Sig P229 Vs. M&P

[Bob P]

Let me explain this in the most succinct terms possible.

I like the M&P.

15rd magazines for the M&P are a no-no for MA

I don't care because I still shoot it better than any non-1911 pistol I've ever shot.

Therefore, the unavailability of large capacity magazines for the M&P in MA was not and is not a deterrent for me in choosing to purchase and shoot an M&P, and to use it as my nightstand gun.

In fact, I've had to stop myself from impulsively buying another.

Got it?

Can you go over that again, this time sung to the tune of Yankee Doodle?

 

[clinotus]

Let me explain this in the most succinct terms possible.

I like the M&P.
15rd magazines for the M&P are a no-no for MA
I don't care because I still shoot it better than any non-1911 pistol I've ever shot.
Therefore, the unavailability of large capacity magazines for the M&P in MA was not and is not a deterrent for me in choosing to purchase and shoot an M&P, and to use it as my nightstand gun.
In fact, I've had to stop myself from impulsively buying another.
The post was in response to this post, implying that magazine capacity should be an automatic disqualifer for someone considering the M&P in MA.
Got it?

I love your attempt at using the word succinct, while you lack reading comprehension. I dont care if you were cheerleading a Lorcin over a Colt, taking 8 rounds over 17 rounds makes little to no sense.

 

[vellnueve]

Well, I stand by my statement.

I will take 8 rounds in a 1911 over 17 rounds in a Glock 17 any day of the week, as stated earlier.

But seriously, I'll take 8 rounds in a 1911 over 17 in a Glock 17 any day of the week.

If you can't understand that, then I can't explain it to you.

Better gun (for me) > larger magazine capacity

 

[Mikey]

Never thought I would say it but I agree with vellnueve.

 

[vellnueve]

Never thought I would say it but I agree with vellnueve.

 

[M1911]

I will take 8 rounds in a 1911 over 17 rounds in a Glock 17 any day of the week, as stated earlier.

I owned a Glock 17 for many years. I made exactly that choice as well -- I left the Glock 17 in my safe and carried a 1911. I am far more accurate with any of my 1911s than I was with that Glock 17.

For me, the 1911 worked better. I'm not saying that is true for others.

 

[clinotus]

Well, I stand by my statement.

I will take 8 rounds in a 1911 over 17 rounds in a Glock 17 any day of the week, as stated earlier.



If you can't understand that, then I can't explain it to you.

Better gun (for me) > larger magazine capacity

You can't explain it because you don't seem to want to understand the question outside of specific platforms.

 

[vellnueve]

Considering that the title of this thread is targeted at two specific platforms, I think that's appropriate.

nhams assertion that the OP should not go after an M&P just because no large capacity mags are available is, in my view, a poor reason for making a choice between the 229 and the M&P.

 

[vellnueve]

For me, the 1911 worked better. I'm not saying that is true for others.

Exactly. And the way we apply that to the original question is to say: If you shoot the M&P and shoot better with it than with a 229, then go with it, even if pre-ban mags don't exist for it.

 

[Cabin Fever]

nhams assertion that the OP should not go after an M&P just because no large capacity mags are available is, in my view, a poor reason for making a choice between the 229 and the M&P.

The assertion wasn't so much that the OP shouldn't consider the M&P line at all. I was simply pointing out a Massachusetts-specific weakness of M&P pistols.

You are right in that it would not be good to buy the Sig solely for mag capacity reasons, but it is certainly something to consider (especially in a thread comparing the two)!

 

[vellnueve]

It's a valid factor of consideration, but I'll always go with whatever model I shoot better with. For me, that's the M&P. For him, it could easily be the 229. Some people love Sigs. I personally find the trigger a little big and the pull longer than I would like, but I have small hands.

 

[mark056]

In the end handguns and how they "feel" are so subjective. I would suggest that you go to a commercial range and rent or them for comparison or perhaps you might have some friends that could loan you their pistols for comparison.

In standard configuration you are really talking about two different systems: traditional double action vs a type of "safe action." Traditional double action semi-autos with the dual trigger pull have never been a big deal with me, perhaps because my first semi-auto was a traditional DA/SA pistol: a S&W Model 39. If I had transitioned from say a Browning Hi-Power or a 1911, then I might have a different take on it.

The pre-ban mags for the Sigs does have merit in my opinion but is not a deal breaker by any means. Magazine capacity is not everything, but I would not purchase a 9mm M&P or a Ruger SR17 simply because I am limited to 10 round mags, but that's just me.

I have small hands, but really love the Sig short trigger which I had installed after-market by a qulaified Sig armorer. It was worth the money in my opnion.

Each gun has their positive and negative points, in the end it is really up to you and how each gun shoots for you is what really counts.

Good luck and best wishes.

Mark L.