Accuracy - What would you do?

[want2race]

I have tested both back to back. Although the Sig had the stock recoil spring. I do like the trigger once it's down in the 3.5# range. The reset sear makes dry firing awesome. However, with the Apex barrel my Smiff just became more accurate than the stock 320. Not too mention I can do 2.5# triggers in the M&P. Not there yet on the 320. I think the "super target" is going to be the next production must have gun though.

[rhowell309]

I haven't been too fond of Sig CS and ability to provide parts. The modular grip concept is nice to fit different size hands but absolutely useless if they can't ship them. After 5 months of waiting and them selling me the wrong one twice, I'm about ready to give up on them.

Edited April 30, 2016 by rhowell309

[munsonbw]

We've ended up with several threads talking the same thing, but since the last couple of posts here also bring in other guns to the discussion I'll post here.

I am on the fence about the whole accuracy/barrel issue with the M&P. Like any (nearly any) product, there will be examples that escape factory quality control. There will also be times when the manufacturer refuses to acknowledge or accept some examples as being "defective". There is also a strong tendency on this board to expect high levels of accuracy from a competition gun. Regardless of why it seems likely for some here that the only way to get an acceptable M&P is to add a trigger kit and barrel. Take a gun that is about $550, add $100 for a trigger kit (or less if you just go with the spring kit) and $200 for the barrel and you are at $850. I think to be fair we should also consider what it costs to get other guns to the same level of accuracy and quality of trigger. I think there is a reason why CGW gets the money they do for their CZs. Sure, there are reports here that a stock 75 outshoots the M&P. But it needs a trigger job and does the stock CZ equal the M&P with Apex upgrades? Or a Tanfo Stock 2 at $850 as well, and that assumes the stock trigger is acceptable.

One must also consider why we are even messing with improving a "flawed" gun. For me, I just did not like the feel of a Glock and at my level of skill the feel of the gun was most important. I have also seen reports of sub-par accuracy from them too. Granted not to the extent you find on the M&P, but it happens. I tried out the XDm comp too, $100 more and could have also benefited from a trigger kit. Maybe a PPQ or some of the lesser known guns could have been choices, but I also thought about aftermarket support making accessories more expensive and negating any savings. So for the foreseeable future I am happy with my choice. On my first outing my bench rest group at 10yds with PMC 115gr was pretty much the same as my Dan Wesson shooting a 200gr SWC handload (read: to the best that I am able to shoot). A little worse results when shooting freehand, but being the first time out it was as expected. I am looking forward to installing the comp spring kit and benching it again at further distances to see what I get with mine.

[TacticalReload]

I agree with what you're saying here. For example, I like to read people's experiences that they post online when they take their new M&P to the range for the first time... someone just posted up on another forum that he took his new Performance Center M&P to the range. He said he "loves the gun" and it "shot surprisingly well"... his description of "surprisingly well"? He said that he was able to keep all shots within an 8" circle at 7 yards. I'm guessing that he is much more representative of the average M&P buyer than the people here who bench rest their gun for accuracy. Anyone who thinks that 8" at 7 yards is "surprisingly" accurate is never in a million years going to know if their gun is woefully inaccurate so, as long as it fits his hand and doesn't jam, of course he's going to love his gun. Hell, if he left out his definition of "accurate" and just told everyone that it was very accurate, it would be yet another tic in the "I don't know what you people are complaining about" column.

Logically comparing the gun to those of other brands is a good way to make a sensible decision without letting emotion get the best of you. It's what I've been trying to do in order to feel less irritable with the whole thing. However, I think my problem is that I ponied up extra $$ for the base gun because I figured that a Performance Center model might give me a better pistol... it was $700. Factor in $200 more for the barrel plus taxes and fees and I'm pushing a grand before even touching the trigger pull or anything else on the gun. It's simply too much money for what it is, IMO. I don't like the feel of the Glock in my hand, but I have shot them so much that I shoot them about as good as anything else... and I could get an MOS plus a Vanek trigger, different guide rod, mag well, a few mag extensions, and a new set of sights for that kind of cash. If you really wanted to compare apples to apples, a box stock Glock really only needs a set of sights, some springs, and a new connector to be in the ballpark of that $850 M&P you're talking about. And that isn't even touching the topic of resale value. Back in the height of the "sport compact car" craze, you could find people who were driving around in custom $45k Honda Civics that could barely perform like a stock V6 Mustang or Camaro... you had to wonder about the sensibility of it all.

I guess we all just have to do our own cost-benefit analysis when choosing a gun. As was mentioned previously by others, I would automatically factor in a $200 barrel into any M&P purchase price... and if you happen not to need one, then that's extra money in your pocket. Personally, now that Apex has done the hard work to design a barrel with new geometry to fix the "early unlocking" issue, I can't see why S&W doesn't incorporate something similar into a version 2.0 of the M&P. Rumor is that S&W is already modifying the M&P design in order to submit it for military trials. I'm pretty sure that S&W has done their own cost-benefit analysis themselves and determined that it's easier and cheaper to deal with the small minority of end users that will actually complain than to admit that there is a design flaw, which would open themselves up to more people (who would otherwise never realize there's an issue) sending their guns back in to be fixed.

[munsonbw]

I forgot that you bought the Performance Center gun. That would really rub me the wrong way if your gun when returned is as bad as it started for accuracy. I think the extra money for the Pro does not necessarily imply a better gun. Better sights, longer barrel and lower production numbers seems to about equal $100 up-charge to me. Now add the money for the PC gun and you start wondering why the money should not have gone towards at least picking the best/better fitting barrels and slides out of the parts bin. Oh well. For a long time Range Rovers were terribly built vehicles, but it didn't stop people from buying them for various reasons.

Don't even get me started on the compact car thing. We seem to have more in common than choice of gun...

I wonder if S&W will have a special series of guns for the military. You may know that Springfield made a 1911 for the FBI trials that is known as the Pro. Those guns are worth $3000+ used and are a far cry from the SA standard 1911. I do wonder, though, if the M&Ps sold to LE go through any special checks. I just cannot imagine the potential liability and reputation implications if a bad guy killed a cop, or if a cop killed a by-standard, and the lawyers learn that the gun used patterns like a shotgun and MAY have contributed to the missing of intended targets. Would be an interesting study to get one of the LE trade-ins and bench it.

Ben

[TacticalReload]

It seems that the PC gun is literally just a regular gun with a ported barrel / slide and an over-travel screw. At the very least, I was hoping that I was paying the up-charge to get better service on the back-end if I needed it. Clearly no such luck.

There are a number of people on certain forums who believe that a modified (military) M&P will make its way to the general public. Regardless, I'm not sure how any agency could be okay with issuing M&P9's to their officers unless every single one of them was bench rested prior to acceptance. As was mentioned previously, a lot of cops can shoot their way out of a paper bag; but that's not a reason to accept a gun that patterns 12". I also wonder if LE M&P's go through any special tests. Only testing them for accuracy might be a corporate admission of a systemic problem (especially if word got out that there was a high failure rate), but I'm sure it could be spun into a case of "we want LEOs to carry the very best"... something akin to how Federal boxes up "special" batches of primers and calls them Match Primers even though there is not difference in their composition. However, if that was the case, you'd think they would also perform the same test on their PC guns. They HAVE to know that at least some of these are going to competitive shooters who will mount red dots and will want accuracy.

[B585]

I realize this is kinda off topic, but holster are you using on your PC? I was thinking Blade-Tech and using the one built for the CORE even though I won't be using an optic. I was hoping to run low pro Dawson sights so I called them and got what they recommended, but the rear sight didn't fit. I am hoping I they make a low pro that fits the PC since I won't be co-witnessing.

[TacticalReload]

I never even got that far yet. I was planning on trying Carry Optics with it so I would probably pick up something that is cut for the RMR, but I want the holster to serve double-duty for my VTAC in IDPA / Production. Since I have another gun, I don't think I'll ever run the PC without a dot so I don't expect to mess with the stock sights.

[Titaniumbadger22]

I'm still fussing with my M&P Pro, but I think I'm getting closer. It has an Apex trigger kit and Apex grade barrel, Dawson fiber optic front sight with adjustable rear. My first outing with the Apex barrel wasn't as good as I hoped, but I think I have that problem figured out thanks to TacticalReload (spring in the barrel). Went out today and the vertical spread was better, but I had to move the rear sight so far to side to get where I wanted that I was no longer inline with the bore axis. I didn't have the tools with me, so I called it a day. I did shoot my factory barrel and Apex barrel back to back though. My Apex barrel was about 4" for 5 shot groups at 25 yards and my factory barrel was about 6"-7".

Yesterday, just after installing the Apex barrel I took it out to compare it to my CZ SP01 Shadow with a variety of drills. For accuracy at 25 yards, my CZ shot a 2" group of 5 shots, my M&P was 5". I then did a 5 yard 50 shot dot torture drill, 2" dots. CZ was 45 and the M&P was a 44. Next I did 4 strings of timed plate rack at 15 yards (6 plates) from surrender with a draw and threw out the worst time. CZ was 6.93 seconds average, M&P was 6.31 seconds average.

I want to use my M&P as my IDPA SSP gun. I don't like to de-cock my CZ or have to deal with both DA and SA trigger pulls. I want to just use my CZ for ESP and other games. So for skills that matter for practical pistol games, The M&P is still performing just fine. I'm still trying to get it to shoot 3" groups at 25 yards, I think I would be perfectly satisfied with it if I can. 4" groups consistently would be good enough.

I moved my front sight tonight, then my rear with the laser. I need to go adjust it for real and then repeat the 25 yd accuracy test against the CZ. If the groups are not more than twice the size of the CZ, I guess I'll be ok.

[ddc]

With respect to holsters I've used Blade Tech and Comp Tac for different USPSA/IDPA platforms, M&P, PPQ, Kahr, 1911.

I find them to be very similar. The difference is more in the belt attachment options than the gun/holster interface. I like the Blade Tech non-adjustable Sting Ray more than the Comp Tac option but they both work. The Adjustable Sting Ray is more flexible if you have different belt widths but I've had the adjustment tab disappear once too often. My current Adjustable Sting Ray has the tab epoxied into place. (no more adjustment, lol)

Comp Tac uses hex head screws. Blade Tech uses cross head screws. They both use the same bolt pattern so you can mix and match holsters and belt loops between the two brands if you like or in an emergency.

Edited May 1, 2016 by ddc

[B585]

Thanks for the feedback. I still shoot long range competitions on a fairly regular basis, but I haven't ever done any comps with a pistol. I would like to do IDPA/USPSA in the production class this summer after I get some more practice and a little more comfortable with all the procedural stuff that comes with action pistol shooting. I really need to get used to drawing quickly so I want to get a hoster and mag holder now. I think I am going to ahead and order the Blade-Tech that fits the CORE and some mag holders.

It is amazing how much different action pistol is from 1000 yard comps. I readily admit that quick shooting has humbled me...it is a totally different kind of shooting, but I am now completely hooked. It is still hard for me to get out the mindset that the sights don't have to be in perfect alignment to take the shot (or that you can shoot more than 1 shot in a minute..haha), but I am working on it. I hate that there isn't a range in close proximity that allows rapid shooting, but I am making due and seeing progress on my double taps, etc.

I just got my SDI, Apex Comp Spring Kit, and RAM installed today. I think everything is working right so I can't wait to try out the new barrel and see what it can do. I did the barrel exactly like Randy said to in the video with the barrel not completely going into battery when you slowly release the slide. The one thing I did notice was that when feeding my home defense ammo (Speer Gold Dot) is that if don't release the slide quickly, it doesn't feed. Is that normal? I did fire off a total of 8 rounds without any malfunctions. I also noticed that now the slide has no play when in battery (with my original barrel, there was significant play) so I am hoping I will see a significant improvement in the accuracy of this gun. Especially for someone still relatively new into pistols, it killed me before that when the shot didn't hit where I intended it to, I didn't know if it was me or if it was the gun...I guess that is the one similarity that I have found between long distance shooting and action pistol. Other than that, they are totally different IMO.

One other comment....I am really impressed with this forum. I have been a member of numerous forums for guns and diesel trucks and I love the lack of bickering and drama that goes on this forum. Thanks everyone for their feedback/help.

[munsonbw]

B585,

First, you are spot on with the forum. That is why I only posed the question I had about the M&P accuracy here. I read many threads on other gun forums that would have run TacticalReload out of town for defending his gun accuracy issues. Even in the face of before and after targets with other compelling arguments he would likely be labelled a glock fanboy. Oh well, their loss as he has done a lot of work to prove what can be done with the Apex upgrades to, in my mind, prove that a poor shooting gun is real and can be fixed.

I just started competition shooting in Feb. doing a monthly IDPA match. I was lucky and found a fantastic club. We run an "outlaw" match which means cover garment is optional, we use non-standard targets like bowling pins, etc. The group of guys is also great. Fair warning, some IDPA matches have been known to be full of super serious guys screaming "cover" at you all the time. Don't be discouraged if you find these guys. I have not shot USPSA yet (but intend to) and I would argue that IDPA or maybe even something like a bowling pin match or steel match would be a good place to start. IDPA has more rules as I understand it than USPSA, but at the same time the course of fire is dictated to you and generally speaking there is less going on. IDPA also tends to reward accuracy over time, which will allow you to take time on shots and be more deliberate. Your first couple of matches will be a disaster. Penalties and misses will likely kill your score, but that is all normal I am told. I have been shooting my Commander size 1911 in CDP with no magwell. My draws are slow and I fumble my reloads (that is when I actually notice I am at slide lock!) and I still manage to finish 9/13. I guess my point in this is just to find a match and go. You do not need to be a fast shooter to have fun. The most important thing, by a mile, is safety. Understand what the 180 rule is and practice handling your gun and moving with your finger OUTSIDE the trigger guard. Failing to following these rules will get you sent home. Tell them you are a new shooter and ask if there is someone you can squad with that can help show you the ropes. Odds are high they will not be a-holes and will make sure you are safe and have fun. PM if you want to know anything else from my first experiences.

Search on youtube for: "Introduction to IDPA - a Tutorial for Beginners" It's a good overview.

[ddc]

Yeah, there are a lot of tutorials on youtube and a lot of match video which can be very instructive. The fast guys go really fast; don't worry, us normal guys are just a tad bit slower, lol.

Check out the powerfactor show, www.powerfactor.com. The first 20 or so episodes are all about some basic USPSA/IDPA instruction and getting you ready for your first match.

[B585]

Well, I got to try out the Apex barrel and all I can say is THANKS RANDY!!! I was shooting with my hands rested on a bag at 30 yards (my range finder said 31 yards). Everything was completely cold (these were first shots of today). I am still using the factory sights and factory cheap ammo so I think it is safe to say that the groups could have been a little better with different sights and better ammo, but I am very happy with the results!!! As soon as I completed this group, I started practicing drills, etc. and I couldn't believe how much better I was shooting. Best of all, I now have the confidence that if I don't hit the target, it is MY fault. For someone that is still fairly new to shooting pistols, I can't stress enough how much more I enjoy shooting this gun because now I can accurately gauge my skill level. I have included a picture of my groups with the factory barrel at 28 yards after it was heated up (which always produced the best results). Each target was a different brand of ammo/weight of bullet. Each target I took 10 shots. On the ones with less than 10 holes, I missed the 6"x6" target (the center target was not mine). The second picture is my 30 yard group with the Apex. I only shot it 7 times (all hits) and this was the first ammo I tried (Magtech 115). I had ZERO malfunctions with ~250 rounds today. I couldn't be happier with this purchase.

Edited May 2, 2016 by B585

[ddc]

So it looks like you went from roughly 6" groups at 28 yards to roughly 3" groups at 30(31?) yards?

That would work for me.

[TacticalReload]

Good job, man. Welcome to the club of people that can now roll your eyes at all the folks who will continue to tell you that it's not the gun that is inaccurate, it's that you don't know how to shoot it accurately. Don't you wonder why S&W isn't immediately changing the geometry of their factory barrels? I bet Randy could make a fortune licensing his barrels to them!

[TacticalReload]

The FedEx guy dropped off my M&P today... freshly back from S&W. Here is the note enclosed:

YAY! Thanks for nothing. Ironically, the FedEx guy said, "This is from Smith and Wesson, right?" (keep in mind that the label says "SAW" instead of the full name of the company). I answered yes. He said, "I deliver a lot of these boxes." That's not a good sign, is it?

In any case, I figured I would go to the range to see if maybe some fairies sprinkled magic dust on my pistol in transit somewhere. Here is what I got. These are both full 10 round groups... same ammo, same distance, same gun, different barrels. I borrowed a "rest" from the range. I use the term lightly since the whole rest weighed less than my pistol and was too long to fit on the shelf in the shooting lane. I made do... the results are obvious enough anyway.

I could do the masochistic thing and send it back again, but for what?

There was a guy a couple of lanes over that was shooting an M&P9L CORE. I was tempted to ask him what he thought of his gun's accuracy, however he didn't appear to be shooting very accurately at just 5 yards so I probably wouldn't have received an answer that would tell me a whole lot.

As a side note, I did get one "light" strike (Apex striker spring). I put "light" in quotes because it was a pretty solid dent in the primer (Winchester). It went off on the second try... based on the striker mark on the primer, I probably would guess that a Federal primer would have gone off. I'm surprised that the Winchester didn't. Maybe it was not fully seated? I'm going to continue to use the Apex spring unless I get more light strikes. This is the first one I've had.

[munsonbw]

For the sake of trying to fight the good fight, I would see if you can get a tech on the phone and get his email address. Ask if you can be so kind as to show him the results before and after someone made a fix to their product. With the current level or interest they have shown i guess you will get no where, but I just wonder how they can argue. Keep in my one of their "techs" (seemed to know a reasonable amount) told me "this gun should shoot 3-4" at 25yds". not combat accurate, not accurate as you are, but he stated a specific group size.

[TacticalReload]

I don't know if I have the energy to follow through with more contact with S&W CS. I get your suggestion, and it would be great if I could do that; but I am not sure if I would get past the first rep to answer the phone... and I'm guessing it will be a firm "send it back to us again" and let us check it out.

[B585]

TR,
I hate to be the barer of bad news, but there are other possible factors that could be causing your results besides the barrel. First, your optic could be coming loose only when you are shooting the factory barrel. Another strong possibility is the Coriolis Effect. I realize all these "scientists" say the earth always spins at same rate, but my own data had confirmed they are wrong. For example, I have been shooting from the same range in the east to west direction and sometimes I hit higher or lower than anticipated which is proof to me that the earth must be changing its speed....I can't come up with any other conclusion other than shooter error which I know can't be possible. I do have admit I am not sure how the earth knows how to alter its speed so that each day is exactly 24 hours...Anyways, getting back to your example, if your loads have a muzzle velocity of 6' per second, it will take your bullet over10 seconds to reach its target which would make you off by more than 10 MOA assuming the earth is spinning at its "normal" speed in the central US....even worse in Florida. I bet you never even considered those possibilities.

Edited May 3, 2016 by B585

[BrianKr]

Brian, you seem more level-headed about this whole debacle than I am, which is respectable. I guess I was especially fired up because I had just gotten off the phone after a frustrating conversation with S&W. I've never been one to leave a pistol stock (as is, I'm sure, the case with most of us here) unless it was solely a defensive gun. But almost all of those types of changes were made to improve an adequate gun. Don't like the stock Glock trigger? Swap it out. Don't like the sights on your revolver? Swap them out. Think your pistol that groups 3" is not accurate enough? Change the barrel, tighten the gun, etc. But I haven't ever run into a gun that wasn't broken or defective that groups like this one, so I view it as exactly that -- defective. Problem is that the "defect" apparently is a function of the design as evidenced by the wide-spread issue, and the manufacturer refuses to address it. Top that off with the way the phone conversation went, and I get quite irritable.

I respect you decision to factor an extra $200 into the cost of the gun when looking at additional M&Ps... it's what anyone who cares about accuracy should really do. However, I need to take it one further and say that I simply won't bother buying any more products from them for the foreseeable future. Part of that is on principle but most of it is because I've seen too many problems with their current-production revolvers lately and I just don't see the value in another M&P. A $500-700 base gun plus $200 for the barrel plus $50-150 for the trigger work and you are left with a plastic gun that could cost you over $1000 just to get it to shoot accurately with some semblance of a usable trigger... and that's before guiderods, springs, sights, magwells, and all the other doo-dads that we like to put onto game guns. I just feel like there are platforms that represent a better value, no matter how good the grip feels in the hand. And like I said, the phone call left me feeling feel burnt by them. The whole "if you're still not happy then send it back again" thing left me cranky when they flat out said that they didn't do anything to the gun. I don't put spoiled milk back into the fridge hoping that in three days it might magically taste good again. He suggested that maybe they had actually fixed it... he literally said "Well, one person might have adjusted something and put the gun down... then the next guy might have picked it up, test fired it, and said it's good while not knowing that someone else fixed the gun." That is stupid on so many levels that I couldn't even begin to argue.

As for the law enforcement angle, I hear you. I was never a LEO, but I worked for a security contractor and we employed a ton of former LE -- plus those that weren't still were getting paid to carry a gun, which IMO means it's your responsibility to know how to adequately use that firearm. Sadly, every 6 month re-qualification came with a disheartening amount of people pulled from the contract until they could successfully requalify (issued handguns were Glock 19's firing 115gr standard pressure). The course of fire was a joke and the requirements were merely to meet 80% of max score. A quarter of the shots were taken at between contact distance and 3 yards, and none were taken at longer than 15 yards (with more half the 15 yard shots being braced)... and there were people scoring less than 40% of max score. All that being said, just because a gun that patterns 6" at 15 yards could out-shoot them doesn't mean that I'd want to put those guns in their holsters. I don't think that starting with one hand behind your back is okay... I think the fact that a lot of them can't shoot is even more reason to have a gun that actually puts bullets where it's pointed. But I hear what you're saying.

I can't argue with this at all. You can't be alone in your critique of S&W, and rightly so. What a shame that S&W is doing this to themselves.

Wouldn't it be nice if a gun from the PC actually performed? Heck, an average M&P 9mm ought to perform too. But my expectation is that when I pay extra to get something better I actually expect a higher level of performance.

I'm not trying to make excuses for S&W, but many years ago there was a semi-auto shotgun that was extremely popular with the skeet or trapshooting crowd. It was widely known that if one used this gun competitively that one didn't buy just one. You bought 3. One to shoot, one that would be in for repairs, and a 3rd as a spare for when the gun in use broke.

Eventually I'll try a buddies CZ P-09. But if I move to that gun, should it fit me, I'll need to change out the trigger parts also, and get the slide milled for an optic. Their mags are also more expensive. So no matter which way I go it's going to cost me. Thank goodness that I don't assemble an open gun. As you wrote, that would be quite costly. I'm in CO division.

I guess I'm just a fatalist about the M&Ps. It's the devil that I know. (shrug of the shoulders) It doesn't mean I'm happy about it.

I think deep down we're in basic agreement. S&W is just pooping on their customers at this time.

Edit: BTW, I just sent S&W customer service a nicely worded email outlining the problem and what it cost me to fix it. If I hear back from them I'll update this. I don't expect anything to change because of it. S&W has to be aware that they have a problem. I can't imagine it's anything other than a deliberate business decision and that just boggles my mind when the fix is so obvious.

Edited May 3, 2016 by BrianKr

[TacticalReload]

Yeah. We are on the same page. I'll probably stick with the platform for now too because I'm pot-committed after the $ spent on it. I'll most likely look for used guns going forward though.

[Molon]

Apex Grade Gunsmith Fit Barrel - 4.25”

I purchased my Apex Grade Gunsmith Fit Barrel (4.25”) directly from Apex Tactical Specialties. I shipped my Smith & Wesson M&P9 CORE directly to them for the fitting/installation of the barrel.

I paid the additional fee for Apex Tactical Specialties to test-fire my M&P9 CORE after their fitted barrel was installed. The test-target that was included with my returned pistol is pictured below. Aside from some brief demographics written on the test-target, the only technical information that was written on the test-target was a note stating:

10 @ 10

I can only assume that meant that the test-target was of a 10-shot group fired at a distance of 10 yards. The group has an extreme spread of 2.226”. An extreme spread of 2.226” at 10 yards would sub-tend to an extreme spread of 5.565” at 25 yards. My M&P9 CORE grouped better than that with the original factory barrel.

The Apex Tactical Specialties test-target . . .

In a duplicate of this thread that I posted on another website, Randy Lee posted the following comments about the test-target.

“I figured I should chime in about the test target in question.

The target does reflect 10 shots from a distance of 10 yards offhand. It was what our technician shot for function and approximate sight in after the barrel was fitted, not for group. The technician was shooting in a poorly lit indoor range using the iron sights, since the optic was not provided. This was also in the mix of some 20 firearms that the tech had to test fire that day. While I will not make any excuses for the large group, it is important to bear in mind that the gun is obviously capable of consistent mechanical accuracy.

The test fire fee is not the same as the Ransom Rest accuracy charge. If you were charged for the Ransom Rest test, please call our office so we can arrange for your gun to be returned to us for expedited Ransom testing.

We differentiate function/sight adjustment targets from accuracy targets by the red center. When I shoot from the Ransom Rest, I use a black and white target with a black dot in the center because the RMR dot matches the 1" black center at 25 yards. . . . We are changing our test fire procedures for barrels we fit in house as a result of this thread to reflect mechanical accuracy. It was one of the things that slipped through the cracks since I have been doing more administrative work that back at the bench or in the shop.”

....

02/28/16

To date, I’ve fired 150 rounds of quality factory loaded ammunition through the Apex Grade Gunsmith Fit Barrel during function testing and barrel break-in. I like to have fired at least 200 rounds through a pistol barrel before conducting an accuracy evaluation of it.

There have been no malfunctions with the Apex barrel in my M&P9 CORE while firing an assortment of:

Federal 9BP 115 grain JHP

Speer 124 grain Gold Dot

Federal 9MS 147 grain JHP

Federal 147 grain HST

Speer 147 grain Gold Dot G2.

Since the Apex Tactical Specialties test-target was fired at a distance of only 10 yards, I did fire a few 10-shot groups from a distance of 10 yards (from the bench) for comparison. The group pictured below was fired using factory loaded Federal 147 grain HST ammunition. The group has an extreme spread of 0.633”.

....

03/08/16

The 10-shot group pictured below was fired at a distance of 15 yards using factory loaded 124 grain Gold Dot ammunition. The group has an extreme spread of 0.912".

.....

03/12/16

At this point, I have a total of 300 rounds of factory-loaded ammunition fired from the Apex Grade Gunsmith Fit Barrel and have not had any malfunctions. The 10-shot group pictured below was fired from the bench at a distance of 25 yards using factory-loaded Federal 124 grain HST ammunition. The group has an extreme spread of 1.38"

.....

4/17/2016

Strictly for kicks and giggles, here's a pic of a statistically insignificant 5-shot group fired from the bench at a distance of 25 yards. The group has an extreme spread of 0.75".

....

Edited May 4, 2016 by Molon

[rhowell309]

Molon, I'm curious on how long it took them to install the barrel and return your gun.

[TacticalReload]

Molon, I'm curious on how long it took them to install the barrel and return your gun.

I'm more interested in how long it took to put together that post complete with precisely measured and documented photos! Kudos... makes my posts look like they were slapped together half-assed (which they were).