1enforcer said:i would stay away from the glocks. go with the m&p. m&p is a far better gun.
You are entitled to your opinion 1enforcer, but I sure don't agree with you. Glock has been around now for many years. It is a time proven and reliable design! While I do feel that ergonomically the M&P pistols are a better design (at least in my hands) that does not make them a better, or worse, pistol.1enforcer said:i would stay away from the glocks. go with the m&p. m&p is a far better gun.
40SX said:I own four Glocks and my 27 is the only Glock that resides in my safe only to come out once in a while to shoot paper because of reliability problems. I use to carry it, but not again until I have 500 trouble free rounds though it again. My S&W M&P compacts never malfunctioned, so I'd go for the M&Ps.
DHart said:Generally speaking, I like the ergos better on the M&P (I have a 40Compact), but I have had perfect reliability with my Glocks (29 and 19) and problems with mag drops, slide lock back, and light primer strikes with my M&P. S&W is verrry good about trying to correct problems with the M&P, but the fact remains that it is not uncommon for M&P owners to have problems with these three issues I mentioned. I am doing my best to try to get my confidence level with my M&P up there, but unfortunately, I can't rely on mine to be as drop dead reliable as my Glocks. I carry my Glock 19 most of the time these days. My M&P gets regular shooting, but I'm still having some problems with it. If I were to go out and buy a carry gun that I would need to rely on right now, I'd put more trust in the proven Glock design than on the new M&P design. Perhaps in another year or two, these common M&P problems will disappear altogether.
I like the M&P Compact concept a lot and prefer the grip & trigger feel of the M&P, but I'd say that if you want a stone-reliable, compact 40 with near certainty of no problems, I'd buy a Glock 23 and a 9mm Lone Wolf barrel and you'll have both a 40 and a 9 in a very proven, solid, compact design.
DHart said:Kraig... I haven't personally tried a 23 converted to 9, but from what I gather from others who have... it apparently works well. I do agree with you that for best reliability, shoot the gun in the caliber it was created for in the first place... unless and until you have proven to yourself that your caliber conversion is stone reliable. I have a 29 and a 19 and have only shot them in their native calibers. They are stellar performers even if the grip feel isn't as nice as I'd like it to be. I think a 23 is on the horizon for me as a 40 cal carry gun.
DHart said:Thanks for the info. Unless one really NEEDs to get two calibers out of a 23 or a 27, it sounds like buying two guns is just a much better way to go, even if it's a bit more expensive!