any flies on the m&p??

fellas... i've been watching the smith and wesson m&p rollout w/ detached curiosity. handled one a few times, but never shot it. this weekend i handled one again, and looked it over critically. it isn't as refined as a sig p-series - but it isn't priced like a sig-p either. its more comfy than a glock, more appealing lines than an h&k, and smoother than an xd.

not a big fan of the mag disconnect, but don't think that's a real big deal. magazine availability isn't what i'd like, and factory mags are expensive at ~$40 per - but not any worse than h&k (yeah, glock owns the mag market).

what is the downfall of the m&p? for the longest time smith produced garbage for autoloaders, but the m&p appears to be a serious, well-designed gun that comes in less expensive than a glock, and much smoother than an xd...

for awhile there the h&k was on my short-list of guns to buy next, but that m&p is very attractive. i gotta wonder, what am i overlooking? why would i, or anybody for that matter, choose an h&k over the smith?

CB900F wrote: Dak; It's been my feeling that the M&P line is a face-lift of the Sigmas.  The Sigmas have had a lot of well-deserved bad press.  I suspect that since Walther & S&W are cooperating with each other, that Walther has stepped in to help the Sigma line become saleable.  Part of that effort would seem to be the re-name, ala .244/6mm Remington. 900F

That's my take on it, too. Nothing more than a rehashed Sigma. The 'new' M&P isn't enough to get me interested in it. Generally, I don't like S&W autos anyway... But I do have a stainless 4006 that shoots well, though.

As for polymer pistols.... I'll keep my Glock 22 .40 cal thanks....