Glocks vs S&W M&P

[Deaf Smith]

If it's to fight with, I'll get the Glock for the simple reason it's combat tested and been so for decades.

If for competition where people don't shoot back at ya, well IF the M&P is as accurate as the Glock, then I'd get the M&P.

Deaf

[RBid]

Originally Posted by IdahoG36

I agree with this. Glock was great in the 80's and 90's, but there are much better options available that are just as reliable, and have the same or better mag capacity.



For the life of me, I still don't understand the love affair people have with Glock. They fit your hand like a brick. They are unnecessarily bulky. Glock's trigger is average. Their plastic sights are a joke. As for aftermarket parts, why would you have to change out parts on "Perfection"?



I have owned several Glocks when I was new to pistols, and they did one thing well- they went bang every time I pulled the trigger. Other than that, I wasn't really impressed.



IMO, the M&P is a much better gun than the Glock 17 as far as ergonomics go. Other than that, they are both high capacity, reliable guns. Not much difference there.



Now if I had the opportunity to own a Glock 18, I'd be all over it. I'll leave the rest to the Kool Aid drinkers

The 'brick' thing is overstated. They have squarish grips, but at 1.18" wide, they are NOWHERE NEAR as bulky as people claim they are-- in 9 or .40, anyway. Yes, the stock sights are terrible. No argument, there. Yes, the M&P grips are more comfortable in hand during fondling. In live fire, I don't notice any difference at all in how the grips feel, other than angle.

My personal appreciation for Glocks has nothing to do with Kool Aid, and everything to do with the facts. Specifically, that the 19 frame gives me an easy to conceal firearm with a 4" bbl, which eats up recoil and shoots flat, is easy to be accurate with, holds 15+1, works every time, and which I've been able to find mags and holsters for on the wall of many local shops. I understand that there are a lot of people who get them "because cops use them" or because many big names do. That doesn't change the fact that they are very user friendly.

[ClydeFrog]

Tango Down is the after market parts company that sells a new slide release for Glocks that looks like the M&P style.
Larry Vickers, www.VickersTactical.com designed it.

Clyde

[Uncle Malice]

The Vicker's slide stop that ClydeFrog mentioned is excellent. I have it on both my Glock 20 and Glock 21 - and will soon add it to my Glock 19 and Glock 26, replacing the OEM extended slide stop. It works great and does feel very similar to the M&P slide stop which is a good thing for me, running both platforms. Price is great and shipping from Amazon is quick.

Here are a few pics.

[RJLII]

My wife has the M&P9 and I have the Glock 17. Neither one of us regrets our decision.

[IdahoG36]

Posted by Constantine

As to the comment of "the only good thing it did was go bang every time."

Can someone get him a cookie? That's the point.

I understand that ultimately, that is the point of any handgun. My post is merely stating that Glock is not the only ultra reliable semi auto on the market. Many other offerings are 100% reliable, and offer much better ergonomics.

I understand the Glock hater fanboys. I used to be one until I put my man pants on.

I am by no means a Glock hater fanboy. Over the years, I have owned the following, in no particular order- G22 RTF, G23, G27, G21SF , G20, G29, and a G19. I do have considerable experience with Glock, and I stand by the statements that I made about them earlier. I am not merely speaking out of my a** like some of the people that don't like Glocks, but have never owned one.

When I was out shopping for a new .45, I held a Glock 21 SF and a Glock 21 Gen 4. It honestly felt like I was holding a 2X4 in my hand. The M&P .45, SR45, and several others felt much better in this respect.

[Beezer]

I recently shot both and purchased the M&P. It just felt better in my hand. But the Glock was by no means a bad gun. M&P was more comfortable for me.