Hello there,
This forum is great lots of info!
I am a newbie in the world of polymers and I have noticed that some fellows are putting recoil buffers inside the frame. Each make has an specific design so Glock has it's specifics and SW has it's own too, they are too different designs doing the same thing.

Now, I have found a lot of information about recoil buffers for glocks and other pistols (1911, sigs, etc) but nothing for the MP's, nothing even in this forum.

Could someone tell me if the polymer frame in the mp9 tends to deform after certain amount of shots (like glocks do for instance). Glocks deform where the metal slide comes in contact with the frame (right in front of the trigger group - aprox -) Here is a photo from another FORUM I am a member of in Canada.
CanadianGunNutz.com

There you can see the difference between a glock with and without the recoil buffer.

Has anyone tried these recoil buffers on the mp9 or mp40?
There is one for sale in amazon here:
Amazon.com : Strike Industries Frame Shock Buffer for SMITH&WESSON M&P M&P9, M&P40, M&P45(Not for all Model) : Hunting And Shooting Equipment : Sports & Outdoors@@AMEPARAM@@http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/31ndFLMBQ5L.@@AMEPARAM@@31ndFLMBQ5L

It is obvious that this type of accesorie works well in the GLOCK but I like to know if anyone has tried them in the mp9, or even better, maybe the mps do not need this gimmick?
Have you notice any wear in your mp frame after certain amount of shooting?

Thanks!

None of those guns were designed with a shock buffer. They are not necessary and there is no proof that they even help.

What has been proven is that the buffer can interfere with the operation of the gun if not properly tuned.

I have used them. I won't use them anymore.

__________________
Freedom isn't free.

Not necessary. May induce a malfunction. Solution to non-existent problem that may cause a problem.

well, there is proof of deformations/wear happening to the Glocks after thousands of rounds, they still function though but they might go out of service at certain point.

See the photos in my first post (link to canadian gun nutz) where it's shown what I am talking about.

I wonder if any of you could show//upload photos of an MP after thousands of rounds, to see if there is wear/deformity of the frame.

Thank you.

Todd Green put over 60,000 rounds through an M&P9-the ongoing reports and pictures are on his website. I don't recall anything about frame damage. I couldn't pull up your pictures. I'm at work, so I can't check, but the M&P design uses a stainless steel chassis, I expect that takes any/all recoil forces.

I'll also comment that while, if you pay close attention to the buffers and change them before they start getting ratty, they may do something to minimize frame battering. However, I've also seen a number of 1911s that ran buffers and had cracks in the dust covers from the buffers. I've also had a semi rifle I tried buffers in and they caused my optical sights to lose zero in about 20 rounds. Removing the buffer terminated the problem. I expect buffers are like a lot of things, a way to make people spend money on things that may/may not provide an improvement.

Not only that, there are well documented reports of 9mm Glock 17s going 500,000 rounds without such a device, and the Pistol-Trainer test of the M&P was stopped at about 63,000 rounds.

They are just not needed, and can cause a host of other issues.

The link in the OP only works if you're a member of that board. I don't want to join a forum just to see some pics.

Do you have any proof that a buffer would have prevented the problems you saw?

__________________
Freedom isn't free.

Ok thanks, here is the link:
pistol-training.com * Blog Archive * M&P Endurance Test Ends

There are no photos of the frame though. They do mention the slide cracked (which happened to a few mps) but I am not worried about that since SW seems to take responsibility of this and replace the slide no questions asked.

yes, there are photos of 2 different Glocks, one with buffer and one without. The one with buffer looks VERY good and the one without shows lots of wear.

the thread I am talking about talks about different mods that are being done on a Glock (very cool thread that I encourage you to see). One of the mods is the buffer. That is why I have decided to ask the SW pros here for some advice about it. It seems to work on the glocks very well.

They might no be needed but they do prevent wear on the frame, at least on the Glocks.

Why not just post the pics here? I'd like to see them.

__________________
Freedom isn't free.

Here are the photos, please follow the link in my first post to see the original thread if you'd like (you might need to register if you are not a member), in the meantime here are the photos for the sake of entertainment.

Buffers are a cure looking for a problem, spring the gun properly for the load used and change out every 3-5,000rds. If it makes you feel better that a 1/8" of polymer is going to work wonders in your gun go for it, I refer to it as "Marketing".

It's an interesting idea. It does look like it would increase the pressure needed to fully rack the slide by hand.

Someone makes a recoil buffer replacement slide spring. This is suppose to reduce the felt recoil and reduce muzzle lift.

A recoil spring for every season is also outstanding marketing without real benefit-except to the gents selling the widgets. The factories that make the pistols spend a lot of development money on engineering talent and product testing. I'd believe that they have a much better idea about suitable spring rates than Sammy the Springmaker. On the other hand, you do have to wonder about an engineer who decides to stop a speeding steel object with plastic. Hope that guy also didn't determine the spring rate on Glocks.

Perhaps one should reflect that stuff like the photos illustrate are why S&W uses a replacable steel chassis instead of casting the rails into a plastic frame.

Good point! and that is where I wanted to go with this. So no matter whether the slide hits the frame or not, if something happens you could still replace the steel chasis and keep going, or does the damage on the frame affects the proper function of the gun?
I do think that there is a lot of enginnering put into the gun design, but at the same time they have to sell guns. I am not sure about the recoil buffer being a complete gimmick though.
I like to see photos of a SW after 10 thousand rounds and see how that frame is holding up.

OK, got the opportunity to pull my own M&P down and I have to eat a bit of crow-maybe. I also unintentionally mis-used the term chassis when I stated it was replaceable. If you check out the S&W website, you can find a picture of the chassis that is cast into the plastic grip frame to reinforce it. The user replaceable parts are the trigger and sear blocks that also have the frame rails as an integral part. This is significantly different from the Glock design.

The recoil shoulder in the M&P grip frame is indeed plastic. Without a scale present in the Glock pix, I can't evaluate dimensions. However, there is considerably more material behind the shoulder in the M&P. Without an X-ray, I can't figure out exactly where the steel chassis is.

I don't have an accurate round count out of either my duty M&P40 or my personal M&P9. I'd estimate in the 5K rounds area on the 9. I have to look very hard to see any evidence of contact, much less deformation. Basically, you could simply trim off swaged out plastic and keep going. If it gets battered too badly, I expect S&W would replace it under warranty.

BTW, everything has a life expectancy. Guns do, in fact, wear out. Quality guns take longer.

I have some pistols that are designed and delivered with buffers. They work fine.

I tried some of the aftermarket buffers for guns that were NOT designed for buffers and ran into problems with malfunctions and early failure of the buffers. The customer service at Paraord immediately said "throw away the buffer, our guns will not work with them." My gunsmith showed me that just sticking in a buffer messed up the spring length in a Colt, and could cause bottoming and MORE impact to the frame, with early buffer failure, unless spring and guide rod were changed also.

Just randomly sticking buffers into pistols without considering the entire engineering of the action and recoil system can cause function problems or early failure.

So if you are qualified to re-engineer your gun, go ahead.

However, the number one reason people quit my IDPA matches is that they "improve" a perfectly good stock pistol until it is so unreliable it won't make it through a match without choking.

__________________
Science plus Art

it would seem to me that if a weapon designer and manufacturer (like S&W) felt that their product M&P pistol needed a little plastic buffer to survive countless firings in order to avoid warranty repairs THEY WOULD PUT ONE IN THERE AT THE FACTORY AND WARN THE USER TO ALWAYS USE IT. but what do I know--i'm just a 76 year old fart.

I have use shock buffers in my .45 Colts but only when shooting at the range and then buffer comes out when the gun is home or is my CCW.. I have seen buffers cause feeding issues tie a gun up and also have see a stuck open slide.. There is no place for a buffer in a self defence weapon unless it came that way from the factory... My .02 worth ! George

The last time I talked to the folks at Gunsite, who perhaps see quite a few different guns and quite a lot of rounds downrange, and who also have a gunsmithy on the premises, they pretty well said that the "shok buff" type of buffers have frequently "disintegrated" causing the gun to tie up and malfunction. Those in favor of the things say that it would not happen if they were replace, and perhaps this is so, but who wants to keep track since Glocks are known to go hundreds of thousands of rounds without the kind of damage the buff is designed to prevent.

For my purposes, a pistol that will go that long without the device does not need one, especially if it can tear up and do harm by causing malfunctions.

Like the full length guide rod on the 1911, the shok buff is a solution to a non-existent problem designed to make money for the seller.

I know this is a somewhat old thread but has anyone actually tested one of these buffers on a M&P? I mean for $10 plus shipping I think it would be at least worth testing fit, function, and durability before saying it's not needed on our guns or that it will cause malfunctions. I will agree that when these style buffers degrade they can have the potential to cause problems but that's up to the user performing regular maintenance to decide.

I do plan to purchase and test one of these in the next few months on my already highly modified M&P40 and let you know what I think and compare my results to the manufacturers claims.

__________________
Later,
Hock

We've already seen M&Ps go over 30,000 rounds with no appreciable damage or excessive wear. The owners of those guns will probably put over 100,000 through them in time. They didn't use shock buffs.

What do you hope to gain with this buffer?

__________________
Freedom isn't free.