Is the M&P carried by the military?

JamesArthur60

JamesArthur60

US Veteran
Joined
Dec 2, 2008
Messages
1,332
Reaction score
312
Location
Columbus, OH
This question came up and I don't know the answer. If the American military sidearm of choice is not the current S&W model M&P, but is for many police agencies, why call it the Military & Police model? My best guess is, since S&W had provided a gun model for the military in the past, they simply reacquired the name for product advertisement purposes. Right or wrong?
 
Register to hide this ad
The original Military & Police revolver, for which the current series of pistols and rifles is named, was was originally designed for the military trials around 1900. It was originally beat out by Colt revolvers, but thousands of M&Ps were used in WWII as the famous "Victory Model". The .45 caliber version of the current M&P pistols was actually intended to be submitted for consideration when everyone thought that the U.S. military was going to replace the 9mm M9 with a new .45 caliber pistol. Economics and politics soon put an end to that effort. However, you can be sure that the current M&P pistols, which have been so well received by many American law enforcement agencies, will be (or are being) actively offered for sale to various military and police forces around the world. The name "Military & Police" only implies that they are suitable for use by Military and Police forces, not necessarily that they are currently being used by such.
 
The "Military" part of M&P is merely marketing. Currently the US Military likes Berettas, Glocks, and Sigs, but no M&Ps that I've seen.
 
Not in the US but it has been adopted by Iraq or Afghanistan (my mind is blanking on which but I seem to recall Iraq). Give it time, the military is just slow in adopting new weapons if it doesn't have to. Heck I qualified on a M9 that was 25 years old and the M16s we used were older than that. They sure could use the M&P though, amazing platform!
 
22lr said:
They sure could use the M&P though, amazing platform!
Click to expand...

Unfortunately I don't think an M&P would make it through a military trial and torture test. I've seen too many odd problems with these, like dead triggers, front dot sights falling off, cracked slides, etc. M&Ps are good guns, but I don't feel that they would meet military specifications for procurement.
 
No where does it say these need to be sold to "OUR" military. S&W has a long history of arming other countries forces.

Have fun and be safe.
Nightshade2x
 
I agree with Dragon88, no way the M&P would make it through the trials. Regards 18DAI.
 
Current US military sidearms are the M9 (Beretta 92FS), M11 (SIG P228), SIG P226 Navy (Navy SEALS), HK MK23 (SOCOM), and the MEU(SOC) M-45 (M1911). Only the M9 and M11 are in widespread use (M11's are not that common) and no Glocks were ever officially procured for issue although I have heard of some being private purchased with unit funds for Navy pilot use during Dessert Storm.
 
Last edited:
Glock 19s are being procured and used by certain units in the Army. Several guys I have worked with carried issue Glock 19s instead of M9s.
 
Mack said:
Current US military sidearms are the M9 (Beretta 92FS), M11 (SIG P228), SIG P226 Navy (Navy SEALS), HK MK23 (SOCOM), and the MEU(SOC) M-45 (M1911). Only the M9 and M11 are in widespread use (M11's are not that common) and no Glocks were ever officially procured for issue although I have heard of some being private purchased with unit funds for Navy pilot use during Dessert Storm.
Click to expand...

The 75th Rangers procured some Glock 19s and 26s. Both have NSNs and can be seen in various photos of deployed Rangers.
 
From what I recall the M&P 45 was originally developped with the intent that it would be used by a branch of the US military but that somehow never happened. The trigger quality on M&P out of the box varies from OK to downright horrible but that can be fixed with an Apex kit. Also some 9mm suffer from chronic lack of accuracy due to barrel unlocking problems. Again fixable with the new Bar-Sto / Apex barrel but that's a lot of trouble for a plastic gun. I personally gave up on them.
 
I think there has always been some "wildcatting" going on in the military. A couple years ago during that unpleasantness in SE Asia, it was not unusual to see troops with things that were obviously not issue. Nobody said a thing when I showed up with an all black, totally tricked out Series 70.
 
LeMans said:
From what I recall the M&P 45 was originally developped with the intent that it would be used by a branch of the US military but that somehow never happened.
Click to expand...

If you are thinking of S&W's desire to enter it into the Joint Combat Pistol trials, the entire JCP was cancelled. It was one of the main reasons that so many new 45's hit the market all of a sudden.
 
Black market sidearms was a big business during OIF. From my time there Jan04 through Jan06 I saw everything you could imagine being carried by our troops, contract security, and Iraqi's. On our contract alone we had several hundred handguns stashed for issue if we had to bug out(We had no military support), along with rifles M4's an AK's, and eight M79's. All we did was live on a FOB, our worksite was 20 kilometers north of the FOB, so we had to convoy every day back and forth providing security both ways an at the work site.
 
18DAI, this is the second forum where I have seen you post that the M&P could not possibly pass a military trial. But in neither post have you given any supporting rationale. So, what are your reasons?
 
It's actually the second board that I've said "I doubt it would..." and "..I'd be surprised if it did..." In neither post did I say "could not possibly pass a military trial." If your going to quote me quote me accurately.

My supporting rationale is having participated in an agency T&E of the M&P 40. The M&P has a lousy gritty trigger, that would not facilitate the expediant training of new recruits in accurate marksmanship.

In addition I don't think the M&P pistol is durable enough for lengthy service with low maintenance costs. I've seen just locally, since the Guilford County Sheriff's department got these M&P's, walking roll pins, broken strikers, FTF's, rusting slides where the rear sight is mounted and an across the board decline in qualification scores. These are not indicators of a handgun that would excell in a military environment.

Then there is that idiotic "tool" in the grip. How long till those are getting lost by new recruits or are falling out due to wear/improper installation.

There are too many superior handguns to the M&P for it to succeed in a military trial, IMO. The FN 45, HK USP, Sig and others stand a better chance at getting any contract for a new sidearm.

All a moot point anyway as the military just ordered several thousand new Beretta's. There isn't going to be a new handgun anytime soon.

Edited to add: BTW During the T&E where the M&P 40 was evaluated, we selected the Glock 22 for patrol and the Glock 23 for plainclothes/detectives.
 
Last edited:
Am I the only one who thinks the stock trigger is actually decent? The M9 is a great gun, but after 20 years they wear out. The one I qualified on had 15% of the finish (if that much), failed to fire at least once per mag, and the gun was hitting a full foot low at 25 feet. The M&P trigger is the least of the issues for a military weapon.

You also have to realize the changeable backstraps would be eliminated for a military weapon, and the rust issues have been dealt with.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Narragansett
Is Victory 22 a Worthwhile Purchase?
2
Replies
33
Views
1K
nll401
N
demkofour
Bitten by the S&W Generation Gap
Replies
5
Views
658
Tntcwg3
T
T
The "Phantom" 3967
Replies
11
Views
1K
Green Frog
G
L
The elusive M46
Replies
3
Views
399
huthike
H
sjmjax
Accuracy issues with the 39-2?
2
Replies
22
Views
905
stansdds
S

Latest posts

Back
Top