S&W M&P 9 vs Glock 17 3rd gen vs Glock 17 4th gen

C

calvados.boulard

CGN frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
156   0   0
Location
Victoria BC
Hello all,

I'm wondering about people's opinion on the S&M M&P 9 versus the Glock 17 3rd generation, versus the Glock 17 4th generation.

I've shot the M&P, and the 3rd gen Glock, and am 'ok' with either. I like the look of the M&P better that the look of the Glock. I know people are going to say, 'it's all about what feels right in your hand', but I'd like to hear some people's experiences and opinions on these 3 fine pistols.

It seems from what I've read thus far, that the M&P's reliability is coming close to the legendary reliability of the Glock. Can anyone attest to that? Is the 4th generation Glock as reliable as the 3rd generation?

This will be my first pistol purchase, and I'm the first to admit that I'm a bit of a noob to all this. I've done my cfsc and crfsc, and am awaiting the delivery of my license.

Thanks in advance.

CB
 
both are great and will work every time... go with what feels the most comfortable in your hand. The one thing i dont like about a lot of the m&p's is the magazine disconnect safety (gun wont fire without a magazine in it). not much of a fan of the beavertail frame either...
 
I only have about 1600 rounds through my Glock 17 4th Gen so far, and only one mis-feed which was due to a faulty cartridge.

Other than that, it has been the stuff legends are made of! :D
 
You won't go wrong with any of those pistols. Personally, my hands don't work with 3rd Gen Glocks (didn't with 1st or second either) but the M&P works great. I haven't tried a 4th gen Glock yet, but will at some point. If you're going to shoot lead in a Glock, remember that you MUST keep the barrel free of lead deposits, if you let them lead up, you risk the possibuility of a Kaboom, no such worries with the M&P. There are plenty of good, functional aftermarket parts available for both guns these days, unless you want to really pimp your pistol - then you're better off with Glock. As far as reliability goes, I shot close to 1,500 rounds on Wednesday and Thursday of this week through my M&P (putting my total to around 15,000) with one FTF (high primer - fired on the second try). I'd expect either Glock to do the same.
 
Get whichever one you want the most. You can read for hours about "reliability" and "torture tests" etc etc. Any of the guns you mentioned will probably be "reliable" enough for any application you will use it for. Also nothing is perfect, all these guns are mechanical none of them are 100% guaranteed not to fail. Some better than others yes.

I was in the same spot at one point, deciding on my first pistol, trying to decipher all this reliability/accuracy blah blah info. Then basically you realize that people generally just have their favorite gun and root for it and try and tell you its better etc. Just like Ford sucks, Chevy's rule etc etc.

As long as your choosing from a decent standard of choices (which you certainly are), just get the one you want most and you'll be happy with it :)

Good luck and happy shooting!!! Welcomer to the club!
 
i had mp9 and own a subcompact glock in 10mm...both are good guns. in ful size id take gen4 glock over 3.5 just fits my hand better. but mp is a better deal imo.
 
the m&p is a great combat pistol out of the box. I have a glock 34 tricked out with a storm lake match barrel, and other parts as well as a m&p 40. i shoot both extensively, my glock 34 has about 2K rounds thru it, absolutely flawless. same with the m&p. my issue is the so called lack of aftermarket support for the m&p.

The problem with combat pistols, is they are not very accurate. yeah, sure the m&p can shoot lead with no mods, but its still as acurate as any glock. These guns are not bullseye pistols, they are center of mass guns. if you are looking at hitting the bull at 25 meters every time, it will be tough to do with either pistol in this category.

If you want to dab in the aftermarket to make these toys more accurate, it will be much easier to do with a glock, as the aftermaket availability of parts is extensive, cheap and still easy to get over the border. I heard glock has phonominal guarantee on their guns, but its not i ever had to use it.

Virtually, you are making a good choice with both guns. they are built to be trouble free and reliable, easy to feed, easy and cheap to fix, cheap to buy. i had 2 glock 17's a glock 22 and a glock 19, i currently own a glock 34 and m&p 40, and love(d) all of them

cheers and have fun
 
calvados.boulard said:
Hello all,

I'm wondering about people's opinion on the S&M M&P 9 versus the Glock 17 3rd generation, versus the Glock 17 4th generation.

I've shot the M&P, and the 3rd gen Glock, and am 'ok' with either. I like the look of the M&P better that the look of the Glock. I know people are going to say, 'it's all about what feels right in your hand', but I'd like to hear some people's experiences and opinions on these 3 fine pistols.

It seems from what I've read thus far, that the M&P's reliability is coming close to the legendary reliability of the Glock. Can anyone attest to that? Is the 4th generation Glock as reliable as the 3rd generation?

This will be my first pistol purchase, and I'm the first to admit that I'm a bit of a noob to all this. I've done my cfsc and crfsc, and am awaiting the delivery of my license.

Thanks in advance.

CB
Click to expand...

You know you have to have at least one of everything eventually, and ten of the ones that turn out to be your favorites....so just buy either one now to start, and get the other next month.

There you go. A practical solution, no further discussion needed. ;)
 
I Have a gen 3.5 Glock 17 and I love it. I pick it over the M&P because of the way it shoot and handle. I won't say Glock is better because I think M&P is better gun but just not my cup of tea. M&P is the gun that you shoot the first time will tell you love it ot not. Glock will have to shoot it for a long period of time to tell you love it or hate it, I turn out love it. But mind you any CZ or Beretta line of pistol is way better gun.

Trigun
 
I've owned the S&W MP9 and I still own my Glock 17 3rd gen...

They are both awesome, I would use either one in a scrape...

I'm interested in the double spring system on the 4th gen glock, I think it's overkill but someone thought it was a good idea. As for fit and feel, the S&W is a little easier on the eyes but I always use a hogue grip on my Glock so the feel is pretty much equal.
 
well said, afterall, the m&p pistol series is a copy of the glock. they just made them prettier and friendlier to law enforfcement market, for example, you dont have to pull the trigger to field strip gun, optional mag disconect, ambi controls and grip backstrap options right out of the box. the m&p is a great success so far, and i think that due to its popularity, it will be a serious contender for the glock market share
 
If you like the looks of the M&P better go with that. The only thing I would add to my M&P 9/40 is a .22lr top end if it should ever become available
 
calvados.boulard said:
I'm wondering about people's opinion on the S&M M&P 9 versus the Glock 17 3rd generation, versus the Glock 17 4th generation.
Click to expand...

Which handgun in .40 cal?
http://www.canadiangunnutz.com/forum/showthread.php?t=511036
The M&P is superior. Is it because of...

the "safer" magazine disconnect?
the "safer" integral locking device?
the "safer" sear-disconnect disassembly process?
the "new and improved" striker?
the S, M, and L backstraps?

What about the scarcity (in Canada) of no-mag-disconnect models?
What about the scarcity of replacement strikers?
What about the reduced number of holster options?
What about the lack of a .22LR conversion kit?

The Glock is not better because there are more aftermarket parts, holsters, and accessories available for it than the M&P, although there are. The Glock is not better because more soldiers, sailors, and aviators carry it than the M&P, although they do. The Glock is not better because more police officers in Canada, the United States, and the world, carry it than the M&P, although they do. The Glock is not better because one can buy every single part for the pistol, either Glock or aftermarket, your choice - from the striker to the trigger to the frame, every part.

Glocks are everywhere. Everybody and his dog has a Glock. If you hate to follow the crowd, and you prefer to be the first one on your block with the brand-new-and-improved 2011 model of whatever is rare and relatively hard to get parts for, I guess the Glock is not for you. As for me, simple, common, and proven-reliable is a virtue; given a choice between the Gen3 and the Gen4 Glock, I would take the proven Gen3.

(I'll leave the beta testing to you guys. ;) )

http://www.canadiangunnutz.com/forum/showthread.php?t=511036&page=4
Click to expand...
 
I think we disproved all of the above, last time around.

My M&P has no integral locking device, mag disconnect, and you can strip it just like a glock (pulling trigger) instead of using the sear disconnect.

The glock was an outstanding leap forward in handgun designs... 20 years ago (give or take).... The M&P has aped a lot of ideas (yes, it IS plastic framed, and yes, it is striker fired), but - Could one not argue that the CZ75 just apes the GP35?

Both the Glock and the M&P are excellent guns. I personally feel that the Glocks (in any caliber) are about as comfortable to shoot as a hockey stick being run down a metal railing fence, but if the shoe fits...

See if you can find some CGN member to take you out for a test drive, with both pistols.
 
I have owned both and like the Smith and wesson a bit more. Mags are more expensive though as not a lot of M&P used mags out there yet.

The Smith has some advantages like a higher tang so you can get your hand up on the gun higher to control recoil. I also have a Sig P226 and it is more accurate but that is to be expected.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom