Gen5 G17 and M&P 2.0 Comparison shoot

[Lunker]

I had always been a Glock guy, believing that its simplicity of design and parts abundance made it the no-brainer platform choice. I also shoot a number of hammer guns for fun and they all have the more traditional grip angle. I have tried and abandoned a few other striker guns along the way (Sig 320, CZ p10) but never the M&P.
I picked one up and decided to shoot it side by side against my Gen5 G17 to get some impressions. They both have RMR’s and overwatch falx triggers, so it seemed like a fair comparison.
The Glock feels much lighter in my hand, even though the difference is only 2 ounces. I had always been told Glocks are easier to shoot fast because the aggressive wrist angle keeps your arms locked in better. I didn’t find this to be the case in semi rapid fire (~2/second). For me the M&P was much steadier and the dot came back into view more reliably.
The accuracy in slow fire seemed to be a wash out to 15 yards. The only feature I liked better on the Glock was the ambi extended slide release. I can’t activate the m&p release with my strong hand. Maybe with some more practice.
My biggest surprise has been how much more solid the M&P feels and how well that grip texture really locks it into my hand.

[HCM]

I had always been a Glock guy, believing that its simplicity of design and parts abundance made it the no-brainer platform choice. I also shoot a number of hammer guns for fun and they all have the more traditional grip angle. I have tried and abandoned a few other striker guns along the way (Sig 320, CZ p10) but never the M&P.
I picked one up and decided to shoot it side by side against my Gen5 G17 to get some impressions. They both have RMR’s and overwatch falx triggers, so it seemed like a fair comparison.
The Glock feels much lighter in my hand, even though the difference is only 2 ounces. I had always been told Glocks are easier to shoot fast because the aggressive wrist angle keeps your arms locked in better. I didn’t find this to be the case in semi rapid fire (~2/second). For me the M&P was much steadier and the dot came back into view more reliably.
The accuracy in slow fire seemed to be a wash out to 15 yards. The only feature I liked better on the Glock was the ambi extended slide release. I can’t activate the m&p release with my strong hand. Maybe with some more practice.
My biggest surprise has been how much more solid the M&P feels and how well that grip texture really locks it into my hand.

I’ve always found guns with flat sided grips easier to shoot fast regardless of the grip angle as it allows more engagement with the support hand.

IME the M&P shoots fine but the biggest negative is the CORE optics mounting system. Using longer screws which have to go through the optic, plate and onwards into the slide, makes them more vulnerable to shearing forces during recoil.

[GJM]

Many people will be more comfortable with the M&P grip angle. Both OEM triggers are decent, but the Apex FSS is better than any trigger in a Glock. The BUIS on the M&P are ridiculously high. I prefer the MOS system, with its shortcomings to the CORE. The Glock has been more accurate at 25 for me with OEM barrels. The Gen 5 Glock has a flared magwell, where the M&P mag opening is pretty tight. Really gets down to personal preference.

[NETim]

I had always been a Glock guy, believing that its simplicity of design and parts abundance made it the no-brainer platform choice. I also shoot a number of hammer guns for fun and they all have the more traditional grip angle. I have tried and abandoned a few other striker guns along the way (Sig 320, CZ p10) but never the M&P.
I picked one up and decided to shoot it side by side against my Gen5 G17 to get some impressions. They both have RMR’s and overwatch falx triggers, so it seemed like a fair comparison.
The Glock feels much lighter in my hand, even though the difference is only 2 ounces. I had always been told Glocks are easier to shoot fast because the aggressive wrist angle keeps your arms locked in better. I didn’t find this to be the case in semi rapid fire (~2/second). For me the M&P was much steadier and the dot came back into view more reliably.
The accuracy in slow fire seemed to be a wash out to 15 yards. The only feature I liked better on the Glock was the ambi extended slide release. I can’t activate the m&p release with my strong hand. Maybe with some more practice.
My biggest surprise has been how much more solid the M&P feels and how well that grip texture really locks it into my hand.

What caused you to ditch the CZ P10?

[Brianjkeene]

What caused you to ditch the CZ P10?

For me it was the short trigger reach and, in my opinion, inconsistent and unpredictable trigger. Many people love the P10 trigger but I simply disliked it enough, along with the reach, to prefer a Glock or M2.0

[zcap]

IME the M&P shoots fine but the biggest negative is the CORE optics mounting system. Using longer screws which have to go through the optic, plate and onwards into the slide, makes them more vulnerable to shearing forces during recoil.

I completely agree. While the CORE the mount design allows for adapter plates with recoil fences, the plates themselves do not independently secure to the slide so the fences do not sufficiently mitigate shear force on the optic screws. This is not just hypothetical, my M&P M2.0 CORE pistols have consistently failed to hold zero with both the OEM and aftermarket plates which use the CORE design.

Thankfully, Forward Controls released M&P optic plates using a MOS style design where the plate is independently secured to the slide. In my experience, using the FCD plate on a M&P CORE slide or getting a non-optics ready M&P slide milled have been the most robust optic mount options.

[HCM]

I completely agree. While the CORE the mount design allows for adapter plates with recoil fences, the plates themselves do not independently secure to the slide so the fences do not sufficiently mitigate shear force on the optic screws. This is not just hypothetical, my M&P M2.0 CORE pistols have consistently failed to hold zero with both the OEM and aftermarket plates which use the CORE design.

Thankfully, Forward Controls released M&P optic plates using a MOS style design where the plate is independently secured to the slide. In my experience, using the FCD plate on a M&P CORE slide or getting a non-optics ready M&P slide milled have been the most robust optic mount options.

Our local PD issued .40 cal M&P 1.0s and tested the CORE system extensively. They initially approved the CORE for personally owned guns but had enough issues (even in 9mm) that they disallowed COREs and only approved direct mill. They currently issue the factory ACRO cut M&P 2.0 in 9mm.

[757_Magnum]

@GJM Did you ever try out the Stack-A-Toe setup, and if so, how do you think it compares to your Glocks with Apex trigger and Mayhem/Evolution/Rogue barrel and comp setup? I'm asking because my G19s are set up similarly, and I've thought of giving the M&Ps a fair shake since some people find them a bit more forgiving.

[Lunker]

What caused you to ditch the CZ P10?

I liked the gun. Great texture and controls. Decent sights. It seemed like what Glock would create if they improved their product based on customer feedback.
But it never quite fit me right. I think the reach was too short, and it led to me putting sideways pressure on the trigger. It caused drastically inconsistent trigger pulls for me. The guy I sold it to loves it. So probably just me.

[GJM]

@GJM Did you ever try out the Stack-A-Toe setup, and if so, how do you think it compares to your Glocks with Apex trigger and Mayhem/Evolution/Rogue barrel and comp setup? I'm asking because my G19s are set up similarly, and I've thought of giving the M&Ps a fair shake since some people find them a bit more forgiving.

I shot a M&P with an Apex gunsmith barrel fit and FSS trigger, both fit by Randy Lee, for a year in USPSA CO. I used a Romeo 3 Max. Good shooting setup.