S&W M&P ergonomics

[northernlights]

I had the opportunity to hold an M&P at a shop once a while back, and I immediately did not like the ergonomics. Why? The top of the grip, that is supposed to contact the webbing near your thumb, seemed to lean away from my hand, like I couldn't get a secure fix to it. It was nice other than that, but that really killed it for me.

I see people raving about the M&P's ergos all over the internet. I feel like I'm the only one with this problem. Does anybody else feel this way or is it just me? Maybe the shop had a backstrap on that was too large for my hand?

[IntenseImage]

Id have to check how mine "fits" when I get home, but to me, its one of the most comfortable guns I have when held. Even better when shooting.

Most shops will leave the standard medium back strap in place so it could be that you need the small to bring your hand closer or even the large to fill the gap - the large back strap extends under the beavertail unlike the other 2

[greener]

I agree, trying different grips might have improved the poor ergo perception. I bought an M&P about 5 years ago because it felt better than the Glocks and XD's I tried.

These things aren't "one size fits all." If it doesn't feel right, find one that does.

[donm]

Just to clarify, M&Ps come with all three backstraps. The other two sizes are probably in the case.

[GrumpyBear]

Just to clarify, M&Ps come with all three backstraps. The other two sizes are probably in the case.

The changeable backstraps are what "makes it" for me.Even though I have small hands for my size I use the medium grips.

I have tried all three sizes and this is just what works best for me.If the OP was closer to me I'd offer to let him go shooting with me to try the different grip sizes to see if that made a difference for him.

[TommyJefferson]

I was never too impressed with the feel of the m&p line. They always felt like slightly improved glocks to me. No, I think it's CZs for life for me.

[Pagoda240]

I was never too impressed with the feel of the m&p line. They always felt like slightly improved glocks to me. No, I think it's CZs for life for me.

Yes improved glock Not to get to far off point but have seen a few CZ's in USPSA and not overally impressed to much going on with decocking and safety .... Each to his own... I am a 1911 fan at heart but i have my M&P with the large backstrap with the beaver tail portion removed. It allows my hand to get higher up on the gun. Will try and post pictures later.....

[Sparxfly72]

Diff'rent strokes fer ... whatever. I like the looks of the M&P, and I also like the looks of XDM's. Unfortunately for them, I don't pick my handguns based on looks, but on function, that is, reliability/trigger/ergo in MY hand. Call me "fanboy" or whatever, but Glocks rock my world and I'll stick with them.

[Asmodeus6]

I'm just going to say the following.

The M&P is not all it is touted to be as far as ergonomics are typically reported by people. I do not find it vastly superior to anything, and particularly not a the gen 4 Glock. Especially for those with very small hands, such as a female, child, or people with extremely tiny hands. As they are often suggested for those people due to their "superior" ergonomics and small grip. The reality is often the M&P will feel better in the shop, but when it comes down to actually shooting it. It's not all rainbows, kittens, and magic beams of sunshine blasting forth from your asshole.

Many of the simple things that are just 'right' in the gen 4 chassis are neglected in the M&P pistol. A useful reset in the trigger. A grip texture that keeps the gun planted. A mag release that is of a useful size. And in some places the added roundness in the name of ergonomics, such as the side bolsters, just put your hand in a dumb position where there are consequences. Like being snagged and dragged by the trigger during recoil if you have very small hands as it creates an angle at the finger joint when it meets the trigger. A small grip frame is only part of the ergonomic equation and the M&P barely shows up for the rest of the evaluation.

Stuff like this may not be an issue for most people. But as "the" fuller size option so often suggested for the small handed and female shooters. I find it odd noone else ever brings up any of this stuff.

Despite being larger and an almost uncomfortable grip. The gen 4 Glock stays put in the same shooters hand, and the result is less rotation. No pain. And more than one comment that the Glock recoils 'less'. While we know this is physically impossible. The decreased rotation attributes to less muzzle rise.

To compete the M&P needs a serious stipple job, and trigger mods. As well as the removal of everything they seemed to add on 'after the fact' in the name of ergonomics in the grip panels. Especially the sides, and that godforsaken hump / divot in the middle of the grip I was so happy Glock finally decided to tame down to nothing on the gen 4. On the M&P it changes the angle of approach of the hand to the trigger area which is relatively straight, while the grip makes your hand want to cant downward at the fingers. Especially if your hands are barely making it in the first place.

It's not all it's cracked up to be.

[Pagoda240]

KKM Barrel, Apex forward set tirgger , apex ram and slide lightened. Its not a 2011 but dam is close for the money.