What is new/different about the M&P 2.0? Saw it advertised the other day and wondered what changes they made if any.

I dont own a 2.0 yet but am seriously considering it.

So can only add info from the SW site if that helps ya:



ABOUT M&P® M2.0™

"Designed for personal, sporting, and professional use, the M&P M2.0 delivers an entirely new platform, introducing innovative features in nearly every aspect of the pistol, including trigger, grip, frame, and finish. Highlights of the M&P M2.0 pistol include an extended stainless-steel chassis and high grip to barrel bore axis ratio for reduced muzzle rise and faster aim recovery.

The M&P M2.0 pistol further improves performance with a fine-tuned, crisper trigger, lighter pull and a tactile and audible reset. The pistol, available in three calibers, includes an aggressively-textured grip and four interchangeable palmswell inserts for optimal hand-fit and trigger reach. The striker-fire, semi-automatic polymer pistol is available in matte black or FDE – Flat Dark Earth – finishes, and includes two magazines, a limited lifetime warranty and a lifetime service policy."

Main differences in a nutshell are the grip texture, lack of the beaver tail, some metal reinforcement in the dust cover/rail area, and the interface between the trigger bar and sear is a little different.

Everything the others mentioned plus it has a redesigned Slide Stop to help prevent the slide from going forward and chambering a round when the mag is vigorously inserted, some call it "Auto-Forwarding".

Yeah, I forgot about the slide stop. Kind of a funky looking thing with that little tension lever or whatever it is.

I handled one the other day @ my LGS, wasn't impressed. The textured grip is nice but other then that, will keep my FS40.. I actually like the beaver tail, with the 2.0 felt like my big hands were going right up into the slide.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

And I'm the opposite. I didn't like the beaver tail on the original M&P. In fact, I actually removed it from my last one.

Oh, and for the OP, one other difference with the 2.0 is it has a metal magazine catch instead of plastic.

The original has a metal mag catch.

__________________
Freedom isn't free.

Mine didn't. It's in the post above yours.

From the Search feature of this Forum:

M 2.0 differences. What are they?

Are you sure? I don't think it would work if the mag catch were all plastic. Check this out:

The green arrow is pointing to the catch. It's a metal tab encapsulated by polymer. This is why many think it's plastic when it's really not.

If the new 2.0 is all metal, that's better. But that doesn't mean the original was bad.

__________________
Freedom isn't free.

Thanks for the help. Looking at the pictures post it looks like they changed the trigger unless the one is after market.

The picture in post #8 is an original M&P with an Apex trigger.

__________________
Freedom isn't free.

Sorry. I think we had a misunderstanding. Yes, the original used a plastic piece with a metal insert. The 2.0 the whole thing is made of metal.

I never had an issue with the original magazine catch and haven't heard any reports of issues. Not sure exactly why they went to the solid metal one but they did.

Correct. Thanks.

Haven't gone through the 2.0 armorer module for the M&P line (it wasn't yet being offered as a field class, just after the 2.0 had been released).

I've spoken with one of our guys who owns a couple of them and has been shooting the dickens out of them. I've also briefly discussed it with someone at the factory, once they were allowed to discuss it outside the factory.

I've only handled one of them, but not yet had the opportunity to get in any range time.

Without giving up any particular secrets, as it were ...

The new slide stop design is incorporated in the frame's sub-chassis. Very interesting. I like it. That makes 3 slide stop/spring designs in the M&P line now, meaning the original, the shield and the 2.0's.

We were told the lengthening of the front locking block's frame rails, and the lengthening of the sub-chassis (further into the dust cover) also helps delay unlocking, and offers the potential for improved accuracy. (Delayed unlocking was a feature of the TSW line, you'll remember, claimed to reduce felt recoil and improve accuracy.)

The new trigger design is interesting, but I'd like to get more than just a cursory glance at it. My friend who owns a pair of 2.0's (LE firearms instructor and a M&P armorer, himself), said that both of his 2.0's are amazingly accurate (as are his regular, original M&P's, though), but the triggers surprised him by being at virtually opposite ends of the normal +/- tolerance range.

One has a trigger pull that's down at the really light and smooth end, and the other is noticeably heavier. Well, to be fair, the original M&P's had an allowable (+) or (-) of 2lbs above or below the standard average weight listed (for caliber, as the .45 had a slightly heavier baseline standard weight than the 9/.40/.357). Dunno about the 2.0's, yet, as I haven't gone through the armorer class.

He said the new trigger design/linkage also seems to offer a different sort of "stacking" before trigger break occurs, but that's probably as much a subjective perception as anything.

I'll be curious to see how it feels when I can spend some range time with one. It subtly set a little better in my hand, in some way, just holding it and examining it. Curious to see how it feels in live-fire.

Not so much a fan of the more aggressive texturing, but that seems to be the trend, at the moment. The extra grip insert is a nice addition, and a minor reduction of the frame's grip tang probably isn't unwelcome.

__________________
Ret LE Firearms inst & armorer

I've only had mine for a couple of months. It's seen two range sessions and one IDPA match and has right around 400 rounds through it. So far I'm really liking it.

My opinion is if you're in the market for a new polymer framed, striker fired pistol the M&P would be hard to beat for the price. If you already own an M&P I honestly wouldn't suggest you run out and upgrade to the 2.0. While the improvements to the 2.0 are nice, they are also fairly subtle. Well, except maybe for the grip texture. That one is pretty noticeable.

That ugly (in my opinion) beaver tail always kept me away from the M&P. The lack of afore mentioned tail in the 2.0 caught my eye right away. So much so that I bought one with the 4.25" barrel, no thumb safety. I love it.

Why don't people like the beaver tail? Is it just looks or is there some functionality detractor that I'm missing?

__________________
Freedom isn't free.

It is totally irrational I know but for me its just looks. I find the beaver tail hideous. Had S&W left it on the 2.0, I would have bought another Glock. Heck, I'm even thinking of getting a 2.0 in .45 ACP. The only thing holding me back is 10 rounds on the S&W as compared to the Glock 21 which holds 13.

No big deal for me. I didn't like it being longer than necessary for my normal sized hands. I Dremeled off the portion that offended me. I think it carries a little better AIWB without the extra unnecessary length poking me.

So I purchased the M&P 2.0 about 6 months ago and its been a great gun so far. The main differences from the new 2.0 compared to older models would have to be the grip texture for sure as well as the added rigidity in the frame. Also, the slide rails are much beefier on the 2.0 which I think would help stability as well. One other MAIN difference is the way the sear is engaged. There is now a c shaped "actuator" that surrounds the side of the sear. When the actuator is pushed back, the sear then depresses, releasing the striker. Seems to work great, only thing is, the 2.0 trigger bar is not adjustable like the older models if I'm not mistaken. Overall, a great gun so far.

Would you please post a picture of this "actuator" for us?

__________________
Freedom isn't free.

http://i73.photobucket.com/albums/i2...sgquvug3l.jpeg

Here is picture of the C "actuator" I'm talking about. The actuator surrounds the M&P sear lobe...once it is engaged by the trigger bar, the actuator pulls the sear lobe upwards, depressing the sear in the rear... and of course releasing the firing pin.

With the Apex sear, I noticed the lobe of the sear actually sits about 2 millimeters forward within the actuator compared to the original M&P sear that fits snuggly in the actuator. It did not affect functionality whatsoever but it bothered me. I like a nice tight fit. I ended up doing some mild work to the stock M&P 2.0 sear to smooth it out, similiar to the APEX sear, which resulted in my trigger pull actually being pretty much almost the same as what the Apex sear would have given me.

Like I've said before, this is not to say anything against APEX parts, they are fantastic and I will always believe that. This is just something I noticed.

Let me know what you guys think.

I put an Apex trigger in my 2.0, was not impressed at all, put the stock back in, I hope they come out with some more stuff for the 2.0.

Is there any plan for S&W to make the M&P Compact in the 2.0 version?

They company has become very good at keeping their plans under wraps.

When this very question was asked at an armorer recert, the only answer offered was that there are probably some very interesting and exciting things in store as the year progresses.

__________________
Ret LE Firearms inst & armorer

Could someone please enlighten me why the state of California will not allow me to purchase one of these? I'm not LEO.

Because guns are evil?

Because ANY change in a firearm requires the company to resubmit for approval by the Attorney General's office for sale in Califonistan. S&W may have submitted, or not, but they do not dictate approval or the time it takes the state bureaucrats to review the gun and issue their ruling.

__________________
Who watches the watchers?

I have had mine now for a few months. Just recently I shot 2 boxes of 50 each aluminum case rounds. That beast ate every one of them without a hiccup!

Attached Images

0224170903a.jpg (118.3 KB, 42 views)

It's because they don't have the microstamp.

__________________
Freedom isn't free.

Are you referring to the digital matrix barcode on the slide?

No, it's a CA thing.

__________________
Freedom isn't free.

I got to handle a FS9 2.0 at a gun show today.
I am NOT a fan of the stippling at all.
Worse than the Gen 4 Glocks, IMHO.
To each his own, so I'll stick with my 1.0 series, thank you.

Microstamping is a technology by which the chamber imprints each cartridge case with a unique number or mark as it is fired. The theory being that it's a fingerprint of the gun, and so can be used to solve crimes as criminals leave their empty cases behind at their crime scenes.

No new guns can be added to the CA good gun list unless they incorporate this technology, and AFAIK no gun maker has yet incorporated it into their production. Hence, no new guns have been added to the list since the microstamping requirement became effective. And since it costs money to keep a gun ON the list year after year, manufacturers tend to stop re-listing guns when sales don't warrant the continued cost.

So the number of different handguns which can be sold legally in CA has been dropping. Something which I'm sure the powers that be in Sacramento consider a feature, not a bug, in the law.

My wife's Shield did this a couple of times. I have never had this happen with any other M&Ps or while I was shooting it.

All of the above is true. The biggest thing you will notice is the more aggressive grip stippling. That, and your wallet will be lighter.