Taller rear sight needed for SD9VE plus accuracy issues...

[Nakanokalronin]

I took out my new SD9VE today with the Apex poly trigger and the results were the same as my first time. If I aimed at the head of a standard silhouette target, I hit center. The accuracy is also not very good. I tried 6 different brands of ammo in 3 different weights and they all grouped in the same low sporadic group.

Now I had a SD9VE before. No mods done to it and it shot great with any ammo. I replaced the rear sight with a stock one from an M&P on both pistols. Same ammo went through both of them. The current SD9VE shot terribly before and after the Apex trigger.

I've also owned every size of M&P in 9mm and a few 3rd. Gen Smiths. All of them had unimpressive accuracy as well. My 9mm Glocks, XD/Ms, Berettas, etc. have had great accuracy with the same ammo.

I also brought my M&P FS45 to the range today and it was shooting like a laser as usual. I've come to the conclusion that S&W doesn't make very accurate 9mm handguns. It's either that or I've gotten seven 9mm lemons in a row from them.

As for the SD9VE, I'm going to keep it as a loner gun but I need to get a taller rear sight. I know some suggestions will tell me to send it back to S&W. I've been sending brand new guns to manufactures for the past year two years and I'm at the point that if I need to send it back, I'll sell it instead. I've sent S&W a 500 that could not be fixed and a M&P FS9 back twice for accuracy issues that couldn't be fixed either. Just like the M&P, they'll tell me that the splatter pattern group is with-in spec.

So, anyone know of a inexpensive taller rear sight for the SDVE/M&P pistols? Adjustable is fine as well as long as it can be adjusted much higher than factory.

 

[scooter123]

At what range were you shooting, 25, 50, or 100 yards? Yeah, it matters. Because at 25 yards a rear sight 1/32 inch taller will probably dial in your elevation. If you were shooting at 100 yards due to the ballistic drop your only option will be to incorporate some hold over into your sight picture, because you won't find a sight made with enough elevation for that distance.

Note, if you were only shooting at something like 7 yards you also won't find a rear sight with enough compensation to correct for a 10-12 inch deviation at this short range. From your statements about your issues with S&W 9mm pistols I can only conclude that they just don't "fit" for you and I would suggest that you simply purchase a brand that shoots well for you.

 

[sd9boi]

Just out of curiosity, what is your definition of "unimpressive" accuracy ?? Your definition of "laser" accuracy ?? What distances are you firing at ?? No judgments here, us curious about your standards !! Thanks !!

 

[ADP3]

In addition to the range affecting bullet point of impact bullet weight also makes a difference. In short, lighter bullets and/or shorter range equals lower point of impact. FWIW my three SD9VE's hit point of aim from a rest at 50 feet with 115 gr. FMJ ammo (Federal, S&B, WWB, Magtech, PMC, Rem-UMC). Groups run 2 1/2 -3".

Best Regards,
ADP3

 

[Nakanokalronin]

When rounds are randomly shooting off of the group or the group is large and sporadic than it's unimpressive.

My M&Ps in 9mm got at best a 4" group with the Shield and at worst a 8" to 10" group with a FS9 which went down to a 6" to 7" group after S&W replaced the barrel. This was all at 15 yards.

I tried to explain a little back story, but I'll simply state that I've owned well over 70 pistols from different brands with different trigger pulls, many being 9mm. When I first reported accuracy issues on here about my original FS9 it was always about me getting used to the trigger, shooting stance, ammo and other various things other than the pistol itself. I tried 7 different brands of ammo in 3 different weights. Just like what's happening with the SD9VE, it doesn't matter what I put through it.

I've corrected some other pistols that shot low at 15 yards like this one does, but I'm wondering what sight options are out there for the M&P/SD9VE. My M&Ps shoot where I'm aiming so new sights are not needed which means I haven't looked at options, especially for a taller rear.

What do I mean by laser accuracy? About a 1.5" group at worst at 15 yards with American Eagle 230gr. ammo. My M&P FS45s shoot as well as my high end 1911s.

The guns fit me fine, but the accuracy of the 9s are bad. If it was the gun then the 45s would be just as bad, but they're almost the complete opposite in accuracy. I have plenty of other nine's that are fine so I have already strayed away from S&W 9s. The only two I now own is my 5904 and SD9VE. Also you may have missed that I owned a SD9VE before and it shot just fine. Not very accurate, but accurate enough so I did get one that was okay.

It's hard to describe what I consider good accuracy sometimes when I've seen what many people consider "good". My first grouping with my 45 at 15 yards today could be covered with the palm of your hand. I felt that it was terrible, but many would consider it good.

 

[Nakanokalronin]

In addition to the range affecting bullet point of impact bullet weight also makes a difference. In short, lighter bullets and/or shorter range equals lower point of impact. FWIW my three SD9VE's hit point of aim from a rest at 50 feet with 115 gr. FMJ ammo (Federal, S&B, WWB, Magtech, PMC, Rem-UMC). Groups run 2 1/2 -3".

Best Regards,
ADP3

I used 6 different brands of ammo, 115gr., 124gr. and 147gr. 2 brands were +P and the rest were standard. I usually run 7 different brands and 3 weights through every gun I buy, but I ran out of one. They all shot low and in the same general area. I aimed at the top of the head of a standard silhouette with every round and they all hit in the chest area at 15 yards. All 6 brands and all 3 weights.

 

[star1]

Dawson has front sights of varying heights, perhaps go that route instead of changing the rear sight
Norm

 

[Nakanokalronin]

Dawson has front sights of varying heights, perhaps go that route instead of changing the rear sight
Norm

The problem is if I go with a shorter front I'll start seeing the top of the slide. Thanks for the reply though. I'll search around and see what I can find.

 

[scooter123]

Why bother? You say that Springfields shoot fine for you why not simply dump the SD9 and get a Springfield XD, XDM, or XDS? You are asking for a recommendation for a sight to correct a 10-12 inch error at 45 feet and that is HUGE. Personally I have NEVER EVER see a pistol or revolver with sights this far off. However I have seen uncountable numbers of folks who flinch with certain firearms and just won't admit they are flinching.

BTW, as someone who has had to cope with a tendency to flinch with handguns since the mid 70's I've learned to recognize when I am flinching and what to do about it. I will also note that Medically a flinch is called the Startle Reflex and it's considered normal to have this reflex and a symptom of a significant problem if you don't.

I'll also note that I recently purchased a Ruger LC9S Pro for a summer carry pistol and it's light enough that the recoil is quite harsh. However it shoots where it's aimed and I was able to keep every hit within a 6 inch group with a 0.28 second split at 40 feet. Since for me the sights are just a blur without reading glasses I consider that acceptable accuracy. I'll also note that after sending 125 rounds downrange with the SR9S I then shot my Ruger SR1911 and the larger 45 felt a lot like I was shooting a 22 rimfire due to the difference in felt recoil.

Point is that when I aim at a target and miss I don't blame the handgun, I consider that a result of me not shooting well. Then I concentrate of "feeling" for what I am doing incorrectly and work on fixing that. I can also tell you that the experience I've acquired over the years has shown me with absolute clarity that accuracy problems are nearly 100% a result of defects in my technique and not in my weapons. So, I would recommend that you take some time and re-examine if perhaps the "defects" you are having issues with aren't perhaps a defect in your technique.

PS; in over 40 years the ONLY, as in single, weapon related defect in accuracy I have experienced personally was due to the use of CFE223 with a 60 grain Nosler Ballistic tip bullet in my Precision 223. Why I do not have a clue. However this bullet loaded with Varget will provide sub 1/2 inch groups at 100 yards from a rest. Loaded with the CFE223 group sizes expand to over 12 inches. As for it possibly be a powder charge related flaw, I have tried every possible listed charge between the listed Start Weight and the listed Maximum. Because CFE223 meters wonderfully and Varget meters like a handful of sticks. However CFE223 just won't work with this bullet.

So, yeah the possibility for a weapons or ammunition related defect does exist. However the odds of that defect occurring with the number of 9mm S&W pistols you have claimed to have used is vanishingly small.

 

[S&W Rover]

I've owned and shot a number of pistols over the past 40+ years. My take:

1. It could be the OP's shooting. (Sometimes a shooter if off a bit, and sometimes a shooter doesn't "fit" well with a particular grip, trigger, type of sights, level of recoil, etc.).

2. It could be the pistol isn't accurate. (Sometimes a design just doesn't lend itself to accuracy, and sometimes the individual pistol has a problem).

3. It could be ammo -- either poor manufacturing, or a projectile weight or shape that doesn't work well with the pistol, etc. For example, M&P9's reportedly work better with 124 grain bullets than 115 grain bullets.

4. It could be all three -- which makes it harder to figure out the problem. Also, a combination of several problems can lead to "stacking tolerances" that makes good performance even harder to attain.

I had an experience similar to the OP's with a M&P9, and could not get the pistol to shoot accurately. I read a great deal about M&P9 accuracy problems and potential solutions - most involving a new barrel -- for this particular pistol. In the end, I sold it.

So, whether it is 1, 2, 3, or 4 -- the practical answer is to stick with guns that work for you. Some of my pistols are just tremendously accurate - my P239, my Mdl 3913, my old Model 10-11, etc. Other guns I've had are not so accurate for me.

My SD9VE has good mechanical accuracy (the gun itself) but is a bit hard to shoot (practical accuracy) because of the long trigger. When I work on it, I can make this pistol shoot very well. However, my skills are not good enough to make the long trigger with the striker-fired mechanism work quite as well as I can make other pistols with DA/SA work.

Answer: life is short, dump the ones that aren't working for you.

 

[Nakanokalronin]

So the M&P 45s are a fluke even though they're the same gun as the M&P 9? My original SD9VE was just okay in accuracy and it did shoot at the level I was aiming, but this time it's me shooting 2 feet lower? My M&P9s also shot at the level I was aiming at, but their groups were very unimpressive.

I don't have a flinch and own quite a few DA/SA and DAO handguns. I also own quite a few SAO handguns as well so I'm use to every trigger pull out there. I got the same response when I posted about the FS9. Then a bunch of other people have accuracy issues with the M&P 9s. The SDVE and M&Ps are not some one-of-a-kind special gun with a hard to master trigger pull. This current SD9VE has the poly Apex trigger that improves it quite a bit. I shot it with both the factory and Apex trigger and the accuracy is the same. My original SD9VE had the stock trigger only and it shot at the level I was aiming so I'm not quite sure it has anything to do with the trigger.

BTW, S&W has changed the M&P 9mm barrels how many times now? Last time I checked they were on a third 9mm barrel to correct the accuracy issues. If it was just the end users having a hard time getting use to the trigger, I doubt S&W would be making multiple barrels to correct something that's about the shooter and not the gun. I don't think they'll bother changing the SD9VE barrels since it's a budget firearm.

How did my groups with my FS9 go from 8-10" down to 6-7" after a barrel change from S&W? I didn't change my grip, trigger pull, stance or ammo. First time I sent it in all they did was drift the rear sight to shoot too far to the right. I laser bore sighted it like I do all of my handguns, corrected it and it was center, but in a sporadic group. The second time I told them I needed the updated barrel (their barrel #2 at the time) and it did bring the groups in tighter, but still far from acceptable.

For S&W Rover,

1. I have two M&P FS45s that are fantastic shooters. They're set up exactly like all of my M&P 9s were.

2.This could be a possibility since my original SD9VE shot where I was aiming, only with a sporadic unimpressive group.

3. I've already posted this a few times now, but I have been using 6-7 brands of ammo in 115gr., 124gr. and 147gr. It's the same ammo I use to test every one of my 9mm handguns and they shoot them just fine.

As for selling it, I may do that or I'll send it in to S&W and see if they say "with-in spec" or not. Maybe the QC isn't consistent and I some how get the 9mm lemons every single time. I'm going to buy the new Shield in 45 since it was a night and day difference when I shot my first FS45 compared to the 9s.

I'm not bashing the brand. I'm just telling you my experience with as much info as I can. I'm glad others have good experiences with the 9mm models.

 

[S&W Rover]

Nakanokalronin,

My 1 - 2 - 3 possibilities were just meant to sketch out in my mind what the hypothetical possibilities are; not to say that #1 is the most likely or that I think the issue is your shooting. I do think there are different issues of grip fit, sight picture, etc., that make all of us better with some guns than with others; and make different people able to wring different levels of accuracy out of the same gun. For example, I shot my P239 tonight with great accuracy (e.g., by my standard, which is all 50-100 rounds in a 2.5" shot group at 7 yards). That DA/SA trigger works for me, and I can really see the big, bold sights. The gun itself is obviously mechanically accurate, too! I also shot my new (to me) Mdl 915, and most of the time was pretty accurate; but I had a few flyers, and the sights (a smaller rear and front sight than the Sig) just are harder for me to see. The pistol may have mechanical accuracy equal to the P239, but I cannot shoot it as well! Maybe with more practice.

I get what you are saying on the ammo issue. Just listed it as a hypothetical consideration when people have accuracy problems. By the way, I think the bulk of people who bring accuracy problems with the SD-family of guns to this forum -- many of them new shooters, with the SD9/40 their first gun -- are having problems with the trigger. That is, they often report shooting down and to the left (for right handers) which is typically pushing the trigger; this can be accentuated with the long trigger pull of the SD pistols. It is entirely over-come-able, and most people get better with practice...

The issue of the M&P9 and its accuracy problems are mentioned often on web forums. Some ascribe them to the lock-up and timing; others to the barrel's twist rate. And, to make it more enigmatic, some M&P9s apparently shoot better than others that appear to be identical. Randy Lee at Apex makes a good case for how his new Apex barrel can improve the accuracy of this platform. I could only get 5-6 inch groups (at 7 yards) from my stock M&P9; that's why it is gone. For some people, hitting a silhouette or a metal plate is "good to go" and the M&P9, which is known for its reliability and certainly is fine in most self-defense scenarios, will do that all day long.

 

[3hounds]

I know Dawson and Novak make adjustable rear sights, windage and elevation adjustable.

It's never the manufacturers fault, ALWAYS THE SHOOTERS on these forums.

Good Luck Nak, 3