M&P 9mm accuracy - how is it these days?

[HOUSTON RICK]

A poor workman blames his tools. There is absolutely nothing wrong with the accuracy of the M&P if you know what you are doing.

 

[HorizontalMike]

My 5 inch M&P 9 Pro was frustratingly inaccurate. After testing at least a dozen different types of factory ammo of different weights and manufacturers, the best I could get was a 3 -4 inch group at 15 yards from a solid braced benchrest with Winchester 124gr NATO ammo. My 9mm Shield could easily out shoot the 5 inch gun. My 4 inch .40 and all of my 45 acp's would easily punch a ragged hole at the same distance so it isn't me. Finally was able to pick up an Apex barrel and early first shots are encouraging, just haven't gotten to do a lot of testing with the new barrel yet.

Bingo! I replaced parts on both my 4.25in and 5in M&P2.0s with APEX barrels and triggers. IMO, while having the new APEX trigger show marked improvement alone, adding the APEX barrel to the mix made the greatest improvement on accuracy. Proper hand-fitting is essential.

NOTE: This is NOT a criticism of stock S&W workmanship, just an effort to show the proverbial "... you get what you pay for..." Adding/stepping-up to higher quality parts can, and often does, make a good gun great! Just my $0.02 worth...

 

[Donn]

I've got three Gen 1's, full size, 9c, and Shield. All three are out-of-the-box stock, and have been in the black since Day 1. Obviously, YMMV.

 

[Telecaster]

As others have said, you have to define "accurate" before judging the accuracy of your gun.

 

[Saudade]

My FS has gone through a few changes during it's time with me. Started off in 2013 as a FS. Gritty trigger but still shot well for me. Then put in a PC sear and a bit of "spit and polish". Trigger improved and so did my groups. Next came a 5" ported CORE slide kit with an RMR. Groups got a bit better. Next came the full 2.0 trigger group. Very nice but no real change in groups. Finally added a 5" Storm Lake (non ported) barrel. Don't see a big difference here either.

All S&W barrels are 1:10, the SL is 1:16. I shot both 115s and 124s, all brass, all FMJ from a mix of manufacturers.

So my take is the gun is not, itself, inaccurate but this shooter was (well, still is). The gritty trigger, creepy break and overtravel made it difficult for me to hold my aiming point. The "combat sight" picture was also harsh on my aging eyes. The improved trigger help me "break the shot" cleaner. The RMR helps me keeps my poa where I want it.

I also have a 2013 1.0 Compact. Out of the box, I actually shot this a bit better at first. It also has a 2.0 trigger in it. Haven't shot it yet like this.

I also have a 2014 1.0 Shield. I don't often shoot this beyond 10 yds. The issues above regarding triggers and sights apply here too.

 

[CenTx]

When the M&P 9mm was introduced, 2005 I think, it had a 1-18 twist. If you were shooting 115 gr or 124 gr projectiles and accuracy was ok. However, a lot of competition shooters, IDPA & USPSA, were using 147 gr projectiles for the softer recoil impulse, but did not shoot as accurately with 1-18. At some point S&W changed it to a 1-10 twist, which is common to many 9mm pistols.

 

[Bangler]

My Shield and 3.6" compact shoot dead on.

 

[song dog]

I had (3) 1.0 M & P's 9 mils, the Pro shot well but not happy with the M & P 4 1/4 and Shield, they shot too low for me as defense guns. I really liked the M & P line, out weighed adding Apex triggers and barrels as took advantage of the panic gun buying as those 1.0's found new homes. So replaced them with new 2.0's, another 4 1/4 and another Shield, both 9's, much better triggers, both print tight clusters 1" low of bulleye @ defense ranges. I had more rounds over the years in the Pro series, never had any FTF or FTE as they just ran well. I wished S & W had a custom shop or other options thinking off adding custom match barrels down the road. My "steel" guns are Dan Wesson's .45/9 mil with match grade barrels so I've been spoiled.