I’m getting bored with all of the coronavirus stuff over in the Lounge, so I thought I would make good use of my home confinement by putting together a report on the long-term use of my M&P semi-autos. It may be of little interest to anyone but myself, but preparing it has at least given me a few hours of something to do. Any other members who want to tell of their M&P experiences, feel free to post.

I have three M&Ps. More accurately, three and a half, because my 40 compact has a Storm Lake conversion barrel that allows me to shoot it as a .357 SIG. I have shot all three extensively, so my experience with each is considerable. My main shooting statistic is an accuracy score from the last 15 range sessions combined for each gun. The score is the percentage of shots that I’ve placed in a 4”x4” square at 15 and 20 yards. The square is marked by the four small red dots that surround the bullseye of a Birchwood-Casey sight-in target (see photo) that I’ve used exclusively for the past four years. All shots were taken standing unsupported, with a two-handed grip.

M&P 40 Compact v1.0
Purchased December, 2014
Round Count: 15,916 (13,388 .40 S&W; 2,528 .357 SIG)
Accuracy Scores for .40 S&W: 15 yards, 348 shots in square/540 shots taken = 64%; 20 yards, 316/680 = 46%
Accuracy scores for .357 SIG: 15 yards, 394/630 = 63%; 20 yards, 329/650 = 51%

Comment: As you can see, there is little difference in accuracy between the two rounds at 15 yards, but at 20 yards the .357 SIG has a clear advantage. My 40c has been my carry gun ever since I bought it, and I now carry it as a 357. The Storm Lake barrel was a perfect drop-in fit. My 40c is not only accurate, it has been very reliable, with only two failures to eject and two failures to feed, over its 15,916 rounds while shooting two handed. Shooting one handed, I had several additional FTEs and FTFs early on, but those were due to limp wristing, which I don’t count against the gun. As I approached 10,000 rounds, I started getting failures to fire. When a new striker did not help, S&W took it back and completely rebuilt it, replacing every moving part except the extractor, at no charge. (Love that S&W lifetime service policy!) It has functioned flawlessly ever since. While I’m always on the lookout for a better carry pistol, I have yet to find one that has the combination of accuracy, reliability, capacity, portability, and hitting power that my 40c/357 has. It’s a keeper.

Shield 9 v1.0
Purchased June, 2015
Round count: 5,850
Accuracy Scores: 15 yards, 527/1184 = 45%; 20 yards 22/78 = 28%

Comment: I bought this because of the many favorable reviews on the Forum. Guess what? Sometimes you guys are wrong! It was defective right out of the box, with a bent recoil spring assembly (RSA) that contributed to numerous FTEs early on. The replacement RSA flew apart after one use. Its “replacement” was a rifle sling assembly. (An RSA is an RSA, right?) It took 3 ½ months to get a proper replacement, but my Shield 9 never really recovered, and continued to have problems with jams. It had a wobbly ejector, which earned it a trip back to the factory, but S&W pronounced its wobble to be within spec, and it was returned unrepaired. It continued with the occasional malfunction and mediocre accuracy, and after 18 months, 4,900 rounds, and 28 FTEs and FTFs (way too many for a carry gun), I was exasperated enough to give up on it, and I laid it aside.

Eight months passed, and I decided to undertake a rejuvenation project. I bought a bunch of self-defense ammo, and decided to see if my Shield 9 could fire any of them at least 200 times with no failures. If that project worked, then I would have a reasonably reliable back-up carry gun. Fortunately, two rounds made it past 200 firings with zero failures: Hornady Critical Duty 135g +P (387 rounds), and Federal HST 147g (225 rounds). I also discovered that the Shield 9 was significantly more accurate with Winchester NATO target rounds than with any other. While the overall accuracy rate at 15 yards is 45%, it is nearly 60% with Win NATO. So now, after a long journey, my Shield 9 has become an acceptable carry pistol. However, it has fallen to third place in the rotation because of my Shield 45.

Shield 45
Purchased February, 2017
Round count: 7,661
Accuracy scores: 15 yards, 404/565 = 72%; 20 yards, 369/728 = 51%

Comment: Once again, I bought a Shield because of the many favorable reviews on the Forum. Guess what? This time you guys were right! I love this gun. It’s easy to carry, its recoil is surprisingly mild, and its 15-yard accuracy is astonishing. (The attached target photo shows one of my better days at 15 yards with my Shield 45.) I can’t believe that it is so accurate with such a short barrel. It outshoots ever other pistol I have, including my SIG P320 compact. The only exception is my FNX 45 Tactical with its 5.25” barrel and Vortex red dot.

I did have the original magazine followers, so I had a bunch of failures to feed initially, but after I received the redesigned followers, the FTFs went away, and it has been very reliable since. I added a Hogue grip which has helped to improve my accuracy. My main challenge is shooting one handed. The combination of a small gun and a big round means you need a very firm grip and a firm trigger pull, or you’ll limp wrist it into a failure to feed. But those have diminished with practice. Overall, however, I have no reservations about carrying my Shield 45. Even though my 40c usually gets chosen for my daily carry, it’s because of its greater round capacity, not because of its greater ability. Anyone considering the purchase of a Shield should consider the 45 first. It is superior to the 9 in every way, except capacity. And to me, it’s worth giving up one extra round for the superiority of the 45.

Triggers
I haven’t said anything about the triggers, because everyone has individual preferences for what they’ll tolerate in a trigger, but here’s my take. The triggers in both Shields are just fine with me. They were stiff initially, but smoothed out nicely by 1,000 rounds. I’ve never had any desire to replace them. The 40c situation is more complex. It’s had three triggers. The original factory trigger was rough initially, but became very smooth with use. At 6,000 rounds, I replaced it with an Apex DCAEK set, just because. The factory trigger had smoothed out so much by then that the improvement from the DCAEK was barely noticeable. The gunsmith even commented on how smooth the original trigger was. When I had to send the 40c back to S&W, they of course removed the Apex stuff (which they kindly returned), and replaced it with a new M&P trigger system. It was horrible, the worst I’ve experienced, though it’s smoothed out somewhat in the 5,000 rounds since. I could stick the DCAEK back in, but haven’t for two reasons: 1. The DCAEK was in the gun when the failures to fire developed, and I’m not sure what role (if any) it may have had in those failures. 2. I’m shooting as well or better with the current trigger than I did when the DCAEK was in it, so why mess with a semi-good thing.

So that’s my M&P story. What’s yours?

Attached Images

IMG_0106.jpg (86.5 KB, 506 views)

__________________
What, me worry?

I had a 1.0 .40 that had a decent trigger, I never felt the need to change it.
Up and traded for a 2.0 .40, and the trigger was really heavy and gritty.
I put the Apex duty/carry in it.

A few months ago I bought a 5 inch 9mm in FDE, and it had a heavy (8 1/2 lb.) trigger that felt like it had sand in it.
It also got the Apex parts.

My first Shield back in 2016 was a PC .40. Just after I bought the .40 Shield I picked up another Shield in .45.
I liked the .45, but liked the PC .40 just a little more. Traded the .45 for a 9mm to give to my daughter.

I've carried the PC.40 almost everyday for the last 4 years, but a couple months ago bought a Remsport ported barrel in 9mm for it.
About the same time I felt like I again wanted a .45 Shield, and it has replaced the PC.40 as my daily carry.

Although the .45 is slightly larger for carry, it feels better in my hand, recoil is downright pleasant, accuracy is surprisingly good for a subcompact, and it has shot well with any kind of ammo.

My .45 Shield had some feeding bobbles when I first got it. I thought it might be due to the Hornady XTPs, as those bullets have a different taper than most other .45 loads. It ran fine with hardball.
I looked at the mag followers, and they were the old style.
A call to S&W, and they sent me the new style followers, and it's ran 100% since, even with the Hornady XTPs.

All 3 of my M&Ps. the all black .45 Shield really stands out, it will get FDE Cerakote as soon as I get my blast cabinet set back up.

__________________
U. S. Army Veteran

I like my M&Ps, but I don’t love them. I’ve only fired a fraction of the number of rounds as the OP.

M&P9 1.0: the original trigger was decent, I put over 1200 rounds through it with the only failure of any kind happening after I intentionally dropped it in a mud puddle to see what would happen. The chambered round fired, the next round jammed. I was never thrilled with its accuracy, so I put in the DCAEK trigger kit and it’s a little better. It’s my go-to 9mm.

M&P9 Pro 1.0: Longer barrel and sight radius, otherwise I can’t tell any difference. That’s probably just me. 100% reliable.

M&P9C 2.0, 3.6” barrel. The 2.0 trigger is a little more crisp I guess, but still not something to rave about. I’ve only put a few hundred rounds through it. 100% reliable. I figure it’s a good backup for my standard 9 1.0.

Shield 9: I put the Apex sear in it to reduce jerking. A light gun with a heavy-ish trigger doesn’t help accuracy. It’s a little easier to make tight groups with the lighter, crisper trigger. I probably have 1500 rounds through it with 100% reliability. It’s not, however, carried much. I just can’t get a warm fuzzy feeling carrying a gun with a short, light trigger.

As far as accuracy, I’m confident they will perform to minute of bad guy. I wish they could also be bullseye match accurate, but it is what it is.

My M&P story:

1- M&P9 v1. Bought to shoot production in USPSA and IDPA. Replaced factory tigger springs with Apex trigger kit. Changed front sight to Ameriglo Liked the ergos, still do. 100% reliable. Most accurate of the three. Wife now uses it for her IDPA gun

2- M&P 9c v1- bought to shoot CCP ( and BUG when rules allowed) in IDPA. Also as a carry gun so left factory trigger alone. In all honesty, trigger left much to be desired. Changed sights to Ameriglo CAP sights. Ended up not using it much, recently sold it to friend who wanted it more than me. Was 100% reliable. Least accurate of the three- probably due to the trigger. Still has reasonable combat accuracy.

3- Shield 9 v1. Got it in a trade. Has thumb safety which I’m ambivalent to. Trigger is so so, better than the 9C, but nothing to write home about. 100% reliable. Use it as a carry occasionally. Good combat accuracy- I did better in IDPA stages than I did in a bullseye setting.

I’ve looked at the v2s and as mentioned above, didn’t notice a significant improvement, especially over the 9 full size with the APEK trigger kit.

My take away is the M&P series is a good, economical, Reliable, and ergonomic gun that has gotten better. Challenge is the competition is getting better- for my hands and eyes at least- SIG 320 / 365 series and CZ P10 as examples

__________________
Guns + Dogs= Bliss

Nicely Done!

I also have 3 M&Ps. A Fullsize, Compact and Shield (all 9s, all 1.0s, all from 2014).

Triggers were the typical gritty mushy 1.0 triggers. The Shield smoothed out within a few hundred rounds and I don't feel the need to replace it.

The Compact and Fullsize initially got the "Burwell" treatment which improved them.

My FS now sports a ported core slide kit, RMR and the 2.0 trigger components. It's pretty good for a "stock" trigger. Plan to do the same to my compact.

No M&P story really. I like the Shield 45. After a couple thousand rounds (reloads as well as several different kinds of defensive ammo) it hasn't had one stoppage. Very accurate for a tiny barrel. About the only thing I don't like is a minor complaint. I don't shoot a ton defensive ammo since it's expensive (reloads hit to the same point of aim). With that in mind the extractor really tears into the case head on brass. Not so bad if you only load it once and shoot at the range but if you carry different sidearms and reload the same rounds the case head gets to be pretty chewed up. Don't get me wrong I love that it grabs the case that hard for a defensive sidearm it just bugs me.

Good thing we aren't talking about the magazines. Putting that 7 rounder back together, well, I get creative with my wording most times...