I am looking at a Smith & Wesson M&P 22lr. Any one have any experience with this gun? I also looked at the 22-A however; it had a lot of negative reviews. Any info. will be appreciated.
S&W M&P 22lr
-
Glocktalk is a forum community dedicated to Glock enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about Glock pistols and rifles, optics, hunting, gunsmithing, styles, reviews, accessories, and more!
Ken43
1 - 20 of 34 Posts
Joined
·
4 Posts
I have one and love it. I've shot it with optics and iron sites. It is a lot of fun and pretty much eats any ammo.
Joined
·
140,132 Posts
Just more pot metal junk from Umarex, in my opinion. Smith & Wesson doesn't build it. To me, there are better ways to spend $400 on a rimfire pistol.
To each there own. I know many people like them.
Joined
·
2,369 Posts
get a ruger or a browning
Joined
·
419 Posts
I had one the first year they came out. It was a fun little gun and always had people come over and try it out.
It was however picky on the ammo. If i remember correctly CCI makes .22 ammo just for AR type .22's. Something about the feed ramps not liking the short heads.
-Phal
It was however picky on the ammo. If i remember correctly CCI makes .22 ammo just for AR type .22's. Something about the feed ramps not liking the short heads.
-Phal
Joined
·
827 Posts
I got two in, kept one and transferred one to a friend, we both love them! Mine shoots anything, haven't asked the friend what brand rounds he's running through his. (Note: this the M&P 15-22, I also have the M&P22, and it's been flawless too)
I've got some other Umarex "junk" and never had a problem with any of it. Inexpensive (relatively) and goes bang when the trigger is pulled, doesn't go bang when it isn't. In fact, the three latest purchases of mine that were made by Kimber, Glock and Smith&Wesson are what I've had the most trouble with. The Kimber went back to maker twice, the Smith once, but will have to go back again, as it still is failing exactly as it did before sending it back! The Glock (17 gen 4) still sprays brass in interesting directions.
I've got some other Umarex "junk" and never had a problem with any of it. Inexpensive (relatively) and goes bang when the trigger is pulled, doesn't go bang when it isn't. In fact, the three latest purchases of mine that were made by Kimber, Glock and Smith&Wesson are what I've had the most trouble with. The Kimber went back to maker twice, the Smith once, but will have to go back again, as it still is failing exactly as it did before sending it back! The Glock (17 gen 4) still sprays brass in interesting directions.
Joined
·
7,862 Posts
I'm enjoying mine:wavey:
Joined
·
140,132 Posts
Seriously? Walther?
No, it's not made by Walther. It's made by the same company that builds the POS Walther P22. It's called Umarex. It's an airsoft company that also builds cheap rimfire replicas out of zinc, aluminum, and plastic.
Joined
·
745 Posts
I have experience with both the M&P-22 ams The 22-A.
I more time on the 22-A. I have only rented the M&P-22 at the range. I have owned and shoot a 22-A.
I will start with the M&P-22. I rented it at a local range where it came with only one mag. The pistol was dirty but not extremely dirty by any means. I'm guessing it had maybe 200 rounds through it before I started. I brought 200 rounds of different ammo brands ammo. Some was federal LRN some were Winchester Super-X and the rest was CCI Mini-Mag. The pistol had -0- issues the whole time. The trigger was actually pretty good and maybe slightly better than my M&P-9. As for accuracy I seemed to shoot it high/left. and it got worse as I got farther out. It seemed real accurate. More accurate than me. The only complaint might be the plastic safety lever seemed cheap. But it did it job fine.
As for the 22-A I have at least 750 rounds through it.
I has only had one issue where a case got stuck un the chamber. No idea why or what caused it and it has never done this since. It is VERY accurate and easy to field strip.
I have put 300+ rounds through it in one range trip with 0 issues so far. It seems as it could care less it it is dirty, clean, dry, or wet. It just plain runs and isn't picky on ammo at all.
The only complaints I have with it is the safety is a bit hard to
maneuver on/off with my thumb. It's small and take a good bit
off pressure to move. Also they use a plastic recoil buffer in the bolt and it gets pretty chewed up after 750 so far. I'm still on the same original buffer but they do give you extras ones with a new pistol. The trigger is better than the M&P-22.
For the Money it is HARD to beat the 22-A. But it's still not a Runger MK pistol. I'd get a Ruger MKIII over the other 2.
I more time on the 22-A. I have only rented the M&P-22 at the range. I have owned and shoot a 22-A.
I will start with the M&P-22. I rented it at a local range where it came with only one mag. The pistol was dirty but not extremely dirty by any means. I'm guessing it had maybe 200 rounds through it before I started. I brought 200 rounds of different ammo brands ammo. Some was federal LRN some were Winchester Super-X and the rest was CCI Mini-Mag. The pistol had -0- issues the whole time. The trigger was actually pretty good and maybe slightly better than my M&P-9. As for accuracy I seemed to shoot it high/left. and it got worse as I got farther out. It seemed real accurate. More accurate than me. The only complaint might be the plastic safety lever seemed cheap. But it did it job fine.
As for the 22-A I have at least 750 rounds through it.
I has only had one issue where a case got stuck un the chamber. No idea why or what caused it and it has never done this since. It is VERY accurate and easy to field strip.
I have put 300+ rounds through it in one range trip with 0 issues so far. It seems as it could care less it it is dirty, clean, dry, or wet. It just plain runs and isn't picky on ammo at all.
The only complaints I have with it is the safety is a bit hard to
maneuver on/off with my thumb. It's small and take a good bit
off pressure to move. Also they use a plastic recoil buffer in the bolt and it gets pretty chewed up after 750 so far. I'm still on the same original buffer but they do give you extras ones with a new pistol. The trigger is better than the M&P-22.
For the Money it is HARD to beat the 22-A. But it's still not a Runger MK pistol. I'd get a Ruger MKIII over the other 2.
Joined
·
7,502 Posts
I like the M&P 22. I understand it isn't some fancy-pants pistol, but it is a good, reliable, realistic trainer for my regular M&P pistols. I have a suppressor I can run on it too. It isn't going to win beauty or accuracy contests, but it is what it is.
Joined
·
457 Posts
I love mine, it functions flawlessly and eats any ammo i put in it.
Joined
·
1,912 Posts
I used to own a M&P .22lr pistol. The initial cleaning was a pain in the butt. Preservative packing grease everywhere. As long as I kept it clean and lubed, it would go bang. Mine cycled Federal and Winchester bulk 36gr copper plated just fine. Even though, there were some aspects about it that I didn't like.
1. The sights do not mimic their center fire cousins. Center fire M&P pistols have a three-dot set up. The M&P 22 pistol has a plastic front dot sight and a rear notch (no dots). Since the slide is either aluminum, I didn't want to risk drifting on a set of iron sights.
2. If the center fire M&P pistols can have adjustable back-straps, IMO the M&P 22 pistol should too.
3. No exposed hammer / no Ruger MKIII like firing pin block. Decocking the pistol is more involved. Either ride the slide forward while depressing the trigger, or put a drywall anchor in the chamber for the FP to impact.
4. Mine was issued with a single magazine. When I owned a M&P 22p, magazines were hard to find and expensive.
I sold it because my Ruger MKIII Standard can out perform the M&P 22 pistol every day of the week. Whenever I wanted to shoot a .22lr pistol, I reached for the Ruger.
I'm in agreement with BAC. If I had done my due diligence and found out it was a Umarex manufactured pistol, I'd have stayed away from it. My experience with Umarex has been less than stellar.
1. The sights do not mimic their center fire cousins. Center fire M&P pistols have a three-dot set up. The M&P 22 pistol has a plastic front dot sight and a rear notch (no dots). Since the slide is either aluminum, I didn't want to risk drifting on a set of iron sights.
2. If the center fire M&P pistols can have adjustable back-straps, IMO the M&P 22 pistol should too.
3. No exposed hammer / no Ruger MKIII like firing pin block. Decocking the pistol is more involved. Either ride the slide forward while depressing the trigger, or put a drywall anchor in the chamber for the FP to impact.
4. Mine was issued with a single magazine. When I owned a M&P 22p, magazines were hard to find and expensive.
I sold it because my Ruger MKIII Standard can out perform the M&P 22 pistol every day of the week. Whenever I wanted to shoot a .22lr pistol, I reached for the Ruger.
I'm in agreement with BAC. If I had done my due diligence and found out it was a Umarex manufactured pistol, I'd have stayed away from it. My experience with Umarex has been less than stellar.
1 - 20 of 34 Posts
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
