S&W M&P .45 vs Glock 21

T

tacstar

Inactive
How does the S&W M&P .45 compare to 3rd & 4th generation Glock 21's?

S&W used a polymer frame for the M&P line & the ergonomic issues associated with the 3rd generation pistols have been addressed. IMO the price point makes it attractive.
 
Never thought I'd say it, being a pretty big fan of Glocks, but I think from here on out I'm going to be a M&P user. I have a pretty good supply of both brands around here, and still shoot both brands, but the Smiths have about won me over. My last purchase was a M&P 2.0 in FDE, and I am really fond of it.
After some years of taking a back seat to Glock, Smith is back in the saddle.
 
People bashed Glock as being the plastic gun and now look how many other makers are making polymer guns...............I choose Glock 21 because I have one and like everything about it
 
Love my G4 Glock 21, one of my favorite .45s and my most common bedside gun.

I tried the original M&P and hated the trigger even with APEX parts, I am willing to try the 2.0 and change my opinion, however.

So, IMO until they drop a .45 2.0, Glock all the way for me.

Be aware the Glock is aa beefy grip, and if you have medium hands the Gen 4 frame will likely fit better. They say it is the same as the Gen 3 SF in size, but the Gen 4 is signigicantly smaller feelung in my hands.
 
I own both.

The difference is mainly in the thickness and the grip angle. If you are ok with the 10 round capacity then I would favor the M&P due to it being a much slimmer gun and a really great shooter.

The nice thing with the Glock is 13 rounds flush fit but you pay with a very bulky gun. And the magazines are quite bulky as well.

In the end it will be preference. I favor my SIG p227 over either of them.
 
In the end it will be preference. I favor my SIG p227 over either of them.
Click to expand...

Same here. The Model 227 is just about perfect (sorry Glock boys :p) for what I'm looking for in a .45 cal. auto for use in self-defense.
 
disseminator said:
If you are ok with the 10 round capacity then I would favor the M&P due to it being a much slimmer gun and a really great shooter.

The nice thing with the Glock is 13 rounds flush fit but you pay with a very bulky gun. And the magazines are quite bulky as well.
Click to expand...
That sums up my opinion as well. I shoot the G21 better—as oddity given my extensive trigger time with the M&P9—but I'd hesitate to buy the Glock for carry duty simply because the gun and mags are so honkin' big.

IMHO the Glock "XL" platform is better suited to the 10mm Auto cartridge because the large size really helps soak up the snappier recoil.
 
I'm an old-school 1911 user (over 50 years now), but found that I managed quite well with a friend's Glock 21. Shooting at speed, from the leather at the 7 & 10 yard lines, my defensive controlled-pairs groups were the same size as those with my treasured 1911's. Slow fire, I do better with the 1911's, but not as much as I'd have thought. Too, the Glock's mag capacity gives it an additional plus if that's important to you. Rod
 
You should also look at the XDM version if you're going for comparable polymer pistols.

Of course real men shoot STI 2011s. ;)
In fact, with a .45 acp round, an STI first took out a Tiger tank in WWII in mid 1944. remember when Tom Hanks blew up that Tiger Tank in Saving Private Ryan? Yep...an STI. While some people say we used rockets in bazookas to defeat German armor, real experts know it was just a .45 round in a longer tube to make it look more scary.
 
I love my gen 2 glock 21.



I've since removed the adjustable sights and put a piece of bike inner tubing on the grip.
 
I'd take my own Gen4 Glock 21 and my HK45. Then I'd take the Sig P320 and the Walther PPQ .45ACP. I like the M&P Shield, the larger M&P's not as much.
 
I've owned several .45ACP handguns. One of the best was a HK Mark 23; but, it is huge. Had several 1911's, hard to beat that platform. Recently picked up a STI Edge, haven't fired it much; but, it looks promising. The biggest surprise was a Shield 45. Unbelievably accurate, easy to handle and conceal and a soft shooter. Next on my list is a CZ97; my buddy has one. Great pistol.

I have yet to shoot a Glock. Folks swear by them. But, they just don't have the visual appeal to me.

Neither the M&P .45, nor the Glock 21 seem to offer much, IMO. But, I'll bet either, or both, offer more performance than I'm capable of extracting. I suspect a lot of the comparisons we read are subjective, based on the individual's likes/dislikes. IMO that is good, beats marketing spiel.
 
I have a Gen 4 G21 and an M&P 45. I like the ergonomics and the looks of the M&P better but I shoot the Glock a little better. Both are unmodified. On average, the Glock has slightly better accuracy, especially with plated bullets. Both seem to cycle anything that even looks like a .45 auto round.

Thanks to the OP for starting this thread. It's time to take them both out for some fun!
 
I shot a G21 (both Gen 2 and 3) in USPSA as well as carried one on duty for years. It is a rather under rated pistol in my observation.

In fact I won or placed in many events against guys shooting custom 1911s (which I also own/use/enjoy), not due to my superior speed/skill, but simply because the G21 always went bang, no matter how hot and or filthy. It's extreme reliability, and decent capacity makes for a great .45.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top