Has anyone had any experience with the S&W 99 in 45 ACP?
I have used the 9mm version and thoroughly enjoy shooting it - a totally reliable and very accurate pistol.
I want to purchase plastic framed 45 ACP and am considering the S&W 99. Has it been as reliable as the 9mm versions? Any feeding problems with LSWC's ?
Any expereinces would be welcomed.

I have one in 45 I've been very happy with, accurate and reliable.

On the negative side, magazines are fairly scarce, though I saw that CDNN had some recently. Also the mag capacity of 9 is a little on the low side by current model standards for a double stack. But the grips are thin.

Can't help with the LSWC's, only factory ammo through mine.

Yes I have experience with the SW99-45ACP.

The early magazine springs were problematic. The slide would not lock open after the last round fired. The spring fully extended was too soft for the magazine follower to activate the slide stop. S&W replaced the magazine springs under warranty. S&W changed the spring design.

The ambidextrous magazine release levers require a change in hand position on my part. Apparently my hand position allowed inadvertent contact which resulted in partial magazine release.

The trigger positions double-action, single-action and anti stress single should be noted by those that use the pistol. Trigger system smoothes out with usage.

The sights are considered fragile but I’ve had no problem with durability to date.

Two back straps descent ergonomics.

Accuracy is acceptable on par with service grade semi-automatics.

Handled an S&W MP45 I’ll keep the SW99.

My example feeds LSWC 185Gr & 200Gr

I logged some hours with a SW99 .45 for a while.

Decent gun.

I decided not to buy one when I was done with the range sessions, though. I couldn't really put my finger on a specific reason, or reasons, but I just didn't want to own one.

I do like the SW99 series, too. Quite a bit. I own a couple of them (9/40). I'm somewhat familiar with the SW99, having attended 3 armorer classes for the 99 series.

After I attended a M&P Pistol armorer class I ordered a M&P 45 and have been very pleased with it. Very.

There are some features which I prefer in each design.

If possible, trying one before buying might be a good idea.

S&W's focus is on the M&P series, obviously.

__________________
Ret LE Firearms inst & armorer

dennis40x,
I assume the tigger on you 45 ACP S&W99 is the same as my 9mm version - DA/SA with the option of releasing the striker for a heavier longer first shot DA pull.

fastbolt,
What perticular features do you particularly favor or look upon with disfavor on the Model 99 and M&P designs?

The M&P has some refinements in the design, in my opinion, such as:

Enhanced frame strength (w/steel sub-chassis)
Frame rails are easily replaced if damaged (without frame replacement)
Heavy slide dust cover to resist damage if dropped 'muzzle first'
Beavertail grip frame to reduce potential for slide bite
Slide serrations which are less slippery when wet
Grip inserts include palm swells as well as back strap differences
Ambidextrous slide stop lever
Reversible magazine catch button
Large, robust extractor hook (which can be replaced independently)
Stainless steel recoil guide rod assembly
Beveled barrel hood
Through-hardened stainless steel barrel & slide (no zone tempering)
Simplified sear housing mechanism
Dove-tailed front & rear sights, press fit into the slide

Now, the 99 series parts come from Germany. Sometimes when I've called for parts I've had to wait because they were on back order from Germany. Hopefully, once S&W can catch up on the huge demand for the M&P pistols it will become easier to get parts for them. I've had to wait for some parts orders, and I still have a couple orders which have yet to be filled. I'm told the parts are being used in production as fast as they're being received.

The 99 series sear housing blocks are a bit complicated and expensive. The ejector is molded into the housing block, so if an ejector breaks you have to replace the whole housing block. The ejector can easily be replaced as a separate part in the M&P.

The standard plastic rear sight bases on the 99's are only held in the slide by a plunger which is held in place by one side of the windage adjustment screw. The top 'prongs' of the plunger can be broken with less of an impact than some folks might expect, and this can result in the rear sight base shifting.

The slide's plastic rear end cap is somewhat thin on the 99, while the one of the M&P is thicker. I've only had one SW99 end cap crack, but there's been some reported issues by other users.

I do like the 99's striker safety block. Unique design. Easy to remove & replace (as long as the armorer doesn't reverse it, though). I also like their striker return spring, which helps prevent excessive contact between the firing pin and the safety block. This idea was adopted in the M&P pistol, too.

The striker spring used in the QA is heavier than the one used in the AS. No big deal, but you don't want to mix them up if you have both models in use, since putting the one used in the AS gun in a QA gun may result in light strikes. You don't want to mix up the trigger bar guides between the models, either.

The extractor is a drop-in part on the 99, and it's easier to remove & install. It's technically a fitted part in the M&P and the solid extractor pin is not easy to remove. The M&P 45 models use a roll-pin instead of a solid pin, which I think is a good idea (part of the military spec submission when the .45 model was being developed for the anticipated military trials).

The M&P extractor is very large and robust. We were told in the armorer class that it was intentionally designed to help resist hook damage in the event of a case failure-to-extract situation where the user might have to try to re-engage the case rim.

Removing the locking block to repair a damaged/worn slide stop lever spring in the 99 series is not an easy task because of the nature of the rolled steel pin used to mount it in the frame and its very tight fit in the locking block. I've heard of LE 99 series armorers who won't attempt to remove and replace the locking block pin in the 99 series, but return the guns to the factory if a repair requires removal of the locking block. I've removed & replaced a number of them, even outside of the classes, but it takes some effort with a roll pin punch and a 4 oz ball peen hammer. Rolling over the edge of the pin by improper removal/installation of the pin can potentially cause damage to the frame, too, such as wallowing out the frame hole.

The sear housing block in the 99 series is a bit complicated and includes a couple of pins and springs, one set of which can come loose during an armorer inspection if the housing is tipped over onto the left side. Armorers are told not to disassemble the sear housing block, but instructions to reinstall the single action sear spring, sear and pin are included in the manual. This was handy the first time I had to ordered a new sear housing block (broken ejector), and I discovered the single action sear pin, sear and spring had fallen out of the block during shipping. Some positioning of the sear under spring tension is needed in order to reinsert the pin.

The barrel lock assembly (meaning the plunger and its spring) must be seated within the steeped hole in the plastic frame properly. It's possible to install it so the spring catches on the stepped edge of the hole (instead of the spring base being placed on the bottom of the hole). This can bend, kink and damage the spring. The barrel lock is what holds the barrel (and therefore the slide) onto the frame and it must have good tension. Also, it's probably not a good idea to damage the hole in the plastic frame.

The M&P has a couple of its own potential issues which can be annoying when reassembling after an armorer detail strip, though.

The spring and spring plate used by the striker safety plunger require some care during reassembly. The spring is long and thin, making it interesting to compress and install the spring plate (called the 'UFO" during class, for reasons which soon become apparent ) when installing the rear sight base. If the spring become bent over under the spring plate it effectively stops the plunger from moving and the sight has to be removed again in order to correct the problem.

The takedown lever retaining wire is pretty small from the perspective of making sure it remains in the recessed groove in the locking block during reassembly. I've found that using a dab of grease helps keep it in the block.

Also, aligning the slide stop lever and trigger assemblies in the frame so the pin can fit through both of them, while making sure the trigger return spring is captured by the pin, can be interesting.

Armorers are told not to disassemble the sear housing block for routine cleaning, although instructions are provided in case the gun becomes extremely dirty or is submerged and has to be fully cleaned. The parts are simpler to replace than in the 99 design, although the magazine safety lever spring requires a bit of attention when the lever and spring are being replaced. On the other hand, the design of the magazine safety is elegantly simple, involving just the spring and lever. Some engineer earned their money with the simplicity of how that design functions in the gun.

The thumb safety design is also pretty simple, as well. It lacks the firm 'feel' of the safety lock lever functioning as felt in most 1911's though, which can take some adjustment on the part of some 1911 shooters.

I could probably think of some other differences and arguable advantages & disadvantages between the 2 designs, given some more time, but that sort of covers the basics.

There's been quite a number of revisions and ongoing refinements in the M&P model line, and I'm sure there will be some further ones since S&W seems very serious about making this model work in regard to regaining their stature in the LE field.

__________________
Ret LE Firearms inst & armorer

Fastbolt,
Thank you for the very informative and comprehensive analysis of these two guns. I shoot the S&W 99 and Walther P99QA. They both have proved to be extremely reliable and surprisingly accurate especially considering their short sight radius. I saw an ad for the S&W 99's in 45 ACP at Ca $360 plus shipping which spurred my interest and the reason for the inquiry. I also shoot a Glock 17 and a M&P9Pro. I do prefer the beavertail on the M&P series.
Thanks again,
Tony

De nada.

Please remember that these are just some personal thoughts based on ownership & user experiences, a well as having attended armorer classes, for the two designs.

I like both the 99 and the M&P series.

I like my SW99c 9mm well enough that I didn't even think about ordering a M&P 9c, but did order a M&P 40c. (Also having a 3913, CS9 & G26 sort of made adding a M&P 9c to my working collection seem a bit unnecessary, too. ) BTW, I've come to realize that I can wring a bit more noticeable practical accuracy out of my SW999c then even my 3913 (or G26, which would disappoint some of the fan/enthusiasts elsewhere, no doubt). The traditional double action (presently called the AS by Walther) trigger of the 99 series is a fine one, I think, but then I tend to like TDA guns for common defensive gun roles nowadays. I was less interested in the QA variation, myself.

As long as we're talking about strictly personal preferences and opinions, I tend to think the 99 series is at its best when chambered in 9mm, while I think the M&P series was almost "made" for the .45 ACP. A terrific match, as far as I'm concerned.

I've been told that the design of the .45 in the 99 series was only accomplished at great length after S&W was dealing with Walther, and in retrospect it seems like it came a little too late, considering when the M&P project was in the works.

Something I didn't mention ... and which is completely subjective ... is that the over all grip dimensions and height of the SW99 .45 seemed a bit large, especially compared to the M&P 45. Barely more agreeable than the full-size Hk USP 45 I was using at the same time as the SW9945. The ability to change the grip dimensions in the way of the back strap and the palm swell (to some extent) make the M&P a much easier model to 'adjust to', in my opinion, when it comes to the larger size frame required for the .45 ACP.

I've heard from some satisfied owners of the SW99 .45, though ... and the price you quoted seems pretty reasonable, unless the added shipping and registration add too much to it.

Guess it depends how much you'd like to have one, huh?

The magazines are going to remain expensive, of course, but mags for S&W guns generally are fairly expensive.

__________________
Ret LE Firearms inst & armorer

I think $360 is an excellent price for a NIB 99 in 45.

CDNN has 45 mags for $19.99. Smith & Wesson SW99 45acp 9rd Blue Mag New Factory

At one time I owned one of each caliber of the 99's. Of the three, the 45 was my favorite. I shot it best. All of the 99's feel good, but the 45 version felt the best. For the money you are looking at its a great pistol. I wound up selling all three to me brother to finance a move into another brand. I don't remember what I bought then, but I still think fondly of that 99 in 45 acp.

Out West