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
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
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.Originally Posted by pew_pew
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Last edited by RJ; 01-24-2017 at 07:40 PM.
Interesting... According to this the M2.0 uses the same sear as the M&P45 and Shield.
Anti-astroturfing disclaimer: I am the owner of Bagman Tactical (custom tactical nylon).
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.
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.
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.
Appreciate the range reports!
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, DeFoor Pistol Tests, and Five Twenty Five) have been just fantastic for comparing guns because the drills have been so challenging. I added El Pres and Hackathorn’s “The Test”. 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, 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:
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:
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".
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".
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.
Reply With Quote
