new shooter - M&P and its competitors

[zip22]

I recently became interested in shooting and was given a new Mark III along with some range time and instruction as a gift. I had a great time shooting it, and I'm looking at getting another handgun for target shooting and maybe HD. While at the range, I also shot a ruger P series .45. It was fun, but I'm not sure I want to go that large.

Right now, what I'm thinking of is a 9mm striker fired model. I focused on 9mm because its relatively available, cheaper, and should be more than enough for my purposes. I like the striker fired models because of decreased complexity and the consistent trigger.

Now, the main models in this category seem to be Glock, Springfield XD, and Smith and Wesson M&P. I've been reading everything I can about these product lines (including the M&P pro and XD(m)), and the one that has drifted to the top of my list is the M&P. All seen to have their fanboys on one end and the anecdotal failures on the other, but I like the design of the M&P, it seems to have a good track record for durability, and it has the simplicity of the glock. Glock is right below it because I don't care for the grip design - including the finger ridges. The only negative of the M&P for me is that magazines seem to be slighty more pricey than glock.

Killing some more time today, I was looking for some of lower cost models that fit my criteria. I found the Ruger SR9 (don't like the safety) and the S&W Sigma. These both seem nice, and could save me some cash. I guess I am just more drawn to the perceived robustness of the M&P series. How do these two models really stack up to the Glock/M&P/XD options? I've seen a few youtube reviews, but nothing with any extended use feelings.

I plan on checking out the models mentioned at the range. I was really just looking for some more input and any suggestions for additional models I should take a look at. Also, is $499 at buds gun shop a good deal for the M&P 9? I'm not exactly in a position to buy just yet, but I should be soon and I don't want to pass up a steal.

 

[john81276]

What size do you want? Full, compact, or sub-compact? I'd think that would impact things somewhat.

I'm with you - I think the Glock is a well made pistol, but it didn't feel good in my hand.

After shooting the Glock, M & P, and XD in sub-compact sizes, I went with the XD - it shot the best for me. The M & P was my second place.

I guess what I'm getting at, is that it's going to be subjective. Best plan would be to go to a range that would have all three (or more if considering other options) and SHOOT them. Then get the one you liked the most.

 

[Texaskaiser]

You are in good hands with the M&P 9. I was in a similar spot as you when in the market for a new HD gun and when i held the M&P i knew it was the one for me. When i went to the shop origionally i had the intention of getting a glock 17, but upon holding it i didnt care for the grip angle.

I have put about 1200 rounds through my M&P 9 without a hiccup and that includes monarch, winchester white box, and many other types of ammo (mostly cheap russian ammo) that all work-all the time.

Good luck on ur purchase and i highly recommend the M&P.

 

[zip22]

Yeah, I plan on trying them out as soon as I can. I'm looking at the full size or compact models. The 15+ round capacity models since different lines fit different areas. I was specifically thinking the M&P 9 (maybe the L but not the c), either the 17 or 19 model Glock, and service model XD.

 

[HKFan9]

Honestly, for a range 9mm as well as HD if god willing you ever need to use it for that, either the M&P or Glock or XD would work and work very well. Honestly after turning 21 and going on a buying frenzy I am starting to realize I only need certain things instead of WANTING them. The thing I regretted about ever handgun I bought, even if they were great guns, is that they didn't fit my hand well which in turn, I wasn't shooting to the best of my ability.

I'm currently switching to the dark side and buying a Glock 17 RTF2 to get off my start in IPSC production class. My buddy owns the M&P and I am borrowing it to use in my first IPSC match because I am selling my H&K USP and the rest of mine are CCW pieces. The M&P has a great grip and great feel, go with what you like best between anyone of those and u wont be wronged. I really really like the M&P but Glock won me over because it fit well, and you can get parts,mags and accessories almost anywhere for them. Where as the M&P and XD's are newer products and are gaining the support steadily.

 

[ritepath]

I went with the M&P 9c but you really can't go wrong with any of the three IMHO. I didn't buy the glock because it just didn't feel right in my hand. I shot my buddies XD compact 40 and it was a great little gun.

 

[rsxr22]

Check out any HK with a LEM trigger. They will run about 100-200 more but if you find one used, you could get it for just a little more than a new glock or xd. They are truly in the elite of polymer made pistols. IMO they are the best, but just like every other manu. some folks do not like them. I own the p2000sk in .40 w/ sa/da trigger and it is my primary ccw gun. I really like the ambi slide-stop and how well the gun fits in your hands. The new HK pistols that were released (P30 and HK45) are 2 of the most ergonomic handguns i've ever held

 

[pacerdude]

I too was in the market for a 9mm or 40s&w striker fired pistol a few months ago. My two favorites were the M&P and the XD/ XDm. I finally decided based on ergonomics to go with the M&P. And I LOVE it.
I would recommend it to anyone.

 

[Maul Rat]

If you are looking at the M&P9 Pro Series I'm sure you have seen my two terrible videos. I am hopefully going out "gravel pit" shooting this weekend in the back country of Northern Minnesota with a couple friends. Hope to get some better videos of it with my friends shooting it, both are way more experienced with handguns than myself. The friend should have has .40 S&W Glock with, not sure which model it is though. I went with the M&P9 Pro Series over the XD(m) 9mm because the M&P is MADE in the U.S.A. where as the XD is made in Croatia and assembled in the U.S.A. The M&P has a Stainless Steel slide, the XDm is Forged Steel. M&P has a 5 in barrel over a 4.5 in, and compared one on top of the other I would say the M&P isn't much more than a 1/4 inch longer. About the same height, the M&P holds 17+1 where the XD has 19+1, but I found a mag extension online for $17 that adds 6 rounds to the M&P. And the sites on the Pro Series are far superior if you ask me. I personally think it had and overall better feel in the hand too. The back straps change out way faster, nice for when the Wife come shooting with me, only takes all of about 30 seconds to change the grips.

Sorry for the long post, but I hope my information has helped.
I really wanted an XD for a long time, then saw the XD(m) and drooled over that until a co-worker turned me towards the M&P, I haven't looked back since.

 

[zip22]

does anyone have experience with both the sigma and the M&P? I've heard the trigger is not the greatest, but I'm thinking more of going cheaper than up to the pro or xd(m).

 

[mjoy64]

If I was you... I'd shoot a Sigma before I bought one. They are a tremendous value, but some people don't like the trigger. It would be fine for plinking on the range and HD and is a fine starter gun (IMO) as long as the trigger agrees with you.

 

[skoro]

I've had an M&P9c for the past year. Very pleased with it in all respects. Shoots and handles well, very accurate, never a jam, and compact enough for occasional carry. Even at its small size, it packs 12+1.

 

[Sevens]

Run any search on the Sigma on any site and the common denominator is going to be the trigger. And there's always a few folks who own them who think the complaints are overblown, in fact, there was a post just this morning here on TFL that said exactly that.

I've put a couple of magazines through a Sigma. It's a shootable, functional handgun. Price is cheap, and it's a S&W. But the trigger is a deal breaker, IMO. It's awful, and an awful trigger is an impediment to good, quality, enjoyable shooting. Would be fine as a defense-only piece.

Still, many Sigma owners say they are happy and the trigger is no big deal. I don't have a problem with that-- I applaud it. Won't work for me, however. Some folks do a little trigger work to it, some folks simply call up S&W and send it back and S&W does some work on it and then they are even happier. This is all good, IMO, but it doesn't change the obvious fact: the trigger is a known quantity.

So... go to a gun store and get one in your hand and ask the salesman if you may dry-fire it. Make sure you do this a number of times. If you do, and you are cool with it, then have at it. You might save some dough and really like the pistol.

When I'm in a gun store with some folks who are relatively new to shooting and they are still in the brain-storming stage for what they may want to get, I always suggest that they ask to dry-fire a Sigma. When they've done that, I figure they have a baseline for what a crap trigger feels like.

Me? I wouldn't mind owning one. If I found a used one for cheap, I'd likely buy it. I think it's a quality handgun that could fill a role. But to buy one as a range pistol, a competition pistol, or a handgun that I could use to become a better shooter? No way, no thanks, wouldn't do it. The trigger sucks.

 

[fatboy02]

Put them all in yor hand, try to rent them to shoot if you can, and one will stand out to you as your favorite.

If you can't shoot them, find the one that fits you the best you really can't go wrong with the Glock or M&P both are great guns but have a completly different feel to them. I went with the M&P because of the way it fit in my hand and I love it. Not as much as the 1911 .45 but that is another thread.

 

[LoneStarWings]

I shot a 1911 and an M&P when I was shopping, went with the M&P because it felt better and I was more accurate with it.

I now have about 3000 rounds through my M&P and it's a fantastic weapon, gobbles up all kinds of ammo, is easy to clean, and all around fun to shoot.

 

[Old Timer]

zip22 said:

does anyone have experience with both the sigma and the M&P? I've heard the trigger is not the greatest, but I'm thinking more of going cheaper than up to the pro or xd(m).

I have both. My Sigma (SW9VE) is (obviously) a 9mm and my M&P is .40 cal with an extra .357 Sig drop in barrel.

The complaints regarding the Sigma trigger are overstated either by those who have excessively weak hands, or fail to understand the rationale behind the trigger design, or have fired insufficient rounds through the gun to break in the trigger.

If you have weak hands the best thing to do is buy a hand grip exerciser and strengthen your hands. Shooting is just like any other sport, in order to master it you have to get in the proper shape, and the strength of your grip is vital to good control.

The Sigma trigger is stiff and long because it is designed that way. Without an external safety the long stiff trigger helps lessen the possibility of an accidental discharge. (And please, you that see yourselves as the forum's official word police, yes, there is such a thing as an accidental discharge.) Even some police departments recognized the problem with too light a trigger pull as exemplified by the New York Trigger (NY-1) module for Glocks which raises the trigger pull from about 5 pounds to about 8 pounds.

Lastly the Sigma trigger takes some breaking in. Usually about 300 rounds through the gun will smooth the trigger (so much for the "dry fire it a few times to get the feel of the trigger" myth - the trigger is going to change significantly over the first 300 or so rounds fired). Mine has about 10,000 rounds through it and the trigger is still long (which is how I like it, giving me the opportunity to "set" the trigger to the break point, then just a slight squeeze to fire the gun), but it is smooth with a very crisp break in the last mm of the pull. When I bought mine I polished the sear surfaces with my dremel tool and lightened the trigger pull by changing the sear spring arrangement, but it still took the 300 rounds to make the trigger excellent, as it now is.

Now, as to the M&P, I have the full size .40 caliber, and I love it. The trigger is also long, but not as stiff and very, very smooth. It is quite easy to "set" the trigger by pulling it most of the way back, then, just before it breaks, practice good breath control, sight alignment, and that last little bit of trigger pull, resulting in a clean break and a very tight grouping on your target.

Of the two guns the M&P is obviously the better gun, for significantly more money, of course, but if you buy the Sigma, understand how it works, shoot it enough to get a good break in, you will not be disappointed. The Sigma might very well be the best bang for the buck available today. For anyone on a tight budget I highly recommend the Sigma in either 9mm or .40 cal.

 

[goose13]

I have the M&P 9mm compact, went with the compact for concealed carry purposes. But it shoots great, I'm glad that I got it

 

[sholling]

I think you'll find the full size M&P a fine shooter.

 

[rsxr22]

If you want to go the SW route, pick up a SW99. It is Smith's version of the Walther P99 and is superior to the M&P, the main reason being that the m&p uses more plastic than most other companies, and i am not sold on using polymer on the slide of a gun, even glock still uses steel for the firing pin assembly.

 

[zip22]

Is the SW99 a current model? I don't see it on the S&W website and a quick search says it may have been discontinued.

Also, where does the M&P have polymer on the slide? From what I have seen, the M&P slide runs on steel inserts just like the Glock.