Looks like S&W is going after the G26 market…kind of…
https://www.instagram.com/p/BiPmP6nAo9Q/?taken-by=smithwessoncorp
https://www.smith-wesson.com/firearms/mp-9-m20-36-compact
I…I don’t understand it. It’s a “G19” grip with what equates to a “G26” slide? The compact is .40 of an inch longer, why is this a thing?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Because S&W thinks there is a market for it, of course. You and I may not want it but others certainly might. No, others certainly will want one.
After all, why is the Glock 19X such a thing. Not for me as it seems backwards, but they are selling a boatload of them.
Choices are good, even if they aren’t my own choice.
There are a couple of advantages I see. For appendix carry, the shorter barrel length would be a bit more comfortable when seated because it won’t be digging into your leg or groin as much plus it will give you a full grip without having to use a “pinky” extension and it’s a 15 round magazine flush.
I put the 2.0c mags w/spacers in my 1.0 compact just for giggles and really liked the combo.
I can see this being a nice appendix piece. Shorter slide, full capacity. I see it as a win. I want it.
Simple. Some people want the smallest doublestack gun that they can get a full grip on. Realistically, the G26’s popularity has its roots in a 10rnd mag version of America.
Personally, I feel that if you feel you need a smaller gun than this, the solution is to go to a single stack, not to a dangling pinky grip length.
I think this is an answer in search of a problem. Whereas I see the utility of a G19X, FN 509, etc, the longer grip on what is effectively a G26-sized weapon is lost on me. If I were in a situation where I had to carry something small, I’d be carrying my single-stack.
With the popularity in the 19x, 509, and whatever Sigs p320 equivalent is, I think that market is saying they want shorter slides with full firing grips. The slide on this is somewhere between the 26 and 19. I don’t think this is Smith’s answer for a small carry gun, that is the shield. This is something entirely different.
It sounds a lot like the PX4 Compact, but with a striker. That gun is somewhat popular among DA/SA and Beretta nuts. It certainly is a good blend of concealability and shootability. If I were married to S&W guns, I would give this thing strong consideration. Its probably a great choice for someone that is issued a fullsize M&P and wants something just a little smaller for off duty carry. Just like a lot of guys that are issued a G22 or G17 own a G19; you know, a compact-ish gun with a full grip and a 15rnd mag.
There are a lot of guns that aren’t Glock 19’s, and some of them are pretty good. Not sure why that is so troublesome for some people.
These short barreled full size frame guns are beyond my comprehension. If I want compactness to conceal well I’m not going to pick a full size frame and if I am picking a full size frame there’s just no downside to a full length barrel that I can see.
Shorter slide makes it more comfortable for AIWB carry. If your carrying strong side, it offers no real advantage.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
As a dude with enormous hands, I love these things. As a consumer, I applaud companies like S&W that are at least trying to innovate.
I get what they’re trying to do, and that’s one of the things that I like about the Glock 19X. My pinky is literally right on the bottom of my Gen4 G19. I just don’t see the utility of that larger grip in a 3.6" barrel. If I’m going to carry something with that small of a barrel, it’s going to be a backup, probably on my ankle. Likely a single stack, or I may eventually cave and get a G26. I guess if one carried appendix, the shorter barrel could make sense there, especially when seated.
I guess I can see a “range” where a shorter barreled setup would be more comfortable for AIWB. Everybody’s physical build is different and comfort is subjective.
I sold my G19 and Keeper holster for a full size M&P specifically because it was a lot more comfortable. My Shield isn’t as comfortable as the FS either. The longer barrel is long enough to preclude the “digging in” and gives extra leverage if you run a wedge so it conceals just about as good as a single stack. The icing is you get the longer barrel’s performance and sight radius. There really isn’t a downside that I can see.
I recently traded my HKVP9 for a NIB S&W 2.0 c with the 4" barrel. It’s the first gun that I feel can actually make me want to retire my Glock 19 for off-duty/CCW work.
I had the 2.0c for about 2 weeks when the new 3.6" compact was announced. The difference in the slide from the 4" to the 3.6" isn’t enough for me to consider trading my current 2.0c in on the new 3.6" model. But if I didn’t have my current 4" 2.0 compact, the 3.6" would have my attention.
Shadowwriter, I also don’t see much use for the 4.25" full size M&P over the 4" M&P 2.0 compact. 1/4 in difference in sight radius doesn’t make enough of a difference to me to matter. The 5", however, is a completely different story. Kinda like a G34 vs a G19 or G17. However, the G17 is enough larger than the G19 to make it worthwhile. That said, i’m probably going to trade my G17 Gen5 toward a G19X given I already have a G19 and G34 Gen5.
This is what the compact should have always been. There is no way a 1/4" shorter barrel and 2 less rounds in the mag from the Full Size makes a compact.