View Full Version : GLOCK VS M&P QUESTION(GRANT,or ANYONE)
Grant ,with all these Glock and M&P thread's, I was wondering what do you think about the Test that Steve from ADCO Firearms, did on his GLOCK 21 .Do you think the M&P could past the same test's as Steve put though his Glock?If some one could post a link to that thread that would be great.:D
Wow 88 views and no one has anything to say.....:D ,:p ;)
I don't know the answer but I would sure like to see it. A test like that will answer some questions about any gun that goes through it.:D
Regarding the M&P what I really want is a Glock 19 sized ,15 round, 9mm M&P. The fullsize M&P grip is a bit too long to conceal properly for the way I carry and personally, I just don't like the compact M&P.
I'm also still not that thrilled about the trigger reset on the M&P but that's probably something that just takes more trigger time to get used to.
I will be getting a M&P sometime down the road but for now I'll stick with my Glocks.
Agreed, i have shot my full size M&P and while i like it, it takes some time too get used to the trigger as i have put ALOT of time and rounds through my glocks.Also i will say that after fireing the M&P 1500 rounds, i still think for ME the glock points better and shoots Better.Also ,Im sure MOST people here Know what im talking about (the Bigbore/Steve GLOCK test) that he did.But it seems no one whats to say anything or make a guess as too think that the M&P would pass the same test?? Humm i guess they think that it would not.:D
Again, I don't know the answer but, IMHO, the M&P isn't quite ready for that test yet...;)
:D ,Just makes me wonder why would'nt be?When SOME people on this board are saying the M&P is the their view, a better weapon/more reliable weapon.Humm guess we will never know.:D
Grant ,with all these Glock and M&P thread's, I was wondering what do you think about the Test that Steve from ADCO Firearms, did on his GLOCK 21 .Do you think the M&P could past the same test's as Steve put though his Glock?If some one could post a link to that thread that would be great.:D
I do remember the test and think the M&P would do just fine.
The real test though is to take the Glock and the M&P through a night fighting course with a SF light attached to them. ;)
C4
I do remember the test and think the M&P would do just fine.
The real test though is to take the Glock and the M&P through a night fighting course with a SF light attached to them. ;)
C4
Again, the only issues reported were with a batch of G22s. Not all Glock 22s just a batch. There haven't been any reports of failures with the 9mm Glocks. Dinger has run his G19 w/x200 through several of Larry's classes and you stood next to me in the Harrington class when I used my G17 w/x200. Same goes with Bill C, subzero, chris914 and several other members on this forum that you know personally.
PS - This reminds me that I need to order an X300 for my M&P ;-)
You know what... ill put my money where my mouth is.... if Steve/Bigbore wants an M&P to put through the SAME test i WILL give him MY M&P to test.I dont think the M&P would pass.
I do remember the test and think the M&P would do just fine.
The real test though is to take the Glock and the M&P through a night fighting course with a SF light attached to them. ;)
C4
(Grant) Right ,you keep missing the point, The Glock 22's(bad batch) were the ones with the problems.. i have not have ANY problems with my 17's or 19's with the TRL 1 OR TLR 2 LIGHTS.These pistols have had thousands or rounds through them and were run VERY HOT.
You know what... ill put my money where my mouth is.... if Steve/Bigbore wants an M&P to put through the SAME test i WILL give him MY M&P to test.I dont think the M&P would pass.
I wouldn't be so sure. I do agree with Grant that the M&P is a fantastic design and a lot of thought went into it. Like I said in the other thread S&W had the benefit of looking back over the Glock's history and could apply the lessens learned and improve in areas that needed improvement. It's easy to do when you're building a new platform.
One example is the half-football shaped frame rails. They will shed carbon, sand, dirt and crap better than squared off rails.
I'll tell you what, give me your M&P to test :D
I wouldn't be so sure. I do agree with Grant that the M&P is a fantastic design and a lot of thought went into it. Like I said in the other thread S&W had the benefit of looking back over the Glock's history and could apply the lessens learned and improve in areas that needed improvement. It's easy to do when you're building a new platform.
One example is the half-football shaped frame rails. They will shed carbon, sand, dirt and crap better than squared off rails.
I'll tell you what, give me your M&P to test :D Ahhh i dont know(look's at you up and down) You dont have an HONEST face.:p ;) :D
Not having handled any M&P as of yet, it's interesting to do a comparison just by examining the promo material from each company.
Glock's barrels are billed as cold hammer-forged with a Tenifer surface treatment, and have polygonal rifling. The M&P barrels have standard rifling as far as I can tell (?) and are Melonite treated, which presumably is a similar process to Tenifer.
M&P frames are Zytel polymer over a steel subframe/skeleton (seems similar in concept to my Benelli Super Nova shotgun). Glock frames are solid polymer, called "Nylon 6", or something to that effect.
The M&P slides are made from Stainless Steel and Melonite treated. Not sure what Glock slides are made from, but they get the Tenifer treatment.
Glock says that their polygonal rifling is a bit better than conventional rifling as far as long-term wear is concerned. Anyone know if that's a valid point?
I wouldn't be so sure. I do agree with Grant that the M&P is a fantastic design and a lot of thought went into it. Like I said in the other thread S&W had the benefit of looking back over the Glock's history and could apply the lessens learned and improve in areas that needed improvement. It's easy to do when you're building a new platform.
One example is the half-football shaped frame rails. They will shed carbon, sand, dirt and crap better than squared off rails.
I'll tell you what, give me your M&P to test :D
Agree,I think M&P is a good design, i dont think it would pass steves rust/salt test.
Right ,you keep missing the point, The Glock 22's are the ones with the problems.. i have not have ANY problems with my 17's or 19's with the TRL 1 OR TLR 2 LIGHTS.These pistols have had thousands or rounds through them and were run VERY HOT.
No I'm not. You're not being specific enough and you're making it sound like no Glock will run with a light attached, period. I want all the facts on the table so everyone can make an educated decision about what to buy next.
The problem I have with these discussions is that anyone can take a look at the problems/issues associated with any handgun and make the same assertions you're making.
No I'm not. You're not being specific enough and you're making it sound like no Glock will run with a light attached, period. I want all the facts on the table so everyone can make an educated decision about what to buy next.
The problem I have with these discussions is that anyone can take a look at the problems/issues associated with any handgun and make the same assertions you're making. I was talking to Grant.. should have said his name.And i just said I DID NOT HAVE ANY PROBLUMS with my Glocks with a light.
Not having handled any M&P as of yet, it's interesting to do a comparison just by examining the promo material from each company.
Glock's barrels are billed as cold hammer-forged with a Tenifer surface treatment, and have polygonal rifling. The M&P barrels have standard rifling as far as I can tell (?) and are Melonite treated, which presumably is a similar process to Tenifer.
M&P frames are Zytel polymer over a steel subframe/skeleton (seems similar in concept to my Benelli Super Nova shotgun). Glock frames are solid polymer, called "Nylon 6", or something to that effect.
The M&P slides are made from Stainless Steel and Melonite treated. Not sure what Glock slides are made from, but they get the Tenifer treatment.
Glock says that their polygonal rifling is a bit better than conventional rifling as far as long-term wear is concerned. Anyone know if that's a valid point?
You're just about there! Polygonal rifling is suppose to wear better. Melonite and Tenifer are hardening processes but Tenifer can not be performed in this country. They do not prevent corrosion.
I was talking to Grant.. should have said his name
Oh and I thought I was replying to Grant :D
Oh and I thought I was replying to Grant :D
Dont insult me like that, thinking i was Grant lol. (J/K);) :D
KintlaLake
12-03-07, 10:11
The real test though is to take the Glock and the M&P through a night fighting course with a SF light attached to them. ;)
Before or after they're dropped from an airplane? ;)
I found the "torture test" entertaining, just like the tale told by the FFL who sold me my G19. He claimed to have left his G19 buried in the backyard over a winter, dug it up in the spring, "ran it through the dishwasher" and then ran it dry through a two-day pistol course.
Whatever. ;) I bought one anyway.
Dont insult me like that, thinking i was Grant lol. (J/K);) :D
No, Grant is a good guy. He is very passionate about gear and equipment and he looks out for his customers. He sells both Glocks and S&W but he believes S&W is the better product for his customers. You have to respect that and he has literally talked me out of spending money in the past because he didn't think I needed it or it wasn't the proper piece of equipment for my needs. He could have sold it to me any way and made some money but instead sent me home empty handed.
He and I agree that the M&P is the future but I prefer to take a more moderate approach to discussing the differences.
It's all good and he knows I'm having a hard time letting go of my beloved Glocks :)
Again, the only issues reported were with a batch of G22s. Not all Glock 22s just a batch. There haven't been any reports of failures with the 9mm Glocks. Dinger has run his G19 w/x200 through several of Larry's classes and you stood next to me in the Harrington class when I used my G17 w/x200. Same goes with Bill C, subzero, chris914 and several other members on this forum that you know personally.
PS - This reminds me that I need to order an X300 for my M&P ;-)
That is a negative. All Glocks can suffer from this issue. In the SF X300 user manual it does NOT say that only one Glock model is affected. If it was just the G22's then SF would state JUST THE G22, but they do not.
In the low light class we saw different Glocks have failures with lights.
C4
You know what... ill put my money where my mouth is.... if Steve/Bigbore wants an M&P to put through the SAME test i WILL give him MY M&P to test.I dont think the M&P would pass.
Please give us your expert advice as too why it wouldn't pass? Would it because it uses a plastic guide rod? Oh wait that's the Glock. How about the fact that it has no metal lining in the frame? Oh wait, that's the Glock.
C4
(Grant) Right ,you keep missing the point, The Glock 22's(bad batch) were the ones with the problems.. i have not have ANY problems with my 17's or 19's with the TRL 1 OR TLR 2 LIGHTS.These pistols have had thousands or rounds through them and were run VERY HOT.
You keep missing the point. It isn't just the G22 and it wasn't a "bad batch." We keep seeing it with current production Glocks 22's.
Like anything, not all weapons exhibit the same issues. You and many others can have weapons without any issues. Then again, you can have entire PD's that have the same issue.
C4
No, Grant is a good guy. He is very passionate about gear and equipment and he looks out for his customers. He sells both Glocks and S&W but he believes S&W is the better product for his customers. You have to respect that and he has literally talked me out of spending money in the past because he didn't think I needed it or it wasn't the proper piece of equipment for my needs. He could have sold it to me any way and made some money but instead sent me home empty handed.
He and I agree that the M&P is the future but I prefer to take a more moderate approach to discussing the differences.
It's all good and he knows I'm having a hard time letting go of my beloved Glocks :)
And no one wants you to get rid of and or not like the Glock. ;) The point though is that the M&P is the future and if no one wants to believe me, at least consider Vickers and Hackathorn's comments. They have forgotten more about pistols than most people know.
C4
Please give us your expert advice as too why it wouldn't pass? Would it because it uses a plastic guide rod? Oh wait that's the Glock. How about the fact that it has no metal lining in the frame? Oh wait, that's the Glock.
C4
Please read my past post again"i dont think it would pass steves rust/salt test"Thats what i said about it AND This is MHO,I never clamed to be an expert.:rolleyes: IM farrr from being one of those.:) :D
Please read my past post again"i dont think it would pass steves rust/salt test"Thats what i said about it AND This is MHO,I never clamed to be an expert.:rolleyes: IM farrr from being one of those.:) :D
Why wouldn't it? Do you know what the difference is between Melonite and Tenifer?
C4
:confused:
And no one wants you to get rid of and or not like the Glock. ;) The point though is that the M&P is the future and if no one wants to believe me, at least consider Vickers and Hackathorn's comments. They have forgotten more about pistols than most people know.
C4
That why LAV carries a Glock 19??? insted of an M&P :confused:
Why wouldn't it? Do you know what the difference is between Melonite and Tenifer?
C4 There are 3 differnt types of Melonite treatments.. but with stanless steel that smith is useing on their slides the meloniite does not go into the metal like Tenifer does.On stainless steel the Melonite only make's the slide very hard and acts like a protective coating.. but it does not BOND to the stainless steel like Tenifer does to the carbon steel slide of a Glock.If im wrong or missed something let me know. AS the is just MY Guess.:D
:confused:
That why LAV carries a Glock 19??? insted of an M&P :confused:
Larry carries a G19 as it is the most common pistol found in a class. Vickers is such a good instructor that he doesn't want to have a better handgun than what the students do so he shoots what he sees in classes.
Let's face it, LAV's true and first love is the 1911. Do you actually think he prefers the G19 to the 1911?? The answer is no.
C4
That must have been SOME batch of G22's!
I've seen my G22 choke due to sand, so..
I don't know what this test consisted of, don't matter, when I see a sample size of more then one, maybe 10, maybe 50, maybe 100, tested in a controlled scientific manner, thats when I'll take notice. Untill then, all we can do is make educated guess'.
Much like Doc Roberts testing ammo, some guy at the gunshow, with video of a side of beef being shot, or one guy oversees getting shot in the ass, doesn't much make for a conclusive test.
I've had similiar discussions on another forum, where some posters believe just because THEIR Glock has been "Perfect", "flawless", "don't jam" etc. that some how grants absolution to all the Glocks out there that do malfunction, its like they are the Glock Pope.
I like Glocks, I carry one at work everyday, I've seen them malfunction with alight on, do to sand, I've seen/felt teh trigger weight vary from pull to pull. I've had problems getting the trigger to unlock, due to my short fingers, etc.
Muck like the 1911 vs. Glock thread's, I don't see why all three can't peacfully co-exist, all of mine get along fine in the cabinet.
Bob
ETA: Don't know why LAV carries a G19, but I'm pretty sure Grant nailed it, maybe we should ask him.
I do know that Paul Howe shoots a Glock 45, whatever the little double stack model is. His reason? He wants to show students, you don't need a high dollar custom gun, to meet the standard. Though, I think, and I think he thinks, it would be easier if you did.
There are 3 differnt types of Melonite treatments.. but with stanless steel that smith is useing on their slides the meloniite does not go into the metal like Tenifer does.On stainless steel the Melonite only make's the slide very hard and acts like a protective coating.. but it does not BOND to the stainless steel like Tenifer does to the carbon steel slide of a Glock.If im wrong or missed something let me know. AS the is just MY Guess.:D
There are 3 types, but they are all basically the same in there rust fighting ability. Some of the melonite finishes are shiny, some are flat. The melonite DOES go into the metal so even if the color is rubbed off, the protection is still in the metal.
So yes, it does provide corrosion resistance.
C4
Larry carries a G19 as it is the most common pistol found in a class. Vickers is such a good instructor that he doesn't want to have a better handgun than what the students do so he shoots what he sees in classes.
Let's face it, LAV's true and first love is the 1911. Do you actually think he prefers the G19 to the 1911?? The answer is no.
C4
ARE you 100% sure about that ?did he say that too you? directly? That he would rather carry a 1911 then a Glock?
There are 3 types, but they are all the same in the rust fighting ability. Some of the melonite finishes are shiny, some are flat. The melonite DOES go into the metal so even if the color is rubbed off, the protection is still in the metal.
So yes, it does provide corrosion resistance.
C4
I knew i was SOMEWHAT close.:D
Also let me say this, i think the M&P is a DAMN fine pistol.I dont LOVE my Glocks or anything of that sort(i only love my kids/wife.. well kind of love my wife .. sometimes);) :D (jk).But i think time will tell if this pistol we be the be all end all.I hope it will, its nice to see an AMERICAN company get a pistol into the market.:)
ARE you 100% sure about that ?did he say that too you? directly? That he would rather carry a 1911 then a Glock?
LOL, I think you are stepping out of your lane a bit. Let me ask you something, do you have Vickers personal cell number? Does he call you to "chit chat?" Does he defer to you in training classes for questions on gear?
Yes, I am 100% certain that Larry likes a good many guns over the G19. He does think it is a good weapon, but it is not "perfection."
C4
Also let me say this, i think the M&P is a DAMN fine pistol.I dont LOVE my Glocks or anything of that sort(i only love my kids/wife.. well kind of love my wife .. sometimes);) :D (jk).But i think time will tell if this pistol we be the be all end all.I hope it will, its nice to see an AMERICAN company get a pistol into the market.:)
Do I think one shoe fits all? Nope. I personally prefer the 1911 over all other HG's. The M&P is my second favorite followed by the Glock.
It is nice to see an Americal owned company come out with a fantastic product (as it doen't happen often enough).
C4
LOL, I think you are stepping out of your lane a bit. Let me ask you something, do you have Vickers personal cell number? Does he call you to "chit chat?" Does he defer to you in training classes for questions on gear?
Yes, I am 100% certain that Larry likes a good many guns over the G19. He does think it is a good weapon, but it is not "perfection."
C4
LOL, no i just think you are taking my question a little too personaly..(maybe you need Just A thicker skin.;) :D Being half jewish-Italian it takes me a LOT to get worked up.;) :D .
LOL, no i just think you are taking my question a little too personaly..(maybe you need Just A thicker skin.;) :D Being half jewish-Italian it takes me a LOT to get worked up.;) :D .
This is a technical discussion forum geared towards professional shooters. I take every question serious and really don't have time for people playing games.
C4
Alright, enough talk!
Mr.J, send your M&P to Steve so he can start the torture test!:D ;)
BTW, even though I'm still on the fnece about the M&P I'll not deny that it has definite advantages over the Glock. First and foremost is the better egronomics...
This is a technical discussion forum geared towards professional shooters. I take every question serious and really don't have time for people playing games.
C4
Agree 100% Only, im just a plinker (who shoots ALOT) BUT have NO training back ground, in fact i would get the Pat Rogers prize for the most screw ups:D .Do i think people need training YES.IM just too LAZY to get it.;) ,But im VERY serious about being SAFE around firearms,AND haveing people be safe around me with firearms.
Alright, enough talk!
Mr.J, send your M&P to Steve so he can start the torture test!:D ;)
BTW, even though I'm still on the fnece about the M&P I'll not deny that it has definite advantages over the Glock. First and foremost is the better egronomics...
There is no question that the ergonomics on the M&P are superior to most any HG made. It also have a much higher bore line. These are all things that add to a weapons accuracy (not detract).
C4
There is no question that the ergonomics on the M&P are superior to most any HG made. It also have a much higher bore line. These are all things that add to a weapons accuracy (not detract).
C4
The ergonomics on the M&P are the BEST, it feels the best out of any handgun i have owned(well the 1911 is nice too);) :D .But i just have to get used of that damn trigger,I will in time.:)
KintlaLake
12-03-07, 13:44
...(Grant) has literally talked me out of spending money in the past because he didn't think I needed it or it wasn't the proper piece of equipment for my needs. He could have sold it to me any way and made some money but instead sent me home empty handed.
Likewise. It doesn't get better than that.
Alright, enough talk!
Mr.J, send your M&P to Steve so he can start the torture test!:D ;)
BTW, even though I'm still on the fnece about the M&P I'll not deny that it has definite advantages over the Glock. First and foremost is the better egronomics...
Man, i knew i should have not typed that , saying i would let steve ruin my M&P LOL.;) :D
I'll tell you what, give me your M&P to test :D
Someone pony up enough ammo and I'll test mine to failure!
Someone pony up enough ammo and I'll test mine to failure!
Any other services that you are willing to offer.:p ;) :D
There is no question that the ergonomics on the M&P are superior to most any HG made. It also have a much higher bore line. These are all things that add to a weapons accuracy (not detract).
C4
How does a high bore line contribute to accuracy? The only thing I've heard about a high bore line is negative, and that is more muzzle flip.
How does a high bore line contribute to accuracy? The only thing I've heard about a high bore line is negative, and that is more muzzle flip.
The M&P has the same lines as a 1911 (regarded as one of the most accurate HG's ever made).
C4
Grant i want to ask you a question..What are your views on Clint Smith?.. Rob Pincas(sp)? from Vallhia(sp).In terms of there training views?.Also, does you wife train with you? Pat Rogers,ect(The same trainers that you train with?).This question has been moved to Training and Tactics fourm
Jay Cunningham
12-03-07, 19:54
Grant i want to ask you a question..What are your views on Clint Smith?.. Rob Pincas(sp)? from Vallhia(sp).In terms of there training views?.Also, does you wife train with Pat Rogers,ect(The same trainers that you train with?).
Shouldn't you take this to PM?
Shouldn't you take this to PM?
It should be moved ,But why would it need a pm? i thought the training fourms were for listing up and comeing classes only.
The M&P has the same lines as a 1911 (regarded as one of the most accurate HG's ever made).
C4
I'm not following. 1911's that are accurized have match barrels, fitted slides to barrel lugs, fitted bushings, tightened slide to frame, match triggers, etc. But box-stock entry models with a mfg's product line which aren't accurized aren't any more accurate than a Glock, Sig or S&W in my limited experience.
I'll concede that 1911's have good triggers and for most people, between the flat mainspring housing or the arched version, they can find a model that works for them ergonomically. That more than anything else forms the basis around building an accurate gun, but high bore line isn't one of those features/characteristics that in my mind automatically spell accuracy.
Shouldn't you take this to PM?
.....
I'm going to purchase the M&P .45. A buddy of mine has one and it shoots real good. I never liked my Glock, i ended up selling it.
I'm going to purchase the M&P .45. A buddy of mine has one and it shoots real good. I never liked my Glock, i ended up selling it.
Which model, a 21? Those feel very "clubby" to me, even the 21SF does. The GAP models are OK, but then you have to deal with finding GAP ammo. But external/terminal ballistically speaking, unless you shoot +P in your ACP, the two cartridges are identical.
I'm not following. 1911's that are accurized have match barrels, fitted slides to barrel lugs, fitted bushings, tightened slide to frame, match triggers, etc. But box-stock entry models with a mfg's product line which aren't accurized aren't any more accurate than a Glock, Sig or S&W in my limited experience.
I'll concede that 1911's have good triggers and for most people, between the flat mainspring housing or the arched version, they can find a model that works for them ergonomically. That more than anything else forms the basis around building an accurate gun, but high bore line isn't one of those features/characteristics that in my mind automatically spell accuracy.
Not "accurized" 1911's. I am talkng right out of the box 1911's are FAR more accurate than any other right out of the box HG (combat type).
The trigger and grip angle/bore axis are key to building an accurate weapon. This is why companies always try and mimick the 1911. Both the XD and M&P do this.
Grip alignment and bore axis are key to deducing felt recoil and allowing for faster follow up shots. This is one of the reasons why a 1911 (in the right hands) is one of the fastest shooting weapons around. The other key to accuracy is trigger weight. If the trigger pull is heavier than the weapon itself, then your accuracy will always suffer.
C4
Not "accurized" 1911's. I am talkng right out of the box 1911's are FAR more accurate than any other right out of the box HG (any).
The trigger and grip angle are key to building an accurate weapon. This is why companies always try and mimick the 1911. Both the XD and M&P do this.
C4
Out of the box accuracy?.. are you talking Kimber customII /springfield loaded Models. Or Wilson,les bear,Ed Brown.Out of the box.
Out of the box accuracy?.. are you talking Kimber customII /springfield loaded Models. Or Wilson,les bear,Ed Brown.Out of the box.
Can be any of the above. An out of the box Kimber is going to be more accurate than a Glock.
C4
Can be any of the above. An out of the box Kimber is going to be more accurate than a Glock.
C4
After 7000, to 10,000 round's still more accurate then a Glock or a M&P,Sig,H&K,ect?
After 7000, to 10,000 round's still more accurate then a Glock or a M&P,Sig,H&K,ect?
Round count has nothing to do with it as it doesn't change the grip angle, trigger pull, etc.
C4
Robb Jensen
12-03-07, 21:16
Can be any of the above. An out of the box Kimber is going to be more accurate than a Glock.
C4
I find this to be true maybe 50% of the time. A Kimber is typically easier to shoot more accurately out of the box than a Glock for an unseasoned shooter.
I find this to be true maybe 50% of the time. A Kimber is typically easier to shoot more accurately out of the box than a Glock for an unseasoned shooter.
Agree. A Glock can be shot very well, but it takes time. Even LAV has stated that it has taken him awhile to become good with the Glock.
When I first shot a 1911, I was shooting hole in hole. When I first bought my Glock, I couldn't hit a car. When I first shot an M&P (and ran it fast like a 1911 with similar accuracy) I knew that S&W was onto something.
C4
I hate to rain on anyone's parade over what pistol can and can't pass the test, but I believe that Steve has mentioned that all his test proves is that the G21 he tested passed those tests.
It was quite an amazing test, but I've seen trusted people here post that normal shooting has jammed a G21 on a square range - regularly even.
So, on any given day you may have a Glock choke a goat, and a super tight Les Baer run 1,500 rounds of 230gr JHP +p.
What does it mean??
It means that we all realize that you need to take care of a gun, in order for it to take care of you. What Steve did was entertaining, but doesn't really create any new gospel about the Glock or the G21 in particular.
I have no idea if the M&P45 would pass. I don't really care either, as I'd never treat a pistol like that and expect it to run afterwards. Even if it did....
Was it Guns&Ammo TV that tried to test the vaunted M1A by dragging it through the mud and firing it??
Except, the M1A decided to NOT cooperate and choked horribly during a test that was meant to show how well the M1A was designed to operate in those conditions...
Yet, we have stories from the Vietnam jungle where the M14 went through worse than they did on TV, and it remained in the fight. 100's, or 1000's, of accounts in fact...
What does it mean?
It means that ONE rifle did not do well in that test. Test 100 of them in a controlled repeatable fashion, and let us know how the sample fares over time.
All good points Ed. 1911's are un-reliable and Glock's run forever. Not true. AR's are un-reliable an AK's run forever. Not true. Semi auto shotguns are un-reliable and pump's run forever. Not true.
The list is endless.
C4
It means that we all realize that you need to take care of a gun, in order for it to take care of you.
Goes for more than just guns. Sound advice for anything mechanical.
Since the topic of this thread is, "Glock vs M&P".....
I was thinking about a 9mm with night sights for CC and night stand use with an X300. Basically, i wanted "one gun for everything." I looked into MANY handguns including the Glock 17, Glock 34, and M&P fullsize.
When I factored in PRICE, the M&P was the winner, hands down.
Right now, with the deal Grant has on the M&P.... PLUS the Smith and Wesson coupon where you get $50 BACK.. AND 2 FREE MAGS.... the M&P is one hell of a deal.
I will just flat out tell you all. If you want, or THINK you want an M&P, buy one from Grant and do the $50 & 2 Mags rebate.
Matt Edwards
12-04-07, 10:24
"Glock vs M&P vs 1911..."
I have all three. (like most of you) All have advantages over the other 2. All have advantages that would make any of them a great "one gun" guns.
A little OT. I love reading the "The AR is unreliable" type threads (even more on the bubble gum forum I hang out on) No matter how meny times I hit guys with what I have experianced in over 20 years of running those guns in the worlds worst enviernments, they still would chose to belive what their 200 round "torture" test with their bushmaster "proved".
I love reading the "The AR is unreliable" type threads (even more on the bubble gum forum I hang out on)
HOLY CRAP, THERE'S A FORUM ABOUT BUBBLE GUM?!?!?!
IdahoCorsair
12-06-07, 23:12
Grant,
I know you've got a great reputation on here, but I'm going to have to disagree a bit...
How does having a higher bore and different (better) angle on the grip make a gun inherently more accurate? It's just seems to not be mechanically.
Maybe you've found that works better for you, but that's just your shooting style, rather than the mechanics of the gun. And as for you shooting hole on hole with your new 1911, and then you couldn't hit much with the new Glock (and for you, maybe that was 2" groups, or maybe you couldn't hit the paper, I don't know), it's called trigger control buddy. Does that make the 1911 a more accurate gun? No. It means it takes more training to use (at least when you're all tuned up on 1911 triggers)... but I'd actually even disagree with that. I for one, can mostly shoot hole on hole with my G19, and G17, and prefer how low the bore sits in my hands as it helps me control recoil as it's not flipping over the top of my fist, but rather going almost straight back into my arms.
Now, of course, in proper fashion, if I've misunderstood what you said, please correct me.
edited to adjust "tone" of post. My bad guys.
Grant,
I know you've got a great reputation on here, but I'm going to have to take issue with what you've said.
How does having a higher bore and different (better) angle on the grip make a gun inherently more accurate? That just seems to be one of the stupidest things I've ever heard. It's just mechanically not true.
Maybe you've found that works better for you, but that's just your shooting style, rather than the mechanics of the gun. And as for you shooting hole on hole with your new 1911, and then you couldn't hit much with the new Glock (and for you, maybe that was 2" groups, or maybe you couldn't hit the paper, I don't know), it's called trigger control buddy. Does that make the 1911 a more accurate gun? No. It means it takes more training to use (at least when you're all tuned up on 1911 triggers)... but I'd actually even disagree with that. I for one, can mostly shoot hole on hole with my G19, and G17, and prefer how low the bore sits in my hands as it helps me control recoil as it's not flipping over the top of my fist, but rather going almost straight back into my arms.
Now, of course, in proper fashion, if I've misunderstood what you said, please correct me.
Your question has already been answered here: https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?p=101616#post101616
As far as my shooting the Glock, I have been a Glock shooter since 95 (so am not new to the firearm). I can also shoot a Glock very well (now), but it is not a natural firearm to shoot well right out of the box.
I train with some of the best instructors in the country and am generally one of the best shooters in the classes I take. Please do not try and lecture me about "trigger control."
C4
Regarding high and low bore axes.
I was always under the impression that a low bore axis meant the boreline was closer to the forearm. In other words if you drew a line down the middle of the bore and a down the middle of the forearm as you hold the gun the distance between the two would be small.
A high bore axis would be the opposite.
Grant,
I know you've got a great reputation on here, but I'm going to have to take issue with what you've said.
How does having a higher bore and different (better) angle on the grip make a gun inherently more accurate? That just seems to be one of the stupidest things I've ever heard. It's just mechanically not true.
Maybe you've found that works better for you, but that's just your shooting style, rather than the mechanics of the gun. And as for you shooting hole on hole with your new 1911, and then you couldn't hit much with the new Glock (and for you, maybe that was 2" groups, or maybe you couldn't hit the paper, I don't know), it's called trigger control buddy. Does that make the 1911 a more accurate gun? No. It means it takes more training to use (at least when you're all tuned up on 1911 triggers)... but I'd actually even disagree with that. I for one, can mostly shoot hole on hole with my G19, and G17, and prefer how low the bore sits in my hands as it helps me control recoil as it's not flipping over the top of my fist, but rather going almost straight back into my arms.
Now, of course, in proper fashion, if I've misunderstood what you said, please correct me.
Since you are new to the forum, I'm going to post a link to the rules. Perhaps you have not read the rules. Pay particular attention to rules 1 & 6. If you disagree with someone that's fine, but saying something is the stupidest thing you've ever heard and the general tone of your comment is getting out of line. It is not covered by "please correct me if I'm wrong."
https://www.m4carbine.net/faq.php?faq=vb_faq#faq_new_faq_item
All new members should be aware that abuse of dealers, staff, moderators, industry professionals or your fellow members on this forum is NOT acceptable and is not tolerated. Anyone who has an issue with a manufacturer must contact the manufacturer for satisfaction and resolution. Industry disclosure is required. If you are a manufacturer or dealer it must be disclosed in your screen name.
IdahoCorsair
12-07-07, 11:27
Above edited for "tone" of the post. My bad, I didn't intend it that way guys.
and Grant, I wasn't saying your trigger control was bad... your description of your shooting speaks clearly that you DO have great TC. I was just saying that it was a different trigger to you, given you've shot a vastly different trigger for years and become proficient with it, thus making a new trigger just "different," taking some time to dial it in for you.
And as for the Glock trigger... ah yes... the chevy truck of triggers v. the 1911s Ferarri trigger. I think everybody agrees the Glock trigger sucks in comparison to the 1911 triggers. BUT. Well, I actually was teaching a lady a couple weeks ago that just couldn't get that 1911 trigger down (on of the first ever btw). Simply amazing. Those Glock shooters I've taught usually can do a couple inch group at 7 yards right off the bat, despite never (or hardly) having shot a gun before... no better or worse than the 1911 shooters I've taught. Just my experience.
Thanks for understanding. I hope you will stick around and enjoy the forum.
Now let's get back to the topic.
Regarding high and low bore axes.
I was always under the impression that a low bore axis meant the boreline was closer to the forearm. In other words if you drew a line down the middle of the bore and a down the middle of the forearm as you hold the gun the distance between the two would be small.
A high bore axis would be the opposite.
Exactly. And a higher bore line acts like a longer lever for recoil. Assuming everything else is equal, a higher bore axis will result in more muzzle flip. It shouldn't affect accuracy one way or the other, but it theoretically would affect shot-to-shot recovery.
Exactly. And a higher bore line acts like a longer lever for recoil. Assuming everything else is equal, a higher bore axis will result in more muzzle flip. It shouldn't affect accuracy one way or the other, but it theoretically would affect shot-to-shot recovery.
The 1911 is considered one of the fastest HG's made and is why most competition type shooters use it. It of course has about the highest bore line there is.
A high bore line with a high grip angle balances itself out. A high bore line with a low grip would of course create a lot of muzzle flip.
C4
I do remember the test and think the M&P would do just fine.
The real test though is to take the Glock and the M&P through a night fighting course with a SF light attached to them. ;)
C4
I used my G22 with an X200B attached during the Vickers/Hackathorn night class and had no problems. In fact i have never had a malfunction with that gun and im up to 8500 rounds!
"Glock vs M&P vs 1911..."
I have all three. (like most of you) All have advantages over the other 2. All have advantages that would make any of them a great "one gun" guns.
A little OT. I love reading the "The AR is unreliable" type threads (even more on the bubble gum forum I hang out on) No matter how meny times I hit guys with what I have experianced in over 20 years of running those guns in the worlds worst enviernments, they still would chose to belive what their 200 round "torture" test with their bushmaster "proved".
My G22 never ever fails. My highly customized (by one of the best in Az) $2500.00 Colt 1911 has failed me too often to be by the bed side. Its downstairs in the secondary safe. Strangely enouth i would never part with it. Cant figure out why.
One gun comparisons have limited value.
My issued G22 has failed,at least more then "never".
My considerably less the 2500 dollar custom 1911's seem to work fine.
No real round count on either, but they get shot plenty.
We could be here for days, with the "mines been great" stuff, from supporters of any gun.
Bob
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.