I personally believe their is a lot of extremely high grade bull **** involved when a 1911 costs 3000 +bucks. I do know that a gun like that has a lot of good quality gunsmithing, usually a very nice trigger and overall fit and finish that goes into that and that's what separates it from the $500 or $600 dollar gun. I don't believe it is a $2400 dollar difference. A thousand dollars more I could believe.
S&W M&P 9mm trigger
- Thread starter gunnut57
- Start date
That's a good question. I wasn't very clear - not unusual for me. Sorry.
What I meant to communicate was that the average, everyday old Model 10 of my youth, a pretty common item compared to say, a Python or a Model 27/57/29, for example, still had a pretty darned fair trigger without any gunsmithing or additional parts from a after-market vendor. My experience is that it was unusual to find one that required anything to be serviceable just as it came out of the box - not necessarily perfect, but completely serviceable. I couldn't say that about the M&Ps I have owned and/or had the opportunity to fire.
- Joined
- Aug 21, 2005
- Messages
- 8,020
- Reaction score
- 7,101
And it won't be worth as much, as many, if not most, buyers want used pistols to be as issued from the factory, normal wear from use excepted. Often, the reaction from a private buyer is, "how do I know it was done properly," and from a dealer on trade-in, "it is not as desirable if modified with these after market parts, so I will have to give you less."
rcpilot44
Member
Bought an MP 9mm 4.25 pro series. Last weekend put 150 rounds through it. Felt a bit gritty. Today 100 rounds and it is definitely smoothing out. Gun seems very accurate.
One of the things S&W tried to avoid with the M&P, in my estimate, is a very short and light trigger. I think they could have engineered a lighter trigger in there, but decided not to, and not just for cost reasons. Why? Because it would make the pistol easier to trigger, literally, and thus dangerous in "everyday" use as a SD or service pistol (and these are pistols that by and large do not have safeties).
Would you leave your S&W revolver cocked, just so it had a very smooth 2-3 lbs. trigger? No, you leave the hammer down and have a very smooth but long and heavy - 8-12 lbs - trigger pull. Because it is safer. So safe, in fact, revolvers don't have "safeties." The long trigger pull IS the safety. Likewise, the longer and heavier trigger pull on a M&P is safer and more appropriate for what most people use the pistol for.
Apex triggers are fine but they are generally for people who practice with their gun and know it well. They are super on the range. But if you have an Apex kit in a self-defense gun, it might be wise to use the heavier of the two springs provided by Apex in the forward set sear trigger, and it certainly is smart to think about what you've got there, and to be aware what you are working with. Among other things, it is a pistol that is a bit easier to trigger and thus to have a ND when holstering, and in fact in while handling it in general. I know, I know, the best safety feature is between the ears. Which is why NDs keep happening.
I'm just putting forth this line of thinking as an explanation why stock M&Ps have a somewhat heavier and longer trigger, from what I imagine is the perspective of the M&P engineers. (The grittiness IS a product of cost-savings, but works itself out after a couple of hundred rounds or, as indicated, with a light stoning).
My point it, we shouldn't lament the somewhat long and somewhat heavy trigger of the stock M&P -- it is appropriate and reasonable! For those who want a lighter and shorter trigger, there are Apex kits.
My M&P9 has a nice, light Apex trigger & FSS kit, and is very smooth. Not quite the smooth and light trigger of cocked S&W revolver or a good pistol when in SA mode, but pretty darn nice. My M&P is NOT my home defense or carry weapon -- it is a range gun. My HD weapon is a 3" Mdl 65 and my CCW is a Mdl 642.
Would you leave your S&W revolver cocked, just so it had a very smooth 2-3 lbs. trigger? No, you leave the hammer down and have a very smooth but long and heavy - 8-12 lbs - trigger pull. Because it is safer. So safe, in fact, revolvers don't have "safeties." The long trigger pull IS the safety. Likewise, the longer and heavier trigger pull on a M&P is safer and more appropriate for what most people use the pistol for.
Apex triggers are fine but they are generally for people who practice with their gun and know it well. They are super on the range. But if you have an Apex kit in a self-defense gun, it might be wise to use the heavier of the two springs provided by Apex in the forward set sear trigger, and it certainly is smart to think about what you've got there, and to be aware what you are working with. Among other things, it is a pistol that is a bit easier to trigger and thus to have a ND when holstering, and in fact in while handling it in general. I know, I know, the best safety feature is between the ears. Which is why NDs keep happening.
I'm just putting forth this line of thinking as an explanation why stock M&Ps have a somewhat heavier and longer trigger, from what I imagine is the perspective of the M&P engineers. (The grittiness IS a product of cost-savings, but works itself out after a couple of hundred rounds or, as indicated, with a light stoning).
My point it, we shouldn't lament the somewhat long and somewhat heavy trigger of the stock M&P -- it is appropriate and reasonable! For those who want a lighter and shorter trigger, there are Apex kits.
My M&P9 has a nice, light Apex trigger & FSS kit, and is very smooth. Not quite the smooth and light trigger of cocked S&W revolver or a good pistol when in SA mode, but pretty darn nice. My M&P is NOT my home defense or carry weapon -- it is a range gun. My HD weapon is a 3" Mdl 65 and my CCW is a Mdl 642.
Last edited:
Good post, S&W Rover, and I think we all agree a short, crisp, 3# trigger on the M&P is not something S&W is going to want as a general rule for this type of pistol. In fact, it is the gritty, unmanageable quality of the trigger that disturbs the gun and makes it difficult to maintain proper sight alignment through discharge that I object to.
I can adapt fairly quickly to most Glocks, though I do not like them, but after shooting my new M&P40 once a week through the fall and winter the first year I owned it (2006), I was more than ready to set it aside and go on to something else.
By spring, I could detect little improvement in trigger action of this particular gun. My much newer M&P9 was quite a bit better right out of the box. The grittiness is still there, but diminished in magnitude.
I can adapt fairly quickly to most Glocks, though I do not like them, but after shooting my new M&P40 once a week through the fall and winter the first year I owned it (2006), I was more than ready to set it aside and go on to something else.
By spring, I could detect little improvement in trigger action of this particular gun. My much newer M&P9 was quite a bit better right out of the box. The grittiness is still there, but diminished in magnitude.
Last edited:
