Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 35

Thread: M&P 2.0 V Glock

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    288
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by teksid View Post
    Both are good and dependable guns.
    How do you like the 19 compared to the Smith. I looked real hard at a 19. Might get one someday just to check out


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    293
    Feedback Score
    0
    I’ve owned Glocks since about
    1987, and have owned many. Since my first M&P, I’ve sold all the Glocks but two, a 19 and 36, both of which, while fine pistols, live in the back of my safe.
    In the past couple or three years I’ve bought nine M&P’s. I keep several other brands of striker and da/sa guns, and am a DEVOTED 1911 fan, but the M&P 2.0’s are real favorites of mine. Accurate, super reliable, and fit me like the proverbial glove. You’ll not go wrong.

    Skip

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    9,931
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    Quote Originally Posted by dpb1776 View Post
    How do you like the 19 compared to the Smith. I looked real hard at a 19. Might get one someday just to check out.
    When the 2.0's came out I got an FDE 5 inch for action pistol, I was hoping to get more accuracy than I had with Gen 3 G17.

    I loved it, that summer I shot 200 rounds a day through it 3 or 4 days a week. Nary a bobble. Initially, it shot low for me, but I fixed that with a new front sight from Dawson. There was some talk of the the stiff slide release and I monkeyed with it a bit, that was all I did to the pistol. I don't recall a malfunction. I could put all the rounds in the 4inch X-ring of the AP-1 target at 50 yards, unfortunately not during matches.

    Then, shortly after the 19X's were released, I found one at a good price in a small town gun store while on, of all things, a Sunday School trip. I bought it and decided I didn't like the sights so replaced them with a set of Dawson's. It shoots good, but IMO not quite as good as the 2.0, of course that could be a result of nearly 1.5 inches more sight radius on the Smith. Best Glock trigger I've ever shot, though.

    I don't shoot the 2.0 as much anymore, it didn't make sense to practice with two different production pistols, and GSSF, only allows Glocks.
    Patriotism means to stand by the country. It does not mean to stand by the President... - Theodore Roosevelt, Lincoln and Free Speech, Metropolitan Magazine, Volume 47, Number 6, May 1918.

    Every Communist must grasp the truth. Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun. Our principle is that the Party commands the gun, and the gun must never be allowed to command the Party Mao Zedong, 6 November, 1938 - speech to the Communist Patry of China's sixth Central Committee

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    288
    Feedback Score
    0
    Those FDE 5 inch are accurate I got mine at a stupid price, My 1.0 5 inch is about to get an apex barrel, trigger and a stippling job looking forward to comparing the two after that. The
    gen 5 trigger I liked better than the Smith it's just the grip I much prefer on the Smiths, I have looked at a couple of built up Glocks that were really cool but had a cool price tag to go with it.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    A Little Here And A Little There
    Posts
    3,225
    Feedback Score
    82 (100%)
    I just ditched my Gen 3 G17 for a M&P 2.0 4" compact.
    I have had an O-G M&P 9C 1.0 w/ Apex DCAEK for several years, and has been a great CCW gun, but a bit to small for a "combat" gun, and can't mount a light.
    The G17s were just to big for me to CCW, but I have always shot 17's well.
    Wanted to streamline my guns into ONE platform that can do both. I hate G19s (don't fit my hand right, and I'm not dishing out mega-$$$ for a custom glock), so there had to be a compromise... let's just say that after YEARS of trying to find that perfect do-all niche gun that also fits my hand right.... the 2.0 Compact is it. So far. Time will tell how it holds up, but for now... if the G19 is not your gun, try a M&P 2.0.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ron3 View Post
    I only had one in .45 but yes, reliable.

    Far better grip / handle than a Glock. Texture, angle, contour, all better

    I found three possible downsides.

    1. You have to like, or at least not dislike, the hinged trigger

    Indeed. As far as actual pull weight/crispness, it kicks the ass of stock Gen 4/5 Glock, P320, and P10C pistols (at least the ones I tried, YMMV). But as far as physical trigger profile... I don't hate the hinged trigger enough to ditch it yet, but the Glock center-dongle type feels a bit better under the finger. Of course, if you hate it...there are alternate aftermarket triggers, and at the price point the M&P 2.0s [ were ] at, you would have been able to drop a new one in before getting to a stock Gen 5 G19 price point.


    2. If you dont like the aggressive texture you'll spend 5 minutes lightly sanding it until its perfect for you

    Yes. I hate stippling, and IMO the half-rubber-ish smooth texture of the 1.0 was always just right to me. But the 2.0 cheese grater texture is nothing that can't be remedied easily.
    The ONLY good thing about the 2.0 cheese grater grips is that it is noticeably better if shooting barehanded with sweaty hands than a slicker plastic grip like a Glock. That being said, unless you have seriously calloused man-hands, you won't be shooting for long before reaching for a glove....


    *****

    5. Slightly heavier than a Glock for better or worse.

    I do not find this noticeable.

    Those are the only negatives I found. Reliable, accurate pistols that feel good in the hand. They also come with decent, steel sights and seem to recoil less than Glocks in my opinion.

    Yes, and for the [previous] price, not having to immediately drop a hundred bucks on sights was another nail in the Glock coffin for me.
    That being said... maybe my eyes are starting to get shit, but I found the sight picture of the stock sights to be a bit to "close" for me (there's a whole thread on it in this pistol forum), resulting in difficulty acquiring a clear target and sight picture which led to annoying and confusing "accuracy issues".
    If this is an issue for you, recommend switching to a .115 width front sight (I got a 10-8 brass bead front). Should solve most of the problem cheaply.
    My only other gripe is holster availability, and magazine price. After getting nice and used to $20 (or less) Glock magz, jumping up to $28-30+ dollar clipazines was a big oof.
    And of course everyone and their damn uncle makes a glock 19 holster. M&P 2.0s....kinda still getting there a little bit. I just finished a 3 month wait for a light bearing holster from Safariland....
    That being said... some M&P 1.0 holsters might still fit the 2.0. I have one of those HSGI OWB holsters and it fits my 1.0 and 2.0 just fine. However, it's also a bit of a "general" shape/molding. YMMV with other brands.

    The other personal thing I've always like about the M&P line, is they seem a little more "people friendly" to a wider variety of shooters, with their better grip angle, and less 'blocky' grip. I had a relative who's had problems getting good accuracy results with their G17 for years, and there was a noticeable and almost immediate improvement when I let them try a couple mags out of my 2.0 M&P. So, YMMV, but in my book, another point in favor of the M&P if you ever forsee other (likely less trained people, like kids, wife, etc) aside yourself ever needing to use it, or wanting to own their own gun.

    As far as new polymer guns on the market; if the M&P 2.0 4" Compact wasn't the *perfect* size (pretty much a G19 clone), I would be seriously looking at a P10C (budget boi option) or P320 Compact (mags are hella expensive though). But both of them were too close to the G17 in grip length for me, to be able to bother with them for CCW. YMMV.
    That being said, the 320 is the first Sig I've ever shot I've actually liked (I hate the 22x series MORE than I hate G19s). The grip size/shape was *perfect* (can't speak for the X-Carry, I tried the standard 320 Compact), and with something to crisp the squishy factory flat trigger up, it seems like it would be a real shooter.
    P10C grip was also really good, still needs a trigger upgrade to fix the squishyness, and probably some new sights (I thought the factory sights were a bit small, YMMV), but you'd probably still come in under a Gen 5 G19 with simliar upgrades, and mag price also isn't to bad.

    That being said.... I also see nothing there with either of those that justifies the extra $$$ for initial cost or upgrades over the M&P 2.0.
    "Once we get some iron in our souls, we'll get some iron in our hands..."

    "...A rapid, aggressive response will let you get away with some pretty audacious things if you are willing to be mean, fast, and naked."-Failure2Stop

    "The Right can meme; the Left can organize. I guess now we know which one is important." - Random internet comment

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    221
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by dpb1776 View Post
    How do you like the 19 compared to the Smith. I looked real hard at a 19. Might get one someday just to check out


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    I like them both. It would be a hard choice to make. I’ve put 9,000 through the G19 and only 2400 through the 2.0. I shoot the 2.0 better (but barely perceptible) than the 19, but the 19 carries better.
    I’ve tried just about every new SFP to come down the pike in the last decade and if one of them ever takes the 19’s place it would be the 2.0.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    288
    Feedback Score
    0
    Thanks for the input


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Sin City
    Posts
    1,814
    Feedback Score
    22 (100%)
    I like them both also. For my personal use, the MP2.0 wins for the better out of the box trigger and grip profile/shape. That’s just my personal opinion though. From a reliability perspective, can’t see there being much difference. There certainly isn’t from my experience.

    Which platform do you shoot better would be the differentiator.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    SWFL
    Posts
    3,112
    Feedback Score
    6 (100%)
    Keep in mind Glock magazines and especially spare parts (RSA, striker, extractors, etc.) are MUCH easier to find than M&P parts. Glock magazines are cheaper as well, so if you stack magazines deep, Glock is gonna be cheaper even with a higher price for the pistol itself. Holsters are also more abundant as well, like for example the Safariland 6353DO, light bearing holster options in various configurations from holster makers such as Tier 1 Concealed and LAS Concealment seem to be more abundant. While I like the grippiness of the M&P 2.0 it’s a bit aggressive for AIWB & IWB concealed carry vs. Glock Gen4/5 texture.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    561
    Feedback Score
    0
    I have both. As PatrioticDisorder said the Glocks are easier to get parts and accessories for plus I enjoy shooting local indoor GSSF Matches, but I do like the M&P grip shape and angle more. Stock triggers between the Gen 5 and M&P 2.0 are about as equal for me. Try both and get what you want, or get both. I believe the M&P are going to gain in popularity more in the future though.

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •