S&W forum in particular.
M&P 10mm
- Thread starter giggitygiggity
- Start date
Dan-O
Member
My view is that they will fix any problems. I need a new 10mm, like a hole in me noggin, but they’re just bad ass. Can’t have too many .40 heavy in my opinion.
Steve in NC
Member
I own 3 10mm’s now. The third one was probably the first M&P 10mm to be sold in the state of NC. Manufacture date on the box was 211207 and I bought mine 211216 when my son texted me that they just received shipment at LGS. It has run flawless since then. They put a double step in the chamber to help with feeding that long case but it doesn’t create the unsupported smiley face when firing nuclear loads. Only a very faint ring in the brass on heavy loads.
My gun is setup 100% S&W parts and the trigger is 4#-6oz after polishing trigger mechanism contact points with brown polishing compound.
The one thing I can hold S&W's feet to the fire on because I have reworked all of my M2.0 safety plungers and I’ be done probably 6 or 7 more for customers is the rough machined trigger safety plunger. Most new 2.0 come with a rough plunger finish. I chuck it up in a drill and polish it with craytex and also put a heavy chamfer and polish the hole inside the plunger where the return spring runs. If S&W would fix this issue they would have a great gun right out of the box.
I own several Gen 1 and M2.0 M&P’s, full size, Shields, 22, EZ’s. Never had major issues on any of them. I have over 25k rounds on my 2008 gen 1 3 1/2” Compact model and it’s still going.
The other thing I do not recommend is to NOT use the Apex safety plunger. They round the head off a lot and I believe it causes a timing issue with the striker clearing the plunger and peens the striker over to where eventually you can push the striker past the plunger with finger pressure. And it creates light strikes sometime if it drags enough.
I have seen this on 3 different M&Ps and replaced them with polished S&W plungers that I only round off the chamfered corners and not all across the front face to where it looks like a dome as Apex does. Makes for a really smooth trigger, but I believe there are issues. The rest of the Apex kit is top shelf. With my 2.0 I use 100% OEM parts and end up with great triggers. I do eliminate the hinged trigger with Apex 1 pc polymer trigger.
Update 3/11:
I got thinking on this and 2 additional things came to mind that I think I need to bring up for full disclosure.
#1 - Those plastic optic adaptor plates that came with the new Optic ready M&P which the 10mm's are in that release. I do not shoot optics yet on my 10mm so this wasn't on my radar. BUT, with that said, those plastics plates that Smith includes that will make it easy for you to adapt any optic footprint is nice from a sales perspective. When it comes to reliability and execution that suck. They will shear/break and cause loose optics at some point with the extra recoil of the 10mm. If you do shoot an optic, use these plastic plates to determine which optic you prefer and then buy one of the after market machined aluminum plates for your preferred optic and be done with it.
#2 - 4" vs 4.6" with feeding issues. Some have reported feeding issues and this is almost exclusively with the 4" model from what I have seen and heard reported. I'm sure there are exceptions. It seems when S&W released this pistols initially the magazine springs measured 6" OAL (brand new) when removed from the magazine. But when I finally got the call that the very first shipment of extra S&W 10mm magazines were received at my LGS, I drove down that day and bought some more. Remember as I stated above my gun was one of the first production pistols to be released for sale in Dec 2021. The (2) magazines that came brand new with the gun the mag springs measured 6" OAL. When I bought these the extra magazines many months later those factory springs without ever being loaded/fired measured 7" OAL. So it appears S&W has put some more spring pressure to ensure better feeding on lower round counts in magazines.
One trend I have seen when there is failure to feed on youtube videos is that its is a 4" model and the FTFeed is usually in the lower 50% of the magazine. So I wonder if that extra spring pressure of the newer mags might cure this feeding issues??
I would test it but my 4.6" model has fed 100% since day 1 from lighter factory FMJ loads up to nuclear handloads without an issue. So I can fix was isn't broken.
Anyone else have a 4" with the 6" springs that is having FTFeed issues able to swap out to the newer 7" sprung mags and see if there is a difference/cure??
Steve
Steve
My gun is setup 100% S&W parts and the trigger is 4#-6oz after polishing trigger mechanism contact points with brown polishing compound.
The one thing I can hold S&W's feet to the fire on because I have reworked all of my M2.0 safety plungers and I’ be done probably 6 or 7 more for customers is the rough machined trigger safety plunger. Most new 2.0 come with a rough plunger finish. I chuck it up in a drill and polish it with craytex and also put a heavy chamfer and polish the hole inside the plunger where the return spring runs. If S&W would fix this issue they would have a great gun right out of the box.
I own several Gen 1 and M2.0 M&P’s, full size, Shields, 22, EZ’s. Never had major issues on any of them. I have over 25k rounds on my 2008 gen 1 3 1/2” Compact model and it’s still going.
The other thing I do not recommend is to NOT use the Apex safety plunger. They round the head off a lot and I believe it causes a timing issue with the striker clearing the plunger and peens the striker over to where eventually you can push the striker past the plunger with finger pressure. And it creates light strikes sometime if it drags enough.
I have seen this on 3 different M&Ps and replaced them with polished S&W plungers that I only round off the chamfered corners and not all across the front face to where it looks like a dome as Apex does. Makes for a really smooth trigger, but I believe there are issues. The rest of the Apex kit is top shelf. With my 2.0 I use 100% OEM parts and end up with great triggers. I do eliminate the hinged trigger with Apex 1 pc polymer trigger.
Update 3/11:
I got thinking on this and 2 additional things came to mind that I think I need to bring up for full disclosure.
#1 - Those plastic optic adaptor plates that came with the new Optic ready M&P which the 10mm's are in that release. I do not shoot optics yet on my 10mm so this wasn't on my radar. BUT, with that said, those plastics plates that Smith includes that will make it easy for you to adapt any optic footprint is nice from a sales perspective. When it comes to reliability and execution that suck. They will shear/break and cause loose optics at some point with the extra recoil of the 10mm. If you do shoot an optic, use these plastic plates to determine which optic you prefer and then buy one of the after market machined aluminum plates for your preferred optic and be done with it.
#2 - 4" vs 4.6" with feeding issues. Some have reported feeding issues and this is almost exclusively with the 4" model from what I have seen and heard reported. I'm sure there are exceptions. It seems when S&W released this pistols initially the magazine springs measured 6" OAL (brand new) when removed from the magazine. But when I finally got the call that the very first shipment of extra S&W 10mm magazines were received at my LGS, I drove down that day and bought some more. Remember as I stated above my gun was one of the first production pistols to be released for sale in Dec 2021. The (2) magazines that came brand new with the gun the mag springs measured 6" OAL. When I bought these the extra magazines many months later those factory springs without ever being loaded/fired measured 7" OAL. So it appears S&W has put some more spring pressure to ensure better feeding on lower round counts in magazines.
One trend I have seen when there is failure to feed on youtube videos is that its is a 4" model and the FTFeed is usually in the lower 50% of the magazine. So I wonder if that extra spring pressure of the newer mags might cure this feeding issues??
I would test it but my 4.6" model has fed 100% since day 1 from lighter factory FMJ loads up to nuclear handloads without an issue. So I can fix was isn't broken.
Anyone else have a 4" with the 6" springs that is having FTFeed issues able to swap out to the newer 7" sprung mags and see if there is a difference/cure??
Steve
Steve
Last edited:
Old_Grouch
Member
I am a lifelong S&W fan but I can honestly say that their quality is not what it once was. Current production Performance Center guns are almost as good as the regular production line guns used to be. We've had to send several PC guns back in the last few years. I still buy a S&W revolver occasionally, but only if I have it in-hand to check it first.
I'm a smith and Wesson fan too. My latest purchase in revolvers were the 686+ that I carry and the 617 that I purchased for double action training for the 686, both continue to work flawlessly.
