Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'General Firearms Forum' started by Deputydave, Apr 11, 2019.
Sounds like a fantastic deal.
My beater M&P 45 police trade in. I added an Apex trigger, Ameriglo Hackathorn sights, and sprayed the slide with an old heat-cure coating called Molyresin. It has started to wear off a bit from the kydex, but it a tool not a treasure. ffr1910
I own an '08 production M&P 45 FS/DE with original thumb safety option and factory NS, and a '10 production M&P 40c with NS.
I originally ordered the M&P45 after attending my first M&P armorer class, and ordered the 40c after retirement.
The M&P 45 no longer has the thumb safety. I eventually removed it and filled in the frame cuts with the plugs 2 or 3 years ago. (This was even after I figured out how to adjust a couple of the angles on the side of the safety assembly lever that engages with the slide plunger and spring on the side of the sear block, to increase the resistance for both raising and lowering the thumb safety ... being a longtime 1911 guy who has a preference for a tension level for both movements, even though the lever is not located in the same "spot".)
It initially came with a measured/average trigger pull of 8 1/2lbs +/- (which was within normal 2lb +/- spec of the .45 trigger, already being heavier than the 6 1/2lb +/- 2lbs of the 9/.40 models). It was a tackdriver, but initially a bit stiff and gritty on the press. Made me work a little bit harder. After it had seen a couple thousand rounds I checked it again and saw it had dropped to 5 1/2lbs.
Then they came out with the revised stronger striker (and spring), so I ordered one to try it. It was still smooth, but the trigger pull was bumped back up to something like 7 1/2-8lbs.
Then, when people were talking about having their sear blocks drilled out for a larger sear plunger and spring, I learned that one of the ways S&W had increased the trigger pull weights on the original MA models was to use a different sear block with a larger/heavier sear plunger & spring. (It also involved a heavier trigger spring and steeper cam loop angle - or "candy cane", as it was being called in-house.)
So, I discussed it with one of LE guys at the factory, and ordered each of the MA-compliant blocks appropriate for both my M&P 45FS and 40c. The trigger pull bumped up maybe another half pound. Still smooth and a tackdriver, though. Haven't done anything else since then. It works.
The 40c got the then-new revised MIM striker assembly (and then the aforementioned MA sear block).
A little later both guns got a later revision of the slide stop assemblies, with the latest lever spring rate change and revision of the stress point on the right lever, which also acted to put more tension against the outside of the trigger bar, which meant a more noticeable "recovery" of the sear and trigger bat engagement.
After my last armorer recert I added yet again the latest slide stop assembly (for the "1.0" models), trigger bar and sear, which I was told would bring up my 40c to current specs of the latest "1.0" models. That was possible because I'd already gone to the older MA sear block with the larger sear plunger & spring, as the current sear block's guides wouldn't fit with the molded frame guides in my older vintage gun.
It made the trigger similar to what I experienced with my then-current late production issued M&P 40 (my last issued weapon, being a retired guy who had stayed on as a reserve). It was okay, but once the shooting got fast and busy the subtle nuances of trigger pull weight fall by the wayside, and I'm not a "shoot to mechanical reset" shooter, but a "trigger recovery" shooter, so the minor "reset" feature has no interest to me for a working gun.
FWIW, due to changes in the sear block frame guides, newer sear blocks aren't interchangeable with older models, and when ordering some parts and assemblies the factory usually needs to ask for serial numbers to look up the parts needed for any particular production vintage, and to make sure any changes in specs (angles, etc) are compatible and appropriate for any particular M&P.
Once I lost my peace officer exemption I could no longer buy the constantly revised and improved M&P's (outside of the original CA Shield), unless I wanted to buy a used one from one of the guys who were frequently buying - and quickly getting bored with - each and every new gun that was released.
I haven't had any particular interest in any of the new M&P's or Glocks, though, because I have an ample "supply" of previously acquired pistols from all the opportunities I ahd to buy discounted pistols as an armorer.
Besides, now that I've taken a couple year sabbatical from being a firearms instructor, I'm no longer busy working hard to try and make a significant dent in my former agency's range ammo inventory a few times a month.
Rather like how I no longer feel the need to pound a heavy bag like I used to do in my earlier years in the arts, trying to learn blows and kicks. Now it's more a matter of finding the right balance of making sure the edge of any of those skills don't degrade too quickly or get too rusted over.
When I got my 9mm FDE 5" M&P, it came with a thumb safety. The very first day on the range, I started hating it. It was too easy, to engage/disengage. Made firing it not fun. Many times I found my self mashing the trigger, wondering why it is not firing, only to find out the safety was engaged..........again.
One call to S&W for free frame plugs and one youtube video later, my safety is now in the spare parts bin.
I had no idea the safety tension could be adjusted.
Well, nobody from S&W will officially state that it can be "adjusted", nor recommend it be attempted.
The ease of the original M&P lever's movement did seem to catch folks who used a "modern technique" 1911 thumb placement, or just high/neutral with plastic pistols, by surprise if their thumb came in contact with it.
However, having been through some other armorer training classes where we were taught to that it would sometimes be necessary to file and stone some surfaces to make them fit within required specs (or remove burrs, etc) ...
I studied the engagement surfaces of the lever notches and plunger and decided to make an adjustment to a couple spots on the lever notches (rather than the point of the plunger, which some other folks have tried). I made the angles steeper and a bit deeper where a couple of the lever surfaces engaged the plunger tip for both lowering and raising the lever. I found the spots where it ended up with the tension (if not the lever position and thumb "placement") being pretty similar to what was needed to raise and lower a standard 1911 safety-lock (thumb safety) lever. It made it similar to the potential for unintentional engagement or disengagement of a 1911 during normal shooting.
The guy who was in charge of the firearms training and armorers at my agency examined the end result and approved it to be done to his personal M&P 45.
I eventually was approved to make the same "adjustment" to one or two other M&P 45's owned by a couple of other senior instructors (also longtime 1911 guys, which somewhat speaks to their thumb placement).
The problem with this sort of "adjustment" is at least twofold.
First, you're operating outside of anything specifically approved by the factory to be done as an armorer.
Secondly, if you don't know what you're doing (and approach it cautiously, having some background in repairing and servicing guns), you may risk ruining the gun (that assembly, at any rate), and/or making it unsafe for continued use. Here be dragons.
I'd not have done this adjustment for anyone else without the approval of the head of the FTU, meaning he accepted the liability for it being transferred to his shoulders. Granted, he was now the head armorer and I'd known him his whole career, and he trusted me, but that's a significant (and arguably unnecessary) exposure to potential liability that he decided to accept.
I'd enjoyed much the same trust when originally working under the first guy in charge of the FTU when I first joined the FTU. He eventually approved me to make various adjustments to duty and off-duty weapons, under his supervision, for specific and practical reasons. Since he was a machinist before he became a cop, and had enjoyed building high end 1911's, Hi-Powers and PPC revolvers as a hobby, he was a pretty demanding task master, though. Armorer classes were always much easier than having him overseeing my work at the bench.
Not being a trained and licensed gunsmith, I don't do these sort of things for money or profit, or for the general public. I'm just a simple LE armorer.
Duty gun is an M&P40 first gen. They were bought in 2010. Obviously it's stock.
Also an M&P40 compact first gen. I got it for something like $200 during an armorer's course. Stock.
When we were looking to switch from 4043s, I wanted to like the then new Sig P250, but I shot the M&P better.
I've shot the full-size in local IDPA matches and that pistol just feels right.
Anyone else shoot your full sized better than the single stacks. I know I do went to a range and rented the 2.0 Shield and the 43X. Did not shoot either one well at all. Did really well with the 2.0 9 compact and my first gen full sized M&P 9.
I have 1.0 9c, Shields in 9 &45, have a 4.25” Pro Series 9 that I wish I hadn’t sold, and just picked up a former Milwaukee Police Dept M&P 40 with good night sights for $275 with all three back straps, manual and had Talon grips installed on it. The MPD gun was made in 2013 and has an audible and tactile reset, unlike my late 2011 made 9c.
The former MPD gun is likely going to be my off duty carry gun soon as I get it to the range to make sure it’s still good to go, although it’s in nice enough shape I have no doubt it’ll be fine.
I do find it’s easier to shoot the double stacks better than the shields, I think it’s because they’re so skinny, at least for me.
I just have to say the Shield is a solid platform. I own a few and have been impressed with then. While I do find them a bit thin I do like them and shoot them well. I think for the money that are both reliable and something I fully trust. I would have no problem carrying one.
I agree 100% But as some said maybe shooting it more and training with it. It could just be me but it seemed to have a touch more felt recoil.
Do you have the Gen 1 or the 2.0 version.
I want a 40 again. I was in LE back in the 80’s I carried a S&W 586 4”. The 40 I want is the 2.0 compact. Your new 40 a compact I’m guessing.
Both but I prefer the 2.0 version better.
The one I shoot over the weekend was the Gen 1 with the 7rd mag and did not like the feel at all. I would have buy several 8rd mags or install mag extensions.
I will have to look hard at the 2.0 shield.
One of my carry pistols is a 2010 m&p 4.25 40 with a thumb safety and a apex fss trigger kit . Nice shooter and feels good in the hand . Never had issues with tripping the thumb safety but I did reduce the size of the thumbs safeties as I prefer the small GI safety on 1911's , smaller is better for me . After reading on a forum the new 2.0 m&p 40's use a 20lb springs instead of the old 16lb spring and verifying that with s&w CS and I did change to a 20lb spring and split times shooting it were quicker for me and light loads still cycle well .
I love my M&P's.