I have a lot of respect for Hilton Yam of 10-8 Performance, though truth be told I've only met him a couple of times (and I doubt he even remembers). That said, everyone, and I mean everyone I've ever talked to about his work has had nothing but high praise. As a result, I follow his blog and social media outlets. Not too long ago he posted this:
"...a few months ago I wrote a blog article titled GLOCK VS. M&P…OR WHY I SHOOT AN M&P...[the article] seemed to either garner support from M&P fans or bitter hatred and foaming spittle producing rage from...anyone not an M&P fan, especially the Glock people. Funny enough, I probably have more Glocks and time on and around them than a lot of those mindless fanboys...but I digress. Point being, I get lambasted for suggesting that some fairly simple workarounds on a plastic pistol make it very workable for me. Yet for the past decade I was lauded for showing how some really expensive and skill intensive workarounds for a 100 yr old pistol could make it workable for some folks. Um, WTF?"I was intrigued, so I looked up the original article. It's a good read, regardless of your preference of pistol breed. Here is an excerpt:
Excerpted from Glock vs. M&P…or why I shoot an M&P
"...For purposes of discussion below, I will be comparing the Glock 17 vs. the M&P 9mm full sized model. If we were comparing the Glock 21 to the M&P 45, then let’s just stop here and declare the M&P .45 the winner and move on. Superior ergonomics by far, good accuracy, and availability of thumb safety to help transition 1911 shooters make the M&P 45 the clear winner in my opinion. Add a viable and reliable factory 14 round magazine, and you pretty much have the whole package wrapped up with a bow. Same with .40 – the M&P was designed for the .40, with steel chassis for increased rigidity and none of the durability or function issues of the Glock 22. Oddly, the 9mm was shoehorned into the M&P platform rather than the reverse which is true for Glock, and it is therefore the weakest model of the M&P. So why do I shoot one all the time?
- The main downfall of the M&P 9mm is the wildly varying accuracy thanks to some QC issues and design flaws. The M&P 9 barrel uses a tragically slow 1:18.75″ twist, which does a poor job stabilizing heavier bullets. To add insult to injury, the M&P also unlocks extremely quickly. This early unlocking tends to negate any conventional wisdom on what bullet weights should shoot well with the M&P, and you’ll want to do a bit of experimenting. The Glock is inherently more accurate than the M&P, and will shoot 3″ or better at 25 yards with a wide range of ammunition. I feel that 3″ or less is a good measure for service pistol accuracy at 25 yards. My 3 primary M&P 9mm’s will all shoot 3″ or better at 25 yards with any 147 grain ammunition that I feed them, and two of them have printed 2 5/8″ standing offhand at 25 yards with 147 grain. That works for me. However, all three of the guns shoot about 6-8″ at 25 yards using 115 and 124 grain ammo. My solution at this point is just to stick with 147 grain.
|25 yd standing offhand groups with M&P 9|
- I feel that the M&P ergonomics are far superior for a 1911 guy, and better thought out overall than Glock (even the Gen 4). The availability of interchangeable backstraps and thumb safety make the M&P a very logical polymer substitute for a 1911. I love my M&P 9′s light recoil and lack of maintenance and setup requirements, making it a great vacation from high maintenance/setup 1911s.
- Reliability? The 3rd Gen Glock 17 is an extremely reliable gun, but it’s a real crapshoot right now with the Gen 4. The M&P 9mm tends to be quite reliable across the board, and my 3 guns have not had any weapon related malfunctions in about 9000 rounds since the end of October 2011. I have isolated some real bad primers in some of my ammo that have given me failures to fire, and had a total of 2 magazine related failures which were tracked down to a bad follower and worn spring in one mag. That mag has been rebuilt and has since been 100%..."
He makes several more points. I encourage you to read the article in its entirety if you carry or are curious about either of these weapons.
Note: if you're interested (and even if you're not) I am a Glock man, largely because my old rangemaster used to say, "If you're going to treat your gun like a classic car, carry a 1911. If you're going to treat it like a lawnmower and leave it out in the yard, carry a Glock."
I treat mine like a lawnmower.
I have begun shooting my M&P more frequently, however, and I really like the ergonomics of the grip (though I'm not wild about the factory trigger pull); I'm also going to be reviewing the new S&W M&P CORE once it arrives.
End of tangent and digression.