Jhp147

Interesting. When I got an early M&P, I sent it to Dan Burwell for trigger work. One thing he did was angle and polish the striker foot. It seemed like a logical improvement , though I could imagine that the angle would very slightly reduce the distance it travelled both backward in cocking and therefore the amount of forward travel. I was worried it might reduce striker force but I could not tell any difference. It looks like the 2.0 incorporates a better version. Anyone tried the 2.0 in a 1.0 or know if they might interchange?

I took a tour of the S&W plant in 2007. The guy doing the tour was a 30 year employee of the factory, doing this as a volunteer. While showing us where they were shaping or cutting M&P barrels, he mentioned some dots or maybe dimples on the bottom of the barrels or chambers as though he got asked about them often. He said they were not any kind of secret code, they were a way of measuring tool wear. I guess these are the dots you mean, but I’m not sure. Then again, that was 15 years ago.

If by short you mean shorter than Commander, read up on potential reliability issues before buying. Newer Colt Defenders may be more reliable out of the box that earlier ones, not certain. My older one is not quite there yet. For me, a solid belt and OWB holster allow me to carry a steel framed Commander-sized gun comfortably, but I see a lot of lightweight frames being carried. 1911s feel much slimmer than full size double stack guns I carried for years. I have no experience with the .38. I’m also of the opinion that buying on price is not the best way to get into 1911s. I’ll pay for reliability and quality instead of save money and be frustrated with something that does not do what I want-function.

From your list, I’d say you are coming from exactly where I have. I shot a lightweight Guardian and the quality difference was just visible. I wanted a stainless steel frame and got a Valor (but bobtailed-to try it out) and have decided I’ll buy DW over anything in the factory grade guns. Even thinking about selling two Government sized I thought I liked a lot to buy one DW to replace them. I agree with the poster above as far as like an Ed Brown. Small sample but the two or three I have looked at look closer to a Brown than a Colt for way below Brown price.

If you are a little familiar with what the insides/small parts look like and the way the slide feels when operating of your other guns, look at the same things in a DW. That will make your decision.

I bought a new Springfield RO Elite Champion package that came with 5 of their 9 round mags-CheckMate, I think. Two of the five refused to lock back and I could see no visible differences between them and the ones that did. Switched followers and bodies and got variable results. Sent them to Ed Brown on the mag trade in deal at ten bucks each and got back what looks like two of the very same mags-except with the EB etched on the lower side and two different pads with each. They lock back each and every time. In the meantime I bought a Wilson ETM 10 that works.

I'm no 'smith but have put on and taken off a few sights for customers and officers as an armorer. My personal rule is that on any Kimber in for sights, it is ONLY with the understanding that the rear sight will likely be destroyed in the process. Otherwise, we recommend priority mail to Novaks or Kimber as best option. I have seen too many beat up slides and wont' be a guy that does that. After the usual 24 hours penetrating oil soaking and then oil pressed under the sight via the set screw used as a piston, heat via heavy duty solder gun at screw hole to melt Loc-Tite, the sight pusher (won't work but just so I can say I did ) and them wrapping everything in tape for application of the various punches and hammer...if none of that works, we go to the mill which is at least less work than a Dremel but does the same thing. Point being, those things are bears.

My 2006 M&P is so bad about the slide angling and sights shifting left to right when the tension comes off the striker/sear that it discouraged dry fire. I've wondered if a newer locking block with less generous tolerances was ever available or if a newer one would help. I have a newer striker and large spring sear block installed. It is not nearly as visible in my later models, but they are .45.

They will all lock back by hand. Just on a quick look when I had them apart, I didn't see any difference in the followers at all. Good idea on the comparison, I'll look at them again and number the followers to match the magazines and see if I can narrow it down to followers. Springs all seem to feel the same but will double check the length and will check back in after I get a chance to shoot this week. Most appreciative. ETA-I remember adding bend to the upper leg of numerous .45 CMC mag followers years ago when they were tired and not locking back. That or a new spring or both. Never thought about a new one needing it.

I let curiosity about 9mm get the best of me and purchased the Springfield Armory RO Elite Champion. It came with 4 magazines, and I bought a Wilson ETM for comparison. Final score is that two magazines work great, two feed great but either seldom or never lock back. The Wilson works every time, too. Looking at the mags, took them apart (what a pain compared to .45) and could find NO differences between the 2/2 though I didn't mic the parts or anything like that. I shot the gun with an EGW slide stop to see if there was an issue that could be fixed that way. It is a bit tight and didn't change things with the two FTLB mags. Next? I hate to call SA and try to exchange two mags, but if that is it, that is it. Worst they can say is no.

I'm thinking it's going to be a pretty big meeting if the support group ever forms, judging from these threads.

AGAIN? This is the most popular subject on forums, I think, the threads run forever. I'd like to see the Spartan product in the video run through the more controlled test that George Fennell does on Weapon Shield. I ran across "tungsten di-sulfide" while looking at something else unrelated to firearms, and it seemed like a great anti-friction additive, used in engines. Just for grins, I bought a bottle of gun oil from Archoil that has the tungsten di-sulfide. It feels more slippery than my WS, but have no idea yet if it stays in place or prevents corrosion. That gets me up to about 8 partial bottles of lubricants I have. Some folks collect guns, I just collect the oil.

Is it worth calling Apex? I can't think but that they'd help since you are 100% Apex now. I've seen threads where they have helped folks with guns with the "generous" tolerances M&Ps often......feature.

Guess the rail block isn't or won't be available. Curious how that would help/not help an Apex barrel, but I'd mainly like to have less slop in the slide so the front sight doesn't move so much when the tension on the striker is released when I dry fire. Minor annoyance, I know.

I don't know about open guns as far as lubricant needs compared to other ones, but the videos George Fennell of Weapons Shield posts on his site are pretty convincing. Have used his stuff for years (with Slide Glide on rails at times) but again-no experience in high volume race guns.

That thread probably explains the "Export Only" SKU numbers, frames that went to Britain and some here were nearly one-offs or cobbled together with altered or created parts, judging from the chop job to clearance for the safety. Rare birds, great info! Missed out big time when I never got a 945 and regret it. EDITED TO ADD: Next post corrected my wrong impression that the photograph was from the old thread shown when it is actually the poster's gun as explained below. Now I wonder if it went over and came back or was one of the team guns here. I'm guess that these guns inadvertently were the test bed for what became the 945s.

If you haven't looked it up already...the Standard Catalog of Smith and Wesson describes the 3566TSW Limited that came in .356TSW in five product codes with yours probably being 170032. They were produced in 1993 only. I mention the five because there is nothing in the list of variations or details about the guns in the info that shows or describes the safety type at all. The photo in the book only shows the right side of the gun with the filler plug in the right side of the slide, no safety on that side of the frame. The only slide mounted safeties I was aware of are the ones on the 945s made between 1998 and 2005. Looks like they were all ambi and were 1911 style/shape. I don't see anything else with frame safeties until the 2004 introduction of the 1911s. I have tried to stay sort of familiar with S&W, and don't recall ever seeing anything except a photo of one like you describe being fired by a S&W team member, but I could not recall if it was a slide or frame mounted one as that was a long time ago. The only production figures listed are a 3 1/2 inch compact version that was a run of 200. Two versions were cataloged as "Export only" with no further description. Definitely worth the cost of a "letter."

I don't know that this will help, as the info I saw was 10 years ago and specs may have changed...but at one time, some folks on another forum were replacing their springs with .063 music wire to make the springs STIFFER. To do that, they pressed the spring out, top to bottom, and drilled it with a 1/16th bit. No glue was mentioned, they were describing them as "press fit." There was some discussion about how the flexibility of the grip, the varying distance (tolerance? variance?) between catch and mag contributed to the way the whole thing worked as far as the mags being released too easily. Maybe you could reduce the engagement of the mag catch by removing a bit of material (cheap part, no messing with frame) and improve it to your liking.

All joking aside, would those insides be understandable or acceptable in a $1500 gun rather than the current prices on 2011s? I'm not on my way out to buy one and only have owned a Spartan and Trojan (both a lot less than $1500 insides and outsides but ran) and the 2011 guys I know don't complain-but that was 2011s from a few years ago. I'm not questioning your judgment, I'm actually looking for more insight. I've considered a 9mm SS of some sort and this looked like it made sense. Keep seeing new people and news out of Georgetown and wonder. Like most Texans, having a GOOD gun that is made here appeals to me.

This is EXACTLY what I was thinking...the EDC9 at half the cost...sorta. I don't know if this would make me want to sell a Commander, but I'm sure curious.

For .45 shooters, looks like they have the original version and 2.0 back in stock at http://www.speedshooterspecialties.com/store/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=103_88_315&products_id=875

There is an M&P specific part of this forum, http://smith-wessonforum.com/forum.php . There are some LE armorer types that can be found there, good source of factory type info. To ME and this is just my NON-scientific take, each forum offers a different type of M&P user and a different angle. The BE forum has more experimenters, the competition and often out on the front edge of things guys...the high round count shooters. The M&P forum has a broad range of users, with some novice user/carriers and some internal mechanical authorities worth looking at (I think Avedis is one, but there are three or four there), and the S&W forum has more LE armorer type insights in the posts.

Cheapest I've seen right there. Getting there on cost, but now looking at the 2.0 guns and still watching for Apex. Wonder if they can get close to that? I'm in no hurry.