Smith & Wesson M&P 3.5" vs 4" 2.0 Compact - Buying choices/decisions 

This was a fantastic comparison. The information was spot on and the video quality was amazing. Great job! 👍🏾

Awesome! I was looking for videos comparing these 2 guns just a couple of hours ago!

I love my M&P 3.6" M2.0 in 9mm. It's just a little smaller than my G19 which was my edc choice before. Great video.

Excellent comparison between The 9c and larger compact 2.0! Love my 9c, been my baby since 2012.

I own both…the 4inch stays in the nightstand…I carry the 3.6…both are outstanding.

Sleeves are available to use the 15 rounders, now, in the 9C. And there is an updated 9C designated as the 2.0 Subcompact but it shares the 3.6 barrel of the smaller 2.0 Compact instead of the 9C's 3.5 barrel.

The 3.5 1.0 is basically what most would call a subcompact when the 1.0 came out there was only two size full size and what used to be called compact now with the 2.0 there is full size compact and subcompact

When I first started carrying, weight was the biggest concern and not concealment. The rage was single stack 6-8 round count guns (sheild/G43/LCP). With the newer micro carries holding 10-12 rounds (Hellcat/P365/GX4/MC1) its the way to go over these two. However, they are snappy at the range, and not very comfortable to shoot while practicing. Normal EDC I'll go 2.0 because I'll practice with it more at the range.

nice video, so the 3.6 is subcompact, 4 compact and 4.25 full size?

I have both. The slide lock and the grip texture are the biggest changes. I consider the grip an upgrade and the slide lock a negative. I ended up sanding the metal pin on the slide lock to make it releasable with thumb pressure. Many people just remove the metal pin. The trigger felt exactly the same however I did notice changes to the sear mechanism while removing the sear for light sanding. Found a moon shaped crater on the top surface of the sear in both models. Recommend either sanding that off or replacing the sear entirely.

I currently own a full size, the 9c, and the shield, and I do carry concealed all of them (not at the same time of course) I was curious about getting the 2.0 compact but the difference in size compared to the full size is so negligible that I don’t think it is worth the investment for me. Now, if I were looking to buy my first M&P I would definitely buy the 2.0 compact hands down. After years of carrying them, The one thing I don’t like about the 9c and the shield is the short grip. Although I have mag extensions on both, I have to change my grip considerably to reload, that is why I prefer to carry the full size or my G19 instead. I liked your presentation very much, very clear and to the point. Thank you.

Like you,, I already have the 1.0 M&P9c. I saw a used 2.0 4” for $325 in good shape. I had to buy it as the other gun is awesome and it is a steal. It feels great and much improved trigger. I was sweating it in my local gun shop for weeks. Then I made the mistake of picking it up...

I got shield 40 cal with safety Heavy !! With 8 round and 7 mag , a small canon that delivers xtra power

You can get a pinky extension for the 10 round M&P9c 3.5; which is nice if your use to the longer grip and are forced to travel in CA.

I prefer the 2.0, 3.6 version. Best cc IMO

Good afternoon. Initially, I would like to congratulate your videos: great comparison, with generalities and well-pointed details. I'm a Brazilian Army Aviation Colonel and my wife and I are IPSC shooters. As I live in Brazil and so we "still" have a lot of gun restrictions, so I depend on a lot of gun information before importing it from the US (I love S&W guns). I currently own an S&W M&P 9 but I intend to carry this weapon in defense. So I want to buy two more M&P 2.0 to shoot. For me, an M&P 9 2.0 5 inch. However, I doubt the size of the gun for my wife. She has a very small hand (I know I can adjust this with the back straps) but I would like to hear some thoughts on her options: M&P 9 2.0 4 inch or 4.25 inch! Apart from the capacity of the mags, what do you think there are any significant differences in performance between them such as weight, control (muzzle flip and recoil) and accuracy? Are the differences too small or are they worth considering? Thank you guys for your attention, Vini.

Much appreciated.

Just bought a new M&P Compact 2.0 9mm 4", triggers so light if you breath on the damn thing it'll go off ! Put a little Weapon Shield on the trigger spring and it's even lighter lol. Overall very good pistol.

Why did you leave out the new awesome 3.6" version of the 2.0 Compact? It's barrel length is just slightly longer than the M&P 9C with a 3.5" barrel and 12 round magazines, and yet it shares the same magazines as the 2.0 Compact with the 4" barrel and utilizes the 15 round magazines. For most people the full size 4.25" barrel seems to me to be unnecessary (unless you have really big hands or have no trouble carrying a full-size gun) and the 4" Compact largely fills in the niche and is more versatile. And, the 4" (as well as the 3.5" and 3.6" versions) can utilize the grip sleeves to use the full-size magazines. Perhaps the most versatile one, and the easiest to carry is the older 9C. 3.5" is shorter and easier to conceal, and with the grip sleeves NOW availble it can utilize both the full size 17 round and the 15 round 2.0 Compact magazines, as well as the 12 rounders. And, those mags all allow mag extensions and pinky extenders, etc. The Hyve grip extension actually gives it the same capacity as the 2.0 Compacts, but it is ever so slightly longer in the front but ever so shorter in the back than the 2.0 mags which might make it easier to conceal. It, however, does not have the nicer 2.0 Trigger and it doesn't have the rough texturing that the newer ones come with. The new 2.0s are awesome, but the older M&Ps, newer released older ones with updated triggers, and older ones with say Apex triggers, are all fabulous guns. Everyone that loves striker fired handguns would pretty much love the new 2.0 versions. Perhaps the real only detractor for some is the M&P hinged trigger. Some people, and especially Glock fanboys, really cannot get into that hinged trigger. I personally don't mind it; I actually like the hinged trigger over the Glock trigger, and I like the more natural and ergonomic grip and grip angles on all the M&Ps. For me, that hinged trigger reminds me more of a DA revolver trigger. So, if you are so inclined the 2.0s are fabulous guns, BUT the "first-edition" 9C is awesome on its own and infinitely more versatile for carry, as again, with an upgraded trigger it can utilize a variety of mag extensions, and in particular the Hyve mag extention (yeah, its gaudy and the aluminum color and the Hyve advertisements are a detractor, but with either that extension or the newly released X-Grip sleeve for use with 2.0 Compact 15 rounders and all of the pinky plates, etc., and you have got one versatile little gun. If I had to choose between the full-size and the 2.0 4" compact, I would take the latter. If I had to choose between the M&P 9C and the 3.6" 2.0 Compact, I would take the 3.6" Compact, and if I was hankering for concealed carry, I would probably buy the 3.6" over the 4" barrel, especially for Appendix carry. But I will say that the 4" is slightly heavier and a better shooter than the 3.6". Still, if I already owned the 9C, I would get either of the 2.0 Compacts and some 2.0 Compact X-grips and have two awesome firearms. Love all of the choices, S&W. NOW you need to release a 3.5 or 3.6" barreled 9C and provide 2.0 Compact and full-size sleeves with it. That would be awesome with the rough texture, updated trigger, etc. SYour video released 2 or 3 months ago should have mentioned the 2.0 Compact with the 3.6" barrel. Thanks for the nice info, though.

I have an MP9C perhaps a earlier version of the smaller MP2.0. First my view, S&W has so over used the MP logo that it has become confusing and meaningless. For what it is worth, The MP9C seems heavier, perhaps more dense than the 4 inch MP 2.0. The regular mags for the MP9C are 13 rounds. There are 10 round mags for the folks where the government has decided 10 is max-NY and Calif-I think. The MP 2.0 comes with the adapter, spacer, for the 17 round mag. For my MP9C I had to purchase, pay for the spacer. I like you, discovered the 15 round mag from MP 2.0 will fit my MP9C. Would be great if someone will come up with a spacer. The grip on the MP2.0 is very aggressive. Not sure but I seem to recall I did my MP9C as well. Course tool slips, hone stone sticks makes it quick and simple to knock the sharp tips off the textured serface.

No fde for the 3.6" 2.0 yet. Unfortunately

i a 76 male, have never carried before and pretty thin, i,m thinking the smaller gun, is that just me, or should i consider both, is there that much difference to where at my age and weight i should opt for the smaller gun, thanks

What sight do you have on your pistols?

Spent most of the video looking at the Rolex GMT Pepsi. I'm assuming it's a 16710. I like firearms. I love watches.

Nice M&Ps, nice "Pepsi" bezel too

Where can I get the slide milled for the optic and for the cowitness sights?

Did you have to modify the slide put a red dot on the m&p9c?

What’s the barrel length of the full size

Ok, I'm a little confused. The photo on the thumbnail says 3.6 vs vs 4 and shows those two guns, but that's not what the video title says, and your showing the 9c and the compact 2.0 in 4. And at the 00:49 mark you said that the 3.5 was available in the 2.0 version, but they didn't do that. Is this the right video for the title?

I know this is an old video what ammo do you use for the 3.5 inch barrel as im look to get the 2.0 3.6 inch and im concerned bout ammo

My revolver broke after 26 shots, no return phone call after a month. I don't beleive or trust s&w quality anymore.

Is the compact okay for lefties? I saw the shield is not.

Why not compare the 3.6 2.0 to the original 9C Compact with the 3.5" barrel? You are confusing viewers by muddying the difference between 2.0 3.6 and older 9C in video. They are quite different in handling and feel, etc.. Also, aftermarket Hyve +3 mags extensions awesomeness (detractors: costly, ugly blingy coloring, need grippiness, etc.) makes the older Compact extremely versatile and is easier to conceal than 2.0 Compacts as it is shorter in the back where it counts but still great purchase and removes that awkwardness found on the 9C with stock 12 rounders. With a little grip tape you have the most versatile package. Hopefully a 2.0 “9C” will be released with either a 3.5 or 3.6 length barrel (preferably with the 3.5"). That versatile firearm would be easier to conceal, especially with Appendix and would allow flush 12-round mags, 12 round mags with pinky extensions, 15-round (with X-grip or alternate sleeve that is yet to be released)j or aftermarket mag plates such as Taran Tactical or Hyve, and with the current sleeves that allow it to use full-size mags and capacity. In my opinion currently the 3.6 2.0 Compact is the best compromise for CCW, and the 4.0 largely makes the 4.25 full-size irrelevant. The slightly easier concealment with the 4.0 Compact over the full-size, and the ability to use full-size magazines, AND the ability to share magazines with the 3.6 Compact (a must for balance, etc.) would make it more versatile and attractive to most that don't have large hands. Smith, are you listening? I would like to see a 2.0 update of the venerable 9C Compact and a “compact” 15-round 4.25”. I would also like for X-grip or someone else to release magazine sleeves that allowed one with the 9C to utilize the 15-round compact magazines as well as the full size ones. Smith and Wesson is a winner if it continues to keep its quality and provide options. As a side note for those living in Republiks, the Hyve +3 will not work with 10-round older M&P 9C magazines, but will work with the 12-rounders. The Magblocks for 2.0 Compact from 15 to 10 work perfectly with the 12 rounders and the Hyve to make end product 10-rounders. For those that want CCW only, the Shield 2.0 might be a better value. It's quality, etc. in my opinion make it better than the shoddy, somewhat thoughtless relesse of the Glock 48. The 4" Performance Center Shield is also interesting, but what I would really like to see is a 3.6 Compact or Shield in 9mm configured like an M&P 380 EZ which was released with its awesome trigger. The M&P 9 EZ would be a fabulous tool.

I have all of them i always carry the 3.5

Somebody likes M&Ps.

They also make the subcompact

Nice Pepsi Rolex, firearms not bad either.

I have the Shield in 9mm and the full size in .40. Both are great guns. Can't get the compacts in Ca.

9mm? or .40?

3.6 = 3 1/2

F 9mm im looking for 40 cal videos jfc

Not a strait Comparison. The 2.0 3.6 has a longer grip. Your thump nail does not match the content. Again, another waste of time not getting what I'm looking for.

If you’re female you carry the 3.6. Lol 😂 dang bruh ur really not good and identifying pros and cons huh.