M&P40 questions

[Grimjaws]

Hey all. I had a family member sell me some 40 ammo cheap so I'm in the hunt. I've been looking but not many 40 available locally unless I look online.

Last night stumbled on a NIB M&P40 1.0

Seller is asking $399

I see police trade in used for about the same price online.

Questions
Is $399 a good price?

Used ones have night sites or one more magazine than this one and will be cheaper but not sure how much abuse it took. Would you go NIB for a little more or get used? After fees and such online used is coming close in pricing.

Does this pistol prefer a certain grain like 165 or 180 for point of aim?

Thinking of making this my home defense gun and would add a flashlight once I run a few hundred rounds through it - does this impact the pistol with the extra weight forward in terms of reliability? I thought I heard Glock had some issues with this back in the day but not sure of this S&W.

Last should I just buy a 2.0 instead - are the updates worth the extra price?

Thanks gang!

 

[686-380]

Regardless of price, does it FIT you?

I apologize for not having a definitive answer for your questions. As an average person who's done my own research and experimentation, I can make the following recommendation - Find what you have the best competency with, regardless of caliber/price. The cheapest gun is worthless if you can't/won't operate it effectively. Here's another consideration, hearing loss:

The Truth About Silencers: Secrets most gun owners don't know - YouTube

 

[Grimjaws]

Behind the curtain

Alas no silencers for me - I live in a restricted state. This would be a range toy first then may be my bump in the night gun

Interesting video! Thanks for sharing

 

[jurek]

$399 for NIB M&P40 is a fair price.

It's hard to recommend something if we do not know your preferences and shooting level.
I personally would add another $300 and buy M2.0 model or go with different firearm. But that's me. I know differences between original M&P and M2.0 and would never use old again.
Regarding the choice between new and used, I always go with new.

But, as mentioned - it's you and your choice. You know yourself best, not us.

 

[spricks]

I would not hesitate to buy the new M&P 40 1.0 at that price. I have a new one in the box that I bought ten years ago for $529 when I thought high- capacity mags might become an issue. I would never think of selling it for less than I payed..... it's worth $529 to me anyway.

 

[AppStFan]

For your use as a home defense gun the M&P .40 will serve you just fine.The M&P was built around the.40 versus the Glock which was built around the 9mm. The NIB price of $399 is probably not unreasonable in today's market. You might find a police trade-in for a little less. They will usually have some holster wear but have not been shot a great deal.

The 2.0 version will have a better trigger and be a little more refined but I guess it depends if you want to spend the extra bucks for the latest and greatest. I have the 1.0 version and have never had any issues with it. Whichever way you decide to go, the M&P full size is a fine weapon.

 

[STORMINORMAN]

A NIB M&P 40 1.0 at under $400 is a bargain, IMHO.

There's a HUGE panoply of aftermarket parts and accesories available. With conversion barrels (and the appropriate magazines in 9mm) you can easily have three calibers: 40 S&W, 357 SIG & 9mm.

You would be hard pressed to find a more reliable and versatile pistol.

Jump on it!

Cheers!

 

[walnutred]

I purchased a M&P 40 V1.0 when the police trade-ins were running about $200. I liked it so well I bought another M&P 40 in a different barrel length then proceeded to buy two M&P 45s in different barrel lengths. I have no experience with the 2.0 versions but would be surprised if you purchase a M&P police trade-in that showed much abuse. Unlike the M10s which could have served for decades the M&Ps were simply not used long enough.

 

[sheepdawg]

Not flashy and plastic has no character but my 2009 Pro Series is a fine pistol. Well over 5K through it and I honestly can't recall a jam. Trigger snobs may laugh at the 1.0 but after 5K I can't complain about mine.

 

[WR Moore]

The M&P40 1.0 was our issue service pistol from 2006 on. I retired in 2015 and the only issue I had with mine was the take down lever broke during qualification. Didn't discover it until I went to clean it. As others have noted, the M&P was designed around the .40, it didn't seem fussy about ammo. At expected defensive ranges you'll see no difference in point of impact. The 165 gr round was developed because the FBI found unexpected pressure peaks with 180 gr ammo.

Can't speak to the .40 but my M&P9 experiences no issues with a mounted light. The Glock issues seemed to be with examples of a certain model.

NIB should have 2 mags, our LE price in 2006 was $429 with 3 mags.

If you look around here, one of the resident armorers listed the suggested parts change out intervals.

 

[The Mighty S&W]

I bought one of the first M&P .40 full size pistols to become available in my area when they were first released back in 2005 I believe it was. It was a good pistol. Very reliable, reasonably accurate, and felt pretty good in the hand. I'm not a trigger snob by any means, but even by my modest standards, the trigger was absolutely terrible. It was long, gritty, heavy, with a surprise break and absolutely no discernible reset. I believe some minor changes were made to the factory trigger on those original M&P pistols over the years, but a lot of people still reported worst in class triggers on them.

For the price of $399.00, it's a pretty darned good pistol assuming that you don't mind the trigger. I tried to get used to mine, but by the time I bought it, I simply had too many comparable handguns with far better triggers, and I lost interest rather quickly. The other thing that I personally didn't care for on the original M&P's was the aesthetics of the beaver tail on the frame. Anyway, night sights are cheap, and chances are that any night sights that come on a police trade in pistol will be nearing the end of their lifespan, so I wouldn't let that sway me toward buying used.

If funds aren't a major concern for this purchase, and you are able to put a bit more into it, I can wholeheartedly recommend the M2.0 pistols. They are simply night and day better than the older guns in several meaningful areas. First, they not only improved the triggers, but they now have one of the best factory triggers available on any handgun of the type. Next, they added another backstrap size to the mix and added a far more aggressive grip texture. Then, they beefed up the internals of the new pistols adding more metal to the frame/rails. In addition to this, they released a "compact" model that is nearly identical in size and overall profile to the Glock 19. Finally, they deleted the beaver tail from the frame.

For the money, I would buy an M2.0 and never look back. If your finances won't allow the additional expense, you'd still be getting a really good pistol with an original M&P. I'd buy new regardless of which you choose. There just isn't enough difference in cost to justify buying used in my opinion.

 

[oneoff]

I had one I sold for that price with a few thousand rounds through it, no troubles. Still have the Compact version of that era, with an Apex trigger in it, and consider that essential (for me).
Buy it if you like it!
You'll be fine reselling it if you change your mind.
My M&P .40 compact was bought when they first came out, has well over 5 thousand rounds through it, with no hiccups. I also have conversions for 9mm and 357sig, and just enjoy it for what it is. My wife named it Mamma Bear, so it can never be sold.

 

[lkabug]

Good gun at a good price.

 

[Bob L]

LGS has a used 2.0 in 40 for $450 with a 3.6" barrel if you're interested.

 

[M29since14]

I would never suggest anyone buy the original M&P 9mm based on my experiences with four of them, two FS, a 9L, and a 12-round compact model, but the FS .40 SW version I bought early on has been a good weapon. More recently, I bought a 2.0 version in the compact size when it came out and I like it better than the 1.0, but still have my original 1.0 and don't really plan to sell it.

I'd buy the new gun for $399, as opposed to a who-knows-what-you'll-get trade-in gun. If the trade-in gun was $200 or so, maybe. Trade-in guns can sometimes be a little rough, in my experience, and if you are the type that takes a little pride in your guns you might be disappointed with the one they send you. If you can spring the extra bucks for a new 2.0, that would be my ultimate preference. I really like the 5-inch model for range use.

 

[FortyFiveACP]

I bought a new M2.0 Compact in 40 from my LGS when they had it on sale and I think it is quite excellent so I definitely recommend it for people hunting something in that size class. It was $450 new which is only a little more than your $399 but that was before the recent pricing levels.

I don't have any experience with the first gen models but I really like the M2.0 Compact. A lot of capacity in a Goldilocks size and it is very soft shooting.

 

[swsig]

Here's what I had to say about my 1.0 M&P 40 compact in a previous post wherein I reviewed my three M&Ps:

"I have three M&Ps. More accurately, three and a half, because my 40 compact has a Storm Lake conversion barrel that allows me to shoot it as a .357 SIG. I have shot all three extensively, so my experience with each is considerable. My main shooting statistic is an accuracy score from the last 15 range sessions combined for each gun. The score is the percentage of shots that I've placed in a 4"x4" square at 15 and 20 yards. The square is marked by the four small red dots that surround the bullseye of a Birchwood-Casey sight-in target (see photo) that I've used exclusively for the past four years. All shots were taken standing unsupported, with a two-handed grip.

M&P 40 Compact v1.0
Purchased December, 2014
Round Count: 15,916 (13,388 .40 S&W; 2,528 .357 SIG)
Accuracy Scores for .40 S&W: 15 yards, 348 shots in square/540 shots taken = 64%; 20 yards, 316/680 = 46%
Accuracy scores for .357 SIG: 15 yards, 394/630 = 63%; 20 yards, 329/650 = 51%

Comment: As you can see, there is little difference in accuracy between the two rounds at 15 yards, but at 20 yards the .357 SIG has a clear advantage. My 40c has been my carry gun ever since I bought it, and I now carry it as a 357. The Storm Lake barrel was a perfect drop-in fit. My 40c is not only accurate, it has been very reliable, with only two failures to eject and two failures to feed, over its 15,916 rounds while shooting two handed. Shooting one handed, I had several additional FTEs and FTFs early on, but those were due to limp wristing, which I don't count against the gun. As I approached 10,000 rounds, I started getting failures to fire. When a new striker did not help, S&W took it back and completely rebuilt it, replacing every moving part except the extractor, at no charge. (Love that S&W lifetime service policy!) It has functioned flawlessly ever since. While I'm always on the lookout for a better carry pistol, I have yet to find one that has the combination of accuracy, reliability, capacity, portability, and hitting power that my 40c/357 has. It's a keeper."

Triggers with 1.0s are hit and miss. The original trigger was very good. It became quite smooth after 1,000 rounds. The second trigger is still somewhat gritty after 5,000 rounds, but it has a very clean break, and most importantly, its grittiness has had NO effect on accuracy.

At the advertised price, I'd have no hesitation in buying it, but only after a thorough inspection.

 

[WR Moore]

Quick word about triggers: the M&P 1.0 was designed as a LE service pistol, not a target gun. That said, virtually every new mechanical device will display some "grittyness" initially from machining articfacts. By the time our transitional training ended, the triggers were far better than they were initially. You can accomplish much the same thing by dry fire.

 

[The Mighty S&W]

Quick word about triggers: the M&P 1.0 was designed as a LE service pistol, not a target gun. That said, virtually every new mechanical device will display some "grittyness" initially from machining articfacts. By the time our transitional training ended, the triggers were far better than they were initially. You can accomplish much the same thing by dry fire.

While what you say about the M&P being designed as an LE duty sidearm is true, that doesn't excuse the abysmal triggers on the first generation guns. I spent a career as an LEO, and cannot think of any reason in the world why such a poor trigger would be considered a benefit for law enforcement use.

I do understand the benefit to a heavier trigger, and agree that a heavy, double action type trigger pull has its merits. But, the original M&P triggers weren't just heavy. They were gritty, they were long, they had a lack of discernible reset. They were just bad triggers. This is a widely universal opinion. If such triggers were desirable, other pistols intended for LE service would be equipped with similar triggers, and Smith & Wesson themselves would never have bothered to improve them in subsequent offerings.

The truth is that the original M&P is a very good pistol with a very bad trigger. The M2.0 M&P is an outstanding pistol with one of the very best factory triggers available on the market. And, while the qualities of a trigger used for LE duty should be a bit different than those for a target pistol, they still should be significantly better than those found on the original M&P. The SIG Sauer I was issued when I bought my first Gen M&P was better, as was the trigger on my Glock's, the triggers on my Beretta's, the triggers on my 3rd Gen Smith & Wesson's, and the triggers on my 1911's. Every one of those guns was designed as a law enforcement service weapon, and every one of them had a better trigger than the original M&P.

 

[STORMINORMAN]

Somebody got a lemon...?

Perhaps some early M&Ps exhibited less than desirable triggers. My experience with my "pre-2.0s" is decidedly different. Trigger on the PC C.O.R.E. is fantastic. Trigger on my M&P 40c is excellent. I have an Agency Arms trigger set waiting in the wings for my other full size M&P 40, but I thought I'd let it get broken in a bit before I decided to take the plunge...

There's always an initial good cleaning and a bit of polishing (I like Mother's) to remove any grittiness if that's the case out of the box: my 1st semi-automatic S&W was a SW40VE, so I have "been there and bought the T-shirt"...

Cheers!

P.S. Next to the GLOCK there are probably more options for trigger modifications with the M&P than any other striker fired pistol.