I have a 2011 era Glock 22 Gen.4 with the frying pan finish that has been superb. I paid $600.00 for it after taxes. I picked up an M&P 9 yesterday that I paid $450.00 for plus a $25.00 transfer fee. The M&P is a nice handgun and feels far better in the hand than the 22. The trigger on the Glock 22 is excellent. The bang switch on the M&P is mediocre at best. There is a reason the Glock was $125.00 higher-----the workmanship is better. You will be well served with an M&P but it does not compare to machining and finish of the plastic. The frying pan finish is one of the best factory offerings i have ever seen. The Glock stays in the safe for bug out and home protection. The S&W is the knock about/car/beater in our family.
One man's brief and brutally honest take on Glock vs. M&P
1 - 20 of 115 Posts
YOUR MILEAGE MAY VARY
Joined
·
3,378 Posts
Comparing fit and finish between a M&P and a Glock is like comparing quarter mile times between a Prius and a Volt, just sayin'
Joined
·
16,885 Posts
YMMV, indeed. One of my friends just sold both his G19 and G21 and prefers the M&P in both 9mm and .45ACP. He is just more accurate and is better acclimated to the trigger. He decided to just go with one, and used the sales of the Glocks to fund the purchase of the .45. Plus a bunch of ammo, that he shoots each week at the range.
Finances dictated he just go with one platform, so for him the M&P was the right choice.
I agree, for me Glock is just better. I got used to the trigger pretty quick, in tandem with the grip angle is just so consistent from one gun to the next. It may not be perfect, but it is perfectly consistent.
Finances dictated he just go with one platform, so for him the M&P was the right choice.
I agree, for me Glock is just better. I got used to the trigger pretty quick, in tandem with the grip angle is just so consistent from one gun to the next. It may not be perfect, but it is perfectly consistent.
Joined
·
131,392 Posts
Eh, quality is about the same in my eyes. They're both cheaply built plastic service pistols.
Honestly, whoever thinks a stock Glock's trigger is "excellent" needs to seriously broaden their horizons.
Touche!!!
Joined
·
131,392 Posts
Joined
·
917 Posts
They are both tools and will be treated as so
Joined
·
30,515 Posts
Yeah, my 9 pound G42 triggers are really keepers.
I keep Band Aids in my gun shop for when I shoot my Glocks. Any amount of shooting the Glocks rubs my trigger finger raw.
Joined
·
8,945 Posts
The G22 trigger is excellent? Compared to what? Keltec, HiPoint, Lorcan? The only way around a Glock trigger is to pull it 50,000 times and then it will seem ok. After 350,000 rounds you will have a permanent dent on your right middle finger between the first and second knuckle and will no longer be able to shoot a 1911.
Joined
·
131,392 Posts
I guess you never fired a Sigma. :whistling:
Joined
·
22,879 Posts
Yeah, those were pretty bad. :yuck:
Joined
·
2,705 Posts
With no live fire experience on the 4.25" M&Ps, I do have a flat Apex trigger on my 5" competition/carry gun. The closest experience to this sub-2 lb trigger that I have had with other guns is with the Walther LP400 air pistol (!). And without the Teutonic squareness of a Glock, my finger doesn't rub on the frame. So in my limited experience, the M&P is a good gun.
My newest and second Glock is a 20SF Gen 3 bought about three years ago and my only M&P is the Pro CORE 9L bought about two years ago, so they're both about the same era.
Without throwing them both into salt baths and whatnot, I can't tell which finish is more anti-corrosion resistant, but they both look about the same: basic service pistol finishes. Fit is probably about the same - basic service pistol fitment. Not something to get excited about.
Trigger pulls is where I slightly favor the Glock more because of the positive reset. The takeup and break on the Pro CORE (which supposedly has an improved trigger mechanism over the standard M&P) seem to be a tad smoother and lighter than the Glock. However, the reset is still too vague for me to like.
Anyway, nothing I've seen from the M&P Pro CORE that would make me feel excited about buying another M&P of any kind. Same thing with the Glock 20 Still Fat. I cherish my Gen 1 G17, but if I can't buy a third Glock, I wouldn't lose any sleep over it.
I'd buy a different version of the Walther PPQ or HK VP9 before I'd buy another version of any of the current plastic phantastics that I already have: Steyr, SW, Springfield, FN, ad infinitum.
Without throwing them both into salt baths and whatnot, I can't tell which finish is more anti-corrosion resistant, but they both look about the same: basic service pistol finishes. Fit is probably about the same - basic service pistol fitment. Not something to get excited about.
Trigger pulls is where I slightly favor the Glock more because of the positive reset. The takeup and break on the Pro CORE (which supposedly has an improved trigger mechanism over the standard M&P) seem to be a tad smoother and lighter than the Glock. However, the reset is still too vague for me to like.
Anyway, nothing I've seen from the M&P Pro CORE that would make me feel excited about buying another M&P of any kind. Same thing with the Glock 20 Still Fat. I cherish my Gen 1 G17, but if I can't buy a third Glock, I wouldn't lose any sleep over it.
I'd buy a different version of the Walther PPQ or HK VP9 before I'd buy another version of any of the current plastic phantastics that I already have: Steyr, SW, Springfield, FN, ad infinitum.
Joined
·
39,680 Posts
As a firearms instructor who helps train people to use firearms as dedicated defensive weapons, I usually have the most push-back from folks who are "trigger pull" snobs, regardless of the type of their favored handgun.
It's usually easier to help shooters who don't think that they've already found the penultimate handgun, and who aren't prepared to quickly denigrate every other handgun at the slightest opportunity.
Of course, it's almost always easier to work with semi-auto pistol shooters who learned their foundation skills on DA revolvers, as they usually find anything to be easier and "better" than a long & heavy DA revolver trigger pull.
Besides, once you ramp up some minimal range-induced stress, and throw in some unexpected (and previously unpracticed) demanding courses-of-fire and drills, the typical "trigger pull snob" usually discovers that their finely tuned, custom trigger isn't nearly as helpful (or as practical) as they liked to envision while standing around on a static range, leisurely shooting slow-fire targets. Or while sharing stories at the gun shop display counter.
I own, carry & shoot Glocks and M&P's (and a lot more brands/types, but those are the two mentioned in the OP).
I've been through the Glock and M&P pistol armorer classes enough times to sometimes forget how many times it's been for each of them. (Without going to find and count certificates, it's either 4/3 or 4/4 of each.)
I could list many perceived features that could be debated as advantages and disadvantages for both, but both are fine, decently reliable, good quality examples of the modern plastic service-pistol trend.
I'm presently carrying a new production issued M&P40 (as a reserve after my retirement), but that's because they gave it to me. I'm old enough, and have been doing this long enough, that I'm no longer interested in carrying anything of my own as a duty weapon. If they'd given me a Glock, I'd be carrying one of those for duty use.
As far as I'm concerned anymore, let it be their gun that gets subjected to the rigors (abuse) of police work, meaning taken into evidence or subjected to unexpected damage, loss or theft during normal use. They'll give me another one that looks just like it.
I'll continue to carry my own Glocks and M&P's as retirement CCW's, though. I'm much less likely to need to use one of them as I go about my normal life. Besides, I like to carry smaller guns as retirement CCW than the full-size guns in either the Glock of S&W M&P lines.
Brief and brutally honest? Really? It's just a plastic service-type pistol, when all is said and done.
It's usually easier to help shooters who don't think that they've already found the penultimate handgun, and who aren't prepared to quickly denigrate every other handgun at the slightest opportunity.
Of course, it's almost always easier to work with semi-auto pistol shooters who learned their foundation skills on DA revolvers, as they usually find anything to be easier and "better" than a long & heavy DA revolver trigger pull.
Besides, once you ramp up some minimal range-induced stress, and throw in some unexpected (and previously unpracticed) demanding courses-of-fire and drills, the typical "trigger pull snob" usually discovers that their finely tuned, custom trigger isn't nearly as helpful (or as practical) as they liked to envision while standing around on a static range, leisurely shooting slow-fire targets. Or while sharing stories at the gun shop display counter.
I own, carry & shoot Glocks and M&P's (and a lot more brands/types, but those are the two mentioned in the OP).
I've been through the Glock and M&P pistol armorer classes enough times to sometimes forget how many times it's been for each of them. (Without going to find and count certificates, it's either 4/3 or 4/4 of each.)
I could list many perceived features that could be debated as advantages and disadvantages for both, but both are fine, decently reliable, good quality examples of the modern plastic service-pistol trend.
I'm presently carrying a new production issued M&P40 (as a reserve after my retirement), but that's because they gave it to me. I'm old enough, and have been doing this long enough, that I'm no longer interested in carrying anything of my own as a duty weapon. If they'd given me a Glock, I'd be carrying one of those for duty use.
As far as I'm concerned anymore, let it be their gun that gets subjected to the rigors (abuse) of police work, meaning taken into evidence or subjected to unexpected damage, loss or theft during normal use.
They'll give me another one that looks just like it. I'll continue to carry my own Glocks and M&P's as retirement CCW's, though. I'm much less likely to need to use one of them as I go about my normal life. Besides, I like to carry smaller guns as retirement CCW than the full-size guns in either the Glock of S&W M&P lines.
Brief and brutally honest? Really? It's just a plastic service-type pistol, when all is said and done.
Joined
·
42,095 Posts
They're both painfully uninteresting.
Joined
·
42,095 Posts
erfect10:1 - 20 of 115 Posts
