s&w m&p hate

I am liking my 9FS, and I have rented the 9c and the first time I tried it I didn't care but everytime I have tried it after it has been fantastic and I am seriously considering it as a better carry option compared to the FS. I like how the m&p's feel in my hand and how they feel when I shoot them but I do like the feel of a glock trigger, not to say that I hate the m&p trigger.

I think the M&P Shield 9 is likely the best ergonomic subcompact pistol out there. I know the triggers are a lot like their counterparts, though, and so I will pass on it because I'd rather not have to do the kind of trigger job required.

Glocks are easy to work on because their strongest feature is the simplicity of design. They're too blocky for my taste, though, so I have decided to try some Springfields.

Sigs look awesome to the eye, but they're pricey.

Subcompact Kahrs are some of the most conealable pistols out there, but they're not made to run 10,000 rounds as far as reliability goes.

Someone somewhere in this thread said it all. The guns being manufactured today all have some feature that's admirable and all are well-built enough to meet most anyone's standard.

That being the case, it's going to come down to the little things for someone to be drawn to a line of pistols.

Smith & Wesson are a Massachusetts manufacturer. They, if no one else, should have been rallying gunowners and pressuring politicians in the state to stem the tide of political opposition.

Massachusetts is like the cradle of liberty and gun manufacturing. And having lived there I think it's a shame that it's becoming known more for its oppressive, anti-gun politics.

So I don't hate S&W, I just think they've dropped the ball politically and part of that is seen in making guns with 16 pound triggers.

Oh, and I've owned two Walther PPS pistols which required trigger jobs and an M&P .40c which had the worst trigger I've ever tried. A good out of the box trigger is important to me.

So I don't hate S&W, I just think they've dropped the ball politically and part of that is seen in making guns with 16 pound triggers.

Click to expand...

What 16 pd. trigger? On what gun? Did you fix it?

tipoc

this thread will help

http://www.northeastshooters.com/vbulletin/threads/72677-10lb-trigger-pull-question

FireInCairo said:

I think the M&P Shield 9 is likely the best ergonomic subcompact pistol out there. I know the triggers are a lot like their counterparts, though, and so I will pass on it because I'd rather not have to do the kind of trigger job required.

Click to expand...

I'll never understand the thought behind needing the prefect trigger on a nonrange or target gun, or why anyone would turn down the "best ergonomic subcompact pistol out there" because of it. It was designed to be a ccw, and it exceeds at that. Will how crisp the the trigger breaks or the extra couple of lb really matter or do you really think you'd notice it at all when someone is shooting at you, or coming at you with a knife, or has a gun aimed at your person? To each their own I guess.

FireInCairo said:

Smith & Wesson are a Massachusetts manufacturer. They, if no one else, should have been rallying gunowners and pressuring politicians in the state to stem the tide of political opposition.

Massachusetts is like the cradle of liberty and gun manufacturing. And having lived there I think it's a shame that it's becoming known more for its oppressive, anti-gun politics.

So I don't hate S&W, I just think they've dropped the ball politically and part of that is seen in making guns with 16 pound triggers.

Click to expand...

That was discussed earlier in this thread by Ugaarguy....

ugaarguy said:

That's a trigger modification that's on the MA compliant models ONLY, and not on ALL of the M&P pistols as you're asserting. Would you prefer they not make a compliant model and not sell their flagship pistol to residents of MA?

Was the Ruger SR9 designed by politicians? They have a MA compliant version of it.

What about every pistol manufacturer in the US that offers handguns with 10 round mags for states that have those simpler regulations: Are they kowtowing and letting politicians design their pistols?

Click to expand...

FireInCairo said:

My Walther PPS, which was distributed by S&W, had a trigger well over 12 pounds. They, too, are well-known for absurdly heavy triggers in Massachusetts.

If the rule is 10 pound minimum, there's no sense in going beyond that.

Click to expand...

ugaarguy said:

No, there's plenty of sense in going beyond that. It's called a safety margin or a margin of error. There's no harm in going 20% over, but if you're .00001% under you're in legal trouble. It's just like all the shotgun manufacturers making 18.5" bbls instead of 18" bbls. Who says the state's weights and measures are calibrated the same as S&W's? Or the same as these guys posting on the web?


Would you prefer they didn't make a MA compliant model? Or do you like having the option to buy the pistol in MA?

Click to expand...

I noticed that ugaarguy asked you the same question twice, but you never answered...

S&W does sell 3-4 models of the same gun. CA compliant, MA compliant, with a safety, and w/o a safety. If Ugaarguy is correct in his assessment, then your "they've ball politically" comment is not fair and is unwarranted. They are a gun company and their job is to sell guns. They did their job, selling guns to MA residents, when they complied with MA law. It's not their jobs to rally "gunowners and pressuring politicians in the state to stem the tide of political opposition." If MA has crappy gun laws it's because the people that live in MA voted for progun control candidates to represent them. If the people in MA don't like their gun laws, then they need to "rally" on election day.

I don't "hate" inanimate objects. That said I don't like the m&p guns. The triggers are lousy. Spongy, long and gritty. They feel cheap and are ugly to boot. Overpriced for what they are too. IMO of course.

I'm old enough and own enough pre 2001 S&W handguns to recall when they made good looking reliable accurate handguns with great triggers right out of the box.

Yes, I'm aware of Apex Tactical aftermarket parts. What I don't get is why should I have to immediatly buy aftermarket parts to give my new S&W handgun what it should have come from the factory with?

If I wanted to rebuild new handguns right out of the box, after paying too much for them, I'd still be buying Kimbers.

I also wonder what kind of prior experience with handguns those who tell us to "just learn to work the m&p trigger" or "get use to it" have.

The trigger and control of same is the first building block to accurate shooting. Evidently there are many gun buyers today who are willing to settle for less. I'm just not one of them.

Thaddeus Jones said:

I don't "hate" inanimate objects. That said I don't like the m&p guns. The triggers are lousy. Spongy, long and gritty. They feel cheap and are ugly to boot. Overpriced for what they are too. IMO of course.

I'm old enough and own enough pre 2001 S&W handguns to recall when they made good looking reliable accurate handguns with great triggers right out of the box.

Yes, I'm aware of Apex Tactical aftermarket parts. What I don't get is why should I have to immediatly buy aftermarket parts to give my new S&W handgun what it should have come from the factory with?

If I wanted to rebuild new handguns right out of the box, after paying too much for them, I'd still be buying Kimbers.

I also wonder what kind of prior experience with handguns those who tell us to "just learn to work the m&p trigger" or "get use to it" have.

The trigger and control of same is the first building block to accurate shooting. Evidently there are many gun buyers today who are willing to settle for less. I'm just not one of them.

Click to expand...

It's not a target gun, and many people do fine and are very accurate with the stock trigger. How well the trigger is on any firearm is highly subjective. Just because YOU do not like the trigger and aren't accurate at close range (it is a close range s.d. firearm) and are placing the blame on the trigger does not mean that everyone else suffers from YOUR personal problems with this firearm. It also does not mean they're inexperienced with handguns, inaccurate with the stock trigger, or are settling for less.

A really good trigger is merely a crutch anyway. Since shooting DA revolver exclusively for a year or so a while back, I'm not bothered by any Glock, M&P, xD, Kahr, etc. trigger I've felt.

"It's not a target gun." Yes, thats the excuse most often offered by m&p fans.

"..its a close range s.d. firearm.." Well that IS the first time I've heard that stated. The folks I've seen shooting it at IDPA matches must not know that.

And for the record I never stated what accuracy I have achieved with the multiple m&p's I've shot.

I do recall shooting 4.5 inch groups at 25 yards during a 2007 LE T&E using an m&p 40. That was about the best I've gotten one of those to shoot. That also happened to be one of the best groups turned in during the eval. The Glock 22 was eventually chosen instead.

I think if people like the m&p and are satisfied with it as a "close range s.d. firearm" more power to them.

"A really good trigger is merely a crutch."

I can't believe that is a serious statement made by a moderator on a gunboard.

Thaddeus Jones said:

"..its a close range s.d. firearm.." Well that IS the first time I've heard that stated. The folks I've seen shooting it at IDPA matches must not know that.

Click to expand...

You do know that IPDA is a sport organized and run to emulate close range self defense scenarios right?

Agreed^^^ Idpa is pretty close.
I would consider "target" distance 25-50 yds.
Not that 7yd nonsense.

The idea that the politicians are guiding the design process of a gun manufacturer strikes be as foolish hogwash,

Click to expand...

We wish, Have you seen the new "Massachusetts Compliant" Kahr P9 with thumb safety and loaded chamber indicator? Probably why the M&P and Shield came out initially with a thumb safety.

I'm currently down on Kahr because of poor customer service on my CW9 broken frame rail and their ignoring of my follow-up Emails, but I've got over 6000 good rounds through it.

Thaddeus Jones said:

"It's not a target gun." Yes, thats the excuse most often offered by m&p fans.

"..its a close range s.d. firearm.." Well that IS the first time I've heard that stated. The folks I've seen shooting it at IDPA matches must not know that.

And for the record I never stated what accuracy I have achieved with the multiple m&p's I've shot.

I do recall shooting 4.5 inch groups at 25 yards during a 2007 LE T&E using an m&p 40. That was about the best I've gotten one of those to shoot. That also happened to be one of the best groups turned in during the eval. The Glock 22 was eventually chosen instead.

I think if people like the m&p and are satisfied with it as a "close range s.d. firearm" more power to them.

Click to expand...

You also aren't making much sense. On one hand you claim the gun is inaccurate because of the trigger, and then you claim you shoot 4.5 inch groups at 25 yards? I said it before and I'll say it again, your personal "opinion" on how the trigger preforms for "you" is not a refection on how well or how accurate others can shoot with it.

You didn't have to mention you were a Glock fan... I could already tell by your attitude.

No. I never heard anyone at the local IDPA matches describe it as "close range" self defense.

Competition with your carry gun and equipment is what it was described as.

Every match I've attended had far more 15 and 25 yard targets set up than 7 yard targets. The closer targets are often movers as well. That is the Oxford NC match.

Armor Snail said:

Agreed^^^ Idpa is pretty close.
I would consider "target" distance 25-50 yds.
Not that 7yd nonsense.

Click to expand...

Would you consider a 4 inch barrel hand gun that was able to get 4 inch group at 25 yards inaccurate for what it was designed and manufactured to do?

Thaddeus Jones said:

No. I never heard anyone at the local IDPA matches describe it as "close range" self defense.

Click to expand...

Please describe to me a normal stage at an IPDA match. Then explain how this isn't a close range self defense scenario.

While you are at it, explain to IDPA themselves how they are doing it wrong.

The International Defensive Pistol Association (IDPA) is the governing body of a shooting sport that simulates self-defense scenarios and real life encounters.

Click to expand...

http://www.idpa.com/

Praxidike said:

Would you consider a 4 inch barrel hand gun that was able to get 4 inch group at 25 yards inaccurate for what it was designed and manufactured to do?

Click to expand...

It could sure be better.
4" @50 maybe.

Praxidike once again you are wrong. I don't like Glocks either. I don't own one. And likely never will. The Glock 22 won the T&E because it scored higher than the m&p.

I don't own any plastic striker fired handguns. Largely because of their poor triggers.

I did briefly own a Walther PPQ. The Walther PPQ 9mm I briefly owned did in fact have the nicest trigger of any striker fired gun I've tried.

Oh, BTW I don't consider 4.5 inches at 25 yards anything more than combat accurate.

My S&W 3rd gen 45's can all better that grouping.

Thaddeus Jones said:

Praxidike once again you are wrong. I don't like Glocks either. I don't own one. And likely never will. The Glock 22 won the T&E because it scored higher than the m&p.

I don't own any plastic striker fired handguns. Largely because of their poor triggers.

I did briefly own a Walther PPQ. The Walther PPQ 9mm I briefly owned did in fact have the nicest trigger of any striker fired gun I've tried.

Oh, BTW I don't consider 4.5 inches at 25 yards anything more than combat accurate.

My S&W 3rd gen 45's can all better that grouping.

Click to expand...

That's just the point. Most people who buy m&ps are buying them for close quarters self defense - combat purposes and not for 25-50 yard shots in a competition. They are not settling on anything and the firearm is plenty accurate for what it's being used for.

The ongoing problems with extraction

Click to expand...

I find this strange, I've run my M&P40 and M&P40c with 9mm conversion barrels for several thousand rounds and have never had an extraction issue. I've M&P 40, 40c, 9mm Pro & 45 and Shields in 9mm and .40S&W haven't had a failure in any of them except with my reloads as will be described below.

I did put in the extra power striker springs in my 40 and 9mm Pro to solve ignition problems with my reloads, didn't notice any decrement to the trigger from doing so. For some reason the Shields and M&P 40c and 45 have had no ignition problems with my reloads. I'm a big believer in "If it ain't broke, don't fix it!"

I like the stock M&P trigger much better than the stock Glock trigger -- most likely because the M&P fits my hand like the glove, while the Glock fits like a block. I've Glock 17, 22, 21, & 20 so its not like I haven't given them a fair shake, but all besides the gen 4 22 needed the 3.5 lb connector for me to be able shoot acceptably -- lighter trigger definitely helps when the gun is a poor fit to the hand, the gen 4 is the first Glock to give me a decent fit.

Most people who buy m&ps are buying them for close quarters self defense - combat purposes and not for 25-50 yard shots in a competition. They are not settling on anything and the firearm is plenty accurate for what it's being used for.

Click to expand...

I've got Trijicon RMR optic on my Shield 40 and doing the "final" sight in with my carry ammo off sand bags at 25 yards it put five shots into 2.5" the mechanical accuracy is there for the 25 yard shots. The short sight radius of a sub compact definitely works against you.

jamal28 said:

i was refering to the hate it gets from the owners of glocks and sig.

Click to expand...

That's just fanboy nonsense, is all. Glocks, Sigs and M&Ps are all fine pistols. Go with the one that fits your hand the best and you'll be pleased.

The only place I've ever even seen such a statement was in this thread.

In all my years of training I've only ever been taught that a good trigger and control of same is fundamental to accuracy.

I was never told it was a "myth". Evidently Apex Tactical, who is profiting greatly from the m&p's lousy factory trigger is unaware of this "myth" as well.

Otherwise why would they waste their time and money coming up with a better trigger? Someone should tell them.

I keep hearing complaints about the M&P triggers, so I must be a very fortunate guy. I've owned two; a 45FS and a 9C. Both triggers were a little stiff at first, like lots of new semi-autos tend to be. With some use and dry firing, they both quickly became nice and smooth. No complaints from me.