M&P M2.0 Compact Leaked | Smith & Wesson Taking The Glock 19 Head On?

It looks like Smith & Wesson is planning to throw down with the Glock 19 in some good ol’ fashioned fisticuffs. The brand new M2.0 Compact seems to check just about every box that the Glock 19 does, AND it has more features than the Austrian wonder pistol.

While I haven’t had extended range time with the current full-size M&P M2.0 models, I did get a chance to shoot one at a range event briefly and was extremely impressed at the improvements that have been made. The texturing was spot on, the slide serrations were super functional, and the pistol shot rather well for the couple of mags I was given.

Take those features and apply them to an M&P Compact that is Glock 19 sized and you have a pistol that may just woo me to the dark side of striker fired handguns. Now to get my hands on one.

Along with the promo photo that was leaked, it appears that a dealer flyer or something was leaked as well. Thankfully we see all of the specs on the pistol except for what the MSRP is, but I was able to reach out to one my sources in the industry and come up with a possible MSRP of $569 and a probable street price of $499.

As soon as some pre-sales pop up I will update the post with a link HERE > Without Safety 9mm – .40 S&W | With Safety 9mm.40 S&W.

 

 

 





Patrick R

Patrick is a Senior Writer for The Firearm Blog and TFBTV Host. He is a verified gun nerd. With a lifelong passion for shooting, he has a love for all types of firearms, especially overly modified plastic handguns, precision rifles, and AR based things. You can follow Patrick on Instagram @tfbpatrick, Facebook, or contact him by email at TFBpatrick@gmail.com.

The above post is my opinion and does not reflect the views of any company or organization.


Advertisement

  • wicapiwakan

    welp, i just bought a G19 about 2 weeks ago, too. i figured this would be coming out eventually but didn’t know when and didn’t want to wait. i was interested to at least give one of these a squeeze but my old carry gun (a used bersa, it was at the time the best pistol i could afford and i put over 1k rounds through it before i had any issues) was starting to give up the ghost and i thought it unwise to carry it too much longer.

    well, the die is cast, i suppose. even if this is good, i suppose it won’t suddenly make the G19 bad.

    • Stuki Moi

      It will take a lot more than yet another attempted G19 clone to make the G19 “bad.”

      If the 2.0s hold on to the softer shooting in .40 advantage of the originals, the 23 may face some competition.

      • Patrick R. – Senior Writer

        I don’t think that .40 is really that important anymore. .40 pistol sales have been dying at an alarming pace. I really think that we will see it die out almost entirely in the next couple decades.

        • wicapiwakan

          FWIW i never really got the point as it’s only ever been marginally better than 9, but ammo costs more and recoil is significantly harsher. i see the same problem to an even larger extent with .357 sig.

          • Patrick Karmel Shamsuddoha

            What you have to understand about 40 Smith & Wesson is it was developed in a time where a +P+ 9 mm hollowpoint rounds didn’t exist yet, .40 s&w forced technology advancement in the ammunition that at the time really only had FMJ and a few specialty hollow point that had a host of there own issues in early 80s and 90s The creation in standardization of the FBI ammunition test gave everyone a benchmark improve their ammo to meet a minimum threshold of performance. so yeah modern 9mm is almost as good as 40 Smith & Wesson’s now that you can shoot it in +P+ hollow points the smaller round

          • BillyOblivion

            .40 wasn’t an *advancement*, it was a retreat.

          • wicapiwakan

            except, you really don’t need 9mm +p+

            there are plenty of standard or regular old +p rounds that pass the FBI ballistics protocols. when it comes to things like barrier penetration and windshields, putting more power behind the round can even be a detriment. that’s all down to bullet design instead of brute force.

            so with .40 you’re left with a round that’s only marginally better performing than 9 (which still passes all the tests), kicks harder, blows up guns and costs more. it’s not as bad as .357 sig, but i still just don’t understand why it’s a thing in 2017. 9 is fine, and it really always has been.

          • Stuki Moi

            There’s a bit of space between passing the driving test, and being an ideal driver…. 🙂

            More seriously, 9 is great for police and military use. And ditto for civilian defense against other humans. But even in urban settings, I suspect a civilian is at least as likely to be justified in firing his sidearm at an aggressive stray dog, as at another person. In more rural settings, add moose and bears and whatever else.

            Against 4 leggeds, the added powder capacity of the .40/.357 starts to make more sense. While, in the .40/.357, not being extreme enough to detract from their defensive uses. They really are a more direct auto pistol substitute for the traditional revolver all-use round, the .357 magnum.

          • Stuki Moi

            Problem is, you can’t find +p+ training rounds. And if you do, +p+ rounds have very little standardization. Even some cops who hated the .40, aren’t too happy to be handed el cheap’n-weako 115 grainers for all their training; then be sent out on the street with a round with 50% more recoil, and twice the blast and cycle speed.

            .357 Sig is the ultimate numero uno wrt standardization. Every load is pretty much exactly the same. From training FMJs to HPs. You can mix’n’match Speer, Federal, Winchester and Remington rounds, both defensive hollowpoints and training FMJs, all in the same magazine; and you won’t know which one is which when firing them.

            But .40 is almost as standardized, just separated in a few different weight classes.

            Both calibers makes for more realistic training, compared to what all but the most “sophisticated” of 9 wielding departments are privy to.

          • BillyOblivion

            BIGGER IS BETTER!!!

            COMBAT PISTOL CALIBERS START WITH 4!!!

          • pablo pintos

            10mm ..

          • BillyOblivion

            “Caliber” is measured in inches.

            10mm is a bore diameter 🙂

        • Patrick Karmel Shamsuddoha

          I don’t think the decline of 40 is going to be as complete as a lot of people claim it will be there are so many abstract cartridges out there that are still supported by companies. I’m not arguing that 40s best days are ahead it’s hay day is over but it won’t disappear

        • Stuki Moi

          I’ll try this again…..

          I believe the .40 will fall in usage, but stop at a plateau.

          .40/.357 (in all guns essentially the same round with a different barrel), is much closer to a .357mag for the auto pistol era. Their scope of reasonable use, stretches from unquestioned defensive use, to minimalist bear defense. And all in between. From legendary .357/125 magnum impersonators, to .40/180 “FBI” rounds.

          And, due to the engineering that has gone into making the blunt rounds feed while still retaining chamber support, many/most FMJ training rounds are now largely indistinguishable from specialized bear/woods loads: Blunt and with large meplats. At the 1 in 10 rifling that is becoming the standard, the .40/180s are as ideal as a general use auto caliber gets, for maximum penetration with solids.

          In addition, pressures and bullet weights are very standardized. In .357 almost 100%. In .40, to within a few different weights. In all cases, your training rounds are ballisticly identical to your service ones. And, per above, to your bear/woods ones. This is important for generations who did not grow up shooting revolvers, as there is no time where you are more likely to subconsciously revert to how you’ve trained, than when faced with a charging bear. Or moose. Or pitbull…..

          Hence, unless you are judged on narrowly timed police qualification courses, or really mind the (often slight) added recoil, the added capacity of the .40/.357 adds a lot of versatility. While taking a very slight toll in terms of capacity. And none at all in terms of grip size and holster compatibility.

  • Patrick Karmel Shamsuddoha

    Haha I was in the dark despair of almost buying a gen5 19 and I have been saved M&P 2.0 compact phenomenal lol JK

    But in all honesty this size gun is about 6 years over due

    • Stuki Moi

      But now they need a subcompact…….

      • Patrick Karmel Shamsuddoha

        They have been making the original M&P compact with the 12 rd mags 3in Barrel and while those sold well they just never had the appeal as the 19 but they were much better shooters then the 26 which is what they should be compared to

        • Stuki Moi

          I just can’t see Smith walk away from the huge market their “tweener” size afforded the old Compact. The 19 and this one, is just a bit too big for many non operators, and the 26 is too small and lacks a light rail. With the original M&P Compact being just about Goldilocks.

          The 2.0 grip texture would work great on that gun. Trigger improvements too, I suppose.

          • Adrian

            Stuki- 100% agree. The Original 9c was perfectly smack dab in the middle. I love my 9c. The only thing that could have been better is giving it the 2.0 stippling job. I don’t mind the trigger. Its fine for a carry gun.

            I was excited about seeing the compact until i saw that it was 15 rounds making it a longer grip. Its 2(3 if you +1) rounds shy of being a full size grip. Heck with my x-grip and one of my full size magazines my 9c now has 18 rounds. I thought that was excellent planning.

            All in all they make a great product and im sure it will sell well. I’m in the market for a compact 45 now. I really want to get the 2.0 45c so I hope they leave its dimensions like the current 45c but 2.0 it.

        • Grant

          One thing I don’t understand is when you read a review of the G26, they never mention factory 12 round mags are available. Glock should really include one with every G26 sold, instead of packaging them with all 10 round mags.

        • Bill

          Yeah, what you said. I figured my “old” Compact was analogous to my G19.

      • wicapiwakan

        you know, i’ve kind of soured a bit on subcompacts. i was in the market for one for quite some time, i even intended to buy a G26, shield, PPS or similar.

        i went to the gun store and looked at the G26. it fit my hand without too much trouble (i have small hands) and it seemed pretty nice. same with the PPS.

        then the gun store clerk asked if i’d like to try a G19. now, being the guy i am, i of course said yes, as i’ve never met a pistol i didn’t like enough to at least fondle.

        the G19 fit me pretty well. i tried on a holster and the gun, and it didn’t print. i pretty much instantly forgot about the G26 and similar, and plonked my money down for the 19.

        i’m not a large man. i’m 5’8″ and have tiny hands. if i can comfortably carry the gun and it doesn’t print, most anyone could. so, the question i have is now is why would you give up the capacity, the accuracy and the overall power of a G19 for a smaller gun, when the G19 carries just fine for a little guy like me?

        there doesn’t seem to be much point. from now on, i’m hooked on this size of pistol. i think it’s the sweet spot. it’s not huge and unwieldy, but it doesn’t give up much in terms of velocity or shootability.

        • BillyOblivion

          …and have tiny hands.

          Donald? is that you?

          Does the SS let you have a gun?

          But seriously, I’ve got a 26, a 19 and a 43–purchased in that order over 12 to 14 years.

          The 26 *is* easier to conceal, especially if you’re sitting. Or rather it’s not easier to conceal when sitting, it’s just easier to sit (I’ve been carrying appendix that long).

          These days honestly the 26 doesn’t get much carry–the 43 is more comfortable for those times when I’m in “ABC” mode, and the 19 goes with me when I’m feeling a bit more paranoid.

          Of course there’s the S&W M&P Shield for that niche, which isn’t *quite* as nice as the glock–it’s got one more round, but it’s one round bigger.

          And (and this shouldn’t matter, but it does to me) the Smiths just *look* busier. Which trips the “they’re tarting it up” button.

        • Rick O’Shay

          The Shield is almost dimensionally identical to the 9c, just a bit thicker in the grip and heavier. That’s it. Longer in the grip than the 9c, even. To call the Shield a subcompact is a joke.

          • TwoThirtyGr

            The shield is thicker in the grip than the 9c and heavier? The shield is a single stack, 9c is a double stack.

          • Rick O’Shay

            I know. I’m simply saying, for all the praises people sing for the Shield, the 9c is pretty overlooked.

          • Demuslim Fanboy

            I carry the M&P9c my brother has the shield. The shield is considerably skinnier but also much taller (prints more when bending over). I love mine and will probably get shield or a g43 sometime as well. The M&P9C is a great firearm- however, after carrying for a while now- i would recommend going the smallest, lightest, and thinnest gun if CCW is all you care about. Summertime is hard and if its not comfortable you’re not going to carry it.

          • Rick O’Shay

            There is literally, when both are fully loaded, a mere 4 ounce difference between the two. The slide width is pretty much identical. The frame on the 9c is just a *hair* wider. The biggest differences between the two, as you mentioned, is pretty much the grip. And that grip on the Shield… dang that is a looooong grip for a so-called “compact.” I feel like the Shield is the harder one to conceal, between the two.
            If you’re carrying concealed, odds are you’re probably carrying IWB. If we’re going to be completely honest when it comes to gun thickness and concealability, an 1/8″ difference in grip thickness is absolutely nothing under a shirt. No one can see that. And if you’re having so much difficulty carrying and concealing a handgun that you need to lose 4 ounces for it to work, I’d actually suggest getting a better belt and holster.
            I’m not at all saying the Shield is a terrible gun. I just think it’s a bit overhyped, and that S&W already had a better conceal carry gun out with the 9c.

        • Mike

          The G19 is near perfect. However I carry a G26 because it work for pocket carry for me.
          The M&P is nice and if I did not own several Glocks and a “few” magazines I would probably buy one. But I do not think any of the new pistols are that much better that I would replace my existing one.

          • Richard Lutz

            Pocket carry? Seems to me a DAO revolver would be much safer for pocket carry than a Glock unless it has a NY2 trigger which makes it too hard to shoot well.

        • scaatylobo

          TOTALLY AGREE, but I am 5’4″ and a bit stocky [ 48″ chest[
          So the G-23 and the G-19 are the sweet spot for me too.
          I have a 43,17,35,30sf,27,to compare them to.
          I have shot the S&W 2.0 and it was a hoot for sure.
          BUT the only way I would even consider losing the Glocks is —— IF S&W took them in trade ,even up.
          Then I would “consider” that.

        • CavScout

          You went in without a clear idea of what you wanted, and walked out with a full size pistol… The 19 isn’t compact, and this new compact is only compact in name. The Shield and PPS vs the G26 vs the G19; all very different sized guns. The Shield and PPS aren’t ‘compacts.’ They’re whatever the new slim/carry size that is huge now.

      • Adam D.

        That’s what I thought as well.
        If they’re planning to discontinue the original M&P9C that is.
        I’ve only shot it once before, but I loved it.
        It’s a very interesting size.
        Not as small as a G26, but noticeably smaller than a G19.
        Double stack capacity, “full size” ergonomics,
        but in a very compact size overall, and a lot more comfortable than the Glocks.
        Hurts me to say that, because I love Glocks, but basically any modern polymer framed gun I get to use or handle nowadays is more comfortable than the good old Plastic Fantastic.

        I think the original M&P9C filled a very unique gap in the market with its size, but I guess there’s a good reason why S&W changed it.
        Probably they want to gravitate more towards the recent “MHS proportions”.
        For subcompacts the Shield is still a good option, but it’s a single stack, and that’s a different animal altogether.
        Who knows, maybe Smith has a true subcompact double stack in the pipeline.

        • Veritas

          What gets me is everyone made a gun with that between a G26/G19 size. Besides Smith, Walther, H&K, Sig, Ruger. And I’ve never met someone who had those and praised them as better in size than a G26/G19.

        • Demuslim Fanboy

          I love my M&P9C. Its treated me so good. I think the biggest selling point is its size to capacity ratio. I saw a video comparing height*length to capacity. Simply put the M&P9c is the most efficient bullet per square in. Very utilitarian choice.

      • CavScout

        Yes they do. I was waiting for what will now be the 2.0 ‘subcompact’ ever sine 2.0 guns were announced. Guess I’ll have to wait more months. The new Compact is slightly smaller than THEIR full size models, but is still full size pistol.

    • Patrick R. – Senior Writer

      I have to admit, I am really torn ….

      • Patrick Karmel Shamsuddoha

        I’m torn between sending it to ATEI here in Detroit or to Agency Arms to turn it into a Roland special M&P

        • Patrick R. – Senior Writer

          ATEi doe some amazing work. They will be getting all my machine work going forward for what it is worth.

      • Patrick Karmel Shamsuddoha

        Agency is pretty but ATEI is the hometown hero

      • Marc

        Hammer fired Patrick. Come back to the light.

    • Lawren Downing

      M&P 2.0 Compact all day long no contest. The grip angel alone has me sold.

    • n0truscotsman

      I’ve been running a M&P standard and shield for a couple years now. Ill probably pick up one of these.

    • 2ThinkN_Do2

      They’ve had the M&P Compact for around a decade, it’s a fine piece of equipment; have not had any reason to return for service, or complain about either the compact 9 or 40. I’m sure this improved version will be equally as excellent. I’ll stick with y originals however.

    • CavScout

      I like options, but like the G19, this new one is a full sized pistol. I prefer not to carry full sized pistols. For those times I want to carry more than a Shield, the first gen compact size works really well, and still conceals well enough.

  • Stuki Moi

    This thing sure looks awesome! Looks purposeful and comfortable at the same time.

    Also, the sheer number of compact’ish striker guns that have finally “caught up” with the G19, has got to mean some serious downward pressure on prices, once their newness wears off.

  • Audie Bakerson

    I notice the “New” on the magazine portion, though a quick check of S&W’s site says there isn’t currently a 13 round mag and that may just be what it is referring to.

    • Patrick R. – Senior Writer

      That is correct. In fact, neither size magazine should be available on the Smith site. This is the first compact grip M&P that has been produced, the prior compact was more of a sub-compact in size.

  • Lawren Downing

    My prayers have finally been answered. Bye Bye Glock

  • James Young

    It’s looks good and all, but I have my M&P9c I carry and that seems like the perfect size. The G19 sized guns feel too big for carry, and I’d rather just grab the full sized M&P. Or grab a 17 round mag with a grip sleeve and stick it in my M&P9c for HD or as use it as a spare mag.

    • Bill

      For a while I carried a 9c in uniform with 2 full size mags as spares.

  • James Young

    Is something wrong on the website? It says the weight is 28oz, but the M&P2.0 Full Size is 4oz lighter than that, huh? That doesn’t makes sense. Sounds like a typo.

    • nate

      yeah websites sucks for posting actual facts on pistol weight and dimensions. maybe one was weighed with magazine inserted and the other was not

  • BillyOblivion

    Hey reporter, what features does it have that the Glock doesn’t?

    • Patrick R. – Senior Writer

      Hey reader, it comes with a tool in the grip.

      Also, forward serrations, useful interchangeable backstraps, better sights and (I am assuming) 1913 rail instead of the Glock rail.

      Woulda been more fun for you if you had used your eyeballs to look at the photos before commenting. It would have made you seem a lot smarter.

      • Rick O’Shay

        Someone’s still salty about his RAS review feedback.

        I kid, I kid.

      • PK

        Aw, don’t be nasty. Get some sleep, man.

        • burningwar

          Nah, I like the constant reminder of why I run TFB on full Adblock.

        • BillyButton

          And get the man some platform shoes, too, while you’re at it.

          • Patrick R. – Senior Writer

            2/10 – Lacks originality and substance. I expect better from TFB trolls.

      • Rnasser Rnasser

        MICRO forward serrations… 😀

      • Edeco

        O.O

      • AndyHasky

        OPTIONAL safety is huge plus for some too.

      • Mmmtacos

        Damn, Pat, calm down…

      • Stan Darsh

        Why did you delete the TFBTV commercial for Century Arms? The bit were you said “the parts and construction of the C39V2 are of the utmost quality” was hilarious.

        • Patrick R. – Senior Writer

          I think I addressed that in the video that was re uploaded.

      • DangerousClown

        Yeah, but most Glocks have a tool ON the grip.

    • PK

      It’s another option, for starters. That’s what makes this hobby so wonderful, there’s something for everyone. We all have slightly different preferences, and it’s good to have more choices on the market.

    • John

      Unlike the Glock, it feels good in the hand.

      The only feature you really need.

      • john huscio

        That “feature” is subjective.

  • N8ballnhv

    So they have one in .40, but not one in .45 ACP? Hopefully they have one coming soon.

    • Mmmtacos

      With few exceptions most manufacturers that offer 9 and 40 pistols tend to use the same frames and numerous other parts as well that can be used between both calibers or modified for one caliber to another (like milling out the extra space for a 40 barrel from a 9 slide).

      Pistols of the same variety in 45 tend to require far more different parts, most notably the frame itself. You can see this just in Glock and S&W: Glock came out with the 22 and 23 right after the .40S&W dropped by just changing a few things in the 17 and 19. Then they came out with their sub compacts in 9 and 40: the 26 and 27 models respectively. Glock’s sub compact 45 is a totally different beast: the 30, which has a very distinct magazine base pad. S&W M&P 9 and 40 pistols look identical, but the 45 is obviously different just by looking at the slide. Same with the Shield: the 9 and 40 have been on the market for years while the 45 only just recently came out.

      Due to manufacturing costs and an assumed lack of demand who knows if we will ever see a S&W compact 45, I can tell you Glock doesn’t offer one and they offer 25 different pistols to US civilians in seven different calibers (never mind the past and future variations of each of those pistols).

      I’m just saying: don’t hold your breath. It took four years after the Shield was released before a 45 came out.

  • JumpIf NotZero

    I hope S&W knows just how badly they messed up by not making the 2.0 series modular.

    This gun with a serialized fire control group – DONE.

    • Patrick R. – Senior Writer

      What problem does that solve exactly? I know exactly one person that has converted their P320 … one. Most just buy another gun since ti is almost the same spend.

      • Xerxes036

        I switch my P320 between the Compact and the Carry configuration regularly. Sometimes I like having the full 17 round capacity without having the full bulk of a full size gun.

        • Patrick R. – Senior Writer

          Make that two out of the half million delivered pistols.

          • Xerxes036

            1. The infamous Patrick acknowledged me!

            2. Those who will admit to it!

        • Stuki Moi

          Compact to Carry is just a $40 grip frame, right?

          Considering some of the most popular grip mods for Glocks, are cutting 19 grips to 26 length, and thatt one of Glock’s current gaps in the lineup is a “carry” sized gun, that in and of itself would be a nice feature of P250/320 like modularity.

          And then there’s the aftermarket…..

          • Xerxes036

            Yep a $40 grip module. The MHS Glock is basically a G19 slide assembly with a G17 sized grip and a frame mounted safety.

      • AndyHasky

        the modularity it’ll provide once the aftermarket starts supporting it will be huge and you’ll ask why you ever questioned it in a few years. There is no doubt it is the future and Glock and S&W will be playing catch up to sig in a few years.

        • Patrick R. – Senior Writer

          Care to expand on that? You really didn’t give an answer.

        • Clint Thompson

          Yep, I read a post about using the p320 FCU in a short barreled carbine recently somewhere…firecontrolunit.com sounds oddly familiar

      • Clint Thompson

        I like a lot of your articles and reviews but I strongly disagree on this.

        Well I bought a compact p320, got a full size conversion kit with siglites for 379, bought a small grip for each, (80) a medium carry module for my compact slide (40) and a medium subcompact grip (40) plus a 12 round mag (40) for my subcompact. For less than 1000 I have a good competition/ range gun, a 15-17round compact that’s concealable and a 12-15 round subcompact for deep concealment. All with night sights. For about $800 that’s 3 9mm firearms that all serve different purposes.

        LOTS of people with the p320 do similar things. Read sigtalk or another sig sauer forum for evidence. Your opinion =/= fact. Neither does mine.

        The Walther PPQ has the best trigger of any striker fired gun and no one I’ve spoken to has disagreed with me. That doesn’t make it a fact, though just an opinion. I’m sure lots of people online will disagree but I sure won’t say “well only one or two or 100 disagree so I’m still right”.

    • BBMW

      This gun is NOT modular in the way the SIG is. It just extends the molded in steel frame forward. That was part of the 2.0 changes.

      • TwoThirtyGr

        That was his point. Lol

    • jonp

      By a .40 and a Storm Lake 9mm barrel. Viola!

  • Jack Harrison

    How is this going to compare the Shield? More like the Shield 45 than the Shield 9? Would it be best to wait for the M2.0C or go with Shield?

    • Patrick R. – Senior Writer

      This is double stack, if you are looking at a single stack the Shield is your gun.

    • Rick O’Shay

      Dimensionally M&P 9c 1.0 is almost dimensionally identical to the Shield in 9mm, just a tad thicker in the grip due to the double stack, and a bit heavier as well. I imagine 2.0 will have nearly identical dimensions. I’ve owned and carried both the 9c and Shield, and prefer the 9c due to the ambi controls. A good holster and belt negate the thickness and heft in terms of conceal ability.

      • Demuslim Fanboy

        The Shield is a polymer frame with an overall height of 4.6 inches and length of 6.1 inches with a witdth of .95 inches.

        M&P9C – The pistol is 6.7 inches long, 4.3 inches high, 1.2 inches wide

        So the M&P9C (version 1) is actually shorter than the shield, a little longer and thicker. Height is one of the biggest factors in printing while weight and thickness are large factors in comfort.

    • 2ThinkN_Do2

      I’ve had 9 & 40 caliber M&P’s in full and compact size, and a Shield in 40. My favorite of all those is the 40 Compact. The Shield is not as small as I would like a single stack to be, so I traded it in for a Kimber Micro 9 CSE. The M&P line has been flawless for me, only once having problems with 9mm ammo sold exclusively thru Bass Pro made by Winchester. The same ammo is 40 cal. worked flawlessly, must’ve been a bad run on that box of 9’s. I would certainly recommend an M&P Compact in 9 or 40 based on my experience with them.

  • Brett baker

    “I shoulda been a MHS winna.”

  • Xerxes036

    About frickin time! I hated the size of the 1.0 compacts sold mine with no regrets a couple years ago.

  • EverythingIsTerrible

    Yes!

    I’ve been hoping the M&P 2.0 compacts would be G19 size so badly. I probably won’t even be buying a G19 gen 5 now.

  • Rnasser Rnasser

    Why the M&P didn’t made the MHS finals?

    • nate

      only people that know that are in the Army acquisition Office and the People at Smith and Wesson, and none of them will likely tell. My guess is that the Submission didn’t meet some technical details and wasn’t allowed to continue on at that point. When you choose a new item in military acquisition you first eliminate all submissions that do not meet the requirement’s and then you narrow down based on other factors (performance, cost, etc) so I think the M&P is a great gun and just because it didn’t make the MHS does not mean much to me because my needs are different than big army needs.

    • CoffeeIsLife

      Apparently, S&W didn’t spend enough $$$ bribing GAO officials…Sig has that art down to a science.

      • Gary Kirk

        A lesson hard learned from Beretta the last go round..

    • Stuki Moi

      Didn’t Glock claim, during the 5 launch, that their’s, and Sig’s, submissions, were the only ones that met the 2000 mean rounds between stoppage requirement?

      Sounds a bit strange to me, as I know plenty of M&Ps that have gone well beyond that, even being religiously fed nothing but whatever happens to be the cheapest at any given time. Can’t imagine the entire rest of the field somehow screwed up something that fundamental, and something which is pretty easy to get right nowadays.

  • nate

    Christmas is looking good this year

  • Mmmtacos

    This is a first-time for me where I hear about a new gun and know I will buy it. I mean, sure, there’s tons of guns I have wanted to buy, thought about buying, etc. but this is the one I have been waiting for.

    When I got my first M&P many moons ago I had a few gripes that held it back from being the ideal gun from me. Shortly before the M2.0 was announced I sold it as it fell out of favor. Then the M2.0 came out that addressed every one of my concerns. Ended up buying one earlier this year and it’s easily my favorite gun.

    But, it’s just too big for carry. So begrudgingly I carried a Glock 19 gen 3, a gun I’ve described as the gun I love to hate and hate to love. It wasn’t the gun I wanted to carry, but it was the gun that checked all the boxes: big enough to be comfortable, holds enough rounds, small enough to be concealable. I like many was befuddled as to why every other major manufacturer didn’t compete with a similar size pistol: something truly between a full size and compact. Only a handful did, but I didn’t care for them over the Glock 19.

    Now I have the M&P I want in the size I want. Yes, please. I will most definitely be buying this gun when it drops (no, not like a P320).

  • Trotro

    I’ve been looking for a p10-c for months now without success. If this comes out soon I may have to reconsider.

    • DangerousClown

      I don’t think anything S&W makes will be an alternative to a CZ. That’s from someone who carries one or the other daily.

  • Josh Ortiz

    I love the idea of M2.0 compact. The 4 inch barrel seems a little fishy to me. The full size M2.0 have 4.25 barrels. I would expect something more along the lines of 3.5 to 3.65 inch barrel.

  • john huscio

    If it has the Same squirtgun trigger and awful accuracy of the other m&ps, count me waaay out………bad timing to release this right in the middle of the new glock malestrom…….the gen 5s are gonna crush them.

    • Mmmtacos

      Admittedly the original M&P triggers were terrible, the trigger shape is not for everyone, and there was a short run of barrels that unlocked prematurely that resulted in poor accuracy (IIRC S&W replaced the barrels for free, too).

      The M2.0 trigger is miles better though. It’s no Apex, but it’s easily better than the stock Glock trigger unless the gen 5 improved.

      I don’t know how you can even ration that the M&P is an inaccurate gun outside the aforementioned issue that’s long since been rectified (and is non-existent on the M2.0). Among full size, tilting barrel, striker-fired, polymer framed pistols it’s just as accurate as the best of the production pistols in it’s class.

      Personally I think S&W is going to steal away some of Glock’s thunder with this. The Gen 5 was an incremental update compared to the M2.0 in the first place. This will be, and is, directly compared to the venerable Glock 19. I don’t know about you, but I am excited to see my favorite pistol finally available in the size I’ve always wanted. I won’t be carrying a Glock 19 for much longer, that much I am sure of.

  • Bulldogdriver

    Finally the perfect all round pistol! Have been waiting for this for ages.

  • Danger Dave

    These “forward serrations” are a joke. If they wanted something useful they should have went with the design they used on the first gen .45. It actually had full length serrations on the front of the slide. Also, what the hell is the point in these hideous square holes in the dust cover? Do they really need them to let everyone know they put metal under there?

  • tsh77769

    Someone will now take this gun and cut down the grip to use the 12 round compact mag. That would actually be pretty sweet.

  • Harry’s Holsters

    As a glock fanboy and an original M&P hater this might be my new carry gun.

    I’ve been really impressed with the 2.0 my buddy has and the texture is the best I’ve felt of both factory textures and custom stippling.

  • Madcap_Magician

    The odd thing is that as much as I liked the ergonomics on the M&P, I always thought they were the ugliest of the polymer service pistol families. This one looks much better.

  • Mr. Katt

    The ONLY feature this gun has that is an improvement over the Glock is the SIG/Beretta type takedown lever.

  • mig1nc

    I remember seeing this a long time ago, back when somebody leaked pictures of the Smith & Wesson MHS candidates. Everybody was posting about how the compact looked Glock 19 sized and how awesome it would be… Well, here we are today.

  • Tom

    The beauty of the G19, and what other manufacturers have not figured out, is the capacity and size/thickness. Sure the glock is super reliable, has a good reset, etc. but where it really stands alone is the thickness of the frame/grip for the capacity. The XDm compact is a perfect example, similar size barrel/grip to a G19, ergonomically I feel it’s better, and enjoy shooting it more, but it’s thickness makes it much less appealing to conceal and with less capacity. It’s the same with guns like the XDs/Shield vs the 42/43 the glock is smaller, lighter, and easier to conceal. The other thing is glocks tend to have very rounded/smooth lines and that tends to reduce the ease at which they print in concealment, there’s nothing to snag on. Many other guns have sharper more dramatic lines/corners/edges and they can print easier and snag on stuff.

    The key to knocking glock off it’s horse is threefold, it has to maintain the same capacity but be no thicker, it has to maintain the same reliability, and it has to have a good trigger. Reliability isn’t hard, many striker guns are just as reliable as glocks these days. Trigger is hit and miss because everyone likes something a bit different, but the size/capacity combo especially the thickness of the whole gun, slide, frame, and grip in that area glock pretty much stands alone.

  • TwoThirtyGr

    No backstrap hump with small backstrap goes a long way for a lot of people. I love the G19 but the backstrap/grip girth of the m&p 2.0 fits a lot of people’s hands fine where the Glock does not.

  • zacpierce

    I’m actually really disappointed if this is true. To me, the M&P 9C 1.0 was the absolutely perfect size carry/conceal firearm. Noticeably smaller than the G19. Just perfect in every way in terms of size and capacity. 12+1 is more than enough. Sacrificing comfort and concealability for the extra 3 rounds just doesn’t make any sense to me. I love the 9c and have been super excited for this release. This is such a letdown.

  • Bearacuda

    I’ve been saving up for a P10C but this does have appeal, especially in the potential aftermarket. With the CZ the scale of production (or lack thereof) worries me for the long term.

  • Pranqster

    But wheres the pig nose?

  • MP is steadily creeping up on the Springfield XDm 9mm 3.8 Compact. But the Springfield shoots like magic, right out of the box. I can put multiple shots in the same hole at 25 paces, sitting, supported by my arms on the table, with factory irons (weak, shameful factory sights), and I wear eyeglasses.

  • Dan

    I have three MP compacts and qualify as a retired chief LEO each year so I can carry anywhere in US. I can only carry with the one I qualify with. One is a forty with Viridian light and laser. All three handle recoil very well and can easily be carried in ankle holster or on the belt. I am anxious to see any improvements as they are fine the way they are.

  • Richard Lutz

    Nice, but I cannot help but feel it has too many features and violates the KIS principle. Better for police use due to the thumb/magazine safety options no doubt, but for militia/CCW use I cannot help think the Glock 19 is better and the more proven design.

  • bthomas

    The MP is a fine pistol. Wish S&W had gotten first out the door with it. Glock set the pace. Now everyone has to keep up. Maybe one day down the road, S&W will be as well regarded throughout the world as Glock. Right now, Glock is in first. Everything else is just everything else.

  • Old Vet

    Well, now I am re-thinking buying the Gen 5-19…..way to go S&W.

  • Gluemendoom

    Will the rebate apply?