Compare M&P to Glock.
1 - 20 of 32 Posts
I like the way the M&P feels in my hand over the Glock. Once you hold the M&P and then you hold a Glock, the Glock feels a little off.
Glock has taken an "if it ain't broke..." approach to their products in my opinion. All industries are ran on innovation. I'd like to see that in Glock before I'd purchase one.
Glock has taken an "if it ain't broke..." approach to their products in my opinion. All industries are ran on innovation. I'd like to see that in Glock before I'd purchase one.
Either gun is a good reliable gun (although the Glock has a longer track record). I chose the M&P because it fit me better. Comes to point of aim naturally; just bring it up and shoot. “Instinct” shooting comes much easier and since I will use it as a CCW after I put enough rounds through, that is important. I had to mentally adjust the POA with the Glock every time I brought it up. That definitely would not work.
Joined
·
508 Posts
I was in your boat, and frankly really wanted to be a glock guy... Glocks have a notorious reputation but I just could not for the life of me get comfortable with that trigger safety protruding out of the face of the trigger. The XD's is lighter and becomes flush with the trigger face upon contact while the Glock's safety resists you and remains protruding.
Consider the XD line of weapons as well, they are also very good.
I think glock has become stubborn about their weapon design, or complacent, and despite the latest iteration that's being released of the glock 21 which is a slim line w/ ambi mag releases and a picatinny rail ala M&P, they haven't changed anything. There is no reason NOT to incorporate things that are quickly becoming standard like interchangeable backstraps (The Air force requires it on their new inquiry to manufacturers)
Interesting to note, the Air force request to manufacturers also declared they must be a larger caliber then 9mm... and mentioned specifically .40 and .45. Glock just does not have the edge in those two calibers when compared to the offerings of Smith and Wesson and Springfield Armory.
If Glock doesnt quit sitting on its Laurels its age of popularity could be coming to a close... The glock was revolutionary, but today it is dated. Reliable but dated...
Consider the XD line of weapons as well, they are also very good.
I think glock has become stubborn about their weapon design, or complacent, and despite the latest iteration that's being released of the glock 21 which is a slim line w/ ambi mag releases and a picatinny rail ala M&P, they haven't changed anything. There is no reason NOT to incorporate things that are quickly becoming standard like interchangeable backstraps (The Air force requires it on their new inquiry to manufacturers)
Interesting to note, the Air force request to manufacturers also declared they must be a larger caliber then 9mm... and mentioned specifically .40 and .45. Glock just does not have the edge in those two calibers when compared to the offerings of Smith and Wesson and Springfield Armory.
If Glock doesnt quit sitting on its Laurels its age of popularity could be coming to a close... The glock was revolutionary, but today it is dated. Reliable but dated...
kB was a biggie for me. Since my two G-brand friends have both had "explosive disassembly" occur with their Glocks, I've shied away from them. The ones that have happened with non brand G hardware have been reloads from Glock fired brass (generally).
After hearing the horror stories, seeing the results, and reading about how they happen, I will not have a firearm that does not fully support the shell.
MI_Jester
After hearing the horror stories, seeing the results, and reading about how they happen, I will not have a firearm that does not fully support the shell.
MI_Jester
Joined
·
375 Posts
Mainly, I like the M&P's trigger better. Not spongy. The grip feels better (not slick) and I think it is a much better looking pistol (caution, subjective opinion alert).
Smith and Wesson has treated me and several other people I know extraordinarily well in the warranty-repair area. This included "a stupid shooter trick" (I wasn't the shooter!) that Smith fixed 100% and free. This is first-hand knowledge.
My personal exposure to Glock's warranty work was less than satisfactory, but it has been many years ago and perhaps they are more effective in this area now. I did remember it, though, and customer service is an important deciding factor for me in many purchases.
Smith and Wesson has treated me and several other people I know extraordinarily well in the warranty-repair area. This included "a stupid shooter trick" (I wasn't the shooter!) that Smith fixed 100% and free. This is first-hand knowledge.
My personal exposure to Glock's warranty work was less than satisfactory, but it has been many years ago and perhaps they are more effective in this area now. I did remember it, though, and customer service is an important deciding factor for me in many purchases.
I prefer Glocks myself, i may get another m&p down the line, but the m&p has a few things that i just don't prefer(opinion). I don't like the roll pins, in my opinion they look cheap compared to regular pins, i don't prefer the hinged trigger,or the trigger pull, yes i know Dan can fix one but it cost $100 in shipping and 50 for the work,take down is kinda funky, and didn't understand the need for the beavertail,or the rattling mags, my m&p i had was a great shooter, reliable as long as i had it (500 rnds), but i just kept asking myself that if i ever needed one and had both, which one would i pick up and Glock came to my mind everytime, best thing you can do honestly is just shoot them both and
![]()
decide for yourself, also may try Glock Talk and see what kind of replies you get there.
Sold my Glock 19 to help finance my M&Ps. They never fit my hand right and didn't point right for me. M&Ps fit my hand like a glove and they have better triggers imo, although the reset is longer than on a Glock.
Hold the M&P, then hold the Glock. Try to shoot both. I find the M&P to be a much softer shooter.
Hold the M&P, then hold the Glock. Try to shoot both. I find the M&P to be a much softer shooter.
In my opinion, I just could never get comfortable with a glock. The grip to bore angle is entirely too steep for me, which causes the top of the rear sight to line up nicely with the front of the ejection port… this is obviously not good.
After holding an M&P, I am further convinced that the Glocks feel like 2x4s.
I know there are oodles of glocks in police and mil service but let’s be realistic here, LEO and MIL always buy the cheapest of the acceptable weapons. After Indiana State Police had to trade in all of their .40 glocks because of wide spread failure, I took note.
I’ve also personally seen 3 glock failures at the range as well as the aftermath of another. The three I saw were all take down bar failures, two of which resulted in nothing more than the slide coming off in the shooters hand as they were checking to make sure the weapon was clear. The third sent the slide down range after the 4th round fired (carrying the 5th round with it)
Personally I hate the glocks trigger. That bar in the middle of the trigger literally makes me angry.
After holding an M&P, I am further convinced that the Glocks feel like 2x4s.
I know there are oodles of glocks in police and mil service but let’s be realistic here, LEO and MIL always buy the cheapest of the acceptable weapons. After Indiana State Police had to trade in all of their .40 glocks because of wide spread failure, I took note.
I’ve also personally seen 3 glock failures at the range as well as the aftermath of another. The three I saw were all take down bar failures, two of which resulted in nothing more than the slide coming off in the shooters hand as they were checking to make sure the weapon was clear. The third sent the slide down range after the 4th round fired (carrying the 5th round with it)
Personally I hate the glocks trigger. That bar in the middle of the trigger literally makes me angry.
For CCW I still prefer a Glocl 19. The M&P compact is too small for me. I like the M&P for a full size gun and have both the .40 and 9mm But don't carry either right now because I'm waiting for XS Big Dots. I have the same sights on all my guns and want to stay uniform. Also, I like the trigger reset better on my Glocks even with Dan's trigger job. You can hear a Glock reset from accross the range. The M&P is a very subtle reset and would be tough to notice under stress. Even with large hands the Glock 19 is still the perfect carry piece for me. I've had very bad luck with XDs. The two I bought, a compact .40 and the new .45 both broke the first day. Sent them back and never looked back. If the M&P comes out with a .45 I may take a look at one if nothing else just to complete the full size M&P collection. But if I was going to carry the weight of a .45 again I'd probably just carry my 1911. I really believe the lighter the gun the more likely you are to carry it.
G19 is probably a slightly better gun for CCW just because size. I like the M&P better though, overall, because it seems to be an up to date "current" version of the Glock, as Glock has not changed anything in a long time.
Here are some things to think about
M&P:
1.) Stainless steel
2.) Lifetime warranty
3.) 17+1 is nice
4.) Mag safety is nice for me (but you can get them without it), so is loaded chamber indicator
5.) Possibly cheaper than Glock, at least it is in Columbus, OH.
6.) Adjustable grips
7.) Truly out of the box ambidextrous
8.) Made in USA (factor for me, but others hate it or don't care)
9.) Takedown for me is easier than Glock due to Sig-like takedown lever.
10.) Steel Novak sights vs. Glock plastic sights
11.) Can shoot lead and reloads easily.
12.) Rockwell hardness = 68
Glock:
1.) Parts are avail. anywhere
2.) Not many parts in gun, so not much can go wrong (at least that is the theory)
3.) 1 year warranty (I think), although I hear they stand behind stuff longer than that.
4.) Durable tennifer finish.
5.) Torture test proven
6.) Holsters, clips, and everything is more readily avail.
7.) Mags for Glock are cheaper than M&P mags
8.) Their barreling is supposed to be more accurate, but can't shoot lead.
9.) Adaptability to shoot .22 and other calibers can be done on same platform.
10.) Rockwell hardness = 64
Maybe someone else can comment on kaboom factor of unsupported chamber versus supported chamber. I don't know much about that and am unsure whether M&P has a fully supported chamber or not. I believe they do.
Trigger is about the same to me and, honestly, if this is going to be your primary gun, you will get used to about anything as long as it is not total crap! Best to try it before you buy it. Go rent both!
Here are some things to think about
M&P:
1.) Stainless steel
2.) Lifetime warranty
3.) 17+1 is nice
4.) Mag safety is nice for me (but you can get them without it), so is loaded chamber indicator
5.) Possibly cheaper than Glock, at least it is in Columbus, OH.
6.) Adjustable grips
7.) Truly out of the box ambidextrous
8.) Made in USA (factor for me, but others hate it or don't care)
9.) Takedown for me is easier than Glock due to Sig-like takedown lever.
10.) Steel Novak sights vs. Glock plastic sights
11.) Can shoot lead and reloads easily.
12.) Rockwell hardness = 68
Glock:
1.) Parts are avail. anywhere
2.) Not many parts in gun, so not much can go wrong (at least that is the theory)
3.) 1 year warranty (I think), although I hear they stand behind stuff longer than that.
4.) Durable tennifer finish.
5.) Torture test proven
6.) Holsters, clips, and everything is more readily avail.
7.) Mags for Glock are cheaper than M&P mags
8.) Their barreling is supposed to be more accurate, but can't shoot lead.
9.) Adaptability to shoot .22 and other calibers can be done on same platform.
10.) Rockwell hardness = 64
Maybe someone else can comment on kaboom factor of unsupported chamber versus supported chamber. I don't know much about that and am unsure whether M&P has a fully supported chamber or not. I believe they do.
Trigger is about the same to me and, honestly, if this is going to be your primary gun, you will get used to about anything as long as it is not total crap! Best to try it before you buy it. Go rent both!
Joined
·
375 Posts
mp91, very good comparison post! I might argue that the Melonite on the S&W will equal Tennifer, but maybe that remains to be seen. I would like to go to a M&P armorer's school to see if it is as easy to work on as a Glock, but that may not matter to most people who will never go beyond a field strip.
I have some experience with work done on Glock's "detonations" of some years ago. FWIW, the large body of research I saw turned up no catastrophic failures with the 9mm Glocks. I pretty much bleed S&W blue, I admit, but try to be fair when the "kaboom" subject comes up.
I have some experience with work done on Glock's "detonations" of some years ago. FWIW, the large body of research I saw turned up no catastrophic failures with the 9mm Glocks. I pretty much bleed S&W blue, I admit, but try to be fair when the "kaboom" subject comes up.
Personally, I prefer the MP now. Ive owned and shot Glocks for 15 years and always liked my Glocks, but the grip angle just got me. You couldnt shoot anything else naturally after getting used to the Glock and I believe your hand/trigger finger is designed to pull the trigger directly to the rear with the MP/1911 type grip angle. With the Glock grip angle, your trigger finger pulls to the rear and up and I think that magnifies the "trigger jerk or snatch".
I picked up the MP we tested for our Team and it automatically felt natural and perfect in the hand, from the first time. Once I put in a little bit of time on the MP (I shoot about 30,000 plus rounds a year, mostly for IPSC, and some for work) I improved my proficiency rapidly w/ the MP over the Glock. Now I dont think there is any comparison. If the MP holds up over time, I think SW is going to take back a good part of the market.
Safariland reps that we had at our PD for the holster transition said they were making holsters like crazy for the MP due to a lot of demand and dept's switching to the MP.
From what Ive seen, I think the MP will hold up just fine. We should start a thread and keep track on who has the most rounds out of an MP.
I picked up the MP we tested for our Team and it automatically felt natural and perfect in the hand, from the first time. Once I put in a little bit of time on the MP (I shoot about 30,000 plus rounds a year, mostly for IPSC, and some for work) I improved my proficiency rapidly w/ the MP over the Glock. Now I dont think there is any comparison. If the MP holds up over time, I think SW is going to take back a good part of the market.
Safariland reps that we had at our PD for the holster transition said they were making holsters like crazy for the MP due to a lot of demand and dept's switching to the MP.
From what Ive seen, I think the MP will hold up just fine. We should start a thread and keep track on who has the most rounds out of an MP.
K said:
I got an email from Ernest Langdon two weeks ago and he said he has a M&P40 with over 40K rounds through it - no problems noted. I think most of us that shoot competition will probably put 20 to 30K a year through them at a minimum if you're shooting it exclusively. Based on what I've seen I don't expect any issues with durability out of this gun. Like they say - time will tell but folks were saying the same things about the G guns 20 years ago. I know because I started carrying a G17 in 1987. Looks like they did okay in the long run. I don't see much difference here.
Joined
·
12 Posts
I Myself own a Glock 22 and a M&P 40. right now I carry the Glock for work but I am in the process of switching to the M&P for a duty weapon.
I fell in love with the M&P from the first time I handled one. the feel is nice a few things i don't like is the breakdown process I think it is lame I prefer the breakdown of the glock. I was fortunate to get a M&P without the Mag Saftey. i have to say i like the Glock Mags better as well. i do like the mag release on the M&P better. But I like the Glock trigger better, I slowly getting use to the M&P trigger.
I guess when comes right down to it I'll always like glocks, i will not part with mine, but i like the way the M&P feels and I shoot as well with it as i do my glock so thats why i am choosing to carry it for duty over my glock.
I fell in love with the M&P from the first time I handled one. the feel is nice a few things i don't like is the breakdown process I think it is lame I prefer the breakdown of the glock. I was fortunate to get a M&P without the Mag Saftey. i have to say i like the Glock Mags better as well. i do like the mag release on the M&P better. But I like the Glock trigger better, I slowly getting use to the M&P trigger.
I guess when comes right down to it I'll always like glocks, i will not part with mine, but i like the way the M&P feels and I shoot as well with it as i do my glock so thats why i am choosing to carry it for duty over my glock.
Melonite is Tenifer under a different trade name.sheepdog said:
I've been a Glock fan for 10yrs, I dumped my Glocks in favor of the M&P. It's that good. "Glock has a track record" is BS. That's no reason not to buy a pistol, you should test any gun yourself before you trust it. Track record or not, lemons are made regardless of maker.
I personally think that it is sad
![]()
that people will dump a brand of guns that has served them well for 10 or 20 years for something that is new to the market, i mean there are just to many great guns out there to limit yourself to just one brand, and although all guns have their problems i do believe that a good track record is something to consider, i mean if a track record means nothing why not just buy a bunch of high points or some other cheap gun to protect your family or your self with? All i'm saying is that it's nice to know that the gun you are purchasing has a rep for being well made so your chances of getting a lemon are slim.
1 - 20 of 32 Posts
