Glock 21SF versus S&W M&P Full SIze .45 ACP?

[MikeO]

In 2005 S&W considered the M&P DAO. In 2007 they considered it DAO. In 2009, they still consider it DAO, for the same reasons they did in '05 and '07. From Tom Gordon, S&W US Government Sales and Administration/Technical and Sales Support Mgr:

"We consider this DAO because there is more striker mov,mt to the rear, albeit small."

So the trigger performs the double action of 1) fully cocking the partially cocked striker and then 2) releasing the now fully cocked striker. Or at least S&W is still saying it does.

From NIJ/NLECTC:

Double action: A mode of operation that permits a single pull of the trigger to cock and fire the pistol.
(See single action and striker fire action.)

Single action: A mode of operation that uses the trigger to fire the pistol only. (See double action.)

Striker fire action: A pistol design that employs an internal striker mechanism to detonate the primer. In operation, the pistol is normally in a partially cocked condition. Pulling the trigger completes cocking the action and then releases the striker mechanism to fire the pistol.

So is it a SA SFA like the XD, or a DA SFA like the Glock? Or is SFA off by itself and SA/DA/DAO do not apply and we are spinning our wheels again?

What works for S&W and the feds works for me. What works for you? 

[Kilroy]

Any will do.

I don't view the comments of any company rep. as being unbiased.  In my area, the S&W rep is persona non grata for cause.
I'd rely on the documentation issued by the company.

The M&P is a fine pistol and makes many owners very happy.  I started shooting one in 2005 and went through a variety of problems, all quickly fixed by the factory.

I do take issue with manufacturers that step outside the normal bounds of competitive process when their product fails to pass the specifications outlined in the request.  When this results in a cancellation of the process, no new guns for the end user, then I have an issue with that company.  So it is important to be honest and above board, play by the rules and accept that the end user has a requirement as outlined in the required specifications.  Anything less is unethical.

[callithump]

I had the M&P and shot it extensively for the first time last Christmas with my brother in law. He liked it alot and picked one up for himself. It shot to point of aim and we had no failures. We both liked the configurable grip. Personally, I thought accuracy was lacking and the reciprocation of the slide seemed more noticeable, different. I did not like the release tab in the grip for disassembly and I did not like that they recommended not using +P ammo. Granted for the .45 standard loadings are more than adequate. I picked up the 21SF when I unloaded the Smith. I can't stand the trigger bar so I do what I do with all my glocks... stick a toothpick in that little hole and gently smooth it to match the trigger face. I like that the mag springs are guaranteed to not take a set so I have more than 2. I like the low bore axis and the accuracy at 1 to 1 1/2" at 25 yards is more than twice as good as the M&P. It is a fun gun to shoot. I like the ambi mag release. It is so natural I have to remind myself not to switch to the forefinger. I tried the solid metal recoil spring assembly and saw no difference so I went back to stock. Trijicons are next as well as the extended slide release though I never use it. I really like Null's shoulder holster so I'm working with that. The changes to the grip (and I'm sure they changed the grip angle) are really very nice. It's a better gun than it's parent.
As for the 30sf I have to say that the m30 and m29 point so naturally for me I can't imagine I'd like the change. One of these days I might handle one but now I'm waiting for the 20SF.
The 21SF is a gun I would buy again... maybe I'll get two of them, we'll see.