M&P9c advantages over SR9c?

[tackdriver]

I am currently considering buying the M&P9c and the SR9c. I know this question has been asked before, so let me ask it a different way:

What advantages does the Smith pistol have over the Ruger? Other than "it fit me better," what advantages do you see? The fit I'll have to figure out for myself. Frankly, before shooting them (and I will) both, I am leaning toward the Ruger.

The Ruger has adjustable sights and the trigger feels much better in dry firing. I know the Smith has extra capacity in the "small" magazine, but that doesn't make a difference to me. The price difference is tremendous.

[stevieboy]

Don't own either but I've fired both (well, actually, I've fired the SR9 not the 9c). I liked the S & W, really liked the Ruger. The one I fired just felt better in my hand. I really liked the slim grip frame. It was accurate, reliable, and the trigger, while nothing to write home about, wasn't bad. Best of all, the price of the Ruger was about $150 less than the S & W.

[Coltman 77]

My M&P 9 just has a better feel and balance to me than the Ruger.

Both are fine pistols, which one do you shoot better tackdriver?

[Tom Servo]

Funny how perceptions differ. I find the SR9 trigger to feel stiff and creepy, while the one on the M&P has a definite, clean break.

Both are fine guns.

[3leggeddog]

I had a Sr9 for 8 months ,it had to go back to ruger in the first 4 months , the trigger was heavy-[lbs], the barrel peen up . Even after new barrel was install ,and 450 rds later the shot group did spread out! Their quality control is a crap shoot!
I traded it in on the Mp9c and it is way better made inside + out!! I got close to 500rds threw it now and NO troubles at all...Its shoots more accurately for me,fast follow shot are quick. After about 200 rds the trigger smoothed out great! I paid $125.00 more for the Mp9c , my life is worth it !

[sonnycrockett]

Its debatable ^^^^as you can see above
having owned both the M&P and the SR9c
I can say I prefer the Ruger over the M&P,its built better
it has a way better trigger and it was quite a bit less money
So when you say Advantages I see the Ruger as the one on top


Some will argue in defense of the M&P - but IMO S&W should stick
to revolvers ...

[s002cjs]

For me, it was looking at some real-world examples of what's been used where, and applying my personal PERCEPTION (which may not reflect reality)...

I asked myself what pistol I would believe would be reliable in a week-long heavy shooting course (1000-2000 rounds in that timeframe with few problems, low fatigue). I don't expect to run into that situation very often (just can't afford it!) but it seemed like a decent litmus test for reliability. That really shortened my list quite a bit, and I just couldn't find that much about Rugers being used to that extent...not saying it's not out there or that they can't stand up to it, but it's just my perception.

[Mike-Mat]

Never shot the Ruger. But I LOVE my M&P9. It's just a well made gun. Fit, Finish, Accuracy. The S&W probably does cost more. I don't own any Rugers. I've looked at them and they just dont stand out for me.

But I'm sure you wouldn't be disappointed with either. Both companies have a fine rep for quality and customer service.

Mike

[TheJ]

I really love my M&P 9c and for me that much money wouldn't be the determining factor. I own a Ruger (not a SR9c) as well though so I'm certainly not opposed to the brand. For me though when I decided to buy the M&P 9c versus several other choices including the SR9c, it came down to which one I enjoyed shooting more and was most accurate with. I suspect unless the price difference is prohibitive for you, it will come down to the similar factors for you as well. Also if you rent to try then, don't forget that the different palm swells can really change the feel too.

[tackdriver]

Funny how perceptions differ. I find the SR9 trigger to feel stiff and creepy, while the one on the M&P has a definite, clean break.

The trigger on the SR9c is significantly modified compared to what came out on the full-size SR9 before and after the recall. Only recently has Ruger started putting the enhanced SR9c trigger system in the full-size pistol. The 'old' SR9 trigger did suck, although no worse than the gritty feel of the M&P.

I am pretty much settled on the Ruger. The only differences I see are cost and that I prefer its trigger. $150 difference isn't a determining factor until you get down to them being so similar and one is 20% less than the other. Only problem is, now that I've got it down to these two, no one has an SR9c in stock, much less one up for rental.

So it goes. I can be patient.

[tristar viper]

The M&P's have exactly what someone mentioned; a gritty trigger and it's awful. I've shot two of them and while I shoot them just fine, I don't enjoy the guns for some reason. Probably the trigger, and the fact I find them hideous to look at. They are to me the ugliest pistols on the market.

[Takedown]

I have fired both, I have the SR9C and my girlfriend has the M&PC. I shoot the Ruger better and she shoots the M&P better. I don't like the extra wide safety on the M&P but she does. It all comes down to how you shoot it. The only advantage I see the M&PC has over the SR9C is magazine capacity on the smaller mags 12 v 10, otherwise they are both great guns.

[18DAI]

I agree that all the M&P's I've shot had terrible gritty triggers. I also agree that the M&P is an ugly pistol.

I haven't shot the SR9c yet, but the full size SR9 was a very good shooter. Regards 18DAI.

[skoro]

I've had my M&P9c for two and a half years now, and it's been flawless. No jams in over 1000 rounds. Handles nicely, holds 12+1 in a compact frame, and is accurate. Unlike what others have reported, mine has a smooth trigger.

I haven't shot a SR9c but had a P95 that was a very good weapon, just kinda bulky and clunky. It now serves as my nephew's HD gun. My Rugers have all been good guns, too.

[TRguy]

Mine can't decide if it is mid-size or compact. Some days it is rockin 12+1 and others it is ridin' with 17+1. And for good measure slide the can on it so as not to leave a large calling card.

I have shot the SR9, I'm going with the S&W MP9c, though my everyday carry is a FNP-9

[Tomac]

An APEX sear & striker plate will greatly improve the trigger on the S&W.
Tomac

[cluznar]

Own a Ruger SR9c and it is one great gun. 1,000 rounds with no hiccups.
Great trigger, easy to shoot, accurate, dependable, easy to conceal.

What more could you want in a gun?

[testuser]

I'd say.

The M&Pc:

Pro: Dimensionally a little more efficient.

+2 rounds in a pistol that's .3 of an inch shorter than the SR9c.
Overall length is slight shorter, despite having the same barrel length.

Con: Seems like it has a higher bore axis.

SR9c.

Pro: Tends to fit people will slimmer hands better. Some like the trigger better. (Then again, a longer trigger pull lends itself to safer carry without a safety.)

Con: A manual safety on a gun with a trigger type than doesn't require one. This could accidentally be left on.

M&P has an optional thumb safety that can easily be removed by the end user if no longer desired. I've done this before, just drive out a few pins and lift out the safety.

[LockedBreech]

I like that you can get an M&P without a manual safety or LCI, and I think the M&P is a nicely finished gun.

That said, I've been packing a Ruger LCP for two years and it is an astonishing bargain. For a $300 pistol, it shows little carry wear and has eaten 1,000 rounds or so of 5-6 different brands including 3 different JHPs without a hiccup.

If I had the money I'd own both the SR9c and the M&P9c, both are wonderful guns made by solid American companies. I'd trust either. While the SR9c is more affordable, the M&P9c certainly gives you plenty for your money.

[MLeake]

While this pertains to full-size more than compacts, at a couple different IDPA clubs and a shooting class, I have seen a lot of M&Ps. I have not seen a single SR9.

I haven't shot the SR9, but personally did not like the grip or trigger of the one I handled at a friend's LGS.

Before anybody accuses me of being a Ruger basher, over the years I have owned two GP100s, two SP101s, an LCR, and a Super Blackhawk.

[wbw]

My vote goes to the SR9c. I played with the M&P9c before I bought the Ruger. It felt better in my hand but overall I liked the SR9c better. My intention was for a carry pistol and I felt that the Ruger was better suited to that for me. Here's mine:

[TacticalDefense1911]

Not very many LE departments or professional instructors have adopted or suggest the Ruger as a serious option for a defensive pistol, while the M&P has a large following and is almost universally accepted as an excellent performer. This should be a hint.

[RBid]

Resurrected 2010 thread.

I'll play, though.

The SR9c has the improved trigger (as compared to the first run of the SR9), which I love.

As for the M&P having worked its way into the LEO arena, I have been told that Smith & Wesson aggressively pursued this. I am told that they offered extremely aggressive buy/exchange programs, to help LE agencies transition to the M&P.

[checkmyswag]

I like the trigger in the SR series.

I like about everything else on the M&P better.

[Kreyzhorse]

I've only dry fired each gun but I've got to say that I thought the Ruger had a much better trigger and I preferred how the Ruger fit my hand over the Smith.