Smith&Wesson just sent me a replacement striker for M&P9c & it appears to be the old style black MIM not machined stainless kind they switched over to. Have Specs. changed for this part again?
S&W Replacement Striker
- Thread starter Kitgun
- Start date
Register to hide this ad
Fastbolt
Member
Actually, it was the original black finish strikers that were machined, and the revised (newer) strikers that are MIM and shiny (stainless MIM, it seems).
The revised striker has a 1-piece spring keeper, with the opening facing upward. The spring was also revised (apparently because of the change in mass with the new striker design).
In these 2 images the older striker design is the one with the black finish.
In this pair of pictures, looking down on the striker assembly from above, you can see the opening of the new 1-piece striker (instead of how the previous pair of keepers surrounded the whole striker head).
The revised striker has a 1-piece spring keeper, with the opening facing upward. The spring was also revised (apparently because of the change in mass with the new striker design).
In these 2 images the older striker design is the one with the black finish.
In this pair of pictures, looking down on the striker assembly from above, you can see the opening of the new 1-piece striker (instead of how the previous pair of keepers surrounded the whole striker head).
OP
Thanks for the Info. Striker that I just received from S&W is black, will post Pic when possible.
OP
Sure looks like old style prone to breakage type striker to me.
Fastbolt
Member
The striker they sent you appears to be the older machined style (2nd revision, with the extra metal at the front of the striker's foot, for more spring compression). This requires the 2-piece white spring keepers. The next (current) revision is the shiny MIM striker that requires the 1-piece white spring keeper.
Did you just call and ask for the separate striker, and not the complete striker assembly?
If you ordered it as an individual component, did they ask what was in your 9c (finish color) when you ordered it? If so, they might have sent you the right part for the 2-piece spring keeper design you're using, maybe? Dunno. I can only guess.
It's easier to order the striker assembly, if it's for a repair (or spare). I keep a few individual striker springs for periodic preventive maintenance replacement (every 5K rounds or 5 years of use, whichever occurs first).
BTW, I wouldn't consider the machined strikers to be "prone to breakage". The MIM revision is indeed a more robust unit (especially for competitive shooters who might want to do a lot of dry-fire), but the machined strikers weren't reported to be breaking in any great numbers. Nor were they subject to a "Recall". The engineers are constantly making improvements, refinements and changes in manufacturing specs.
The current armorer manual (3rd version, from 2010) lists both types of striker assemblies, so armorers can maintain both designs (because of the difference in spring keeper design). There's still a lot of them out there in-service and doing fine.
I ran a few thousand rounds through my pair of M&P's, both of which had the machined strikers, without any breakage. I eventually replaced mine with the newer versions to see if I could notice any difference, but I kept the original parts as spares. I had a couple extra of the machined strikers I'd ordered as spare/repair parts, and I'm keeping them for that use.
If it bothers you, you could call customer service and ask to return that individual striker (for refund, filling out the form pictured under the striker), and instead ask to order a complete striker assembly of the current MIM design (for the 9/.40/.357 model).
Did you just call and ask for the separate striker, and not the complete striker assembly?
If you ordered it as an individual component, did they ask what was in your 9c (finish color) when you ordered it? If so, they might have sent you the right part for the 2-piece spring keeper design you're using, maybe? Dunno. I can only guess.
It's easier to order the striker assembly, if it's for a repair (or spare). I keep a few individual striker springs for periodic preventive maintenance replacement (every 5K rounds or 5 years of use, whichever occurs first).
BTW, I wouldn't consider the machined strikers to be "prone to breakage". The MIM revision is indeed a more robust unit (especially for competitive shooters who might want to do a lot of dry-fire), but the machined strikers weren't reported to be breaking in any great numbers. Nor were they subject to a "Recall". The engineers are constantly making improvements, refinements and changes in manufacturing specs.
The current armorer manual (3rd version, from 2010) lists both types of striker assemblies, so armorers can maintain both designs (because of the difference in spring keeper design). There's still a lot of them out there in-service and doing fine.
I ran a few thousand rounds through my pair of M&P's, both of which had the machined strikers, without any breakage. I eventually replaced mine with the newer versions to see if I could notice any difference, but I kept the original parts as spares. I had a couple extra of the machined strikers I'd ordered as spare/repair parts, and I'm keeping them for that use.
If it bothers you, you could call customer service and ask to return that individual striker (for refund, filling out the form pictured under the striker), and instead ask to order a complete striker assembly of the current MIM design (for the 9/.40/.357 model).
Last edited:
OP
Thanks for in depth usefull information. Part is for older "09" M&P9c. It does fit and work so I guess all is well. Original striker did fail after much dry firing & about a 4000 live round count. Smith and Wesson sent out the replacement for free and it took less than a week for delivery. Still the best customer service around!
The strikers sent to me by S&W for my two Shields were both the newer, shiny MIM units, sold as a complete package with springs, etc.
Fastbolt
Member
The new (late 2010, as I recall) striker design was made to be more tolerant of dry-fire.
FWIW, while I did a little bit of dry-fire to acclimate myself to the M&P triggers, I'm not a big proponent of sitting around and doing hundreds of repetitions of dry-fire with striker-fired pistols.
The firing pins of hammer-fired guns and striker-fired guns usually differ in that the striker type firing pins have a large "head", from which the short firing pin protrudes through the breech face's firing pin hole, while the regular firing pins usually have a long tapered body which ends in the pin tip.
I've never liked the thought of dry-fire resulting in hammering the rear of the breech face by having the head of the striker type pins repeatedly impacting against them without the pin being cushioned by hitting against the primer cup of a live cartridge (or properly sized dummy round made to cushion the pin's impact). I could see that causing a bit of unnecessary stress to the head of the striker after a bit.
I'll do a little bit of dry-fire to get the feel for a new trigger design, or if it's required to field-strip a gun (Glock, Sigma, SW990L, etc), but I won't sit around "practicing" dry-fire. I'd rather be practicing the trigger by shooting the gun on the firing line.
Just some thoughts.
- Joined
- Jan 1, 2013
- Messages
- 3
- Reaction score
- 0
Trigger pull reduction
Hey guys I need some serious help with the trigger pull reduction. I have now seen 2.different ways to reduce the pull. I'm confused on which one to do or do I do both. The first one was the apex spring package replacing the striker spring and couple other parts. The other one I have seen is replacing the trigger sear spring. Both have claimed to reduce the pull and not effect reliability. The confusing part is they are in totally 2 different areas of my firearm. Can anyone help? I laugh because I feel if I do both I'm gonna have the smoothest loosest trigger pull, based on what they say! The video for replacing trigger sear spring is on YouTube under S&W sigma trigger sear spring mod sw40ve sw9ve smith & wesson swap fix.
Hey guys I need some serious help with the trigger pull reduction. I have now seen 2.different ways to reduce the pull. I'm confused on which one to do or do I do both. The first one was the apex spring package replacing the striker spring and couple other parts. The other one I have seen is replacing the trigger sear spring. Both have claimed to reduce the pull and not effect reliability. The confusing part is they are in totally 2 different areas of my firearm. Can anyone help? I laugh because I feel if I do both I'm gonna have the smoothest loosest trigger pull, based on what they say! The video for replacing trigger sear spring is on YouTube under S&W sigma trigger sear spring mod sw40ve sw9ve smith & wesson swap fix.
