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

[DHart]

A good while back, I remember reading that the accuracy of the 9mm M&Ps was widely criticized.

Has Smith & Wesson markedly improved the accuracy of the 9mm M&P pistols during the later years of v1.0? How about for v2.0?

 

[mmb617]

Any problems with the accuracy of my 2.0 Compact 9mm are not the fault of the gun. Blaming the gun is the easy way out instead of realizing it may be the shooter that's the problem.

 

[first-model]

Any problems with the accuracy of my 2.0 Compact 9mm are not the fault of the gun. Blaming the gun is the easy way out instead of realizing it may be the shooter that's the problem.

I agree. I shot a full-sized M&P 9mm 1.0 in competition for years. The only things I had done to it were an Apex sear, and a set of Trijicon night sights when the white dots on the originals started coming out. The gun was as reliable and accurate as one could possibly hope for, and any missed shots were entirely the fault of the person holding it.

If someone is complaining about the accuracy of this gun, then they're just not ready to admit where the real problem is.

Mike

 

[jbtrucker]

Shield 1.0 and 2.0 long slide are accurate . Hit all over with 1.0 full size

 

[Babysitr]

Mine is a shield 1.0 9mm.....changed the front sight to a lower one, never had a problem with accuracy

 

[Ranger17]

I never had accuracy issues traced to any of my MP's. Whether my 1.0 Full Size 9, my 1.0 PC Shield 9 or my 2.0 EZ Shield 9.
Some days at the range I almost impress myself with how well I did. And occasionally some days are not nearly as clean. Same guns, same ammo used. Any variation is all on me; that's why I will always say those guns are more accurate than I am.

 

[Telecaster]

M&P is a "combat accurate" gun, not a target gun. It's "accurate enough" for its intended purpose. Supposedly the gunsmith-fit Apex barrels can make it more accurate, but I have no experience with those.

 

[lhump1961]

Sorry for the picture of a picture but this is from 21ft out of a 2.0 Compact. I would like to take credit but this is my son-in-law with my gun...the squares are 1". I can sometimes post similar groups but not as consistently as he can.

I must confess that this 2.0 has an Apex trigger but that has nothing to do with the accuracy of the gun...just makes it a bit easier for the shooter.

 

[CA Escapee]

As I recall S&W went with an unconventional twist rate in the early M&P 9mm barrels. There were accuracy issues with certain weights of bullets. Long ago they changed the twist back to the usual twist rate and the problem went away.

There was a lot of chatter on Internet forums back about 7 years ago about the change. Latter v.1.0 and definitely v.2.0 guns weren't affected by the wrong twist.

I seem to have read that S&W put a punch mark on the bottom of the chamber where it meets the barrel to indicate the new twist.

 

[JJEH]

This was the 1st round of qualification, cold gun and cold shooter. It's a 96/100 on a timed course and the guy is d.e.a.d.

Of course, I was nervous too when all the brass is watching you, so I didn't really take my time and watched my breathing.

But for an edc gun, used for personal protection against whatever I'd say accuracy is more than suffice. I did put in a StormLake barrel though to get the 1/16 twist, which factory was 1/18 I believe. The 1/10 Apex was not available at that time, so if I have to do it all over again I'd go with the 1/10.

If you want competition accuracy, the longer version with different sights and a match grade barrel and -trigger might be the better choice.

 

[Bob512]

The accuracy is excellent. No issues at all

 

[sandog]

My 5 inch 2.0 is plenty accurate, even with cheap range ammo.
With my carry ammo, 124 grain HST's, it'll group even tighter.

 

[DHart]

As I recall S&W went with an unconventional twist rate in the early M&P 9mm barrels. There were accuracy issues with certain weights of bullets. Long ago they changed the twist back to the usual twist rate and the problem went away.

There was a lot of chatter on Internet forums back about 7 years ago about the change. Latter v.1.0 and definitely v.2.0 guns weren't affected by the wrong twist.

I seem to have read that S&W put a punch mark on the bottom of the chamber where it meets the barrel to indicate the new twist.

Escapee... what you mention here is what I was asking about - the accuracy issues with the early M&Ps chambered in 9mm, that were commonly complained about when they first came out.

I bought an M&P40 Compact when they first came out and went through some teething issues with a mag drop issue (weak mag retention spring), but never had any problems with accuracy in the 40.

So, those widely discussed 9mm accuracy issues were resolved quite a long time ago it seems. NICE.

 

[ultratec00]

I can only comment on my experience with M&P 9Cs 1.0 and 2.0. Both had the 3.6" barrel. Again, criteria for accuracy is shooter dependent. I keep hearing about "combat accurate", in my eyes if a firearm with a minimum 3" barrel can't routinely group 3.0-3.5"/preferably less at 25 yards off sandbags, it fails my criteria. Some may say that is beyond "combat accurate". For me, in this ever changing world where the realm of self-defense, or defense of others, has evolved beyond what it was 10 years ago, it is not but that is MY criteria. Your criteria is your business and totally dependent on one's inherent capabilities. It's not unreasonable to say group size will at least double for most individuals when comparing shooting off hand to shooting from a supported rest/sandbags.

Both M&P 9Cs noticeably failed to meet my criteria even after extensive testing with multiple factory brands and reloads. The 2.0 9C would shoot Speer 124gr Speer Gold Dots well, but that was it. Drove me batty because I like M&Ps and someone will have to fight me to ever relinquish my M&P 45s, FS, Cs, and Shields, which by the way have had no issues meeting MY criteria and typically go above and beyond.

In comparison, both my FNS-9s (FS/C) meet my criteria. My S&W 3913 meets my criteria. Surprisingly, the two Canik 9s (Elite and Elite SC) recently acquired (price was just too good to pass up), are noticeably more accurate than any of the above and go above/beyond my criteria. Not to be outdone, both my Kimber Micro 9s flat out shoot even-though they are subcompacts. Shield 9 comes close enough as well.

Take the above for what it's worth. It is an observation based on MY experience/criteria with two M&P 9Cs. The FS or 4" may do noticeably better, can't say, haven't tried, and am not going to spend the $$ to find out.

 

[mckenney99]

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.

 

[TMan51]

Any problems with the accuracy of my 2.0 Compact 9mm are not the fault of the gun. Blaming the gun is the easy way out instead of realizing it may be the shooter that's the problem.

Good answer.

I have 4 M&P's, two 9 Shield's and two .380 Bodyguards, 3.1" and 2.75" barrels. Considering weight and barrel length, both are far more accurate that I thought they would be. Both would shoot better if they were in the hands of a better shot.

The shooter isn't so much the problem, as it's the limiting factor.

 

[WR Moore]

As I recall S&W went with an unconventional twist rate in the early M&P 9mm barrels.

S&W used the same twist in all their 9 mm guns from the first model 39 through a goodly part of the M&P9 series. It was also the same twist as used in their .38/.357 barrels, 1-18.75. Through the decades, there was no apparent accuracy issue with that twist and commonly used ammunition.

Then came the gun gamers running heavy bullets at air rifle velocities to make power factor by the skin of their teeth. This could cause stability issues, not to mention errors introduced by increased time in the barrel making marksmanship fundamentals much more important. At that time S&W changed to the pretty much standard for 9 mm 1-10 twist. Aiming at military contracts might have had a lot more to do with the change than whining from gamers.

Having gone through transition training 3rd generation to M&P, and guiding others through it, the biggest "accuracy" issue was management of the trigger.

I picked up a spare 1.0 slide assembly to fit an optic. The barrel/slide doesn't have the same exceptionally tight production tolerances that my original one has and my initial iron sight groups were horrid at 25 yards. After fitting an optic and relearning the trigger the slightly sloppy slide assembly did 1 1/4 inches at 25 yards. Sight picture and trigger management count.

 

[sotexas]

I have a Pro Series 9mm, Full Size 45, EZ 380, and both length of Shields in 9 & 45 all 2.0 and all are very accurate. My skill is the only weakness.

 

[Wdbutcher97]

I bought a near new M&P9 1.0 that I really liked, but my 1.0 Shield 9 was consistently more accurate. That really surprised me. That might be the reason the original owner let it go and so did I. I bought another near full size M&P9 2.0 awhile back and it may not be a competition pistol with me pulling the trigger, but it's ok with me. I like it.

 

[TMan51]

Sight picture and trigger management count.

I found that you need to shoot your M&P's often enough to get the feel and timing for the triggers down. In the warm weather I shoot regularly with my pair of Bodyguards, as timing and "feel" with those is critical with hitting anything. When the temp drops, and I'm not in shorts and a T-shirt, I shoot the 9's regularly. The triggers are not the same at all.

Another surprise is that the sight picture is very nearly the same with all four guns. I need to hold half way up a 6" Shoot-n-See spot to catch the middle of the target at 10yds for the BG's and 15yds for the 9's. It took a couple trips and a few taps with a light hammer and drift, to get the L/R right, but both will stay on a 6" face with a Weaver Stance and 6 o'clock hold for multiple magazines, (if I'm paying attention).

All in all, for the price, the M&P series I own are well worth the money when balancing accuracy and pretty much 100% reliability. I'm tempted to spring for one of the 4" or 5" models.

 

[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.