PPS .9mm vs. S&W M&P9C

[ldhunter1959]

Do any of you PPS owners also happen to own the Smith-Wesson M&P 9C? As my issues with my Taurus 709 continue (being sent back to factor for second time in less than a month), I am kind of thinking the PPS may be in my near future. But, I have always liked the feel of the M&P, too. Have not been in a place where both were available.
Primary purpose is concealed carry. Are the two pistols comparable?

[Milspec]

I sold my M&Pc 9mm and bought a PPS. The PPS is thinner and easier to conceal.

[ldhunter1959]

As it is a double-stack, I would expect it to be thicker - the specs show the PPS at about .9 inch and the M&P C at about 1.2 inch. Probaby pretty close to the CZ 2075 I traded for the PT 709 (gun shop got the best of that deal).
Some S&W guys seem to think the M&P is a significantly more dependable firearm than the PPS. That surprises me, but it might be an S&W bias.

[bigfatdave]

I have fired both back-to-back, the M&P 9c is a perfectly good gun but not as good a fit to my hand as the PPS or other pistols I own, but that's a personal ergonomic thing.
They're good guns, if they fit your hand and you don't mind the width ... I like flat squared-off autoloaders like the PPS, 1911, etc etc, with a good holster/belt a M&P9c wouldn't be all that much harder to conceal.

I'm sure the reliability range of PPS and M&P pistols overlaps, they're both pretty damn reliable service-grade pistols. If you like the trigger and grip there's no reason it wouldn't run for you.

The real question is why the M&P9c? ... if I wanted a doublestack carry 9mm pistol I'd be chasing a P99c or Ruger's SR9c or a Springfield XD9sc.

[ldhunter1959]

Forgot about the SR9C. If I go doublestack, the M&P Compact just has some appeal to me that other's don't have - personal preference. I believe the M&P compact to about the most compact of the doublestacks. No, pure preference is single stack.

[LanceOregon]

Originally Posted by ldhunter1959

Forgot about the SR9C. If I go doublestack, the M&P Compact just has some appeal to me that other's don't have - personal preference. I believe the M&P compact to about the most compact of the doublestacks. No, pure preference is single stack.

I own both. The Trigger on the PPS is better. But the M&P Compact has the definite ammo capacity advantage: 12 + 1 rounds, compared to 7 +1 rounds on the PPS. That is 5 more rounds.

But as far as width goes, there is no contest. The PPS is dramatically thinner and more comfortable to carry.

Here is a comparison photo. My PPS is on the left, my S&W M&P compact on the right:

[ldhunter1959]

Capacity is not as big of an issue. Compactness and concealability and of course dependability are more important to me. I did give up on the Taurus 709 slim (wonderful size and feature set, but bad experience - I traded it for a Taurus 9mm 1911 - fun, solid gun). So I will still be looking for a 9mm carry pistol - packing either a Colt Agent revolver or a Bersa Thunder .380 these days.
But my old shovelhead harley has consumed some of my "spare" fun tickets of late and so a new gun must wait. At about $700, the PPS is not a purchase to sneeze at in my pocketbook.

[Walternet]

Maybe a look at the Kahr arms Cw9,they can be had for about 375.00,You just have to be ready for a longer pull than either,MP or PPS,but very accurate shooter.

[LanceOregon]

The quality of the Kahr pistols, however, cannot begin to compare with the Walther PPS.

.

[Walternet]

Originally Posted by LanceOregon

The quality of the Kahr pistols, however, cannot begin to compare with the Walther PPS.

.

I haven't owned but have shot a PPS, but I do own a p99 and love the Walthers,I also own 3 Kahrs all of them have been flawless.But I disagree that they cannot begin to compare,that's a big blanket to be tossing .The CW9's are great guns.This is just my opinion like you have yours.