s&w 5906 vs s&w m&p9


PDA






jamal28
March 7, 2014, 10:20 PM
If u had to choose between the s&w 5906 and s&w m&p9 as a front line combat pistol . Which one u take into battle.

If you enjoyed reading about "s&w 5906 vs s&w m&p9" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
iLikeOldgunsIlikeNewGuns
March 7, 2014, 10:57 PM
5906 regardless of where I'm taking it. I'm not a fan of plastic at all. I prefer a heavier gun by far for recoil management. A good belt and holster completely negate weight while carrying for me.
I prefer to carry a 1911, but I love my 5906. I've put many thousands of rounds through it with no issues ever. The thing is built like a tank. I don't see how the m&p could be any more durable. Plus I have several 15 & 17 standard cap mags as well as a 33 rounder that is surprisingly reliable :D

Hangingrock
March 8, 2014, 12:30 AM
The problem that most individuals would have is the management of the DA/SA trigger transition on the S&W5906. Few users are really dedicated to manage the trigger system in a compressed firing sequence the DA press would probably be on the order of 10lbs and the S/A press 5 lbs. On the current MP series the trigger press from shot to shot would be the same on the order of approxmently 5lbs with an Apex Duty/Carry kit installed. That's been my experience others respondents view points and experiences may differ from mine.

Wreck-n-Crew
March 8, 2014, 12:57 AM
The problem that most individuals would have is the management of the DA/SA trigger transition on the S&W5906. That would be if most are young. I started out with DA/SA semi autos with safeties and de-cockers.

My 5906 is the most reliable Semi I have ever owned and the softest shooting 9mm with a 4" barrel I have ever shot.

When you say front line....kind of throws me. The weight is an issue for some and if it is I would suggest the M&P. But if my life was on the line an I had a choice just at that very moment the 5906 Hands down. Just so easy to manage and follow up shots are much faster. Oh and did I mention most reliable I have ever owned? :D You really can't wear one out either! Eats anything including every reload I put I it.

Not arguing one over the other just sharing my experience. If you ask people today about reliability, you might get a list of different pistols come up. Some may think reliability hit it's mark with newer polymer guns. But truth is the old S&W's and Ruger P series were just workhorses. Nothing against the polymer either, I own too many to throw stones!

David E
March 8, 2014, 01:56 AM
The problem with the 5906 isn't the weight or the DA/SA transition.

It's remembering to:

1) decock when you're done shooting, but still have ammo in the gun...failure to do so can result in an ND which can result in injury or death.

2) UN-decock after you remembered to decock in the first place. Failure to do so can find you yanking on a disconnected trigger like a madman when you need it to go bang NOW, which can also result in serious injury or death.

This doesn't mean you can overlook the different protocols needed to make sure the slide mounted safety and magazine disconnect safety render your gun useless at the worst time.

These concerns aren't necessarily deal breakers, but the shooter must be aware of them and properly address them and ingrain proper habits into their gun handling before carrying the gun.

iLikeOldgunsIlikeNewGuns
March 8, 2014, 06:23 AM
^ So basically a 5906 isn't for people who dislike manual safeties and/or decockers...

I'm not everyone, I'm just me, and I prefer having a manual safety as an option if I want to use it. The double action pull feels pretty smooth, I'd feel safe carrying it with the safety on or off, draw can be tuned so your thumb automatically feels for the safety. I find the 5906's to be very natural to use, forward is bang, and a little spring helps it snap out of safe. Many thousands of rounds and I haven't had a single mishap with operating the pistol, and it's not even a primary piece for me, I'm a 1911 guy. It's my primary 'arm a friend' pistol though (=

hardluk1
March 8, 2014, 07:14 AM
Carry the one you shoot best IF you have a butt load of experience with both. Other wise take the one you know and trust.

hemiram
March 8, 2014, 09:37 AM
I would take the 5906. It's not even close. Give me steel, and I'm happy.

I cannot understand how carrying a pound or so weight more would bother anyone of any size at all. I carried a Dan Wesson 6" Model 15 or a S&W 28 for years without any problems.

JDR
March 8, 2014, 10:35 AM
Smith & Wesson's marketing decision to drop all of the 3rd Gen product line in favor of the M&Ps is based on the fact that the polymer guns have a higher profit margin. I would much rather have a 5906

tuj
March 8, 2014, 11:47 AM
love my 5906. The DA trigger pull is 11lbs but smooth, the SA pull is about 4lbs. Management of the first shot is typical DA, but after that, the trigger is short and crisp.

David E
March 8, 2014, 12:08 PM
^ So basically a 5906 isn't for people who dislike manual safeties and/or decockers...

I find the 5906's to be very natural to use, forward is bang, and a little spring helps it snap out of safe. It's my primary 'arm a friend' pistol though (=

It doesn't matter if the shooter likes a manual safety, it matters if they're willing to master it. IF they are, then the 5906 is a superb choice. If one prefers the 5906 but finds weight to be a concern, then get a 5903 or 5904 variant.

When I teach weapon handling protocols on a slide mounted decocker, I try to imprint the decocking process as one step consisting of two parts: decock/up! It takes awhile to instill that, as there's nothing "natural" about it. In fact, the student is told to practice that a few thousand times at home. Because of this, any decocking gun is a poor choice to "arm a friend" with

I carried 3rd Gen autos for years when I was a cop as well as after. Great guns. I shot a perfect Qualification score with each of them. In fact, one gun, a 5903-SSV, I'd just purchased the day before and the very first 50 rounds fired thru it were for Qualification. Still got a perfect score. Made IDPA Master on the first attempt with my 3914 (which had been my BUG)

Their really short trigger reset is an often overlooked feature of the 3rd Gen autos.

I'd feel very well armed with the 5906....but I'd pick the M&P, ideally the Pro, given the choice. BUT, if I was a cop again, I'd pick the 5906 due to the manual safety and threat management advantages.

SwampWolf
March 8, 2014, 03:15 PM
Quote:
The problem that most individuals would have is the management of the DA/SA trigger transition on the S&W5906.

That would be if most are young. I started out with DA/SA semi autos with safeties and de-cockers.

My 5906 is the most reliable Semi I have ever owned and the softest shooting 9mm with a 4" barrel I have ever shot.


I absolutely agree with Wreck-n-Crew. Mastering any firearm is a matter of good training and plenty of practice. I don't think that a Third Generation Smith is anymore difficult to "learn" than most other pistol designs; including a 1911 carried in "condition one".
Before I retired and after our agency transitioned from revolvers to semi-autos, I carried and qualified with the mandated Smith Third Generation pistol (mine was-and is-a Model 6906) for a couple of decades. Over the last fifty years or so, I've shot many, many different types and designs of auto pistols extensively, from P-38s to Glocks and I've never experienced a pistol any more reliable than these S&W pistols. Reliable, well-made, rugged and plenty accurate. It's the one I'd pick to employ as a "front line battle pistol".
Which isn't to say that you wouldn't be equally well-served with a Smith M&P, a Beretta Model 92, a SIG Model 226, a Glock Model 17, a Model 1911, an HK USP or a host of other fine options. The op asked for opinions and the Third Generation Smith pistol is my choice.

Jim PHL
March 8, 2014, 03:19 PM
Per the original post, for a "front-line combat pistol" I'd go with the M&P for the lighter weight and 2-extra rounds in a standard mag (17 vs. 15). The extra pound or so might not sound like a lot but again, for a front-line combat pistol, I would think you'd be carrying a bunch of other stuff and would like to save weight wherever you could.

My choice has nothing to do with accuracy or reliability of the 5906 and for pretty much any scenario other than this or concealed carry I'd pick the 5906 over the M&P.

jmr40
March 8, 2014, 04:05 PM
The 5906 was a good pistol that is no longer in production. That would eliminate it from consideration for me although I think it is the better gun. The M&P wouldn't be at the top of my list either. But I have no problem with plastic.

jamal28
March 9, 2014, 05:15 AM
I think im leaning towards the 5906 or the 5903(alloy frame version) due to the longer track record of reliability and it being a hammer fired which gives a you second strike capability plus magazines are all over the place heck s&w will fix the pistol even though its not mass produced anymore.

TestPilot
March 9, 2014, 08:39 AM
M&P40 over both. M&P9 has accuracy problems that S&W still have not resolved.

It will likely not get resolved because apparently the customer service dept sees 3 inch gruop at 7-10 yards is an acceptable standard.

M&P is easier to operate and maintain compared to any S&W 3rd Gen.

jamal28
March 9, 2014, 01:18 PM
I think those accuracy problems have been addressed especially when agencies like Texas Dps adopting the m&p9 not to mention the upcoming military pistols trials and the Fbi pistol trials

243winxb
March 9, 2014, 01:52 PM
The 5906 with adjustable sight is the way to go. I shot a few used police guns, all good. Read about the S&W at link http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=746062 http://www.americanrifleman.org/Webcontent/gallery/172/2036SWShieldShootingResults.jpg S&W M&P Shield - NRA test This MOA converts to about 6" groups @ 25 yards.

TestPilot
March 9, 2014, 05:24 PM
I think those accuracy problems have been especially when agencies like Texas Dps adopting the m&p9 not to mention the upcoming military pistols trials and the Fbi pistol trials

I've been a victim of it no less than a few monthes ago with a new pistol.

I have better hits with M&P40 shooting at a head sized target standing with no support at 35 yards than shooting an M&P9 with the upper body and arms supported shooting at a target 4 times larger.

Waveski
March 9, 2014, 10:01 PM
The 5906 is an accurate and totally reliable pistol. I have 2 of them. I have absolute faith in them in all ways. I swear I could feed carrots and gravel through that action and it would still feed.
Go with the stainless 5906. The alloy frame variants do not point or balance worth a hoot.

Opinion given.

jon_in_wv
March 9, 2014, 11:45 PM
I own both and its a mixed bag with either. Both are soft recoiling, accurate, reliable, etc..........Personally, I would choose the M&P just for its better sights, better grip, and lighter weight. I don't think durability is an issue with the M&Ps. I have over 10,000 rounds through my M&P 9C and it still looks and shoots like it is new.

mgmorden
March 10, 2014, 12:00 AM
M&P40 over both. M&P9 has accuracy problems that S&W still have not resolved.

Actually by all accounts S&W resolved this around a year ago with the faster twist rate barrels.

As to the original question, I'd take the M&P. Never shot or even handled a 5906 but I've fired a good number of other DA/SA designs and I've come to not like them. When I first got into firearms I actually prefered them but over time my opinion has changed. These days I prefer a striker fired gun. I do wish someone made a steel framed striker fired design though. Having the consistent trigger of a striker with the recoil management of a heavy steel frame would be interesting.

jamal28
March 10, 2014, 12:08 AM
Hey mgmorden I was also under the impression s&w fixed those accuracy problems I think they have

jamal28
March 10, 2014, 12:27 AM
hey testpilot have u called s&w to have your gun serviced under warranty

TestPilot
March 10, 2014, 02:24 AM
hey testpilot have u called s&w to have your gun serviced under warranty
Yes, that is where I got the 3 inch at 7 yards(or may be 10) standard comment from.
Actually by all accounts S&W resolved this around a year ago with the faster twist rate barrels.
The issue is alive and well. Not resloved at all.

Barry the Bear
March 10, 2014, 02:34 AM
I would take my 686 and be done with this question! :neener: But in all seriousness I would choose the 5906 just because I love the feel of the weapon and it reliability can not be argued against. I wouldnt really care about "recoil reduction" due to a steel frame cause honestly, If you cant handle a 9mm in ANY platform, your gonna be dead before the battle starts. :rolleyes:

mgmorden
March 10, 2014, 10:17 AM
The issue is alive and well. Not resloved at all.

Are you implying that the faster twist rate did not solve the problem (because you'd be the first I've heard of to say that), or are you angry because they wouldn't replace your barrel with the newer version?

FWIW, I have a 4 year old M&P 9L which still has the older twist rate and I've had no accuracy problems.

Thaddeus Jones
March 10, 2014, 12:05 PM
Another vote for the 5906. Great trigger right out of the box with no need for expensive after market parts. Accurate, reliable and looks good doing all that.

In 48 years of shooting handguns I've yet to see any new shooter have trouble with the DA to SA transition. Although I've often read on the internet how terrible it is.

I think it is a training issue. Not enough experience or training? Never experienced a good trigger or the accuracy that it helps provide? Here, shoot the m&p. :)

TestPilot
March 10, 2014, 01:32 PM
Are you implying that the faster twist rate did not solve the problem (because you'd be the first I've heard of to say that),
Not even an implication.

That is exactly what I am saying. The one I have is manufactured far later that when the new twist rate came out.

I am not the cause, since if my shooting ability is the cause then I would have to be equally inaccurate with M&P40 which is not the case at all.

And if they think 3 inch group at 7-10 yards is not an issue, then why would they resolve it? Apparently they are denying that it an issue at all. Pathetic.

jon_in_wv
March 10, 2014, 11:14 PM
M&P40 over both. M&P9 has accuracy problems that S&W still have not resolved.

Funny my M&P 9C is one of the earlier ones and it seems accurate enough to shoot a steel plates out to as far as 200 yards. Someone must have forgotten to tell it that its supposed to be inaccurate.

jawman
March 10, 2014, 11:39 PM
I'd take an M&P, however I've never fired a 5906 before. But for being a plastic gun, the recoil on the M&P is nothing. Shooting the M&P40 has as much recoil as a P226 in 9mm. Yes I said that right. And the ergos are incredible. Love the low bore axis, too. If you're concerned about the accuracy issues on the M&P9, realize that it is only the full size models that are affected. M&P9C, Shield, 40 and 45 are just fine. If you're worried about the M&P9 FS accuracy issues, buy a M&P40 and drop in a Storm Lake or KKM 9mm conversion barrel (must be a conversion barrel, not a regular 9mm barrel because the M&P40 chamber hood notch has external differences than the 9, and the conversion barrels take these differences into account), then buy some 9mm mags and now you have 2 pistols in one.

As for the accuracy issues on the M&P9, Smith has changed barrels: http://modernserviceweapons.com/?p=3719, however, some argue that the twist rate is not the only issue; barrel fit and lockup timing should also be considered. Remember, the M&P was built for the .40 S&W cartridge, and was then built down to handle 9mm. All of the S&W shooting team members run hard fitted Storm Lake barrels in their M&P9's.

The chances of you getting an inaccurate M&P9 FS is pretty low. I think they've fixed most of the kinks on that. But if you're worried, get the .40 version and do the above.

Edit: I misspoke when I said the 40 had a differenct extractor, ejector, etc. than the 9. The 9mm and 40 are very similar, and share the same part numbers, including recoil springs, extractors, ejectors, sears, everything.

Onward Allusion
March 10, 2014, 11:58 PM
Heh, absolute no-brainer. 5906 all the way. The thing is so tough that it will eat empty cases. No hyperbole here. The all SS construction will absorb pretty much all recoil. When you run out of ammo, you can use it as a club to crack skulls. Accuracy is darn good for a duty pistol because the frame's rail extends down the dust cover. Capacity is also good. Aftermarket mags by Mec Gar (same company that makes the Beretta & Sig mags - to name a few) sit flush with 17 rounds or extend around 1 inch with 20 rounders.

The only thing the M&P has on the 5906 is it's integral rail. If you really must have a rail, go with the 5906TSW.

IMO, it's one of the best 9mms ever made.

jamal28
March 11, 2014, 02:43 AM
Hey onward allusion I must agree with u. The 5906 is one of the best 9mm ever built period

Waveski
March 11, 2014, 08:29 AM
Onward and Jamal -

Great minds think alike.

I repeat myself - 2 5906's , for $700. Both now shining , Flitz having cleaned away years of carry blemishes. What a value!

SigFTW
March 11, 2014, 09:37 AM
I would also take the 5906 over the new plastic M&P. I have been a old school S&W fan sense the early 90s. Even though its out of production, it built like a tank and should last.

ColtPythonElite
March 11, 2014, 09:53 AM
I carried a 5906 as a duty weapon for a number of years. It was well built, reliable, and reasonably accurate. I hated the DA/SA trigger, though. When we got plastic guns I bought my 5906 for $180. That included 3 mags, box/paperwork, and leather. I never used it and let it go. I don't miss it one bit.

jamal28
March 11, 2014, 03:40 PM
and by the way mecgar still sells 15,17,and 20 rd mags and trijicon also makes night sights and if the d/a pull is too long just change the mainspring to a 20 or 18 lbs from ismi gunsprings

jon_in_wv
March 11, 2014, 11:05 PM
I'm indifferent about the double/single action transition but I will add the single action of my 3913/5906 is magical. One of the best I've had. For those who haven't shot a 5906, and have shot the M&P, the M&P's recoil is light but the 5906's is even lighter. One other thing to consider is the ammo available. My M&Ps seem to shoot any weight really well, my 3913 was built during the surge in heavier weight 9mms and it really shoots 146gr bullets like a dream, but the lighter weight bullets not so much.

PabloJ
March 12, 2014, 01:08 AM
I do not like to wear massive belts or suspenders so I would never pick steel-framed S&W but alloy-framed version would be as acceptable as the M&P9. Having owned 457 & 457s I can recommend Gen 3 S&W as very good weapon to have. Last one I have seen was 908 is very good condition for only $299+tax. There was no going wrong there.

frank c
March 12, 2014, 09:46 AM
If u had to choose between the s&w 5906 and s&w m&p9 as a front line combat pistol . Which one u take into battle.
I own and Shoot both 5906 & M&P 9mm.IMHO the 5906 because it,s built like a tank.

dtalley
March 12, 2014, 12:06 PM
I love my 5906 but my M&P fits my hand better with my short fat fingers.:)

jamal28
March 14, 2014, 01:58 AM
If I was in law enforcement or security it would be the m&p but if the **** really hits fan I got my 5906 loaded with 18 rounds of 124gr gold dots and my saiga 12 with 10 rounds of buckshot ready to go

jamal28
March 14, 2014, 02:02 AM
But its something about the 5906 when you first pick it up u notice that its built like a tank and well made machine ready to take on any task

JTQ
March 14, 2014, 10:44 AM
I did my early auto loading pistol shooting with S&W TDA autos, and I'm pretty familiar and comfortable with their operation. As a group, I like them and think they are great guns. They are a little heavy by current standards, and are out of production, but they are still great guns.

One thing I always find interesting in threads concerning the S&W TDA autos, and Ruger P-Series pistols, is you generally don't see statements like these...

Slide mounted safety that flips up was reason enough for me to pass on it.

When conducting a tap-rack-bang drill, the slide mounted safety can be activated during the "rack" portion of the drill. The extra step would be to sweep up on the safety to ensure it is not activated.

On the other hand, these are pulled from a Beretta 92FS thread here on THR. I don't even own a Beretta (I do have an S&W TDA auto), but you can't get more than a few posts into a Beretta 92FS thread without somebody making the above quotes, even if they are not related to the subject of the thread, yet the issue practically never comes up with the S&W TDA pistols or Ruger P-Series guns that operate the same way.

Just an observation.

SwampWolf
March 14, 2014, 02:53 PM
Interesting that you make this point, JTQ, because, as much as I like Smith Third Generation autos (see post in this thread and many others), in my experience, on not so rare occasions, during re-qualification drills involving clearing contrived malfunctions (especially when the support hand is used to sweep over the top of the slide to clear a "stovepipe" jam), the safety can be inadvertently activated on tda (I assume you mean "traditional double-action") S&W pistols, much like what can occur with similarly configured pistols like the Beretta 92FS. It didn't happen all that often but it is a possibility that the shooter should be aware of so that he/she knows how to respond and correct (by pushing the safety back in the "fire" position) the situation while under fire.

Wreck-n-Crew
March 14, 2014, 03:09 PM
One thing I always find interesting in threads concerning the S&W TDA autos, and Ruger P-Series pistols, is you generally don't see statements like these...


Quote:
Slide mounted safety that flips up was reason enough for me to pass on it.

Quote:
When conducting a tap-rack-bang drill, the slide mounted safety can be activated during the "rack" portion of the drill. The extra step would be to sweep up on the safety to ensure it is not activated.
Probably because the 5906 doesn't fail and no reason for tap/rack/bang?:D: :uhoh:

jamal28
March 14, 2014, 03:16 PM
In my opinion the 5906 had two flaws its weight and the slide mounted safety both can be overcome with practice

SwampWolf
March 14, 2014, 03:27 PM
Probably because the 5906 doesn't fail and no reason for tap/rack/bang?

Good point Wreck-n-Crew. You will note that the incidents that I referenced with tda Smith Third Generation pistols occured with induced "malfunctions" for training drills. It's almost impossible to get these pistols to jam on their own accord.

jamal28
March 14, 2014, 06:04 PM
there's a reason the Smith 3rd gen pistols are nicknamed "the poor mans sig". Because its reliable as hell

TestPilot
March 14, 2014, 06:41 PM
One thing I always find interesting in threads concerning the S&W TDA autos, and Ruger P-Series pistols, is you generally don't see statements like these...

Quote:
Slide mounted safety that flips up was reason enough for me to pass on it.
Quote:
When conducting a tap-rack-bang drill, the slide mounted safety can be activated during the "rack" portion of the drill. The extra step would be to sweep up on the safety to ensure it is not activated.

Actually those equally applies to S&W 3rd Generation or Ruger P series.

You only hear more about Beretta because Beretta actually still makes slide mounted lever guns. For S&W 3rd Generation and Ruger P-series, it is kind of a moot issue. Since only a small portion of people are issued those guns, people who use them are people who likes them. For Beretta, since it is still issued by number of government agencies, while the number may be dwindling, there are a fair number of people who are forced to use it against their will. I had a distaste for Beretta with the primary reason for that distaste is that I was forced to use it. You probably won't hear about Beretta issues as much if it was not the U.S. military pistols.

However, indisputable fact is that both S&W 3rd Generation and Ruger P series is no longer in production, except limited runs only for government agencies, and both manuacturers did not make any replacement model for DA/SA with slide mounted lever.

There just isn't a demand for TDA + slide mounted lever type as much as other type of systems. That is not just because the public that consists of people of various degrees of knowledge. If you look at special operation teams, you just don't see them desiring a TDA + slide mounted lever pistol, and if you happen to find one that use them, they're an exception rather than the rule.

ColtPythonElite
March 14, 2014, 06:52 PM
In my opinion the 5906 had two flaws its weight and the slide mounted safety both can be overcome with practice
Carrying a 5906 with the decocker up doesn't mean you are being unsafe.

TestPilot
March 14, 2014, 07:05 PM
Carrying a 5906 with the decocker up doesn't mean you are being unsafe.

It is not being unsafe.

However, that does not relieve the user of the slide mounted lever problems.

It is still an issue with reload / malfunction clearing as well as the probablity of lever chaning position by accidental swipe during physical struggle with opponent, etc.

ColtPythonElite
March 14, 2014, 08:20 PM
Eh, 60 of my closest friends and I carried 5906's as duty weapons for 10+ years with no manipulation problems.

TestPilot
March 14, 2014, 08:59 PM
Eh, 60 of my closest friends and I carried 5906's as duty weapons for 10+ years with no manipulation problems.

"no manipulation problems" meaning exactly what? Because I find it hard to belive all 60 shooters never made a mistake involving the lever when there was a great deal of training involved.

However, even if it did not happen to your sample, the risk exists, and that risk does not exist on pistols that does not have a slide mounted lever.

If that risk was non-existant, why would there be a section of the training that specifies taking an extra step to ensure the lever it up after manipulation?

ColtPythonElite
March 14, 2014, 09:53 PM
Nothing to argue here. TestPilot points out a design flaw that might hinder incompetent users. For many others, it was a fine duty weapon....I never had issues with it, but don't miss my issued 5906, either.

jamal28
March 14, 2014, 10:01 PM
Coltpythonelite your rite it is a fine design which that is plenty accurate and reliable as hell and was built to last a life time and then some

jamal28
March 14, 2014, 10:11 PM
trust me I have seen the gun drug thru dirt, toss in mud, left over nite in snow, and thrown onto the concrete pavement its reliable. Only reason military didn't adopt it over the beretta and sig is smith wouldn't chrome line the barrels and add a anti corrosion finish

Hangingrock
March 14, 2014, 11:01 PM
jamal28:Only reason military didn't adopt it over the Beretta and sig is smith wouldn't chrome line the barrels and add a anti corrosion finish

Maybe my recollection of the military trails is failing me but I don't remember that being the issue.

jamal28
March 15, 2014, 12:45 AM
Yeah hanging rock they scored low on the corrosion and means rounds(had to shoot a certain amount of rounds to pass) test and us military had a requirement for chrome lined barrel

jjones45
March 16, 2014, 01:43 PM
I would go with m&p just because it's in production and parts will be easy to come by. I am also not a fan or safety/decockers on the slide. This is why my berreta 92fs is gone, although I wish I didn't let go now. I am also not a fan of da/sa triggers where the da feels like a staple gun. This is the same complaint I have with my uspc. Maybe a gunsmith can smooth out that da trigger pull and that issue would be gone. I have never shot a 5906 but hear lots of good things about them. I just wonder why s&w would stop production of such a fantastic gun, but then again it wouldn't be the first time

Big Shrek
March 16, 2014, 02:16 PM
Frontline?

Perhaps another pistol is in order...like one of the 10x6 series??
If in doubt, overkill is always acceptable...10mm tends to fit that bill ;)

There are G'smith's who've made a fortune making 3rd gen's into DAO only,
and after doing so, get the trigger sorted out to be VERY nice...

But I like the decocker, if one is properly training on their firearms as one should, its not an issue...
reason I went with a CS45 recently was due to having had a Star 30P as my first semi-auto many years ago...
so I'm way used to the slide-mounted flipper...and will probably mod mine down quite a bit,
as the Star had a much smaller one, S&W's seems to be a bit bulky...overly so...

Hangingrock
March 16, 2014, 07:45 PM
jjones45: I just wonder why s&w would stop production of such a fantastic gun, but then again it wouldn't be the first time

Glock had something to do with it. S&W lost market share thus the development of the Sigma, SW99, and the MP series. On the 3rd try S&W finally got it right.

jamal28
March 17, 2014, 11:48 AM
yeah glock was blackballin everybody in the 90's they come to a p.d. and offer to buy there old guns in exchange for new glocks with free armorers course and parts. Who wouldnt take that kind of deal everybody lost to glock that includes s&w , beretta, and sig

Hangingrock
March 17, 2014, 08:05 PM
jamal28: Who wouldnt take that kind of deal everybody lost to glock that includes s&w , beretta, and sig

Glock simply made a business decision which benefited them. How do you think S&W is climbing back into the market place???? Most likely using the same play out of the Glock Play Book. Its the nature of doing business.

Coop45
March 17, 2014, 09:27 PM
I'd like to have a 39XX to go with my 5906. If the magazine safety offends you it is easily removed from under the rear sight.

jamal28
March 17, 2014, 09:32 PM
yeah it benefitted them and half the pd's in the u.s. not to mention it was free advertising for them to gain exposure to the public. Everybody want to carry what the police is carrying

miles1
March 17, 2014, 10:35 PM
I have no dog in this debate as I have neither pistol.But out of curiosity...If the 3rd gen S&W was such a solid pistol why did they stop making it?

Edit....Didn't read all the post in this thread but still doesnt exactly answer the question.Theres not that many all metal pistols on the market with S&W reputation not to gain some of the consumer dollars.

Wreck-n-Crew
March 17, 2014, 11:10 PM
Edit....Didn't read all the post in this thread but still doesnt exactly answer the question.Theres not that many all metal pistols on the market with S&W reputation not to gain some of the consumer dollars.

Cost for one (manufacturing). For two they lost so much in LE sales and civilian market that they had to make a polymer frame. I understand designing a new pistol cost money but not near as much as they lost. Someone was not looking as far ahead as they should have been IMO.

jamal28
March 18, 2014, 12:35 AM
Yeah wreck-n-crew i think s&w should at least a limited run of there 3rd gen pistols each year maybe a couple thousand i mean look at the sig 226/229 and the beretta 92/m9 they still have good sales.

Big Shrek
March 18, 2014, 01:20 AM
Price & reliability...that is always the bottom line when it comes to mass weapons purchasing.
There may be other factors, like in federal orders where congress/senate gets involved and usually screws things up...
but for the most part they want a low price and a reasonable reliability...

JTQ
March 18, 2014, 08:55 AM
Big Shrek wrote,
Price & reliability

...for the most part they want a low price and a reasonable reliability...
Don't forget weight. S&W metal framed autos were/are plenty reliable. If still produced, they would be expensive and heavy compared to their polymer competition.

For those that can't remember back to those days and how much metal guns cost, in the 1980's I bought an S&W 4506 and a Colt Combat Elite. They sold for within $20 of each other. Colt's current Combat Elite is an $1,100 gun. I suspect the S&W 4506, if still made, would be at least a $1,000 gun. Do you think S&W would sell a bunch of those? Maybe, maybe not.

I think S&W still has the ability to produce those guns. A few years ago the West Virginia State Police bought 750 S&W 4566 TSW's. I guess if you order enough of them, you can still get them.

http://ir.smith-wesson.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=90977&p=irol-newsArticle_Print&ID=1596867&highlight=

Hangingrock
March 18, 2014, 09:52 AM
If there is no substantial demand for your product you'll either cease being or create/ innovate/manufacture a product that meets consumer requirements in the market place in order to be profitable.

jamal28
March 18, 2014, 09:55 PM
Its a great gun i just changed the recoil spring and mainspring for a lighter d/a pull and brought some mecgar 17 rd mags

jjones45
March 18, 2014, 10:22 PM
If there is no substantial demand for your product you'll either cease being or create/ innovate/manufacture a product that meets consumer requirements in the market place in order to be profitable.
Yep, and we are in the era of plastic striker fired handguns and I'm not mad about it

miles1
March 18, 2014, 11:09 PM
The CZ 75 cost roughly $475 made out of metal(Aluminium?),Are the 3rd gen smiths made out of something different that would up their cost?

JTQ
March 19, 2014, 12:33 AM
miles1 wrote,
The CZ 75 cost roughly $475 made out of metal(Aluminium?),Are the 3rd gen smiths made out of something different that would up their cost?
It's not what they were/are made of, it's who is making them and where they are made.

For instance, a Colt 1911 made in the US costs about $1,000. An RIA 1911, made in the PI costs about $500. Both are 1911's, both are made of steel. One is made in the US the other is not.

Hangingrock
March 19, 2014, 10:27 AM
Material selection and technical aspects of the product matter not if there is no consumer demand. If your product is no longer viable in the marketplace that's to say no perceived advantage over other products of comparable user functionality then you end up not being competitive and eventually defunct.

If you enjoyed reading about "s&w 5906 vs s&w m&p9" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!