# S&M M&P 9mm Vs Glock 26



## mfehemr (Aug 22, 2012)

Hey gang,

I am getting ready to purchase a sub compact for CHL purposes and after researching, I find myself considering either the Glock 26 or S&W M$P 9mm. The S&M seems to be a better value but since we are only talking about $100, wanted to make sure I was not quibbling over a few buck, nor am I a fan of paying for a name - what are your thoughts?


----------



## berettabone (Jan 23, 2012)

What's an S & M?????????


----------



## jdeere9750 (Nov 28, 2008)

berettabone said:


> What's an S & M?????????


Or a M$P????????


----------



## SouthernBoy (Jun 27, 2007)

This is what I just posted on your other thread with the same subject heading.

*"The M&P 9mm is quite a bit larger than the Glock 26. It is about the same size as the Glock 17 so there is no real comparison between these two pistols... they are in a different category. "
*


----------



## chessail77 (Mar 15, 2011)

The Glockaphiles won't admit it but the S&W M&P is an improvement over the Glock, but you would have to compare for yourself and decide. If you are wanting to go smaller then look at the M&P compact model or the new Shield .....


----------



## SMann (Dec 11, 2008)

chessail77 said:


> The Glockaphiles won't admit it but the S&W M&P is an improvement over the Glock


Why? Because it's prettier? Because it has more parts (which always adds reliability....not)? Because you say so? Hey guys, chessail77 won't admit it, but he doesn't know what he's talking about. You like that? Arrogance like that tends to piss people off.

To the OP, hold them both and you will probably know real fast which one you prefer.


----------



## Todd (Jul 3, 2006)

berettabone said:


> What's an S & M?????????


New line from Smith. Comes with a whip and a set of handcuffs.


----------



## recoilguy (Apr 30, 2009)

SouthernBoy said:


> This is what I just posted on your other thread with the same subject heading.
> 
> *"The M&P 9mm is quite a bit larger than the Glock 26. It is about the same size as the Glock 17 so there is no real comparison between these two pistols... they are in a different category. "
> *


I have to assume he means the M&P compact. They are very close in size.

If not then you have made a very good point, I should really never assume.

If he does mean the M&P compact, both are very good guns. I own a 26 and I would buy a M&P compact if I were in the market again. It has to be the preference of the buyer

RCG


----------



## sgms (Jun 2, 2010)

Find some place you can rent them both, shoot them both same session and decide what works best for you. What I am comfortable with you might not be, both are good pistols with good reputations and decent customer service/repair should it be needed.


----------



## niadhf (Jan 20, 2008)

I have the M&P compact and a G19. Both are good guns. I felt both needed trigger work. Parts for the M&P trigger cost me more ($100 vs $36). But I also think that the M&P is now a noticeably nicer trigger. 
Short version, in terms of product, both are great guns. The real question becomes which fit you better and which do you shoot better 
Unless you are in a restricted state, the Smith holds 2 more rounds. The Glock is lighter.


----------



## Bowhunter57 (Nov 25, 2006)

Glocks are excellent weapons, but they don't fit my hand, so I don't shoot them well enough to own one.

I have the M&P Service model and the compact model. Both are very accurate, no malfunctions, are easy to operate, easy to clean and are affordable.  Mine are in 9mm, as I don't care for the 40s, due to too much muzzle flip. I have yet to shoot the 45acp, but it doesn't come in a compact model...yet.

Good luck with your choices!
Bowhunter57


----------



## Todd (Jul 3, 2006)

Bowhunter57 said:


> I have yet to shoot the 45acp, but it doesn't come in a compact model...yet.


Sure it does, the M&P45c. Product: Smith & Wesson M&P45c - Compact Size, No Safety


----------



## SouthernBoy (Jun 27, 2007)

recoilguy said:


> I have to assume he means the M&P compact. They are very close in size.
> 
> If not then you have made a very good point, I should really never assume.
> 
> ...


While it could be argued that I was being a little facetious, he never mentioned the M&Pc versions and since words do have meaning, we must really take him at his word that he was not talking about the M&P compacts.


----------



## SouthernBoy (Jun 27, 2007)

I have three M&P's and twice as many Glocks. I can be very objective when comparing these two platforms as that is exactly what I have done over the past year.

*M&P*
This platform is a fine entry into the combat defensive handgun world, offering perhaps among the best ergonomics of any gun in this genre. It is a natural in the hand and is very accurate. It carries nicely and is well suited for serious training. However, it does have a few negatives.

It is more prone to getting more parts dirty than the Glock. The magazines are harder to load quickly and could pose a problem under stress. The gun is also prone to failure to hold the slide open after the last round has been fired. I have found this correctable by making sure the magazines are clean and lubricated (use a silicone spray or a dry lube). There are more parts and a detail stripping is not as simple as with the Glock. The bore axis is higher than that of the Glock. The Smith and Wesson recommends against the use of +P+ loads in their M&P pistols.

*Glock*
The mere fact that this gun has been a mainstay with police and military all over the world for going on 30 years speaks for itself. It is reliable beyond a fault. Few parts (I think 34) and simple to field _and _detail strip, The Glock gets the nod here. Easy to learn to shoot and easily tunable if desired with a wide assortment of inexpensive parts freely available, another nod to Glock. The Glock is easier to clean than the M&P and doesn't seem to get as dirty in all of its internals. Did I say reliable?

On the other side of the equation, the ergonomics of the Glock are not as good as a number of other entries. Some just can't seem to get use to the grip angle or the general hold and feel. The basic OEM sights leave a lot to be desired and really need to be upgraded.

The M&P and the Glock are excellent choices for the person who wants a quality carry gun that will hold a decent complement of rounds in the magazine and will go boom when it is called upon to do so. The choice largely will come down to personal preferences.


----------



## Bowhunter57 (Nov 25, 2006)

Todd said:


> Sure it does, the M&P45c.


Todd,
Thanks for posting that reply. I've got to get out more often.  Especially, to my local gun shop.

Bowhunter57


----------



## niadhf (Jan 20, 2008)

Ignore this post. Ouldnt delete from phone.


----------



## niadhf (Jan 20, 2008)

mfehemr said:


> Hey gang,
> 
> I am getting ready to purchase a sub compact for CHL Purposes..





SouthernBoy said:


> While it could be argued that I was being a little facetious, he never mentioned the M&Pc versions and since words do have meaning, we must really take him at his word...


I think we can take him at his word. Of course the argument. Ould be mafe that smirh doesnt make a SUB-compact.


----------



## stev32k (Sep 26, 2012)

I just bought the M&P 9c last week after spending a lot of time looking at the M&P and Glock models. I looked at both the Glock 19 and the M&P 9. The basic reason I went with the M&P was the feel of the gun in my hand. It just felt better. The 19 has those finger ridges and they bugged me. My fingers always ended up on top of the ridges when I first picked up the gun. When I adjusted my grip it felt like my fingers were too far apart. I really wanted the full size M&P 9, but by the time I made up my mind it had already been sold and I didn't want to wait any longer so I got the 9c. With a full size mag and the mag extender (or sleeve) that came with it the 9c feels just like the full size 9.


----------

