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, Hilton_Yam_10-8Performanceand 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 Kit Up! Hilton Yam of 10-8 Performance discussing the relative merits of the M&P vs. Glock in an article from 'Modern Service Weapons'. 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.

http://modernserviceweapons.com/?p=171

 

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.

 

{ 10 comments… read them below or add one }

JCitizen February 5, 2013 at 1:08 pm

I like 'em both – it is a real toss up! I got to admit; I'd rather have been carring a Glock in the service, than the Beretta. But that is because I've seen over 10,000 rnds go down range without a hitch using the Glock. And the pistol doesn't seem the worse for the wear either!

Reply

Moondawg February 5, 2013 at 3:35 pm

I have and shoot both, M&P 9 and Glock 9mm. I noticed the author did not mention the truely awful standard trigger on the M&P as compared to the glock standard trigger. For an extra $100 an Apex kit will fix it. I fail to see the need for a thumb safety on a striker fired pistol. Just because the 1911 has a thumb saftey, it also has a grip safety, does not mean a properly designed striker fired pistol need one. I do agree that the M&P grip is a little more ergonomic than the glock. Now try and completely strip a M&P and see how long it takes you and how many of its tiny little springs you loose in the process. You can completely strip a glock, replace all its springs and put it back together in the time you are striping the M&P and hunting the several tiny springs that went spoing off into never find land. Also the M&P has more springs to break and more parts, some of them really small than does the glock. The author mentioned the accuracy problem with the M&P, and the need to fire 147 gr bullets, not the most effective 9mm round. For another couple hundrend $$ you can cure this problem with an after market barrel. Overall, I think the Glock beats the M&P.

Reply

Red February 6, 2013 at 3:30 am

I'd really like to see a three-way comparison with Glock, M&P and Steyr (another Austrian design by a former Glock-guy, who then went on to do the Caracal).

Reply

jackalope February 8, 2013 at 11:24 pm

Throw the Walther PPQ in there too.

Reply

Marc February 6, 2013 at 8:47 am

Ergonomics appeal more to the 1911 crowd and there are workarounds for its many flaws. To me those are very, very weak selling points. Btw, I own neither.

Reply

Fred February 6, 2013 at 10:25 am

We have a2 Gen 4 Glock 19s & a Gen 4 23 in my house hold. Several thousand rounds using a variety of 115 & 124 grain have been fired from both guns with no failures of any kind. The Glock are very accurate and seem natural in in my hands. Maintenance is simple and the guns are absolutely reliable. The ladies of the housed handle both guns well but prefer the 19s due to the some what lower recoil of the 9 vs the 40. That said, the derogatory comments regarding Gen 4 Glock 19 & 23 pistols is mystery. What is wrong with the Gen -4 Glock 19 and 23?

Reply

Johnny Quest February 6, 2013 at 10:46 am

You need to do a web search and you will be amazed at what you will find. In a nutshell, the Gen 4's had extraction and ejection problems. These have been well documented. Glock seems to have gotten a handle on it – I think. I do know that Apex tactical came out with extractors for both the later Gen 3's and Gen 4's that corrected the deficiencies.

Reply

Brandon February 7, 2013 at 10:12 am

I have not seen the uber reliability from Glocks that everyone else seems to have. Are they reliable? Sure. Are they super reliable? None of the Glocks I have used seem to be. I have one on my side as I write this that I am issued and it isn't all that bad. It does malfunction though and I can't tell exactly what the cause is. It malfunctions whether it has a load of oil on it or barely any oil. Clean or dirty. Some are magazine related from one of my mags that looks to be older than dirt but others are not. In the academy, I used an old gen 3 glock that was the range door knob. After deep cleanings under the watchful eye of armorers, I and others still had fairly routine malfunctions. On a qual course for the FAA, I used a brand new Glock 9mm and had some issues but I assume this is because it was not broken in. My M and P on the other hand, has never had a single malfunction to this day. That makes me an M and P guy all day long. I want to like the Glock and used to love them until the M and P came along. I agree with everyone about the trigger though. I have gotten used to the weight and all but the reset still bothers me.

Reply

JCitizen February 7, 2013 at 10:19 am

Every time I've investigated malfunctions with Glocks it has turned out to be the ammo. It doesn't matter if it is hand-loaded or commercial; the Glocks I've shot really like NATO issue ammo, or Wolf, for instance. But it is always the ammo every time.

Reply

Fred February 7, 2013 at 11:56 am

Thanks for the comments n Glock reliability. Our 19s & 23 G-4s are less than one year old and none have every malfunctioned. The guide springs were replaced in oldest, a 19 & at 23. The newer 19 was purchases with the updated guide spring. Perhaps my pistols had the problems noted above corrected when purchased. Initially, a variety of brand name ammo was fired from all pistols; however, we now shoot Federal HST and FMJ with no malfunctions.

Reply

Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post: