Choosing a handgun, especially for concealed carry, is a deeply personal decision. Two pistols consistently top many "best of" lists: the Sig Sauer P320 and the Smith & Wesson M&P 2.0. Both are striker-fired, polymer-framed handguns known for reliability and ergonomics. However, significant differences exist that cater to varying preferences and needs. This in-depth comparison will help you determine which pistol best suits your requirements.
Key Differences: A Side-by-Side Look
| Feature | Sig Sauer P320 | Smith & Wesson M&P 2.0 |
|---|---|---|
| Frame | Polymer, modular (changeable grip modules) | Polymer |
| Trigger | Striker-fired, generally considered crisp | Striker-fired, slightly heavier pull than P320 |
| Grip Texture | Varies by grip module; generally aggressive | Textured, but less aggressive than some P320s |
| Sights | Varies by model; often includes night sights | Varies by model; often includes night sights |
| Disassembly | Requires takedown lever; generally simple | Requires takedown lever; generally simple |
| Ambidextrous Features | Many models offer ambidextrous controls | Offers ambidextrous slide releases and magazine releases |
| Customization | Highly customizable with various grip modules and accessories | Customizable with aftermarket parts, but less extensive than P320 |
| Price | Generally more expensive for comparable features | Generally more affordable |
Ergonomics and Feel: The Handgun's Embrace
The Sig P320's modularity is a significant advantage. Different grip modules allow users to customize the fit to their hand size, significantly impacting comfort and control. This is especially crucial for concealed carry where a secure grip is paramount. The M&P 2.0, while not modular, still offers a comfortable grip for many shooters, thanks to its textured polymer frame. However, the lack of modularity means finding the perfect fit might involve trying different sizes in the store.
Trigger Performance: The Heart of Accuracy
Both pistols feature striker-fired mechanisms, known for their relatively short, light trigger pulls. Generally, the P320's trigger is lauded for its crispness and clean break, contributing to improved accuracy. The M&P 2.0's trigger is slightly heavier and may feel a bit less refined, though it's still quite usable and reliable. Individual preferences will significantly influence the perception of each trigger's performance.
Concealed Carry Considerations: Size and Weight
The P320's modularity allows users to choose a smaller grip module, making it a viable option for concealed carry, even for individuals with smaller hands. The M&P 2.0 also offers various sizes (compact, subcompact), providing options for concealed carry. The weight difference between models will influence how comfortable each is to carry throughout the day. Consider trying on different models to see which feels best for your body type and preferred carry method.
Reliability and Maintenance: The Long Haul
Both the Sig Sauer P320 and Smith & Wesson M&P 2.0 boast excellent reputations for reliability. Both are relatively easy to maintain, requiring standard cleaning and lubrication. The simplicity of their designs contributes to their dependability and ease of use.
The Verdict: Which Pistol Reigns Supreme?
There's no single "winner" in this comparison. The best pistol depends entirely on individual needs and preferences.
- Choose the Sig Sauer P320 if: You prioritize modularity and a crisp trigger, valuing customization and a potentially more comfortable grip. The price point may be a factor.
- Choose the Smith & Wesson M&P 2.0 if: You're looking for a reliable, affordable handgun with a comfortable grip and a simpler design. The slightly heavier trigger may not be a deterrent.
Ultimately, the best approach is to rent or borrow both pistols and spend time at the range. This hands-on experience will provide the most accurate assessment of which handgun feels best and performs optimally for you. Remember to always prioritize safety and proper training when handling firearms.
