View Full Version : What makes the S&W M&P such a good handgun?
I'm looking to get a 9MM handgun as I currently seem to find myself without one and am considering either an M&P, XD, or a Glock.
I have no predisposition toward any of those - though I have owned and like Glocks and my brother is now a firm XD fan - and since there seems to be quite a lot of experienced folks here, I'd like to know why the M&P seems to have gathered such a strong following.
I'll be using the gun for general range use on targets at defensive and extended ranges, IDPA, a HD pistol, and possibly CCW.
any suggestions?
I'm looking to get a 9MM handgun as I currently seem to find myself without one and am considering either an M&P, XD, or a Glock. I have no predisposition toward any of those - though I have owned and like Glocks and my brother is now a firm XD fan - and since there seems to be quite a lot of experienced folks here, I'd like to know why the M&P seems to have gathered such a strong following. I'll be using the gun for general range use on targets at defensive and extended ranges, IDPA, a HD pistol, and possibly CCW. any suggestions?
1) Shooting characteristics: First time I saw an M&P, I happened to be shooting my Steyr 9mm. I compared the two; the M&P's frame was nearly idendical to the Steyr in terms of low bore axis.
What is that? It means the barrel sits very low in the hand. On such a gun, the is noticeably less muzzle flip, and a much faster follow-up shot is possible. This aspect makes the M&P, the Steyr and the HK P7 series into excellent shooters where time matters. Top that off with very good accuracy and you have a winner.
2) Reliability and durability: the gun works and does not break.
3) Support. Here is where the M&P has a big edge over my old Steyr M9; if anything were to ever go wrong with the M&P, its easily fixed either under warranty or by factory repair, plus parts are available.
Add to that: there is a strong aftermarket for accesories and S&W has just extended the $50 rebate plus 2 free extra magazine deal, so the M&P is nearly as cheap as my Steyrs were - plus there is no sign that the S&W as a company is going away in our lifetime. If anything, the M&P looks set to take away significant market share from Glock in both police and civilian CCW sales.
There are some intrinsic advantages of the M&P over the Glock, like having a better trigger, and being able to put a light on the rail without the frame deforming. Things like sights can be worked around on either platform to the shooter's liking. Likewise, both guns are "low bore axis". Some of the other issues may be getting more into hair splitting, such as the metal versus plastic guide rod.
The M&P has a more complicated internal design, and the Glock may still be more rugged/reliable in terms of endurance, tolerance of crud, being dropped in the mud, stepped on, etc. Time will tell for the gun itself, but the case seems true enough already for the mags.
The biggest difference to me is with the grip. Had that worked out substantially better for me, I would have stuck with the M&P. As it turned out, I went back to my G19. Everybody has a different hand though, so you have to test this out for yourself. No plastic gun really fits my hand as well as a 1911, but the G19 has enough other advantages as an everyday carry gun for me to compromise on the grip.
M&P offers only a full-size and a compact. If they ever add to the line a true mid-size comparable to the G19, I may give that another chance.
Sorry, I don't have any experience with XD's.
http://mp-pistol.com/boards/
http://sigforum.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/430601935/m/4641094411/p/1
http://mp-pistol.com/boards/viewtopic.php?t=10617
There is some good info over at mp-pistol.com. I think both of those threads (sigforum and mp-pistol) are worth checking out. Just like most other forums though there is a lot of biased, unfounded crap being thrown around so don't read too much into them.
Once you get through all of that I think you will find that some people believe the M&P is ergonomically superior to any other plastic gun, the bugs seem to be worked out of them, and they seem to be proving reliable.
I don't think they have been around long enough for the long-term, hard usage quirks to start popping up (something like the Glock 40's breaking locking blocks, etc.). I only know of a few that have been run hard, and only one of them had issues. This is by no means an indication of long-term durability.
For me, they feel better in the hand and shoot better than any of your other choices. I had an early production 45 that had lots of issues. S&W eventually fixed it and I got rid of it. I found that I liked my newer production 40 better anyway and it's hard to argue with 15+1 rounds of 40 in the hand.
In 9MM, you don't have a bad choice. Any of the above should serve you well. Try them all if you can. Having owned a carried all of them (Glock, XD, M&P), my current choice is the M&P. YMMV.
thanks for all your responses, they've been very helpful.
I have actually shot all these guns except the M&P and had somewhat settled on the G19 but don't like the lack of a safety on the Glock.
my next choice was the XD, due to the grip safety and was ready to go with that one till I spent some time shooting an XD45. it did not do well for me though I do like the XD9 and my thinking was moving in this direction.
now, I see the level of admiration for the M&P is so widespread that I feel I would be making a mistake to ignore it and hence my questions.
does anyone honestly feel that one of these guns is "superior" to either of the other in whatever way you want to characterize it?
Gutshot John
03-07-08, 10:25
I have actually shot all these guns except the M&P and had somewhat settled on the G19 but don't like the lack of a safety on the Glock.
Two questions:
1. Only a few M&P models have a safety...aren't the others no more safe or unsafe than a Glock?
2. If you always assume that your weapon is loaded, and you never point it at anything you don't want to kill, and you keep your finger off the trigger until you're ready to shoot, what need does a manual safety fulfill on a non-SA?
I don't know what makes an M&P so popular as I've never shot one but I'm looking forward to finding out. I love Glocks in 9mm but the M&P feels so much nicer in the hand.
The SA-XD is ok I had a 9mm Tac, but I'd stay away for the money. The one I had functioned reliably, but the prospect of only having SA work (lack of after market parts) on it made it a loser.
Two questions:
1. Only a few M&P models have a safety...aren't the others no more safe or unsafe than a Glock?
2. If you always assume that your weapon is loaded, and you never point it at anything you don't want to kill, and you keep your finger off the trigger until you're ready to shoot, what need does a manual safety fulfill on a non-SA?
I don't know what makes an M&P so popular as I've never shot one but I'm looking forward to finding out. I love Glocks in 9mm but the M&P feels so much nicer in the hand.
The SA-XD is ok I had a 9mm Tac, but I'd stay away for the money. The one I had functioned reliably, but the prospect of only having SA work (lack of after market parts) on it made it a loser.
apologies for the confusion - I'll try to restate a little clearer.
1. you are right, without a manual safety an M&P is the same as a Glock. in this case, my comparison would be apples/apples and would discount the lack of safety on either. that said, if it was available with a manual safety, I'd be tempted to get it that way if the manual of arms was similar enough to my 1911.
2. I'm pretty OK with my gun handling in regard to safety but my concerns have to do with non-firing handling, specifically reholstering. something getting in the way of the trigger, such as shirt material, has caused numerous NDs when inserting and pushing a Glock down into a holster. certainly it's a handling issue and should not be an issue to someone who meticulously and religiously follows a proper reholstering procedure, but it has been and will continue to be an issue, even for very experienced shooters.
I have heard of it occurring numerous times and personally witnessed it once. I don't ever want it to occur to me. as someone once said about the cop who's Glock ND'ed on him while he was "adjusting" it in his holster while in the stands watching a basketball game, "you'd have to be a dipshit to cap yourself in the ass"...
as you say, I don't know why the M&P is as popular as it is either, but I DO intend to find out. thanks for the reply...
Gutshot John
03-07-08, 11:30
I keep wondering about this reholster AD I keep hearing about and yes I've seen the vids too, but you never really get a sense of why, other than generalized "operator error". Either way it seems to be the fault of the shooter, not the gun, and I'm wary of those who rely on technology to overcome poor technique.
My sense is that they don't keep the finger off the trigger and when reholstering the caught finger pulls. If there is more to it than this, please let me know. Everything about gun safety should be meticulous and religious. IMO if someone is going to rush a reholster, than he's at least as likely to rush putting it on safe/doing it incorrectly.
There is simply no need to rush a reholster.
Other than that you're right, it's about training...doing things consciously and deliberately. Same way every time.
If you're used to a 1911, I can see why you'd like a safety to keep things consistent.
Re. issue #2, a 1911-style safety -- or probably any other type -- can be bumped, snagged, etc. and become disengaged accidently just as easily as a trigger can be pulled. The only real margin of safety there is something with a very heavy trigger like a revolver.
Developing an instinctive habit of keeping the trigger finger forward pointing and outside of the trigger guard is the generally recognized means to avoid ND's while holstering or similar handling. Sure, there is still some risk -- and always will be -- short of not carrying the gun.
Going to the store for beer also entails risk, but I'm still goin'! :D
I keep wondering about this reholster AD I keep hearing about and yes I've seen the vids too, but you never really get a sense of why, other than generalized "operator error". Either way it seems to be the fault of the shooter, not the gun, and I'm wary of those who rely on technology to overcome poor technique.
My sense is that they don't keep the finger off the trigger and when reholstering the caught finger pulls. If there is more to it than this, please let me know. Everything about gun safety should be meticulous and religious. IMO if someone is going to rush a reholster, than he's at least as likely to rush putting it on safe/doing it incorrectly.
There is simply no need to rush a reholster.
Other than that you're right, it's about training...doing things consciously and deliberately. Same way every time.
yes, the reholster Negligent Discharge (not Accidental Discharge, IMO) is an "operator error" - no two ways about it. but nonetheless, it does happen, and sometimes to very experienced operators.
in the example I witnessed, the gun discharged when the shooter was doing draw from concealment drills and the covering garment - maybe a button or bunch of material got in the trigger guard while reholstering into a kydex holster. he said it seemed to go in normally but it fired before he felt it "snap" into place. in this case there was no injury, just a properly frightened operator and a chunk of concrete missing from the floor of the range that I shoot at.
on another occassion, my brother who owns a gun store and range said he had a shooter ND trying to reholster a glock into one of the "retention" holsters like a Sherpa - though I don't know if it was one of these in particular or if it was specifically the mechanism in the holster itself that caused the ND. in this case the shooter received a nice gouge across the side of his calf and heel of his foot, and yes, he did have to get medical attention along with a police report. my brother also said that it raised hell with his insurance.
anyway, I don't mean to disparage a Glock or any pistol without a manual safety. I am simply saying that I prefer it, as on my 1911, or a system such as my SIG's, whereby I holster with my thumb pushing on the exposed hammer...
Re. issue #2, a 1911-style safety -- or probably any other type -- can be bumped, snagged, etc. and become disengaged accidently just as easily as a trigger can be pulled. The only real margin of safety there is something with a very heavy trigger like a revolver.
Just as easily? I'd have to see some data to support that. In my experience, a safety disengaging accidentally is a lot less common than accidental trigger presses.
Furthermore, with a manual safety, two things have to go wrong (safety comes off, trigger gets pressed) as opposed to a Glock/M&P which only requires something to contact the trigger at the wrong angle during a reholster.
I carry an M&P myself, I'm not saying they're death on a stick. But fooling oneself into believing they're no more oops-prone than guns with manual safeties (or hammers in general) ... not something I'm willing to do.
The idea that experienced shooters never make mistakes, or that anyone who makes a mistake is an unsafe moron, is a fantasy. Spend enough time around enough serious shooters and you'll see mistakes happen. That's why redundant safety rules exist.
Gutshot John
03-07-08, 13:24
Just as easily? I'd have to see some data to support that. In my experience, a safety disengaging accidentally is a lot less common than accidental trigger presses.
Furthermore, with a manual safety, two things have to go wrong (safety comes off, trigger gets pressed) as opposed to a Glock/M&P which only requires something to contact the trigger at the wrong angle during a reholster.
I carry an M&P myself, I'm not saying they're death on a stick. But fooling oneself into believing they're no more oops-prone than guns with manual safeties (or hammers in general) ... not something I'm willing to do.
The idea that experienced shooters never make mistakes, or that anyone who makes a mistake is an unsafe moron, is a fantasy. Spend enough time around enough serious shooters and you'll see mistakes happen. That's why redundant safety rules exist.
Making mistakes IS human and yes ANONE has the potential to have an AD.
but you're still responsible for that mistake. I'd say there is about as much chance of "accidentally" deactivating a safety as there is having the trigger "accidentally" catch something at a bad angle, in fact it's probably a greater chance. I've tried it and it's virtually impossible unless you're sticking something inside the guard. I'd bet money that the ADs where it's claimed that the trigger caught on something "but not my finger" is too embarrased to own up to it.
Likewise what happens if you forget to put the safety on? Having that extra step of activating or deactivating the safety can have safety consequences. In fact firearms are inherently dangeous. A safety is not going to keep you from screwing up. You can have redundancies until the cows come home....and redundancies for the redundancies...but where do you draw the line and stop acting like obsessive compulsive and just accept the responsibility for carrying a dangerous weapon.
Relying on technology so you don't have to think about what you're doing or blaming it for YOUR negligence is the mistake here. You are responsible for every shot you fire. PERIOD.
Relying on your safety to make your gun "safe" is a recipe for disaster.
If you're aware of the condition of your weapon, you don't point it at anything you don't want to kill, and you keep your finger off the trigger until ready to shoot. Then there is no reason or an excuse for having an ND and 99% (short of weapon breakage which is beyond your control)of the time there is no reason to have an AD.
Again it boils down to a training issue and thinking about what you're doing.
P.S. Every "you" in the above sentence is the royal you...not specific to an individual.
but you're still responsible for that mistake.
Agreed. That's why I don't criticize people who want to take reasonable steps to reduce the odds of such mistakes.
I'd say there is about as much chance of "accidentally" deactivating a safety as there is having the trigger "accidentally" catch something at a bad angle,
I might agree with that. The fact is that both are very unlikely, but both happen. Nonetheless, my point is still valid: if your safety clicks off, that won't fire the gun all by itself. You still need the additional problem of having something depress the trigger. With a Glock, only one of those things has to go wrong.
I'd bet money that the ADs where it's claimed that the trigger caught on something "but not my finger" is too embarrased to own up to it.
While I agree this is most commonly what happens, it is possible to have the gun fire because a shirt tail, jacket lanyard, thumbstrap, etc. gets in there.
Regardless of whether it's a finger or an errant object, those discharges wouldn't happen if there was a positive manual safety on the gun that was "on." Neither would they happen if a person was holstering a TDA hammer-fired gun in the proper manner.
Likewise what happens if you forget to put the safety on?
So what you're saying is that training can fail, and accidents can happen. That's my whole point. ;)
You can have redundancies until the cows come home....and redundancies for the redundancies...but where do you draw the line and stop acting like obsessive compulsive and just accept the responsibility for carrying a dangerous weapon.
That's a slippery slope fallacy. Since I'm advocating one redundancy, I'm not going to respond to the hypothetical dozens of safeties. As for redundancies in general, I don't think too many people consider one redundancy overkill on life-saving equipment.
Relying on technology so you don't have to think about what you're doing or blaming it for YOUR negligence is the mistake here. You are responsible for every shot you fire. PERIOD.
This is a straw man. No one advocated ignoring training or being irresponsible. As you and I agreed from the beginning, even trained people make mistakes.
If you're not going to rely on technology, you don't need a gun in the first place.
If you're aware of the condition of your weapon, you don't point it at anything you don't want to kill, and you keep your finger off the trigger until ready to shoot. Then there is no reason or an excuse for having an ND and 99% (short of weapon breakage which is beyond your control)of the time there is no reason to have an AD.
Agreed. In that case, you could run around with a gun set up like an Olympic Free Pistol, whose trigger pulls are measured in single grams. Because if you can guarantee that nothing will ever pull the trigger unless you want it to at the moment you want it to, who needs the burden of a 2# trigger? :cool:
Again it boils down to a training issue and thinking about what you're doing.
Training issues make for great blame targets, but the reality is that everyone is subject to training issues. I don't know anyone who has access to all the practice, ammo, and professional instruction they want. The reality is that the vast majority of people lack significant proficiency with their weapons.
Gutshot John
03-07-08, 14:21
Agreed. That's why I don't criticize people who want to take reasonable steps to reduce the odds of such mistakes.
I didn't criticize anyone. In fact I said if you're used to a safety like on 1911, then you're probably justified. What I criticized was a mentality that says 'I've got a safety and so I've got a safe gun.'
I know it's happened to me...yep I had an AD...and yep it was my fault. (PS it was with a gun that DID have a safety).
I don't think I'm a moron, but it scared me enough that I'm uber paranoid about everything i do.
I might agree with that. The fact is that both are very unlikely, but both happen. Nonetheless, my point is still valid: if your safety clicks off, that won't fire the gun all by itself. You still need the additional problem of having something depress the trigger. With a Glock, only one of those things has to go wrong.
True but my point is likewise valid...if you keep your finger off the trigger until you're ready to shoot then short of mechanical failure which is beyond yours or the safeties controlYou should never have a ND. Moreover your trigger finger outside of the guard prevents anything from sneaking in there.
Also true is that a safety relies on the operator to operate it. If he is in too much of a rush to holster safely, why is he taking his time to safe the weapon?
Likewise the more steps in a procedure, the more likely you are to forget one (i.e. putting the safety on). If operator error is the problem here, then the operator can still make the error to put on the safety.
While I agree this is most commonly what happens, it is possible to have the gun fire because a shirt tail, jacket lanyard, thumbstrap, etc. gets in there.
Yes possible, but again if you pay attention to your holster, and look at what you're doing (as you're supposed to do) this SHOULD not happen. If you can get the gun out of its holster safely...you should be able to put it back.
Regardless of whether it's a finger or an errant object, those discharges wouldn't happen if there was a positive manual safety on the gun that was "on." Neither would they happen if a person was holstering a TDA hammer-fired gun in the proper manner.
Again requires a trained operator to make sure it's "on." If the trained operator did everything else properly the safety is redundant. If he didn't do anything else properly, I'm dubious that he's going to activate it.
So what you're saying is that training can fail, and accidents can happen. That's my whole point. ;)
And it's a great point...accidents can happen...but almost invariably because someone isn't doing what they're supposed to be doing.
That's a slippery slope fallacy. Since I'm advocating one redundancy, I'm not going to respond to the hypothetical dozens of safeties. As for redundancies in general, I don't think too many people consider one redundancy overkill on life-saving equipment.
Fair enough. I withdraw that one.
This is a straw man. No one advocated ignoring training or being irresponsible. As you and I agreed from the beginning, even trained people make mistakes
If you're not going to rely on technology, you don't need a gun in the first place.
I didn't say you did say that. But my point is that even if you had the safest gun in the world and have an AD that kills someone, you're still gonna get charged with manslaughter. The safety doesn't make the gun safe, the operator does.
Agreed. In that case, you could run around with a gun set up like an Olympic Free Pistol, whose trigger pulls are measured in single grams. Because if you can guarantee that nothing will ever pull the trigger unless you want it to at the moment you want it to, who needs the burden of a 2# trigger? :cool:
So long as you're properly trained I have no difficulty with the concept. If you're trained on a 2# trigger great...but you'll have to answer why you have it in court.
Training issues make for great blame targets, but the reality is that everyone is subject to training issues. I don't know anyone who has access to all the practice, ammo, and professional instruction they want. The reality is that the vast majority of people lack significant proficiency with their weapons.
If you agree that operator error is the main compenent of 99% of AD/NDs and you agree that the vast majority lack significant proficiency...then how is it not a training issue?
Lack of or a multitude training is not sufficient excuse.
Bad things happen to nice people. Fact of life.
As far as safeties go, I can go either way. I had an indoor ND once with a 1911. The safety couldn't save me from my brain. And I think that's the biggest issue with ND's, the brain is not working. There are times when something like a shirt tail or those little plastic slider lock things embedded in jackets and fleeces will get in the trigger guard and cause some excitement during a reholster. That's why I always make sure the holster area is clear before I reholster my Glock.
So, why not use a thumb safety? When I carried a 1911 the safety would occasionally get bumped off (I'm a lefty with an ambi safety) on car seats, door jambs, etc. I made a habit of checking it every once in a while. Bottom line, it can help you from making a mistake, but over reliance on it can lead to other mistakes. Full engagement of your brain is your best defense against ND's and AD's.
As to the M&P vs Glock thing: find a range that has both and try them out. I'm a Glock guy from way back, but the M&Ps show great promise. I think the ability to change the grip out is an advantage. But the 9mm Glocks have an excellent reputation for durability and longevity, and it's well deserved.
The choice in 9mm is tough, but my favorite is the G17. You can CCW it relatively easily, but it's great for games and plinking. If the M&P fits your hand better and shoots well for you, I'd go that way.
Re. issue #2, a 1911-style safety -- or probably any other type -- can be bumped, snagged, etc. and become disengaged accidently just as easily as a trigger can be pulled. The only real margin of safety there is something with a very heavy trigger like a revolver.
Developing an instinctive habit of keeping the trigger finger forward pointing and outside of the trigger guard is the generally recognized means to avoid ND's while holstering or similar handling. Sure, there is still some risk -- and always will be -- short of not carrying the gun.
Going to the store for beer also entails risk, but I'm still goin'! :D
well, you may be right but then, that'd be one more step on the way to bang, wouldn't it? but that's not what we are talking about...
since the discussion concerns ND while holstering, I don't see how your saying the safety can be bumped, snagged, etc. as relevant. even if the safety was removed accidentally, with the gun in the holster, the trigger is protected from being pressed accidentally.
Research by Enoka and also by Heim have identified several causes of unintentional discharges of weapons, wherein indexing is not 100% effective at preventing NDs.
1/Startle Response
2/Loss of Balance Response
3/Overflow (aka Sympathetic Reflex)
4/Trigger Searching
Let's just take one of these: Overflow. In a non-adrenal state, the average adult male can exert well over 100 lbs of grip. In an adrenal state, this number can increase significantly. Example, if you grip with your non-firing hand while not intending to grip/close/clench the firing hand, it still can produce between 5% and 20% of the grip of the non-firing hand.
Essentially, the little muscle that keeps the index finger straight is overcome by the larger and more numerous muscles of wrist and forearm.
This amount of force can and has resulted in pistols with 12 lb DA trigger pulls being fired unintentionally.
One example of this is an AZ DPS officer who had his pistol out, trained on the bad guy. Bad guy struggled, officer tried to control bad guy with non-firing hand, but had an ND and killed said bad guy.
I encourage anyone interested in the above to read the study by Heim (I believe it's called, "Does the Finger obey the Brain?"), available via the NTOA's website www.ntoa.org
Making mistakes IS human and yes ANONE has the potential to have an AD.
but you're still responsible for that mistake. I'd say there is about as much chance of "accidentally" deactivating a safety as there is having the trigger "accidentally" catch something at a bad angle, in fact it's probably a greater chance. I've tried it and it's virtually impossible unless you're sticking something inside the guard. I'd bet money that the ADs where it's claimed that the trigger caught on something "but not my finger" is too embarrased to own up to it.
Likewise what happens if you forget to put the safety on? Having that extra step of activating or deactivating the safety can have safety consequences. In fact firearms are inherently dangeous. A safety is not going to keep you from screwing up. You can have redundancies until the cows come home....and redundancies for the redundancies...but where do you draw the line and stop acting like obsessive compulsive and just accept the responsibility for carrying a dangerous weapon.
Relying on technology so you don't have to think about what you're doing or blaming it for YOUR negligence is the mistake here. You are responsible for every shot you fire. PERIOD.
Relying on your safety to make your gun "safe" is a recipe for disaster.
If you're aware of the condition of your weapon, you don't point it at anything you don't want to kill, and you keep your finger off the trigger until ready to shoot. Then there is no reason or an excuse for having an ND and 99% (short of weapon breakage which is beyond your control)of the time there is no reason to have an AD.
Again it boils down to a training issue and thinking about what you're doing.
P.S. Every "you" in the above sentence is the royal you...not specific to an individual.
I think you're losing the original intent of my thread here - I'm asking about the relative merits of the M&P versus other "plastic" guns.
but since I opened the can of worms by stating my preference is one of having "something" on a pistol that prevents movement of the trigger regardless of whether you have your finger on it or not. let's assume for the sake of argument that the shooter did not have his finger anywhere near the trigger and the ND WAS caused by clothing or some other object getting into the trigger guard during reholstering, OK?
to continue this discussion about whether an AD or ND is not the fault of the shooter is irrelevant and not in the context of the original thread.
thanks for your reply...
Gutshot John
03-07-08, 16:23
It says you have to have a user/pass to access publications. Do you have a link or way to publish it?
One question I'd have is in what role having the finger on the trigger leads to those problems. For example in terms of muscles overwhelming trigger finger...if the finger is not on the trigger what difference does it make how hard you squeeze?
I don't know for sure because I wasn't there, but your description indicates the officer had his finger on the trigger when he didn't intend to. Likewise I'd be curious as to what weapon he was using.
Biomechanically there is a sympathetic tightening when you squeeze, but that would be true irrespective of a safety. Having or not having a safety would not mitigate this as a concern.
Research by Enoka and also by Heim have identified several causes of unintentional discharges of weapons, wherein indexing is not 100% effective at preventing NDs.
1/Startle Response
2/Loss of Balance Response
3/Overflow (aka Sympathetic Reflex)
4/Trigger Searching
Let's just take one of these: Overflow. In a non-adrenal state, the average adult male can exert well over 100 lbs of grip. In an adrenal state, this number can increase significantly. Example, if you grip with your non-firing hand while not intending to grip/close/clench the firing hand, it still can produce between 5% and 20% of the grip of the non-firing hand.
Essentially, the little muscle that keeps the index finger straight is overcome by the larger and more numerous muscles of wrist and forearm.
This amount of force can and has resulted in pistols with 12 lb DA trigger pulls being fired unintentionally.
One example of this is an AZ DPS officer who had his pistol out, trained on the bad guy. Bad guy struggled, officer tried to control bad guy with non-firing hand, but had an ND and killed said bad guy.
I encourage anyone interested in the above to read the study by Heim (I believe it's called, "Does the Finger obey the Brain?"), available via the NTOA's website www.ntoa.org
yes, I understand this, and along with "sympathetic" reflex, etc., this is NOT what we're discussing here.
I'm talking about the simple act of placing the gun in the holster and a piece of clothing, etc. gets into the trigger guard pressing the trigger in the act of pushing the gun down into the holster.
and this can happen very easily even for someone who takes great care and time to keep their finger laid correctly alongside the pistol, outside of the guard and holster correctly.
personally, with guns other than the ones we're talking about, I have had a fold of my t-shirt get fouled in the holster when I was returning the gun to the holster. since it was a SIG, and I was using my thumb in top of the hammer to insert the gun, nothing occurred but I did have to remove the gun, clear the holster of the material and then reholster.
truthfully, I don't know if that would have caused an ND in another gun because I stopped when I felt the obstruction, but it did point out to me how easily it can happen. to anyone. at any time.
thanks for the reply...
Gutshot John
03-07-08, 16:32
I think you're losing the original intent of my thread here - I'm asking about the relative merits of the M&P versus other "plastic" guns.
but since I opened the can of worms by stating my preference is one of having "something" on a pistol that prevents movement of the trigger regardless of whether you have your finger on it or not. let's assume for the sake of argument that the shooter did not have his finger anywhere near the trigger and the ND WAS caused by clothing or some other object getting into the trigger guard during reholstering, OK?
to continue this discussion about whether an AD or ND is not the fault of the shooter is irrelevant and not in the context of the original thread.
thanks for your reply...
Sometimes discussions in one direction open new avenues of another. This is how discussions flow and sometimes things get off the original topic. I don't see this as a bad thing.
You brought up the issue of safeties and said you "ruled out the Glock" due to a lack of safety. and I was responding to that question and interaction from others.
As for the reholster....all you have to do is "look" the gun into your holster and you'll avoid the clothing issue. If you're reholstering there is the assumption that there is no more threat. Again in this case relying on a safety to compensate for not paying attention to what you're doing is the more dangerous scenario.
Any differences between the Glock and the M&P are probably negligible. The biggest upside of the Glock is 25 years of proven performance and consistency. They aren't pretty...but pretty is as pretty does.
Bad things happen to nice people. Fact of life.
As far as safeties go, I can go either way. I had an indoor ND once with a 1911. The safety couldn't save me from my brain. And I think that's the biggest issue with ND's, the brain is not working. There are times when something like a shirt tail or those little plastic slider lock things embedded in jackets and fleeces will get in the trigger guard and cause some excitement during a reholster. That's why I always make sure the holster area is clear before I reholster my Glock.
So, why not use a thumb safety? When I carried a 1911 the safety would occasionally get bumped off (I'm a lefty with an ambi safety) on car seats, door jambs, etc. I made a habit of checking it every once in a while. Bottom line, it can help you from making a mistake, but over reliance on it can lead to other mistakes. Full engagement of your brain is your best defense against ND's and AD's.
As to the M&P vs Glock thing: find a range that has both and try them out. I'm a Glock guy from way back, but the M&Ps show great promise. I think the ability to change the grip out is an advantage. But the 9mm Glocks have an excellent reputation for durability and longevity, and it's well deserved.
The choice in 9mm is tough, but my favorite is the G17. You can CCW it relatively easily, but it's great for games and plinking. If the M&P fits your hand better and shoots well for you, I'd go that way.
thanks, I agree. I do have access to a range that has both pistols and I intend to try them this weekend.
the G19 was my first choice but as I said, IF all other things were equal, I would prefer a system to prevent the trigger from being depressed accidentally while holstering, such as a manual safety, as on a 1911, or the exposed hammer of the SIG.
it appears that a manual safety is available on some models of M&P and/or that those without can be retrofitted. that might be of interest to me and would be a reasonable distinction between these two guns which was the original intent of my thread.
thanks for your reply...
Sometimes discussions in one direction open new avenues of another. This is how discussions flow and sometimes things get off the original topic. I don't see this as a bad thing.
You brought up the issue of safeties and said you "ruled out the Glock" due to a lack of safety. and I was responding to that question and interaction from others.
Any differences between the Glock and the M&P are probably negligible. The biggest upside of the Glock is 25 years of proven performance and consistency. They aren't pretty...but pretty is as pretty does.
that's true. the truth is that I shoot Glocks really well and like them quite a bit. in fact, when my number comes up in the lottery, I intend to own quite a few of them. but until then, I'll just have to do with buying my guns one at a time.
my interest in starting this thread was to determine significant differences between the three platforms that I mentioned after seeing all the admiration for the M&P generated here on this site. the safety issue is merely a small portion of the overall weapon evaluation and I don't want it to become the focal point.
thanks for replying...
Gutshot John
03-07-08, 16:51
that's true. the truth is that I shoot Glocks really well and like them quite a bit. in fact, when my number comes up in the lottery, I intend to own quite a few of them. but until then, I'll just have to do with buying my guns one at a time.
my interest in starting this thread was to determine significant differences between the three platforms that I mentioned after seeing all the admiration for the M&P generated here on this site. the safety issue is merely a small portion of the overall weapon evaluation and I don't want it to become the focal point.
thanks for replying...
Fair enough I apologize if I hijacked your thread.
Honestly though I'd avoid the XD. It's ok...but the Glock easily outclasses it, and it seems like the M&P does too (which is also a better bargain).
The M&P looks way cooler, and its ergonomics are among the best I've handled. It's a very well thought out design and the interchangeable handguards beat the other two like a stick. I can't wait to shoot one. Of all the polys it seems that it's the only one that can challenge the Glock market share, but at this point Glock is Microsoft and the M&P is Netscape.
Fair enough I apologize if I hijacked your thread.
Honestly though I'd avoid the XD. It's ok...but the Glock easily outclasses it, and it seems like the M&P does too (which is also a better bargain).
The M&P looks way cooler, and its ergonomics are among the best I've handled. It's a very well thought out design and the interchangeable handguards beat the other two like a stick. I can't wait to get my hands on one.
that's already the direction I was leaning. I liked the XD when it was introduced for the reasons I already discussed but having shot the XD45, it doesn't work for me.
whatever I get, I'll get the 9MM first but would also like a .45 in the same platform. at this point, the M&P is in first place without ever having fired one. I hope to fix that this weekend.
thanks for your reply...
Gutshot John
03-07-08, 16:58
that's already the direction I was leaning. I liked the XD when it was introduced for the reasons I already discussed but having shot the XD45, it doesn't work for me.
whatever I get, I'll get the 9MM first but would also like a .45 in the same platform. at this point, the M&P is in first place without ever having fired one. I hope to fix that this weekend.
thanks for your reply...
Based on first hand experiences...Glock double-stack .45s suck...unless you have really big hands (I've sworn off double-stack 45 altogether). If you want .45 then the M&P is the clear way to go.
The larger grips of the Glock (even 9mms) are my only real complaint, to make me happy I had to have them reduced. An interchangeable grip is a way nice thing to have.
John_Wayne777
03-07-08, 19:25
The idea that experienced shooters never make mistakes, or that anyone who makes a mistake is an unsafe moron, is a fantasy. Spend enough time around enough serious shooters and you'll see mistakes happen. That's why redundant safety rules exist.
Example:
At the recent low light class I very nearly ended up with an AD while reholstering my M&P 9mm. I had a pouch for a Surefire light set up on the right side of my belt. The lanyard from that light somehow got into my Blade-Tech holster.
As I went to reholster I noticed that something felt funny right as I was about to finish pushing the pistol home in the holster. I stopped and slowly and CAREFULLY withdrew the pistol and discovered the problem. Had I been in a situation where I didn't have enough free clock cycles of brain power I might not have had the ability to know something was wrong by "feel" alone.
It was a low light class, so it was dark outside. Too dark to "look" the pistol home. It's not always a practical option to watch the weapon go back into the holster.
It's one of the drawbacks of a striker-fired weapon with no manual safety.
Did it scare me? Yes. Did I throw the M&P downrange and run into the night screaming "UNCLEAN!! UNCLEAN!!!!"? Nope. It didn't even put me off of the M&P, as I went out and bought two more *after* that little moment of terror.
Now as to why the M&P is such a "good" handgun, here's my reasoning:
The M&P comes closer than any other handgun I've tried to giving the level of performance of my pet 1911. It's reliable. By all reports thusfar it seems like it is going to be at least as durable as other service quality handguns (if not more durable) and it does all of this at a very reasonable price point. I payed 400 for my full sized M&P 9mm, 435 for my 9C, and 450 for my .45 M&P. That's less for three handguns than I paid for my ONE 1911....
What's not to love?
Off the top of my head, I've had it happen twice.
Once, many years ago before I stopped drinking the Kool-aid, I had it happen with a Glock (can't recall whether it was a G23 or G19). I was using one of those Jimmy Smitz NYPD Blue holsters from Bianchi and the thumb strap got into the trigger guard as I was holstering. Trigger went click. Luckily, I was dry-firing. I stopped using the holster shortly thereafter.
More recently, I got the little waist lanyard from a vest caught in the trigger guard as I was holstering a SIG. Because I holster a hammer-fired TDA gun properly I felt the pressure on the hammer and knew something was amiss. Keeping my thumb on the hammer I disentangled everything and went on about my business.
I am a big fan of the M&P, but as I said it's delusional to believe that SFA guns without manual safeties are as good at preventing accidents as guns with manual safeties, hammers, etc. I've been saying for years, the easier a gun is to shoot, the easier it is to shoot accidentally.
For me, in the case of the M&P, I believe the benefits outweigh the chance of an accident. That's much different than kidding myself into believing an accident is impossible, though.
If you intend to expand your collection to other calibers I would definately give strong preference to the M&P. The .45 and .40 cal Glocks are generally less durable and reliable than their 9mm stable mates, but the M&Ps tend to scale up better.
John_Wayne777
03-07-08, 21:19
Off the top of my head, I've had it happen twice.
In my various training travels I've encountered a police officer who reported it happening in his presence.
The officer was a member of a narc unit. They were effecting an arrest and had to go hands on with a suspect who was grabbing at another officer's weapon. One of the officers who was going to help attempted to reholster his Glock issue weapon in a leather holster with a thumbsnap, and boom....the round took a small chunk out of his right buttock.
Then, of course, there's my close call. I'd say that a good rule of thumb with weapons that don't have a manual safety is to avoid holsters with thumbsnaps, any sort of outerwear that has a drawstring on the bottom of it that is near the holster, or having anything with a lanyard on the same side of the body where you intend to carry the weapon...ESPECIALLY Surefire combat lights.
It's not an every day event, but it does happen and it's something I think anyone who carries should make themselves aware of. Mr. Murphy is an equal opportunity rapist...he'll screw an ordinary joe just as happily as a .mil or LEO.
Gutshot John
03-07-08, 21:23
By way of clarification I never claimed that guns without manual safeties prevent accidents. I've only tried to say that any gun is as safe or unsafe as the operator using it with or without a manual safety.
Given the reholster scenarios above, a manual safety would only make a difference if the operator thought to use it. The assumption is that he would not forget to do this. Given the stresses of the scenario, whether you think it likely or unlikely, it's still one more step to remember and screw up.
John_Wayne777
03-07-08, 21:27
Based on first hand experiences...Glock double-stack .45s suck...unless you have really big hands (I've sworn off double-stack 45 altogether). If you want .45 then the M&P is the clear way to go.
The larger grips of the Glock (even 9mms) are my only real complaint, to make me happy I had to have them reduced. An interchangeable grip is a way nice thing to have.
I agree. The M&P is the best handling double-stack .45 I've ever tried. The decision to go with a 10 round standard magazine by S&W was a good one, in my opinion, because it allows the weapon to fit better in a wide range of hands than the G21.
The G21SF is an improvement, but it's still not as good as the M&P in that regard IMO.
Gutshot John
03-07-08, 21:37
I agree. The M&P is the best handling double-stack .45 I've ever tried. The decision to go with a 10 round standard magazine by S&W was a good one, in my opinion, because it allows the weapon to fit better in a wide range of hands than the G21.
The G21SF is an improvement, but it's still not as good as the M&P in that regard IMO.
I held off on trying the Glock .45 until the SF came out. Slight improvement...but still pretty big.
I've got it up on gunbroker if anyone is interested. Used it once.
I am a big 1911 fan first off, love my Ed Brown's, but...
As for less expensive guns, IMHO you can't beat a slightly customized M&P (period). Had an XD for a week and never liked the grip angle, fit, trigger or the fact that it was made in Croatia (no offense). Glocks are reliable yes, but grip angle and trigger always bugged me (even with the 3.5lb connector). But I still use a G29 for backpacking.
Closest feeling/acting "plastic" gun to a 1911: Stock M&P + a $70 Burwell trigger job. For me the medium grip is best all around handling, small most closesly approximates the 1911 slim feel.
Here is my fav of the moment:
Started life as a std FDE M&P45...sent to Dan Burwell Custom: Sharksin stippling, 3.5lb trigger, frame "melt", NP3, 10-8 rear, trijicon front.
http://i194.photobucket.com/albums/z302/mpardun/MPs_MandP45.jpg
Gutshot John
03-08-08, 08:49
Darn...I guess I'm just going to have to go buy one. :mad: ;)
In my various training travels I've encountered a police officer who reported it happening in his presence.
The officer was a member of a narc unit. They were effecting an arrest and had to go hands on with a suspect who was grabbing at another officer's weapon. One of the officers who was going to help attempted to reholster his Glock issue weapon in a leather holster with a thumbsnap, and boom....the round took a small chunk out of his right buttock.
Then, of course, there's my close call. I'd say that a good rule of thumb with weapons that don't have a manual safety is to avoid holsters with thumbsnaps, any sort of outerwear that has a drawstring on the bottom of it that is near the holster, or having anything with a lanyard on the same side of the body where you intend to carry the weapon...ESPECIALLY Surefire combat lights.
It's not an every day event, but it does happen and it's something I think anyone who carries should make themselves aware of. Mr. Murphy is an equal opportunity rapist...he'll screw an ordinary joe just as happily as a .mil or LEO.
A local officer here nearly died when he shot himself through the leg with his Glock. He was reholstering in his squad car and a bungy cord from his windbreaker slipped inside his holster and through the trigger guard of his pistol. As he pushed the pistol in the cord tightened pulling the trigger.
As a result, pistol training for his department, and every surrounding department, changed.
John_Wayne777
03-08-08, 11:45
It doesn't surprise me.
I'd humbly suggest that anyone who carries (either for self defense or for their job) avoid using ANY clothing that has something like drawstrings at the bottom of the garment, ESPECIALLY if they are carrying weapons with no manual safety.
John_Wayne777
03-08-08, 11:47
I am a big 1911 fan first off, love my Ed Brown's, but...
As for less expensive guns, IMHO you can't beat a slightly customized M&P (period).
You guys that keep posting pictures of these nicely customized M&Ps are making it REALLY hard on me. I've got two M&Ps that will be heading out for some trigger work, but every time I see one of these nice weapons the temptation to tell Mr. Burwell or Mr. Bowie to "go nuts" increases.....
Because I holster a hammer-fired TDA gun properly I felt the pressure on the hammer and knew something was amiss. Keeping my thumb on the hammer I disentangled everything and went on about my business.
Todd, how do you recommend holstering a gun with an exposed hammer, such as a 1911? I've been taught two ways. One method is to keep your thumb under the thumb safety applying pressure upwards as you holster. The other I've been shown is to keep your thumb on top of the hammer as you slowly holster. Thanks for your help.
What exactly is the frame "melt" mod?
STS -- a 1911 is different from a TDA gun, obviously. There are different schools of thought on the 1911 safety. My personal preference is to have my finger atop the safety lever at all times except for the moment when I'm flipping the safety on. That way, at any point, pressing my gun out includes an automatic subconscious disengagement of the safety.
Depending on the size of your thumb and the size of your beavertail, having positive contact with the hammer on a 1911 could be tricky.
For a TDA gun, putting your thumb on the hammer as you holster is practically a guarantee of safety. No matter how much force is applied to the trigger, you're applying the same amount of force to keep the hammer in place. I've done many demos (with clear guns, obviously) and you simply can't make a hammer-fired DA gun go off if you holster this way.
What exactly is the frame "melt" mod?
...a concept that I first saw in a Clark Custom 1911 I owned back in the 90's, basically all edges are smoothed (melted) primarily for smooth holstering and carry purposes (and cosmetics I guess if you like the look).
The M&P is not bad from the factory, some 1911's have a few sharp corners.
Here is a pic of a Clark "Melt" job for reference:
http://www.clarkcustomguns.com/images/guns/md45.jpg
A local officer here nearly died when he shot himself through the leg with his Glock. He was reholstering in his squad car and a bungy cord from his windbreaker slipped inside his holster and through the trigger guard of his pistol. As he pushed the pistol in the cord tightened pulling the trigger.
As a result, pistol training for his department, and every surrounding department, changed.
That was local to you? I had heard about that but didn't know where it happened. Now I know!
...a concept that I first saw in a Clark Custom 1911 I owned back in the 90's, basically all edges are smoothed (melted) primarily for smooth holstering and carry purposes (and cosmetics I guess if you like the look).
The M&P is not bad from the factory, some 1911's have a few sharp corners.
Here is a pic of a Clark "Melt" job for reference:
http://www.clarkcustomguns.com/images/guns/md45.jpg
OK yeah. I just don't think I could tell the difference between the one posted in this thread and a stock one. I'm stupid :(
The 1911 you posted is very obvious.
OK yeah. I just don't think I could tell the difference between the one posted in this thread and a stock one. I'm stupid :(
The 1911 you posted is very obvious.
The M&P posted had a SLIDE melt, not a frame melt.
The M&P posted had a SLIDE melt, not a frame melt.
Now that I can actually see!
OK, I went by and tried out a couple different guns and I'm pretty much sold on the M&P.
now a question. where can I get the best price? due to certain issues, the best deal I can get locally for a standard length 9MM with the "package" that includes a Bladetech holster and a third mag is $490.
where is everyone finding all these $430 deals?
Gutshot John
03-10-08, 09:19
OK, I went by and tried out a couple different guns and I'm pretty much sold on the M&P.
now a question. where can I get the best price? due to certain issues, the best deal I can get locally for a standard length 9MM with the "package" that includes a Bladetech holster and a third mag is $490.
where is everyone finding all these $430 deals?
I can't find the catalog, but I remember that CDNNinvestments had 9mm M&Ps for $399.
Re. the trigger-pull ND issue (and with minor continuation of OT hijack), pretty soon the weather will be warm enough that I will have to switch to carrying my S&W 640 centennial under a t-shirt everyday. The trigger on that little rocket is as stiff as a board -- I can hardly pull it when I want to.
Maybe just as well.....it's a stick-the-thing-in-the-bad-guy's-face-and-pull-the-trigger gun.
http://i113.photobucket.com/albums/n232/blackscot/pistols/P1010018.jpg
does anyone have any idea when the 9L will be available?
does this qualify for the rebate?
One plus of the XD in the context of this holstering discussion is the grip safety. If you holster in a manner similar to how Todd recommends holstering a TDA pistol (thumb on back of slide where the hammer would be leaving the XD's grip safety undepressed) will prevent the gun from discharging. I still take the precautions of checking to see if anything will get in my trigger guard, but the grip safety is a good feature IMO.
I did just bring home a M&P9c today though...I love how they feel and shoot (although I must say my M&P9's trigger job spoiled me, the trigger on this thing absolutely sucks at the moment; definitely in comparison to my XDs).
One plus of the XD in the context of this holstering discussion is the grip safety. If you holster in a manner similar to how Todd recommends holstering a TDA pistol (thumb on back of slide where the hammer would be leaving the XD's grip safety undepressed) will prevent the gun from discharging. I still take the precautions of checking to see if anything will get in my trigger guard, but the grip safety is a good feature IMO.
I did just bring home a M&P9c today though...I love how they feel and shoot (although I must say my M&P9's trigger job spoiled me, the trigger on this thing absolutely sucks at the moment; definitely in comparison to my XDs).
yeah. I too am a little underwhelmed by the quality of the out of the box trigger. one thing that was funny was I tried a MP9 and 45 back to back and the two triggers couldn't have been more different with the newer 45 being light years better than the 9. it gives me hope....
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.