Smith and Wesson’s Military & Police (S&W M&P) series of semiautomatic pistols have had a rocky history. Designed at a time when Smith and Wesson desperately needed a competitor to the Glock, the first generation M&Ps suffered from significant reliability issues. But now with the M&P 2.0, does S&W have an actual competitor to the venerable Glock?

S&W first tried to create a striker-fired polymer-framed pistol with the S&W Sigma in the 1990s as a knee jerk reaction to Glock’s exploding popularity on the American pistol market. But in their rush, S&W practically copied Glock’s fire control group verbatim, leading to a patent lawsuit from Glock. The Sigma was slightly redesigned, but it was a rushed design that never really caught on, though the later SD9 series saw some popularity.

S&W would try again after some deliberation with the Military & Police range of semiautomatic pistols. The name was a throwback to S&W’s old incredibly popular Model 10 revolver, which was called the Military & Police in some variants. The M&P pistol was aggressively marketed and released in a wide variety of calibers to directly compete with the Glock.

What makes the M&P unique is the hinged trigger safety. While a lot of polymer/striker designs feature a trigger safety, most are of the blade type with a single blade in the center of the trigger preventing movement unless depressed. Apart from the Glock, the H&K VP9, Walther P99/PPS/PPQ, and CZ P-10C, among others, use this system. The M&P’s trigger, on the other hand, is broken into 2 parts with a joint down the center. The bottom of the trigger is the trigger safety which must rotate rearwards to release the trigger and let the trigger pull continue.

But early M&Ps suffered from significant reliability issues. Texas DPS adopted the M&P, only to switch back to Sig Sauer P226s in 2014, Similar problems occurred with Belgian police.

S&W decided to give the pistol a soft relaunch with the M&P 2.0, adding a better trigger, more aggressive grip texturing, and an extended steel frame inside the pistol. Most reliability issues seem to be ironed out on the 2.0 release.

So how does the M&P 2.0 stack up to the Glock? Pretty well, though it lacks Glock’s extensive aftermarket. Where the M&P really shines is the amount of options in safeties, calibers and configurations that they offer with the 2.0. Glock refuses to deviate far from the standard Glock design when selling pistols to consumers and most organizations, only adding manual safeties for major contracts like the U.S. Army Modular Handgun System (MHS) trials.

On the other hand, the M&P offers variants of every pistol with and without a manual safety. S&W’s premium “Performance Center” variants even feature a grip safety while removing the trigger safety in favor of a single piece aluminum trigger.

This makes the M&P one of the best options out there for someone looking for a striker-fired polymer-framed pistol with a manual safety. While MSRPs of M&Ps are around the same as similar Glock models, street prices tend to be cheaper. While it took almost a decade, S&W has finally made a striker-fired polymer-framed pistol that can compete with the Glock.

Charlie Gao studied Political and Computer Science at Grinnell College and is a frequent commentator on defense and national security issues.

Image: Creative Commons.