Temptations: S&W M&P 2.0 Compact vs. G19

S

Spats McGee

Administrator
TFL Residents, please lend me your collective wisdom.

I have a dilemma. In 2013 (if memory serves), after much wailing, research, and overthinking, I bought my G19. She's been my jack-of-all-trades gun, and has served me well. She's been both my EDC and nightstand gun for 4 years. I'm careful to clean her every 500 rounds, give or take 100, but she doesn't seem to mind a little mild neglect. I've got around 2000 rounds through her, without so much as a hiccup after I replaced the slide lock spring which broke at ~400 rounds. I don't mind the finger grooves or the trigger. I'm fairly heavily invested in her, having amassed 3 holsters, 10 magazines, and a small assortment of replacement springs and other small parts.

Here's my dilemma: I'm sorely tempted by this new S&W M&P Compact 2.0. On paper, it's virtually identical to the G19. Ammo capacity is the same. The M&P2.0 weighs a whopping 10g more unloaded. My G19 has night sights. The MP does not, but I realize that's a pretty easy fix. The G19 is .05" longer, overall. I've looked at my favorite holster makers. Some have holsters, some do not yet have any. In particular, I've taken a liking to the Stealthgear Revolution holsters. There are none of those for the M&P2.0 Compact. By most accounts that I've read, the M&P line gives Glock a run for its money in reliability. The M&P 2.0 Compact is pretty new to the market, and I'm no gunsmith. Are there any internal changes that you would expect to negatively impact reliability? (As a potential carry gun, reliability is the key factor for me.)

The only M&P I've ever shot is my Shield, but I really like it. I've handled various M&Ps several times and the ergos are very good. Clearly, I'll need to try one out if my local range gets one. They don't have one yet.

So here's my dilemma: Is it worth the hassle and $ to try to trade my G19 for an M&P 2.0 Compact?
 
Spats McGee said:
TFL Residents, please lend me your collective wisdom.

I have a dilemma. In 2013 (if memory serves), after much wailing, research, and overthinking, I bought my G19. She's been my jack-of-all-trades gun, and has served me well. She's been both my EDC and nightstand gun for 4 years. I'm careful to clean her every 500 rounds, give or take 100, but she doesn't seem to mind a little mild neglect. I've got around 2000 rounds through her, without so much as a hiccup after I replaced the slide lock spring which broke at ~400 rounds. I don't mind the finger grooves or the trigger. I'm fairly heavily invested in her, having amassed 3 holsters, 10 magazines, and a small assortment of replacement springs and other small parts.

Here's my dilemma: I'm sorely tempted by this new S&W M&P Compact 2.0. On paper, it's virtually identical to the G19. Ammo capacity is the same. The M&P2.0 weighs a whopping 10g more unloaded. My G19 has night sights. The MP does not, but I realize that's a pretty easy fix. The G19 is .05" longer, overall. I've looked at my favorite holster makers. Some have holsters, some do not yet have any. In particular, I've taken a liking to the Stealthgear Revolution holsters. There are none of those for the M&P2.0 Compact. By most accounts that I've read, the M&P line gives Glock a run for its money in reliability. The M&P 2.0 Compact is pretty new to the market, and I'm no gunsmith. Are there any internal changes that you would expect to negatively impact reliability? (As a potential carry gun, reliability is the key factor for me.)

The only M&P I've ever shot is my Shield, but I really like it. I've handled various M&Ps several times and the ergos are very good. Clearly, I'll need to try one out if my local range gets one. They don't have one yet.

So here's my dilemma: Is it worth the hassle and $ to try to trade my G19 for an M&P 2.0 Compact?
Click to expand...
I say do it.

I actually ditched my Glock 19 Gen 4 and Gen 3 after switching to the M&P 2.0 Compact. I had the M&P 9L first but when the same thing but compact came out, it was a no brainer for me.

James Yeager even let me shoot his 2.0 FS when I was at Tactical Response training with my 9L. The trigger is greatly improved as well as just about every other aspect of the 2.0.

The trigger mechanism has changed for the better and the steel inserts in the frame improve the overall feel. Not to mention the slide not going home on its own when a fresh magazine is inserted.

I like just about everything that the Smith and Wesson M&P 2.0 Compact has to offer over the Glock. Granted, nothing earth shattering and out of this universe. But they matter to me. On top of being American instead of Austrian. We've been waiting for something similar. And I feel that this is in fact the actual "Glock Killer" we've all been waiting for. Not to mention them going for $425 right now.


Just my $0.02.


Do it!

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
 
What do you think you would gain by going to the M&P 2.0? Is there something you don't like about the Glock 19?

I have only handled and dry fired the M&P 2.0 Compact. I think it is a fine pistol but personally I did not like how far back the trigger has to go for release.
 
I don't know that I'd get rid of the Glock; I didn't when I picked up my S&W M&P9 2.0 a couple months ago. But then again, I kept my Glock 19 out of a vague "prepper" reason more than anything else. In every way I think that my S&W is a better performing gun. It even looks better. Though I think it's important to note that I don't believe that the S&W performs significantly better than my Glock. It's really just slightly improved.

For instance, for me, my Glock tends to shoot slightly left (I've heard this is not unusual for whatever reason), and what we're talking about is about an inch to an inch and a half to the left of center out to about 15 yards. With all my other full-size handguns I shoot right down the middle. My M&P9 2.0 shoots down the middle. I believe this has something to do with the grip shape (not a 2x4) more than anything else.

It's not a big deal, but it satisfies that OCD part of me that dislikes hitting left of center. In terms of groups, neither gun has an advantage, so far as I can tell. But for me, since the M&P hits right over the front sight, I'm more confident overall, which makes shooting quickly and accurately a little easier. With the Glock beyond 15 yards I have to consciously account for the left-ward hits, which slows me down a little.

All of this translates into the M&P spending more time at the range than my Glock, but I have no plans right now to get rid of it.

Bet that didn't help you at all.
 
sigarms228 said:
What do you think you would gain by going to the M&P 2.0? Is there something you don't like about the Glock 19?
Click to expand...
Better ergos, maybe? I must admit that I like the looks of the M&P better, but I have to admit that looks almost never really enter into the equation in gun choices for me.

There's nothing that I don't like about the G19. Yep, she's ugly, but she shore can cook! She runs. She goes bang every time & she's undoubtedly capable of more accuracy than I am. Maintenance is simple & she needs very little.

Rangerrich99 said:
. . . . I kept my Glock 19 out of a vague "prepper" reason more than anything else. . . . .
Click to expand...
Clearly, you're a man after my own heart. I have this vague, gut feeling that no matter what happens in this world: (a) there will always be someone making G19 parts; and (b) if I ever do have to trade it or sell it, there will always be someone willing to buy or trade for it.
Rangerrich99 said:
. . . . . In every way I think that my S&W is a better performing gun. It even looks better. Though I think it's important to note that I don't believe that the S&W performs significantly better than my Glock. It's really just slightly improved.
Click to expand...
Good to know.
 
Spats McGee said:
Clearly, you're a man after my own heart. I have this vague, gut feeling that no matter what happens in this world: (a) there will always be someone making G19 parts; and (b) if I ever do have to trade it or sell it, there will always be someone willing to buy or trade for it.
Click to expand...

Exactly. It's like insurance somehow.
 
Here is a modified reply I made on another forum to a similar question.

Disclaimer: These are my options and are relative judgements based on my personally-owned examples of the three pistols.

Quick Pistol Comparison between the CZ-P10C, S&W M&P9 2.0 Compact and Glock 19 Gen 5.

I currently own and shoot all three of the pistols in question and for myself would rate them as follows:

#1 CZ P10C
Using the large backstrap and sharpie-blacked-out rear sight, this pistol points and shoots best of the three for me. I get the best split times and accuracy from this pistol. Although, at longer ranges (20+ yards) the factory sights aren't the greatest. The point of impact seems to be almost a 6-oclock hold. It is probably worth it to upgrade to a set of Dawson Precision sights to really wring out this pistols potential.

The trigger has a light, short take-up with a distinct crisp break and very short reset. The trigger feels about at the limit of how light a defensive-pistol should be for me. If you tend to stage or prep a trigger, the the CZ does demand some practice.

I did lightly sand the factory grip texture to dull down the sharp points as they were sometimes noticeably painful for me when shooting. The only malfunctions I've had in about 3000 rounds were from some powder-puff frangible ammo that fired but weren't able to cycle the slide enough to extract the spent case; otherwise, it has been flawless so far.

#2 SW MP 2.0 Compact:
Using the ML backstrap and the factory sights with a sharpie-blacked-out rear sight this pistol shoots well for me and demonstrates good mechanical accuracy. Out to 15 yards the pistol basically shoots one-hole groups and beyond that I am the limiting factor on accuracy, but it still shoots distinct groups. This is a relief as I was plagued with inaccurate earlier M&P 9's that produced shotgun patterns beyond about 10 yards.

The M&P 2.0 Compact trigger has a distinct and consistent break point without the mushy feel of earlier models but not it is not as crisp as the CZ trigger. The trigger reset is discernible, by both feel and sound, but feels a little longish. I occasionally out run the reset, failing to fully let off the trigger to allow reset, when shooting quickly. This trigger is a big improvement over past MP triggers and offers no excuses for poor shooting. The sights are slightly nicer than the CZ having a better rear notch, and appropriate for a defensive. Eventually I plan to add a fiber optic front sight.

Some people are having issues with empty magazines dropping free when using the two largest sized back straps, I haven't noticed this but have seen where 17-round mags fitted with the space filler adapter can be slow to drop when the pistol is held at certain angles. The two largest sized back straps also don't fit completely flush to the pistol which seems to only be mostly an aesthetic concern; although, I can sometimes feel the top edge. The grip texture isn't sharp like the CZ but is rough and abrasive feeling. It isn't painful to shoot but might be a concern if carried next to skin. Overall, I think this might be the best M&P offered so far and shoots better for me than any of the so-called performance center M&P models I've tried. It seems to be good to go out of the box. I only have about 800 rounds through this pistol but so far no issues.

#3 Glock 19 Gen5
Using the large backstrap without the beaver tail, and the factory plastic sights, this pistol is functional and shoots like a typical Glock, only better. It has possibly the best Glock factory trigger I've experienced so far and shows noticeably better accuracy than most older generation 19's I've shot. The trigger is smooth with a distinct, consistent break and the typical assertive Glock reset.

The cut out in the front of the grip is at times annoying but not always noticeable. Pearce offers magazine floor plates designed to fill the cut out and I ordered some. The Gen4 19 finger grooves fit my hand well and I think actually allow a little better hold than I get on the Gen5. However, the Gen 5 seems to have a smoother recoil feel and shoots a little better with more consistent ejection.

I have notices the the new much-hyped outer layer finish on the slide and barrel does seem to be wearing surprisingly quickly in places, particularly on the barrel. This is simply cosmetic as the metal still has a protective "Tenifer" like treatment but is a little disappointing.

This pistol has so far demonstrated typical Glock reliability and shootabilty and is the best Glock 19 I've shot so far that did not have more than the cost of the original pistol in upgrades.

If you are a Glock 19 fan, you need one of these. If you hate Glock 19 finger grooves but like the Glock 19, you need one of these. If you are looking to get the best Glock 19 accuracy and trigger without aftermarket parts, you need one of these.


On a side note, while putting away the CZ P10C and SW MP 2.0 Compact after a range trip, I noticed that the magazines for the CZ fit reasonably well into the MP and feed dummy rounds without any problems.

Later, a trip to the range demonstrated that the CZ mags function in the MP 2.0 Compact. I shot about 350 rounds through the MP using the CZ mags. The SW MP 2.0 Compact magazines do not fit the CZ P10C and the longer full size MP mags do not fit properly into the CZ.
 
Last edited:
I personally like the M&P better for all the reasons most others have summarized above.

Is it so much better that it's worth spending $500 on a whole new platform that needs holsters and magazines and accessories? Probably not. That doesn't mean you shouldn't buy one. It depends on what you want to do with it. Ultimately no one plastic striker gun is really THAT much different from any other one.
 
Although, at longer ranges (20+ yards) the factory sights aren't the greatest. The point of impact seems to be almost a 6-oclock hold. It is probably worth it to upgrade to a set of Dawson Precision sights to really wring out this pistols potential.
Click to expand...

I have exactly the same experience with the P07 sights. Definitely a 6:00 hold and not at all to my liking. I expect to get some Dawson sights for it soon. The stock sights supposedly glow in the dark, but so poorly they're pretty much useless.

I found the P07 to be my favorite non-Glock Glock 19 :) In fact I like it so much I decided to learn the DA/SA trigger!

I was a day away from buying the M&P 2.0 compact, too! I never should have tried the CZ!
 
Rangerrich99 said:
I don't know that I'd get rid of the Glock; I didn't when I picked up my S&W M&P9 2.0 a couple months ago. But then again, I kept my Glock 19 out of a vague "prepper" reason more than anything else. In every way I think that my S&W is a better performing gun. It even looks better. Though I think it's important to note that I don't believe that the S&W performs significantly better than my Glock. It's really just slightly improved.

For instance, for me, my Glock tends to shoot slightly left (I've heard this is not unusual for whatever reason), and what we're talking about is about an inch to an inch and a half to the left of center out to about 15 yards. With all my other full-size handguns I shoot right down the middle. My M&P9 2.0 shoots down the middle. I believe this has something to do with the grip shape (not a 2x4) more than anything else.

It's not a big deal, but it satisfies that OCD part of me that dislikes hitting left of center. In terms of groups, neither gun has an advantage, so far as I can tell. But for me, since the M&P hits right over the front sight, I'm more confident overall, which makes shooting quickly and accurately a little easier. With the Glock beyond 15 yards I have to consciously account for the left-ward hits, which slows me down a little.

All of this translates into the M&P spending more time at the range than my Glock, but I have no plans right now to get rid of it.

Bet that didn't help you at all.
Click to expand...



Why don’t you drift the rear sight on the Glock? It’s in a dovetail for a reason. I also shoot slightly left with Glocks. I drift the rear a tiny bit (I’m at the point where I can look at it by eye and know how far to drift it).


I wouldn’t do this trade no. For me personally I shoot Glocks better despite the ergos of the M&P seeming better. I’m also not a big fan of the texture on the 2.0. I typically like aggressive textures but this feels to me like overdone stippling and I’ve had issues personally with similar textures catching on clothing. Lastly I’ve had far better luck personally with Glock QC than S&W. That doesn’t mean S&W can’t make a good pistol, but after 6 M&Ps that went back to the mothership I got tired of using the warranty service.

All that said I think they’re very similar and I don’t really think you’d be gaining anything given that you already have the Glock (the M&P being cheaper is a factor in its favor for initial purchase). Personally I think the better call is to save up some more money and then buy the M&P Compact in addition to your Glock 19. Then if you decide one is redundant you can compare them for yourself side by side and make that choice. Nothing really compares to being able to do the comparison yourself.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Because . . . I'm lazy about things like that. obviously I could do it, I just can't get motivated enough to actually do it. And at any reasonable pistol distance, it just doesn't matter. If I aim at the center of a target's chest, and the hit is an inch or so to the left, it's still a good hit, defensively speaking.
 
Temptations: S&W M&P 2.0 Compact vs. G19

Right but like you say it is noticeable which is why you brought it up. Heck all you need is a punch and a hammer if you don’t want to buy a sight tool. As an OCD person myself I couldn’t live with it like that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
The G19 is a great pistol...

The M&P is also a great pistol.


I like the M&P ergos much better. I own several M&P models, because of this.

I have gotten some brief trigger time with a full sized 2.0, and to me, the difference was very noticeable. It just seemed to shoot better than the original model, and I liked the trigger much more than the original factory trigger.


The question is... Will the 2.0 Compact be enough of an improvement over your G19?

That's really up to you to decide... We can only give our impressions.
 
In January I take the M&P 2.0 (full size) I bought nib last week for a massive test - a 3 day pistol immersion course where you fire 1400 rounds. Now a few days ago I was at the range with this gun for 200 rounds with 1 ftf. However, we are talking about pretty shady el cheapo Walmart ammo and I looked at the failed round and it looked off.

For this course in January I have a 1000 rounds of American Eagle and 400 rounds Fiocchi.

Now here's the thing: this is currently my only semi-auto so if this puppy does not make it through this course I am going to be out the course tuition.

To make a long story short: in January I will really have an opinion to share. As for right now, "the gun was at the range the other day for 200 rounds," seemed to work. The trigger is creepy on the dry fire, smooth when actually firing ammo

I do not disagree with the poster about, "the backstrap is kinda/sorta flush." Its cosmetic. With my normal way to grip the gun, I can't even see this. Doesn't bother more. Way more concerned with, "is this gun going to shoot 1400 rounds over three days and survive....."

KhbKRiT.jpg


VFTY0eX.jpg


Led6u9U.jpg
 
Personally I would not trade a great shooting gun for one that is so new to the market. Purchase the S&W separately.

I did own a M&P9c 1.0 and did not like the grip or the hinged trigger. It felt as though my fingers wanted to slip down away from the trigger guard. At the sametime my G19, because of the grip angle, locked into my hand.

I like the low bore axis and recoil characteristics of Glock as well.
 
vba, that is funny how you prefer the recoil characteristics of the Glock over the M&P.

Most people that I know have the opposite feeling. Even the ones who choose to stick with their Glocks.

Glock has a sort of harsh slide shutting feeling, whereas the M&P pistols somewhat glides forward in a much smoother manner.

As for the bore axis, it seems like both pistols in question have a great bore axis. Glock was too short for me though. I had to put on a beaver tail or else it'd bite me.

The Smith and Wesson 2.0 with the L bakcstrap put me in the same boat. Even though I liked it. I had to go with the ML instead, which gave my webbing some space to tuck underneath the rear of the frame / slide.

I think I'm the only weirdo who loved the beaver tails from the 1.0 M&P pistols. I wish the 2.0 had that option!


Well, overall for me the Smith was enough to make me ditch the Glock 19s I had.



As for customer service and M&Ps *needing* to go back so many times... I have never heard that with my own two ears from instructors and range owners alike. So that's astonishing to say the least. Just about as unheard of as I can recall.
We've had more Glocks go down from cracked frames and trigger return springs more often than hearing of a S&W M&P going down.

But even with that said, their CS has been amazing. I received a new guide rod assembly free of charge for my wife's Shield. 3 Back straps free of charge as well. As well as a friend of mine who received 3 flat base plates for the magazines free of charge.

I think it's tough to beat Smith and Wesson today. With their Shield overpowering the Glock 43 and 42. The M&P 2.0 finally in the same ring, with a bunch of people I know switching over to them. Smith has made one of it's best moves in a long time.
 
Temptations: S&W M&P 2.0 Compact vs. G19

I don’t find a lot of difference between the recoils of the two personally, not enough to be noticeable.

The 6 separate M&Ps that had to go back happened. You’re welcome to disbelieve me. When I got home I’ll look at the Word doc I made to give the exact reasons (I made the doc to stop me from buying more). In 18 courses I haven’t seen many issues with M&Ps or Glocks. Again I liked the pistol, especially the ergos, which is why I kept giving them another shot. I know from both a very large store and a smaller FFL that my experience with more issues with S&W than Glock mirrors their own, and the larger store does millions in sales a year. S&W was always willing to fix the issues without any cost to me and turnaround was typically 3 weeks. I just felt like the warranty service was being used in lieu of better quality control.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
So here's my dilemma: Is it worth the hassle and $ to try to trade my G19 for an M&P 2.0 Compact
Click to expand...

I've traded or sold firearms to acquire something of similar size and platform, but I was making a very obvious improvement. As an example I swapped a saiga 223 for a Colt 6920 right at the cusp of saiga prices being comparable to cheap ARs. Had to horse trade a bit, but wasn't out any money. The colt is the better weapon hands down IMO. Anyway, I don't think a the M&P 2.0 is that much better than the Glock. Plus a Glock 19 has its own separate appeal (I think the "weird prepper" analogy describes it) that the M&P just doesn't have. I would buy the M&P if I really wanted it, but I would probably keep the Glock. It would be akin to trading a Beretta 92 for a CZ75. Both fine guns, different but yet the same, and I would have a hard time getting rid of one just to get the other (even though I prefer the CZ).
 
TunnelRat said:
Right but like you say it is noticeable which is why you brought it up. Heck all you need is a punch and a hammer if you don’t want to buy a sight tool. As an OCD person myself I couldn’t live with it like that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Sorry, I should've been more clear. I only notice it when I slow down and try to shoot for precision. When I shoot defensive drills, such as controlled pairs, draw-to-first shot, multiple bandits, triple bill drills, etc. I'm just looking for the front sight anyway, so I don't 'see' the hits until after the drill. But when I try shooting at say 25 yards and I slow everything down, I see the hits and that's when I really notice that 90% of the hits are slightly left.

And you're right, I could drift the rear sight blade a bit, but my Glock 19 isn't a primary carry/HD gun for me. It's a 2nd string/back-up gun, so making it perfect isn't a priority for me right now. If it ever makes it into the primary carry rotation, I'll probably fix the sights.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top