M&P 9mm inherent accuracy problems?

[shawn mccarver]

Putting the weapon in a vise tests the weapon. All else is a test of the shooter, and most shooters these days cannot shoot worth a hoot.

There are few shooters who can shoot a 2 inch group offhand at 25 yards. Most settle for "minute of B-27" at 5 yards.

Most of the LE/military pistols (not including HK) seem to be designed for "combat accuracy" which is usually thought of as 4 inch groups at 25 yards. Few shooters these days, however, are capable of that because they did not grow up shooting bullseye with K frame S&Ws or match grade 1911s.

Thus, anytime I read a thread on how almost any pistol is "inaccurate" at any given distance, I regard it as nothing more than a confession by the writer that he simply has never learned to shoot.

 

[bobkatwells]

I'm very satisfied with the accuracy of my M&P 9 out to 15 yards. I've been able to correct any accuracy problems I've had with a few stray rounds with some shot group analysis and practice. Well maybe still a few stray rounds here and there.

I suppose any forum thread called "The S&W M&P problem thread" invites all kinds of stuff. The internet is a great source of information and a great source of disinformation.

 

[M29since14]

...Thus, anytime I read a thread on how almost any pistol is "inaccurate" at any given distance, I regard it as nothing more than a confession by the writer that he simply has never learned to shoot.

I understand that philosophy and it's usually the first thing I think of, too, but it won't always be correct.

I have no idea how widespread the lack of accuracy issues with the M&P9 (and M&P40, as far as I am concerned) may be if considered as a percentage of production. There is no way to know unless S&W tells us. Maybe it is very small, and maybe I have just been unlucky? I will simply say this: If anyone would care to try, I would be pleased to let you show me that my two M&P9s will consistently shoot into a 4" circle at 25-yards, using any position you care to shoot from, with any ordinary commercial 9mm ammunition that one would use for target practice (not the $1/round stuff that no one except government agencies can afford). When I say consistently, I mean 5 consecutive targets of 5-rounds each. Simple enough.

The idea that older shooters used to 1911s and target revolvers (like me ) cannot use the M&P trigger is not entirely credible. I don't have this problem with Glocks or with my M&P45. I can manage a bad trigger. I don't like to, and I won't do it if I don't have to, but I can do it. It's not the trigger.

 

[Rastoff]

...If anyone would care to try, I would be pleased to let you show me that my two M&P9s will consistently shoot into a 4" circle at 25-yards, using any position you care to shoot from, with any ordinary commercial 9mm ammunition...

This is a simple test, but I don't think it will happen. The simple fact is that the M&P pistol is not a 25 yard gun. It is a defensive gun and as such is designed for short distances. I have never fired mine at a distance longer than 15 yards and am completely happy with the accuracy I'm seeing.

I wonder what S&W has to say about shooting the gun at 25 yards?

 

[Nakanokalronin]

This is a simple test, but I don't think it will happen. The simple fact is that the M&P pistol is not a 25 yard gun. It is a defensive gun and as such is designed for short distances. I have never fired mine at a distance longer than 15 yards and am completely happy with the accuracy I'm seeing.

I wonder what S&W has to say about shooting the gun at 25 yards?

After talking with a few CS Rep/Techs, they all said 3" at 25 yards for the FS.

As an update, I sold my inaccurate FS 9mm and recently bought a new FS 9mm 3/28/2013 test fire date, new trigger reset and sear and right off the bat I'm getting 2.5" groupings or less at 15 yards with any ammo. Looks like it was the gun after all.

 

[M29since14]

After talking with a few CS Rep/Techs, they all said 3" at 25 yards for the FS.

I would like to see them pull ten guns off the shelf and see all ten of them do that! I'd even settle for 9 out of 10.

I compared the barrel of my new M&P9 with my older gun. It's obvious they have made some changes. No measuring tools needed to see that. Unfortunately, my new gun doesn't shoot any better than my old one.

 

[toadcoder]

I have two M&P Pro Series 5" Pro Series....one with a Dr Optic read dot and the other with Trijicon night sights. Both have Apex triggers in them. I'm 62 but able still able to hit what I'm shooting at out to 15 yards without fail. I own many other handguns ...some very pricey but none of them are more accurate than the M&P's.

Exactly the same experience I have with my Pro CORE 5". Maybe those who are experiencing issues own the cheaper "ghetto" models?

 

[Nakanokalronin]

Exactly the same experience I have with my Pro CORE 5". Maybe those who are experiencing issues own the cheaper "ghetto" models?

I think it's just the way S&W was doing things. I say this since my inaccurate FS stock or with Apex stuff and all sorts of ammo was shooting 10"-8" groups and the newer one is doing 2.5" or less with the same exact ammo.

Before I bought my newest M&P FS 9mm, I bought a SD9VE and it was shooting groups much tighter than my old FS used to.

 

[toadcoder]

I think it's just the way S&W was doing things. I say this since my inaccurate FS stock or with Apex stuff and all sorts of ammo was shooting 10"-8" groups and the newer one is doing 2.5" or less with the same exact ammo.

Before I bought my newest M&P FS 9mm, I bought a SD9VE and it was shooting groups much tighter than my old FS used to.

Interesting. I guess I'll be more circumspect if I pick up another one. I wonder what's going on with the inconsistencies?

 

[Rastoff]

After talking with a few CS Rep/Techs, they all said 3" at 25 yards for the FS.

As an update, I sold my inaccurate FS 9mm and recently bought a new FS 9mm 3/28/2013 test fire date, new trigger reset and sear and right off the bat I'm getting 2.5" groupings or less at 15 yards with any ammo. Looks like it was the gun after all.

I wouldn't expect 3" groups at 25 yards with a gun like this, but if they say it should do it, then it should do it.

Personally, I'd be impressed with anyone who can shoot a 3" group at 25 yards with this gun. Even off a rest.

I'd like to put my gun in a clamp and see what it's really doing.

 

[brocktice]

9mm FS accuracy problem is real

Ever since I got my FS I thought I'd suddenly become a terrible shot. Never had a problem with my 9c. Yesterday I finally took them out to the range together, along with my brother-in-law's 9L and shot at 25 yards from a rest. The 9c (with full-size mag and X-grip adapter) and 9L were great. The FS9 was way left and scattered all over the place. I've attached two sets of targets labeled C3, C4, C5, and FS3, FS4, FS5. They were shot from a bench rest (which I'm not accustomed to), in alternating order (C3, FS3, C4, FS4, C5, FS5). The 9L was the most accurate, with 3/5 of shots in the black on two targets (probably largely due to sight radius).

Given that the triggers and form factors are nearly identical between the guns, I no longer think the issue is trigger control. Coming from a 1911 I initially thought that was the issue.

I've emailed S&W these results and requested they have a look at the FS. The only thing I can think of that would cause it is that there appears to be a large gap at the front of the locking block on the FS that's not there on the 9c or my BIL's 9L, that allows some extra play.

EDIT: Oh, and the FS shoots WAY left. On the bottom target, FS5, I aimed substantially to the right and got them more on the paper, at least.

EDIT2: Just for reference, I measured the groups from the 9c, and they are 3-4". For the FS, well, it's basically larger than the whole target.

 

[Rastoff]

What distance?

 

[brocktice]

All of the shots were from 25 yards, at a rifle range bench rest.

 

[Ofc.JL]

Well, believe or not, it seems that some of the older M&PFS 9's were giving inconsistent results on accuracy. I know, I had a brand new 2011 M&PFS 9 that was all over the place in accuracy. Surprised the heck outa me, I'll tell ya. Minute of "Bad Guy", sure, but tack driving? Not a chance. Did the different ammo deal, trigger clean-up, nothing worked. Sold it to a buddy as a duty weapon and I told him about the fine accuracy of the weapon being non-existant. I Went on down the road with my life so to speak, not troubled by it. About a year later, I started seeing these threads about the M&PFS 9 giving inconsistent accuracy in some pistols and great accuracy in others. I remebered how bad mine was, and all I had attempted to do to make it better to no avail. About the early or middle of 2013, I find out that S&W has done a PIP on the M&P, to include new twist rate barrels on the FS 9. Seems the newer models have much improved triggers(Thank you, APEX, for leading the way...lol.!), and different barrels in the 9's. S&W has apparently listened and updated their product.
It is entirely possible that a new "H" version gun won't shoot, but this is the first I have heard of it. If you have problems, of course contact S&W for help.
BtW, those of you w/ the "H" version gun just do not need APEX trigger parts. The "H" series pistols have very, very nice triggers in them w/ a very distinct trigger reset. Matter of fact, the new "H" version S&W sear looks not unlike the APEX sear. You can do the APEX stuff if you prefer, but shoot it first and see, the "H" guns are awesome in the trigger department, IMHO.
Thanx,Ofc.JL

 

[brocktice]

I believe I have the H version. It has a nicer trigger reset than my BIL's 9L, short, crisp, and loud, and the number on the box starts HAC. Nonetheless, it appears to have a major accuracy issue.

I know S&W is rather backed up when it comes to CS, I got their automatic email response, waiting to hear how they want me to proceed.

 

[M29since14]

Ofc.JL, do you know of a method to positively ID an "H version" of the FS M&P9?

 

[Rastoff]

I believe the "H" he is referring to is stamped on the trigger bar. Remove your slide and look at the trigger bar. What is the letter you see stamped there?

 

[M29since14]

Thanks, Rastoff. I will check.

 

[marine6680]

I have never cared for M4carbine... read a few threads and was put off by a few users there.

A flat out declaration that the site was for the "elite" who only buy the best... and that they have nothing to do with someone who doesn't buy one of their few chosen brands.

The posts just gave me the feeling of a bunch of people who want to think they are experts and better than everyone... either because they spent the most, or because they spent time in the military and had some training...


But as far as the M&P, I have found mine to be accurate.


A question... I never had need to shoot at 25yds for a defensive pistol, and I don't own competition pistols...

So all these people shooting for groups at 25yds... Are they shooting off hand or from a rest/bench?

When I shoot for groups, at 7yds, I can hold them under an inch... but I don't think I could do less than 4in at 25yds off hand.


In a pistol like the M&P, if it is able to do an inch at 7yds, slow fire... and you can handle it well enough to keep rapid fire groups to about fist sized, then they do what you need them to. Be accurate at the typical defensive distances at speed. Those would even work for many "practical" type competitions.

My opinion anyway.

 

[jmmitc06]

No, my first polymer frame hand gun was an M&P pro 9 with the 5'' barrel and the accuracy was superb. At 25 yards, one big hole. So if there is an issue it's not categorical as the M&P pro and standard M&P are essentially identical in most aspects.

I too can attest to the same problems with internet reviews of even older handguns that have been through the ringer. Webleys don't lock up tight enough, RIA 1911s are inaccurate and finish is weak and so on. With the exception of hollow points don't feed in p08s (no surprise) they have been wrong every time. I think in this circumstance most people who write the reviews probably either aren't shooting well from a fundamentals perspective and its more evident at a longer range or they have unrealistic expectations.