|
|
07-08-2020, 11:23 PM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 156
Likes: 3
Liked 59 Times in 33 Posts
|
|
Your Thoughts of the M&P Pro Line
I'm speaking of the original Pro line not the 2.0 version. I'm interested in information on the 9mm and the 40. Specifically round counts; breakage; reliability; etc.
I ask because much of the internet banter has some harsh claims that the original series of Pro line is weak compared to the 2.0 version. Comments are often made that the 2.0 has much "stronger" internals. This isn't adding up to me. Could be true but there is not much in the way of proof more talk is what I'm finding. I figure if anyone knows fat it's on this board.
|
07-09-2020, 08:35 AM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Lexington, SC
Posts: 99
Likes: 43
Liked 24 Times in 11 Posts
|
|
I'll chime in .. because I own both.
My Performance Center C.O.R.E. 40L (long slide) is one of my favorite pistols to shoot. I know it's not the Pro series. but I'm sure they are all tuned by the pro shop.
The 1.0's do not have that full stainless steel chassis full molded into the frame.
That's the only difference I see between the two frame wise.
Shooting the 2.0 and 1.0 is very similar control ability.
I prefer the 2.0 texturing.. but the 1.0 with the C.O.R.E. backstraps make it a very comfortable to shoot.
My 1.0 is very reliable.. eats all I feed it, it's accurate with the SS barrel (5" ported)
Anything turned out by Smith's Pro shop is top notch.. buy in confidence and never regret the purchase.
I have 500 rounds through my 40L since I got it used.. it's never hiccuped.
Hope this helps..
|
07-09-2020, 09:12 AM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Crawford County PA
Posts: 3,710
Likes: 4,394
Liked 6,713 Times in 2,420 Posts
|
|
I've had a Pro 9 for many years and put maybe 5,000 rounds through it. the only breakage was the fiber optic front sight. Issues include not being able to shoot Winchester Steel which for some reason had ejection problems, not apparent in other 9mms. The front of the barrel hood developed a raised wire like edge which I twice stoned off.
The Pro has some Apex parts and I recall there was some controversy over barrel timing. I considered the replacement cost to be more than I wanted to spend. Recently Midway had Storm Lake barrels for 50% off and I purchased one. I test fired it but have not competed.
I moved on to other pistols for club level competition and have kept the Pro 9 because It cost nearly $600 and I have a total of six magazines. I won't voluntarily take the loss in selling or trading.
__________________
Made it, Ma! Top of the world!
|
07-09-2020, 09:23 AM
|
|
US Veteran
|
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Western NC
Posts: 3,711
Likes: 2,987
Liked 6,600 Times in 1,838 Posts
|
|
I purchased mine in 2011, when I believe they first came out. The best thing I can say about it is that out of way too many handguns, this is the one I keep in my bedroom. I've never had any problem with it, and surprisingly to me the tritium sights are still fairly bright. Not a particular fan of fiber optic sights, so I'm glad to have steel ones.
The only thing I would change is the "feature" I'd change on almost all modern pistols, getting rid of the snags on the front dust cover. Not a big deal, just personal preference. Of course, I'm not an "operator", either.
|
07-09-2020, 10:55 AM
|
|
US Veteran
|
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: SoCal, CA
Posts: 2,241
Likes: 735
Liked 1,039 Times in 671 Posts
|
|
I don't have a Pro but I do have several 1.0s.
The "strong" vs "weak" are most likely due to what ctr1970 has already said. The chassis embedded in the frame was extended into the dust cover. This would make the frame more rigid. How much of a difference does it make? I have no idea and I have seen anything that quantifies it.
But the 2.0s have other changes. The trigger has improved, the slide lock now uses a detent, and the grip texture in more aggressive.
I have a 5" CORE slide kit on my FS. I also have a bunch of 2.0 backstraps. I prefer the CORE. I also dropped a 2.0 trigger group in my 1.0. I like it.
IMG_1900.JPG
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
07-09-2020, 11:33 AM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Hills of North Georgia
Posts: 5,131
Likes: 1,854
Liked 12,482 Times in 3,413 Posts
|
|
I have a Pro Series M&P 40 I bought in 2009. 4K plus through it and never a problem. I can't complain.
__________________
LIVE FROM THE DAWGHOUSE
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
07-11-2020, 08:50 AM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 147
Likes: 575
Liked 93 Times in 51 Posts
|
|
My only failure on my M&P Pro 1.0 (4.25") was the slide stop that failed after about 4000 rounds. S&W replaced it under warranty and I purchased a spare slide stop from Brownells. I believe that the original slide stop design was re-engineered several times during its production life.
|
07-12-2020, 01:17 PM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 156
Likes: 3
Liked 59 Times in 33 Posts
|
|
Thanks for the input.
|
07-12-2020, 02:50 PM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 8,161
Likes: 3,622
Liked 5,211 Times in 2,174 Posts
|
|
I have both a FS Pro 9mm and a 5" Pro 9mm. I campaigned the 5" a full year in IDPA/SSP and USPSA/Production: well over 20000 rounds. Chipped the striker and broke a trigger spring. Both parts on the "1.0" are the same as on the 2.0.
I watched a couple of people destroy "1.0" Pros by shooting them in USPSA Open Division with 9mm MAJOR POWER ammo. No S&W M&P is rated for 9mm Major. I suspect most of the "somebody knew somebody who heard" stories about the "weak Pros" originated with the guns shot to pieces by using overpowered Major 9 ammo.
__________________
Science plus Art
|
The Following 2 Users Like Post:
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
|
|
|
|