View Full Version : S&W M&P 45 full vs. mid size
So I am debating which M&P to pick up, but can't decide which one to get. Which would you get why or why not?
There are a bunch of threads about this topic.
It boils down to preference. Both are great choices.
My opinion is that the M&P Mid is just about the best package for a double stack 45 ACP after adding the APEX duty carry kit.
Failure2Stop
07-18-13, 13:01
Interestingly, I am in the same decision cycle, as I am picking up a .45 for heavy competition.
I know that a full-sized 1911 is more better than a commander sized 1911 for anything other than concealing, but I am not quite sure how much that transfers to the M&P 45 platform. I do not believe that sight radius is enough of a reason on its own to necessarily warrant the full size (for sight related tasks I can go neck and neck with a G19 and G17).
The issues to me come down to reliability, recoil characteristics, and light integration.
Anybody shoot them head to head with some data collection?
NCPatrolAR
07-18-13, 13:38
I prefer the midsize. It felt better to me much the same way I prefer the Beretta Centurion over the 92FS
i had all 3 the mid size won and i never looked back
also it is my road gun when flying. i dont care if it gets stolen
my 9mm are all tuned for working guns and a lot of money went into them
try it u wont be sorry
i am also a 1911 life long fan. but for city carry its a lt wt commander as its just simply lighter
for field work its a 5" steel in a work rig
good luck
jjw
I have had my Midsize for about 3 years now and have put more rounds than I can remember through it. Last Oct I went to a G17 for a class I was taking and halfway through the class I went back to my Midsize. It is measurably more accurate than the G17 and the recoil difference is negligable.
Interestingly, I am in the same decision cycle, as I am picking up a .45 for heavy competition.
I know that a full-sized 1911 is more better than a commander sized 1911 for anything other than concealing, but I am not quite sure how much that transfers to the M&P 45 platform. I do not believe that sight radius is enough of a reason on its own to necessarily warrant the full size (for sight related tasks I can go neck and neck with a G19 and G17).
The issues to me come down to reliability, recoil characteristics, and light integration.
Anybody shoot them head to head with some data collection?
Headed back into the .45 world again huh? I was amazed when you left it.
OP, the better selection is really going to be based on your primary role. Having said that I talk to a large amount of people who seem more satisfied with the mid-sized model because they feel it fits a wider field of uses. I have a full size and love it. I do not carry it concealed, but I dont think it would be that hard to. I have carried other guns of equal size with no issue.
I prefer the Middy. Had a full size when they first hit the market.....great gun but the Middy offers the best balance. Makes a great carry gun. I have the Apex FSS in mine... trigger feels like a 1911 now.
Failure2Stop
07-18-13, 16:18
I have had my Midsize for about 3 years now and have put more rounds than I can remember through it. Last Oct I went to a G17 for a class I was taking and halfway through the class I went back to my Midsize. It is measurably more accurate than the G17 and the recoil difference is negligable.
Just to be clear; you are saying that the recoil difference between the G17 and the midsized S&W .45 is negligible?
I'm not doubting your input, simply want to make sure we are talking about the same thing.
Headed back into the .45 world again huh? I was amazed when you left it.
The only reason I am going back to the .45 is to compete in Heavy Division. Nonetheless, the irony is not lost on me.
:D
So I am debating which M&P to pick up, but can't decide which one to get. Which would you get why or why not?
Those mid-size M&Ps 45 are hard to find, atleast in my area. Mid-Size all the way!!! 10+1. Better balance
Timing is everything I guess. I was going to start this very thread, however my reasoning is different. I need a side arm for hunting. I am quite satisfied with my current EDC.
I bought the mid-sized 45 strictly for holster compatibility with the other M&Ps and it's a very tame shooting .45.
Apex trigger kit is almost a must, but otherwise the gun is pretty awesome.
I have both and if I had to choose, I would pick the mid for perceived handiness. But, truthfully, the full is more accurate in my hands.
I have APEX hard sears in both. To me, that is all you need.
Hogsgunwild
07-19-13, 03:58
So I am debating which M&P to pick up, but can't decide which one to get. Which would you get why or why not?
You didn't say what you are planning on using it for. I have the mid-size and picked it over the full-size. The 25 yard accuracy is very impressive, so, for me, it was a good choice as I prefer lighter weight handguns and see no need to carry around an extra half inch of steel.
Just to be clear; you are saying that the recoil difference between the G17 and the midsized S&W .45 is negligible?
I'm not doubting your input, simply want to make sure we are talking about the same thing.
The only reason I am going back to the .45 is to compete in Heavy Division. Nonetheless, the irony is not lost on me.
:D
To me the recoil didnt feel that much different. I know there is a difference of course. This is why is said that . I attended an Adv Handgun course by LAV about a year ago and shot my Midsize. After the first day my hands were sore. We shot about 500 rounds that day. I know LAV doesnt usually shoot as many rounds as he says to bring but we did that weekend. Well after that weekend My hands were really sore. That is one of the reasons I started shooting a G17. This last Home Defense class I took of LAV's on the 2nd day I switched from my G17 to the Midsize in the middle of a range session and the first thing I thought after shooting it was that the recoil compared to my G17 wasnt as bad as I thought it was. So that is why I said negligable. It's a purely subject statement.
I'm a fan of the full size, the extra barrel length doesn't seem any harder to conceal.
Timing is everything I guess. I was going to start this very thread, however my reasoning is different. I need a side arm for hunting. I am quite satisfied with my current EDC.
What are you hunting? Any reason you're looking at 45s instead of a 10mm? Not criticizing, just curious.
walkin' trails
07-19-13, 09:33
I initially wanted a midsize in 2009 when I bought my full size, but none were available and I knew I probably wouldn't have the funds available later. I haven't been disappointed. I have heard some say the midsize has less recoil than the FS, but I don't know that to be true as I have never fired the MS. My FS is not a bad shooter and recoil is more manageable than some 40s I've fired. I've managed to shoot groups as tight as three inches at 25 yards off hand and I doubt that the extra half inch in length or sight radius makes that much difference. The one feature the FS has over the MS is the forward cocking serrations, if you're into those.
What are you hunting? Any reason you're looking at 45s instead of a 10mm? Not criticizing, just curious.
Hog and deer in Florida. .45 is easier to get than 10mm. The pistol is just a back up to my rifle (franken-AR in 6.8mm SPCII)
WittyMango
07-19-13, 17:39
First, I'll say that anyone whose had any kind of shooting experience will explain that when it comes to choice between firearms, it's all about personal preference. You're gonna get that more than any other answer when you ask the question about choosing one thing or another when it's firearms/accessories/tactical or survival gear related. That being said, I completely understand the question because I've been at a loss in the same situation many times before. The paradox is, when we ask those kinds of questions to complete strangers who are likely to have more experience than us, we're basically expecting them to make the decision for us. Been there, done that! lol I'm with you bro! Justt remember that when it comes down to it, it's always YOUR PERSONAL PREFERENCE. Try to weigh the pros and cons of both, not only as a firearm or a pistol, but also try to remember the place of that firearm in your arsenal. Will it be a backup weapon to a primary? Will it be a primary in its own role or situation? Do you plan to carry the firearm seldom or more often can you be found with it rather than without it? If you carry, will it be with or without lights/lasers and other accessories? High capacity magazines that extend the pistol grip? IWB or OWB? Thigh holster or shoulder holster? Will you carry extra magazines or a secondary pistol to back it up? The list of questions and options goes on and on. Sometimes, if you truly think about it, there's a good bit of soul searching to do when you're choosing a particular firearm to own, operate, and/or possibly carry. Not only do you learn more about the firearm and the setup you want use to put it in the best possible position to use for your needs, but you also learn a lot about yourself and how you think in that certain situation. Kind of deep right?! lol
Now, for my opinion. I use a full size M&P 45 with an external safety lever, (2) 14 round magazines, and an attached light in Condition 1 at all times. Why? Because it is a primary home defense weapon for me. It's tucked safely inside of a small quick access safe in the bedroom for my use. A rifle or shotgun is not really an option for me because I have two small children with no real way to keep a long gun out of their reach and away from their curiosity, of course until they learn enough about firearm safety and have proven it. My home is small with tight corners so it suits my needs perfectly. I chose the full size with the safety lever because to me, it is a full size "combat handgun" which, when I carry it in a drop leg holster as backup to my primary long gun, I like the added safety feature which is second nature to me from being in the military.
Now that I've dumped all over you and probably made you feel insulted, or possibly insulted someone else on this forum, make your educated choice wisely. Do your research and sleep on it. Whichever way you go will be the best choice because YOU made it and not someone else for you. When it comes to your firearm collection/arsenal, you are the subject matter expert on your situation. Stay safe and God bless.
BoringGuy45
07-19-13, 17:45
I have a full size and I really, really like it, except for the trigger (an Apex FSS is going in soon though, so that won't be a problem anymore). The perceived recoil is the lowest I've felt in a .45. I've handled the mid-size but never fired it. If I'm going to get another M&P 45, it's going to be the compact. I don't feel like I really have a need for the mid-size as it really doesn't fill any niche I have.
To each his own though.
WickedWillis
07-19-13, 17:53
Plus, unless you are reloading, factory 10mm has roughly the same ballistics as .45ACP.
Hog and deer in Florida. .45 is easier to get than 10mm. The pistol is just a back up to my rifle (franken-AR in 6.8mm SPCII)
I dumped all of my 9mm M&P's in favor of 45's. Right now I have two compacts and two full size guns. I did dork around and swap the slides to make a midsize one day but just didn't care for it.
Having the finger rest magazines makes a big difference for me with the compact. I have large hands and I can grip the compact with a flush magazine but only half of my pinky finger is on the gun.
I also carry in an Incog and while I can do it with full size the 1/2" does make a difference that was a big deal for me. I am 6'2" and don't sit comfortably with the full size.
As of now I exclusively carry the compact. The full size guns are awesome and I will never get rid of them but they are much more of a duty gun or a OWB carry at 4 o'clock.
In shooting I do feel faster with follow up shots with full side but due to concealing it the larger grip made a noticeable difference. Both are very accurate and good to go.
straterman
07-19-13, 22:48
Get the midsize :)
M&Ps in .45 ACP are the best M&Ps period.
straterman
07-19-13, 23:22
Yeah thats about right
It’s unanimous! You better hope it's still on shelf ;) good luck
Plus, unless you are reloading, factory 10mm has roughly the same ballistics as .45ACP.
Depends on the ammo you buy... There are some hot 10mm loads out there, but they are hard to find. Reloading and the 10mm is crazy beautiful though... :)
Failure2Stop
07-21-13, 16:47
I guess the question for me comes down to:
If concealed carry is not a factor in the decision, is there any reason to not go with the full sized from a performance standpoint?
I own the full size and love it, but I shot the mid-size yesterday with assorted ammo. All loads ran flawlessly and impulse was comparable to the fs (still less than the 9mm fs with factory 115gr FMJ.) Transitions are where I think you may find advantage of the mid-size over the fs.
If concealed carry is not a concern, I would get the full size. The full size slide and compact frame would make a better mid size then the actual one I think.
RogerinTPA
07-21-13, 20:40
I guess the question for me comes down to:
If concealed carry is not a factor in the decision, is there any reason to not go with the full sized from a performance standpoint?
Not at all. I had a full size for 5 or 6 years, with the ambi safety lever, which mimics the 1911 for my muscle memory, but more controllable. I ran it in classes and personal range time to over 13K rounds. The trigger had the best feel, break and reset out of all the other M&Ps I own (40, 9, & 9c, prior to getting them outfitted with Apex sears and striker blocks). If there was any grit, I or anyone who shot it, couldn't tell. It was the most enjoyable and accurate .45 I've ever used for the coin, stock, right out of the box. I finally traded it for the midsize, for the option of carrying concealed. It too, is all the gun the full size is, but I did get the Apex sear, which makes the trigger break cleaner, and as smooth as silk.
I guess the question for me comes down to:
If concealed carry is not a factor in the decision, is there any reason to not go with the full sized from a performance standpoint?
Not at all. I love shooting my full size guns, and why take away the 1/2" of barrel if not?
Bolt_Overide
07-22-13, 07:56
Jack, I can back that statement up. I have both and I do not feel that the recoil on the m&p 45 is enough to warrant recoil as part of the decision process.
The only reason my m&p 45s aren't getting a lot of trigger time is the ammo shortage and cost.
Just to be clear; you are saying that the recoil difference between the G17 and the midsized S&W .45 is negligible?
I'm not doubting your input, simply want to make sure we are talking about the same thing.
The only reason I am going back to the .45 is to compete in Heavy Division. Nonetheless, the irony is not lost on me.
:D
Failure2Stop
07-22-13, 09:01
Jack, I can back that statement up. I have both and I do not feel that the recoil on the m&p 45 is enough to warrant recoil as part of the decision process.
The only reason my m&p 45s aren't getting a lot of trigger time is the ammo shortage and cost.
So, from a pure shooting perspective, you find the full size and midsize .45 to be identical in performance?
Do you track performance on them both with any standardized drills?
ie- Bill Drill, Hackathorn Standards, FAST, competition, etc
I don't at all mean that to be a confrontational question, just looking to quantify your experience.
I appreciate the input.
Bolt_Overide
07-22-13, 10:49
The only thing I do regularly any more that would be any sort of quantifiable standard is dot torture.
With the full size I am faster for sure, my guess is the little bit of extra mass on the slide. Accuracy is the roughly the same for both.
Please keep in mind that I do not shoot at your level, and do not have the time to shoot the sort of schedule you do. Also, I run the apex trigger in mine.
I do not believe that sight radius is enough of a reason on its own to necessarily warrant the full size (for sight related tasks I can go neck and neck with a G19 and G17).
The issues to me come down to reliability, recoil characteristics, and light integration.
Anybody shoot them head to head with some data collection?
I don't know enough about the mechanics of pistols to say that the Fullsize offers an advantage, but they feel pretty even as far as recoil impulse and muzzle flip. I don't own the Fullsize, and haven't been shooting much due to an injury - so no hard numbers from drills to back this up.
If you're not sensitive to sight radius, the differences become more trivial. As for light integration, they both take a light but the Fullsize will keep less carbon from getting on the light's bezel. I'm fairly certain the fullsize keeps the bezel behind the muzzle just slightly, whereas the midsize / compact lets an X300 hang out front. A threaded barrel would further reduce this on the Fullsize, whereas something like the X300 Ultra trumps the benefit. Again - trivial.
I bought the mid-sized 45 strictly for holster compatibility with the other M&Ps and it's a very tame shooting .45.
Apex trigger kit is almost a must, but otherwise the gun is pretty awesome.
The Midsize / Compact .45 M&Ps have a slightly shorter slide than the 9mm Fullsize. So depending on holster style, there is a chance it will put the pistol out of battery. Add in the fact that the .45 series has a slightly wider slide, you can almost guarantee the slide is going to be out of battery when holstering.
If you want a "do it all" holster for the M&P line, a holster for the .45 Fullsize will work for everything besides the 9mm Pro / L, though there is a little bit of space around the slide when running a 9mm - which may or may not cause holster rattle if using Kydex.
The .45 triggers have always seemed slightly better than the other calibers. Not sure why, or if it's just a fluke on what I've encountered personally. I don't know that the APEX kit is a must, but it can be a nice addition. I'm not much for the FSS kit though.
First, I'll say that anyone whose had any kind of shooting experience will explain that when it comes to choice between firearms, it's all about personal preference.
I disagree. Personal preference is mostly irrelevant when it comes to a weapon's performance and gauging it against its competition. It's why some have requested hard numbers in regards to performance. I do agree with the part about considering if it will be ran IWB / OWB, with / without a WML, etc. The shoulder holster is pretty dated, and gives no advantage to those outside of vehicle (sea, land or air) operators.
Having the finger rest magazines makes a big difference for me with the compact. I have large hands and I can grip the compact with a flush magazine but only half of my pinky finger is on the gun.
....
As of now I exclusively carry the compact. The full size guns are awesome and I will never get rid of them but they are much more of a duty gun or a OWB carry at 4 o'clock.
You could always try undercutting the trigger guard. Helps a lot on the Compact when running the flush fit.
The Fullsize could also be preferred by those who carry Appendix and prefer a longer slide.
The one feature the FS has over the MS is the forward cocking serrations, if you're into those.
All of the .45ACP M&Ps have forward slide serrations.
I guess the question for me comes down to:
If concealed carry is not a factor in the decision, is there any reason to not go with the full sized from a performance standpoint?
If carry was a factor, my vote would be for the .45 Compact over the other two.
Since it doesn't sound like this will be carried at all, there's really only one performance issue left to consider with the Fullsize since you mention not being sensitive to sight radius, and that's draw time. The length difference isn't much, but I do know some "advanced" shooters (which I believe you'd fall into) who prefer a 17 over a 34 or 19 over a 17 because of the time it takes to clear the holster.
Granted, this depends on holster selection (ride height) and how much forward swing vs upward pull you use on the draw.
If you're running a fullsize WML, it negates the above.
The fullsize is tapered on the front to allow easier reholstering.
The midsize is nearly identical in external dimensions to the M&P9 Fullsize, the M&P22 trainer, the M&P .177 airgun trainer, and the M&P SIRT pistol. Depending how invested you want to get in the M&P platform, the Midsize could be the better choice for consistency.
Failure2Stop
07-22-13, 17:52
Bolt_Override and Steve S.,
Thank you both very much for your time and input.
Bolt_Overide
07-22-13, 21:45
Jack,
No problem, just send me an ECC with mams and can, we will call it even.
Ill even throw in a 25 year old Maccallan.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.