M&P9 M2.0 Competitor

gsparesa said:

I created a video showing the excessive end-play on the rear of the Competitor's slide. Pay particular attention to the rear of the slide and frame.
Play video Here.

Click to expand...

All of my M&P's do that and it has no effect on accuracy. They call can make fist size holes at 25 yards, and that is only because that's about my accuracy ceiling due to the natural tremor in my hands.

JBerry1119 said:

All of my M&P's do that and it has no effect on accuracy. They call can make fist size holes at 25 yards, and that is only because that's about my accuracy ceiling due to the natural tremor in my hands.

Click to expand...

Laughing-out-laud. Now that there is funny!

JBerry1119 said:

All of my M&P's do that and it has no effect on accuracy. They call can make fist size holes at 25 yards, and that is only because that's about my accuracy ceiling due to the natural tremor in my hands.

Click to expand...

LOL… Now that there is funny!

Gman556 said:

Every single striker fired pistol I have ever owned does this to an extent.

Click to expand...

Then you have been buying garbage striker-fired pistols and have been settling on the inferior. You want a quality striker-fired pistol? Try shooting a H&K VP9 OR Tactical. No perceived slop and an awesome precise shooter. Precision accuracy of the S&W Competitor is not in the same league as the H&K VP9 OR Tactical.

gsparesa said:

Then you have been buying garbage striker-fired pistols and have been settling on the inferior. You want a quality striker-fired pistol? Try shooting a H&K VP9 OR Tactical. No perceived slop and an awesome precise shooter. Precision accuracy of the S&W Competitor is not in the same league as the H&K VP9 OR Tactical.

Click to expand...

I own 3 HK's, USP 45/ USP 4O/ HK 45c.

I also had a VP 40 which was garbage and would split brand spanking new factory cases only once fired. HK had determined the chamber was out of spec.

I also just remembered my very first HK 45c was getting fresh unfired rds stuck in the chamber causing me to have to use quite a bit of force to open the slide to unload it whenever I got home. That being said that gun live fired flawlessly and never had any FTE or FTF's ect. HK determined that that one had to tight of a chamber, and told me not to fire it anymore and replaced the barrel.

So I guess you're right I did buy a garbage pistol when I bought those two HK's.

I still have the 45c though so I guess I'm still using garbage pistols than right?

I believe we were talking about striker-fired pistols. You said, "Every single striker fired pistol I have ever owned does this to an extent." Why are you trying to defend your offset position by bringing up hammer fired pistols. What striker-fired pistols do you own that have the same issue as the S&W Competitor? If you don't like H&K, try the Walther PDP. "Mucho betta" than the S&W Competitor.

gsparesa said:

I believe we were talking about striker-fired pistols. You said, "Every single striker fired pistol I have ever owned does this to an extent." Why are you trying to defend your offset position by bringing up hammer fired pistols. What striker-fired pistols do you own that have the same issue as the S&W Competitor? If you don't like H&K, try the Walther PDP. "Mucho betta" than the S&W Competitor.

Click to expand...

You came back into this thread to simply just belittle me here. Making the assumption that I only buy junk pistols? No?

The point I was trying to make is that all of us are capable of purchasing a lemon every now and then no matter the brand.

To me it's kind of ironic being that you own the Smith & Wesson competitor which you yourself posted a video of the issue you are having with it's slide.

All I did was post that I was having the same problem as you are with my M&P 2.0 9mm

I even verified that I could see your problem as plain as day when another member here criticized you for not taking a good enough video.

And here you are insulting my firearm purchasing capabilities.

gsparesa
I picked mine up yesterday. It kinda reminds me of my Walther PPK/S. Except the Walther is much better machined, whereas the Smith looks like it was cast. I do like the titanium finish on the Smith.
I was not happy with the back of the slide end play between the slide and frame.

Click to expand...

gsparesa
I created a video showing the excessive end-play on the rear of the Competitor's slide. Pay particular attention to the rear of the slide and frame.

Click to expand...

Yes, I made an error purchasing this firearm. That is why I'm telling everyone here not to make the same mistake. I wanted so bad for this pistol to be worthy of my collection since it is a pistol made in USA. When I want a pistol real bad and I see it in the LGS, the need to own it overcomes my concerns for checking the gun out thoroughly. The problem is so horrible that it makes it difficult to dry-fire. You never know if it was the gun or myself. Especially while using the RMR and the MantisX.

I RMA'd the pistol back to S&W last week. I want them to fix the torquing slide to the left after the trigger is pulled problem and the loose plastic front strap. I am not hopeful that any of this gets resolved by S&W.
What I find interesting is that some shooters seem to think that this is perfectly fine. Saying things like, "My other striker-fire pistols do the same thing", "Its accurate enough" or my favorite "as long as its consistent, its not a problem". I guess these people don't give a hoot about precision just speed and it doesn't jam. Or, they could just suck at shooting and really can't tell the difference. I tell these guys try shooting a HK VP9 Tactical OR. This is how a striker fired pistol should shoot. Very good trigger and a decent precision shooter. If you don't like HK,try a Walther PDP.

gsparesa said:

Yes, I made an error purchasing this firearm. That is why I'm telling everyone here not to make the same mistake. I wanted so bad for this pistol to be worthy of my collection since it is a pistol made in USA. When I want a pistol real bad and I see it in the LGS, the need to own it overcomes my concerns for checking the gun out thoroughly. The problem is so horrible that it makes it difficult to dry-fire. You never know if it was the gun or myself. Especially while using the RMR and the MantisX.

I RMA'd the pistol back to S&W last week. I want them to fix the torquing slide to the left after the trigger is pulled problem and the loose plastic front strap. I am not hopeful that any of this gets resolved by S&W.
What I find interesting is that some shooters seem to think that this is perfectly fine. Saying things like, "My other striker-fire pistols do the same thing", "Its accurate enough" or my favorite "as long as its consistent, its not a problem". I guess these people don't give a hoot about precision just speed and it doesn't jam. Or, they could just suck at shooting and really can't tell the difference. I tell these guys try shooting a HK VP9 Tactical OR. This is how a striker fired pistol should shoot. Very good trigger and a decent precision shooter. If you don't like HK,try a Walther PDP.

Click to expand...

I'm not sure if you saw my post in another thread here, or maybe it was this one? I gotta go back and read, but installing an apex fitted barrel made this problem go away which led me to believe that it is a barrel to slide fit issue from the factory.

My 7 yard group i.e. 21 feet was just a tad over an inch now.

At 25 yards my best groups that day were 2 1/2 to 3 inches.

My HK 45c grouped just as tight as my 1911's and the slide on that is not as tight and designed for reliability, so this is why I said some guns it affects their accuracy and some it doesn't.

Your thread here helped me in my decision to not get a competitor model, so I thank you for that.

I really want to try a Walther PDP in 45 ACP because from what I read they are very accurate from right out of the box, and have a great trigger also.

Only downfall with that model is its not easy to find any kind of holsters for due to everything being for 9 mm now days.

Hell I might even try an HK VP again because I'm not sure if I want to purchase anymore M&P s.

Glocks are out because I just don't like them.

Yes there are shooters here and everywhere that are satisfied with "combat" accuracy and I don't find anything wrong with that.

I like to have both.

There are a few bull's-eye shooters at my club that wouldn't last two seconds in a real gunfight but they can get some really tight groups. One of them even came running over to my bay one time when I was running drills and tried to tell me that my gun was "doubling". I tried to explain to him that I was running drills, double taps etc. and I just couldn't get it through his head. Sad and scary thing is is he is one of our instructors that gives CCW pistol classes.

Anyways I hope Smith & Wesson sends that thing back to you in better condition and it satisfies your needs.

Watch “The Full Neilson” demolish the luster of the S&W M&P 2.0 Competitor ($999.00 MSRP) against the Canik SFx Rival-S ($899.99 MSRP). The S&W Competitor, no competition against the Canik Rival-S. Click the links below:

[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pcJ0PuGCxXY"]Canik Rival SFX S Vs Smith & Wesson Metal 2 0 Competitor Part 1[/ame]

[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mZhazj3o-7Q"]Canik Rival SFX S Vs Smith & Wesson Metal 2 0 Competitor Part 2[/ame]

Wow… it really is sad that gun that is supposed to be the top of the line from an American Icon like Smith & Wesson but can’t compete with a *** like a Canik, if that is in fact the case.

But it appears this gun suffers from some of the issues many of us have found with Smith & Wesson lately, the biggest of which is their terrible customer service. I can deal with a new gun having some minor problems, but I can’t deal with them not fixing them. Especially on something like a Performance Center Gun.

It's going to be interesting to see how S&W reacts to those who have sent back their Competitor concerning the problem with the slide movement when the trigger is pressed. Will S&W say that it is normal or will they do something about it? I guess we'll see.

Just for comparison I checked my M&P 2.0 Compact 3.6" to see if it exhibited the same shift. I realize we are comparing an all metal pistol to a polymer framed pistol, but since the designs are so similar I don't think that should really make a difference.

My 3.6" showed ZERO movement when the trigger was pulled. I very carefully watched and could see absolutely no movement, and mine is just a run of the mill normal M&P, and not a Performance Center version.

I also checked my older M&P 40 Compact. It did show an almost imperceptible bit of movement. Interesting.

I hope the OP keeps us informed on S&Ws actions on this.

I don't have any of the 2.0 metal frame guns but I do have a 2.0 Compact 4 inch that exhibits the same behavior as shown in the videos. However, I can also get the gun to behave more erratically by either having an empty magazine in the gun (the spring tension on the slide stop steadies the slide) or by having a magazine loaded with dummy rounds for dry fire (the dummy rounds add pressure to the bottom of the slide due to magazine spring tension).

Here are my random results with 3 of the different polymer guns I had around.

S&W M&P 2.0 Compact 4inch:
Empty Chamber/No Magazine - slide consistently twitches left to right upon striker release
Empty Chamber/Empty Magazine - considerably reduced left to right twitch, still there sometimes
Dummy round chambered/Dummy rounds in magazine - random slight movement upon striker release, some times right to left, left to right, or sometimes no movement

Glock 19 Gen3:
Empty Chamber/No Magazine - slide moves upward upon striker release
Empty Chamber/Empty Magazine - no perceptible movement
Dummy round chambered/Dummy rounds in magazine - no perceptible movement

CZ P10c:
Empty Chamber/No Magazine - slight twitch right to left when taking slack out of trigger, no twitch on striker release
Empty Chamber/Empty Magazine - slight twitch right to left on striker release
Dummy round chambered/Dummy rounds in magazine - no perceptible movement

All of the guns that were fully empty (nothing chambered, no magazine) all exhibited some kind of slight movement on striker release. I would say its a good bet most striker guns will do this to some degree.

However, if we simulate conditions of actually firing the gun with dummy rounds in a magazine and a dummy round chambered, 2 of my 3 sample guns tightened up quite a bit and showed very little if any movement.

In the simulated firing condition, the S&W 2.0 still showed a larger degree of movement compared to the CZ and G19 in my comparison. Perhaps more unfortunate, in my case the M&P wasn't consistent in the movement thus more likely to make the results harder to "zero out" of the gun.

The sideways movement is part of the trigger system on MOST striker fired guns. If you look at the underside of the rear half of the slide you'll see a ttrack that forces the trigger bar to reset as the slide moves.

This is part of the trigger bar disconnecting from the sear as it also drops the sear from the tail of the striker.

Now as for slide movement when the trigger breaks, I have two Smiths, one a 1.0 compact and the second a 2.0 Pro CORE. The 1.0 has just barely preceptable movement when the trigger breaks, the Pro has just slightly more.

Both group acceptable to me, 2 inches at 15 for the compact and 2.5 at 25 for the Pro. The MP series are NOT PPC or bullseye guns by any means, they are police/civiian duty and self defense guns. If you want a PPC gun then buy a PPC gun.

I don't buy the argument that the slide to frame fit is going to significantly affect the accuracy of the gun. I love a tight fit as much as anyone else, but with a semi-auto it's the barrel to slide fit (and the tightness of the barrel lockup when the slide is in battery) that's really going to matter. After all, the sights are mounts on the slide—so what the sights are aimed at is what the slide will be aimed at. If the barrel tracks accurately with the slide, then the rest shouldn't be a significant factor in this equation.

I regularly run my M&P 2.0 Competitor at 20 yards, and I've not noticed any differences in accuracy between it and some of my higher end 1911s.

Mike

@gsparesa....Thanks for taking the time for doing the comparison videos on the S&W Competitor and the Canik Rival-S. It is truly eye opening.

As much as I hate to say it, it really shows how much better designed firearm the Rival-S is over the Competitor. I have always been and will continue to be a S&W fan, but they could have done better with the Competitor design. It's not that it doesn't look great and is still a quality firearm, but when shown feature after feature of the Canik vs the S&W, I think it's clear that the Canik is the winner. Time after time the Canik shows design features that are just better done and of much higher quality than the somewhat cheesy designs used on the Competitor. The grip panel designs and the Cerekote vs the hard chrome finish on the Canik are light years ahead of the S&W.

I had put the Competitor as well as the Rival-S on my to get list but I maybe removing the Competitor. I do own a Canik Rival (non metal version) and it is truly a quality built firearm. I can believe that the Rival-S is even better.

The only part that I am split on is the assertion that the slide to frame shift is to blame for accuracy problems. As first-model points out, since the barrel is locked solidly in the slide at the point of firing, I'm not sure if the slide to frame movement is the cause of the inaccuracies. While the movement is concerning, it would happen after the pistol has fired.

On the other hand, even though the barrel and slide and sights are locked together on firing, when the slide is pushed back if it doesn't track true, then it could cause the slide to shift and throw the shot off target. And since your video does show side to side movement of the slide on the frame, that would account for your target hits varying horizontally.

I feel that the M&P design is not really a bullseye competition style pistol and as such is not designed for a high degree of accuracy, but is geared for more of a dependable self defense usage. I'm not arguing with you, I'm just saying that I'm not 100% convinced one way or the other.

Keep us posted on what S&W has to say when they return yours.

rbuzz said:

@gsparesa....Thanks for taking the time for doing the comparison videos on the S&W Competitor and the Canik Rival-S. It is truly eye opening.

Click to expand...

The comparison is good, but I'd argue that it's somewhat apples-to-oranges.

The Rival-S is built on the CZ-75 platform, which is a much more "traditional" metal framed pistol. It's going to trend more towards the 1911 build ethic in that it's going to demand precision fit-and-finish to work properly. I like the CZ-75 and keep an SP-01 Tactical in my regular range gun rotation, but it has its limitations.

The M&P Competitor is based on a Glock style polymer frame. The Metal Series replaces some of the frame plastic with metal, but it's still designed around a looser fit between the slide and the frame—largely to accommodate the needs of a LEO/military duty gun (which is precisely what the M&P was originally designed to be). This includes being able to run for thousands of rounds with little to no maintenance. Because of this, it's a gun that will withstand a tremendous amount of abuse—and will perhaps sacrifice a small bit of accuracy for that.

And before people squawk at me: I know that the CZ-75 is a tried-and-proven platform that can run hard. And I know that Glocks and M&Ps do fail. But I think my general observations here are accurate. At least, it would explain why the vast majority of LEO agencies have dumped revolvers and metal framed pistols (like third gen S&Ws) for Glocks and M&Ps.

I think the M&P Competitor was intended more for "action" style competition, such as IDPA and USPSA. 50 yard bullseye level accuracy isn't going to be important for that type of shooting.

In terms of precision bullseye shooting: I'm not sure that I'd pick any Glock/M&P/polymer based platform for that. The variations you're seeing at 7 yards are going to be increased by seven-fold at fifty yards, and that's going to frustrate you, as you'll be limited more by your equipment than by your skill. I'd be building a custom revolver for that sort of shooting, or I'd look for a nice 1970s era PPC build.

Mike

first-model said:

I don't buy the argument that the slide to frame fit is going to significantly affect the accuracy of the gun. I love a tight fit as much as anyone else, but with a semi-auto it's the barrel to slide fit (and the tightness of the barrel lockup when the slide is in battery) that's really going to matter. After all, the sights are mounts on the slide—so what the sights are aimed at is what the slide will be aimed at. If the barrel tracks accurately with the slide, then the rest shouldn't be a significant factor in this equation.

I regularly run my M&P 2.0 Competitor at 20 yards, and I've not noticed any differences in accuracy between it and some of my higher end 1911s.

Mike

Click to expand...

Mike,
I agree totally that the repeatability of the barrel to the slide (or sights) is accuracy. However, if I’m understanding this correctly, the claim is that the slide is moving when the trigger breaks. If that movement is repeatable, it would not impact accuracy. But I doubt that is the case. I doubt if the slide is moving, its repeatable every time?

But I agree that these aren’t as accurate as I’m accustomed to with revolvers. But I constantly see folks on the gun forums claiming their M&P’s or Glocks are as accurate as a 6” 686. That isn’t my experience, not even close, but I realize that could just be me.

first-model said:

The comparison is good, but I'd argue that it's somewhat apples-to-oranges.

The Rival-S is built on the CZ-75 platform, which is a much more "traditional" metal framed pistol. It's going to trend more towards the 1911 build ethic in that it's going to demand precision fit-and-finish to work properly. I like the CZ-75 and keep an SP-01 Tactical in my regular range gun rotation, but it has its limitations.

The M&P Competitor is based on a Glock style polymer frame. The Metal Series replaces some of the frame plastic with metal, but it's still designed around a looser fit between the slide and the frame—largely to accommodate the needs of a LEO/military duty gun (which is precisely what the M&P was originally designed to be). This includes being able to run for thousands of rounds with little to no maintenance. Because of this, it's a gun that will withstand a tremendous amount of abuse—and will perhaps sacrifice a small bit of accuracy for that.

And before people squawk at me: I know that the CZ-75 is a tried-and-proven platform that can run hard. And I know that Glocks and M&Ps do fail. But I think my general observations here are accurate. At least, it would explain why the vast majority of LEO agencies have dumped revolvers and metal framed pistols (like third gen S&Ws) for Glocks and M&Ps.

I think the M&P Competitor was intended more for "action" style competition, such as IDPA and USPSA. 50 yard bullseye level accuracy isn't going to be important for that type of shooting.

In terms of precision bullseye shooting: I'm not sure that I'd pick any Glock/M&P/polymer based platform for that. The variations you're seeing at 7 yards are going to be increased by seven-fold at fifty yards, and that's going to frustrate you, as you'll be limited more by your equipment than by your skill. I'd be building a custom revolver for that sort of shooting, or I'd look for a nice 1970s era PPC build.

Mike

Click to expand...

I think the comparison was made not to compare apples and oranges but more on the fact that both pistols are competition oriented versions that were based on what were originally polymer firearms rather than a firearm designed for any specific type of competition.

It had little to do with what the original platform they were based on but was more an extension of how two different manufacturers took their existing polymer based firearms and turned them into a premium all metal version.

I think it's important to note that both manufacturers upgraded existing metal designs and offer them at almost identical prices. I'm sure that which firearm is the better of the two is open to opinion.

I'm pretty sure I mentioned above pretty clearly that my slide stopped moving while dry firing as soon as I fitted an apex barrel to it.

I'm not sure if you saw my post in another thread here, or maybe it was this one? I gotta go back and read, but installing an apex fitted barrel made this problem go away which led me to believe that it is a barrel to slide fit issue from the factory.

Click to expand...

I understand that this particular firearm that the OP is talking about in this thread isn't designed for Bullseye accuracy But those seven yard groups are pretty crappy.