos and a way better trigger... again, pick what you want as to 9mm vs .40, w/ modern JHPs, they are comprable...pick the caliber you like |
|
I got the M&P because it was a far better value. I got a factory threaded barrel, 3 grip size options, and 5 17 round magazines for $569 delivered, plus $20 transfer was $589.
It has been perfectly reliable and shoots 2.0" 5 shot groups at 25 yards with my defensive ammunition. For a factory stock pistol that is phenomenal. I am amused when I read gun rag articles featuring high end 1911's that shoot over 2 inches with 7 brands of premium ammo. Todd Green gets the same groups in his torture test so it is not a fluke. My only complaint is that mine is prone to rust. I should send it in for warranty repair but I am lazy. 
Wait, my other complaint is the plastic, hinged trigger. The moment someone comes out with an unhinged, steel trigger, I'm buying it! |
|
I own both, but I determined years ago that there were things that worked better for me than Glocks. Tried about everything out there, settled on the XD until the M&P came along.
When it comes to 9mm service pistols –– the M&P is what I shoot now, and here's why: - No dingus in the middle of the trigger. Hinged M&P trigger is more comfortable. - Can be easily made to fit the hand. No goofy Luger grip angle. - Better case head support and traditional rifled barrel. - Trigger is very easy to work on. - Takedown tool included in gun. - Better out-of-the-box sights. - No frontstrap finger grooves. - Mags drop free. |