Some people do seem to like the M&P 9, but as a basic Glock enthusiast who bought an M&P 22 as a cheaper-to-operate practice pistol, I will not likely ever buy a Ruger semi auto pistol again because the thing is nothing but trouble: jams, failures to feed, failures to extract, stove pipes, failures to fire, the whole works. Which provides good problem solving practice in training, but is not so much fun for just shooting.
MP9 2.0 or Glock
- Thread starter 1northernboy
- Start date
When I started shooting pistols back in the early 70’s, S&W and Colt were the two “go-to” semi autos. Glock was still a glimmer in old Gaston’s eye. I shot S&W (39, 59) competitively and recreationally for the 70’s & 80’s, bought a Glock the first week they were available in Canada, and shot them almost exclusively until about 2005. I was getting bored with the platform, 1911’s have a bad angle for me & I’ve never done great with them. I transitioned into Sigs since S&W weren’t really wowing anyone with what they were doing at the time. Eventually got rid of the Glocks, and shot Sig for about 12 years. I got back into Glocks with the intro of the 19X, and that solidified with the 48. I’ve shot those two heavily since. I’m very tempted to pick up another S&W, and probably will in the near future.
Please don’t pre-determine what you’re going to buy until you’ve ideally had a chance to shoot them. Neither are pretty, so evaluate how well you shoot them, nothing else. One will feel more natural to you, guaranteed. That’s the right gun. Don’t lock yourself in to one brand; they are almost ALL good, some excellent, some not. Explore a bit, you may find something unexpected that fits you better than the big guys
Please don’t pre-determine what you’re going to buy until you’ve ideally had a chance to shoot them. Neither are pretty, so evaluate how well you shoot them, nothing else. One will feel more natural to you, guaranteed. That’s the right gun. Don’t lock yourself in to one brand; they are almost ALL good, some excellent, some not. Explore a bit, you may find something unexpected that fits you better than the big guys
I have over 3000 rounds down the pipe of my M&P 22 and have had zero issues with it, it eats pretty much anything.
Boy did I get a lemon then. But I should admit that mine works fine with one variety of CCI ammo that is hard to get here and never on sale. Wouldn't be too big a deal if I wasn't in Canada and living through ammo droughts every time the US gun community gets nervous.
Well Big Red when we have an ammo shortage it is no better in the US The M&P .22LR is not made by S&W and the gun only looks like the M&P Gen 1 & 2. Not sure it has much to do with the OP's question.
What does the bold portion of your post mean. I get you are a Glock enthusiast. You apparently bought an M&P then at some point you bought a Ruger and apparently that pistol was a problem pistol or did you type Ruger instead of M&P and the M&P was a problem child. Was the Ruger a lemon or the M&P?
Take Care
Bob
TheNatural21
CGN Regular
- Location
- Fort Nelson, BC
I'm pretty sure the M&P 22 is very different in design than the M&P 9 or 45 (1 or 2.0). They look similar on the outside but that's about it. I have a friend with an M&P22 that has some hiccups but not as bad as you describe.. but because it's a totally different gun it's not really that relevant to the 9mm discussion.
One thing I have noticed is, you can't use 9mm force to seat a magazine in the 22LR version, you will likely get a FTF since the round may pop up with that much force. Ease up, keep it lubed and it should be good to go.
I have shot CCI MiniMag's in my M&P22 but my go to ammo is the uber cheap CCI Blazer lead 40g 22LR, like 6¢ a round. That stuff is very accurate, only two duds despite a solid hammer strike. You can find it in 5000 rd bulk deals from time to time.
hatman1793
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
The S&W M&P beats the Glock17 on price but don't discount the newer Glock 48. Its pretty close in price.
Both autos are outstanding. Having said that, add $200.00 & you can achieve nirvana with the superior in all aspects with the vastly superior CZ SP01. The SP01 Shadow creams all 9mm autos C$900.00 & under.
Both autos are outstanding. Having said that, add $200.00 & you can achieve nirvana with the superior in all aspects with the vastly superior CZ SP01. The SP01 Shadow creams all 9mm autos C$900.00 & under.
I own both, a M&P 40 (have 9mm barrel) and glock 19.
Both are really reliable, I have never had any issues with either, regardless of ammo (even cheap winchester steel case crap ammo) .
If I had to pick one, I would likely go with the M&P. Very tough choice, but I guess my bias is: M&P came with a holster in the range kit, and I like the grip angle of the M&P more then the glock. The aggressive M&P 2.0 grip texture is very nice, and could come in handy should the need ever arise (wet or oily hands, etc) . I have owned M&P gen1 also, but they have a gritty (less then ideal) trigger.
The more I think about it, the M&P 2.0 is a better firearm all around, then a glock 17/19. Only gripe is the mag's are stubborn and are the hardest to load by hand (without the magLULA that came included in the range kit) .
By far the M&P are the hardest mags to load out of any handguns I have ever loaded. (The USP .45 loads like butter, barely and resistance at all!)
If I were to choose now, between glock or M&P 2.0 , I would hands down say that M&P is a better value. As mentioned both are uber-reliable, but the trigger in the M&P 2.0 is MILES AHEAD of the glock trigger.
my 2 cents.
-J
Both are really reliable, I have never had any issues with either, regardless of ammo (even cheap winchester steel case crap ammo) .
If I had to pick one, I would likely go with the M&P. Very tough choice, but I guess my bias is: M&P came with a holster in the range kit, and I like the grip angle of the M&P more then the glock. The aggressive M&P 2.0 grip texture is very nice, and could come in handy should the need ever arise (wet or oily hands, etc) . I have owned M&P gen1 also, but they have a gritty (less then ideal) trigger.
The more I think about it, the M&P 2.0 is a better firearm all around, then a glock 17/19. Only gripe is the mag's are stubborn and are the hardest to load by hand (without the magLULA that came included in the range kit) .
By far the M&P are the hardest mags to load out of any handguns I have ever loaded. (The USP .45 loads like butter, barely and resistance at all!)
If I were to choose now, between glock or M&P 2.0 , I would hands down say that M&P is a better value. As mentioned both are uber-reliable, but the trigger in the M&P 2.0 is MILES AHEAD of the glock trigger.
my 2 cents.
-J
Juncrtion I and others have posted the following before. Take the followers out of your mags and file down the"feet" almost or right to the botom of the curve. When you get the follower out you will know what I am referring to Not sure why S&W either has not changed the design of the follower or changed suppliers. It must only be a problem with 10 round mags. In any event once you modify the follower as suggested your mags will load much easier. Right now the follower is bottoming out on the compressed springs.
Take Care
Bob
Take Care
Bob
Lol, thanks for the morning laugh! Every time I shoot against a Shadow in competition I can't help but think " man, that is a vastly superior gun to my Glock" ,, someone should let those Spec Ops guys know about this!
Still alive
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Rainy mosquito infested part of BC
Lol, thanks for the morning laugh! Every time I shoot against a Shadow in competition I can't help but think " man, that is a vastly superior gun to my Glock" ,, someone should let those Spec Ops guys know about this!
Oooooo edgy! You’ve triggered the gamer gods!
Remember, I did win once with a borrowed Shadow....
Yes you did! You were vastly superior that day pal
I have noticed you didn't rush right out to buy one though lol
Still alive
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Rainy mosquito infested part of BC
Yes you did! You were vastly superior that day pal
I have noticed you didn't rush right out to buy one though lol
Touché! You got me on that one!
Don’t need another heavy metal gun. I’m sticking with my Glocks and M&P!
Enjoy your range day today! The indoor range is freezing FYI!
Thanks for the heads up bud, will dress for it lol. Shadows are fantastic guns no doubt, but as we both know, the best gun is the one that works best for you
Still alive
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Rainy mosquito infested part of BC
Thanks for the heads up bud, will dress for it lol. Shadows are fantastic guns no doubt, but as we both know, the best gun is the one that works best for you
Almost made expert with a G34 and competes with a G19! I say Glocks work well for you!
Someone just woke up the Left Coast crowd. LOL. It always is the archer not the arrow.
If you discount a few throw away strikers there has evolved in my mind two layers of striker fired pistol designs. You have the improved but basically the same Glock Gen 5, along with a slightly better designed and more robust Gen 2 M&P along with the Beretta offering, and the Springfield as a group.
Then you have the tier one designs, designs that do set them apart both in build quality and mechanical improvement. I put the Sig 320 and iterations, the Walther PPQ M2 Match and iterations, the FN line of strikers and the CZP 10 and iterations into the truly "next" category. The Walther, with its stepped chamber would probably win out in absolute mechanical accuracy. ALL of the pistols from either tier are dead nuts reliable and all have outlier units pop up from time to time.
Forget what the military/police units use. Their purchasing slaves are driven by budgets and politics neither of which should concern civilian purchasers. Neither group really use their pistols much for anything anyway. I would guess the actual military/LEO use vs practice rounds exceeds the kill ration of small arms to discharges from the Vietnam era by a significant margin. A figure has remained in my head; the number would be in excess of 50,000 rounds per kill but that is from a 50 year recall. It may have been more and the figure may have been reduced since. I'll let the retired armed forces crowd gnaw on my bones over that figure and the observation.
Edgy would almost make Master with any of the guns I mentioned. He would drop less long range shots with the Walther over the G 34/19 he uses but egos and budgets must be served. Too, it is almost impossible to prove that statement given the variables involved. Just saying.
Starting out the M&P Gen 2 at $550 before tax is just to good a pistol to pass on for a first time shooter. The gun will out shoot most shooters, it's mechanical design, with a one piece rail assembly and ergonomics sets it above the Glock Gen 5. If you spend enough money on after market parts on the Glock, a claimed feature if you are tied to that manufacturer, you can offset the guns shortfalls. Most new shooters won't or don't want to go down that rabbit hole.
So where does that leave the OP? Eeeny meeneee miney moe I am afraid. He has choices and what ever he buys or bought I am sure he will defend his purchase like he would defend his first born.
Time for a second cup.
Take Care
Bob
If you discount a few throw away strikers there has evolved in my mind two layers of striker fired pistol designs. You have the improved but basically the same Glock Gen 5, along with a slightly better designed and more robust Gen 2 M&P along with the Beretta offering, and the Springfield as a group.
Then you have the tier one designs, designs that do set them apart both in build quality and mechanical improvement. I put the Sig 320 and iterations, the Walther PPQ M2 Match and iterations, the FN line of strikers and the CZP 10 and iterations into the truly "next" category. The Walther, with its stepped chamber would probably win out in absolute mechanical accuracy. ALL of the pistols from either tier are dead nuts reliable and all have outlier units pop up from time to time.
Forget what the military/police units use. Their purchasing slaves are driven by budgets and politics neither of which should concern civilian purchasers. Neither group really use their pistols much for anything anyway. I would guess the actual military/LEO use vs practice rounds exceeds the kill ration of small arms to discharges from the Vietnam era by a significant margin. A figure has remained in my head; the number would be in excess of 50,000 rounds per kill but that is from a 50 year recall. It may have been more and the figure may have been reduced since. I'll let the retired armed forces crowd gnaw on my bones over that figure and the observation.
Edgy would almost make Master with any of the guns I mentioned. He would drop less long range shots with the Walther over the G 34/19 he uses but egos and budgets must be served. Too, it is almost impossible to prove that statement given the variables involved. Just saying.
Starting out the M&P Gen 2 at $550 before tax is just to good a pistol to pass on for a first time shooter. The gun will out shoot most shooters, it's mechanical design, with a one piece rail assembly and ergonomics sets it above the Glock Gen 5. If you spend enough money on after market parts on the Glock, a claimed feature if you are tied to that manufacturer, you can offset the guns shortfalls. Most new shooters won't or don't want to go down that rabbit hole.
So where does that leave the OP? Eeeny meeneee miney moe I am afraid. He has choices and what ever he buys or bought I am sure he will defend his purchase like he would defend his first born.
Time for a second cup.
Take Care
Bob
Last edited:
