Review of the Smith & Wesson M&P M2.0 Compact

Too little, too late.  That’s my only complaint regarding the M&P 2.0 Compact.  Let me explain.

Back in 2011, I wrote about switching over the M&P 9c.  The M&P line had been around since 2005 and was already well established as a platform that rivaled Glock for reliability.  At the time, I was shooting a Springfield Armory XD(m) for fun and sport, and a Ruger SR9c as a carry gun.  I wanted to shoot a single platform for all purposes and went with the S&W M&P 9c.   The M&P 9c served me well for four years.  I carried it with the 12-round magazine, but at home or in competition I used a 17-round magazine.  Still, I was always secretly jealous of the 15-round capacity that the Glock 19 guys enjoyed.

In January of 2014, the SIG P320 was released.  It would not be until about October of 2015 that I would spot one at a gun show – you can read my review of that gun here.  By mid-2016, I’d made the decision to switch from the S&W M&P line over to the SIG P320 platform.  For nearly the entire life of the M&P 9c, fans begged S&W to make a variant that was more or less Glock 19 sized – roughly the same dimensions and the same 15-round magazine capacity.  I can recall that nearly every year I owned my M&P 9c, when January would roll around, I’d think “this is the year Smith is going to come out with a Glock 19 sized model.”  And every year, I was disappointed.  I think that S&W didn’t want to make a gun quite so derivative of the Glock 19.  To the extent that the entire M&P line is essentially a S&W Glock, I think they wanted their preferred CCW gun to be different than a Glock 19.  Maybe.  Who knows?

In January 2017,  roughly one year after I walked away from the M&P line, S&W announces the M&P 2.0 line, or M2.0.  For the last few years leading up to the M2.0 line, several incremental changes were seen in certain models.  We saw a couple of updates to the M&P trigger, as well as a new grip texture (which were in the M&P Pro series).  All of these changes and more went into the new M&P M2.0 line, first released in full-size only.  But in January of this year, S&W finally, FINALLY gave us a true competitor to the legendary Glock 19 with the M&P M2.0 Compact:

I went to SHOT Show 2018, and got to fire the new M2.0 Compact at Industry Day on the Range.  I was impressed.  Darn impressed.  The stock trigger was light years ahead of the heavy, gritty trigger on the only M&P 9c.  MAYBE even better than the stock P320 trigger.  The grip texture was absolutely amazing.  In my hand, I had to admit that it felt even better than my beloved P320, thanks in part to the lower bore axis.  At this point, SIG had already won the Modular Handgun System, ensuring that the SIG P320 would be around for many years to come, with parts, magazines, and aftermarket support eventually becoming as ubiquitous as is the Beretta M9/92F. SIG had also released the P320 X-Five in 2017 – a purely competition oriented version of the P320.  Essentially, the SIG P320 line already had everything I could possibly want – to include a micro carry variant (P365) for pocket carry.  Still, I was super impressed with the M2.0 Compact at SHOT and picked up a pre-loved model in June – the owner didn’t care for how the textured grip felt on his body when he conceal carried the firearm (a common complaint we’ll get to shortly).

I’ve been testing out the gun for the last 5 months, and the M&P M2.0 Compact is nothing short of fantastic.  As I mentioned above, the trigger is much improved – here’s the five-pull average on my trigger gauge:

That’s just a hair under 6 lbs. – not bad at all.  Can that be improved?  Sure.  But the entire trigger is improved so much over the original M&P – the feel, the length of pull, the reset – I think many owners will weigh the cost and risks associated with an aftermarket trigger and conclude that “not bad” is good enough.  If it weren’t for the hinged trigger, I MIGHT just do the same.  But like many others, I dislike the M&P polymer hinged trigger.  And an Apex trigger kit will turn “not bad” into hands down the best striker fired trigger money can buy.  So I’ll probably get around to picking up an Apex trigger for it.  Probably.  Maybe.

Prior to the M2.0, my biggest complaints about the M&P 9c (aside from the capacity/size) was how much money I had to spend to get the gun the way I wanted.  I had to get the gun stippled, I had to replace the trigger, etc.  Now the M2.0 Compact is more or less on par with the SIG P320 Compact – neither gun HAS to be modified or upgraded at all to be eminently usable.  In fact, I like the grip texturing on the M&P even more than that of the P320 – I never wear a holstered gun without an undershirt, so the issue of the aggressive texturing rubbing your body raw which the previous owner of my gun had (and other owners have reported) doesn’t bother me in the slightest.  So compared to the P320 Compact, in many respects, I’d have to admit I might actually prefer the M&P M2.0 Compact:

Where the P320 beats out the M&P M2.0 is the P320 as a system, and I think this was a critical point as to why SIG beat out S&W for the Modular Handgun System award – heck, the solicitation was virtually written directly to the P320.  The removable fire control unit (FCU) and the flexibility which that design offers is a huge advantage, and I think more manufacturers will employ similar designs in the future.

Smith & Wesson is an American company, so it’s the kind of company I want to see succeed.  I can’t help but wonder what would have happened if S&W had been more aggressive about updating and upgrading the M&P line?  Had S&W rolled out the M2.0 line just two years prior, would that have made a difference in the Modular Handgun System solicitation (which as many have pointed out seemed to be written specifically to the P320 platform)?  Maybe.  We’ll never know.  That’s why I said at the beginning of this review that the M2.0 was too little, too late.  I firmly believe that had S&W brought the M2.0 line to market sooner, it would have had more and better 3 letter agency and Law Enforcement adoption.  At one time, S&W owned the LE market as S&W revolvers rode in the holsters of more LEOs than any other gun.  Once semi-autos took over the market, Glock and SIG dominated the LE market.  When the original M&P line came out, we started to see S&W challenge both Glock and, in particular, SIG.  The P226 was a mainstay for years, but many departments began looking for a more modern, lighter, and easier to operate alternative and the M&P made a great choice for many departments.  SIG responded to the increased adoption of polymer striker fired weapons from Glock and S&W, and developed their own – the P320.  The adoption of the P320 by most branches of the US Military (the Navy SEALS being a notable exception who has chosen the Glock 19) will make the P320 more attractive to most LE departments, and we’ve already seen a flurry of LE of announcements from SIG about LE sales in recent months.  So I’m afraid that S&W will once again find itself largely relegated to the consumer market…a very crowded consumer market.

Still, the M&P 2.0 Compact is a fantastic weapon that maintains its place as one of the three guns I recommend to anyone looking for a good self-defense gun:  Glock 19, SIG P320 Compact, and the M&P M2.0 Compact.

As a supplement to my written photo review, I’ve also recorded a video review with my thoughts on the S&W M&P M2.0 Compact: