I have been planning on picking up a Glock 17c for some time now as a home defense/range gun…I’m going to run a lot of rounds through it. But now I’ve started thinking about the M&P 9mm.
I can get the M&P for $425 + a $50 rebate and 2 free extra mags…Sounds like a hell of a deal. I have shot a Glock 17 before and I shot very accurately with it, it was SO simple to strip and clean, and I know they are drop dead reliable. The only thing I don’t like is the grip.
I have handled an M&P and I like the grip of it better, but I don’t have the chance to shoot one. For those of you experience with both, what would you recommend and why. I’m just not sure how the accuracy of the M&P stacks up, or the reliability and ease of cleaning compares. I hear a lot of good things about the M&P, but I have also heard a lot of troubles with things like pins walking out, mags dropping, the mag release being to sensitive etc.
I would get a regular G17 and/or M&P9. There’s no practical use for me with a C model Glock. If you want a comp buy an aftermarket barrel with a comp on it for range/game use, the C models with ported barrels and slides just burn off the oil and run a whole lot dirtier.
I can’t say you should get one over the other. They both have their pluses and their minuses.
On one hand you have the proven and reliable G17. No one can argue that the G17 has been one of the most reliable handguns since it’s release 21 years ago. The G17, it’s parts, holsters, sights and support are every where. The grip angle may seem odd at first but you get used to it in short order. People complain about it but it’s all about what you’re used to. After a few hundred rounds you’d fall right in line.
The M&P is where the Glock was back in 86/87. It’s a new design and a lot of thought and effort went into it. The ergonomics are fantastic, the grip angle is 18 degrees which is the same as a 1911 and the accuracy is excellent. It’s still new and departments are starting to adopt it, mostly depts that had older/outdated Smiths, so parts and holsters are coming around. There have been some problems but S&W is quickly working them out. They are growing pains in my opinion, just like the Glock went through, but don’t let that stop you from deciding on the M&P. Most of the problems I’ve seen reported have been with the compact versions and S&W seems to have fixed the new production guns.
As for the cost…I still think the Glock is a better value and I’ll tell you why I say that; because I like the trigger on the Glock better. The M&P trigger is a bit heavier and the reset is VERY light to almost non-existent. I’ve heard the new ones are better but I shot a new M&P45 and I couldn’t feel it at all. I think the M&P trigger can be made better than the Glock but you have to pay for it. You might save on the M&P up front but if you want to send it off for a trigger job you’re looking at $100-$110 for the work and overnight shipping to someone like Burwell. Now, he does outstanding work and I’m going to send mine to him eventually but with the Glock you can pop in a $15 #3.5 connector and you have a lighter and crispier trigger. Besides, mags for the Glock will run you $15 instead of $30 for the M&P.
Don’t get me wrong, I absolutely love the M&P and there is no doubt that S&W has a winner on their hands. BUT if I had to choose one and only one at this point I’d still pick a Glock. I expect that my opinion will change but right now, if I could only have one it would be a G17 or G19.
I keep reading about differences in grip angle and I’m trying to understand where everyone is basing their statement from (I’m not saying there aren’t differences, I’m just trying to figure out what point on the grip where the grip angle is measured from).
On a 1911 with a flat mainspring easy, it’s easy. Its a stright line, and it doesn’t matter if it’s an Officer’s frame, a Commander frame or a full-sized frame, the angle stays constant.
Glocks place their hump at the base of the grip, but depending upon which frame size you are talking about, the hump is in a different location in your hand. On the subcompacts, the hump starts right below the web of your hand, the mid-size starts farther down, and the full size, farther down yet.
The M&P has a continuous curve as well, so the angle changes constantly as you move down the grip. But it’s not as pronounced as Glock’s. It’s more like a Sig or a CZ-75.
So at what point along these grips is the grip angle measured, the relatively straight line section where the web of the hand contacts the grip, or farther down where the hump is at its maximum projection? If the latter, would it be fair to say that grip angles between frame sizes change?
Jmart- look at it this way- you aren’t just grabbing the rear of the grip, you are also grabbing the front. The fronts all have a definite angle to them whether they have finger grooves or not.
Hadn’t really thought of that. So is that the angle that everyone speaks of? I realize it would be parallel with the back of the grip, but I always thought the back had a greater influence on pointability and all the “humps” and “recesses” were what distinguished one grip angle from another.
I would also pick the Glock over the M&P. There is absolutely nothing wrong with the M&P, I just prefer to shoot Glocks. Can’t go wrong either way, shoot them and decide what fits you better.
Oh, definately stay away from the “C” model. No need for it.
M&P. I just bought a 9 and have two .45’s and a .40. Great pistol. Very comfortable to shoot. Can’t beat the price you are getting. As far as magazine costs it is my understanding that Smith is dropping the price on those shortly.
