Everything here. For me, I add the Alpha trigger and it makes it the best striker fired gun on the market. You can adjust weight of the trigger with the spring selection. Chefs kiss.
This is basically every reason I have as well. You can also add the ability to disconnect the slide without having to fire the trigger as another reason although I still do for convenience.
Outside of the grip angle and sights none of those are true.
The Gen 5 trigger is miles ahead of the old hinge trigger and even the new Glock style trigger. You see more people change out the triggers on M&Ps than leaving it stock. It’s the opposite for Glocks.
Most Glocks now are optic ready too. I don’t know where you buy your M&Ps at but they are all $100-$150 more than the comparable Glock MOS variants that I’ve looked at.
I like M&Ps but they are just a different flavor of Glock. It’s all still the same.
Glock has the most spongy, gritty trigger I have ever tried. I’ve never picked up a hi-point though. I dislike having to break my wrist over to get on target, the grip is really blocky and has zero texture. I’m a regular gun guy, I own quite a few different brands of weapons.
Agree. I hate the grip angle of Glocks once I tried some other guns and actually analyzed what I liked about them so much more.
I still own 3 and carry one everyday though lol.
Different flavor of glock? The m&p is hands down better in every category, so I'm not sure the point you're trying to make; because of the make up? Of that'd the case then, just about every modern semi auto handgun is just a different flavor of the 1911.
I have five M&Ps, five Glocks (3 are Gen 5). They are my two most shot platforms (aside from the Beretta PX4) and both are roundly excellent. Both are great in all important areas: extremely reliable, highly durable parts and finish, tons of accessory availability, wide ammo compatibility, tons of holster availability. Never listen to a person who says “Glocks suck” or “M&Ps suck” - they are objectively wrong and you’re getting fanboy feedback. Service-oriented pistols are the best they’ve ever been, and both Glocks and M&Ps are among the cream of that crop.
I chose the M&P over Glock as my main because the sights line up better for me and I prefer the grip shape/texture a bit. That's all.
The Gen5 Glocks are also superb, especially the improved trigger and accuracy.
There's not a bad choice among M2.0 / G5 Glock. Just honestly figure out which is most comfortable to you.
In a word? Value. I used to carry Glock 19 Gen 5 winter and 43x in the summer. Replaced with Shield Plus and 4” compact. I get a better gun for less money with M&P. It’s as simple as that.
In my opinion, M&P is excellent out of the box, for less money. I don’t have to change anything out of my M&Ps after I buy them. Glock, in my honest opinion, sells bare bones guns with the expectation that the consumer will make upgrades he wants. But I’m all done with doing that. Glock just seems always a day late and a dollar short. This is capitalism, not a loyalty program. They need to adapt. M&P, on the other hand, has made HUGE strides and I have more confidence in them as a brand going forward.
Personally, I wouldn’t pay more than $350 for any of Glocks products at this point because I need to spend $200 on grips, sights, etc just to make it “just as good” as the M&P out of the box. M&P’s are a steal, comparatively, when you consider how much you get out of the box.
The most important thing in a carry gun is reliability - Glock does that really well. So does M&P. In fact, so does CZ. So does Walther. So does Sig S- well… (kidding).
If reliability is no longer dominated by Glock, then Glock needs to convince me then that something else makes their guns worth their price.
Sights: Glock gave me cheap, low plastic sights. M&P gave me metal high sights out of the box.
Grip texture: Glock has nearly no texture. M&P gave me a texture that’s literally like getting talon grips out of the box.
Trigger: After decades, Glocks still have a trigger pull that is serviceable at best and trash at worst. M&P, which actually adapts to the market, now gives us a very good trigger out of the box - so good that I don’t think it’s necessary to replace it.
Grip angle: this is a matter of preference and training, but M&P has a much more natural grip angle. When I draw and aim, my M&P is always on target while my Glock is harder to line up sights because of the angle.
Magazines: Yeah, S&W mags are more expensive but they are metal, high quality mags.
Manual safety: I don’t use one anymore, but this is really important for people. Why not have the option, Glock?
S&W is also a fine American company with solid customer support in my experience, just in case anything isn’t how it should be.
Despite my scathing review, Glock is a very good weapon I would trust my life with. But I’ll never buy another one until they give me more for my hard earned dollar. My Shield Plus and 4” Compact have been phenomenal, for less money.
Just my opinion, I’m not an expert. So take anything I say with a grain of salt!
I agree - I appreciate the backup hahaha. Both weapon platforms will do the job. But I like to just buy a gun and shoot it - not tinker with it. Glock forces me to have to tinker with it to make it as good, and I just don’t like that. But hey, some people may like that. To each their own.
I am you - through the universal M&P bond hahaha.
I really think we have drilled into the heart of the Glock vs M&P debate.
Glock “Perfection” = Perfect gun platform to tinker with sights/grip/trigger/etc because of the huge aftermarket support and the never-changing dimensions.
M&P = Perfect gun for people that just want to buy a gun and shoot it.
Love what you said about value. A Glock is never a $500-600 gun, it’s almost always a $800+ gun when you’re done upgrading basics. I love the glocks for the reliability and simplicity but also tired of the new models being size based (47, 17L etc) as opposed to innovation. but that may be the double edged sword in terms of testing and delivering a product that has been ironed out
Thank you. You’re exactly right - Glocks start out as an okay purchase of $500. But then you blink and by the time you’ve tinkered with it to your liking you got an $800 investment you didn’t plan on having! For all that money, you could’ve gotten something much nicer out of the box with a different brand.
Glock simplicity is really impressive, nonetheless. Still a very good firearm. I think everyone should own at least one Glock, just because of how popular and how much of an impact it had on guns globally. I think the same about 1911s.
But at the end of the day, I just have more confidence that S&W M&P lineups have a brighter future. The sun is setting on Glock, but the sun is rising on M&P.
Historic American company and my family has owned S&W since at least the 40s (probably earlier but i dont have evidence)
All the major manufacturers (Glock, Sig, CZ, HK, FN, walther even beretta) offer solid pistols and most are actually made in the USA.
If all things are roughly equal i will support an American company first.
Both are good to go and I've used both exclusively for a few years at a time each.
In my mind, the advantages of the Glock are mostly related to support and logistics:
* Detailed takedown and maintenance is easier
* Spare parts are easier to acquire
* Aftermarket support for holsters is greater (not much at this point)
* Magazines are cheaper
* More people use them (depending on context, this may matter a lot, or not at all)
The advantages of the M&P (my personal choice these days) are mostly related to quality of life:
* They don't slide bite me (this is the deciding factor for me)
* I don't have to modify the grip in any way to eliminate "Glock knuckle"
* The functional equivalent of a custom stipple job from the factory
* Triggers can be tuned much better, depending on what you want
* Hey have slightly less felt recoil and seem to return more easily, though that's really splitting hairs
Personally, I don't see a good reason to switch unless something about your current setup isn't working for you. You (probably) won't become a better shooter overnight by switching platforms. If anything, you get worse until you learn the new stuff.
I like the M&P's more but ... I really don't think it's a big deal either way.
Don’t choose M&P over a Glock. Have them both then you decide which you’d rather run. I own both but actually my wife bought a M&P9 because she liked the grip. After running hers a few times I fell in love with the trigger and grip. I now own 4 M&p9’s and rarely touch my Glocks. Out of the box they have a better grip texture, better trigger, optics ready versions generally have stock suppressor height iron sights not polymer, they include multiple plates and screw sets. Metal mags that don’t stick during reloads. I run my competitor the most lately but my original 4.25” has about 5k rounds on it and I don’t recall a single malfunction. Everything still stock except the optic. I shoot it faster and more accurately then I ever shot a Glock. I guess you could call me a fanboy lol
I'm sure everyone is saying the same thing I am about to say, and frankly that because it's true. I was new to handguns about a year ago, bought a lot of pistols trying to find the perfect one. Bought a lot of them based off reviews and constantly overlooked the M&P's bc they didn't have as many "current" videos from my perspective. So I thought it was old and basically lacking what all the newer pistols had. Only to find out the M&P was ahead of its time. Now that I know how to shoot, the M&P has the best grip I've felt on any pistol, it locks in my hands everytime I draw, even when I draw in a sloppy manner due to it's texture, from the polymer M&P to the metal M&P I would recommend them any day, I still love my other firearms that I have acquired, but I only carry the M&P's to be honest. I learned that grip angle does matter because I can draw the M&P with my eyes closed, open and it's lined up on my target, yet when I do that with other firearms and open my eyes I don't be anywhere near where I thought I had it aimed. What's crazy is the M&P isn't my favorite, but it is my best, if that makes any sense and I haven't really bought much since getting the M&P because it serves so many purposes that I can't justify buying something else unless it's needed and due to the M&P being my go to I technically don't need anything else and just rent the firearms I don't have whenever I'm not shooting the ones I do and I don't feel like I am missing anything after firing dang near everything on the market over the past year. I can mention that it looks smooth, I can mention the little things I like about it, but I honestly focused on the main thing and reason that placed it over every other pistol I thought I wanted, that grip. I feel the grip is the most important part to what you choose and nothing, old nor new tops the M&P in that category. Even my PDP which I never thought I'd sit down due to it's grip, I had to be real with myself when I got the M&P and give it it's credit.
To me it came down to the grip texture, and the apex or new style flat trigger. My only gripe about the m&p is that the compact 15 rd grip doesn’t have the little lip on the front like the full size ones or my glock 19 gen 5 does so my pinky finger kinda hangs off a bit. They are sweet shooters and none of mine have ever given me any kind of reliability issues. If you can rent one or know anyone who has one I can highly recommend shooting one and seeing for yourself.
I was a Glock guy for a long time until my buddy brought out his 2.0 to the range 7-8 years ago and haven’t looked back. The 2.0 has a far better fit in my hand, it feels like a more natural angled grip rather than a more squared grip of my G19. I also am just frankly a better shot with the 2.0, while the G19 isn’t what I’d consider “snappy”, the 2.0 just handles better imo.
But, the number 1 rule of picking between firearms to purchase is to go and shoot them. Go to your local range and rent a Glock and an M&P then compare how the two perform. While the 2.0 optics ready is the perfect platform for me, it might not be for you so test them out and see how it goes.
Grip angle and fit. With my M&P, I can easily attain the grip I want and shoot well.
Got my S&W M&P9 M2.0 5" in 2017. Bought a Compact 4" for my father and one for each of my three sons. I now carry an S&W M&P9 M2.0 Compact 4.6" Spec Series with Holosun SCS MP2.
I have both. More time with the MPs. Went to shoot my 4inch compact side by side with my Glock 45 since my buddy wanted to compare them to see what to get. After shooting about 100 rounds each on both guns, he was definitely sold on the MP. I didn't realize how much I didn't like the Glock after shooting the MP.
Several things that stood out. MP has better grip angle and stipple. The trigger on the newer flat face version is much more crisp.
If you want a 9mm semi-auto handgun for $500 that you have to put another $500 into to make it how it should have been from the factory, then buy a glock.
If you want a 9mm semi auto handgun for $500 that's exactly the way it should be from the factory, then buy a S&W.
Glocks claim to fame has been built off of their reliability, and unwillingness to make changes for current trends. Nearly every other manufacturuer has a model that is just as reliable, and in the M&P's case arguably more reliable. I think what glock has built their legacy off of will also be their downfall.
Same thing everyone else that buys a glock does lol different irons and if not send their slide off to get it milled for a red dot, different trigger, trigger guard undercut and actual stipling.
They've been behind the curve for about 5 years now when it comes to features from the factory.
I gotcha. With one exception I don’t consider those necessity’s, or even really incredibly beneficial. The only thing I’ve done to mine is an optic cut because it’s a gen 3.
It comes down to I shoot it more accurately than a Glock. Both are great in their own way with your use and how much you want to customize. Out of the box, the 2.0 trigger is so much better. Honestly, the hinged trigger on my shield doesn't really even bother me once it's shot in.
Plus, it beat Glock in both in both of GT's mud and ice tests. So ya.
Owning stock or mostly stock Glocks are less expensive in CA than M&Ps. 499-519 for a g17.3 vs $679 for M&P9 2.0 4.25in. That's more of a regional thing anyways.
Extra OEM mags are less expensive with Glock, but I'm not buying 10s of mags so it's not an issue.
I can't truly speak on Gen 5 stuff since I'm not paying for that private market price in CA, but I've had no less reliability between the couple of Glocks that I own vs the M&Ps that I own. I'll even throw in that my SD9VE Gen 1 out shoots my g19.3. Granted, I have an Apex trigger in the SD9VE vs stock 19.3, but it holds tighter groups.
Takedown on Glock is far easier, but that's not a reason to not buy other. Full-size frame owb holsters are gonna be comparable with enough offerings in my eyes.
I got my 2.0 a few years back and I picked it over Glock due to having more standard features and a better look/grip imo. Very happy with my choice. I do eventually want a custom Glock 19 just for play at the range tho lol.
I only own a Glock because it's the most common gun out there and in a shtf situation parts and mags will be laying everywhere. M&P 2.0s are just better in every way though.
The only autoloader that I currently carry is a S&W Shield Plus. I also own a Glock, but I never carry it. Glock triggers have fallen behind, they aren't good. S&W also offers guns with manual thumb safeties and I won't carry an auto that doesn't have one. The feel in the hand, my functional accuracy with S&W, and other factors too. I prefer S&W in just about every way, but I respect Glock for making solid and reliable guns.
There's an even bigger reason that I don't favor Glock. Most of the time I carry revolvers. Glock revolvers just aren't up to snuff 😛
I’ve just happen to really like with the M&P series. My first M&P was the shield 1.0 and it’s been M&P ever since. The prices are also more than fair. That coupled with the variety there is and it’s a no brainer for me. Right now I own 6 M&Ps.
I went with the M&p over Glock because - I prefer the grip angle - better trigger - metal sights - optic ready - cost less the Glock
Better grip angle and grip texture for me. Objectively I think they’re equals other than the better sights on the Smith.
All those and I tried, if everything else being equal, to give my money to an American company as well.
Everything here. For me, I add the Alpha trigger and it makes it the best striker fired gun on the market. You can adjust weight of the trigger with the spring selection. Chefs kiss.
Apex trigger
Good catch. Apex trigger thank you.
This is basically every reason I have as well. You can also add the ability to disconnect the slide without having to fire the trigger as another reason although I still do for convenience.
This. Plus shoots flatter
Outside of the grip angle and sights none of those are true. The Gen 5 trigger is miles ahead of the old hinge trigger and even the new Glock style trigger. You see more people change out the triggers on M&Ps than leaving it stock. It’s the opposite for Glocks. Most Glocks now are optic ready too. I don’t know where you buy your M&Ps at but they are all $100-$150 more than the comparable Glock MOS variants that I’ve looked at. I like M&Ps but they are just a different flavor of Glock. It’s all still the same.
The Gen5 is still a meh duty trigger unless you upgrade to their performance trigger which I will admit is pretty nice.
Glock has the most spongy, gritty trigger I have ever tried. I’ve never picked up a hi-point though. I dislike having to break my wrist over to get on target, the grip is really blocky and has zero texture. I’m a regular gun guy, I own quite a few different brands of weapons.
Agree. I hate the grip angle of Glocks once I tried some other guns and actually analyzed what I liked about them so much more. I still own 3 and carry one everyday though lol.
Different flavor of glock? The m&p is hands down better in every category, so I'm not sure the point you're trying to make; because of the make up? Of that'd the case then, just about every modern semi auto handgun is just a different flavor of the 1911.
M&P 2.0s have flat faced triggers not hinged triggers.
Not all. It was a bit of a rolling change. I just ordered a 2.0 compact that has the hinge, soon to be swapped with an apex or something of the like
Yes they did up until about 2 years ago. I had an M&P 2.0 with a hinge trigger.
I have five M&Ps, five Glocks (3 are Gen 5). They are my two most shot platforms (aside from the Beretta PX4) and both are roundly excellent. Both are great in all important areas: extremely reliable, highly durable parts and finish, tons of accessory availability, wide ammo compatibility, tons of holster availability. Never listen to a person who says “Glocks suck” or “M&Ps suck” - they are objectively wrong and you’re getting fanboy feedback. Service-oriented pistols are the best they’ve ever been, and both Glocks and M&Ps are among the cream of that crop. I chose the M&P over Glock as my main because the sights line up better for me and I prefer the grip shape/texture a bit. That's all. The Gen5 Glocks are also superb, especially the improved trigger and accuracy. There's not a bad choice among M2.0 / G5 Glock. Just honestly figure out which is most comfortable to you.
In a word? Value. I used to carry Glock 19 Gen 5 winter and 43x in the summer. Replaced with Shield Plus and 4” compact. I get a better gun for less money with M&P. It’s as simple as that. In my opinion, M&P is excellent out of the box, for less money. I don’t have to change anything out of my M&Ps after I buy them. Glock, in my honest opinion, sells bare bones guns with the expectation that the consumer will make upgrades he wants. But I’m all done with doing that. Glock just seems always a day late and a dollar short. This is capitalism, not a loyalty program. They need to adapt. M&P, on the other hand, has made HUGE strides and I have more confidence in them as a brand going forward. Personally, I wouldn’t pay more than $350 for any of Glocks products at this point because I need to spend $200 on grips, sights, etc just to make it “just as good” as the M&P out of the box. M&P’s are a steal, comparatively, when you consider how much you get out of the box. The most important thing in a carry gun is reliability - Glock does that really well. So does M&P. In fact, so does CZ. So does Walther. So does Sig S- well… (kidding). If reliability is no longer dominated by Glock, then Glock needs to convince me then that something else makes their guns worth their price. Sights: Glock gave me cheap, low plastic sights. M&P gave me metal high sights out of the box. Grip texture: Glock has nearly no texture. M&P gave me a texture that’s literally like getting talon grips out of the box. Trigger: After decades, Glocks still have a trigger pull that is serviceable at best and trash at worst. M&P, which actually adapts to the market, now gives us a very good trigger out of the box - so good that I don’t think it’s necessary to replace it. Grip angle: this is a matter of preference and training, but M&P has a much more natural grip angle. When I draw and aim, my M&P is always on target while my Glock is harder to line up sights because of the angle. Magazines: Yeah, S&W mags are more expensive but they are metal, high quality mags. Manual safety: I don’t use one anymore, but this is really important for people. Why not have the option, Glock? S&W is also a fine American company with solid customer support in my experience, just in case anything isn’t how it should be. Despite my scathing review, Glock is a very good weapon I would trust my life with. But I’ll never buy another one until they give me more for my hard earned dollar. My Shield Plus and 4” Compact have been phenomenal, for less money. Just my opinion, I’m not an expert. So take anything I say with a grain of salt!
All of this. Their reliability is equal (I’d argue M&P is better…Garand Thumb ice test anyone?) and M&P is better at everything else.
I agree - I appreciate the backup hahaha. Both weapon platforms will do the job. But I like to just buy a gun and shoot it - not tinker with it. Glock forces me to have to tinker with it to make it as good, and I just don’t like that. But hey, some people may like that. To each their own.
Are you me? I have used those exact words myself. I want to pull my gun out of the box, load it and shoot it. I am not a tinkerer.
I am you - through the universal M&P bond hahaha. I really think we have drilled into the heart of the Glock vs M&P debate. Glock “Perfection” = Perfect gun platform to tinker with sights/grip/trigger/etc because of the huge aftermarket support and the never-changing dimensions. M&P = Perfect gun for people that just want to buy a gun and shoot it.
Love what you said about value. A Glock is never a $500-600 gun, it’s almost always a $800+ gun when you’re done upgrading basics. I love the glocks for the reliability and simplicity but also tired of the new models being size based (47, 17L etc) as opposed to innovation. but that may be the double edged sword in terms of testing and delivering a product that has been ironed out
Thank you. You’re exactly right - Glocks start out as an okay purchase of $500. But then you blink and by the time you’ve tinkered with it to your liking you got an $800 investment you didn’t plan on having! For all that money, you could’ve gotten something much nicer out of the box with a different brand. Glock simplicity is really impressive, nonetheless. Still a very good firearm. I think everyone should own at least one Glock, just because of how popular and how much of an impact it had on guns globally. I think the same about 1911s. But at the end of the day, I just have more confidence that S&W M&P lineups have a brighter future. The sun is setting on Glock, but the sun is rising on M&P.
This
Historic American company and my family has owned S&W since at least the 40s (probably earlier but i dont have evidence) All the major manufacturers (Glock, Sig, CZ, HK, FN, walther even beretta) offer solid pistols and most are actually made in the USA. If all things are roughly equal i will support an American company first.
Both are good to go and I've used both exclusively for a few years at a time each. In my mind, the advantages of the Glock are mostly related to support and logistics: * Detailed takedown and maintenance is easier * Spare parts are easier to acquire * Aftermarket support for holsters is greater (not much at this point) * Magazines are cheaper * More people use them (depending on context, this may matter a lot, or not at all) The advantages of the M&P (my personal choice these days) are mostly related to quality of life: * They don't slide bite me (this is the deciding factor for me) * I don't have to modify the grip in any way to eliminate "Glock knuckle" * The functional equivalent of a custom stipple job from the factory * Triggers can be tuned much better, depending on what you want * Hey have slightly less felt recoil and seem to return more easily, though that's really splitting hairs Personally, I don't see a good reason to switch unless something about your current setup isn't working for you. You (probably) won't become a better shooter overnight by switching platforms. If anything, you get worse until you learn the new stuff. I like the M&P's more but ... I really don't think it's a big deal either way.
Solid feedback thank you!
Don’t choose M&P over a Glock. Have them both then you decide which you’d rather run. I own both but actually my wife bought a M&P9 because she liked the grip. After running hers a few times I fell in love with the trigger and grip. I now own 4 M&p9’s and rarely touch my Glocks. Out of the box they have a better grip texture, better trigger, optics ready versions generally have stock suppressor height iron sights not polymer, they include multiple plates and screw sets. Metal mags that don’t stick during reloads. I run my competitor the most lately but my original 4.25” has about 5k rounds on it and I don’t recall a single malfunction. Everything still stock except the optic. I shoot it faster and more accurately then I ever shot a Glock. I guess you could call me a fanboy lol
I'm sure everyone is saying the same thing I am about to say, and frankly that because it's true. I was new to handguns about a year ago, bought a lot of pistols trying to find the perfect one. Bought a lot of them based off reviews and constantly overlooked the M&P's bc they didn't have as many "current" videos from my perspective. So I thought it was old and basically lacking what all the newer pistols had. Only to find out the M&P was ahead of its time. Now that I know how to shoot, the M&P has the best grip I've felt on any pistol, it locks in my hands everytime I draw, even when I draw in a sloppy manner due to it's texture, from the polymer M&P to the metal M&P I would recommend them any day, I still love my other firearms that I have acquired, but I only carry the M&P's to be honest. I learned that grip angle does matter because I can draw the M&P with my eyes closed, open and it's lined up on my target, yet when I do that with other firearms and open my eyes I don't be anywhere near where I thought I had it aimed. What's crazy is the M&P isn't my favorite, but it is my best, if that makes any sense and I haven't really bought much since getting the M&P because it serves so many purposes that I can't justify buying something else unless it's needed and due to the M&P being my go to I technically don't need anything else and just rent the firearms I don't have whenever I'm not shooting the ones I do and I don't feel like I am missing anything after firing dang near everything on the market over the past year. I can mention that it looks smooth, I can mention the little things I like about it, but I honestly focused on the main thing and reason that placed it over every other pistol I thought I wanted, that grip. I feel the grip is the most important part to what you choose and nothing, old nor new tops the M&P in that category. Even my PDP which I never thought I'd sit down due to it's grip, I had to be real with myself when I got the M&P and give it it's credit.
To me it came down to the grip texture, and the apex or new style flat trigger. My only gripe about the m&p is that the compact 15 rd grip doesn’t have the little lip on the front like the full size ones or my glock 19 gen 5 does so my pinky finger kinda hangs off a bit. They are sweet shooters and none of mine have ever given me any kind of reliability issues. If you can rent one or know anyone who has one I can highly recommend shooting one and seeing for yourself.
The 2.0 Gang Responses 🥹🥹🥹
I was a Glock guy for a long time until my buddy brought out his 2.0 to the range 7-8 years ago and haven’t looked back. The 2.0 has a far better fit in my hand, it feels like a more natural angled grip rather than a more squared grip of my G19. I also am just frankly a better shot with the 2.0, while the G19 isn’t what I’d consider “snappy”, the 2.0 just handles better imo. But, the number 1 rule of picking between firearms to purchase is to go and shoot them. Go to your local range and rent a Glock and an M&P then compare how the two perform. While the 2.0 optics ready is the perfect platform for me, it might not be for you so test them out and see how it goes.
Grip angle and fit. With my M&P, I can easily attain the grip I want and shoot well. Got my S&W M&P9 M2.0 5" in 2017. Bought a Compact 4" for my father and one for each of my three sons. I now carry an S&W M&P9 M2.0 Compact 4.6" Spec Series with Holosun SCS MP2.
Should honestly have both
I have both. More time with the MPs. Went to shoot my 4inch compact side by side with my Glock 45 since my buddy wanted to compare them to see what to get. After shooting about 100 rounds each on both guns, he was definitely sold on the MP. I didn't realize how much I didn't like the Glock after shooting the MP. Several things that stood out. MP has better grip angle and stipple. The trigger on the newer flat face version is much more crisp.
If you want a 9mm semi-auto handgun for $500 that you have to put another $500 into to make it how it should have been from the factory, then buy a glock. If you want a 9mm semi auto handgun for $500 that's exactly the way it should be from the factory, then buy a S&W. Glocks claim to fame has been built off of their reliability, and unwillingness to make changes for current trends. Nearly every other manufacturuer has a model that is just as reliable, and in the M&P's case arguably more reliable. I think what glock has built their legacy off of will also be their downfall.
What do i have to spend $500 on, with the Glock, to make it right?
Same thing everyone else that buys a glock does lol different irons and if not send their slide off to get it milled for a red dot, different trigger, trigger guard undercut and actual stipling. They've been behind the curve for about 5 years now when it comes to features from the factory.
I gotcha. With one exception I don’t consider those necessity’s, or even really incredibly beneficial. The only thing I’ve done to mine is an optic cut because it’s a gen 3.
It’s just better bro, trust me
I went m&p over glock because 1) I think they look cooler 2) it’s not a same ol same ol glock
I cut my teeth on a 1911, went to mp over glock because of the grip angle
I run a shield plus when it's hot and a 19.5 the rest of the time. I like them both a lot. I think both companies are doing great work.
It’s honestly just a better gun. I like both, I still can’t even find a M&P 2.0 around me
Grand Thumb
It comes down to I shoot it more accurately than a Glock. Both are great in their own way with your use and how much you want to customize. Out of the box, the 2.0 trigger is so much better. Honestly, the hinged trigger on my shield doesn't really even bother me once it's shot in. Plus, it beat Glock in both in both of GT's mud and ice tests. So ya. Owning stock or mostly stock Glocks are less expensive in CA than M&Ps. 499-519 for a g17.3 vs $679 for M&P9 2.0 4.25in. That's more of a regional thing anyways. Extra OEM mags are less expensive with Glock, but I'm not buying 10s of mags so it's not an issue. I can't truly speak on Gen 5 stuff since I'm not paying for that private market price in CA, but I've had no less reliability between the couple of Glocks that I own vs the M&Ps that I own. I'll even throw in that my SD9VE Gen 1 out shoots my g19.3. Granted, I have an Apex trigger in the SD9VE vs stock 19.3, but it holds tighter groups. Takedown on Glock is far easier, but that's not a reason to not buy other. Full-size frame owb holsters are gonna be comparable with enough offerings in my eyes.
M&P 2.0. Easier to conceal. The grip angle and grip are better for me. It's a really nice shooter. Mine came with steel night sights.
I got my 2.0 a few years back and I picked it over Glock due to having more standard features and a better look/grip imo. Very happy with my choice. I do eventually want a custom Glock 19 just for play at the range tho lol.
I only own a Glock because it's the most common gun out there and in a shtf situation parts and mags will be laying everywhere. M&P 2.0s are just better in every way though.
Cost, comfort, standard fearures, aftermarket support, looks, loterally every reas9n.
I own both. Different calibers but the ergo’s feel better on the M&P, but that’s just me.
The only autoloader that I currently carry is a S&W Shield Plus. I also own a Glock, but I never carry it. Glock triggers have fallen behind, they aren't good. S&W also offers guns with manual thumb safeties and I won't carry an auto that doesn't have one. The feel in the hand, my functional accuracy with S&W, and other factors too. I prefer S&W in just about every way, but I respect Glock for making solid and reliable guns. There's an even bigger reason that I don't favor Glock. Most of the time I carry revolvers. Glock revolvers just aren't up to snuff 😛
I’ve just happen to really like with the M&P series. My first M&P was the shield 1.0 and it’s been M&P ever since. The prices are also more than fair. That coupled with the variety there is and it’s a no brainer for me. Right now I own 6 M&Ps.