M&P subcompact

[wnderr]

You made me measure my 2.0, 3.6", 9mm height! It was on my belt (IWB) so it was handy!

4 3/4" from bottom of stock 15 round flush floor plate mag, to top of rear sight.

 

[APS]

Shot my 2.0 subcompact for the first time today. No pinch with either of the standard mags or the 15rnd w/sleeve. Very happy about that. I did get some brass to head but not after the first magazine.
Group size with 147HST was about half as big as 124+P GD, thankfully I have a case of the 147HST already. Holster from JM custom kydex on the way, ameriglo sights ready for the gunsmith to install.

 

[Northener]

You made me measure my 2.0, 3.6", 9mm height! It was on my belt (IWB) so it was handy!

4 3/4" from bottom of stock 15 round flush floor plate mag, to top of rear sight.

1/4" more than my 10 rd mag 1.0 big change.

Where did Smith make the change, is the slide less in height than the 1.0 version, because I think 1.0 and 2.0 magazines work in either, maybe i am wrong.

Plus going from pictures of the 2.0 it does seen the grip area is longer that the 1.0 version as well. Stumped here?

 

[Sheepdogged]

Shot my 2.0 subcompact for the first time today. No pinch with either of the standard mags or the 15rnd w/sleeve. Very happy about that. I did get some brass to head but not after the first magazine.
Group size with 147HST was about half as big as 124+P GD, thankfully I have a case of the 147HST already. Holster from JM custom kydex on the way, ameriglo sights ready for the gunsmith to install.

Let's see some pics!

 

[Sheepdogged]

1/4" more than my 10 rd mag 1.0 big change.

Where did Smith make the change, is the slide less in height than the 1.0 version, because I think 1.0 and 2.0 magazines work in either, maybe i am wrong.

Plus going from pictures of the 2.0 it does seen the grip area is longer that the 1.0 version as well. Stumped here?

I know Smith & Wesson sometimes plays game with their measurements (e.g. sometimes they include the magazine in the weight, sometimes they don't). I wonder if the 4.3" measurement is without the magazine. If it is, that is pretty diabolical (okay, misleading).

 

[Sheepdogged]

Evening all,

I compared the 3.6" to the 4" and 5". Love thanks way it feels in had. I generally carry my shield 2.0 or glock 26.

If you get some time and wouldn't mind, I'd love to see a pick of your M&P Subcompact next to your G26 and Shield (perhaps all three) to see the height. I see some pics on the internet, but the camera angles make it hard and/or they don't have the flush magazines installed. You get some bonus points if you rest them on their slides instead of the sights. I know they measure from the sights, but as sight heights change, I'm more curious about the comparison resting on their slides.