M&P45 compact

[scattershot]

Hi… I have an M&P 45 compact, gen 1. What are the differences between that and gen2? Are they basically cosmetic?

 

[Oldy089]

If there are improvements on the 2.0, they are very minimal or at least not very noticeable . I don't remember any huge difference between the performance, reliability, ergonomics, ets. They were both good to go. A complaint that I remember from the 1st generation was the trigger, but to me most striker triggers are about the same.

 

[scattershot]

Thanks.Appreciate the info.

 

[Beju]

The first-gen M&P 45 Compact is equivalent to the M&P 45 2.0 Subcompact. The M&P 45 2.0 Compact has the same grip length and 10 round capacity as the full size, but a 4" barrel instead of the 4.6" that the full size has.

A .45 ACP '1.0' Compact is going to be less different compared to a 2.0 Subcompact than the 9/40 models, as S&W had already updated the sear design by the time that the .45 ACP and Shield models came out.

The main noticeable differences would be more aggressive grip texture and less usable front slide serrations on the 2.0 SC.

 

[ultratec00]

If memory serves right, the 2.0 introduced additional reinforcement in the frame. The 2.0 also got rid of the trigger loop and replaced it with an Sear actuator. For those who have both 1.0 and 2.0, I prefer the trigger loop as it allows the user to adjust where the wall is on the trigger pull. There's also that annoying "hitch" because of the slop in the actuator as it engages.

You have an all in one firearm with the 1.0 compact as it can readily be turned into either a mid-size or full size. Stay with the 8 round mag or turn it into a mid-size by simply using the 10 round mag with spacer. I prefer the feel of the 10 round mag with spacer over my full size 1.0. The 1.0 compact accepts a full size slide, so effectively you have that configuration with the full size slide and 10 round mag with spacer.