M&P Bar-Sto Barrel from Apex Tactical preview pic

[Savage Hands]

http://i941.photobucket.com/albums/ad251/SShenaniguns/9c4c399b.jpg

[orionz06]

Can't wait.

[Jay Cunningham]

Well, the M&P is truly the modern 1911 in at least one sense - you take it out of the box and then replace all the parts before you shoot it!

:p :cool:

[Savage Hands]

Todd's test gun proves that not all M&P 9mm's have accuracy problems :D

[fuse]

That test gun was also made around 3 years ago...word is, certain things have changed, in terms of production.

[JV_]

That test gun was also made around 3 years ago...word is, certain things have changed, in terms of production.The early unlocking problem is not a new one, but that may not be the sole cause of the accuracy problems in the M&P.

[orionz06]

Well, the M&P is truly the modern 1911 in at least one sense - you take it out of the box and then replace all the parts before you shoot it!

:p :cool:


Well at least the M&P works out of the box, none of the parts are required for function.



I do believe, if the numbers I have heard are correct, that I will eventually have about a G17's worth of parts in one M&P though.

[Savage Hands]

The early unlocking problem is not a new one, but that may not be the sole cause of the accuracy problems in the M&P.

Randy Lee saw the ability of them to change the twist if needed from the 1:18.75 to a friendlier 1:16, but that does not mean they are going to across the board anytime soon. He also witnessed changes to the hood on some barrels but was this for production or T&E?

fuse, I know you're pro-glock and anti-M&P as you've posted on other boards, but this isn't the place for that kind of nonsense.

[Kyle Reese]

True enough, but try that M&P 9 on steel at 25 and see what happens. :cool:


Well at least the M&P works out of the box, none of the parts are required for function.



I do believe, if the numbers I have heard are correct, that I will eventually have about a G17's worth of parts in one M&P though.

[fuse]

Randy Lee saw the ability of them to change the twist if needed from the 1:18.75 to a friendlier 1:16, but that does not mean they are going to across the board anytime soon. He also witnessed changes to the hood on some barrels but was this for production or T&E?

fuse, I know you're pro-glock and anti-M&P as you've posted on other boards, but this isn't the place for that kind of nonsense.

I'm not really pro or anti anything. It would seem the m&p and Glock are fighting over the title of 'plastic 1911' these days.

I have read various rumblings on other boards of the quality of the barrels themselves going way down in recent times.

The m&p with threaded barrel kit is a great example. how can they afford to sell it at that price? Unless they are losing money on each unit. Or they have figured out how to do things much, much cheaper.

[orionz06]

True enough, but try that M&P 9 on steel at 25 and see what happens. :cool:

I have hit out to 75 yards. I do want to see how I do on some 25 yard bullseye with a Glock set up with the same sights though. I do not deny that some of the M&P's are horrendous.

[Savage Hands]

I'm not really pro or anti anything. It would seem the m&p and Glock are fighting over the title of 'plastic 1911' these days.

I have read various rumblings on other boards of the quality of the barrels themselves going way down in recent times.

The m&p with threaded barrel kit is a great example. how can they afford to sell it at that price? Unless they are losing money on each unit. Or they have figured out how to do things much, much cheaper.


But you need to look at your sources as the older M&P's were prone to various teething problems and have been worked out for the most part, the quality of barrels and other once problematic parts for the M&P have actually gotten better.
If you've looked at Glocks 25 year record, they have had their ups and downs as well. You can take any of the plastic guns and find the same parts for them that is just being released for the M&P since it's a newer kid on the block, does it make all the other platforms bad as well? I understand you're reading bits and pieces fuse but not all of your information is accurate as I'm on those same boards as well.

[orionz06]

If you've looked at Glocks 25 year record

This does get overlooked, but Glock did fix their issues, only to bring them back. What needs to happen is S&W fix theirs, not Randy Lee. A wise man once said "Nobody can fuck up a good gun as much as S&W..."

[Savage Hands]

This does get overlooked, but Glock did fix their issues, only to bring them back. What needs to happen is S&W fix theirs, not Randy Lee. A wise man once said "Nobody can fuck up a good gun as much as S&W..."


I agree, but even Randy (what he said on TOS) thinks that their doing a pretty good job at fixing potentially serious issues which is happening to a small percentage of people.

It would be nice if an Apex rep came over but I know that they're uber busy as is.


Oh and LAV was right about S&W lol

[ToddG]

Todd's test gun proves that not all M&P 9mm's have accuracy problems :D

You have to keep in mind that my test gun shot high with everything, to the point that S&W had to send me a hand-crafted taller front sight.

There is absolutely no question that a significant number of M&P9 pistols leave the factory with barrel lockup issues. I see guns in class all the time that shoot high (ridiculously high, like 12"+) at 25yd with weak practice ammo but POA/POI with +p JHPs.

The problem predates my 2008 test. The M&P9 I was shooting prior to the test gun had a "Langdon" barrel in it. They were a small special run of barrels S&W did for Ernest Langdon to address the problem. That barrel shoots all ammo like a laser beam. The barrel was installed because my 2006-manufacture gun had the same "weak ammo high, strong ammo POA" problem.

[Savage Hands]

Hopefully what they learned from Langdon's specifications trickled down to the factory guns. Both of my M&P's group well standing unsupported when I do my job, both of mine were manufactured in 2009.

[JV_]

It didn't trickle in to my 2010 gun...

Sent using Tapatalk.

[Savage Hands]

It didn't trickle in to my 2010 gun...

Sent using Tapatalk.


Terrible accuracy? Did you ship it back to S&W?

[ToddG]

Hopefully what they learned from Langdon's specifications trickled down to the factory guns.

Not. In fact, the factory specifically rejected the idea of making all the barrels to the Langdon specification because of fears that some percentage might need hand fitting. That's reasonable. But instead of looking for a more suitable middle ground, they just decided to stick with the bad profile.

I've seen a number of 2009-2010 manufacture guns that had this problem including some of the "pistol-training.com" guns... even though Smith and I specifically discussed this and they were supposed to make sure those guns got tested.

Like the gen4 9mm reliability issues, the M&P9 accuracy issues are not universal. Some people will tell you they've got five perfect ones, another guy will tell you he's had five bad ones. The problem is that it shouldn't be hit or miss (pardon the pun).

[Savage Hands]

Part of the reason I waited on the M&P was due to S&W's autoloader reputation, Apex's parts/service and your test that I thought was rather positive helped me into giving them a shot (no pun intended). If my luck changes as the round count goes up, I may try a P30.

[ToddG]

Don't get me wrong, I think the M&P is a great design and when it's right it's an awesome gun. My test gun ran like a champ and was super accurate. I've seen countless M&Ps come through class and do great. But there are a handful of known issues and they crop up often enough that it's a bother.

Now there's APEX to correct a lot of the problems, so if the overall design suits you and you're willing to spend the money -- or if you're already invested in the M&P and want to improve it -- you're in great shape there, as well.

OTOH, if buying from scratch, what is the cost of an M&P9 plus all the APEX upgrades and the new barrel compared to, say, a stock P30?

[Savage Hands]

Don't get me wrong, I think the M&P is a great design and when it's right it's an awesome gun. My test gun ran like a champ and was super accurate. I've seen countless M&Ps come through class and do great. But there are a handful of known issues and they crop up often enough that it's a bother.

Now there's APEX to correct a lot of the problems, so if the overall design suits you and you're willing to spend the money -- or if you're already invested in the M&P and want to improve it -- you're in great shape there, as well.

OTOH, if buying from scratch, what is the cost of an M&P9 plus all the APEX upgrades and the new barrel compared to, say, a stock P30?


Technically, living in California makes the P30 not even on the roster without jumping through hoops. I'll take my 9c as an example where it would come out too $540 + $100 DCAEK/ RAM if you install it yourself, $25 + $5 shipping to have an upgraded sear block that are now coming in the newer M&P. I won't include sights as that would be replaced on both gun but having the Bar-Sto and Locking blocks fitted will probably add a few hundred to the gun but how many are willing to spend that to get a gun capable of ~1" groups at 25 yards for a carry gun? If reliability doesn't change, I may have the barrel and locking blocks installed to my FS9 but not to my 9c which I carry 99% of the time as I don't think either of mine need it. I would like having the FS9 rival my old Les Baer that I shot ~2" five round group standing unsupported at 25 yards with Winchester White Box, I can't imagine how that thing would have shot with good ammo rested.

[Josh Runkle]

That test gun was also made around 3 years ago...word is, certain things have changed, in terms of production.

Word from where?

It's fine to complain about design flaws, problems, etc, but you seem to be saying that production changes are the cause, and I have seen zero evidence of that.

An m&p I have was produced at the end of last year (about 6 months ago), I bought it 3 months ago and it has just shy of 2,500 rounds through it wih zero malfunctions, and the accuracy is perfect. The only thing I have changed on it is the sights.

I just went through the m&p armorer's course last month and heard nothing about production changes aside from a few positive ones, or negative ones that were solely due to silly state requirements (like a pd in MA requiring a 12lb trigger).

Is your information from a reliable source, or some nonsense heard at a gunshop in the middle of a silly debate between whether the world is going to end may 21, 2011 or dec 21, 2012?

[Pennzoil]

The barrel looks good and options are nice... especially when it's Apex providing them. The barrel looks about a quarter of an inch longer. I wonder if it will stay at that length? Also I know it's early in the game but I hope if the barrel makes it into production they will have a blued option.

I haven't pushed my new M&P outside of 25 yards yet but it seems to be good so far with what I've done at 25 yards. Guess I'll put my steel out to 50 and 100 this week to see how I do compared to with my Glocks. If the industry professionals say some 9mm guns have issues I believe them but wonder how many people who aren't professional shooters have a gun that shoots ok but use it as an easy out when sucking at distance?

[JV_]

but wonder how many people who aren't professional shooters have a gun that shoots ok but use it as an easy out when sucking at distance?IME: When people feel held back by their gun (genuinely), they replace it.

[dookie1481]

I assume this requires fitting, right?

[Savage Hands]

Gunsmith fit only.

[Chris Rhines]

IME: When people feel held back by their gun (genuinely), they replace it. True enough. I just bought a new STI limited gun for exactly that reason.

That said, I like the M&P platform enough (and have enough money invested in it) that I'll almost certainly give the Bar-Sto barrel a try. I do understand the attraction of having a gun ready to go out of the box, but I don't really share it. As long as a gun works how I want it to, I really don't care if I have to tweak it some.

To the OP - Any word on price/availability? Should I just start calling Apex over and over (again?)

[Savage Hands]

True enough. I just bought a new STI limited gun for exactly that reason.

That said, I like the M&P platform enough (and have enough money invested in it) that I'll almost certainly give the Bar-Sto barrel a try. I do understand the attraction of having a gun ready to go out of the box, but I don't really share it. As long as a gun works how I want it to, I really don't care if I have to tweak it some.

To the OP - Any word on price/availability? Should I just start calling Apex over and over (again?)


More info should be released in the next few days.

[fuse]

Is your information from a reliable source, or some nonsense heard at a gunshop in the middle of a silly debate between whether the world is going to end may 21, 2011 or dec 21, 2012?

Clearly it is from somewhere closer to latter. My apologies.

[orionz06]

IME: When people feel held back by their gun (genuinely), they replace it.

All of this really has me wondering now. I need to get my hands on a different gun just to see if the shortcomings I think exist in my accuracy at distance are me or the gun.

[TCinVA]

I just went through the m&p armorer's course last month and heard nothing about production changes aside from a few positive ones, or negative ones that were solely due to silly state requirements (like a pd in MA requiring a 12lb trigger).


Unfortunately in armorer's courses the companies don't always lay out all their problems. The M&P has had some issues all along that Smith just hasn't fixed...like the early unlock problem on 9mm guns. Smith isn't consistently turning out the best product they can with every gun they ship.


All of this really has me wondering now. I need to get my hands on a different gun just to see if the shortcomings I think exist in my accuracy at distance are me or the gun.

Most of the time it's going to be you. Switching guns is an oft-tried means of dealing with problems and many who switch do see some boost in their performance...but generally it's because they are using an unfamiliar gun which they haven't had as much time to build ingrained bad habits on. Getting someone else who is competent to shoot the pistol to see if they get the same results you get is the easiest way to figure out if it's you or the gun. If you're worried about 25 yard accuracy with the M&P, get that competent shooter to bench the gun and fire it for maximum accuracy. If nobody can get the gun to group worth anything, or if you have to hold 2 feet low to make a hit, then the gun probably suffers from the early unlock problem and will need to go back to S&W.

[orionz06]

Most of the time it's going to be you. Switching guns is an oft-tried means of dealing with problems and many who switch do see some boost in their performance...but generally it's because they are using an unfamiliar gun which they haven't had as much time to build ingrained bad habits on. Getting someone else who is competent to shoot the pistol to see if they get the same results you get is the easiest way to figure out if it's you or the gun. If you're worried about 25 yard accuracy with the M&P, get that competent shooter to bench the gun and fire it for maximum accuracy. If nobody can get the gun to group worth anything, or if you have to hold 2 feet low to make a hit, then the gun probably suffers from the early unlock problem and will need to go back to S&W.

I need to aim a few inches low at 25-35, but it seems to be in line with the 9mm trajectory charts I have looked at.

[ToddG]

It's fine to complain about design flaws, problems, etc, but you seem to be saying that production changes are the cause, and I have seen zero evidence of that.

The whole 9mm barrel lockup problem was caused by a production change when the 9mm compact came to market, for starters. M&P9 pistols built before the Compact models existed do not exhibit the same problem because they have a slightly different barrel profile.

Issues like the "dead trigger" problem didn't just suddenly crop up out of nowhere halfway into the pistol's production life. Those things are caused by changes in material, design, vendor, etc.

When I was at Beretta and SIG, we didn't advertise all of our production changes to armorers classes, either. It's a serious mistake to think that everyone who gets in to an armorers class is suddenly considered part of the family and entitled to all the company's dark secrets.

[Jay Cunningham]

I need to aim a few inches low at 25-35, but it seems to be in line with the 9mm trajectory charts I have looked at.

I'm not sure that is anything to be concerned with. I know that shooting my Glock 19 once I get back to around 20 yards or so I need to start holding low.

[JV_]

I'm not sure that is anything to be concerned with.I agree. A change in ammo can cause a couple inch variation at 25Y.

[TCinVA]

I need to aim a few inches low at 25-35, but it seems to be in line with the 9mm trajectory charts I have looked at.

I have to aim a bit low at 25 to hit with 115 grain ammo as well. That sounds normal.

[Savage Hands]

I agree. A change in ammo can cause a couple inch variation at 25Y.


That is 100% correct and is why people should test their carry ammo out to 25 yards to see where the actual POI is.

Edit: it's best to test it at various distances, 7 yards may be low while 25 could be high depending on the sights and ammo.

[Savage Hands]

Hi guys,

Wayne is spot on. Now that all the chaos bringing out the forward set sear is over, I can talk about the barrel.
It started out as an oversized blank I received from Irv. The external chamber and hood dimensions (other than some cosmetic cuts on top) are nearly identical to the Glock barrels so we ran with the same dimensions Irv uses for his M/T Glock barrels. It was the fastest way I could think of to get the project off and running.

I began cutting the bottom lug to achieve the absolute maximum slide/barrel dwell time. The prototype maintains mechanical lockup for roughly .160" of rearward slide travel. This is roughly 2x the dwell distance that a match fit 1911 has. I got the gun functional Sunday at 5:30 pm and Scott and I made a bee line to the range.
We only had enough time to shoot a few rounds at about 13 yards.
Not enough for any conclusive data, but I can tell you the the barrel shoots consistently better off hand groups than either of our 5" guns. Due to the increased dwell time, the gun's recoil impulse is as soft as our 9Ls which have heavier slides.

I am going to use .100" as my target dwell distance as I think .160" is unnecessary. My next step is to have three 5 inch barrels made from a rather expensive Krieger barrel blank. Once I am satisfied with the barrel performance, the dimension and CAD files will be sent to Irv for production.

I will provide more accuracy data as soon as it stops raining, and I can get out to the 25 and 50 yd ranges.

-Randy
__________________
www.apextactical.com






I have not heard of as many complaints regarding the 9c, mostly fs and 5" guns. That may be due to the fact that more people are shooing the longer guns in training/competition than the compacts.

Knowing Irv, he will probably make most if not all of the barrel configurations.
Including threaded versions.

-Randy

[orionz06]

I'm not sure that is anything to be concerned with. I know that shooting my Glock 19 once I get back to around 20 yards or so I need to start holding low.


I have to aim a bit low at 25 to hit with 115 grain ammo as well. That sounds normal.

I will have to get some good ammo and run through it then. I never felt the gun was too terrible, but I would love to find out that I can be a little better. :D Might not be good to see that I just suck though.:mad:

[DannyZRC]

I had been concerned with the slow rifling of the M&P 9, I guess it's a blessing in disguise that my FFL could find the thumb safety in .40 but not in 9.

[JDM]

Just made a quick trip to the range with the full size 9 that I'm carrying. POA=POI at 25 yards with Federal Champion 115 grain 9mm FMJ.

I got a good one I suppose.

Also,This was the first time I've shot at 25 yards with my pistol in a long time, and I did quite well. All that Dot Torture is paying dividends I believe.

[mik3]

http://i941.photobucket.com/albums/ad251/SShenaniguns/9c4c399b.jpg

I would totaly spring for one of these. in 9fs 9pro 40fs 40L, both my .45acps are lazer beam accurate so they would not need it but the other would all benifit I think for sure.

[CQC.45]

All of my 45s are tack-drivers (though I did replace w/ storm lake for improved twist rate). Someone feel free to correct me if I am wrong, but this problem seems to be isolated to the FS and L 9mms. The .40s seem reasonably accurate as does the 9c (I have shot quite a bit of almost all of the M&P variations).

Does anyone else's experience contradict this?


I'm curious to know if the .40s or 9c suffer from the lockup issue as well

[ToddG]

The .40's do not, in my experience.

The 9mm Compacts do not normally, either. The whole lockup problem began when Smith had to change the hood profile for the Compact barrels (the original design from the full size guns was too tight). For whatever reason, they decided to make the change universal for all 9mm barrels and so the Compacts lock up right and the longer barrels sometimes don't.

Having said that, I had a student last year whose 9mm Compact shot more than 12" high at 25yd and after going back to Smith, they "repaired" it and it only shot about 6" high after that. :mad:

[Savage Hands]

I guess I'm lucky for 2/2 well shooting M&P's :eek:

[mtdawg169]

The .40's do not, in my experience.

The 9mm Compacts do not normally, either. The whole lockup problem began when Smith had to change the hood profile for the Compact barrels (the original design from the full size guns was too tight). For whatever reason, they decided to make the change universal for all 9mm barrels and so the Compacts lock up right and the longer barrels sometimes don't.

Having said that, I had a student last year whose 9mm Compact shot more than 12" high at 25yd and after going back to Smith, they "repaired" it and it only shot about 6" high after that. :mad:

Interesting. I guess I now know why my 9c outshoots my 9FS.

[Savage Hands]

More info


Hey guys,

We ran the proto for a little bit tonite. Only about 25 rounds. One non-apex employee had the opportunity to shoot the gun, which included the forward set sear and trigger. We are still wiping the drool off the gun...

Lisa, Scott and I are preparing for the International Revolver Championship and our mad rush to get custom revolvers out to our revo shooting friends. As such, I have only limited time to begin thorough testing, at least for the next two weeks.

I will be testing the gun in our Ransom Rest with a variety of ammo and post the results. It is the only way to demonstrate repeatable mechanical accuracy.
I will be rezeroing the sights between shots since this is a service pistol, and shot to shot deviation resulting from slide to frame play must be taken into account.

-Randy

[NickDrak]

We need more info....Please.

[irishshooter]

any new news regarding the Bar Sto Apex barrel???

[Savage Hands]

Still in the works, they hope to start installing them be years end.

[irishshooter]

Still in the works, they hope to start installing them be years end.

thanks Shenaniguns, looking forward to it ;)

[Savage Hands]

thanks Shenaniguns, looking forward to it ;)



No problem, I think they want the locking blocks to be released at the same time.

[Mitchell, Esq.]

Updates?

[Savage Hands]

Should be ready by Shot.

[Savage Hands]

Bump, yet I no longer have any M&P's lol


I'd very much encourage all members with a 2011 Join Date to go back and bump one of your threads from 2011!

#postpfnecrobump

[LOKNLOD]

Bump, yet I no longer have any M&P's lol

That's okay, Apex barrels are still "new", even 5 years later ;)