DocGKR, is it possible the "dots' you're seeing and were in that 10-8 posted picture are in fact Rockwell hardness test hits? And as such might have nothing to do with the twist and hood changes?
Originally Posted by Whiskey_Bravo
DocGKR, is it possible the "dots' you're seeing and were in that 10-8 posted picture are in fact Rockwell hardness test hits? And as such might have nothing to do with the twist and hood changes?
Did a quick accuracy comparison between my three M&P9 FS this morning and thought I would share. Shooting wasn't the best as I had just got off a 12 hour midnight shift and my eyes were a little tired. All ammo was 115gr Winchester FMJ. For this test I held at 6oclock on the bullseye with all guns to keep things equal. 10rd groups.
1) Serial # HAFXXXX, OCT 2012 production, my oldest gun that had accuracy problems and now has a KKM drop in Barrel. I couldnt find the orginal barrel to inspect it.
2)Ser# HBCXXXX, MAR 2013 production, Barrel has two dots and this is by far the most accurate stock M&P I have ever owned. I recently shot a 295 of 300 on a bulls eye course at an FBI class with it.
3)Ser#HACXXXX, may 2013 production, Barrel has two dots and was just bought last week.
Stock Barrel
Storm Lake Barrel, No better than stock
KKM Barrel, Little bit better but still nothing to write home about
I noticed that the newest gun has significantly more front to back play between the barrel and the slide. I think this may get a trip back to Smith.
Just to aggrivate myself I grabbed one of the new recruit's Glock 17 gen4 with plastic sights and the crappiest stock trigger I have ever felt on a Glock and shot this:
Yeah, that was done off the books as I could not get them to do it as a program. The guy that helped me with this has been there at S&W for many years and has forgotten more about how guns work than I will ever know. He and the others helped me out and went out and had this done by the guys that build the barrels on the production line (as they have also be there for many, many years. Think 1970's time frame). I think we made like 7 barrels or something like that. They were all stainless barrels with no black finish like the production barrels. And they shot great.
Let me just say it did not go over well for me or the ones that helped me do this back then. No one got in any real trouble at the time as it never really full public at the time. But the word got out and there where ones that were not happy with what we did or how we did it. Because it worked, they could only make so much of a stink about it at the time. Almost all the barrels went to guys that where winning matches with the M&P, so that helped as well.
Last edited by JV_; 07-16-2013 at 05:21 AM. Reason: added missing [ in quote
www.langdontactical.com
Bellator,Doctus,Armatus
So, let's see... you came up with a product improvement that worked, but it was "un-sanctioned" and therefore confusing and/or unacceptable to the suits/engineers?
Gee... why am I not surprised?
.
I have recently done some accuracy testing with various handguns for work. Those included M&Ps, Gen 4 Glocks, and HKs (P30 and HK45) in 9mm and .45 ACP. All the guns shot in the 2.5 inch and under range in .45 ACP. I was shooting with the dust cover on a pistol rest and my wrists braced on a sandbag while seated at 25 yards.
9mm was a whole 'nother story. I tested Winchester White box 115 FMJ (3.5 inch ammo), Winchester RA9T 147 gr JHP, and Winchester RA9BA 124 +P bonded JHP.
The P30 shot groups of 2 inches and under with regularity. I was being attacked by flies and other winged annoyances on the day I shot the P30 and while it was easily capable of groups in the 1.5 inch range, I kept jerking rounds out so that it averaged 2.1 inches.
The G17 shot a 1.9 inch average. No flies that day, nor on the M&P days that followed.
The first 2 M&P9s with no dimple barrels shot 8-12 inch groups with the WWB 115s, 6-8 inch groups with the 124 +P, and 4-5 inch groups with 147 JHP. One gun shot much better than the other and turned in 5.5 inch groups with 124+P and 4.2 inch groups with 147 JHP.
The second 2 M&Ps with single dimple barrels shot about the same as the better gun from the first test with 5.2 inch groups regardless of bullet weight.
I did shoot a couple of groups offhand just to see if the rest was a problem. I shot average groups of 4.5 inches that way regardless of bullet weight. I shot an M&P 45 and a Gen 4 G17 into 3 inches, also offhand, from 25 yards and in between M&P 9 groups. I know I don't shoot better offhand than from the rest, so maybe it affects the M&P9 somehow.
I know that I am not the world's greatest pistol shooter, nor am I really even good, but if I can shoot an M&P45 into 3 inches at 25 from a rest or offhand and I cannot shoot an M&P9 into the same groups size with quality ammo, then I don't think it is all me.
Your results and conclusions may vary.
... said the guy on the F.A.S.T. Wall of Fame ...
Very solid data and not something that is likely to surprise most folks.
Out of curiosity, were the HKs LEM models or DA/SA?
I don't have my exact numbers in front of me, but when I did my M&P accuracy testing, I used a G4 Glock in 9mm and P30 9 as reality checks, and essentially duplicated your findings, excepting the dimpled barrels didn't exist then.
They were TLG Special LEMs.
They were TLG Special LEMs.
If you can pull the trigger on an LEM that well and pull the trigger on a Glock that well -- two significantly different triggers in my opinion -- then it's hard to see how the operator was at fault here.
Reply With Quote
