[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Mods - Please Lock (Page 1 of 2)
Posted: 9/23/2011 6:34:24 AM EDT
|
Before I get started, please let me note that I've shot several M&Ps. Here I am wondering what all the M&P hype is about. My take is that they didn't shoot any better than my XD or CZ. The M&P polymer feels like cheap plastic compared to my XD. The trigger is ok. The finish is ok. The grip is ok. I've seen the rail on a few M&Ps look like hell after someone has mounted and removed a site/laser. I admit that the pistol is ok/average/acceptable, but the fact that people are comparing them to Glocks, Sigs, and HKs is a bit ridiculous.
So what is it about M&Ps that you owners love so much? |
|
I own 3 glocks, an XD, and an M&P.
They have all been very reliable. I just like the feel of the M&P better. I don't care for the grip safety on the XD and it just seems too big. Glocks are great but the finger grooves on them have never matched my fingers. The M&P fits my hand better an I shoot better with it. To each his own. Carry whatever you want. I'll stick to my M&P. 
|
|
I agree with the first poster about the grip safety on XDs. I hate grip safeties, but I love the XD's trigger. I own several Glocks, but picked up my first M&P9C for a few reasons. First, the grip and feel of the gun are much better than both the Glock and the XD. (BTW, I love Glock's RTF2 frame) Second, the grips could be changed and the grips actually affect the grip unlike the bacstraps on the Glock and XD. Third, I got the compact b/c I hate the G26. The G26 is stubby and I am unable to shoot it well, but the M&P9C allows me to get a full grip on the gun with the factory extended mags and the grips allow me to make the gun fit me, which is what I needed in a carry rig. I don't know what you mean about the feel seems cheap compared to the XDs. All I know is that I love my M&P9C and already have a full size M&P on order once Smith gets done with its contracts.
|
|
Quoted:
I say the same thing about Glocks. They aren't for me. I'm not going to troll forums about it though. The intent here is not to troll, although I see why you may think that. The real point I am trying to make is that it's not just a few people who like the M&P, it's a lot of people. Friends, family, guys at the range, guys on this forum, and even the local law enforcement agencies (as well as many agencies across the US). This is far from a few fanboys claiming the pistol they bought is the better than yours. It seems like there is more to it than that considering how many people are raving about them. When I pick one up, handle it, and shoot it, it was just a bit of a let down. |
|
I have an M&P9 as my CC and HD gun. The best thing about it for me is that I could get the trigger down to 3 - 4lbs without spending a dime. But I would say it's about equal if not slightly better than my Glock as far as build quality goes...
The Glock fanboys are the most rediculous to me because Glocks have to be the cheapest $500 guns ever made. That being said, I would say the XDm I owned had much higher build quality than either. All are equally reliable in my experience. |
|
The ergonomics are great but I can't pin point why I never have been able to hang on to one. I had an M&P .40 full size and it was a great gun, it was actually my very first pistol. I let it go for something else.
Couple years later, I got an M&P .45 compact that was a nice gun too, felt pretty good in the hand....sold it to and don't regret it. Also had a Glock 23 that I traded in for a Glock 19 and I will never get rid of that gun, and I picked up a Glock 34 that I also believe will never leave either. I like the trigger on the M&P but not so much that I would brag about it, I like the Glocks definate reset in their trigger, all the M&P's I have shot, have a mushy reset that I am not always able to recognize, that's just me. Can't explain it at all, I do love the M&P's just not enough to keep one around for very long. They are built well and both of mine were 100% reliable, yet I had no problem letting them go for something else. I don't think there is much hype behind them, other than some guys who put them up on a pedestal just to spite people that like Glocks, I have seen that at ranges and it's just stupid. Glocks, XD's, and M&P's are all great guns, they all can fail but for the most part they are all reliable and certainly good reasons for owning each one. I seemed to "settle" with Glock but others may not. |
| I have a M&P45c & 9 fullsize. The reason I bought them was they fit my hand better than the others. The glocks are great guns, they just feel like I am holding a brick. To each their own, I don't think any is better than the other. They all have there pluses and minus'. |
|
I have owned many handguns in the past couple years. A P229, P226, Glock 21SF, M&P9, BHP, and Springfield TRP. I have also tried the G19, XD9, XD45, FNP9, CZ75, EAA Witness .45, and Sig Pro.
Of all those, the M&P has the best shooting characteristics. The recoil impulse is rearward as opposed to upward, which allows me to get back on target faster. It's all about the ergonomics as someone earlier stated. In terms of reliability, I'd say most modern autos of quality are on par with each other. I can shoot most pistols well, but the M&P is the easiest to shoot quickly. I will say that I absolutely hate the XD. I can't hold it, I can't shoot it, and I can't stand looking at it. My dad and uncle each own an XD and I tried to get decent with them. I can Robin Hood an entire mag with most handguns no matter the action: DA, DAO, SA, striker, whatever. But for some reason every time I shoot an XD (I've tried 2), the rounds don't land where I want them to. The FNP9 comes in a distant 2nd or last place. It's just a matter of preference. |
|
replying before I read the other replies...
M&P's are great because: 1) Low bore axis 2) Great ergonomics 3) Simple operation 4) SENSATIONAL Crimson Trace solution 5) Good trigger 6) Stainless steel metal parts, nice flat black finish 7) Great sights 8) Great looking A note on #5: I don't get why people rag on M&P's trigger.. it's a good trigger! Shoot it like a 2-stage: take up the slack, find the second stage, then squeeze. Awesome. I wish it had a more prominent reset, but that's nit picking. Basically, M&P's are a great package. They got everything right. Oh and: 9) Made in USA but the fact that people are comparing them to Glocks, Sigs, and HKs is a bit ridiculous
I agree. M&P's are superior to all three. 
Now I'll go back and read the replies. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
I say the same thing about Glocks. They aren't for me. I'm not going to troll forums about it though. The intent here is not to troll, although I see why you may think that. The real point I am trying to make is that it's not just a few people who like the M&P, it's a lot of people. Friends, family, guys at the range, guys on this forum, and even the local law enforcement agencies (as well as many agencies across the US). This is far from a few fanboys claiming the pistol they bought is the better than yours. It seems like there is more to it than that considering how many people are raving about them. When I pick one up, handle it, and shoot it, it was just a bit of a let down. ...and I think the same thing about Glocks and XD's.  Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile |
|
Quoted:
goes... The Glock fanboys are the most rediculous to me because Glocks have to be the cheapest $500 guns ever made. Seriously? So, exactly what is it that makes an M&P worth 100 bucks more? The fact that Travis and Chris used them in their Dynamic Handgun video? You can sprout off about fanboys all you want, the reputation of Glock as one one the most reliable pistols to ever exist, to me atleast, is worth a measly 500 bucks. I shoot glocks and sigs, I have had the pleasure of shooting a few 9mm M&Ps, but, if Glock isn't worth 500 bucks, an M&P sure the hell isn't worth 600-650. That's sig money, my friend. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
goes... The Glock fanboys are the most rediculous to me because Glocks have to be the cheapest $500 guns ever made. Seriously? So, exactly what is it that makes an M&P worth 100 bucks more? The fact that Travis and Chris used them in their Dynamic Handgun video? You can sprout off about fanboys all you want, the reputation of Glock as one one the most reliable pistols to ever exist, to me atleast, is worth a measly 500 bucks. I shoot glocks and sigs, I have had the pleasure of shooting a few 9mm M&Ps, but, if Glock isn't worth 500 bucks, an M&P sure the hell isn't worth 600-650. That's sig money, my friend. My M&P was ~$500  As far as build quality and construction its > glock. Mind you, I shoot a G34 in USPSA a few times a month.
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
goes... The Glock fanboys are the most rediculous to me because Glocks have to be the cheapest $500 guns ever made. Seriously? So, exactly what is it that makes an M&P worth 100 bucks more? The fact that Travis and Chris used them in their Dynamic Handgun video? You can sprout off about fanboys all you want, the reputation of Glock as one one the most reliable pistols to ever exist, to me atleast, is worth a measly 500 bucks. I shoot glocks and sigs, I have had the pleasure of shooting a few 9mm M&Ps, but, if Glock isn't worth 500 bucks, an M&P sure the hell isn't worth 600-650. That's sig money, my friend. My M&P was ~$500 As far as build quality and construction its > glock. Mind you, I shoot a G34 in USPSA a few times a month.There is a big different between build quality and fit and finish, I would agree with you on the fact that the fit is better on M&Ps, but then again, Glock has never been know to be a tight, "spec" gun. The fun stores around my parts have them at 599.99. I don't usually include online prices, because after shipping and shops doing the "transfer" (Most dealers charge for a background check, as we don't have a firearm registry) here in Florida, it winds up being the same price. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
I say the same thing about Glocks. They aren't for me. I'm not going to troll forums about it though. The intent here is not to troll, although I see why you may think that. The real point I am trying to make is that it's not just a few people who like the M&P, it's a lot of people. Friends, family, guys at the range, guys on this forum, and even the local law enforcement agencies (as well as many agencies across the US). This is far from a few fanboys claiming the pistol they bought is the better than yours. It seems like there is more to it than that considering how many people are raving about them. When I pick one up, handle it, and shoot it, it was just a bit of a let down. Then perhaps you should have used another word than "hype", which has a negative connotation. Simply asking why they are so popular might have been more well-received. BTW, I don't own one but have been thinking about picking one up in .45. I do have Glocks, XD's, CZ's, Witnesses, and BUL's (all polymer) in .38 super 9 and .40, so I have some experience with "plastic" pistols. If you don't think the M&P's are so great, just be thankful that we have so many options these days. |
|
In the beginning, I had Glocks. I'm also a cheap fuck when it comes to buying bullets, so I buy and shoot lead. We are constantly told you will die horribly if you use lead in a Glock. Plus, the guns just hurt my hands to use, and was much worse in heavy recoiling calibers.
Next I tried XDs. They worked pretty well and fit my hand much better. The trigger was a step backwards from Glock, IMO, the finish sucked, and there were other quirks I didn't care for (internal extractor nearly took explosives to remove, trigger design, etc.) They were mostly reliable and accurate, though I retired my main USPSA .40 XD after I noticed a hairline crack starting on the locking block. Then I tried M&Ps. They fit my hand best of all and the trigger was pleasant after a few minutes with Burwell's PDF file, and workable even without it. The mag safety was easily removed, and the metal finish took more abuse than the XD, though still not up to Glock's abusability index, IMO. Even my wife could properly grip it with the smallest backstrap installed. The mag capacity is great, it handles lead projectiles with no complaint, and it's made in USA by a company that's been around longer than most. I've owned about every other service pistol out there and while I sold most and kept a few, I still like the M&Ps for my main go-to guns. If something happens to change my mind, that's OK too. Nothing's perfect and I don't get emotionally invested in run-of-the-mill service pistols. |
|
As someone that's used the 3 major poly brands at length, including in competition, I can now say that I prefer XDm's to Glocks or M&Ps.
The stock triggers are better, the slide to frame fit is better and they just "feel" more expensive when you mess around with them. That being said, I don't even own an XDm right now.
|
|
Quoted: The Glock fanboys are the most rediculous to me because Glocks have to be the cheapest $500 guns ever made. What the fuck are you talking about? Glock uses top quality carbon steel, proprietary Nylon 6 polymer and uses Tenifer metal treatment. There is nothing "cheap" about a Glock. As to the OP, the M&P is a great pistol and the only real direct competitor to the Glock. |
|
Quoted: As someone that's used the 3 major poly brands at length, including in competition, I can now say that I prefer XDm's to Glocks or M&Ps. The stock triggers are better, the slide to frame fit is better and they just "feel" more expensive when you mess around with them. That being said, I don't even own an XDm right now. Holy shit, you're an "XD" guy calling a Glock cheap? The "XD" (HS2000) is a $259 pistol that nobody wanted until SA had HS put their roll marks on it. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
As someone that's used the 3 major poly brands at length, including in competition, I can now say that I prefer XDm's to Glocks or M&Ps. The stock triggers are better, the slide to frame fit is better and they just "feel" more expensive when you mess around with them. That being said, I don't even own an XDm right now. Holy shit, you're an "XD" guy calling a Glock cheap? The "XD" (HS2000) is a $259 pistol that nobody wanted until SA had HS put their roll marks on it. Quoted:
Quoted:
The Glock fanboys are the most rediculous to me because Glocks have to be the cheapest $500 guns ever made. What the fuck are you talking about? Glock uses top quality carbon steel, proprietary Nylon 6 polymer and uses Tenifer metal treatment. There is nothing "cheap" about a Glock. As to the OP, the M&P is a great pistol and the only real direct competitor to the Glock. username says it all. 
I'm talking about the slop in the slide to frame fit, or the horrible DAO trigger... I know it's a good reliable gun, but that's because it so SIMPLE in design. Which in turn means it has the worst trigger out of the 3. I'll take the SAO M&P or XDm trigger > the DAO Glock trigger any day of the week. |
|
To each their own. I have owned all 3 myself (Glock, XD and M&P) and found the XD to be the least appealing of the 3. Based on my experiences and preferences, I still think the Glock is the overall best of the 3 with the M&P being a close second or actually best choice for those who just can't handle or adjust to the Glock's grip. The XD for me was a distant 3rd. YMMV?
I really can't see why some people love the XD's but that's why its good to have choices, no one gun (not even the beloved 1911) is perfect for everybody. |
|
Don't own one but got to shoot a few hundred rounds with a 9mm and for the price you really can't beat it.
I have seen these selling (on sale) for as lows as $398. For me, they were a joy to shoot, accuracy was great and the ergonomics were excellent. Haven't tried other M&P calibers but was surprised with the item especially for the price. |
|
I sold an XD to get my first M&P, and sold a nice commander size 1911 after that. Ended up with a M&P9c also.
I didn't like the XD at all, it was chunky and clunky and too tall. I've never liked Glocks. I wanted something that felt good, was boringly reliable, and that I shot very well. That is the M&P. I shoot it better than any other pistol I've ever had, and I have about 7,000 rounds through my first one with 0 malfunctions. It's also relatively light, and carries well. I don't know what else you'd want. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
As someone that's used the 3 major poly brands at length, including in competition, I can now say that I prefer XDm's to Glocks or M&Ps. The stock triggers are better, the slide to frame fit is better and they just "feel" more expensive when you mess around with them. That being said, I don't even own an XDm right now. Holy shit, you're an "XD" guy calling a Glock cheap? The "XD" (HS2000) is a $259 pistol that nobody wanted until SA had HS put their roll marks on it. Quoted:
Quoted:
The Glock fanboys are the most rediculous to me because Glocks have to be the cheapest $500 guns ever made. What the fuck are you talking about? Glock uses top quality carbon steel, proprietary Nylon 6 polymer and uses Tenifer metal treatment. There is nothing "cheap" about a Glock. As to the OP, the M&P is a great pistol and the only real direct competitor to the Glock. username says it all.
I'm talking about the slop in the slide to frame fit, or the horrible DAO trigger... I know it's a good reliable gun, but that's because it so SIMPLE in design. Which in turn means it has the worst trigger out of the 3. I'll take the SAO M&P or XDm trigger > the DAO Glock trigger any day of the week.
The fact that you just said a Glock is a DAO and XDs and M&Ps are SAO says that you know nothing about striker fired pistols. Please, man, stop while you "think" you're ahead. If you honestly think a stock M&P trigger is better then a stock Glock trigger, there is something wrong with you. |
|
There's no fuckn round with the M&P, much like the Glock.
To many, the M&P fits the hand better than the Glock. To some, maybe American made means more... Come to think about it, I don't own a foreign gun, though I want a Glock. Many many rnds through my M&P, never a malfunction, jam, or anything. Keep it lube, and it's as sure as the sun rising. Maybe that's why many police forces are switching to them, but I dont know why. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
As someone that's used the 3 major poly brands at length, including in competition, I can now say that I prefer XDm's to Glocks or M&Ps. The stock triggers are better, the slide to frame fit is better and they just "feel" more expensive when you mess around with them. That being said, I don't even own an XDm right now. Holy shit, you're an "XD" guy calling a Glock cheap? The "XD" (HS2000) is a $259 pistol that nobody wanted until SA had HS put their roll marks on it. Quoted:
Quoted:
The Glock fanboys are the most rediculous to me because Glocks have to be the cheapest $500 guns ever made. What the fuck are you talking about? Glock uses top quality carbon steel, proprietary Nylon 6 polymer and uses Tenifer metal treatment. There is nothing "cheap" about a Glock. As to the OP, the M&P is a great pistol and the only real direct competitor to the Glock. username says it all.
I'm talking about the slop in the slide to frame fit, or the horrible DAO trigger... I know it's a good reliable gun, but that's because it so SIMPLE in design. Which in turn means it has the worst trigger out of the 3. I'll take the SAO M&P or XDm trigger > the DAO Glock trigger any day of the week.
The fact that you just said a Glock is a DAO and XDs and M&Ps are SAO says that you know nothing about striker fired pistols. Please, man, stop while you "think" you're ahead. If you honestly think a stock M&P trigger is better then a stock Glock trigger, there is something wrong with you. Ok, let me break this down for you. With a Glock, 2 things happen when you pull the trigger, you cock the striker then you release it. DAO. With the M&P or XDm, only one thing happens when you pull the trigger, the sear drops and releases the striker... no cocking action so its SAO. |
|
Honestly I really dont see any HYPE on the M & P.. Quoted:
Before I get started, please let me note that I've shot several M&Ps. Here I am wondering what all the M&P hype is about. My take is that they didn't shoot any better than my XD or CZ. The M&P polymer feels like cheap plastic compared to my XD. The trigger is ok. The finish is ok. The grip is ok. I've seen the rail on a few M&Ps look like hell after someone has mounted and removed a site/laser. I admit that the pistol is ok/average/acceptable, but the fact that people are comparing them to Glocks, Sigs, and HKs is a bit ridiculous. So what is it about M&Ps that you owners love so much? |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
As someone that's used the 3 major poly brands at length, including in competition, I can now say that I prefer XDm's to Glocks or M&Ps. The stock triggers are better, the slide to frame fit is better and they just "feel" more expensive when you mess around with them. That being said, I don't even own an XDm right now. Holy shit, you're an "XD" guy calling a Glock cheap? The "XD" (HS2000) is a $259 pistol that nobody wanted until SA had HS put their roll marks on it. Quoted:
Quoted:
The Glock fanboys are the most rediculous to me because Glocks have to be the cheapest $500 guns ever made. What the fuck are you talking about? Glock uses top quality carbon steel, proprietary Nylon 6 polymer and uses Tenifer metal treatment. There is nothing "cheap" about a Glock. As to the OP, the M&P is a great pistol and the only real direct competitor to the Glock. username says it all.
I'm talking about the slop in the slide to frame fit, or the horrible DAO trigger... I know it's a good reliable gun, but that's because it so SIMPLE in design. Which in turn means it has the worst trigger out of the 3. I'll take the SAO M&P or XDm trigger > the DAO Glock trigger any day of the week.
The fact that you just said a Glock is a DAO and XDs and M&Ps are SAO says that you know nothing about striker fired pistols. Please, man, stop while you "think" you're ahead. If you honestly think a stock M&P trigger is better then a stock Glock trigger, there is something wrong with you. Ok, let me break this down for you. With a Glock, 2 things happen when you pull the trigger, you cock the striker then you release it. DAO. With the M&P or XDm, only one thing happens when you pull the trigger, the sear drops and releases the striker... no cocking action so its SAO. Essentially, that is what occurs with each of the pistols. Glocks are only partially cocked by the action of the slide returning to battery and the remainder of the spring tension on the striker and some of it's rearward movement, is provided mechanically when the trigger is manipulated. I believe Gock calls it a "safe action trigger". The striker on the XD is fully cocked by the action of the slide returning to battery making it a single action only pistol. The striker of the M&P is also fully cocked by the action of the slide returning to battery which makes it in reality, a single action only pistol as well, but the striker is forced rearward a tiny fraction of an inch as the sear moves to release it when the trigger is manipulated, which enabled Smith and Wesson to describe it as a double action pistol for gaming and they got away with it. But it is a true single action pistol. All three pistols have "double action style" triggers although none of them is actually a double action pistol. When the M&Ps were originally introduced, some gun writers improperly described them as being double action which caused confusion for a while. |
|
Quoted:
Before I get started, please let me note that I've shot several M&Ps. Here I am wondering what all the M&P hype is about. My take is that they didn't shoot any better than my XD or CZ. The M&P polymer feels like cheap plastic compared to my XD. The trigger is ok. The finish is ok. The grip is ok. I've seen the rail on a few M&Ps look like hell after someone has mounted and removed a site/laser. I admit that the pistol is ok/average/acceptable, but the fact that people are comparing them to Glocks, Sigs, and HKs is a bit ridiculous. So what is it about M&Ps that you owners love so much? I can't speak to Sigs or HK's, but I have owned XD's and several Glocks. The M&P feels WAY BETTER in the hand than either of them, even the Gen4 Glocks. XD's have gotten way out of hand with the design, they're starting to look like something out of Star Wars. To "Spacy" for me. The high bore axis doesn't help them either. Also they are over priced in my opinion. As to Glocks. I still have love for Glocks, but they still don't have anywhere near the ergonomics that an M&P does, not even close. As far as fit and finnish on the M&P's, I haven't seen anything but great finnishes on them, at least on the newer ones in the last few years. You say the grip is "OK" most will say the grip is FAR superior to any other polymer pistol. Keep in mind though that everybody's hands are different and will percieve what is "Comfortable" differently. The rails on mine have had weapon lights on and off many, many, many times, and there are NO signs of it looking "LIKE HELL" All just my opinion of course
Yes the trigger isn't the best out of the box, but a couple APEX parts (EASY TO DO) and it's better than most! |
|
OP,
i feel the same way.....i jumped on the MP bandwagon a few years ago and bought two....a full sized 9mm and a 357 sig.... the slide to frame fit was very sloppy on both....you could drive a truck trough the gap and the slide had a lot of play right/left... the bottom of the grip looks just sloppy and crooked when a magazine is inserted.... I kept getting light primer strikes with the 357 and started having the magazine drop issue with the 9mm........ I would "love to love" the XD but i just hate that damn grip safety for some reason....... so for me, i guess the perfect handgun is the Glock......(AND my Beretta 92) |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
XD haters are about as dumb as Glock fanboys. But then again they're usually one in the same. The irony of you calling someone dumb is quite amusing. Glad you're amused. Now, quote me saying something dumb.This was said by you, even though all 3 pistols have the same type of trigger pull, regardless of how the trigger and slide manipulate the striker. C-rad: I'm talking about the slop in the slide to frame fit, or the horrible DAO trigger... I know it's a good reliable gun, but that's because it so SIMPLE in design. Which in turn means it has the worst trigger out of the 3. I'll take the SAO M&P or XDm trigger > the DAO Glock trigger any day of the week. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
What's wrong with grip safeties?  Nothing. People use it as an excuse to hate. Even though the most popular pistol in the world has a grip safety. Glock pistols have become the most profitable line of products, taking up 65% of the market share of handguns in the United States, in spite of preliminary opposition from the market due to strength and reliability concerns. That's just the US. What makes you think a US produced pistol (1911s) would be doing better then 65% of the market outside of the US? |
|
I have a Glock and love it, but when I handle the M&P at work I look at it and think, man if this thing had a 1911 style trigger on it, I would buy one in a heartbeat.
The trigger is the only thing I don't like about it, I don't like the pull or how it feels at all. It feels flimsy to me, but I'm sure its very rugged. If they would change that trigger into something real nice I'd be all over it and foaming at the mouth. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
XD haters are about as dumb as Glock fanboys. But then again they're usually one in the same. The irony of you calling someone dumb is quite amusing. Glad you're amused. Now, quote me saying something dumb.This was said by you, even though all 3 pistols have the same type of trigger pull, regardless of how the trigger and slide manipulate the striker. C-rad: I'm talking about the slop in the slide to frame fit, or the horrible DAO trigger... I know it's a good reliable gun, but that's because it so SIMPLE in design. Which in turn means it has the worst trigger out of the 3. I'll take the SAO M&P or XDm trigger > the DAO Glock trigger any day of the week. That's exactly it though, the Glock has a very different trigger than the other two as confirmed by another poster. But, nice try. |