A Look Back: History and Heritage
Choosing your first handgun is a significant decision, one that can impact your safety and peace of mind. Experienced shooters often look to upgrade their existing EDC (Everyday Carry) setup for improved performance. At the heart of many such decisions lie the ubiquitous polymer-framed, striker-fired 9mm pistols. These handguns have become the standard for law enforcement, military personnel, and civilian shooters alike, owing to their reliability, affordability, and ease of use. Among the most popular and respected choices in this field are the Smith & Wesson M&P 2.0 and the Glock 17. This article provides a comprehensive comparison of these two titans, designed to help you make an informed decision about which firearm is the right one for you. We’ll delve into features, ergonomics, shooting performance, reliability, aftermarket support, and, ultimately, value. Both the M&P 2.0 and Glock 17 have their strengths and weaknesses, and understanding these nuances is crucial to selecting the handgun that best meets your specific needs and preferences.
The Glock 17, a name almost synonymous with firearms, revolutionized the industry when it was first introduced. Gaston Glock, the Austrian engineer behind the creation, broke from tradition with its polymer frame and striker-fired mechanism. The Glock 17 was more than just a new pistol; it was a statement about material science and the future of handgun design. Its innovative features, including its lighter weight, resistance to corrosion, and simple operation, quickly won it favor with law enforcement agencies worldwide. Over the years, the Glock 17 evolved through various generations, each incorporating improvements and refinements while staying true to its core design principles. The Glock 17’s legacy is cemented in its widespread adoption by law enforcement and military units globally. Its reliability and ease of maintenance made it a cornerstone in the world of self-defense.
The Smith & Wesson M&P 2.0 emerged as a direct competitor, a testament to the evolution of the handgun market and the demand for a modern polymer pistol. Smith & Wesson, a respected name in American firearms, entered this arena with their M&P (Military & Police) series. The original M&P quickly garnered attention for its ergonomics, particularly the interchangeable backstraps which aimed at making it a better fit for a wider range of hand sizes. Recognizing the need for improvement, Smith & Wesson listened to feedback from shooters, leading to the development of the M&P 2.0. The 2.0 represented a significant step forward, with enhancements that addressed the shortcomings of the original M&P. The 2.0 model features an upgraded trigger, a more aggressive grip texture, and other refinements that would further solidify its standing in the market. The M&P 2.0 continues the legacy of offering a modern alternative in the competitive landscape dominated by Glock.
Examining the Features: A Detailed Comparison
Frame and Feel
The M&P 2.0 immediately stands out with its enhanced grip texture. Smith & Wesson realized that a proper grip is the cornerstone of a solid shooting platform. The aggressive texture, more pronounced than its predecessor, provides excellent purchase, even in wet or challenging conditions. Multiple interchangeable backstraps allow for a customizable fit, allowing shooters to tailor the grip to their hand size. The frame is made of a durable polymer, offering a balance of strength and weight. The M&P 2.0’s grip is designed to fit a wide variety of hands. The feel in hand is secure, allowing for a confident hold and natural pointability.
The Glock 17, famous for its simplicity, features a frame design that is recognizable worldwide. The grip angle and overall ergonomics are favored by a great many shooters. However, the Glock 17’s grip, while functional, lacks the aggressive texture of the M&P 2.0. Some users find the factory texture less effective, and find themselves often contemplating the addition of aftermarket stippling or grip tape to improve their grip. Like the M&P 2.0, the Glock 17’s frame is constructed from a durable polymer, known for its resilience and low maintenance needs.
When comparing the two, the M&P 2.0 has an edge in the initial feel thanks to its more aggressive grip texture. The Glock 17’s grip can feel more slippery in comparison, requiring a more deliberate grip. While the Glock’s basic ergonomics are good, and the frame is built to last, the M&P 2.0 allows for customization of the grip shape.
Sighting Systems
The M&P 2.0 typically comes equipped with standard three-dot sights, common across many modern handguns. These sights are functional and allow for quick target acquisition. Smith & Wesson has also made available a range of aftermarket sight options including fiber optic sights, tritium night sights, and adjustable target sights.
The Glock 17 also ships with standard three-dot sights. Like the M&P, there are many options for customizing the sights on the Glock 17. Options include tritium night sights, competition sights, and a wide variety of options to suit different shooting preferences.
The comparison here is subtle. The sights on both guns function perfectly fine, but are often replaced for different preferences, and the overall visual experience is similar. The differences are ultimately more of a matter of personal preference, with both offering great aftermarket support for sight customization.
Controls and Operation
The controls on the M&P 2.0, including the slide stop, magazine release, and trigger, are generally well-positioned. The slide stop is within easy reach for the thumb. The magazine release button is well-sized and easily accessible for consistent reloads. The controls on the M&P 2.0 are designed to be intuitive and user-friendly.
The Glock 17 also features controls that are simple and effective. The slide stop lever and magazine release button are positioned in familiar locations. Glock has deliberately kept its controls simple, prioritizing ease of use and reliability.
In terms of controls, both pistols offer a streamlined design. The slide stop and magazine release are found in the same relative locations, and are readily accessible for fast reloading.
The Trigger: Pulling the Trigger
The trigger on the M&P 2.0 is a significant improvement over the original M&P trigger. It provides a cleaner break, a more tactile reset, and a reduced pull weight, allowing for improved accuracy. The trigger is smooth and predictable, making it easier for the shooter to control their shots.
The Glock 17’s trigger is often described as simple, but can vary depending on the model and generation. The Glock trigger is known for its short travel, but the feel is somewhat spongy. The pull weight is generally in the same range as the M&P 2.0. Over the years, the Glock trigger has been subject to a huge aftermarket that allows shooters to reduce the pull weight, or customize to their preferences.
The M&P 2.0 has a definite edge in trigger feel due to the cleaner break and more distinct reset. Both pistols however, can have their triggers improved with aftermarket upgrades.
Magazine Capacity
The M&P 2.0, like the Glock 17, accepts high-capacity magazines. The standard capacity for the M&P 2.0 is often compatible, depending on state or local laws.
The Glock 17, is a full-size pistol and also offers similar capacity, depending on the laws in place.
Both pistols can hold a generous number of rounds, meaning fewer reloads during a self-defense situation.
Barrel and Slide
The M&P 2.0’s barrel is typically constructed from high-quality stainless steel, with a precision-machined rifling. The slide is made from stainless steel, often coated for wear resistance. The M&P 2.0’s barrel is designed for durability and accuracy.
The Glock 17’s barrel also uses a high-quality steel construction and is designed for accuracy and longevity. The slide is typically made from steel, with a durable finish that is built to withstand harsh use.
In terms of materials, both pistols are built to last, with barrel and slide materials that will hold up well under stress.
Performance on the Range: Accuracy, Handling, and Reliability
Accuracy Assessment
Both the M&P 2.0 and the Glock 17 are capable of excellent accuracy, however, the M&P 2.0’s better trigger may give it a slight edge in the hands of the average shooter. At typical self-defense distances, both pistols can place rounds on target with excellent consistency.
Recoil Control
The M&P 2.0, with its more ergonomic grip and improved trigger, often provides a slight advantage in recoil control, which can lead to faster and more accurate follow-up shots. The Glock 17 also has manageable recoil, and is known for its balance.
Reliability: The Heart of the Matter
Both the M&P 2.0 and the Glock 17 have earned reputations for exceptional reliability. Both pistols have been put through rigorous testing and have proven themselves capable of functioning reliably under various conditions. Both designs are simple and well-engineered, which contributes to their consistent performance.
Customization: Building Your Ideal Handgun
The M&P 2.0 benefits from a robust aftermarket, and offers a wide array of parts, including grips, sights, triggers, barrels, and more. This allows for extensive customization to tailor the handgun to individual preferences and shooting styles.
The Glock 17 has an even larger aftermarket than the M&P 2.0. Parts are easily found, readily available, and are often affordable. Glock’s design allows for vast customization and aftermarket upgrades.
The Glock 17 is at the top of the aftermarket space for the firearms industry, but the M&P 2.0 offers excellent options as well.
The Verdict: Pros and Cons
M&P 2.0: The Advantages
- Superior grip texture
- Improved trigger
- Excellent ergonomics and customizable grip.
- Competitive price point
- Highly reliable
M&P 2.0: The Disadvantages
- Aftermarket support, though strong, is slightly smaller than Glock.
- Some shooters may not prefer the grip angle.
Glock 17: The Advantages
- Legendary reliability and durability.
- Vast aftermarket support.
- Simple, easy to maintain design.
- Widely available and well-tested magazines.
- Classic design, proven over decades.
Glock 17: The Disadvantages
- Grip texture can be less aggressive.
- Trigger feel can be less refined out of the box.
- Original sight design can be basic.
Deciding Factor: The Choice is Yours
In conclusion, the M&P 2.0 and the Glock 17 are both exceptional handguns, each with its own set of strengths. The choice between the two depends on your individual preferences.
If you prioritize grip and ergonomics, the M&P 2.0 is a strong contender. If you are prioritizing reliability and aftermarket, the Glock 17 is for you.
Ultimately, the best way to make your choice is to handle both pistols. Consider the grip, the trigger, and how each gun feels in your hand. If you can, visit a range and rent both, firing both to get a sense of how they perform.
Regardless of your decision, both the M&P 2.0 and the Glock 17 are reliable and accurate handguns, capable of providing you with effective self-defense.
