Plastic vs. steel

[Maks_H]

I shoot with Stock II which is pretty much like Shadow but with worse trigger. Now I am considering to try a polymer "striker fire" gun. I have in mind M&P 9L I prefer G34 but isn't approved. What are pros and cons of polymer versus steel. Take in mind that I shoot IPSC production so tuned or aftermarket triggers are not allowed. I have to stay above 5.0lbs trigger. And there is no way that I can try M&P 9L at the range.

[Philo_Beddoe]

I shoot with Stock II which is pretty much like Shadow but with worse trigger. Now I am considering to try a polymer "striker fire" gun. I have in mind M&P 9L I prefer G34 but isn't approved. What are pros and cons of polymer versus steel. Take in mind that I shoot IPSC production so tuned or aftermarket triggers are not allowed. I have to stay above 5.0lbs trigger. And there is no way that I can try M&P 9L at the range.

Steel = heavier and because of that less recoil

Polymer = lighter and it seems to make your transitions faster

Personally I think it just comes down to preference.

I had a M&P pro but got rid of it and now shoot a shadow, under ipsc rules especially I think DA / SA are at a slight advantage. All your shots beside the first can be light SA.

[Iggy42]

I used to have a M&P40 (this was before the pros and the "L" versions) and I sold it for a 1911. Personally I prefer steel guns as for me polymer guns just don't feel right. That being said if I was going to go with a polymer (thinking of getting one as a carry pistol, 13rds of rock-n-roll in .45ACP is hard to say no to) I would get a XD(m). Grips feel better to me than a M&P, plus I just plain don't like Glock grips. I know some people will argue bore axis and such, but as long as you are happy with what you are shooting the rest is just window dressing.

The nice part about the M&P's and the XD(m)'s is that they have interchangeable backstraps so you have adjustment in the grip for a better fit. I will say that I found that I liked my M&P more (and shot better/more accurately) once I found the backstrap I was comfortable with. Biggest drawback for my personal M&P (your experience my vary) was that due to S&W's "safety trigger" there was a great deal of slack in the trigger. Again it just may have been my personal gun, but I have heard others say so. I imagine that all the polymer guns share this issue, but I would think some are better than others.

Being in a similar situation where I cannot try before I buy (local dealers won't let you and I am new to area so just no friends yet that will let me shoot their stuff) I would recommend visit as many dealers as possible and perhaps dry fire some if they will let you. Not the same as sending a live round down range but it will give you a rough idea of how the trigger will feel and such. There is a lot that you will miss going this route, but at least its something.

Edited March 19, 2011 by Iggy42

[z40acp]

If you are not allowed to change the sears, look at the M&P 9 PRO. Mine came with a pretty good trigger.

[Calmwater]

The Glock 17 is approved.

[feederic]

The thing I love about polymer guns is how easy parts drop in, and how cheap they are. Try replacing a steel frame for $40 from the factory while out of warranty.

[G34 CORDY]

steel for me. I like the feel of a steel gun, the weight helps with felt recoil.

[Cardinal]

I just went the other way. I bought a M&P full size a while ago and used that for IPSC PD.

But just picked up a Stock 2 on Wednesday.

Havent shot it much yet but it was immediately very obvious that the recoil was much less with the Stock 2.

The M&P is more snappy and more flip.

The trigger on my Stock2 was also okay.

I've ordered a new, lighter hammer spring to reduce the DA pull but haven't received it yet. No other changes so far.