Glock17 or M&P9
- Thread starter ss1980
- Start date
Or Glocks delivery servuce to that store.
Both are excellent. Forget the Glock has more aftermarket support comments. Apex does the complete trigger assembly three different ways, sights are available for the M&P if you really want to change them. All you have to do to have a superior trigger over the Gock is replace the USB in the M&P with an Apex USB.
Both are mechanical devices so they both will break and can malfunction. On our stage at the Washington State IDPA match last summer 4 Glocks jammed due to limp wristing, ammo or mag problems. None for the M&P which means absolutely nothing.
Both are relatively inexpensive, easy to maintain and will serve most a lifetime of use. If your prefer the grip angle of the Luger go with the Glock. The M&P follows the 1911 grip angle.
Over 85% of the competitors at last years IDPA Nationals shot either a Glock or M&P. Note IDPA does not have a 5# minimum trigger pull in ther SSP Division, a division similar to IPSC Producton. A Glock 17 in the hands of Bob Vogel won the last World Production Division Championship which also means nothing other than Vogel is one of the top shooting gods on the planet.
M&P Has an embedded steel frame while the Glock doesn't.
Buy both or a CZ or a Tanfoglio or a 1911 or a........they are excellent firearms.
Take Care
Bob
Thank you for a comprehensive review, Bob! I've heard about the Glock jam due to wrist limp. Also had a chance to test out Glock and trigger is mushy for me -- like somebody put a pillow there.
I'm a 1911 guy -- yes, so would probably like the M&P grip angle. 1911 points for me naturally. Hope M&P will too.
Testing out a friend's M&P tomorrow. Excited
I'm a 1911 guy -- yes, so would probably like the M&P grip angle. 1911 points for me naturally. Hope M&P will too.
Testing out a friend's M&P tomorrow. Excited
Thank you for a comprehensive review, Bob! I've heard about the Glock jam due to wrist limp. Also had a chance to test out Glock and trigger is mushy for me -- like somebody put a pillow there.
I'm a 1911 guy -- yes, so would probably like the M&P grip angle. 1911 points for me naturally. Hope M&P will too.
Testing out a friend's M&P tomorrow. Excited
Try the various grips they do play a part in how the gun points. Take the slide off the frame and pull the trigger. That is how the M&P trigger will feel with an Apex USB installed.
Neither the Glock or M&P will have a trigger close to a 1911 although the Apex FSS trigger for the M&P comes close. Any mushy feel you get with the M&P is from the USB being pushed out of the way. It is a $28 something fix if it bothers you.
Take Care
Bob
Same here. had both and found myself reaching for the M&P much more so sold the Glock.
Either way you can't go wrong. It will come down to your personal preferences. I prefer the trigger on the M&P and fits better in my hand.
Over 2000 rounds or cheap ammo through it with out one FTF or FTE.
Report.
I had a chance today to check out both Glock 17 and M&P 9mm. Wow what a difference! M&P looks better, slide is nicer, grip is nicer BUT...
The trigger on M&P is awful FOR ME. The trigger travel is significant. Definitely not what I expected. It almost falls into the black hole or something and only in the end it stops before it break. But before it breaks, it takes some persuasion on my part and my hands start shaking pulling this beat to the very end to make it break. Also though the grip on M&P is much more comfy for my hands, M&P was not a natural pointer. I was pointing it low and it took me time to align the sights.
Glock on the other hand is ugly piece of tupperware brick. Ugly brick as hell! BUT... It pointed where I point it without an effort or sights alignment. The grip felt fine. Not as fine as on M&P but fine enough to point it where it should be pointing. My support hand felt very nice on a Glock. I don't know why people don't like Glock sights as I found them PERFECT (FOR ME). The trigger though mushy was very consistent throughout all its way unlike M&P where the trigger falls into the black hole with no resistance and then you have to really break it in the end to make it fire.
Also Glock is super easy to take apart when M&P takes a bit extra effort.
So it is Glock for me.
I was prejudiced against Glock in the beginning and based on my previous encounter with one. But comparing the two, Glock felt right (again FOR MY HAND).
Thank you every one for your input.
The best advise I took from this is go ahead and try both!
[video]http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/defence/article9795010.ece#ooid=1peGhhODoE8xYf77jwDFYOAmt9 KD45OD[/video]
I had a chance today to check out both Glock 17 and M&P 9mm. Wow what a difference! M&P looks better, slide is nicer, grip is nicer BUT...
The trigger on M&P is awful FOR ME. The trigger travel is significant. Definitely not what I expected. It almost falls into the black hole or something and only in the end it stops before it break. But before it breaks, it takes some persuasion on my part and my hands start shaking pulling this beat to the very end to make it break. Also though the grip on M&P is much more comfy for my hands, M&P was not a natural pointer. I was pointing it low and it took me time to align the sights.
Glock on the other hand is ugly piece of tupperware brick. Ugly brick as hell! BUT... It pointed where I point it without an effort or sights alignment. The grip felt fine. Not as fine as on M&P but fine enough to point it where it should be pointing. My support hand felt very nice on a Glock. I don't know why people don't like Glock sights as I found them PERFECT (FOR ME). The trigger though mushy was very consistent throughout all its way unlike M&P where the trigger falls into the black hole with no resistance and then you have to really break it in the end to make it fire.
Also Glock is super easy to take apart when M&P takes a bit extra effort.
So it is Glock for me.
I was prejudiced against Glock in the beginning and based on my previous encounter with one. But comparing the two, Glock felt right (again FOR MY HAND).
Thank you every one for your input.
The best advise I took from this is go ahead and try both!
[video]http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/defence/article9795010.ece#ooid=1peGhhODoE8xYf77jwDFYOAmt9 KD45OD[/video]
Last edited:
Why the Glock Became America’s Handgun
Why the Glock Became America’s Handgun
For Business Week reporter Paul Barrett, the gun industry has always been a fascinating topic. "There is really no other business that is so tied up with American history, American politics, law, culture, popular culture, and incessant controversy," he says. In his book, Glock: The Rise of America’s Gun, out this week, Barrett goes behind the scenes at one of the world’s most successful, and secretive, gun companies.
By Erin McCarthy
The Glock debuted in the 1980s, and now it’s everywhere. How did it become so popular so quickly?
Gaston Glock had enormous good fortune. He designed this gun originally for the Austrian Army, and that timing was determined by much deeper history. The pistols that the Austrian Army had been using since World War II were falling apart and they needed something new, so he put his hand up and, to everyone’s surprise in Austria, was able to get together with various experts and win this contract and introduce this very innovative pistol.
Meanwhile, in the United States, American police officers were feeling that they were outgunned by criminals. A series of incidents—including an FBI shootout with a couple of psychotic bank robbers in Miami in 1986—persuaded the American cops that the gun they had been using for 75 years, the classic Smith & Wesson .38-caliber revolver, was no longer potent enough. They needed something new. And here came Gaston Glock saying, "I have the pistol of the future, and it addresses exactly what you feel you are lacking."
So basically, in the same way that American auto manufacturers were caught with their pants down a decade earlier by cheaper, more durable, more efficiently made Japanese and German cars, the American gun establishment was caught unaware by [Gaston] Glock. And before they knew it, he had made this huge incursion on their market. Once he won over the police, he used that as leverage to win attention in the larger and more lucrative civilian market.
Gaston Glock was not a gun designer—he was an engineer and a manufacturer. Did not having a background in firearm design help him think outside of the box?
Glock stumbled into this and really changed the market for exactly the reason you just said—because he started with a blank piece of paper. He came up with a gun design before he even had a gun factory. So a factory was built to produce this particular gun and as a result of that, the factory is almost uniquely efficient, and the gun has been uniquely profitable as a result. His costs are so low that he was able to sell the gun very cheaply and basically grab the market away from companies like Smith & Wesson.
What design features did the Glock have that gave it the edge over more traditional revolvers?
Rather than six rounds, the Glock has 17 rounds in the magazine. Instead of a 12-pound trigger pull, like the traditional revolver, it has a trigger pull of slightly more than 5 pounds. That means that someone who is a mediocre shooter or a bad shooter—as many police officers who don’t practice often enough are—will suddenly become more accurate and be more effective.
The gun is much lighter, so that if you’re wearing it on your hip for 8 or 10 hours, it will be more comfortable. The Glock is literally made in a plastic mold as opposed to being assembled from steel. It’s what makes it so light; and what allows the gun to have the large capacity [is that] the plastic is very thin. The Glock is also more durable and will function if it’s not cleaned properly or regularly.
It’s also different from other pistols in that it has no external trigger safety. There’s the main trigger and then there’s what looks like a little baby trigger. The gun doesn’t work unless you depress them both. That was marketed as an innovation, but it was also a reason that the gun design has been heavily criticized by gun-control advocates—because it is true that there is no way to put it on safety. The gun is always on.
And the Glock has a radically smaller number of component parts—36 or 38—than comparable handguns by other manufacturers, which typically have twice as many parts. And this is significant because if there are fewer parts, there are fewer parts to break. Moreover, the Glock parts are entirely interchangeable. So if you’ve got a bunch of Glock 17s or a bunch of Glock 19s you can shuffle all the parts around and put them into any gun, which makes them very appealing to police departments that have hundreds or thousands of weapons.
What role did gun control play in making the Glock a popular weapon?
Efforts to restrict the Glock by name were hugely important. For example, when the gun first showed up in the United States, gun-control advocates said this gun is extremely and uniquely dangerous because it’s made mostly out of plastic so airport security machines won’t detect it. There was a huge controversy over this. There were congressional hearings in ’86 and ’87, and some jurisdictions, such as New York City, banned the Glock.
But this allegation was just factually incorrect. Airport security machines did detect the Glock because they’re mostly X-ray machines, and X-rays see plastic just the way they see metal. Moreover, by weight, the Glock is actually mostly metal anyway. The slide is made out of steel, so if you do have a magnetometer, it should detect that slide. And if someone is staring at it and knows what they’re looking for, they should be able to see it. This was a huge embarrassment for gun-control forces and a huge boon for Glock. There is no better way in the United States to get attention for a gun than to suggest it’s extremely potent and effective.
There’s a lot of talk about Glocks being the weapon of choice for criminals. But that’s not actually true, is it?
There is no doubt that the Glock appeals to criminals in the same way that it appeals to civilians. But as a statistical matter, it never became as prevalent in terms of being found at crime scenes as Hollywood or television police procedurals might suggest.
And there’s a simple reason for that. The Glock, while it’s not a super-expensive gun, is also not a cheap gun. It’s not a Saturday night special. And while there are certainly Glocks on the black market, and there certainly are criminals who use them, it has never become quite as prevalent as really cheap knockoff guns, or even as prevalent as .38 Smith & Wesson revolvers, which have just been around longer so there’s more of them floating around.
The Glock isn’t just a gun—it’s a pop-culture symbol. Do you have a favorite reference?
Sure. This was the first time, as far as I could determine, that the Glock showed up on the big screen: A clever Hollywood prop guy put the gun into the second Die Hard movie. And the screenplay writer actually wrote a little soliloquy that Bruce Willis gave in which he named the Glock. And Willis, who’s playing this hard-bitten, Los Angeles police detective, "That punk pulled a Glock 7 on me. You know what that is? It’s a porcelain gun made in Germany. Dosen’t show up on your airport X-ray machines, and it cost more than you make in a month."
Every single thing he said about the Glock was factually incorrect, and yet people went to the movie and said, "What’s a Glock?" Everyone wanted to know what it was. Gun people loved it because, like car people and foodies, they love to find examples of pop culture getting the facts wrong. And from there on, the Glock became Hollywood’s favorite gun.
It also became the favorite gun of the ascendant popular music, namely hip-hop music. And if you’re familiar with David Foster Wallace, there’s a great scene in his most famous book, Infinite Jest, in which a character who is a junior tennis champion intimidates his opponents by coming onto the court and threatening to shoot himself if he loses a point. And Wallace rhapsodizes about the Glock for a paragraph. It’s a perfect illustration of how the gun has taken on an aura well beyond its use as an actual weapon.
You call the Glock America’s handgun. Why has the it made more of an impact here than anywhere else?
It has had a big impact elsewhere, but more as a police and military weapon. And the explanation is quite straightforward: The United States is by far the biggest and richest civilian gun market in the world. No one knows exactly how many guns are privately owned in this country, because there is no gun census and there’s no [uniform] registration of guns, but reasonable estimates run somewhere in the neighborhood of 250 or 300 million guns privately held. That’s not the cops and that’s not the military. Now that is also not just handguns, by the way. That’s handguns, rifles, shotguns, everything. And they’re still selling. So we have almost a gun per citizen, and yet every year the gun industry sells more. This is an extraordinary marketplace.
- See more at: http://www.popularmechanics.com/tec...-became-americas-handgun#sthash.ekNxqVzi.dpuf
Read more: Why the Glock Became America’s Handgun - Popular Mechanics
Ref: http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military/weapons/why-the-glock-became-americas-handgun
Why the Glock Became America’s Handgun
For Business Week reporter Paul Barrett, the gun industry has always been a fascinating topic. "There is really no other business that is so tied up with American history, American politics, law, culture, popular culture, and incessant controversy," he says. In his book, Glock: The Rise of America’s Gun, out this week, Barrett goes behind the scenes at one of the world’s most successful, and secretive, gun companies.
By Erin McCarthy
The Glock debuted in the 1980s, and now it’s everywhere. How did it become so popular so quickly?
Gaston Glock had enormous good fortune. He designed this gun originally for the Austrian Army, and that timing was determined by much deeper history. The pistols that the Austrian Army had been using since World War II were falling apart and they needed something new, so he put his hand up and, to everyone’s surprise in Austria, was able to get together with various experts and win this contract and introduce this very innovative pistol.
Meanwhile, in the United States, American police officers were feeling that they were outgunned by criminals. A series of incidents—including an FBI shootout with a couple of psychotic bank robbers in Miami in 1986—persuaded the American cops that the gun they had been using for 75 years, the classic Smith & Wesson .38-caliber revolver, was no longer potent enough. They needed something new. And here came Gaston Glock saying, "I have the pistol of the future, and it addresses exactly what you feel you are lacking."
So basically, in the same way that American auto manufacturers were caught with their pants down a decade earlier by cheaper, more durable, more efficiently made Japanese and German cars, the American gun establishment was caught unaware by [Gaston] Glock. And before they knew it, he had made this huge incursion on their market. Once he won over the police, he used that as leverage to win attention in the larger and more lucrative civilian market.
Gaston Glock was not a gun designer—he was an engineer and a manufacturer. Did not having a background in firearm design help him think outside of the box?
Glock stumbled into this and really changed the market for exactly the reason you just said—because he started with a blank piece of paper. He came up with a gun design before he even had a gun factory. So a factory was built to produce this particular gun and as a result of that, the factory is almost uniquely efficient, and the gun has been uniquely profitable as a result. His costs are so low that he was able to sell the gun very cheaply and basically grab the market away from companies like Smith & Wesson.
What design features did the Glock have that gave it the edge over more traditional revolvers?
Rather than six rounds, the Glock has 17 rounds in the magazine. Instead of a 12-pound trigger pull, like the traditional revolver, it has a trigger pull of slightly more than 5 pounds. That means that someone who is a mediocre shooter or a bad shooter—as many police officers who don’t practice often enough are—will suddenly become more accurate and be more effective.
The gun is much lighter, so that if you’re wearing it on your hip for 8 or 10 hours, it will be more comfortable. The Glock is literally made in a plastic mold as opposed to being assembled from steel. It’s what makes it so light; and what allows the gun to have the large capacity [is that] the plastic is very thin. The Glock is also more durable and will function if it’s not cleaned properly or regularly.
It’s also different from other pistols in that it has no external trigger safety. There’s the main trigger and then there’s what looks like a little baby trigger. The gun doesn’t work unless you depress them both. That was marketed as an innovation, but it was also a reason that the gun design has been heavily criticized by gun-control advocates—because it is true that there is no way to put it on safety. The gun is always on.
And the Glock has a radically smaller number of component parts—36 or 38—than comparable handguns by other manufacturers, which typically have twice as many parts. And this is significant because if there are fewer parts, there are fewer parts to break. Moreover, the Glock parts are entirely interchangeable. So if you’ve got a bunch of Glock 17s or a bunch of Glock 19s you can shuffle all the parts around and put them into any gun, which makes them very appealing to police departments that have hundreds or thousands of weapons.
What role did gun control play in making the Glock a popular weapon?
Efforts to restrict the Glock by name were hugely important. For example, when the gun first showed up in the United States, gun-control advocates said this gun is extremely and uniquely dangerous because it’s made mostly out of plastic so airport security machines won’t detect it. There was a huge controversy over this. There were congressional hearings in ’86 and ’87, and some jurisdictions, such as New York City, banned the Glock.
But this allegation was just factually incorrect. Airport security machines did detect the Glock because they’re mostly X-ray machines, and X-rays see plastic just the way they see metal. Moreover, by weight, the Glock is actually mostly metal anyway. The slide is made out of steel, so if you do have a magnetometer, it should detect that slide. And if someone is staring at it and knows what they’re looking for, they should be able to see it. This was a huge embarrassment for gun-control forces and a huge boon for Glock. There is no better way in the United States to get attention for a gun than to suggest it’s extremely potent and effective.
There’s a lot of talk about Glocks being the weapon of choice for criminals. But that’s not actually true, is it?
There is no doubt that the Glock appeals to criminals in the same way that it appeals to civilians. But as a statistical matter, it never became as prevalent in terms of being found at crime scenes as Hollywood or television police procedurals might suggest.
And there’s a simple reason for that. The Glock, while it’s not a super-expensive gun, is also not a cheap gun. It’s not a Saturday night special. And while there are certainly Glocks on the black market, and there certainly are criminals who use them, it has never become quite as prevalent as really cheap knockoff guns, or even as prevalent as .38 Smith & Wesson revolvers, which have just been around longer so there’s more of them floating around.
The Glock isn’t just a gun—it’s a pop-culture symbol. Do you have a favorite reference?
Sure. This was the first time, as far as I could determine, that the Glock showed up on the big screen: A clever Hollywood prop guy put the gun into the second Die Hard movie. And the screenplay writer actually wrote a little soliloquy that Bruce Willis gave in which he named the Glock. And Willis, who’s playing this hard-bitten, Los Angeles police detective, "That punk pulled a Glock 7 on me. You know what that is? It’s a porcelain gun made in Germany. Dosen’t show up on your airport X-ray machines, and it cost more than you make in a month."
Every single thing he said about the Glock was factually incorrect, and yet people went to the movie and said, "What’s a Glock?" Everyone wanted to know what it was. Gun people loved it because, like car people and foodies, they love to find examples of pop culture getting the facts wrong. And from there on, the Glock became Hollywood’s favorite gun.
It also became the favorite gun of the ascendant popular music, namely hip-hop music. And if you’re familiar with David Foster Wallace, there’s a great scene in his most famous book, Infinite Jest, in which a character who is a junior tennis champion intimidates his opponents by coming onto the court and threatening to shoot himself if he loses a point. And Wallace rhapsodizes about the Glock for a paragraph. It’s a perfect illustration of how the gun has taken on an aura well beyond its use as an actual weapon.
You call the Glock America’s handgun. Why has the it made more of an impact here than anywhere else?
It has had a big impact elsewhere, but more as a police and military weapon. And the explanation is quite straightforward: The United States is by far the biggest and richest civilian gun market in the world. No one knows exactly how many guns are privately owned in this country, because there is no gun census and there’s no [uniform] registration of guns, but reasonable estimates run somewhere in the neighborhood of 250 or 300 million guns privately held. That’s not the cops and that’s not the military. Now that is also not just handguns, by the way. That’s handguns, rifles, shotguns, everything. And they’re still selling. So we have almost a gun per citizen, and yet every year the gun industry sells more. This is an extraordinary marketplace.
- See more at: http://www.popularmechanics.com/tec...-became-americas-handgun#sthash.ekNxqVzi.dpuf
Read more: Why the Glock Became America’s Handgun - Popular Mechanics
Ref: http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military/weapons/why-the-glock-became-americas-handgun
Thank you for following the thread 
In all honesty, after this thread, I was all hyped about M&P and actually wanted to go out and buy the range kit for $650 or so, which would include the pistol itself, 3 mags, and holster and mag pouches -- all you need for IPSC or IDPA to start with.
BUT... After handling both at the store and at the range (somebody actually invited me to the range to test one out -- thank you), my opinion strongly swung to Glock BIG TIME.
That was an individual choice. I didn't find any flaws in M&P besides the trigger, which I'm sure can be fixed with popping in a few parts (Apex trigger, for example). But out of the box, Glock trigger was fantastic!!! Mushy but much better than on M&P (FOR ME PERSONALLY).
The ergonomics on M&P are better because Glock is just square like a brick but functionally Glock is just fine! The trigger on M&P is non-existent in the beginning. It just falls down into "the black hole" in the beginning until it suddenly stops and they you have to break the resistance of what seemed to me more than 5 pounds (out of the box). My hands started shaking, I lost the sight picture, etc. The Glock trigger is also about 5 pounds out of the box but it is consistent throughout all of its travel, which leads to consistent trigger pulls every single time -- over and over again. On Glock, the trigger resistance doesn't just disappear and then reappear with mighty force you have to fight with like on M&P, it is actually very consistent throughout on Glock. And for under $20, you can actually bring the trigger pull further down from 5 pounds to about 3.5. I liked it.
In all honesty, after this thread, I was all hyped about M&P and actually wanted to go out and buy the range kit for $650 or so, which would include the pistol itself, 3 mags, and holster and mag pouches -- all you need for IPSC or IDPA to start with.
BUT... After handling both at the store and at the range (somebody actually invited me to the range to test one out -- thank you), my opinion strongly swung to Glock BIG TIME.
That was an individual choice. I didn't find any flaws in M&P besides the trigger, which I'm sure can be fixed with popping in a few parts (Apex trigger, for example). But out of the box, Glock trigger was fantastic!!! Mushy but much better than on M&P (FOR ME PERSONALLY).
The ergonomics on M&P are better because Glock is just square like a brick but functionally Glock is just fine! The trigger on M&P is non-existent in the beginning. It just falls down into "the black hole" in the beginning until it suddenly stops and they you have to break the resistance of what seemed to me more than 5 pounds (out of the box). My hands started shaking, I lost the sight picture, etc. The Glock trigger is also about 5 pounds out of the box but it is consistent throughout all of its travel, which leads to consistent trigger pulls every single time -- over and over again. On Glock, the trigger resistance doesn't just disappear and then reappear with mighty force you have to fight with like on M&P, it is actually very consistent throughout on Glock. And for under $20, you can actually bring the trigger pull further down from 5 pounds to about 3.5. I liked it.
Congrats, I had the same dilemma buying my first handgun 2 months ago except I was M&P or the sp01 shadow... I didn't even want to try a glock because I thought they were ugly and just had big hype. Well the local range talked me into shooting a few rounds in a glock and the next day I was heading home with a g17, two motnhs about 800 rounds and a 3.5# trigger kit and some hi viz sights and I love it.
Love my 17 Gen III, BUT, if parts/accesories availability weren't an issue; and, if I weren't funneled into a NY1 trigger pull, I'd honestly prefer M&P. Also, the metal mags of the M&P feel better going in and out (that's what she said) than Glock's polymer mags.
Just my $0.02, now rounded to $0.05 due to the retirement of the penny.
Just my $0.02, now rounded to $0.05 due to the retirement of the penny.
