Picking a S&W M&P40 M2.0 out of the maze of selections available?

While I have owned and shot numerous S&W handguns over the years, I have never been more impressed than with the latest iterations of the M&P semi-autos in .40S&W caliber.
I was able to buy a LE trade-in M1.0 and it has been a joy to shoot. I have fired more than a few thousand rounds thru it with nary a hiccup. It is extremely accurate and very controllable.
I am now looking for an M&P40 M2.0 but am confused by the different models offered and request clarification and some direction in my next purchase.
The first style is characterized by the #11522 and F1SW11883. Classed as a 'compact' with 4.25" barrel, overall length of 7.4", weight of 25.9 oz, and no beavertail grip.
Style #2 is represented by the 209300-FDEBWE and #10189.
Almost identical to style #1 with the 4.25" barrel, but classified as "full size", wt. of 28 oz., and a full beavertail grip, which perhaps explains the length of 7.6"?
And then there is the style #3, represented by the #11595. Also classed as 'full size', with a 5" barrel, length of 8.25". but a weight of only 24.7 ozs., and no beavertail grip.

Note that I am not noting finish, sights (I would replace OEM with tritium inserts), presence of ambi-controls, but all use the M1.0 S&W 15-round .40S&W magazines.

Have any of you fired both the 4.25 and 5" barreled models, with or without the beavertail grip? Is there a noticeable difference between the different models? I am somewhat leaning toward the 5" barrel for the greater velocity advantage/performance.

Weight-differences are not significantly different to select one model over another.

The overall frame size appears unchanged between the styles, other than the barrel lengths, so that is not an issue.

Any noted observations between these models will be greatly appreciated.
Echo47

FWIW I would characterize the 4.25" as "full size" and the 5" as "long slide" and keep the "compact" description for the 3" barreled short framed version. Not that I consider 5" long for a semi but that seems to be the case for the M&P.

"Full size" to me refers to the frame also, which on the 4.25" and 5" barrel are the same.

As an aside, the grip inserts on the 2.0 also work on the 1.0 and have much more grip. I use the large but clip the upper "wing" and blend and stipple to match the rest of the insert. It allows a tad higher hold and for me is noticeably better.

I have the full size and compact, each in 40 S&W with 357 Sig and 9mm added. Am not much on the plastic stuff but the M&P with basic Apex additions is pretty neat.

Echo47 said:

The first style is characterized by the #11522 and F1SW11883. Classed as a 'compact' with 4.25" barrel, overall length of 7.4", weight of 25.9 oz, and no beavertail grip.
Style #2 is represented by the 209300-FDEBWE and #10189.
Almost identical to style #1 with the 4.25" barrel, but classified as "full size", wt. of 28 oz., and a full beavertail grip, which perhaps explains the length of 7.6"?
And then there is the style #3, represented by the #11595. Also classed as 'full size', with a 5" barrel, length of 8.25". but a weight of only 24.7 ozs., and no beavertail grip.

Click to expand...

I searched all of the models listed on S&W's site... All are listed as "Full Size" on the spec sheets... Not sure where you saw 11522 as a compact model...

I’m not sure if perhaps they do their .40 S&W offerings a bit different or not, but my M2.0 Compact in 9mm has a 4 inch barrel and many would consider it to be a full sized pistol. They offer the same gun in a 3.6 inch version as well and I was thinking that both the 4.25 and the 5 inch are considered full size by the factory.

Regardless, you can’t go wrong here. Pick the barrel length that you prefer and go for it. I have what most would consider very big hands (I wear a 2XL glove) and even my compact 9mm allows my full hand to fit on the grip comfortably.

What are you looking for? Once that's known recommendations can be made.
Home defense, concealed carry? What general size? What caliber? etc.


The 2.0s have a better trigger, longer embedded frame reinforcement, more aggressive texturing and a slide catch/release that's improved, depending on who you ask.


There's an M&P for everybody I have a full size 4.6 in. 45 ACP and a compact 3.6 in 9 mm. Both 2.0s and great pistols. It's tough to go wrong with Smith's polymer automatics. That's why they sell zillions of them.

Sku:11691 3.6” compact sku:11684 4” compact


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The S&W M&P M2.0 .40 S&W Compact comes it two barrel lengths. One has a 4 inch barrel and the second has a 3.6 inch barrel. Both have 15 round magazines. M&P(R) M2.0™ Compact | Smith & Wesson

When you look at the full M&P line up, yes there are a bunch of similar looking but different models, I can see where someone could be bewildered by all the choices.

Once you pick your barrel length (and you already said you are going to upgrade the sights) other things to consider are thumb safeties and the LCI (loaded chamber indicator).

The safety I can go either way. I would never keep it engaged so it has to be flicked down to shoot. Not necessary at all.
If I use it, it is while loading/unloading, or shoving the pistol into the holster. Once in the holster the safety goes off.

The dual safeties on my 5 inch were too easy to operate at first. I left it with a gunsmith friend and now the safeties require more force to operate. Never has mine come on inadvertently since.

The LCI I like. I think I remember hearing that some of these M&P features were added for the Military pistol trials requirements.
LCI is a bar that raises up slightly, right above the bolt face on the slide.
You can see, or feel in the dark, if there is a round chambered.

Once the pistol comes out of the safe and I'm using it, it's gonna have one chambered regardless. But I don't see a downside like the part failing, at least I've never heard of the LCI causing other issues.

You didn't mention the length of your M & P .40 1.0 but if it was an LE trade-in it is almost certainly a 4.25", the standard "duty size" pistol.

If it will be strictly a range gun a 5" 2.0 would be a good choice, but if you like the platform and might carry it one of the Compacts with the shorter barrel options and slightly smaller grip frame might be worth considering. A rental range trip may be a good idea? Good luck in your decision.

I bought the 4.25 in 9mm and 40 for winter carry and the 9mm and 40 shields for summer carry.

I have a 5-inch model, which I like, but don’t shoot it a lot. I’ve been well pleased with it. It doesn’t seem to be nearly as ammo sensitive as my 1.0 model. Both were/are 100% reliable with any ammo I tried in them, but the 1.0 FS model didn’t care much accuracy-wise for anything except Winchester Rangers. The 2.0 shoots very well with about everything. Part of that may be that I can get a much firmer grip on the new gun. Anyway, I can recommend the 5-inch 2.0, based on my limited experience.

I thank all who responded to my posting last week.
My research on the available models of the M&P 2.0 was based on sale listings in the various on-line publications, and I now see that some of the information posted by those sites was not correct. I should have accessed the on-line S&W catalog but neglected to do so.
Mea summa culpa.
Notable was the models #11522 and F1SW11883 classified as 'compacts'.
To refine the model I desire, I should clarify that my M&P40 M1.0 has a 4.25 in barrel with beavertail grip. It came with additional interchangeable palmswell grip inserts and three fifteen-round magazines. I was able to purchase a number of additional LE S&W M&P 15-round magazines designed for both the .40S&W and .357Sig rounds, and I like the benefit of the magazines fitting both the M1.0 and M2.0 pistols.

I am now leaning toward the 5 in. barreled pistol so I don't have near-identical M1.0 and M2.0 pistols. It appears the M&P 5 in. barreled pistol is comparable in size to the Colt Govt. model in .45ACP.
The caliber desired remains the .40S&W for better performance over the 9mm, despite what is written about the 'vast improvement of new 9mm fodder' in recent years.
I can handle the recoil of the .40S&W, I am accurate with it, and I prefer that caliber if given a choice.
I am fairly-large-framed and able to carry a .40 FS pistol concealed without issue most months of the year. I usually carry my .40S&W Walter PPS in the summer.
Purpose of the pistol: BOTH home defense AND concealed carry.
The more rounds on my belt, the happier I am.
I've had a state-issued CPL for many years, and have moved from the .38 Spl to a 4" M-66, Colt Govt .45, steel Commander .45, Glock 23 (hated it), Browning Hi-Power 9mm, to my current S&W M&P .40.
Thumb safeties were only an issue with the Browning and the two Colts. I never had an issue carrying 'Condition 1'.
The LCI is also a 'non-issue' since I carried a specially-modified Ruger LC9. I didn't like the LCI on it and filed down the indicator bar.
I think I may have waited too long to buy my M2.0 as I am now finding no M2.0 models available. But I'll keep looking...
Keep them cards coming with your recommendations and suggestions.
Keep 'yer powder dry!
Echo47

For S&W in the M&P line, Full, Compact and Subcompact refer to the frame size, not the length of the barrel. Frame size determines flush mag capacity. So the M&P .40 2.0 Compact holds 13 rounds flush but comes in 2 different barrel lengths, 4" and 3.6". Just like the full holds 15 rounds but has 4.25" and 5" barrels with ported and optics ready options. A nice feature is you can use the longer mags in the smaller frame if one has the compact or subcompact.

As for telling them apart, as you have observed your 1.0 has a beavertail. The 2.0s do not so that's an easy way to differentiate. The 2.0s also have the little windows in the frame just above the rail while the 1.0 does not.

If you can spare a few dollars more, look at the Performance Center. These offer ported vs non-ported and optics ready vs fiber optics. If you think you may go the red dot route as some point, the CORE models are ready to go with adapter plates for various optics and tall sights.

In my case, I have a M&P 1.0 Fullsize (9mm, 4.25") I bought in 2013. Currently it wears a 5" Ported CORE Slide kit with an RMR and a 2.0 trigger. Still not a fan of the hinged trigger but it shoots great.