When Did Sport Barrel Change?

[ditto1958]

When did Smith & Wesson change the barrel on the M&P 15 Sport, and did they say anything officially about the change?

The original barrel, with 1:8 5R rifling, was considered by many to be a very positive feature of the Sport. The current production Sports have barrels with a 1:9 twist rate and conventional 6 groove rifling.

Is this a big deal? Well, maybe not. In terms of making a practical difference for 99.99% of those using it, most likely no one would notice a difference.

It should be noted that I have yet to read a negative review or report on the Sport regardless of which barrel is on the rifle. Sport owners seem almost unanimous in their satisfaction with the product.a,

But... looking at things another way... I guess I sort of think it's kind of a sneaky thing to introduce a product, and then along the way to quietly make changes in it. I suppose the new barrel is cheaper to make. Also, if a prospective customer is shopping for an entry level AR, why choose the Sport over other very similar offerings that are priced the same? One reason could be if a very attractively priced product has a features that add value, and that the customer is surprised to find on an attractively priced offering.

As stated at the outset, early reviews of the Sport mentioned the barrel as such a feature. Without that, in a crowded sub-$600 AR market, there is much less to make the Sport stand out.

 

[cyphertext]

The change was made Dec 2012, per S&W customer support. We were caught by surprise that the Sport would come with such a barrel, and then again caught by surprise when they changed it.

The fact that you have not read a negative review on the Sport makes it stand out very well in a crowded market, in my mind. It has been out several years, has built a reputation, plus S&W has a complete line of AR rifles from the budget priced Sport to the well equipped VTAC II. Even the Colt and Mil-Spec crowd have come around to give the Sport a slight nod of approval, for a budget gun.

And while the twist has changed, it still has the salt nitride bath finish (Melonite). It takes all standard parts, with no proprietary pieces.

While it may not be seen as the same value as it once was due to the barrel change, it is still a solid choice.

Of course, you and I have already had this discussion on 2 other forums, so it will be interesting to see what my fellow Sport owners have to say here.

 

[therapture]

I thought mine had the 5R barrel and was a little disappointed when I saw the 1:9 on the part. But after shooting it and reading twist rates a bit, I realized for my purposes - it mattered exactly ZERO.

Manufacturing costs increase over time. To keep the same price you have to trade off sometimes for something cheaper - better to change a twist rate instead of say, slapping a cheaper bcg in it, or maybe a lower or something...

 

[ditto1958]

Sportsmans Outdoor Superstore has them for $519 shipped. Dang. They're practically giving them away. Wish I had some extra cash.

 

[HalfStack]

When I got my Sports earlier this year I posted on several gun forums showing it off and they were surprised that for the price I got aluminum instead of polymer.

I think this is one thing that gave it value.

 

[Shootingfun]

Well all I know is that I had to send mine back in for a new barrel cause my first one got shot out at just around 2,000 rounds. I got it back and so far it is shooting like a champ and hopefully this barrel lasts a lot longer. S&W does have some great customer service, I sent it in and had it back in like just 7 days.

 

[sgtsandman]

Your barrel should last linger than 2,000 rounds. I forget what they are rated for but it is definitely a lot more than 2,000.

 

[jimbo728]

It sounds like his barrel was defective, after following that thread.
It must have missed heat treat or something.

 

[jimbo728]

I bought my 1-8 5R Sport in June of 2011. Maybe May, I have to check the papers.
It shoots and prints better than a 16" barrel should, in my humble opinion.
Back then the price was higher because black rifles were still commanding higher prices than they are now.
Another thing on the early Sports, was the steel A2 rear sight adjustable for W&E.
Jim

 

[cyphertext]

Another thing on the early Sports, was the steel A2 rear sight adjustable for W&E.
Jim

S&W was smart to drop those and move to the Magpul rear sight. Most people do not want a fixed rear sight. Unless you are shooting known distance ranges, the elevation adjustment isn't really needed. Sight it in at 50 yds, and you are within +/- 2.5 inches all the way out to 250 yds.

 

[Capt. Bob]

S&W was smart to drop those and move to the Magpul rear sight. Most people do not want a fixed rear sight. Unless you are shooting known distance ranges, the elevation adjustment isn't really needed. Sight it in at 50 yds, and you are within +/- 2.5 inches all the way out to 250 yds.

I think the original sight was a lot better. I think they went to the Magpul because it was cheaper and it would flip down so you could also mount a scope without taking the sight completely off.

 

[cyphertext]

I think the original sight was a lot better. I think they went to the Magpul because it was cheaper and it would flip down so you could also mount a scope without taking the sight completely off.

In a market where flip sights rule the day, a large, "heavy" fixed sight is not "better". Why put a $100 sight on a rifle when most folks are going to just take it off? S&W responded to the market, and in doing so, they did lower their cost to produce the rifle..

Colt did the same thing with the LE6920. They went from the carry handle sight to Magpul. Lowered the cost and gave the consumer what they wanted at the same time.

 

[jimbo728]

In a market where flip sights rule the day, a large, "heavy" fixed sight is not "better". Why put a $100 sight on a rifle when most folks are going to just take it off? S&W responded to the market, and in doing so, they did lower their cost to produce the rifle..

Colt did the same thing with the LE6920. They went from the carry handle sight to Magpul. Lowered the cost and gave the consumer what they wanted at the same time.

I have to disagree that the flip sight is better.For target shooting, having both windage and elevation on the rear sight beats fooling around with the front sight to adjust elevation. The A2 is stronger and better, the weight is not a factor. It comes off with 1 screw and holds adjustment on reinstallation if you dismount it for scope use.
Smiths interests were purely cost saving.
In any event or era the M&P 15 Sport is a great little rifle. Im just glad I got mine before the changes were made.
Jim

 

[cyphertext]

I have to disagree that the flip sight is better.For target shooting, having both windage and elevation on the rear sight beats fooling around with the front sight to adjust elevation. The A2 is stronger and better, the weight is not a factor. It comes off with 1 screw and holds adjustment on reinstallation if you dismount it for scope use.
Smiths interests were purely cost saving.
In any event or era the M&P 15 Sport is a great little rifle. Im just glad I got mine before the changes were made.
Jim

Jim, better for your use, and mine too... But not what the market wanted. Go take a look at the picture thread. Most people want rails, flip sights, and tacticool doo-dads. Unless you are shooting NRA high power style shooting on known distance ranges, the elevation drum is of little use... You can zero at 50 yards and be +/- 2 inches out to 250 yds... which is good enough to ring steel or stay in the black. Most folks don't even know how to zero properly with the A2 style sights anyway.

I'm not arguing that Smith didn't see a cost savings... But most folks wanted the flip sights over the fixed sights and welcomed that change.

 

[M29since14]

...In any event or era the M&P 15 Sport is a great little rifle. Im just glad I got mine before the changes were made.
Jim

Me too. I bought my Sport because I wanted to try the 8-inch twist 5R barrel. With the 9-inch twist barrel I imagine it is still a good value but I wouldn't have purchased. The plastic sight is basically better than no sight at all, but that is about it. JMHO.

 

[jimbo728]

Cypher,
You are right about the cool factor and probably right the most do not care about the target aspect.
Im sure they will learn fast when switching loads and wishing they could quickly and easily click on one sight for adjustments to windage and elevation without having to fool with the front sight.
I remember seeing the newer Sports with the MBUS sight. I was disappointed that the change was made.
My Sport remains just as it was when it came out of the box and Im just as happy with it now as I was then.
Jim

 

[cyphertext]

Only change I made to mine was to put a Matech folding sight on it (has elevation adjustment ) in place of the Magpul and I added a red dot.

 

[rtquig]

The early ones had both rear sights for a while. My firt 1:8 5R had the fixed sight, and the second still Melonite 1:8 5R came with the flip up. I had to take the fixed rear sight off when I put on the Nikon P223, but was able to keep the flip up rear sight on the the Bushnell TRS-25 red dot.

 

[cyphertext]

The early ones had both rear sights for a while. My firt 1:8 5R had the fixed sight, and the second still Melonite 1:8 5R came with the flip up. I had to take the fixed rear sight off when I put on the Nikon P223, but was able to keep the flip up rear sight on the the Bushnell TRS-25 red dot.

I consider mine to be Gen 2... 1:8 barrel with Magpul sight. Gen 3 being what they are selling today.

 

[spad124]

The change was made Dec 2012, per S&W customer support. We were caught by surprise that the Sport would come with such a barrel, and then again caught by surprise when they changed it.

The fact that you have not read a negative review on the Sport makes it stand out very well in a crowded market, in my mind. It has been out several years, has built a reputation, plus S&W has a complete line of AR rifles from the budget priced Sport to the well equipped VTAC II. Even the Colt and Mil-Spec crowd have come around to give the Sport a slight nod of approval, for a budget gun.

And while the twist has changed, it still has the salt nitride bath finish (Melonite). It takes all standard parts, with no proprietary pieces.

While it may not be seen as the same value as it once was due to the barrel change, it is still a solid choice.

Of course, you and I have already had this discussion on 2 other forums, so it will be interesting to see what my fellow Sport owners have to say here.

I bought my Sport in Sept 2013. I researched the Sport in July and August 2013. The barrel twist change was well publicized in the S&W product literature and on S&W's website at that time. Some on-line retailers had not changed their info even though S&W had. So, it's 2 year old news.

I find my Sport to be an exceedingly well made and close tolerance carbine. Perhaps the 5R barrel is more accurate, however, I find the 1:9 on my Sport exceedingly accurate. For me the barrel issue is a distinction without a difference.

I was frankly more concerned about the change in rear sights. The change effectively is a retro move to an A1 sight system: elevation, front sight; windage, rear sight. Simple and sturdy. Cyphertext is right. Sight that set up in at 50 yards and you're good to 250. From S&W's point of view the MBUS makes sense. It's basic and rugged enough that it can be used as sold without any change. However it seems that many people mount optics. With the MBUS, just fold it down and mount the optic. Same with the handguards, many(most?) people change handguards for something tactical so why not sell the Sport with handguards that get by until the guards are changed out a few weeks after purchase.

Personally I was more concerned with the change from the LMT sight to the MBUS sight. So, I found a new LMT A2 sight on eBay for $60. Used, like new, handguards with heat shields for $10.