M&P 9c Future?

[MES-LA]

Now that Smith and Wesson has come out with the 2.0 Compact, what do you think will be the future of the 9c? Would they still produce it, upgrade it, or phase it out?
Thanks.

 

[Flyingfool]

I think the will come out with a double subcompact. Meaning they will shorten the grip on the 3.6” for a 12 round double stack and phase out the gen 1.0 9c and 40c.

So the will have a single stack subcompact (shield), 3.1” and a sub compact 3.6” (9c) and the compact 4.0” 9c and the full size.

They would then have a option from single stack 7+1 all the way to double stack 17 round with intermediate size in both barrel and grip and # of rounds in between.

And don't for get the “pocket” 380 body guard.

 

[Motorsporting]

I hope they will. My 1.0c is my favorite CCW. I would love the features of a 2.0 for it (with a little less aggressive grip).

 

[Flyingfool]

Will the back straps for the 1.0 fit the new 2.0 frame. If so a large
Portion of the 2.0 grip texture could Be removed by installing the 1.0 backstrap. Only leaving a bit on each side and the front. Sand paper can tone that down if need be.

 

[Rastoff]

Everything depends on sales. If it's still selling, they'll keep making it. However, I suspect that with the introduction of the 3.6" 2.0 Compact model, the life span of the original 9c is short.

 

[jstanfield103]

Sure do Love my 1.0 9C

 

[MES-LA]

With the 2.0 Compact competing directly with the Glock 19, you would hope Smith and Wesson would come out with a 9c 2.0 version to compete with the Glock 26.

 

[MichiganScott]

When attempting these sort of predictions, you have to take into account California's goofy laws. Each new variant must be tested by California before they will allow it to be sold in that state. I understand that to be a very costly proposition for the manufacturers. The molds have long since been paid for.

 

[Ballanrk]

I say they will bring out an update to the 9c 1.0. Maybe not the name, maybe Shield double stack, etc.

1. They already have a 3.6 inch barrel in production.
Obviously, a bit longer than the original, but no new mold required if they go with the 3.6.

2. They already have a 12 and a 10 round compliant 9c magazine mold for production.

3. They already have an updated slide.

That leaves the frame to be designed, if not already done.

Of course the data must suggest the market would support it, but development cost can’t be so much that it isn’t worth the time to take a serious look at making such a model.

Edit: I’d like to think S&W from a market perspective would like to keep in line with the Glock 26. Not being a Glock guy I can’t speak to the demand for those, but if the sales are good then it makes since to roll out an updated 9c/12 round capacity.

I think it was smart sales and marketing wise to bring out the 4” first as there wasn’t one similar in the M&P line. The 3.6” falls closer to the original 9c target market so the void wasn’t as large when considering new sales (non S&W owners) -why kill off 9c 1.0 sales before releasing the 4”. S&W benefits from all the early adopters of the 4” wanting the 3.6” or at least has the carry over attention to bump the sales up on the 3.6”.

I feel like this Fall maybe early next Spring we’ll see a new model rolling out.

Of course I could simply be blinded by my want and not being realistic

 

[Philadelphia Patriot]

There’s the shield and then there is the 3.6” compact. I don’t think there is enough demand to make something in between.

Me personally, I prefer to carry the 4” 2.0 compact (.40 s&w) or 4.25” 2.0 full size (9mm)

 

[Rastoff]

When attempting these sort of predictions, you have to take into account California's goofy laws.

I'm not sure why you would say that, but it's wrong. Why would CA laws affect sales at all?

 

[Saudade]

Uh, no new variant will be offered for sale in CA unless it’s from a private party. The 1.0s, except for the Shield are no longer on the roster. The 2.0s never were.

 

[Ballanrk]

Uh, no new variant will be offered for sale in CA unless it’s from a private party. The 1.0s, except for the Shield are no longer on the roster. The 2.0s never were.

Good to know, useful info. That makes me think since it’s a given no 2.0 will be approved. S&W already accounted for that, which wouldn’t factor into potential sales losses when determining the potential market capture of an updated 9c 1.0.

I assumed the only hurdle could be magazine capacity compliance.

 

[markmiela]

M&P 9c Future?

I hope they keep the 9c because from what I hear the 3.6 won’t be offered with a 10+1 mag for a long time if ever.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Fastbolt]

When attempting these sort of predictions, you have to take into account California's goofy laws. Each new variant must be tested by California before they will allow it to be sold in that state. I understand that to be a very costly proposition for the manufacturers. The molds have long since been paid for.

The M&P pistol line, with the exception of the "original" Shield, hasn't been approved for CA sale as a new gun for several years. As it was explained by someone from S&W (during an armorer class), there came a point when CA decided that the ongoing changes and improvements being incorporated into the existing M&P pistols essentially made them "new" models (which hadn't been tested by the state).

That being the case, they'd have to be submitted for testing and approval ... and that happened after the micro-stamping had taken effect (become certified in 2013), so they'd also have to meet that requirement. S&W was not willing to try and adopt micro-stamping technology.

So ... as the older M&P's in production were replaced with what CA felt were new models (meaning substantial improvements), and the original versions were replaced by the newer, refined models, the older M&P's dropped off the Roster at the expiration of the previous approval.

Fortunately, the new Shield 9/.40 and the SD 9/.40 had already been submitted and approved for CA Roster sale before the micro-stamping law took effect. They just slipped in under the wire, so to speak, about a year before the micro-stamping provision took effect.

Obviously, the new 2.0 Shield won't be added to the CA Roster because of the changes compared to the original Shield. However, as long as S&W is willing to continue making the original Shield, S&W can renew it (and the SD) each year on the Roster and CA buyers can get them.

Of course, LE still have the exemption from being required to buy their guns off the Roster ... and the state made a change to the Penal Code's exemption to add some more "types" of agencies with LE powers to the LE exemption.

I only glanced at the change adding those different types of agencies to the exemption earlier this year, but if I was reading it right (and the online chatter I read was accurate), legislators also added language preventing those agencies being added to the exemption status (and their employees who buy handguns using their new exemption) from ever selling any off-Roster duty guns to private citizens as "used" guns. This would mark a change from how the general classifications of peace officer have been able to sell their privately bought off-Roster handguns to non-LE buyers through FFL transfers.

It takes a scorecard and constant attention to keep up with how the firearms laws change in this state.

 

[MES-LA]

I just stopped by my local Cabelas. They had the original 9c and the new 2.0 compact 4" barrel. Side by side, the new compact is almost a totally different gun than the original 9c. The 9c had a clearance tag on it. The guy behind the counter said that meant that either Cabelas was not going to carry it anymore (just that store or all Cabelas??) or it wasn't being manufactured anymore. I've always really liked the original 9c. I might have to pull the trigger and get one before they are gone. Do you think S&W will continue to make the 1.0 9c?

 

[Dave Lively]

Short grip double stack pistols are pretty popular. I would be surprised if S&W decides to make the 3.6 inch compact the smallest gun in the M&P line with a double stack magazine.

I wouldn't be surprised if they don't offer a direct replacement for the 1.0 9c though. The Sig P365 has shown that there is a lot of demand for double stack guns smaller than the 1.0 9c. They might try to trim down the design by making the slide thinner and/or shorter or maybe give up a couple of rounds to make the grip shorter.

S&W runs a tight ship when it comes to controlling rumors about upcoming products. I never hear anything except speculation about what they are planning until they announce the gun.

 

[Cheapskait]

The frame is probably the cheapest major part and since they're already fully invested in the 3.6 Compact, it would be stupid not to produce an M&P 9/40c 2.0.

 

[Will41]

The 1.0 compact is selling for quite a bit more in my city. Hopefully, they will add a 2.0 or keep it since it still the best.

 

[Short_Round]

I'm still seeing M&P 1.0's selling for the same price I paid for my 2.0 Compact (flyer from CDNN today). We live in a world of mysteries.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk