I have had no accuracy issues(at least, none attributable to the gun...)
I have had no accuracy issues(at least, none attributable to the gun...)
Looks like the PPQ is safe for now.
"For a moment he felt good about this. A moment or two later he felt bad about feeling good about it. Then he felt good about feeling bad about feeling good about it and, satisfied, drove on into the night."
-- Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy --
My example of one - the third time I shot it, with a completely uncrowned barrel, newly installed sights and my carry ammo - made first round headshots during a Rangemaster Tac Con match at 25 yards in low-light conditions and was accurate enough for me to place in the top ten shooters...so, quantitatively speaking, it is "good enough."
More generally I've had enough problems with Smith & Wesson handguns that I'd be looking at other choices if I wasn't already deep down the M&P rabbit hole.
I watched a student struggle all class long with one for what we finally determined was a pretty severe tendency to shoot high at 25yd. She sent it back to Smith for repair and upon return it only shot about 6" high, if I recall. I believe she switched to a Glock.
To the best of my knowledge the Compacts weren't as likely to have accuracy problems, but the 9mm still seemed like rolling the dice if you chose to get one.
This is correct. She shoots a Glock 26 now (which I modified with a "-" connector to more closely match the M&P trigger). Every time she shoots one of her M&Ps (she has a sweet M&P VTAC pistol now too), she is reminded how much more she likes the fit of them in her hand, but she carries the Glock because it shoots where it's supposed to.Originally Posted by ToddG
If they'd fix the issue and make M&P9Cs that are reliably accurate, they'd have at least one returning customer, I'm sure.
Thanks to Todd for helping diagnose the issue for us. It's an epiphanic moment when we see Todd shooting over the steel plates on the rack and go "wait, it *is* the gun!"
"The nation that will insist on drawing a broad line of demarcation between the fighting man and the thinking man is liable to have its fighting done by fools and its thinking done by cowards." - Sir William Francis Butler
And a thoroughly embarrassed instructor I was after that.
We all learn something from each training experience, whichever side of the bullhorn we're on. You had a lot of hard evidence showing that it's almost never the gun, so you did what is almost always the solution -- teach shooting skills. You did the stand-up instructor response to this atypical situation and, as you noted, you set it straight. We look forward to giving it another go with better gear.
Back on topic, it seems the accuracy varies by ammo. This particular M&P9C went back to S&W twice, and both times they clearly did test it and make adjustments (no, still not right) but that, combined with some research on the all-knowing interwebs, leads me to believe they may behave better (and are tested) with hotter ammo. Of course, who wants to shoot +P+ all day at the range and good luck getting any ammo at all these days (I'm on strict rationing now as my meager supply dwindles). Regardless, I still prefer a gun that shoots where it's supposed to, regardless of the ammo.
I realize it's not what you're asking about, but we haven't observed this problem in her M&P9 full size or the VTAC version. Haven't done a benched test with the VTAC yet though, but maybe we should.
"The nation that will insist on drawing a broad line of demarcation between the fighting man and the thinking man is liable to have its fighting done by fools and its thinking done by cowards." - Sir William Francis Butler
FWIW, the problems with M&P9 accuracy that I've seen were always related to lower-pressure ammo. My +p carry ammo always shot accurately and to zero. When Smith was developing the 9mm M&P (recall they did the .40 first and released the 9mm later) they used 127gr +p+ Ranger JHP for a lot of their testing because they figured making a gun that could withstand that ammo would mean a tough gun. The downside to that approach is that a number of little issues have come up over the years that only reared their heads when working with weaker ammo, such as extraction problems and the early barrel unlocking/accuracy problem.
My bad one sucked to a wide degree depending on the ammo. Sometimes 8" from a bench, sometimes 12", sometimes an 8" group with a flyer 18" away from the center of the group.
Think for yourself. Question authority.
It has been two years, but when I tested about a dozen M&P 9's (Pro, FS and Compact models), I did not see that trend. What I did see was that each one was very particular as to what load it shot OK, and most of the time would shoot other loads 6-8 inches at 25 yards, including the loads that shot well in other pistols. This led me to having detailed notes for each of the pistols (my wife and I were trying for 2 shooters and 1 carry pistol each), and leaving masking tape on slides when they were not in use with their ammo preferences, tied back to a notebook. If I was going to have a ball and JHP load that worked in each pistol, I would have had more kinds of ammo than Ammoman stocked pre Obama. Speaking with other M&P shooters, it also appeared that as the pistols were shot, and parts wore, accuracy might dramatically deteriorate.
Reply With Quote