2.0 range day

[SLG]

I've had access to a 2.0 for quite some time now, but obviously could not say anything about it. I like it quite a bit, and I'd be perfectly happy carrying one if it was issued to me. There is probably nothing I can add that you don't already know, so I'll just throw some pics in.

First pic is of the three SIMP's I took out today. I do love the M2:-)

Second pic is the steel I hit 10 for 10 at 30 yards with the 2.0

Third pic is the average group I shot today with the 2.0. It is right about 3.5" Temps are a windy 20 degrees, so I will absolutely assume the gun can do better. Also, this was with federal 147g American Eagle, which was the only round I shot through it. No idea what else will do what in it. My final excuse is that I did tend to anticipate on the trigger. Clearly that is my fault, and I attribute it to loss of feeling in my fingers, plus unfamiliarity with the gun. I suspect that after a few hundred dry fires, I would not have that issue.

130191302013021

[Sherman A. House DDS]

Nice. I dig mine, too. I was invested in the M&P before, so now this just makes me happier. I like the more aggressive stippling that will no longer necessitate modification. I also like the fire control group function. Very Apex-like in my hands.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Trukinjp13]

Nice. I dig mine, too. I was invested in the M&P before, so now this just makes me happier. I like the more aggressive stippling that will no longer necessitate modification. I also like the fire control group function. Very Apex-like in my hands.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Thanks for the update. Good to see it is turning out to be a solid pistol!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[flux]

Thanks for the report. Any difference in trigger pull compared to the first gen?

[Luke]

I love the M&P lineup. Now we just need tom to get on board and make a gadget.

[SLG]

Thanks for the report. Any difference in trigger pull compared to the first gen?

Pretty different trigger, and afaik, totally redesigned. Much firmer (less mushy), better reset (as if that really matters). Lighter also, I believe.
The other M&P in the pic is a performance center gun, and it has a very nice trigger.

[Kyle Reese]

Pretty different trigger, and afaik, totally redesigned. Much firmer (less mushy), better reset (as if that really matters). Lighter also, I believe.
The other M&P in the pic is a performance center gun, and it has a very nice trigger.

Worth the $429.99 price tag for LEOs?

[SLG]

Worth the $429.99 price tag for LEOs?

Do you like M&P's? If so, I would say yes.

The one above is the 5" version. I have the shorter version floating around here somewhere, but can't remember where. I would probably take that one, but I need to go shoot it some more.

Also, the safety is almost as good as a 1911. Almost.

[karmapolice]

I love the M&P lineup. Now we just need tom to get on board and make a gadget.

Just thinking out loud but I don't believe the Gadget for an M&P would work due to the fact that it's a fully cocked/tensioned striker at rest unlike the Glock. I'm not an engineer and I did not stay in a Holiday Inn Express so I could be dead wrong, I'm sure someone more qualified like the man him self Tom Jones will chime in.

SLG thanks for posting this, it good to see actual accuracy testing from a reliable source!! Good job on Smith and Wesson for finally making the needed changes.

[GJM]

SLG, thoughts on the M&P vs the G4 17 in shootability?

[SLG]

Let's just bear in mind that this is a sample of one, and all that. I have high hopes for the 2.0, but even if the other one I have available shoots well, it is too small a sample to say anything meaningful.

I have way more time on a G17 than a 2.0, so I don't think it is much of an honest comparison. Overall, I would say it is a better version of a G34 (closer in slide length). Better in that it cycles more crisply, where I always find the 34/35 to be a little sluggish for me. So far, I prefer the slide release of the G17. I think I would like to try an extended slide release on the 2.0, much like the Glock competition release.

I'm very unlikely to shoot either 2.0 much more than I did today, so I will probably not become more familiar or comfortable with them as a whole.

The Performance center version, with the RMR, turned in the fastest 10 yard plate rack time I've ever shot. Also the fastest bill drill. Pretty nice setup.

[Sammy1]

Very cool, thank you.

[EVP]

Just thinking out loud but I don't believe the Gadget for an M&P would work due to the fact that it's a fully cocked/tensioned striker at rest unlike the Glock. I'm not an engineer and I did not stay in a Holiday Inn Express so I could be dead wrong, I'm sure someone more qualified like the man him self Tom Jones will chime in.


Don't want to speak for Tom but in the past he has mentioned that the gadget could work in the m&p but it may have to have the gun undergo some permanent minor alterations.

[GJM]

Let's just bear in mind that this is a sample of one, and all that. I have high hopes for the 2.0, but even if the other one I have available shoots well, it is too small a sample to say anything meaningful.

I have way more time on a G17 than a 2.0, so I don't think it is much of an honest comparison. Overall, I would say it is a better version of a G34 (closer in slide length). Better in that it cycles more crisply, where I always find the 34/35 to be a little sluggish for me. So far, I prefer the slide release of the G17. I think I would like to try an extended slide release on the 2.0, much like the Glock competition release.

I'm very unlikely to shoot either 2.0 much more than I did today, so I will probably not become more familiar or comfortable with them as a whole.

The Performance center version, with the RMR, turned in the fastest 10 yard plate rack time I've ever shot. Also the fastest bill drill. Pretty nice setup.

Considering your years on the Glock, if on a cold, windy, snowy day, I shot my PR plate rack and Bill with a brand new to you pistol, I would certainly take note?

[SLG]

Considering your years on the Glock, if on a cold, windy, snowy day, I shot my PR plate rack and Bill with a brand new to you pistol, I would certainly take note?

Yes and no. I don't hang my hat on any one performance. Plus, it was with the RMR Performance Center version. Really nice trigger and the dot. I may never replicate those runs, even in nice weather, for all I know.

This also gets back to shooting any gun well. A plate rack and a bill drill are pretty easy targets/drills. I should do "about" the same with any decent gun. One really good run is not really indicative of anything, and since I have never chased performance by switching guns, it means even less to me.

[JSGlock34]

Interesting how S&W seems to have expanded its range of ported M&P pistols through the Performance Center, to include the optics ready CORE models, while Glock has discontinued all of their ported models.

[SLG]

Interesting how S&W seems to have expanded its range of ported M&P pistols through the Performance Center, to include the optics ready CORE models, while Glock has discontinued all of their ported models.

Interesting is one word you could use, I suppose.

[Lyonsgrid]

Interesting how S&W seems to have expanded its range of ported M&P pistols through the Performance Center, to include the optics ready CORE models, while Glock has discontinued all of their ported models.

Good to see S&W updating a pretty solid platform. I got to handle a 4.25" 9mm 2.0 today and was happy with the texturing and trigger.

...by the way... Glock ported models are not dead...I've seen Gen4 17C's. Several on GB right now.

[Magsz]

You guys must have pretty low standards.

My local gun shop got in a box of M&P 2.0's and i tried four different guns. The triggers were consistent in their shitty quality. Its still a gritty, bumpy, stagey garbagefest.

They reduced the pull weight marginally but the system still has over travel and the take up feels way too mechanical. You can still feel the ridiculously shaped striker block. I still dont understand why the guns have as much over travel as they do. The new frame mounted over travel stop doesn't seem to do much of anything.

In my mind, it feels like they took the performance center sear and threw it into these guns. Big deal...

[SLG]

You guys must have pretty low standards.

Big deal...

I'm sure you're correct, as trigger pull is not something i care overly much about. Really good shooters can shoot anything, and what starts as a mediocre trigger usually turns into a pretty good one in a few thousand rounds. I'd love to see your shooting standards, as they must be pretty high, and as GJM pointed out in another thread, the majority of standards out there are not set very high. I'm always looking for better, so please, let us enjoy them too.

[Luke]

For all we know magz is jerry miculek... just because he talked down on the trigger don't mean he's a bad shot. I also don't see your times posted of Your record plate rack and bill drill times you don't seem to care about..

[LittleLebowski]

I can't describe the trigger pull in any of my guns other than "those two rifles have two stage triggers (CG63 and one AR with the Larue MBT) and I like the trigger on my 5.45 AR with the heavy trigger spring" :D

[LittleLebowski]

For all we know magz is jerry miculek... just because he talked down on the trigger don't mean he's a bad shot. I also don't see your times posted of Your record plate rack and bill drill times you don't seem to care about..

I know that you don't know SLG nor I, but those of us that have shot with him know that he can shoot. I know of a couple of matches and classes that he's taken top shooter in or won. Anyway, it was a fair question. Maybe Magz can answer.

[LockedBreech]

Not that it's really super on-topic but I am pretty darn impressed at the trigger on my new, bone-stock, probably recent production (no idea how to tell) SD9 VE. Beats the pants off my 2010 M&P40. Certainly very shootable. For a $299 gun I got as a lark/beater gun, and a Smith & Wesson semiauto no less, I was genuinely shocked.

[Luke]

I know he's good.. BUT

1. How does one conclude a person is a sucky shooter based on trigger complaints?

2. I agree with him that once a shooter becomes good trigger/gun doesn't matter much.

3. I genuinely want to know his times. None of the SME's post any of that crap except SURF. Only thing I can think of as to why is they worry they may be judged critically based on there SME title.

[azerious]

Does it still have "Hydro lock" when submerged?:o

[SLG]

For all we know magz is jerry miculek... just because he talked down on the trigger don't mean he's a bad shot. I also don't see your times posted of Your record plate rack and bill drill times you don't seem to care about..

I didn't conclude he must be a sucky shooter, though I know he's not Jerry M. I did conclude that he seems to have nothing useful to add to this thread, given his attitude.

I didn't post my times because I really don't care...they are only relevant to me. That's the definition of a PR. I'm not here to compete against you are anyone else on this forum, and I'm certainly not here for your approval. If you want to show up at a range I'm at, and shoot comparable gear, I'm happy to compete, whether I win or lose. I certainly have nothing to be ashamed about, SME title or not. I have always put my money where my mouth is, and I didn't learn to shoot last week.

[Olim9]

Now we just need tom to get on board and make a gadget.

iirc, due to the backplate design of the M&P's, they cannot desing a gadget for the M&P.

[ASH556]

Let's not turn this into a pissing contest. The thread isn't about SMEs' shooting abilities or anyone else's. However, given an SME's background and possible industry connections, he is probably in a place to evaluate a new piece of hardware and provide meaningful info to those of us who are interested in trying it. If the M&P 2.0 doesn't interest you and you hate Smith and Wesson, this thread isn't for you. Don't muddy the waters please.

Thank you SLG for taking the time and ammo to evaluate the pistol and share your experience!

[BehindBlueI's]

There is absolutely nothing you can post online that someone won't find some reason to sling shit at.

That said, this is a shit review because "Glock Killer" doesn't appear once. Not one fucking time is this gun touted as the next Glock Killer, and I'm supposed to take this shit seriously? Where's the indication that you will be killed in the streetz if you don't drop whatever outdated piece of shit yesterday gun you're shooting now and moving to this new hotness? Where's the phrase "combat accurate?" He didn't even smear zebra shit on it and leave it in the freezer for 5 hours for a realistic torture test. It's like he's never even SEEN a gun review before.

SLG, I'm shaking my head in that tilted "I'm not mad, I'm just disappointed" way right now. That's what your review did to me. Tilted head shaking. I hope you feel that sting for a long time.

[DocGKR]

Luke--Your comment about SME's is not accurate, as I have an "SME" title and have frequently posted my times and scores on various tests, typically in the Drill of the Week threads, like here:
https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?23377-Week-194-Five-Twenty-Five, here: https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?23280-Week-193-The-Humbler-(700-Point-Aggregate), here: https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?23186-Week-192-Defoor-Pistol-Test-1, etc...

[NickDrak]

Does the 2.0 "Auto-forward" as easily while inserting a new mag as the original did? That was part of the reason I completely dumped the M&P a few years ago after owning several of them. On the (4) M&P9's I owned, when shooting hollow point duty ammo the top round would nosedive and either get stuck underneath the feed ramp and lock the gun up, or the slide would go forward without chambering the top round. I never wanted to "Auto-forward" the slide during reloads, but it would happen too often even when trying to finesse the mags in so it wouldn't "Auto-forward".

[Luke]

I've found weak recoil springs can cause issues like you describe (missing the round and nose dive on aitoforward).

[NickDrak]

I've found weak recoil springs can cause issues like you describe (missing the round and nose dive on aitoforward).

It happened with my last two M&P9's straight out of the box.

ETA: And every single M&P9 I've ever handled/shot.

It would never happen with FMJ ammo, but almost always with several different HP duty rounds.

[SLG]

Does the 2.0 "Auto-forward" as easily while inserting a new mag as the original did? That was part of the reason I completely dumped the M&P a few years ago after owning several of them. On the (4) M&P9's I owned, when shooting hollow point duty ammo the top round would nosedive and either get stuck underneath the feed ramp and lock the gun up, or the slide would go forward without chambering the top round. I never wanted to "Auto-forward" the slide during reloads, but it would happen too often even when trying to finesse the mags in so it wouldn't "Auto-forward".

My understanding is that the 2.0 was specifically re engineered to prevent auto forwarding.

It's a Glock killa, for sure.

[NickDrak]

My understanding is that the 2.0 was specifically re engineered to prevent auto forwarding.

It's a Glock killa, for sure.

That would be a huuuuge improvement. Try it out and keep us posted.

[Trukinjp13]

You guys must have pretty low standards.

My local gun shop got in a box of M&P 2.0's and i tried four different guns. The triggers were consistent in their shitty quality. Its still a gritty, bumpy, stagey garbagefest.

They reduced the pull weight marginally but the system still has over travel and the take up feels way too mechanical. You can still feel the ridiculously shaped striker block. I still dont understand why the guns have as much over travel as they do. The new frame mounted over travel stop doesn't seem to do much of anything.

In my mind, it feels like they took the performance center sear and threw it into these guns. Big deal...

First person I have heard knock the trigger like that. Were they all 4.25 or 5"? Mixture of both? Have you tried pc triggers yet?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[karmapolice]

It has nothing to do with the M&P backplate design, but rather the fact that the M&P uses a fully tensioned striker. And that doesn't mean that it's not possible, it just means that a different method and mechanism must be used to achieve similar functionality on the M&P (at least the original M&P, I've not examined a 2.0 but I assume it pretty much the same) as compared to a Glock. I know how I'd do it on the M&P, unfortunately, it's not a drop-in part and would require modification of the M&P slide -- which almost certainly means it's not going to happen as an aftermarket item.

He spoke!!! and I was correct, I'm now a S.M.A. (subject matter amateur) on gadgets and striker fired guns.

SLG thanks again for the info, as I said before it is nice to see information from a trusted reliable source. I will be sticking to my killed on the streets Glocks, but I'm genuinely happy for the industry and consumers that Smith has hopefully made the needed improvements to the M&P line.

[BehindBlueI's]

It's a Glock killa, for sure.

https://cdn.meme.am/cache/instances/folder569/61184569.jpg

Ok, I'm done shit posting in the thread, promise. Back to useful information.

[Erick Gelhaus]

SLG - Thank you for taking the time document and share your thoughts on the 2.0 samples you have had access to. Much appreciated.

:) Regarding the SCD and the M&P line ... the M&Ps have thumb safeties, the SCD isn't needed ... :)

Personally, I'm looking forward to being able to get my hands on at least one of these. As much as the Glock has grown on me, their frame isn't as easy to handle as the M&Ps are for me.

[Dave Williams]

I've been a co-student in a class with SLG, he's a shooting machine.

[SLG]

I've been a co-student in a class with SLG, he's a shooting machine.

Thanks Dave, checks in the mail!

And thanks to you other guys who understand that this thread was not put up for me to boast about a random plate run, but rather to try and provide A data point on the 2.0. I once shot a log, floating in a lake, at around 600 yards with a friend's 10/22. Should I continue with my "I did it once stories?" Sorry, there was no timer present that day. Another time I...anyway, enough of that nonsense, sorry.

Tom, I hate to say it, but though the "auto" loading gun would be cool, Jeff Cooper was the first person I'm aware of to put the idea to paper. It's in To Ride, Shoot Straight, and Speak the Truth, iirc. I believe Todd and I had discussed Cooper mentioning that at one point, but I don't remember for sure. He probably figured you were the only one able to make it real:-)

[GJM]

Here is what I don't understand. People passionate about this sport, and in improving their skills, are constantly benchmarking their performance, looking for improvement. A pursuit driven by data as opposed to what they "already know."

You mention that you went out in the snow and shot a brand new gun briefly, and during that little bit of shooting managed a PR on a Bill drill and a plate rack run. For most of us, that would be a wonderful thing (the PR not the different gun part), and we would be dissecting that performance, trying to figure out why and how to replicate it tomorrow. Now you deflect ithe performance as if they were just luck or not worthy, because it was a speed and not accuracy drill. Is that because the result does not conform to your one platform/one serial number philosophy, or something completely different?

I learn things shooting all the time, many of which I had no idea of until they just happened.

[RJ]

My understanding is that the 2.0 was specifically re engineered to prevent auto forwarding.

It's a Glock killa, for sure.

SLG -

Thanks for posting your review. I'm not in the market, but I have a fondness for S&W M&P FS9, as it was my first pistol.

Couple questions please?

Specifically on auto-forwarding, I've seen speculation online that the left side slide stop mechanism was redesigned in the 2.0. Certainly the lever is larger in the 2.0. Could you comment on whether this is true?

http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170109/f869aa6776a7c3ddf536880fc1d6440c.jpg

There are two oblong ish voids in the polymer at the slide front bottom. Are these functional in any way or just cosmetic? Or do they reveal some kind of ID or bar code/NSN-like number on the frame?

http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170109/0a15c71e31419f96483e4beb45b4658a.jpg

On the striker block profile, generally the Apex USB profile was perceived to address the gritty take up of the 1.0 trigger. Obviously as the stock gun was shot, the striker block would wear in more and the grit would smooth out. Would it be possible to compare the 2.0 striker block profile vs. a 1.0, to see if S&W is using the 1.0 part or perhaps has upgraded the 2.0?

http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170109/0347d611b54bea035b0e4ee8f9e6fdf0.jpg

Thank you.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Robinson]

Just curious as The Gadget was brought up earlier in this thread -- since this pistol is available with a thumb safety would that option make The Gadget less necessary for AIWB carry? I will soon be carrying my 1911 using that method and I'm glad for the redundant safeties.

And my post is not meant to question the value of The Gadget in general, just specific to a thumb safety equipped gun.

[LittleLebowski]

Just curious as The Gadget was brought up earlier in this thread -- since this pistol is available with a thumb safety would that option make The Gadget less necessary for AIWB carry? I will soon be carrying my 1911 using that method and I'm glad for the redundant safeties.

And my post is not meant to question the value of The Gadget in general, just specific to a thumb safety equipped gun.

I think it would make it less necessary, but still, being able to positively control the striker/hammer is something I and many others desire for AIWB carry. I and several other SMEs/Staff had a great conversation with ToddG about how he sees the 1911 as near perfect for AIWB given the thumb safety, the grip safety, and the hammer you (should) ride with your thumb as you reholster.

[Robinson]

I think it would make it less necessary, but still, being able to positively control the striker/hammer is something I and many others desire for AIWB carry. I and several other SMEs/Staff had a great conversation with ToddG about how he sees the 1911 as near perfect for AIWB given the thumb safety, the grip safety, and the hammer you (should) ride with your thumb as you reholster.

Interesting, thanks.

[archangel]

There is probably nothing I can add that you don't already know...

Apologies if I just missed it somewhere, but I still want to know what the button / thingie in front of the slide release is.



Also, since we're talking about autoforwarding again, I figured it was worth re-posting this (https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?12050-M-amp-P-9C-Slide-Goes-Into-Battery-When-Mag-Is-Loaded-A-Problem&p=217268&viewfull=1#post217268).

[Drang]

Take down lever.

Rich, I believe in the other M&P V2 thread it is clear that those "windows" show the serial number.

[archangel]

Take down lever.

The button(?) between the take down lever and the slide release is what I'm asking about,

[SLG]

Here is what I don't understand. People passionate about this sport, and in improving their skills, are constantly benchmarking their performance, looking for improvement. A pursuit driven by data as opposed to what they "already know."

You mention that you went out in the snow and shot a brand new gun briefly, and during that little bit of shooting managed a PR on a Bill drill and a plate rack run. For most of us, that would be a wonderful thing (the PR not the different gun part), and we would be dissecting that performance, trying to figure out why and how to replicate it tomorrow. Now you deflect ithe performance as if they were just luck or not worthy, because it was a speed and not accuracy drill. Is that because the result does not conform to your one platform/one serial number philosophy, or something completely different?

I learn things shooting all the time, many of which I had no idea of until they just happened.

Go reread post 11 and please stop assuming your interests in shooting are the same as mine. Or your analysis of my motivations or thought process.

[joshs]

Funny story that no one can verify the veracity of (you'll just have to assume I'm not a self aggrandizing d-bag -- which might be difficult for some), but back in May of 2010 based upon a discussion about simplifying/improving the autoloader on the now defunct FT&T (firearmstrainingandtactics.com) forum, Todd and I discussed via email a pistol design that automatically ejected a magazine when empty (either when the last round leaves the magazine or after the last round is fired) and then automatically releases the slide when a fresh magazine is inserted. I've got sketches of it in one of my old notebooks somewhere. It was going to be the "next" project we worked on after the gadget -- and then life got stupid/complicated. During the (long) period of complication, Cobalt Kinetics (https://www.cobaltkinetics.com/) came out with their CARS (Cobalt Advantage Reload System) system which is pretty much exactly what we were talking about, but for the AR.


https://youtu.be/m-QRb3_z--w


https://youtu.be/2r7C2qc9qCI

Sorry for the off-topic post. :)

I actually can verify the veracity of the story because I had the same conversation with Todd, and he mentioned that you already had some drawings and thought the system could work in an autoloading pistol.

I still think it's odd that several new pistols have come out in the intervening time and none of them:


Automatically eject the magazine when empty
Mechanically send the slide forward when inserting a loaded magazine
Integrate the slide stop function with the magazine release (some ARs and aftermarket AR devices do this already as well)
Provide for the mounting of non-reciprocating red dot sights.



I'd be happier if a "new" pistol would simply apply the "grippy" texture to the area of the grip where it would provide the most benefit.

[blues]

Well, SLG, I hope you've learned your lesson that "no good deed goes unpunished". (I can certainly understand folks having or asking questions...but this scab picking makes me shake my head. WTF?)

(Back to monitoring the thread.)

[Zincwarrior]

Sorry what is "the Gadget?"

EDIT: How was the grip under recoil?

[JAD]

LL, I don't have 1911 AIWB experience. Is it best practice to ride the hammer, or hold the thumb safety in the "safe" position?
It's my practice, so probably not.

[JAD]

pistol design that automatically ejected a magazine when empty and then automatically releases the slide when a fresh magazine is inserted

Would it go 'ping?'

Is there any way you could get it to smash the crap out of my thumb when I load it?

[Drang]

The button(?) between the take down lever and the slide release is what I'm asking about,

From front to back it's take down lever, slide release, and safety.

[jwperry]

Also, the safety is almost as good as a 1911. Almost.

Question: is this statement in regards to placement or feel?

What size gloves are you wearing in your pic? (I'm hoping that this will help me relate your hand size to mine)

[mmc45414]

From front to back it's take down lever, slide release, and safety.
I think the feature folks are asking about is this thingy:
13041
and from the photos it sure looks to me like an alternative spring for keeping the slide release from disengaging when a magazine is seated, which is a common feature or a bug with M&Ps.

[mmc45414]

Also, the safety is almost as good as a 1911. Almost.


Question: is this statement in regards to placement or feel?

Is it in the same spot as prior M&Ps?

[LittleLebowski]

Sorry what is "the Gadget?"


See my signature.

[Drang]

Rich, I believe in the other M&P V2 thread it is clear that those "windows" show the serial number.
Except the pics and videos on S&Ws site don't show that, so... Never mind. :o

[Zincwarrior]

See my signature.

Ah thanks LL.


and from the photos it sure looks to me like an alternative spring for keeping the slide release from disengaging when a magazine is seated, which is a common feature or a bug with M&Ps.
While a cool "feature" it only seemed to work about 50% of the time thus making the "auto slide" unreliable. I would have loved to havebeen able to slap a mag everytime and have it roll forward, but it didn't always and thus always delayed me slightly as my brain had to stop and work that out.

[spinmove_]

I think the feature folks are asking about is this thingy:
13041
and from the photos it sure looks to me like an alternative spring for keeping the slide release from disengaging when a magazine is seated, which is a common feature or a bug with M&Ps.

Yes! That thing! So glad I'm not the only one who sees that. What the heck is that?


Sent from mah smertfone using tapathingy

[LittleLebowski]

Split off the 1911 and AIWB posts into their own thread.

[orionz06]

Good stuff. Glad to see more data on the gun supporting the notion that it's fixed. Hopefully I'll have one soon.

[Trukinjp13]

SLG my take from your review and time on the rack, is simply that this gun works pretty dang well. I understand your saying it not is necessarily the gun is that much better then you are with your glocks. That it could just be that day you were on. Sounds like you are a hell of a shot on any day from what I have read. I am thinking that if you had an old version and took it out that day it probably would not have went as well. Imho.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Magsz]

First person I have heard knock the trigger like that. Were they all 4.25 or 5"? Mixture of both? Have you tried pc triggers yet?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Mixture of both but I spent more time dry firing the 4.25 black guns they had.

I think alot of people want to believe what they want to believe, ie the 2.0 is a real, significant improvement. I think that 99% of the people that get these guns (on this board) are still going to end up with Apex parts in them.

I think the 2.0 offers HUGE improvements frame wise and in other small area's like the slide lock detent but the trigger is still a huge, steaming pile of crap to me. I carry and shoot a stock gen 3 22 for work and i would take that trigger all day every day over this. Yes its heavy but at least there's a defined wall and almost no over travel. The pre travel is also far smoother than the 2.0 M&P.

Now, having said that, with a simple Apex USB install the trigger would be improved vastly so for those of us that mod our guns, awesome, its a simple fix.

[LSP972]

Not that it's really super on-topic but I am pretty darn impressed at the trigger on my new, bone-stock, probably recent production (no idea how to tell) SD9 VE. Beats the pants off my 2010 M&P40. Certainly very shootable. For a $299 gun I got as a lark/beater gun, and a Smith & Wesson semiauto no less, I was genuinely shocked.

Yup. I stumbled across a NIB SD9VE for $275, but the thing is rather nice (they did a GREAT stock/grip improvement),
shoots every bit as well as a standard Glock, makes a great car piece that if you lose it/get it stolen/whatever... so what? Basically, I feel the exact same thing of the supposedly "better" M&P 40. After long plus 20+ years of lots of dealing with plastic service pieces in training/service/shootings/civilian... well, I simply do not get excited about these pistols. Yes, the HKs are well above the rest... but STILL nothing to get excited over, when you get right down to it... Except the magazines. HK metal pistol mags are the king of the many, many years I've used with pistols. But for plastic carry guns... Pick one you like of those "major" ones, make sure it is reliable, and just use it.

Bottom line for me... HK or a GOOD Glock is my preferred. An M&P who be my fourth choice.

.

[mmc45414]

I stumbled across a NIB SD9VE for $275, but the thing is rather nice

I want one of these just because they are good and solid and $300. I have no other possible rational, just I wanna!

[mmc45414]

While a cool "feature" it only seemed to work about 50% of the time thus making the "auto slide" unreliable.

Yes, I was just kinda sarcastically referring to it as a literal defect, that could be construed as an advantage. An earlier post indicated that maybe it would choke on JHP ammo, a good data point that causes me some concern.

[mmc45414]

Yes! That thing! So glad I'm not the only one who sees that. What the heck is that?

Tried to find a higher res photo:
13042
The prior spring was a pretty wimpy and long spring that was around the same pin the slide stop pivots on, this is probably a more direct lever interaction right onto the slide lock.

[breakingtime91]

I always like mps, glad to see a improvement in them. This thread is really interesting, SLG is a beast when it comes to shooting. I had a great time learning from him and look forward to doing it again. For people to start a pissing contest is halarious.

[Sasage]

My LGS said they should have some in a few weeks to try at the range, can't wait!

Sent from my ONEPLUS A3000 using Tapatalk

[Luke]

I always like mps, glad to see a improvement in them. This thread is really interesting, SLG is a beast when it comes to shooting. I had a great time learning from him and look forward to doing it again. For people to start a pissing contest is halarious.


I've seen a few things in this thread I wanted to reply too but decided against it.. this made me want to reply.

The only thing I could could see as a pissing match would be SLG's response to magzy. You guys are absolutely killing me. SLG basically posts some pictures and says "I like it", random guy comes in and says he dislikes the trigger very much and goes into detail about the characteristics of the trigger that he does not like and y'all freak out. Now the dude sucks at shooting because he actually cares about a trigger.


I'm sure SLG is a great guy, an awesome shooter, so switched on light switches get jealous, king among men... but this is freaking rediculous. It's like a cult.





Maybe I need to be banned lol

[JV_]

Very few guns interest me these days, but I'd like a working M&P 9.

If the long term reports work out, I may buy one.

[breakingtime91]

You guys must have pretty low standards.

My local gun shop got in a box of M&P 2.0's and i tried four different guns. The triggers were consistent in their shitty quality. Its still a gritty, bumpy, stagey garbagefest.

They reduced the pull weight marginally but the system still has over travel and the take up feels way too mechanical. You can still feel the ridiculously shaped striker block. I still dont understand why the guns have as much over travel as they do. The new frame mounted over travel stop doesn't seem to do much of anything.

In my mind, it feels like they took the performance center sear and threw it into these guns. Big deal...

^ Luke, if you read that it comes off snarky. Especially the two spots bolded, I think SLG's response was appropriate. SLG really doesn't need me to say anything on his behalf, you made a statement that implied he is trying mislead everyone given he didn't share times. I found that idea humorous so I responded. But ya, I second you going away for a little bit ;)

back on point: Really interested to see if they fixed the accuracy. Trigger pull in the most part doesn't matter that much, but it will interest me to see what changes they made to fix the accuracy issues past 15 yards.

[ReverendMeat]

Tom, I hate to say it, but though the "auto" loading gun would be cool, Jeff Cooper was the first person I'm aware of to put the idea to paper. It's in To Ride, Shoot Straight, and Speak the Truth, iirc. I believe Todd and I had discussed Cooper mentioning that at one point, but I don't remember for sure. He probably figured you were the only one able to make it real:-)

The feature you describe has been done before at least once: https://www.forgottenweapons.com/grant-hammond-32acp-prototype-at-ria/

Sorry for off-topic, just thought this was cool

[DocGKR]

Luke--you have made some statements that simply seem to be wrong, what is up?

[Clobbersaurus]

But ya, I second you going away for a little bit ;)

I third this! Ban his Unicorn Rainbow farting ass! :cool:



Don't fucking drag me into this.

If anyone wants/needs "to be banned", it's self service now:

13046

:cool:

You're no fun man.....;)

Sorry to derail. I always enjoy SLG's posts. Just trying to lighten the mood. I chalk all this up to cold weather stir craziness.....and Luke has been a bit off off since he switched to an open gun.....we need to do an intervention.

[newyork]

Not that I'm contributing to the information on the new M&P by saying this but:

Can you guys shut up your petulant arguments that have nothing to do with the 2.0 or SLG's first impressions?! Is this a arfcom? Nah.

I'd love to hear more impressions of the new line up via range sessions. This started as a good thread. Now it has nothing to do with the pistol .

[Luke]

1. Missed the part that is in bold. Not that it changes much.

2. Never implied he was trying to mislead somebody. Just thought it was ironic.

3.



I don't want to play anymore.

[Trukinjp13]

On m4carbine there are a few different guys who have ACTUAL range time on the 2.0 and also think the triggers are better and it is indeed more accurate.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[tb469]

Maybe PFestivus should be done quarterly.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JM Campbell]

Thanks SLG, I've stuck with the M&P9s since I actually have 4 that shoot 2-3" at 25yds with 124gr gold dot duty loads. Hopefully the 2.0 will be the fix and I'll transition to them and put my old stock into game guns. I have three currently with safeties and like them and if you say the new safety levers are better I'm positive I'll like them alot. I really like the idea of 5" slides with ts.

Keep shooting them and the info rolling please. I'd like to be selfish and benefit from the info.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using Tapatalk

[Magsz]

I must have missed something too.

SLG and I are apparently fighting? Can someone please point me to the post where SLG hit me with the e-webs dueling glove?

I think M&P triggers are garbage and I clearly defined why I think they're garbage. If you, note that is a generic you and is not directed towards anyone in particular, like the trigger, rock on, its your trigger finger and your dollar, I hardly care. My comments are more directed towards S&W than anyone in particular in this thread.

[Sherman A. House DDS]

I've got 400 rounds through my 2.0 now. I'll (hopefully) have new sights this week, and then I can really get deeper down the accuracy wringing rabbit hole. I can't do my best work with the OEM "painted three dot," jobs.

Good work SLG. I'm (thus far) a fan of the 2.0. I hope that there are follow on versions of the compact, and the CORE. If for nothing else, than I prefer the aggressive grip texture more.

I thought I'd miss the beaver tail, but I don't. Much like the MP-C, the web/grip interface has enough clearance, even with a very choked up grip, to not run the slide into the hand. So that's nice to see.

Of course, like SLG said himself, this is a, "sample size of one." But, with the brain trust here, hopefully we can get closer to N= 2 + in the immediate future. None of my MP's are the manual safety variants, nor are any 5". I think I'll remedy that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[LSW]

I think a lot of us want the M&P to be great. Why? It's probably the best chance for a made in the USA mass produced pistol, made by a US owned company to be great. I know glock and sig are made in GA and NH, but they're foreign owned. Xd is US owned (SAI) but made in croatia. Tons of good US pistols of the 1911 variety but they're custom level pieces. I know I'm pulling for S&W, but at the same time realize the 1st generation M&P was not as good as glock, HK, sig, if for no other reason than quality control. Time will tell if that has changed with the 2.0, I hope it has. S&W claims they have listened to the scrutiny of the 1.0, which is a good thing, and we should continue to scrutinize the 2.0.

[TheNewbie]

I appreciate SLG posting this.

Plus I love PF for it's fun and tense threads. :P

[LittleLebowski]

I must have missed something too.

SLG and I are apparently fighting? Can someone please point me to the post where SLG hit me with the e-webs dueling glove?

I think M&P triggers are garbage and I clearly defined why I think they're garbage. If you, note that is a generic you and is not directed towards anyone in particular, like the trigger, rock on, its your trigger finger and your dollar, I hardly care. My comments are more directed towards S&W than anyone in particular in this thread.

No, you're not fighting. Don't worry about it.

[LittleLebowski]

On m4carbine there are a few different guys who have ACTUAL range time on the 2.0 and also think the triggers are better and it is indeed more accurate.


Isn't that what the first post in this thread stated :D

[Sherman A. House DDS]

Isn't that what the first post in this thread stated :D

"TLDR"

[emoji848]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[blues]

"TLDR"

[emoji848]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Jeez, it's like pulling teeth around here. Is there a dentist in the house? (Two for one. I'm done. Figured I could draw some of the fire away from the main non-combatants.)

[JSGlock34]

I'd like to know more why the M&P entrant was a first round exit from the MHS competition.

[Tokarev]

Here's mine at ten yards offhand.

http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170109/25e5d5cfc7cf5ae17b632fda2fa5e0dd.jpg

And again at 25 yards using a rolled up jacket as a rest.

http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170109/de649a795148d2d863d9065532b930d2.jpghttp://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170109/0f4777caf929a988a7a209317abae244.jpg

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

[jlw]

He spoke!!! and I was correct, I'm now a S.M.A. (subject matter amateur) on gadgets and striker fired guns.

SLG thanks again for the info, as I said before it is nice to see information from a trusted reliable source. I will be sticking to my killed on the streets Glocks, but I'm genuinely happy for the industry and consumers that Smith has hopefully made the needed improvements to the M&P line.

Anybody with a waterfall that doesn't have water in it can't claim much of nuttin.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[jeep45238]

My understanding is that the 2.0 was specifically re engineered to prevent auto forwarding.

It's a Glock killa, for sure.

My rudimentary guess on how they accomplish this is the little doodad in front of the left side slide release – the only thing I can come up with as far as function on that piece is to provide upward resistance to prevent the slide release from moving upon insertion (sure looks like there's a spring that lives in there). Inertia and all that jazz.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Tokarev]

My rudimentary guess on how they accomplish this is the little doodad in front of the left side slide release – the only thing I can come up with as far as function on that piece is to provide upward resistance to prevent the slide release from moving upon insertion (sure looks like there's a spring that lives in there). Inertia and all that jazz.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170109/c321d617ae65eee91088efa112f565d0.jpg

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

[David S.]

I think a lot of us want the M&P to be great. Why? It's probably the best chance for a made in the USA mass produced pistol, made by a US owned company to be great. I know glock and sig are made in GA and NH, but they're foreign owned. Xd is US owned (SAI) but made in croatia. Tons of good US pistols of the 1911 variety but they're custom level pieces. I know I'm pulling for S&W, but at the same time realize the 1st generation M&P was not as good as glock, HK, sig, if for no other reason than quality control. Time will tell if that has changed with the 2.0, I hope it has. S&W claims they have listened to the scrutiny of the 1.0, which is a good thing, and we should continue to scrutinize the 2.0.

More important than supporting the home team is aftermarket support. AFAIK, the M&P series of pistols is the second best supported pistol group (platform?) on the market. . . and third place, whatever that is, doesn't even come close. Most of the aftermarket support benefits of Glock in a more ergonomic package. If I were in the market for a striker fired gun, I'd be watching this pretty closely.

[Sammy1]

I'd like to know more why the M&P entrant was a first round exit from the MHS competition.

I thought they made it to the final three before going out.

[JM Campbell]

http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170109/c321d617ae65eee91088efa112f565d0.jpg

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk
I hope that does fix the auto forward. Auto forward is annoying and useless as tits on a boar.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using Tapatalk

[Tokarev]

I hope that does fix the auto forward. Auto forward is annoying and useless as tits on a boar.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using Tapatalk
It appears to have. I slammed a full mag into the gun pretty forcefully a couple times and couldn't get the slide stop to bounce out of engagement.

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

[Trukinjp13]

Isn't that what the first post in this thread stated :D

That was his opinion, I was just stating that there are more dudes out there with a similar one.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Trukinjp13]

"TLDR"

[emoji848]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

What is tldr?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[blues]

What is tldr?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Google is your friend:



Too long; didn't read (abbreviated tl;dr and tldr;) is a shorthand notation added by an editor indicating a passage appeared to be too long to invest the time to digest. Long used on the Internet, it has birthed this wikilink WP:TL;DR to indicate a cited passage is being protested.
Wikipedia:Too long; didn't read - Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Too_long;_didn't_read
Feedback
About this result •
Urban Dictionary: tl;dr
www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=tl%3Bdr
Literally, "Too long; didn't read" Said whenever a nerd makes a post that is too long to bother reading.

[JAD]

TMEDG



too much effort didn't google

[45dotACP]

Wait...Autoforward is bad?

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

[Oldstate]

I am following these threads closely and appreciate the time spent by those posting their feedback.

That said, as far as accuracy goes, I really want to see one of these in a Ransom rest. I've benched my M&Ps but really don't trust the results 100% at 25 yards given the lack of precision "combat" or competition type sights give you.

[JSGlock34]

I thought they made it to the final three before going out.

My understanding is that S&W did not make it to the downselect (final three).

[psalms144.1]

Wait...Autoforward is bad?

Sent from my XT1585 using TapatalkOCAFIBIGYKODS!

(For those of you not hip - "Of Course Auto Forward is Bad, It'll Git You Kilt on Da Streetz!")

[JM Campbell]

Wait...Autoforward is bad?

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk
It's bad when there ain't no cartridge in the barrel after a auto forward. I know I can't make mine always strip a round.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using Tapatalk

[peterb]

Wait...Autoforward is bad?

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

Reliable autoforward might be good.
Random unreliable autoforward is bad.
...or so I'm told :)

[jeep45238]

Wait...Autoforward is bad?

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

Depends in my opinion. With 1911s, Glock, MP, and Beretta 92s I could always get the slide to go home with a round chambered with 100% consistency. For a gaming gun, I love it.

With my recent move to classic Sigs- I've been able to get the slide home once in a reload, and it was an EMPTY chamber. No bueno for a carry gun unless it's a mechanically controlled function if you ask me (which hasn't been mass produced successfully to my knowledge).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Tokarev]

My experience with the M&P in USPSA is that mags downloaded to ten rounds would nosedive fail to feed if seated hard enough to slam charge the gun.

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

[NickDrak]

Wait...Autoforward is bad?

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

When it commonly causes a feedway stoppage or doesn't chamber a round with actual carry ammo, it is most definitely a bad thing.

[HCM]

Wait...Autoforward is bad?

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

Yes, no such thing as "reliable" autoforward.

It was specifically listed as a malfunction in most LE/MIL pistol test specs including the recent FBI and DHS/ ICE RFI's.

[Magsz]

My experience with the M&P in USPSA is that mags downloaded to ten rounds would nosedive fail to feed if seated hard enough to slam charge the gun.

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

Mine as well.

Auto forward where its a design feature and its reliable would be pretty neat ie what Tom_Jones was talking about earlier. Auto forward as a "feature" not a "bug" being passed off as such is a big problem in my mind.

[HCM]

It's bad when there ain't no cartridge in the barrel after a auto forward. I know I can't make mine always strip a round.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using Tapatalk


13058

[JM Campbell]

13058
Yep, you've seen me tap/rack/bang a few times.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using Tapatalk

[HCM]

Yep, you've seen me tap/rack/bang a few times.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using Tapatalk

At least once on match video as I recall.

[HCM]

Yes, no such thing as "reliable" autoforward.

It was specifically listed as a malfunction in most LE/MIL pistol test specs including the recent FBI and DHS/ ICE RFI's.

Hence SLG's comment about M&P 2.0 being engineered not to autofirward.

[Jim Watson]

My Plastic M&P is very good on autoclose, triggering nearly every time, one misfeed ever.
A friend's is not so reliable with the occasional misfeed but he still considers it a match advantage.

I assume there is a Glock tuning trick. So many of them autoclose so well that when one fails to do so, the competitor routinely bumps the magazine again instead of going to the lever or the slide. Nearly always releases the slide, too.

I have read that the CZ P10 is designed to autoclose.

[LSW]

The slide stop of the original M&P was one of the weak points. I took a pistol class with my wife last year and both sides of the slide stop blew off on my M&P 40c, and one side blew off on the 40 pro 5" she was using. The pistols were autoforwarding.. Round count on both pistols was probably in the 2-3k range when it happened. The compact is a 2011 model and the 5" pro was acquired in 2012 iirc.

We sent the pistols back to S&W so that they could replace the slide stops with the latest iteration of that part (the ones available from brownells were still the first iteration iirc). I've put about another 3-4k rounds through the 40 compact since replacement and it has held up. Neither pistol autoforwards with the new slidestops, at least not when I reload them.

[psalms144.1]

I have read that the CZ P10 is designed to autoclose.And I'm perfectly OK with that if it ALWAYS autocloses. If it's designed to auto close but only does it 85% of the time, it's NOT a "design feature" I want, anymore than the 17M's auto-disassemble-on-draw feature...

[45dotACP]

Gotcha...My G34 has been autoforwarding regularly when inserting a 10 round loaded mag...Probably ought to replace the slide stop then.

Anyways...Back on topic...I like the looks of the 2.0 and if the accuracy issues are fixed I might could be dumb enough to go down the "new gun" rabbit hole for a thumb safety version with a ton of Apex trigger goodies for a gamerfag gun.

Maybe. Then again, I want to get a 6.5 grendel before that happens...And play more 3 gun. Neither of those will lend themselves to "new gun" money.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

[NickDrak]

13058

Five year old video of the last M&P9 I bought. Straight out of the box.

https://youtu.be/C-w2i7OWkyY

[El Cid]

Thanks for the review SLG. It's nice that consumers get some benefit from .mil competitions. Always loved the ergos of the M&P so I'm looking forward to seeing the 2.0 in person.

[Lomshek]

I think it would make it less necessary, but still, being able to positively control the striker/hammer is something I and many others desire for AIWB carry. I and several other SMEs/Staff had a great conversation with ToddG about how he sees the 1911 as near perfect for AIWB given the thumb safety, the grip safety, and the hammer you (should) ride with your thumb as you reholster.

I use the M&P FS & Shield with thumb safety and would like it even more if the safety physically blocked the sear from dropping rather than just blocking the trigger from rearward movement.

From the looks of things I don't think it would take much of an engineering effort or re-work but I'm kind of a belt and suspenders safety kind of guy in a world where too many people argue that a thumb safety will get you "kilt in da streets".

ETA - Thanks again for the quickie review SLG. Overall the 2.0 looks promising.

[AMC]

I am desperately hopeful. Always liked the ergonomics. Shot the M&P better than either Glocks or my SIG. Experienced the accuracy bug myself, sighed deeply and moved on. Interested in this as a retirement gun. I like carrying a full-size gun, but this would be lighter and trimmer than my SIG. Five years to go and the crap on my belt just seems to get heavier every day.:rolleyes:

[That Guy]

Yes, no such thing as "reliable" autoforward.

It was specifically listed as a malfunction in most LE/MIL pistol test specs including the recent FBI and DHS/ ICE RFI's.

Huh. Learn something new every day.

My Walther P99 autoforwards very reliably. So far, my PX4 seems to do so also. I've always thought about it as a definite plus. (I'm limited to FMJ by a silly local law, so that of course limits the relevance of my experience.)

[Luke]

SLG, my apologies for freaking out. Not sure why but it struck a nerve with me, please forgive me sir. I enjoy this place because there are a lot of serious and skilled shooters here who enjoy talking technique and discussing ways to better them selves as students of the gun.

You seem to be a well respected and talented shooter both in a "tactical" sense as well as a established force in the gamer world. I don't know you personally, only things I know is what I've heard around here. Correct me if I'm wrong, I remember reading you had actually won a USPSA nationals a few years ago? If true that's pretty sweet.
One of the many reason I enjoy the range journals here is it gives a peek into the shooters ability as well as how they define the standard at which they deem "good". I haven't looked specifically for yours, but I have looked back through the journals and don't remember seeing yours. If you have the time, and wouldn't mind, I'd love to know more about your career into competitive shooting. As a newer shooter I'm always wanting to learn how the other guys rose to the top. I'd love to here more about it if you have the time.

[SLG]

SLG, my apologies for freaking out. Not sure why but it struck a nerve with me, please forgive me sir. I enjoy this place because there are a lot of serious and skilled shooters here who enjoy talking technique and discussing ways to better them selves as students of the gun.

You seem to be a well respected and talented shooter both in a "tactical" sense as well as a established force in the gamer world. I don't know you personally, only things I know is what I've heard around here. Correct me if I'm wrong, I remember reading you had actually won a USPSA nationals a few years ago? If true that's pretty sweet.
One of the many reason I enjoy the range journals here is it gives a peek into the shooters ability as well as how they define the standard at which they deem "good". I haven't looked specifically for yours, but I have looked back through the journals and don't remember seeing yours. If you have the time, and wouldn't mind, I'd love to know more about your career into competitive shooting. As a newer shooter I'm always wanting to learn how the other guys rose to the top. I'd love to here more about it if you have the time.

I'm not a force anywhere. I won a steel nationals a few years ago, in a very soft category. I came in second in another , and third in yet another, iirc. Uspsa doesn't seem to keep records of those years, don't know why. I shot that match with my duty sig 229 in my concealment holster, which made me very happy, but as I said, it was a very soft win, and I have no illusions that I'd be competitive today in uspsa. I've been very fortunate to shoot on the super squad a number of times at nationals and in area matches, and I held my own, but I'm not a super squad level guy. My last ranking in uspsa was A class. I consider my legit, on demand shooting ability as master class. That is a rough metric, since one is a sport designation, and I'm just talking about discrete shooting abilities, like draws and reloads. I think that's an honest assessment, as I hate sandbag gers. If someone wanted to disagree with me, and say otherwise, that's fine too. Or as Rob would say, I'm a legit A class shooter, where most shooters in most classes are somewhat inflated.

I don't have a journal here, sorry. I'm never afraid to state my score on any test, I just rarely track that stuff anymore. I told my wife about the PR the other day and she didn't even ask what the time was, as she knows how little any of that matters, to me or to her.

I'm all for higher and higher levels of skill, and in an abstract way, I wish I could out shoot the top guys. Just not enough to put any effort into that. I don't enjoy shooting games very much anymore, and prefer not to spend my remaining time that way.

My main focus is fighting ability. Always has been. People who spend too much time on the gun, and neglect the other areas are doing it wrong, imo. I know a lot of really good gunfighters. Guys with lots and lots of experience, not just some guy who got lucky once or twice (nothing wrong with that, just putting the experience level into context). I can out shoot all of them. That tells me a couple of things that actually matter, as opposed to my bill drill time. It tells me that fairly high shooting ability is just not needed. It tells me that taking time away from shooting, and spending it on other areas, like individual and team Tactics, or insertion and extraction techniques, is probably more important. Now, some of that doesn't apply to civilians, and never will. That's fine, but it does apply to my world. And in my world, I enjoy shooting very much. I just don't overestimate it's importance, or mistake high technical skill for anything other than high technical skill. My worst day, on demand ability is what matters to me, way more than any pr run. It's just not as exciting to talk about.

Please reread what I said about magz . I was a bit more sarcastic than I should have been, but I never said he was a bad shooter. I sarcastically asked for his standards, because for me, there are no standards that a crappy trigger can't accomplish, if the shooter is capable. A much overused quote by Steinbeck seems to fit here.

Eta. As much as I dislike sandbaggers, I also dislike grandbaggers. A friend looked into it, and says my steel win counts as a national championship. I'm not so sure. I went to the podium for some wins and not others. They may not count that division as a national win, idk. Until I can get clarification from uspsa, I won't consider it as a national win. Glock is looking into my gssf wins for me as well, to see if it was a first or not. I have probably been too casual in my thought process on this stuff, and I absolutely do not want to misrepresent myself in any way.

Further edited to add: Found out more about my win. I did come in first in a division at Steel Nationals. 2nd in another and 3rd in another. I can definitely say I won Steel Nationals in X division. I gather that USPSA does not call that a national title, so I can't really say I'm a national champion (though many other say that of themselves in similar situations, I don't think it is legit.) Hope that clarifies things.

Luke,

I find it curious that you have not been back in this thread since. Makes it hard for me to take your queries or apology seriously. Maybe I'm wrong but it seems like trolling to me. Then again, I take a person's word as a bit stronger than some others do.

[blues]

My main focus is fighting ability. Always has been. People who spend too much time on the gun, and neglect the other areas are doing it wrong, imo. I know a lot of really good gunfighters. Guys with lots and lots of experience, not just some guy who got lucky once or twice (nothing wrong with that, just putting the experience level into context). I can out shoot all of them. That tells me a couple of things that actually matter, as opposed to my bill drill time. It tells me that fairly high shooting ability is just not needed. It tells me that taking time away from shooting, and spending it on other areas, like individual and team Tactics, or insertion and extraction techniques, is probably more important. Now, some of that doesn't apply to civilians, and never will. That's fine, but it does apply to my world. And in my world, I enjoy shooting very much. I just don't overestimate it's importance, or mistake high technical skill for anything other than high technical skill. My worst day, on demand ability is what matters to me, way more than any pr run. It's just not as exciting to talk about.

Well said, SLG. I think this paragraph gets to the crux on a variety of levels.

There are many skills involved in resolving a conflict whether with a team or one on one. Not the least of which are communication and command presence.

[DocGKR]

SLG--very good post!

[Surf]

I was able to get my hands on some of the first M&P's right off the line, a 9mm and a .40S&W for a pretty in depth T&E. I loved the look, loved the feel in the hand and was very excited. But in the end the results were what mattered. We pretty much fished out every issue that later became commonly known issues and complaints in the M&P line, both .40 and 9mm. I think what made me more disappointed is that it didn't take some super knowledgeable gunsmith / shooter to notice or figure out these issues. Some were so glaring that your average shooter could easily see the issues.

Also what turned me off is that one pistol would not run 2-3 rounds without having a failure. How the heck could a manufacturer and their engineers not notice these issues that were so widespread and how could they send these pistols from the manufacturer to a major organization and not have known this? Anyway that greatly turned me off to the M&P. I did revisit later models, but the trigger and particularly the issues in the M&P9 just kept leaving me underwhelmed.

I did consider a Pro Core model at one point, but just never pulled the trigger. I will admit to having a big preference for the Glock but this thread has got me at least wanting to get my hands on a 2.0 as I so much wanted to like the M&P when it was first even discussed on paper.

I will also note that I am also a big "trigger don't matter" (that much) type of person, but when I did review the original M&P the poor trigger did immediately stand out to me. I did say that many people would not like it and if I were comparing triggers, I didn't like it either. But I guess I was groomed on crappy triggers and feel that having learned to shoot on crappy triggers was a big advantage for me in the long run.

Man I took a lot of heat over those M&P reviews years ago. Good times. :)

[Oldstate]

But I guess I was groomed on crappy triggers and feel that having learned to shoot on crappy triggers was a big advantage for me in the long run.


I think this is the crux of the "trigger debate" in the practical shooting world. Its all in context of what you are used to. I was introduced to pistols at 17 by an Uncle who shot NRA Traditional Bullseye. My first two pistols were 1911's...one a was a full blown accurised custom gun with a super crisp 3 1/2# trigger. It was an 1 1/2" gun at 50 yards in a rest.

The first time I shot a Glock my thoughts were "damn this trigger blows" and was appalled by the lack of accuracy (comparatively) That was a long time ago and I have learned to accept modern polymer pistols for what they are I shot them well. But I instinctively compare any pistol to my first experiences. The reality is when you are shooting at 10 yards trying to quickly place shots in a 6" or 8" area, these things don't really matter that much. But they are nice to have

[LockedBreech]

I started on a DA/SA Beretta trigger and DA/SA is the only trigger that really feels like "home" to me, although I am a demonstrably better shooter with a good striker trigger. Sometimes I can't believe the level of shooting my VP9 lets me get to. As a lifelong mediocre shooter it is the first gun I have ever actually shot WELL, and certainly the first time and only time I've ever been called out for praise on a busy range by the RO. So my gut says a DA/SA trigger is most natural, but the objective results are different. That said, my M&P 40 trigger pre-Apex was rough, and I shot very poorly with that gun.

Some great input from SLG that makes me think I need to focus on my shooting as a full, life-preserving skill set rather than micro-adjusting my trigger finger position, and maybe get some range and training time that isn't standing with nice even metered fire at the 15 yard line.

That post may well have inspired me to take the leap to sign up for my first real training.

[JSGlock34]

So in return for a fully tensioned striker the M&P gets a mediocre trigger?

[Oldstate]

So in return for a fully tensioned striker the M&P gets a mediocre trigger?

Not sure that is the case because Apex seems to have figured it out. Recent production M&P Sears break SUPER clean. I think most of the trigger "issues" stem from the striker block and trigger bar loop. The Apex FSS gets rid of the long take up and their USB smooths out the take up. I think a USB may be all that is needed now in current production M&Ps if my sample is indicative of what is being made now.

[SLG]

I have no insight into M&P triggers, and for the sake of this post, I have purposely not asked.

For a $430 gun, I'm not sure what is expected these days. They have to save money somewhere, maybe they chose the trigger. My PR's that day were shot with the Performance Center M&P with an RMR. I mention that, again, since it seems to have been overlooked a few times. No surprise to me at all that I shot better with it. I'm sure had I shot my Roland instead, the results that day would have been the same. Certainly it is no mystery that I shot those drills faster with the dot gun compared to irons.

At any rate, I mention all that as a long way of saying that the Performance Center gun, an older CORE model, has a really nice trigger. Clearly they can have them, but at what cost to the company? I for one have no issue with a $430 gun coming with a less than stellar trigger. My Sigs, which cost twice as much these days, certainly don't come with triggers that i would define as good. Ok, maybe. Definitely not good though. Pretty sure HK is the same way, unless you...wait for it...pay extra...for a different trigger.

The nice thing is, as I've said before, once you hit the 1,000 or 2,000 round mark, both the trigger and you will work just fine:-) Which is as it should be.

[JSGlock34]

I've just noticed that many of the Glock challengers that have released in recent years feature a fully cocked striker (P320, VP9, M&P, PPQ, etc). I imagine that we don't see many partially cocked designs due to Glock patents (we probably wouldn't even have the M&P without the Glock patents, considering the Sigma episode). But if you're going to utilize a fully cocked striker (essentially a SAO design, right?), I figure you might as well get a noteworthy out-of-the-box trigger in the deal.

I'll admit that I am not entirely at ease with some of these fully cocked designs, but I'm also satisfied with OEM Glock triggers.

[Texaspoff]

I've just noticed that many of the Glock challengers that have released in recent years feature a fully cocked striker (P320, VP9, M&P, PPQ, etc). I imagine that we don't see many partially cocked designs due to Glock patents (we probably wouldn't even have the M&P without the Glock patents, considering the Sigma episode). But if you're going to utilize a fully cocked striker (essentially a SAO design, right?), I figure you might as well get a noteworthy out-of-the-box trigger in the deal.

I'll admit that I am not entirely at ease with some of these fully cocked designs, but I'm also satisfied with OEM Glock triggers.

Wait until you try the new CZ P-10 Trigger. It is very impressive, and it is a partially tensioned design, like the Glock. The last bit of tension is added to the striker before the break, and CZ figured out how to make an outstanding trigger with that design. I have played with the M&P 2.0 also, but I haven't shot them. I was not impressed one bit, it felt like the recent production M&P 1.0 or whatever they call them now. I think S&W has been neutered by all their lawyers and their liability talk. It doesn't take a engineering graduate to figure out how to make a clean crisp trigger with a fully tensioned striker system, and S&W has a huge R&D budget. IMO

TXPO

[Texaspoff]

4.7 pounds consistently, and that is with only about 350 rounds through it. ..:) It is supposed to settle to about 4.5 at around 500 rounds. What else you need, I will be leaving at 4 am tomorrow to go out of town for work so if I can get it now, I can get of for you when I get back.


TXPO

[HCM]

Interesting... I thought hat might be the case from looking at pictures of a field stripped P-10 on the internet. Wanna take some measurements for me? :)

Tom,

Just FYI "Gadget" in Czech is přístroj.

And "Soon" is již brzy.

;-)

[Texaspoff]

I was more interested in some internal measurements of the length variety. :)

Sure tell me what you would like and I will get them for you.

TXPO

[karmapolice]

Anybody with a waterfall that doesn't have water in it can't claim much of nuttin.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

More noise but I have to respond cuz I'm ain't no scrub.

https://media.giphy.com/media/FMw5NmF3AE9VK/giphy.gif

[Mark]

I have to admit I am very anxious to see if these M&P's work out. If they are a 3 inch or better gun at 25 yards I'm in. SLG, based on your two examples (I understand it's only 2) do you think they're at the 3 inch mark?

[YVK]

Not sure what this thread is about any more but a small comment on Smith & Wesson MP.

In 2011 I bought a full sized M&P 9 mm model. That gun took a cake of a worst QC control gun I've had. It shot an 8 inch group and threw brass into my face. However, what really got me was that a takedown lever pin was never installed and that small part just fell out of a gun before I ever fired a shot. How it passed QD, still don't know. I actually asked but never got an answer. I had a barrel replaced, they installed the pin and I later sold it with a disclosure and at a 30% loss to my good friend SecondsCount after he test fired it. Don't know if he still has it.


So I was perusing different sites and found that things are well and unchanged in S&W QC land. http://bearsarms.weebly.com/


Anyone wants a great, now discontinued leather AIWB rig by Josh Kolbeson for a full sized MP, lemme know. Pretty sure I am not getting a 2.0.

[UNM1136]

I think it would make it less necessary, but still, being able to positively control the striker/hammer is something I and many others desire for AIWB carry. I and several other SMEs/Staff had a great conversation with ToddG about how he sees the 1911 as near perfect for AIWB given the thumb safety, the grip safety, and the hammer you (should) ride with your thumb as you reholster.

I am not SME or staff, but I had that exact conversation with ToddG when I took AFHF with him, since I had a 1911 in duty gear, and he was starting to talk me into Appendix, leading by example. I have been trained since 1992 to put my thumb on the back of the hammer of my Smith Model 10 while reholstering, followed by my Model 19. Glocks didn't give me that warm fuzzy, but when my first agency required me to buy a Sig in 1998 I regained the habit. I went to a 1911 in '04, and found that while holstering I could physically block the hammer path to the firing pin with my thumb BUT I did not want to put any rearward pressure the hammer and risk the hammer hooks being pulled off the sear while I did it.

To answer the other question (GJM?) I have had my mode of carry "wipe" my 1911 safety off from time to time and it only happens with my cheapest holsters. I have carried a 1911 IWB and in uniform and in a fanny pack for the last 13 years. In 2013 after meeting ToddG (and embarrassing myself as the second worst shooter there) I bought a SME holster from Five Shot, at SLG's personal recommendation. I have never had a problem wth the safety being wiped off in a quality holster, either duty or concealment, so I do not hold the safety up as I hoster the 1911, I place my thumb on the flat face of the hammer without lifting the hammer hooks out of the sear. I don't think of holding the hammer back, just blocking its path to the firing pin. After a couple of years I noticed I was blocking the hammer without moving it, even while holstering qucikly, for real, on duty as I have taken people into custody. Now I am carrying an M&P for the year while I teach M&P transition courses for the department. Sometime next year I will be T&Eing on duty an RMR on a Glock, and already have my Gadget installed on both the primary pistol and the backup piece.

Pat

[orionz06]

Anyone wants a great, now discontinued leather AIWB rig by Josh Kolbeson for a full sized MP, lemme know. Pretty sure I am not getting a 2.0.

Let's trade?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Robinson]

I am not SME or staff, but I had that exact conversation with ToddG when I took AFHF with him...

Pat

Just a suggestion, you might want to copy this post over to the 1911 AIWB thread too.

[YVK]

Let's trade?



Sure.

[Beat Trash]

Our S&W LE slaes rep is stopping by tomorrow morning with a 2.0. A few of the local suburban agencies are sending people to attend the, "Show and Tell Session". I have to admit I'm curious to see this in person.

If there's any questions anyone is interested in, let me know and I'll ask the rep.

[Willard]

Our S&W LE slaes rep is stopping by tomorrow morning with a 2.0. A few of the local suburban agencies are sending people to attend the, "Show and Tell Session". I have to admit I'm curious to see this in person.

If there's any questions anyone is interested in, let me know and I'll ask the rep.

Thanks for the offer. Probably nothing new here, but if you have the chance, I'd like to know about 25 yard and beyond accuracy potential, auto-forwarding (fixed?), whether the new slide release provides additional strength and eliminates breakages, if the new frame rails were intended to provide extra durability or frame rigidity or something else, and any subtle improvements not being widely reported on. Thanks!

[Lomshek]

So in return for a fully tensioned striker the M&P gets a mediocre trigger?

My take on the trigger "quality" is it's exactly a trade off for a fully tensioned striker. They could make it a 4 pound trigger that functioned more like an Apex FSS but then you'll end up with a whole lot of ND's and holes in people who are habitually sloppy with their safety practices.

As a compromise you get a fully cocked striker with a crunchy, spongy longer travel trigger as compared to someone's ideal.

I haven't messed with H&K or SIG's striker guns but Walther apparently said screw it and put a very nice trigger on their's. For me it's way too light and short travel for a gun with no manual safety.

[GJM]

Our S&W LE slaes rep is stopping by tomorrow morning with a 2.0. A few of the local suburban agencies are sending people to attend the, "Show and Tell Session". I have to admit I'm curious to see this in person.

If there's any questions anyone is interested in, let me know and I'll ask the rep.

Ask them if S&W has fixed the accuracy and quality issues that plagued the legacy M&P 9 FS.

[Beat Trash]

Ask them if S&W has fixed the accuracy and quality issues that plagued the legacy M&P 9 FS.

Their answer would be, "What accuracy and quality issues? There's nothing wrong..."

[GJM]

Their answer would be, "What accuracy and quality issues? There's nothing wrong..."


If the rep did say that, it would make it hard for me to believe anything they then said.

[orionz06]

Ask them if S&W has fixed the accuracy and quality issues that plagued the legacy M&P 9 FS.

Ask twice.

[JSGlock34]

Our S&W LE slaes rep is stopping by tomorrow morning with a 2.0. A few of the local suburban agencies are sending people to attend the, "Show and Tell Session". I have to admit I'm curious to see this in person.

If there's any questions anyone is interested in, let me know and I'll ask the rep.

I doubt he'd comment publicly on what the Army found wanting in the M&P, but I'm curious to know how the 2.0 materially differs from the XM17 entry.

[GJM]

I doubt he'd comment publicly on what the Army found wanting in the M&P, but I'm curious to know how the 2.0 materially differs from the XM17 entry.

Has the improved slide stop?

[Oldstate]

I doubt he'd comment publicly on what the Army found wanting in the M&P, but I'm curious to know how the 2.0 materially differs from the XM17 entry.

This is a shame. For me there is something fundimentally wrong with the fact the US military uses any foreign made weapons.

[orionz06]

This is a shame. For me there is something fundimentally wrong with the fact the US military uses any foreign made weapons.

I agree but I'd also not wanna see the US military using an inferior weapon either. The real answer is US based companies not fucking up a good gun.

"If anyone can fuck up a good gun surely it's S&W"
-Famous instructor guy with mustache

[LockedBreech]

I agree but I'd also not wanna see the US military using an inferior weapon either. The real answer is US based companies not fucking up a good gun.

"If anyone can fuck up a good gun surely it's S&W"
-Famous instructor guy with mustache

This. FN and HK among others are putting out world-class small arms and Sweden is putting out some of the most advanced missile systems on the battlefield and has been for a long time. I want the U.S. military using the absolute best weapons regardless of where they come from. Same reason I didn't buy a domestic vehicle, because I can't rely on the powertrain to survive to 100K the way I can with a Japanese make. U.S. industry should earn business, not receive it out of hand in the form of baubles and bailouts.

[Oldstate]

I agree but I'd also not wanna see the US military using an inferior weapon either. The real answer is US based companies not fucking up a good gun.

"If anyone can fuck up a good gun surely it's S&W"
-Famous instructor guy with mustache

I understand the reasons....I just thinks it reflects poorly. I also hated that CHIPs didn't drive Harleys:)

[98z28]

Another 2.0 data point. Good news, bad news.

The bad first. Before shooting the gun I went to pull the slide off and put some lube on the gun. The sear deactivation lever fell out of the gun. I'm not the first to have this problem, as referenced earlier on this thread:http://bearsarms.weebly.com/

Here's mine:

http://i220.photobucket.com/albums/dd128/stelks98z28/Post/IMG_20170112_092655_zpscqpnwpqp.jpg (http://s220.photobucket.com/user/stelks98z28/media/Post/IMG_20170112_092655_zpscqpnwpqp.jpg.html)

http://i220.photobucket.com/albums/dd128/stelks98z28/Post/IMG_20170112_092719_zpssx6n8941.jpg (http://s220.photobucket.com/user/stelks98z28/media/Post/IMG_20170112_092719_zpssx6n8941.jpg.html)

Now the good news. It shot great. I ran Speer Lawman 115, 124, and 147 grain through it and they all grouped decently well. Here are a couple 5-shot groups fired from 25 yards off a rest:

http://i220.photobucket.com/albums/dd128/stelks98z28/Post/IMG_20170112_093741_zpsiqnorxog.jpg (http://s220.photobucket.com/user/stelks98z28/media/Post/IMG_20170112_093741_zpsiqnorxog.jpg.html)

Also tried some some 124gr +P Gold Dot and 147gr HST. Both grouped respectably well:

http://i220.photobucket.com/albums/dd128/stelks98z28/Post/IMG_20170112_094411_zpsip6rtmdm.jpg (http://s220.photobucket.com/user/stelks98z28/media/Post/IMG_20170112_094411_zpsip6rtmdm.jpg.html)

Sample of one and all that. I want the M&P to be fixed so bad, but the sear deactivation lever makes me think Smith is still determined to screw up this gun with sloppy manufacturing and QC practices.

[LockedBreech]

Ah, S&W, like a college friend on their 8th marriage. :(

[Oldstate]

Question for those with a 2.0:

Does the new finish have a dull parkerized look? Almost like an AR barrel?

The reason I ask is that my recent production 1.0 has a finish like this. It is noticeably different than my older pistols

[98z28]

Ah, S&W, like a college friend on their 8th marriage. :(
And I go to every damn wedding with gifts and hope it turns out different this time. Might need to seek treatment for codependency...

[incogneato]

Question for those with a 2.0:

Does the new finish have a dull parkerized look? Almost like an AR barrel?

The reason I ask is that my recent production 1.0 has a finish like this. It is noticeably different than my older pistols

I haven't seen the black in-person, but the FDE I picked up today has a smooth finish.

[Lomshek]

Another 2.0 data point. Good news, bad news.

The bad first. Before shooting the gun I went to pull the slide off and put some lube on the gun. The sear deactivation lever fell out of the gun.

Nothing like snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.

[Beat Trash]

I spent yesterday morning with our LE sales rep and a couple of 2.0 pistols ( both 4.25" guns). There were representatives from three surrounding agencies there also, as well as our range staff and a few other people from my agency. We are a 9mm agency, but the sales rep only had 40 cal 2.0's. He brought one with and one without a thumb safety. Apparently the LE sales department only got their guns a couple of days ago, vs. the commercial side who've had them for a while. I listened to the presentation and asked a few questions.

Some random thoughts:

The trigger is nice. Nice enough that I would not feel the need to put any Apex parts into the gun.

The stippling is aggressive. You could tone it down by giving it a "kiss" with fine grit sand paper. But for a duty gun, I really liked it, especially when shooting the gun. It did not move in the hand, at all.

The finish is no longer Melonite. Something similar that began with an A, but I forgot what it was called. Still a heat treated finish, but S&W doesn't own the patent for Melonite, so they apparently came up with their own finish.

The magazines and back straps are interchangeable from the original to the 2.0.

The slide assemblies are not interchangeable from the original to the 2.0.

The chassis on the 2.0 that holds the slide rails is longer. The slide rails are huge compared to an original M&P.

The slide stop has been redesigned. Those little welds are gone, replaced with a protrusion. The slide stop no longer can be pulled out without drifting a pin.

The trigger bar has been redesigned and that little candy cane loop is gone. Our armors got very excited about changes in the trigger bar and how it related to making their life simpler.

The 2.0 is 3 ounces lighter than the original gun in the same caliber.

The takedown tool to remove the back strap has been changed. It's much easier to get out when brand new. It contained a lanyard loop that was rated to pull a 300 pound man. But it's subtile looking. I don't know that I would ever need it, but I liked it. Not sure why...

The little horizontal bar looking thing in front of the slide stop is a press fitted bar. Inside is a spring that activates this smaller bar looking thing that you will see press against the slide stop. It's to help reduce auto forwarding. I'm sure it had a technical name, but I forgot.

The finish looked the same as the last batch of original guns we purchased for the current recruit class ( I want to say the last batch of guns are about 3-5 months old(?)

The 2.0 is not the same gun submitted for the Army XM-17 trials. It is based off of that gun, but with various changes and improvements that came out of the trial.

Shooting the guns:

We set up two OPOTA targets and set up blue barrels at 10 yards to use as tables. A pair of 40 caliber original M&P's were borrowed from deputies attending. One original and one 2.0 gun were set up at each barrel so that the shooter could compare the difference.

I grabbed two loaded magazines and went first.

I'm right handed and am currently having some tendinitis in my right elbow. And I haven't shot a 40 cal gun in years. I fired three rounds from each gun two handed. I noticed the 2.0 seemed to track just slightly better. I tried one handed shooting, but my elbow decided it was a bad idea. So I shot weak hand only for about 5 rounds through each gun. The 2.0 had slightly less felt recoil, despite being 3 ounces lighter. I finished up the rounds in both guns shooting two handed at some speed.

I then watched everyone else shoot. Without sounding like a prick, I'm glad the shooting was done at 10 yards. Some of the people in attendance were struggling to keep rounds within the silhouette of the OPOTA target. I would like to be kind to them and blame it on the guns, but this included both of the people who donated their issued duty pistols...

Ejection was very consistent.

For those who actually could shoot, groups were well centered and to the point of aim.

There were no malfunctions and all magazines dropped free.

IF the sales rep is to be taken at face value, the 9mm guns have been shot with all bullet weights and there is no accuracy issues.

I would like to see a variety of loads shot through a 9mm gun at 25 yards from a bench. Call me cynical...

To be honest, I walked in yesterday expecting to be under impressed. That didn't happen. With a very limited exposure to the 2.0, I really liked it. That surprised me.

What did happen is our Range Master made arrangements for some 9mm T&E guns to be delivered so we can spend 3-4 months with them.

My thoughts on the 2.0? If the 25 yard accuracy is what it is being portrayed on the internet to be, then I will wait a couple of months. But I will buy one.

As long as they don't screw it up somehow, I feel that the 2.0 is going to save the M&P series.

I'll be really interested in seeing a M&P9c 2.0...

[Magsz]

I believe they're calling the finish "armornite". Correct me if im wrong.

Also, how does an LE rep show up to a demo without 9mm guns? That's just....yeah....

[Greg]

Also, how does an LE rep show up to a demo without 9mm guns? That's just....yeah....

Harbinger of the inevitable fo'tay comeback? :cool:

[Sherman A. House DDS]

Question for those with a 2.0:

Does the new finish have a dull parkerized look? Almost like an AR barrel?

The reason I ask is that my recent production 1.0 has a finish like this. It is noticeably different than my older pistols

Negative. My 2.0 is a smooth black finish.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[scjbash]

I believe they're calling the finish "armornite". Correct me if im wrong.

Also, how does an LE rep show up to a demo without 9mm guns? That's just....yeah....

It is called armornite. Did some googling and S&W made a post in the industry section of Arfcom saying it is simply Melonite under a different name because of trademark issues.

[Oldstate]

Negative. My 2.0 is a smooth black finish.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Ok. I will try to get a pic to show the difference

[Sherman A. House DDS]

Ok. I will try to get a pic to show the difference

I have three of the original M&P's, of three different model years. And all three have different finishes. OR AT LEAST the qualitative texture and sheen of the finishes are different.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Tokarev]

Two different shooters. 25 yards using a balled up windbreaker for a rest.

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170113/fb9e194cc957de8f2d78666bedc628af.jpg



Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

[Tokarev]

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170113/676f532c055dd14b9079746597c5863a.jpg

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170113/58552c3dcbbd9fa15de83741953c86aa.jpg

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170113/a0cd9d6891f11613f066c9f7de368ded.jpg

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

[Tokarev]

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170113/d11fd80b89398c191c7bffc1cc4ff7b6.jpg

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170113/0dbc36d8b6768f9b505fad757144f97d.jpg

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170113/8f5645f598febe15ad01a8e496869f72.jpg

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170113/c91affbdad140e5fbe9771c672aa5c41.jpg

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

[Tokarev]

Ammo was 124gr Hydrashok, 115gr Atlanta Arms, WWB and 147 Gold Dot G2

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

[Lomshek]

The chassis on the 2.0 that holds the slide rails is longer. The slide rails are huge compared to an original M&P.

The slide stop has been redesigned. Those little welds are gone, replaced with a protrusion. The slide stop no longer can be pulled out without drifting a pin.

The trigger bar has been redesigned and that little candy cane loop is gone. Our armors got very excited about changes in the trigger bar and how it related to making their life simpler.

The 2.0 is 3 ounces lighter than the original gun in the same caliber.

The takedown tool to remove the back strap has been changed. It's much easier to get out when brand new. It contained a lanyard loop that was rated to pull a 300 pound man. But it's subtle looking. I don't know that I would ever need it, but I liked it. Not sure why...

The little horizontal bar looking thing in front of the slide stop is a press fitted bar. Inside is a spring that activates this smaller bar looking thing that you will see press against the slide stop. It's to help reduce auto forwarding. I'm sure it had a technical name, but I forgot.

...I'll be really interested in seeing a M&P9c 2.0...

The fixes to the trigger bar loop and slide stop sound great. Having installed a few Apex set ups and done a good bit of fitting and tuning that bendy candy cane loop was not conducive to good trigger feel or consistency.

Really hoping they finally debut a G19 size gun at SHOT.

[Beat Trash]

Or maybe at the NRA Show...

[Erick Gelhaus]

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170113/d11fd80b89398c191c7bffc1cc4ff7b6.jpg

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

This isn't about what is quoted / re-posted, but rather the whole of both posts ... What the heck is that? Some context, some info, "the" / A standard for measuring groups?

I imagine you are trying to communicate something, I'm just not sure what.

[5pins]

This isn't about what is quoted / re-posted, but rather the whole of both posts ... What the heck is that? Some context, some info, "the" / A standard for measuring groups?

I imagine you are trying to communicate something, I'm just not sure what.

I think he is just trying to provide some scale, not necessarily trying to measure the group size.

[Tokarev]

This isn't about what is quoted / re-posted, but rather the whole of both posts ... What the heck is that? Some context, some info, "the" / A standard for measuring groups?

I imagine you are trying to communicate something, I'm just not sure what.
Just posting a few photos for reference. I'll leave it up to ya'll to interpret how you wish.


Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

[JTQ]

Just posting a few photos for reference. I'll leave it up to ya'll to interpret how you wish.

I think some context would help, such as "this is the most accurate gun I've ever fired, and these are some of my best groups ever", or "these shots are all over the place, the groups with my Glock 17 (or whatever gun you normally shoot) at this range are usually all in the center bullseye."

[Tokarev]

I think some context would help, such as "this is the most accurate gun I've ever fired, and these are some of my best groups ever", or "these shots are all over the place, the groups with my Glock 17 (or whatever gun you normally shoot) at this range are usually all in the center bullseye."
Were the groups good or terrible? These are debatable nobody here knows me or my abilities.

What I'll try to do in the next day or two is repeat the same shooting sequence using the same ammo but with my SIG 320 and maybe a Glock. But I don't have a ton of the G2 stuff and have other things I want to do with it.

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

[JTQ]

Were the groups good or terrible? These are debatable nobody here knows me or my abilities.


I think that's the point.

[ranger]

I would like to see someone who is good at shooting groups at 25 yards shoot (with same ammo, same conditions) an original M&P, a new M&P 2.0, a Glock 17 Gen 4, a VP9, a SIG 320, and so on to see the results.

[ASH556]

I would like to see someone who is good at shooting groups at 25 yards shoot (with same ammo, same conditions) an original M&P, a new M&P 2.0, a Glock 17 Gen 4, a VP9, a SIG 320, and so on to see the results.

This....and 10 shot groups.

[98z28]

I would like to see someone who is good at shooting groups at 25 yards shoot (with same ammo, same conditions) an original M&P, a new M&P 2.0, a Glock 17 Gen 4, a VP9, a SIG 320, and so on to see the results.
Here are a few I could locate easily on my phone:

Glock 19 with stock sights, 25 yards, rested, HST 147
http://i220.photobucket.com/albums/dd128/stelks98z28/Post/IMG_20161107_111226_zpspodwn5gy.jpg (http://s220.photobucket.com/user/stelks98z28/media/Post/IMG_20161107_111226_zpspodwn5gy.jpg.html)


M&P9 full size with Apex SDI barrel and Amerigo pro-glo front sight, 25 yards, rested, three different ammo types:
http://i220.photobucket.com/albums/dd128/stelks98z28/Post/IMG_20160728_154240_zpswif4tnz0.jpg (http://s220.photobucket.com/user/stelks98z28/media/Post/IMG_20160728_154240_zpswif4tnz0.jpg.html)


Sig 320 9mm subcompact and compact, stock sights, 20 yards, unsupported (not five round groups, but I was consistently impressed with the practical accuracy I could get out of the 320's. This was the only picture I could find right away):
http://i220.photobucket.com/albums/dd128/stelks98z28/Post/20160524_153454_zpsvf3ah8hg.jpg (http://s220.photobucket.com/user/stelks98z28/media/Post/20160524_153454_zpsvf3ah8hg.jpg.html)


So far, the M&P 2.0 compares favorably to other polymer guns in accuracy, in my hands. What it'll do with several thousand rounds through it is another question. That was one of the reported problems with the original gun. Even the accurate guns would open up when they got hot or started getting up there in round count.

The M&P is such an easy gun to shoot well. It's relatively easy to work on and well supported by the aftermarket. We always joke about a Glock killer, but if Smith can get this one right, it's a legitimate Glock alternative. I'm hoping Smith finally did their homework with this iteration, but I'm not selling off my g19's just yet...

[SLG]

I would like to see someone who is good at shooting groups at 25 yards shoot (with same ammo, same conditions) an original M&P, a new M&P 2.0, a Glock 17 Gen 4, a VP9, a SIG 320, and so on to see the results.

The issue is that each of those guns may prefer a different round. Shooter ability gets to be difficult to control for, when you're shooting that many groups with that many guns and that many different types of ammo.

[MSparks909]

I think the best way to judge true mechanical accuracy of the new 2.0s would be to use a Ransom Rest. Take the human element out of the equation. Use ~10-12 different 9mm loads. Say 3-4 115 gr. loads, 3-4 124gr. loads and 3-4 147gr. loads. Shoot 10 shot groups of each at 25Y.

Ideally there would be 5 or more of the same pistols to get a general idea as every gun will shoot slightly different. In a perfect world I would do this test with 100 guns, but I don't think it's feasible $ wise to run this test through ~100 guns.

Running a good sample size of commercially available loads through 1 gun in a Ransom Rest would probably give a general idea of how a standard 2.0 will group.

[SLG]

We are in the middle of an ice storm here, but when things clear up in a few days, I'll shoot the 2.0 with a laser, as well as my gen4 17. Maybe others as well, depending how motivated I am.

[SLG]

I added this to my post a few pages back, but decided it might be better here.

I found out more about my Nationals win. I did come in first in a division at Steel Nationals. 2nd in another and 3rd in another. I can definitely say I won Steel Nationals in X division. I gather that USPSA does not call that a national title, so I can't really say I'm a national champion (though many other say that of themselves in similar situations, I don't think it is legit.) Hope that clarifies things.

Luke,

I find it curious that you have not been back in this thread since. Makes it hard for me to take your queries or apology seriously. Maybe I'm wrong but it seems like trolling to me. Then again, I take a person's word as a bit stronger than some others do. I also realize that internet communications are less than ideal, so if I'm wrong, I'm wrong.

[Tokarev]

At some point we should discuss just what levels of accuracy are expected and what levels are practical from a duty-type handgun. And how often is such accuracy needed?


Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

[karmapolice]

At some point we should discuss just what levels of accuracy are expected and what levels are practical from a duty-type handgun. And how often is such accuracy needed?


Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

All the accuracy, all the time.

[JSGlock34]

At some point we should discuss just what levels of accuracy are expected and what levels are practical from a duty-type handgun. And how often is such accuracy needed?

I always thought Vickers (http://www.vickerstactical.com/accuracy.html) had a good take on this.

Another question I get frequently asked is what is the acceptable mechanical or intrinsic accuracy for a service pistol or carbine, meaning what should the weapon/ammo combination be capable of producing from a shooting device or rest that eliminates shooter error. Keep in mind that I come from a surgical accuracy oriented special operations background with little margin for error. Based on this and years of experience, I have concluded that a service pistol should be capable of head shots at 25 yds and a service carbine should be capable of the same at 100 yds –- basically 5 inch groups. However, there is a catch; I have found that under conditions of stress a shooter will only be able to shoot to within roughly 50 % of the accuracy potential of a given weapon. And that is only for the best shooters; the majority will not even be close to that. That means in order to achieve my standard of head shots (5 inch groups) at a given distance the weapon/ammo combination needs to be capable of at least 2.5 inch groups. I personally measure that accuracy standard with 10 shot groups. Many quality service pistols and carbines with good ammo will achieve this, but there are many other factors involved such as sights and trigger pull characteristics. By these criteria it is not hard to see why a tuned 1911 pistol is so popular in selected spec ops units. Keep in mind that any effort to make a weapon more accurate almost always means tightening tolerances which can lead to a less than acceptable reliability standard for a combat weapon. A balance between accuracy and reliability has to be achieved. Surprisingly, there are many pistols and carbines that do a good job offering an acceptable blend of both. In addition, weapons of this type will require a higher degree of end user maintenance to keep them running. Don’t expect a pistol to shoot like a custom 1911 but to be as forgiving about maintenance as a Glock 17; it just doesn’t happen that way.

[SLG]

Don’t expect a pistol to shoot like a custom 1911 but to be as forgiving about maintenance as a Glock 17; it just doesn’t happen that way.[/I]

I always agreed with LAV about that, and still do. I'll just use this snippet as a chance to get a DA/SA jab in.

If you want "practically" custom 1911 accuracy and Glock reliability (which is not the gold standard at all, ime), then a Classic Sig or Beretta or HK will get you there. You can have your cake and eat it too, if you learn to shoot a DA gun.

Now I know there are qc issues today with some or all of those companies, and maybe any given model doesn't meet my standard anymore, idk. I do know that for the years I carried Sigs, I never met someone whose basically stock gun was more capable than mine. Even the custom 1911's usually fell to the sig.

[Trukinjp13]

My p226 was easily my most accurate gun I have owned. Not saying it was more accurate then my springfield lbo, but in my hands it was.

What level of accuracy does everyone want from the 2.0? 2,3,4 inches at 25 yards? I have not shot it but from different groupings I have seen, it seems to be from 3-5 inches at 25. A ransom rest would seem to be the best. But will every gun shoot equally as good or bad?



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Sasage]

Do you guys think that SW will implement some of these changes to the MP9c?

Always debating a SW or P320C in the future.

[JSGlock34]

What level of accuracy does everyone want from the 2.0? 2,3,4 inches at 25 yards? I have not shot it but from different groupings I have seen, it seems to be from 3-5 inches at 25. A ransom rest would seem to be the best. But will every gun shoot equally as good or bad?

I certainly don't think every gun/ammunition combination is going to shoot equally. I think for the M&P to be successful, it needs to at least match comparable model Glocks for accuracy. I'd say sub 3" groups with premium duty ammunition at 25 yards is a start to that conversation, but Glock hasn't been resting on its laurels either. I understand the G17M is more accurate than its predecessors.

[45dotACP]

The gen 4 Glocks are pretty dang accurate. That said, I've yet to shoot a more accurate "duty" pistol than my Beretta 92. The SIGs are supposed to be pretty dang good but the Beretta trigger is just easier for me. Especially with the lighter spring/Wilson trigger bar.

I'm not able to hit the upper A zone of a USPSA target on demand at 25 yards under match pressure though.

I tried out a 1.0 m&p today and it was capable of 3-4 inches at 20 yards in my hands...A little better than my Gen 2 G19

[GJM]

The gen 4 Glocks are pretty dang accurate. That said, I've yet to shoot a more accurate "duty" pistol than my Beretta 92. The SIGs are supposed to be pretty dang good but the Beretta trigger is just easier for me. Especially with the lighter spring/Wilson trigger bar.

I'm not able to hit the upper A zone of a USPSA target on demand at 25 yards under match pressure though.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

Seems like 25 yard groups have three variables -- ammo, the inherent accuracy of the pistol, and the shooter's ability to extract that accuracy through their ability and/or the ergonomics of the pistol.

[Sawyer]

I was just issued a legacy M&P 9 by my agency......yes we got these right when the 2.0 was released. I took it to the range and shot some off hand 10 round groups at about 6 inches at 25 yards (using 124+p HST). When taking my skill into consideration that's about as good as I shot my Gen 4 Glock 17. I also shot some bowling pins at 25 yards and was hitting the pins about every other shot. All and all it seemed fine. I guess some 1.0 M&P's shoot fine?

[98z28]

Seems like 25 yard groups have three variables -- ammo, the inherent accuracy of the pistol, and the shooter's ability to extract that accuracy through their ability and/or the ergonomics of the pistol.
Indeed. "Practical" accuracy - the accuracy I can actually get out of then gun under some stress - is just as important as mechanical accuracy. Of course you can overcome poor fit and poor ergos with more work, within reason, but it's no fun to fight the pistol.


I was just issued a legacy M&P 9 by my agency......yes we got these right when the 2.0 was released. I took it to the range and shot some off hand 10 round groups at about 6 inches at 25 yards (using 124+p HST). When taking my skill into consideration that's about as good as I shot my Gen 4 Glock 17. I also shot some bowling pins at 25 yards and was hitting the pins about every other shot. All and all it seemed fine. I guess some 1.0 M&P's shoot fine?

Most definitely. I've had a few M&P9's that shot great right out of the box. Like 2" at 25 yards great. Not all M&P9's are bad, but it's common enough to be a legitimate concern.

[GJM]

I had a pile of M&P 9 FS pistols at one point, and everyone of them would shoot at least one load well. The problem was my wife and I each had two shooters and a carry one, and I needed about six different loads. Made logistics near impossible.

[orionz06]

I also shot some bowling pins at 25 yards and was hitting the pins about every other shot. All and all it seemed fine. I guess some 1.0 M&P's shoot fine?

Yes, and it made discussion about the gun that much worse. The LE guns were far better though their best still weren't touching stock Gen 4 Glocks. The 2.0 seems like it can do that, outta the box.

[Oldstate]

As was just said and what I said a few pages back....a ransom rest is needed. Not just to keep the pistol steady but because combat sights and the stock triggers are not conducive to accuracy testing at 25 yards.

[LSW]

I always hear that ransom rests don't work very well with plastic framed guns, although Grant at Apex seems to get good results.

Bottom line, real, scientific accuracy testing of firearms is time consuming and expensive for the average joe, especially when you start trying to compare multiple makes/models. It will take an organization like Apex to publish legitimate accuracy results. Good luck finding those kind of public test results for any pistol out there really. Personally I'd pay a hundred bucks plus the cost of ammo to send my gun to an accuracy tester with a proven setup just because I'm a nerd who would like the data.

In the interim, I think if we see the pistol average 4" groups with range fodder ammo and average joe shooters doing 5 round groups at 25 yards, we have no reason to fault the pistol's accuracy. When groups start averaging 6-8", we have problems.

[RJ]

I wanted to ask a related question about the use of a rest, since it seems germane to the way the discussion has gone.

In terms of what's available to the average shooter at a square range (me), I wonder could the experts here comment on techniques?

So the only times I've tried to 'shoot off a rest' involved a sandbag.

I made a normal 2 handed grip, then sat down on a folding chair at the bench. I placed the sandbag, then used it to steady the bottom of my hands. I sighted normally and squeezed the shot.

Should I have rested the dust cover on the sandbag maybe?

I realize this isn't a jig or whatever these Ransom Rests are (I'll go google that shortly, to get better educated) but it's what I had.

Anyway, interesting discussion on accuracy, ammo, and so on related to the 2.0.

[JSGlock34]

In the interim, I think if we see the pistol average 4" groups with range fodder ammo and average joe shooters doing 5 round groups at 25 yards, we have no reason to fault the pistol's accuracy. When groups start averaging 6-8", we have problems.

Why rely on Average Joe results when there are a range of available choices that have actually passed stringent government accuracy standards? Here's how the FBI assesses accuracy...

2) TRAINING AMMUNITION ACCURACY ASSESSMENT (Ransom Rest) PASS/FAIL
a) The three pistols from each class used in Phase II – Part A, 1 Velocity Evaluation will be used for this test.
i) Pistols will be cleaned & lubricated per Offeror’s recommended specifications.
b) Each of the pistols will be secured in a Ransom Rest and fired using FBI training ammunition at a distance of 25 yards.
c) These pistols will fire five 5 - shot groups.
d) The best four of each pistol's 5-shot groups will be used to obtain a final average group
size per pistol. The three resulting group sizes for each class of pistol will then be averaged resulting in one final group size average for that class of pistol. This final group size must be 5.00” or less.
e) If the final average is equal to or exceeds 5.01”, the Offeror will be eliminated from further consideration.
f) Accuracy is measured using Oehler ballistic computer/optical target. In addition to the optical target paper witness targets may be utilized.

6) SERVICE AMMUNITION ACCURACY ASSESSMENT TOTAL POINTS POSSIBLE: 300
a) Three pistols from each class will be selected for this test.
i) Each pistol will be cleaned & lubricated per Offeror's specifications.
b) Each of the pistols will be secured in a Ransom Rest and fired using service ammunition (54227).
c) Five 5 - shot groups will be fired at a distance of 25 yards.
d) The best four of the five 5-shot groups will be used to obtain a final average group size per pistol. Each pistol can score a maximum of 10 points.
e) Points
(1) 0 – 2.00” = 10 points
(2) 2.01 – 2.50” = 9
(3) 2.51 – 3.00” = 8
(4) 3.01 – 3.50” = 7
(5) 3.51 – 4.00” = 6
(6) > 4.01” = Eliminated from proceeding
f) Accuracy is measured using Oehler ballistic computers/optical targeting system. In addition to the optical target paper witness targets may be utilized.

[Beat Trash]

I wanted to ask a related question about the use of a rest, since it seems germane to the way the discussion has gone.

In terms of what's available to the average shooter at a square range (me), I wonder could the experts here comment on techniques?

So the only times I've tried to 'shoot off a rest' involved a sandbag.

I made a normal 2 handed grip, then sat down on a folding chair at the bench. I placed the sandbag, then used it to steady the bottom of my hands. I sighted normally and squeezed the shot.

Should I have rested the dust cover on the sandbag maybe?

I realize this isn't a jig or whatever these Ransom Rests are (I'll go google that shortly, to get better educated) but it's what I had.

Anyway, interesting discussion on accuracy, ammo, and so on related to the 2.0.

Not to get too far off topic, but with a polymer framed pistol there is some flex of the frame as the gun fires. You do not want to rest the dust cover on anything for this reason. MTM used to make a polymer pistol rest consisting of a "Y" shipped piece that fit into a sloping base, that actually was rather effective. I had success resting the trigger guard in the "Y" at times. Mostly, I'll sandbag the gun so that the trigger guard is the only thing touching. Or I'll sandbag so that the underside of my wrists are supported. Especially when shooting smaller guns like an M&P Shield or a Glock 43, supporting your wrists are about all you can do with sandbags.

[5pins]

Why rely on Average Joe results when there are a range of available choices that have actually passed stringent government accuracy standards? Here's how the FBI assesses accuracy...

2) TRAINING AMMUNITION ACCURACY ASSESSMENT (Ransom Rest) PASS/FAIL
a) The three pistols from each class used in Phase II – Part A, 1 Velocity Evaluation will be used for this test.
i) Pistols will be cleaned & lubricated per Offeror’s recommended specifications.
b) Each of the pistols will be secured in a Ransom Rest and fired using FBI training ammunition at a distance of 25 yards.
c) These pistols will fire five 5 - shot groups.
d) The best four of each pistol's 5-shot groups will be used to obtain a final average group
size per pistol. The three resulting group sizes for each class of pistol will then be averaged resulting in one final group size average for that class of pistol. This final group size must be 5.00” or less.
e) If the final average is equal to or exceeds 5.01”, the Offeror will be eliminated from further consideration.
f) Accuracy is measured using Oehler ballistic computer/optical target. In addition to the optical target paper witness targets may be utilized.

6) SERVICE AMMUNITION ACCURACY ASSESSMENT TOTAL POINTS POSSIBLE: 300
a) Three pistols from each class will be selected for this test.
i) Each pistol will be cleaned & lubricated per Offeror's specifications.
b) Each of the pistols will be secured in a Ransom Rest and fired using service ammunition (54227).
c) Five 5 - shot groups will be fired at a distance of 25 yards.
d) The best four of the five 5-shot groups will be used to obtain a final average group size per pistol. Each pistol can score a maximum of 10 points.
e) Points
(1) 0 – 2.00” = 10 points
(2) 2.01 – 2.50” = 9
(3) 2.51 – 3.00” = 8
(4) 3.01 – 3.50” = 7
(5) 3.51 – 4.00” = 6
(6) > 4.01” = Eliminated from proceeding
f) Accuracy is measured using Oehler ballistic computers/optical targeting system. In addition to the optical target paper witness targets may be utilized.



Well, unless someone here has that capability I think the average Joe may be the only realistic option.

[SLG]

Well, unless someone here has that capability I think the average Joe may be the only realistic option.

I think his point is that the testing is already done. Just buy the winner.

Unless you don't like the winner, then buy something else that is tested and proven over the years.

[5pins]

I think his point is that the testing is already done. Just buy the winner.

Unless you don't like the winner, then buy something else that is tested and proven over the years.


I thought the point was find out if the M&P 2.0 had the same accuracy problems like the “classic” M&P.

[orionz06]

As was just said and what I said a few pages back....a ransom rest is needed. Not just to keep the pistol steady but because combat sights and the stock triggers are not conducive to accuracy testing at 25 yards.

I'd love to see it but a pile of guns shooting ~3" with range fodder is still the most assuring thing we've seen in years concerning the M&P.

[Tokarev]

Here's a bit of informal testing. This is my P320 Carry alongside the new 2.0.

I fired five rounds of 124gr Speer Gold Dot +P through both and five rounds of 147gr WWB through both. Bullet holes are marked 320 or MP accordingly. The uptick was the 124 and the = was the 147.

Distance was 25yds. Kneeling with my usual balled up windbreaker for a rest.

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170115/46ca063632c21af72a62d936d193d2e3.jpg

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170115/75bede3549bf1087d43b355e69353150.jpg

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170115/498da1a257e485cae678b72b6a381dba.jpg

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170115/974b2fa1aab365b13e0bfa401b4c49a7.jpg

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170115/57ce72cffe20cafcacd1c9a20cbc246c.jpg

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

[Oldstate]

I'd love to see it but a pile of guns shooting ~3" with range fodder is still the most assuring thing we've seen in years concerning the M&P.

Actually, someone mentioned a laser. That would probably at least limit the sighting issue. Trigger control is the other.

Apex is showing 50 YARD Bullseye or near Bullseye custom accurized 1911 accuracy from a Ransom rest with a change in barrel timing. I think that shows the potential of the platform and should maybe raise expectations a bit for all polymer guns.

[LSW]

Why rely on Average Joe results when there are a range of available choices that have actually passed stringent government accuracy standards? Here's how the FBI assesses accuracy...

2) TRAINING AMMUNITION ACCURACY ASSESSMENT (Ransom Rest) PASS/FAIL
a) The three pistols from each class used in Phase II – Part A, 1 Velocity Evaluation will be used for this test.
i) Pistols will be cleaned & lubricated per Offeror’s recommended specifications.
b) Each of the pistols will be secured in a Ransom Rest and fired using FBI training ammunition at a distance of 25 yards.
c) These pistols will fire five 5 - shot groups.
d) The best four of each pistol's 5-shot groups will be used to obtain a final average group
size per pistol. The three resulting group sizes for each class of pistol will then be averaged resulting in one final group size average for that class of pistol. This final group size must be 5.00” or less.
e) If the final average is equal to or exceeds 5.01”, the Offeror will be eliminated from further consideration.
f) Accuracy is measured using Oehler ballistic computer/optical target. In addition to the optical target paper witness targets may be utilized.

6) SERVICE AMMUNITION ACCURACY ASSESSMENT TOTAL POINTS POSSIBLE: 300
a) Three pistols from each class will be selected for this test.
i) Each pistol will be cleaned & lubricated per Offeror's specifications.
b) Each of the pistols will be secured in a Ransom Rest and fired using service ammunition (54227).
c) Five 5 - shot groups will be fired at a distance of 25 yards.
d) The best four of the five 5-shot groups will be used to obtain a final average group size per pistol. Each pistol can score a maximum of 10 points.
e) Points
(1) 0 – 2.00” = 10 points
(2) 2.01 – 2.50” = 9
(3) 2.51 – 3.00” = 8
(4) 3.01 – 3.50” = 7
(5) 3.51 – 4.00” = 6
(6) > 4.01” = Eliminated from proceeding
f) Accuracy is measured using Oehler ballistic computers/optical targeting system. In addition to the optical target paper witness targets may be utilized.



Because we want to use a USA manufactured pistol from a USA owned company.

[JBP55]

Because we want to use a USA manufactured pistol from a USA owned company.

Off Topic but that is how I feel about the 30 plus vehicles I have purchased.

[Tokarev]

Here are some additional photos.

First is another conglomeration of both the 2.0 and P320 on the same target. Ammo used was reloads (Berry 135 plated with 3.7gr Titegroup) along with 124gr WWB and Winchester 100gr frangible +P. Of course I forgot my ruler...

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170116/d42d56f294a792584130666baad402bc.jpg

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170116/40798489fdefa0fc1fb202e0fe9ed5dc.jpg

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170116/9cff1f68de55f07551be1849733f70f8.jpg

This turned out to be kind of a mess so I tried again using B27 repair centers.

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170116/06356c10987ec7086071bcd22d669409.jpg

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170116/396b18a121d8b2b16bebc419548038bf.jpg

Running out of ammo so only eight rounds on each target with the frangible.

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170116/eae429319f40f68ee4230dca86fd3f8b.jpg

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170116/c449b9e15be9b8a365bbbc0b7abd2023.jpg

Finished things off with 124 Gold Dot +P. Again I was running low so only five shots here.

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170116/06cc15b88c51cae3126dac8cc1a92a11.jpg

Looks like I threw one.
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170116/573e72231b401b5c1d4599750ba220fb.jpg


Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

[LSW]

Here are some additional photos.


Looks like you are shooting the Sig at least 25-30% better than the M&P 2.0. That's not too promising. That's about what it looks like when I compare my old M&P's to one of my H&K's.

[jeep45238]

Looks like you are shooting the Sig at least 25-30% better than the M&P 2.0. That's not too promising. That's about what it looks like when I compare my old M&P's to one of my H&K's.

Also looks like the mp really has a different poi for the first round fed by hand vs recoil. Usually low by a magazine length. I don't like that at all.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[LSW]

Also looks like the mp really has a different poi for the first round fed by hand vs recoil. Usually low by a magazine length. I don't like that at all.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yeah, I had to send an M&P 40 back for that a few years ago. The first round of the mag (the hand fed one) would impact at least 4-5" low at 25 yards, most of the time. They re-barreled that pistol and it stopped doing it.

[pew_pew]

I bought a 2.0 today and it's good. I got the 4.25" because that's what's available without a safety.

Stippling is good and aggresive. The trigger is ok. It's right at 5lbs, pretty smooth, but the break is creepy. Reset is tactile and audible. It's almost like a Glock with mods, like a lighter striker spring.

Recoil is smooth and light. Accuracy seemed good. Off hand I didn't have any surprises. Groups at 25 yards on an NRA B8 were fairly impressive. Still plan on an Apex gunsmith fit Barrel though to see what it's really capable of.

Honestly, as a Glock fanboy I think this has greater potential if the trigger can get sorted. I've messaged Apex to see what they recommend and if it's possible to get a crisp 4lb trigger in the 2.0s.

I'll keep playing with it but a 5" may be in order for production and I think that these M&P's really are underrated.

[Tokarev]

I bought a 2.0 today and it's good. I got the 4.25" because that's what's available without a safety.

Stippling is good and aggresive. The trigger is ok. It's right at 5lbs, pretty smooth, but the break is creepy. Reset is tactile and audible. It's almost like a Glock with mods, like a lighter striker spring.

Recoil is smooth and light. Accuracy seemed good. Off hand I didn't have any surprises. Groups at 25 yards on an NRA B8 were fairly impressive. Still plan on an Apex gunsmith fit Barrel though to see what it's really capable of.

Honestly, as a Glock fanboy I think this has greater potential if the trigger can get sorted. I've messaged Apex to see what they recommend and if it's possible to get a crisp 4lb trigger in the 2.0s.

I'll keep playing with it but a 5" may be in order for production and I think that these M&P's really are underrated.
I haven't tried the parts in my 2.0 yet but I'll bet you at a minimum the Apex spring kit will fit without issue. At least the striker spring and firing pin block. I bet the spring would get you to four pounds and the firing pin block would take a bunch of creep out of your trigger.

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

[pew_pew]

I haven't tried the parts in my 2.0 yet but I'll bet you at a minimum the Apex spring kit will fit without issue. At least the striker spring and firing pin block. I bet the spring would get you to four pounds and the firing pin block would take a bunch of creep out of your trigger.

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

Apex has a section on their site for the 2.0. I thought the striker block just helps with pre-travel?

https://store.apextactical.com/WebDirect/Products/Category?categoryId=71

[Sasage]

I got hands on the LGS, trigger was fine, stippling, weight and balance were impressive. Wouldn't mind adding one to the stable.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A3000 using Tapatalk

[RJ]

Apex has a section on their site for the 2.0. I thought the striker block just helps with pre-travel?

https://store.apextactical.com/WebDirect/Products/Category?categoryId=71

My knowledge is limited, but I think the SB is most noticeable on take up, yes. I've not seen any convincing evidence the 2.0 SB part no. Is any different than the 1.0. The Apex USB made a big difference in my 1.0.


https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170125/520e1eb31aa91b0b918c0cfc61993e29.jpg



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[archangel]

Interesting... According to this (https://store.apextactical.com/WebDirect/Products/Details/191841) the M2.0 uses the same sear as the M&P45 and Shield.

[Kirk]

Looks like you are shooting the Sig at least 25-30% better than the M&P 2.0. That's not too promising. That's about what it looks like when I compare my old M&P's to one of my H&K's.

Not wanting this to be taken the wrong way, but it looks to me like you can't really draw any conclusions at all from that. The groups are far too big to have any kind of real data on accuracy.

[pew_pew]

I received an email from Apex. They recommend the .45/shield sear. They say it'll result in about a 4lb pull and crisper. I'm going to try that along with their striker block and gunsmith fit barrel.

[scjbash]

I shot my new 2.0 today. It's the 4.25" model. I shot 10 round groups off the bench at 25 yards.

These measurements were taken with a tape measure and rounded to the nearest 1/8". It was extremely windy and neither the target or the gun ever seemed to be still. I constantly had to back off shots because of strong gusts during the trigger press. Three or four of these groups also had a called flyer that I didn't include in the measurements. It's not exact but today I was really only looking for a general idea of the gun's accuracy to make sure I didn't need to send it back or buy an Apex barrel. The gun will definitely shoot tighter groups than these.

147gr Gold Dot - 2 1/2"

115gr Magtech - 3"

147gr Lawman - 3 1/8"

115gr Federal Aluminum - 3 1/8"

124gr Winchester NATO - 3 1/4"

For a control group I shot 147gr Lawman from an original M&P. It will shoot 3" groups with that ammo and today I shot right at 4" with it. Based on the conditions and the control group I believe that mechanically this 2.0 is probably capable of 2" groups, if not better with the right ammo.

[Kirk]

I shot my new 2.0 today. It's the 4.25" model. I shot 10 round groups off the bench at 25 yards.

These measurements were taken with a tape measure and rounded to the nearest 1/8". It was extremely windy and neither the target or the gun ever seemed to be still. I constantly had to back off shots because of strong gusts during the trigger press. Three or four of these groups also had a called flyer that I didn't include in the measurements. It's not exact but today I was really only looking for a general idea of the gun's accuracy to make sure I didn't need to send it back or buy an Apex barrel. The gun will definitely shoot tighter groups than these.

147gr Gold Dot - 2 1/2"

115gr Magtech - 3"

147gr Lawman - 3 1/8"

115gr Federal Aluminum - 3 1/8"

124gr Winchester NATO - 3 1/4"

For a control group I shot 147gr Lawman from an original M&P. It will shoot 3" groups with that ammo and today I shot right at 4" with it. Based on the conditions and the control group I believe that mechanically this 2.0 is probably capable of 2" groups, if not better with the right ammo.

Excellent! 2" from the M&P is strong.

[Sasage]

Appreciate the range reports!

[98z28]

I've spent the last month trying to figure out what gun to focus on in 2017. Yes, I should just pick one and start shooting, but it’s been fun working with each of these guns. I’m not issued a gun and told to live with it anymore, so I’m free to burn time and cash as I wish.

I’m looking for a good competition (USPSA and some NRA AP) and carry combo. On the table are:

1. Glock 34/19,
2. Sig P320 full size and compact, and
3. M&P 2.0.

The M&P came out of left field. I’ll already written the M&P off after a stint with them over the summer. They are likely to need fitted barrels to be useful and I didn't want to go back down that road. Then the M&P 2.0 dropped. The grip improvements are small, but they are fantastic. The more aggressive texture is perfect, they smoothed out under the trigger guard (who decided to put texture there is the first place???), ditched the beavertail, and added a medium-large backstrap. That backstrap is awesome. I’ve always preferred the trigger reach of the large backstrap, but the palm swells are too pronounced. They leave gaps on the grip for me, especially shooting with one hand. The medium-large gives the trigger reach of the large, but the palm swells are not as pronounced. It’s the Goldilocks backstrap. I get solid, 360-degree contact with the grip and ideal trigger reach. And then there was a chance that S&W addressed the accuracy issues of the M&P. They’ve stated publicly that the new gun has an “Accurate 1 in 10” twist M&P M2.0 barrel.”

The latest drills of the week (GM test (https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?23627-Week-197-GM-Test), DeFoor Pistol Tests (https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?23740-Week-198-Defoor-Pistol-Test-2), and Five Twenty Five (https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?23377-Week-194-Five-Twenty-Five)) have been just fantastic for comparing guns because the drills have been so challenging. I added El Pres (http://pistol-training.com/drills/el-presidente) and Hackathorn’s “The Test (https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?5184-Larry-Vickers-quot-The-Test-quot)”. These drills have highlighted how hard I have to work with a given platform to meet fairly rigorous standards. I’ve logged the best scores with the M&P and Sig P320 on each drill, but the M&P is noticeably easier to shoot well. It just doesn’t require as much effort to run well compared to the Glock and Sig. To borrow a line from ToddG (http://pistol-training.com/archives/349), the M&P 2.0 is the most shootable gun I’ve ever handled. My first serious pursuit of shooting performance was with early 90’s era classic Sigs, which are my benchmark. I like the M&P 2.0 better. I probably shouldn’t admit that in public, but there it is. The M&P recoil impulse is mild and the slide cycles quickly with very little sight movement. The trigger guard is large enough that I don’t have to contort my finger to keep from contacting the frame, and the trigger is easy to press quickly without disturbing the sights. It's an easy gun to shoot well.

But then there’s the accuracy issue…

Before going down this rabbit hole, keep in mind that the groups mentioned below were fired at an outdoor range, under windy conditions, with the stock sights, and me behind the trigger. The guns are capable of better, but the consistency in each gun’s performance over multiple five-shot groups makes the below information meaningful, at least to me. I benched each gun on sandbags (the magazine well and my wrists rested on the bags) and put three to five five-round groups through each gun with each load (Speer Lawman 115gr, 124gr, and 147gr; American Eagle 124gr FMJ; Speer Gold Dot 124gr +P, Federal HST 147gr.). That took several range trips over the last two weeks.

The first M&P 2.0 I picked up shot quite well. It will reliably put quality JHP’s into three inches or better at 25 yards and FMJ into four inches. This is the gun from earlier in this thread that the sear deactivation lever fell out of. S&W sent me a lever and pin to fix it.

M&P 2.0 #1:
http://i220.photobucket.com/albums/dd128/stelks98z28/IMG_20170112_094411_zps0evj6ygt.jpg (http://s220.photobucket.com/user/stelks98z28/media/IMG_20170112_094411_zps0evj6ygt.jpg.html)



The second M&P 2.0 was horrific. It had three failures to eject in the first 50 rounds (an empty case stayed in the chamber and a live round tried to feed behind the empty case). Two of the failures were with 124gr +P Gold Dot and one was with 147 HST. That gun couldn't reliably put any of the loads mentioned above into less than 6" at 25 yards. It would put four rounds into something like a group, and then an uncalled flyer would open it way up. I'd get a rare 4" group here and there, but that was the exception. That gun is currently at S&W.

M&P 2.0 #2:
http://i220.photobucket.com/albums/dd128/stelks98z28/IMG_20170116_094056_zpssl4cyl8n.jpg (http://s220.photobucket.com/user/stelks98z28/media/IMG_20170116_094056_zpssl4cyl8n.jpg.html)


I decided to give up on the M&P’s. Then I made the mistake of shooting the good M&P against the P320 and Glock 34 on Five Twenty Five and Jerk The Trigger. Every time I shoot the M&P, I’m reminded of how fun and easy it is to shoot. I thought, “There’s obviously something wrong with the other M&P, but this one is great. Folks seem to be having good luck with the 2.0. I may have just gotten a lemon.”

So I picked up a third. It is just OK. It will group quality JHP into less than 4”, but it will throw random flyers with weak 115gr ammo like Blazer Brass. It does well enough to keep all rounds in the black on a B8 with hotter ammo like Speer Lawman 115gr, 124gr, and 147, although it likes the 124gr best. It does not shoot as well as the first M&P, but it is serviceable.

M&P 2.0 #3 (need to drift the sights). That's a 4x6 index card (ran out of B8 targets), so the groups are around 4".
http://i220.photobucket.com/albums/dd128/stelks98z28/IMG_20170125_112341_zpsbo23ajhm.jpg (http://s220.photobucket.com/user/stelks98z28/media/IMG_20170125_112341_zpsbo23ajhm.jpg.html)
http://i220.photobucket.com/albums/dd128/stelks98z28/IMG_20170125_114547_zpsi6ldxyp8.jpg (http://s220.photobucket.com/user/stelks98z28/media/IMG_20170125_114547_zpsi6ldxyp8.jpg.html)


Just for giggles, here's what a stock Sig P320 will do all day long with American Eagle 124gr FMJ. That's the same 4x6 index card from above. The groups are right around 2".
http://i220.photobucket.com/albums/dd128/stelks98z28/IMG_20170125_113436_zpsr88xg0ky.jpg (http://s220.photobucket.com/user/stelks98z28/media/IMG_20170125_113436_zpsr88xg0ky.jpg.html)

[LSW]

I'd consider sending the mediocre one back to S&W too. They'll probably put a new barrel in it. Who knows, they might even get the crazy idea to check tolerances on the new one when they do. Unfortunate but not unexpected.

[ER_STL]

I got hands on the LGS, trigger was fine, stippling, weight and balance were impressive. Wouldn't mind adding one to the stable.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A3000 using Tapatalk

+1 after visiting a local gun store today. The 2.0 specific changes appear to be beneficial from what I could gather. Trigger was better, texture was nice and grippy and the reduction of the beaver tail didn't detract from the way the gun sat in my hand (i.e. I likely wouldn't get bit by the slide). The added L/XL backstrap is perfect for my hands.

Time will tell as to whether or not the gun is good to go. If it proves out I may buy one.

[M2CattleCo]

I got drug to gun shop by a friend today and they had a 2.0. I have to admit, if they fixed the barrel/accuracy issue, they have a winner on their hands.

I put a couple hundred rounds through a VP9 the other day and I couldn't see myself being happy with it. To big, chunky, and flippy. The 2.0 seems much more size efficient.

[98z28]

I keep forgetting to update this post for folks considering the 2.0. The #2 gun from post #249 that would't group well at all (https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?23773-2-0-range-day&p=556526&viewfull=1#post556526) is back from S&W. The repair slip says they replaced the barrel then the gun "passed range testing". I took it to the range and it is indeed much better. It reliably turned in groups like the one below with 124gr +p Gold dot and budget 124gr JHP Monarch. 115gr ball was a little worse, but not much. I didn't try any 147gr ammo, but my experience with three other 2.0's makes me fairly confident that it will group heavier ammo a little worse and a little higher.

http://i220.photobucket.com/albums/dd128/stelks98z28/Post/IMG_20170215_111527_zpsekmj1ctc.jpg (http://s220.photobucket.com/user/stelks98z28/media/Post/IMG_20170215_111527_zpsekmj1ctc.jpg.html)


Just because I'm a glutton for punishment, I picked up another 2.0 from a guy locally who decided he wanted a 5" model instead. I wanted to see how this one shot. It's a solid shooter out of the box.

http://i220.photobucket.com/albums/dd128/stelks98z28/Post/IMG_20170215_110124_zpsshl6jomw.jpg (http://s220.photobucket.com/user/stelks98z28/media/Post/IMG_20170215_110124_zpsshl6jomw.jpg.html)

http://i220.photobucket.com/albums/dd128/stelks98z28/Post/IMG_20170215_110704_zpskuobembo.jpg (http://s220.photobucket.com/user/stelks98z28/media/Post/IMG_20170215_110704_zpskuobembo.jpg.html)

[Tokarev]

Not too shabby!

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

[LockedBreech]

I keep forgetting to update this post for folks considering the 2.0. The #2 gun from post #249 that would't group well at all (https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?23773-2-0-range-day&p=556526&viewfull=1#post556526) is back from S&W. The repair slip says they replaced the barrel then the gun "passed range testing". I took it to the range and it is indeed much better. It reliably turned in groups like the one below with 124gr +p Gold dot and budget 124gr JHP Monarch. 115gr ball was a little worse, but not much. I didn't try any 147gr ammo, but my experience with three other 2.0's makes me fairly confident that it will group heavier ammo a little worse and a little higher.

http://i220.photobucket.com/albums/dd128/stelks98z28/Post/IMG_20170215_111527_zpsekmj1ctc.jpg (http://s220.photobucket.com/user/stelks98z28/media/Post/IMG_20170215_111527_zpsekmj1ctc.jpg.html)


Just because I'm a glutton for punishment, I picked up another 2.0 from a guy locally who decided he wanted a 5" model instead. I wanted to see how this one shot. It's a solid shooter out of the box.

http://i220.photobucket.com/albums/dd128/stelks98z28/Post/IMG_20170215_110124_zpsshl6jomw.jpg (http://s220.photobucket.com/user/stelks98z28/media/Post/IMG_20170215_110124_zpsshl6jomw.jpg.html)

http://i220.photobucket.com/albums/dd128/stelks98z28/Post/IMG_20170215_110704_zpskuobembo.jpg (http://s220.photobucket.com/user/stelks98z28/media/Post/IMG_20170215_110704_zpskuobembo.jpg.html)

Very encouraging, those are perfectly acceptable service pistol groups at 25.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[BJJ]

16995

I shot 93 points in 10 shots slow fire from the 25 with my 2.0. Sorry about the image being sideways. Im not sure how that happened. I felt pretty encouraged given that this was with sights have not been zeroed. I am usually in the high 80s to low 90s with a Glock. Subjectively, it felt like it took a lot less effort to score this high with the M&P.

[Robert Mitchum]

M&P 2.0 / 45

Soft shooting and good accuracy at 25 yards.

10 Rounds at 5 ..7... 10....15 & 20 Yards
17012


13 Rounds at 25 Yards
17013

[Sherman A. House DDS]

M&P 2.0 / 45

Soft shooting and good accuracy at 25 yards.

10 Rounds at 5 ..7... 10....15 & 20 Yards
17012


13 Rounds at 25 Yards
17013

I didn't know they made a .45 version of the 2.0. Cool!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[newyork]

Is there a 2.0 45 mid yet?

[Robert Mitchum]

Is there a 2.0 45 mid yet?

Not yet ...

They only have two versions so far.... Smith & Wesson M&P45 M2.0 with Thumb Safety
17030

Smith & Wesson M&P45 M2.0 with out Thumb Safety
17031
Barrel Length: 4.6" / 11.7 cm
Overall Length: 7.9"