My M&P9

[redial]

50 yards really is the Electric Kool-Aid Acid Test for pistol accuracy and it's where I test loads for bullseye guns. Nearly any ammo except conspicuously bad ammo will shoot well enough at 25, and even some that shoot well at 25 turn to mud at 50.

Is it relevant in USPSA or IDPA? You can decide for yourself, but if you really want to know about accuracy, test at 50 yards.

Mark

[PEETERSMARC]

Hello

I'm a big fan of the M&P line but the inacuracy is a big problem.

So i did a lot of tests and i really think that the M&P can be accurate with the correct load but completly inacurate with some !

I have 7 M&P with older and new barrel and i have the same result in all

Here the last test i did (25 meter) !

Marc

Edited September 1, 2012 by PEETERSMARC

[HI5-O]

Wow, looks like heavier is better.

[grouse]

Awesome thread. I was drinking the m&p koolaid. I need to put it to the test at further ranges and see how it does.

[grouse]

It's a $500 plastic gun. I stuck it in the safe in my nightstand.

This gets my vote for the best comment on the thread. Perfect.

[Art Yeo]

50 yards really is the Electric Kool-Aid Acid Test for pistol accuracy and it's where I test loads for bullseye guns. Nearly any ammo except conspicuously bad ammo will shoot well enough at 25, and even some that shoot well at 25 turn to mud at 50.

[...]

I agree with you if USPSA or bullseye matches are what one has in mind, then finding and getting the right pistol that can perform at those distances are certainly not just an ideal property to have but a requirement.

As for myself, I only shoot IDPA and carry them for CCW purposes. I can safely say that the IDPA matches will only stretch the pistol at longer distances but probably no longer than 25 yds.

For CCW, almost all 99% of the CCW encounters are less than 15ft and significantly large number of those were under 10ft.

As an academic exercise, I'd certainly be interested to see how my pistols perform at 50 yards, including my Les Baer 1911.

No KoolAid needed, simply test your weapons at the distances of your application and trust the results of your tests. That's the best one can do.

[mjohn]

I have been using factory Federal American Eagle 147's. They only problem I have seen is that when reloading, the powder manufacture velocity specs seem to run higher than the velocity of my M&P when shot over various chronos.

Edited September 2, 2012 by mjohn

[theycallmeingot]

i just don't see the point in using an inaccurate gun, even at close range, and calling it "good 'nuff!" when there are similarly priced guns that function just as well, and are way more accurate.

i own an M&P, but if it had the atrocious accuracy that is being described here, I wouldn't. Smith and Wesson would love it if we all only cared about accuracy at 10ft, because they would have no improvements to make.

[Art Yeo]

i just don't see the point in using an inaccurate gun, even at close range, and calling it "good 'nuff!" when there are similarly priced guns that function just as well, and are way more accurate.

[...]

I think you guys may have mis-read what I wrote and it'd also help to glance at the plate targets of the before/after KKM barrel performance.

After the KKM barrel was dropped in, the performance of the M&P9 is close to my 1911's at 50ft but not before.

That's all I'm saying. Hope it clears up things.

[Aint No Rest 4 The Wicked]

All this information was already posted on 10-8 forum and here. Factory barrels, do to a slow twist rate shot 147 well.

KKM shoots 115 and 124 very well. And in a week there will be another thread asking the same

[RH45]

Now go to 25 yards and 50 yards, not feet, and post your photos.

I'll try that in my next range visit but, seriously, are there 50 yard targets in IDPA? I have not seen one that far. I have seen 20yd to 20+ yds ones.

In my mind, the KKM bbl has made the M&P9 good enough for me.

I've had to shoot 50 yards, several times, at IDPA matches.

My 9 Pro shot 2" at 25 yards, but, it's been quite a while since I've benched it. I'm going to have to dig it out one of these days to see if the accuracy deteriorated.

[Keninaz]

When the gun first came out did any of the gun magazine articals note any accuracy problems? I don't recall any issues, however I don't read every gun magazine.

Kendall

[Trident]

Well I'm going to add a little more for ya.

I have been doing a lot of testing lately with the MP and bullets.

This week I again tested all bullet weights, OAL, and PF's from 120 -135.

I did find that the Hornady XTP 124g over 4.2g N320 @ both 1.069 and 1.130 both shot 3" groups of 30 rounds @ 25 yards with over half all touching in 1.5". This is as well, if not better, as any 147g ( MG, Berries, BB, 147g 3.4-6 N320 @ 1.130) previously recorded at 3-4" which was the standard benchmark for my MP Pro with either the OEM or KKM barrel.

Up to this point the 147g bullets are grouped better than 124g bullets by 1-2".

Now I need to figure out why the Hor 124g XTP shot 1-2" better than all other 124g tested?

The one note was that the Hor 124g was loaded the same as the MG @ 4.2g N320 @ and went 135PF as opposed to the MG @ 125PF and all previous tests of 124g bullets were done at 125PF so back to the test range to test this load again & shoot these groups against MG, Berries and BB with all bullets at 135PF instead of 125PF to see if that helps?????

Maybe the accuracy will be better with the 124g @ 135PF????

Edited September 12, 2012 by Trident

[Ronnie j]

When the gun first came out did any of the gun magazine articals note any accuracy problems? I don't recall any issues, however I don't read every gun magazine.

Kendall

Gun rags are selling guns , it's no wonder you didn't hear any negative.

[Trident]

When the gun first came out did any of the gun magazine articals note any accuracy problems? I don't recall any issues, however I don't read every gun magazine.

Kendall

Gun rags are selling guns , it's no wonder you didn't hear any negative.

Accuracy is subjective and most mag test that I have seen are 15 feet (7rds) and closer and 6" is good enough for what they are reviewing.

[Sin-ster]

I'll just toss this in there without pictures, because I'm relatively useless I suppose...

My load has always been:

MG 124 JHP

4.2 grains N320

1.140" in the factory barrel; 1.125" in the KKM

.376 crimp

I never got around to shooting my 9 Pro from rest with the factory barrel, so I have no comparison point. I can say that off hand groups improved immediately and visibly with the KKM, so... it made a difference. However, I was not having problems with the factory unit-- as in, not 4"+ groups at 25 yards...

Before I benched the KKM, I took a class with Manny Bragg. I had him shoot it, off hand at a pretty crappy target for grouping, @ 20 yards. He shot 4 of 5 rounds into one sub-1" clover leaf, and cursed at a flier that stretched the group to about 2.5".

Since then, when I'm actually shooting from a proper rest at a target that makes it easy (on me) to keep the same POA, I've managed 1.5" several times @ 25 yards. Manny is notably better than me...

We shot 99-33 several months ago at one of my local matches-- Merle's Standards, with a 35 yard target. I called 8 Alpha, a Charlie, a possible Delta, and 2 Mikes at said target. I scored 8 Alpha, 2 Delta, and 2 Mikes. (Got going too fast at the end of both strings...) Pretty sure the extra Delta was a bad shot call, and not the gun...

Now, what does that mean? Well, prior to reading Trident's posts about basically the same configuration of barrel and load, I was convinced that KKM + 124 grain MG JHP + N320 was the way to go for these guns. And in general, that may still be true. (I know of 2 other shooters reporting almost identical results as I get with that combo.)

However, it seems pretty clear that some of these guns have problems to some degree or another. And that's why I think we're all waiting on the edge of our seats to see if the APEX stuff coming out will fix some of these guns. Still, I'm pretty positive that the VAST majority of these things are not inherently inaccurate given the right set of components.

ETA-- Trident, I get 130-131 PF out of my gun with the 124 MG JHP's and 4.2 grains of N320, over and over again. At FL State Championship, my ES was *3 FPS*. Something may be going on with your gun or barrel...

Edited September 12, 2012 by Sin-ster

[rack&roll]

Trident said: "I also installed the full Apex treatment and found that while the trigger weight increased by 1/2# with the OEM Pro sear as opposed to the Apex sear the noticeable and audible "click" on the initial first part of the trigger pull is absent and the overall feel is smother, although 1/2# heavier, with the OEM Pro sear. I spoke with Scott at Apex about his sent them video ext.... about this issue. They sent a replacement sear which is better but still present and we are working on it. It seems to have to do with the firing pin to sear, manufacturing surfaces of the Apex sear. The best overall trigger feel is with the OEM Pro sear and APEX comp parts, RAM, and USB. The Apex sear is good for another 1/2 pound off the trigger pull but then I have the click."

I did the same, and just learned to live with the "click". At a match, I don't even notice it, but at home dry firing it can be really annoying. I may just try the OEM sear...thanks for the tip!

[Trident]

I'll just toss this in there without pictures, because I'm relatively useless I suppose...

My load has always been:

MG 124 JHP

4.2 grains N320

1.140" in the factory barrel; 1.125" in the KKM

.376 crimp

ETA-- Trident, I get 130-131 PF out of my gun with the 124 MG JHP's and 4.2 grains of N320, over and over again. At FL State Championship, my ES was *3 FPS*. Something may be going on with your gun or barrel...

Why, or what, did you see different in OAL between the OEM and KKM barrel. 1.140 & 1.125 difference ???? Just curious why you made this change between the two?

[Sin-ster]

I'll just toss this in there without pictures, because I'm relatively useless I suppose...

My load has always been:

MG 124 JHP

4.2 grains N320

1.140" in the factory barrel; 1.125" in the KKM

.376 crimp

ETA-- Trident, I get 130-131 PF out of my gun with the 124 MG JHP's and 4.2 grains of N320, over and over again. At FL State Championship, my ES was *3 FPS*. Something may be going on with your gun or barrel...

Why, or what, did you see different in OAL between the OEM and KKM barrel. 1.140 & 1.125 difference ???? Just curious why you made this change between the two?

I like to load as long as the chamber will allow, minus a .010 cushion (based on the consistency in OAL coming out of my press). I'll mock up some dummy rounds and make sure they're good in the magazines and under manual cycling, then begin to work up the load based on that length.

I use the fired case/fresh projectile method of determining the chamber's max OAL, and then typically resize a case, press in a projectile at .005 over my determined max, and slowly sink it lower to confirm my measurements. (Redding Competition Seating Die makes this very, very easy.)

Simply put, the chamber was tighter and shorter (as I assumed it would be on a match barrel) on the KKM than it was on the factory unit, by about .015-.020 (I can't recall exactly, but I likely rounded down a couple of thousandths for a prettier final number).

I of course tested out the velocity changes of shortening the load up in the factory barrel, and saw no real difference at all. No pressure signs, no hard extraction, etc-- just made sure everything was safe. I've shot... Wow... 25k through the KKM at this point, of that exact load, with no issues; some of the brass has gone through at least 8 times at this point, no less, and still holds primers just fine.

I like to be as long as (safely) possible for a couple of reasons. First and foremost, I've always read that longer is better for reliable feeding. Second, having taken some instruction from SERIOUS precision rifle shooters, they were all keen on loading right up to (and sometimes right ON) the rifling, it just stuck. In all of my 9mm handguns, I use some variation of this exact load... and they all claim at (or above) the best accuracy reports I can find for each pistol.

[Trident]

I'll just toss this in there without pictures, because I'm relatively useless I suppose...

My load has always been:

MG 124 JHP

4.2 grains N320

1.140" in the factory barrel; 1.125" in the KKM

.376 crimp

ETA-- Trident, I get 130-131 PF out of my gun with the 124 MG JHP's and 4.2 grains of N320, over and over again. At FL State Championship, my ES was *3 FPS*. Something may be going on with your gun or barrel...

Why, or what, did you see different in OAL between the OEM and KKM barrel. 1.140 & 1.125 difference ???? Just curious why you made this change between the two?

I like to load as long as the chamber will allow, minus a .010 cushion (based on the consistency in OAL coming out of my press). I'll mock up some dummy rounds and make sure they're good in the magazines and under manual cycling, then begin to work up the load based on that length.

I use the fired case/fresh projectile method of determining the chamber's max OAL, and then typically resize a case, press in a projectile at .005 over my determined max, and slowly sink it lower to confirm my measurements. (Redding Competition Seating Die makes this very, very easy.)

Simply put, the chamber was tighter and shorter (as I assumed it would be on a match barrel) on the KKM than it was on the factory unit, by about .015-.020 (I can't recall exactly, but I likely rounded down a couple of thousandths for a prettier final number).

I of course tested out the velocity changes of shortening the load up in the factory barrel, and saw no real difference at all. No pressure signs, no hard extraction, etc-- just made sure everything was safe. I've shot... Wow... 25k through the KKM at this point, of that exact load, with no issues; some of the brass has gone through at least 8 times at this point, no less, and still holds primers just fine.

I like to be as long as (safely) possible for a couple of reasons. First and foremost, I've always read that longer is better for reliable feeding. Second, having taken some instruction from SERIOUS precision rifle shooters, they were all keen on loading right up to (and sometimes right ON) the rifling, it just stuck. In all of my 9mm handguns, I use some variation of this exact load... and they all claim at (or above) the best accuracy reports I can find for each pistol.

Here are my Max OAL #'s. As you can see my KKM barrel is longer for all.

For S&W MP Pro 9

Magazine Max OAL = 1.180

Stock Barrel

Max Chamber length for MG 124g CMJ = 1.198

Max Chamber length for MG 124g JHP = 1.153

Max Chamber length for MG 147g CMJ = 1.184

KKM Barrel

Max Chamber length for MG 115g JHP = 1.155

Max Chamber length for MG 124g CMJ= 1.228

Max Chamber length for MG 124g JHP = 1.182

Max Chamber length for MG 147g CMJ = 1.220

[Sin-ster]

Your stock Max Lengths match what mine was for the 124's almost precisely. Your KKM, however, is roughly .06 deeper. Crazy.

I wonder if that is the factor that's leading to the variance in performance with that load, or if it's just a coincidence?

[Trident]

Your stock Max Lengths match what mine was for the 124's almost precisely. Your KKM, however, is roughly .06 deeper. Crazy.

I wonder if that is the factor that's leading to the variance in performance with that load, or if it's just a coincidence?

Not sure but I have tested all my loads with oak from 1.120 to 1.145 in .005 and seen no noticeable difference shooting 17 and 34 shot groups.

I even loaded the Hornady 124g at Hornady's recommended OAL of 1.069 and 1.130( for some OAL load consistency) and got a same overall size 3-4" group but tighter group with more than half of the 34 rounds touching in a 1.5-2" hole of 17 or so holes at the 1.069 but with only one test hard to make that call.

Going to do a second test today to confirm the previous Hornady results and hopefully the higher PF (135) MG 124 JHP loaded to 4.4g N320 as 4.2 gets me 125 PF.

[Sin-ster]

Your stock Max Lengths match what mine was for the 124's almost precisely. Your KKM, however, is roughly .06 deeper. Crazy.

I wonder if that is the factor that's leading to the variance in performance with that load, or if it's just a coincidence?

Not sure but I have tested all my loads with oak from 1.120 to 1.145 in .005 and seen no noticeable difference shooting 17 and 34 shot groups.

I even loaded the Hornady 124g at Hornady's recommended OAL of 1.069 and 1.130( for some OAL load consistency) and got a same overall size 3-4" group but tighter group with more than half of the 34 rounds touching in a 1.5-2" hole of 17 or so holes at the 1.069 but with only one test hard to make that call.

Going to do a second test today to confirm the previous Hornady results and hopefully the higher PF (135) MG 124 JHP loaded to 4.4g N320 as 4.2 gets me 125 PF.

Keep your eyes open for pressure signs in that 124/4.4 N320 load. My Federal SPP are definitely on the hairy edge of flattening at 4.25-4.3 grains of same, but they are the softest on the market and the 9mm web can take pretty impressive pressures.

That is nuts that we're getting such drastically different velocities as well. I'd be willing to bet that the difference there also accounts for the greater part of our velocity difference as well.

What's your ES and SD for the 4.2 load? I found that the faster/hotter I push those projectiles with N320, the more consistent the velocities become.

[PC Geek Shooter]

I know people have been talking about the early unlocking issues on the M&P9 FS and 5". Main reason I got rid of my M&P9L. I know Randy from Apex was working on a new locking block to have a cheaper alternative than purchasing the Apex/Bar-Sto barrels.

Anyone hear anymore news on this? Last update I read on M4C was like 4-6 months ago and haven't been paying attention as I am planning on doing the custom fitted Storm Lake barrel from Grant and G&RTactical. Also spending 90% of free time learning more on reloading.

Also like the talk on your reloads.

Someone made a comment that there will probably be a new topic about the M&P9's accuracy in a week or so, so let's keep this thread updated and it'll always be on page 1 or top of page 2 and we won't have to worry about that

[Trident]

Ok getting somewhere here.

MP9 Pro w/ KKM Barrel

I re-tested the Hornady 124g XTP 4.2g N320 @1.130. So with all the tests done with 4.2g N320 and Horandy XTP = 131-134PF. Again all 17 round tests shot 3" groups with 1 or 2 flyers to 4-6". This was the best this gun would shoot.

I then tested the MG 147g at 3.8g N320= 134PF from the 3.6g N320 = 124PF and shot 4 tests of 17 rounds all shot 3" groups with 2-3 flyers @ 4-6" which is the same as before. These 147g 3.8g N320 @ 1.130 loads tightened up from 4" to 3" groups. 4" groups were previously the best 147g loads.

Now heres where it gets even better:

I tested the MG 124g JHP @ 4.4g N320 @ 1.130 = 134PF and with 4 tests of 17 rounds, every test was in 3" groups w/ a total of 2-3 flyers @ 4-6". So it appears that increasing the PF from 125 to 135 brought the groups down from 4-6" to 3" and under.

For now, I think my problem is solved.

Here is a photo of the primers. Let me know what you think.

Edited September 15, 2012 by Trident