History of the .40 M&P

[growr]

Is my memory playing tricks on me or not....I thought the concept of the current M&P was in anticipation of the military wanting to replace the M9....the trials however did not take place and the M&P as we know it was introduced in 2005.

Am I totally off base here?

Randy

 

[handgunner356]

Not sure about that but I understood the thumb safety was added to the 45 to meet the Military trials specs.

 

[shawn mccarver]

I am not so sure about that. I think the M&P was developed to compete with Glock and others. When the US Military put out this last RFP for a potential replacement for the M9, the RFP specified .45 ACP pistols, not .40s.

I believe S&W, like most other interested parties developed a pistol to meet the specs, but the idea was dropped and the military ordered more M9s.

Some of the pistols either developed OR adapted for the latest military RFP for a .45 ACP were the Beretta PX4SD, the HK45, the SIG Sauer 220 Combat, the M&P .45 and the Glock 21 with true Picatinny Rail and ambidextrous magazine release, offered briefly to the public, but now apparently discontinued.

 

[WR Moore]

The M&P40/9/357 was designed to take back the police market from Glock. The M&P45 was designed to compete for the RFP Shawn mentions.

Someone did float the story that the services were interested in the .40, but that was pretty much fantasy.

 

[Fastbolt]

As I recall being told, the M&P pistol project was created to help put S&W back in the running for the LE market, as well as to be able to put out a plastic pistol over which they would have complete control when it came to design and manufacturing.

Up until that time they'd only had the Sigma (which actually sold quite well for the budget-minded shooters, but didn't do much for attracting LE customers), and the SW99/990L, for which they only made the bare slide & barrel, getting (buying) everything else from Walther.

The 4-year M&P pistol project started with a blank sheet of paper, as it were, and S&W solicited a lot of input and feedback from military & LE sources. They apparently wanted to put everything they'd already learned to good use, and make some further innovations, improvements and refinements they felt would offer them an advantage in the LE market.

The M&P was designed around the .40 S&W cartridge, first and foremost, since that had become the dominant LE caliber. They also planned to release it in .357SIG (which is the second gun they've chambered in that caliber, with a small run of Sigma MSW357V pistols previously being made).

The military announced the JCP proposal before the official Jan '06 release of the M&P series (about '05). The slightly larger M&P 45 incorporated some changes made in anticipation of meeting the JCP bid spec, including a thumb safety, using a roll pin for the extractor, as well as making the capacity 10-rds standard and with an extended 14-rd magazine optional.

As I recall, the intended order of release was the .40, then the 9mm, followed by the .357SIG and lastly the .45 model. These were all full-size, with compacts following for the .40/9/.357 calibers, and then with a compact and a "medium" model for the .45 caliber.

I think it was sometime after the Jan '06 release of the M&P series that the military announced the JCP was being suspended, canceled, or whatever ... so S&W had a "dual" .45 model ready to go, with & without a manual thumb safety, in 2 frame colors, and only the commercial/LE market in which to sell it.

As was previously mentioned, S&W wasn't the only major company that had been quietly prepping new or revised .45 pistols for the anticipated JCP, BTW, and we've seen a flood of new .45's released since then.

Naturally, the idea of a thumb safety (created for the JCP spec) created a bit of a problem for S&W once the M&P 45's hit the market, because then suddenly lots of customers wanted the same option in the other calibers. Go figure.

At least they went ahead and incorporated the use of a roll pin for the extractor pin in the rest of the line after a while. Much easier for service/replacement than the "feels-like-it's-welded-in-there" solid pins.

(It's not generally known, but they also FINALLY offered roll pins for the 3rd gen models, after a long time of saying they weren't available or could be used. No part numbers, and armorers have to call back and ask for them, I'm told, but I haven't gotten around to adding any to my parts. I have enough solid pins and have gotten used to banging them in & out. )

I remember they did an excellent job keeping the M&P under wraps until close to its official introduction.

 

[Gunsmart]

Nice write up Fastbolt. Thanks for sharing.

 

[Fastbolt]

De nada.

It was just some quick & dirty snippets from here & there I remember throughout the first couple years after the release.

 

[spelasr]

I shot the old Army Beretta and never liked it much. I also remember the old Army Issue 1911, there was a love-hate relationship with that one but I think the M&P .40 is far superior over the current M9. I own a newer .40 and the only complaint I have is the trigger pull fells like its going over sand paper but I can fix that.

 

[Donn]

Not sure about that but I understood the thumb safety was added to the 45 to meet the Military trials specs.

I read somewhere that the thumb safety was a requirement for some police departments that had unpleasant experiences, (negligent discharges), with Glocks. Not trying to start an M&P vs Glock war, just relaying what I read.

 

[Fastbolt]

I read somewhere that the thumb safety was a requirement for some police departments that had unpleasant experiences, (negligent discharges), with Glocks. Not trying to start an M&P vs Glock war, just relaying what I read.

The thumb safety was the feature originally designed to conform to the JCP specifications.

It was the sear disconnect lever that was designed to appeal to LE agencies (after input from LE sources). It allowed the striker to be released for field stripping without pulling the trigger, and locking back the slide to depress the sear disconnect lever gave the user another opportunity to inspect the chamber to make sure the gun was empty.

 

[Donn]

The thumb safety was the feature originally designed to conform to the JCP specifications.

It was the sear disconnect lever that was designed to appeal to LE agencies (after input from LE sources). It allowed the striker to be released for field stripping without pulling the trigger, and locking back the slide to depress the sear disconnect lever gave the user another opportunity to inspect the chamber to make sure the gun was empty.

Interesting. What was the reason for the mag safety? My Compact 9 has this feature, my FS and Shield don't.

 

[Fastbolt]

Interesting. What was the reason for the mag safety? My Compact 9 has this feature, my FS and Shield don't.

The S&W magazine safety in the metal-framed guns has been credited with saving the lives of a surprising number of cops. However, despite its detractors it's never been documented to have cost the lives of any cops.

So, keeping the magazine safety as an option would seem to have been a no-brainer for S&W's LE sales catalog.

The nice thing is that the mag safety system in the M&P is pretty simple and elegant from an engineering perspective. One lever and its dog-leg spring. Much simpler than the system used in the 3rd gen guns (which was pretty bullet-proof in itself).