Well, went to the range yesterday to shoot a few pistols with my buddy that finally got into firearms.
While there, I decided to do a side by side comparison of these 2 pistols. These were the results of my not too great shooting abilities, and opinions on my perceived results.
First was the M&P 9 C.O.R.E. with a Burris Fast Fire II
I have to say that S&W factory trigger is just awesome in this thing. I have shot Glocks with the Zev & ghost connectors and I swear this still feels better to me. I think its my preference of the shape of the trigger. The smooth contour feels much more comfortable to me than any Glock trigger. The trigger safety on the Glock 17L just adds that tiny bump that is just not as comfortable.
My groups were at a whopping, mind blowing, amazing...ok, not really, 15 ft for both pistols.
At the widest, measured 2.5" even with the one I pulled. I was using printer paper with a dot I colored in the middle with a Sharpie to shoot at. This was a total of 17 rds.
The Burris FastFire II is an ok optic. The dot is not the brightest and easy to find quickly as one would think, but is definitely a huge step up over just plain traditional sights. I am not complaining as it came on the pistol when I bought it and got the whole setup for a pretty sweet deal. I would rather have the Trijicon RMR or DeltaPoint as they have a MUCH better retical, but are alot more expensive too.
Immediately, like all M&P pistols IMO, the ergonomics with the largest palm insert are just about perfect for my hand. A consistent grip for comfortable, stable follow up shots were much easier to produce than with the Glock.
Next was the Glock 17L.
My groups were not as nice but were only .5" wider than with the M&P. Granted I didn't have a red dot on the 17L, I still just don't feel as good shooting it as the M&P. Due to the typical 2x4 Glock grip ergonomics fit in my hand, I always feel more perceived recoil with the Glock than I do in the M&P. A great shooting pistol, but the M&P edges it out in just about every category to me.
Below were my 11 shots.
(forgot to bring my 17rd mags and only had 2 old 10 rounders that don't hold open on empty
).
All in all both pistols performed pretty good. I feel the longer sight radius makes tighter groups much easier to me with both, but the vastly improved M&P ergonomics made it even that much easier.
If in the market for either, it is my preference to go with the M&P. Smooth factory trigger with the far superior grip comfort make it a winner for me!
While there, I decided to do a side by side comparison of these 2 pistols. These were the results of my not too great shooting abilities, and opinions on my perceived results.
First was the M&P 9 C.O.R.E. with a Burris Fast Fire II
I have to say that S&W factory trigger is just awesome in this thing. I have shot Glocks with the Zev & ghost connectors and I swear this still feels better to me. I think its my preference of the shape of the trigger. The smooth contour feels much more comfortable to me than any Glock trigger. The trigger safety on the Glock 17L just adds that tiny bump that is just not as comfortable.
My groups were at a whopping, mind blowing, amazing...ok, not really, 15 ft for both pistols.
At the widest, measured 2.5" even with the one I pulled. I was using printer paper with a dot I colored in the middle with a Sharpie to shoot at. This was a total of 17 rds.
The Burris FastFire II is an ok optic. The dot is not the brightest and easy to find quickly as one would think, but is definitely a huge step up over just plain traditional sights. I am not complaining as it came on the pistol when I bought it and got the whole setup for a pretty sweet deal. I would rather have the Trijicon RMR or DeltaPoint as they have a MUCH better retical, but are alot more expensive too.
Immediately, like all M&P pistols IMO, the ergonomics with the largest palm insert are just about perfect for my hand. A consistent grip for comfortable, stable follow up shots were much easier to produce than with the Glock.
Next was the Glock 17L.
My groups were not as nice but were only .5" wider than with the M&P. Granted I didn't have a red dot on the 17L, I still just don't feel as good shooting it as the M&P. Due to the typical 2x4 Glock grip ergonomics fit in my hand, I always feel more perceived recoil with the Glock than I do in the M&P. A great shooting pistol, but the M&P edges it out in just about every category to me.
Below were my 11 shots.
(forgot to bring my 17rd mags and only had 2 old 10 rounders that don't hold open on empty
).All in all both pistols performed pretty good. I feel the longer sight radius makes tighter groups much easier to me with both, but the vastly improved M&P ergonomics made it even that much easier.
If in the market for either, it is my preference to go with the M&P. Smooth factory trigger with the far superior grip comfort make it a winner for me!
