On those CORE pistols, are those the Gen 1 or Gen2? (ETA: asking because I did an image search for M&P's with installed SRO's, it looks like most M&P 2.0 'optic ready' pistols look like mine, with SRO right up at rear edge of ejection port, while I saw some Gen 1 M&P's where there's more clearance).Originally Posted by SoCalDep
Exclusively on 2.0s. My department doesn’t authorize 1.0 COREs because they are all part of the Pro/Performance Center family and those are not authorized.
Awesome thanks, good to see this discussion on pros/cons and the data on how many rounds you ran thru without issue.
Definitely will keep this optic and train with it, but still good to have awareness of possible stoppages.
Indeed. Also interesting to know that there were several malfunctions with P320s... Since we don’t authorize them I’ve little experience with them but we’ve had people from other agencies go through our classes so it’s good to keep in mind.
An optic related malfunction is certainly possible, and I suppose more likely with the SRO than an optic that doesn’t have some sort of gap and protrusion. That said, the SRO has other benefits and based on overall reliability I don’t consider the minimal potential to be significant enough to sacrifice the benefits.
The 150 grain syntech is not very "vigorous." I've seen similar stoppages with it in G34s which ran fine with an ammo switch.
My experience is that the SRO is the most durable competition optic out there, and by a good margin. I carry a a Glock or M&P every day, and have confidence in their reliability.
Every one of these pistols and optics has their pros and cons. Some people are more confident if they feel an issue is not possible, I feel more confident if I know every possible thing that can go wrong. Mechanical things break, sometimes at the worst time, and I like to be familiar with likely failure modes.
If I was updating the SRO, it would not include the forward overhang, since that has the potential to cause stoppages. I would make the battery cap easier to tighten, and not allow a less than very tight battery cap to cause the optic to not work. I would make the auto intensity work better inside against a light background — the auto seems to work better on my RMR type 2 units. I would also look at design or lens coating’s to get rid of the phantom dot.
Likes pretty much everything in every caliber.
^Agree.
The 2.0 is a sleeper in terms of being recognized for how good it is. I would like to know the backstory on the 2.0 modifications, as it seems to be far superior than the 1.0, and compares favorably to the best of service pistols.
Likes pretty much everything in every caliber.
The Department I work for was a fairly early and very large adopter of the M&P. I wasn't much of an M&P fan in the beginning and only went to it because I'd broken my trigger finger a year prior, was in the testing process to go to our weapons training unit, and scar tissue was building up, making it difficult (and eventually impossible) to press the DA triggers on my Sigs and Berettas. I was afraid to say anything and ruin my chances to get into the unit so I used an M&P and once I made it into weapons training I pressed the shotgun trigger with my middle finger (The trigger guard recoiled into the stock and was super painful) for the first four months I was there.
Then I decided I could go back to the Dr. and if they said I needed surgery I'd proven myself enough not to be considered a loser. The doctor asked me to bend my finger. I showed him how little I could bend it. He took my hand and then used his whole hand to bend my finger all the way into a fist. I heard cracking and about screamed, but then I could bend it and the pain was almost completely gone. I was so mad that I'd sold a bunch of nice guns and freaked out for almost 8 months over something that was fixed in about two seconds.
Anyway... The first M&Ps had ok triggers, horrible barrels, and often shot high. In 2012 (I think) they updated the barrels (still pretty horrible), made the triggers much heavier (not cool), but they shot to point of aim (when they actually hit what they were being aimed at). Worse, I kept switching back and forth between the medium and large grips because neither felt really good. That said, for the average cop they were great! They were super reliable and I abused one for over 40,000 rounds and four years with no lubrication and being dropped in water, mud, sand, and sprayed with salt water. They were accurate enough that most didn't notice any accuracy issue and actually most improved when moving from the Beretta (which is an extremely accurate pistol).
Eventually I went the other way and started carrying Berettas again, then 1911s when we approved them, then Glocks, and ultimately back to Berettas. The 2.0 came out and I wasn't really interested. We tested them and I wanted nothing to do with it. I think I maybe shot 10-20 rounds through a 2.0 until LAPD hosted a pistol optic symposium and demo day in September of 2018. I "didn't like" the M&P so I shot every other gun first... Glocks, STIs, FNs, etc. Toward the end we went over and talked to the S&W guys (while I didn't personally like the M&P, it's a good issue duty gun) and I ended up trying a 2.0 CORE out. Holy crap. The trigger is substantially improved (through some internal changes), the slight contour differences and stippling of the grip made the gun feel right in my hand and helped push the web of my hand into the tang, which without the beavertail allowed my hand to sit higher. Supposedly the chassis and improved lockup make it more accurate... All I knew was that I could hit with it and hit fast.
I picked up a 5" 2.0 with iron sights and it was (and is) a tac-driver. I am now up to three 2.0 COREs, an issued 2.0, and a 2.0 compact. I put one of the CORE slides on the compact frame and it's a great carry gun. One CORE was fitted with an Apex barrel and that's a game changer. I took the CORE frame (the one who’s slide went on the compact) and ordered a slide from ED Brown then had Agency mill it for their AOS system and added an Agency barrel but I haven’t shot it yet. I've heard other people say the 5" and 4" 2.0s are accurate but the 4.25s still aren't great. That's been my experience as well. The Apex makes the 4.25" every bit as accurate as any other gun I've seen.
I've been shooting Glocks a lot this year and overall I still feel like every Glock MOS I own is more accurate than any of my 4.25" COREs (except the one with the Apex) but I shoot the COREs faster. I think the big reason I've stayed with Glock is that I like them and I'm too cheap to buy Apex barrels for all of my COREs. At some point I'll probably pick up a 5" - if it's anything like my iron sight gun I'll be really happy.
Last edited by SoCalDep; 11-26-2020 at 06:15 PM.
I have noticed the improved accuracy in my 2 copies of the 2.0 4" compact, hopefully the new one in this thread is the same.
What do you think of the trigger on your compact, compared to the CORE trigger? Trying to decide whether I'll Apex my triggers; on the fence between keeping them stock vs upgrading. Definitely better than the stock Gen 1 trigger.
Reply With Quote