Help me make sense of the M&P accuracy issue.

[munsonbw]

Hi gang,

First, I am posting this here since the discussions I have seen so far are more factual and data driven than any other that I have seen, especially on the accuracy subject. I have read a LOT on the web and on this forum and I really can't make sense of it. On the surface it seems to me that even the later barreled M&P 9mm is suspect for accuracy. I also understand that accuracy is more than just picking a random box of ammo and putting your hands on a "rest" and making a judgement. However, maybe I missed it, but it seems the M&P is a lightning rod for accuracy criticisms versus guns like the Glock and XDms. I also notice that a lot of the threads here are about fitting new barrels for accuracy. Why would this be needed if the gun was accurate?

I have a 1911 and am familiar with spending lots of money to get custom gun with the best accuracy guarantee. I really don't want to turn this into that. I am looking to buy my first gun to shoot IDPA SSP and USPSA production and the 5" Pro is tops on my list. It feels perfect in my hand and the controls are where I would want them. Doing some "draws" the sights didn't naturally line up, but with a half dozen attempts I think I started honing the muscle memory. I handled a XDm Comp 5.25" at the gun shop and it was a natural pointer for me. It is less comfortable in the hand, but not uncomfortable.

Since I am not yet started on any platform, I could pick either. The lingering trail of suspect accuracy is concerning. However, this is not a bullseye gun so all I expect is for the gun to be able to hit the 25yd shots when I do my part. I also really don't want to have to debate with S&W about getting accuracy improved. In summary, is there cause for concern or is it a non-issue? I do reload, if that matters to the discussion.

Thanks

Ben

[Hi-Power Jack]

it seems that even the later barreled M&P 9mm is suspect for accuracy and is a lightning rod for accuracy criticisms versus guns like the Glock and XDms.

is there cause for concern or is it a non-issue?

1. Welcome aboard.

2. I'm eagerly awaiting an in-depth, quantitative response - I'm also thinking of buying a S&W M&P.

[Bkreutz]

I don't like getting involved in this topic, everyone seems to get real "defensive". I've shot M&P's in competition for 4 years, I've changed to the Apex trigger because I don't like the "hinge in the middle" S&W trigger. I bought a KKM barrel because I was curious, as much as I'd like to be able to justify the cost of the barrel, I didn't notice much difference between the two. I've never had a complaint with accuracy in shooting USPSA, I typically shoot above 90% of the available points, which would be world class if I wasn't so slow , but that's was I get for getting old and having a bunch of artificial joints. I'll probably try one of the Apex gunsmith fit barrels when they move out of CA and start selling threaded barrels, but that's at least a year off. (again, I'm an equipment whore and will try anything at least once. )

[Hi-Power Jack]

Gale, it sounds like you're saying the accuracy of the M&P's you've shot has

been more than acceptable?

[munsonbw]

Bkreutz,

Thanks for the reply. I can certainly appreciate upgrading a barrel to make the gun better. That is, I think, a natural progression of a competitor wanting to hone his tools while honing skills. I listen to a podcast (Triangle Tactical- check them out) and both of the hosts do or did shoot M&Ps. Never a complaint on accuracy, nor did they upgrade barrels to get there. I really want the M&P to be good. I am not looking to bash the gun to promote some other brand. Every engineer makes a bad design now and then and every manufacturing facility lets a defective part out. Designs are improved and quality systems tightened up. It's part of the process. I just don't want to be choosing the marginal design from the sketchy quality plant.

I have accepted the trigger will need work. Again, coming from researching and then buying a 1911, trigger work is a common theme. From what I read, the M&P could be better with some improved finish work on key parts. I am comfortable doing some work and i also think working with a non-"competition" trigger will help me improve my technique. I know it needs some work, so for me that is step one.

Jack,

Thanks for the welcome. Hopefully we find our answers from those in the know.

Ben

[TacticalReload]

Ben,

Here is how I generally see it. I apologize if this gets lengthy, as I'm think it might. First off, there is a bunch of info out there; and some of it is suspect. However, I'm pretty sure what you find here is about as genuine as you're going to get online. This forum is populated by some extremely seasoned shooters; plus the beginner shooters here are willing to acknowledge that fact more readily than elsewhere. This makes for a credible set of opinions, IMO. Definitely not the same cross-section as GT, nor is it a place where brand loyalty leads to blind apologists like some of the S&W forums. The absolute hostility toward some people who have problems on some of the other forums is unreal. There was one thread where an unsatisfied owner said he was selling the gun for a different pistol and it was followed by a collection of sarcastic "don't let the door hit you on the way out" type comments.

I have a couple of friends who own M&P9 models. One has an early production 4.25" and the other has a 5" from about 3 years ago. They both had me install Apex parts into the guns so I had an opportunity to put a few hundred rounds through each of these guns. As some background, I would consider my shooting ability as good for an average shooter or average for a good shooter and no where near the skill level of a lot of the folks here. I tend to shoot fairly accurately, but not nearly as fast as I wish I did -- I'm by absolutely no means a M / GM shooter.

When I shot the 4.25" gun, I don't remember noticing anything one way or another about the accuracy at all. This tells me that it was probably about as accurate as any out-of-the-box pistol in its price range. At the time, I wasn't in the market for an M&P and so I had done zero research into any accuracy issues that the model line was experiencing... so I had no reason to bench rest the gun. When I shot the 5" some years later, I remember thinking that I should have been able to shoot it better. I still wasn't aware of the now infamous M&P9 accuracy issues, and I think I basically wrote it off as being relatively new to the platform. I didn't bench rest that gun either.

Fast forward to last year and I started to seriously consider the M&P for myself. This is when I first encountered the stories of poor accuracy. Long story short (if that ship hasn't already sailed) is that there are enough credible sources out there that I believed there to be a definite issue with some of the pistols. When people like Randy Lee talk about poor accuracy and Todd Green mentions "lock up issues", it gives it credence. Heck, even Kyle Lamb says that he replaces OEM M&P barrels with aftermarket ones -- and he literally has an M&P factory collaboration model with S&W / VTAC. That being said, it appears that there are still quite a number of satisfied owners. So I took a chance and bought a Performance Center model... hoping that a PC model might be less likely to shoot poorly (optimistic, I know).

Well, as you can probably see in my other thread, it didn't work out for me. In fact, I need to do some more testing but it appears that I might even have one of the least accurate ones I have seen reports of online. If I could undo my purchase and get my money back right now, I'd be all over that deal and call it a day. Of course, we know that's not the way it works with firearms. Now I'm almost feeling pot-committed to try to get this gun to work so I'm left to decide to either cut my losses or possibly throw good money after bad in the pursuit to get it to somewhere at least in the ballpark of 3" at 25 yards.

I won't go so far as to try to convince you not to buy an M&P. I will say that it appears that there is at least some risk that you will get one that doesn't group acceptably well for you to be truly competitive in IDPA / USPSA. There also appears to be a reasonable chance that you will have no issues at all. If this purchase represents a sizable investment for you and you are risk adverse, I'd ponder the purchase carefully. Maybe look for a used purchase from someone willing to let you try before you buy. The alternative is to go for a .40 model as it appears the problem doesn't touch that caliber like it does with the 9mm. (If you reload, you can get .40 minor down to the point where it shoots softer than 9mm.) Or you can roll the dice. I'm a little biased considering I've got a lemon sitting in my safe right now so take my opinion with a grain of salt.

[BrianKr]

Well said TR.

I'm in pretty much the same boat, but extremely heavy bullets have appeared to help somewhat; 147s and heavier. I'm in so deep now that I'll throw another few hundred $ at it with an Apex barrel, let my gunsmith install it and see what that does. I actually like the gun, it fits me and feels great in the hand, better accuracy would be a good thing. But I'm comparing it to my 1911s. I'd need to shoot from a rest and will sometime this week to check the red dot with the new heavy bulletted load, but when I checked last I was getting 3" (thereabouts) groups at 15 yards. OK combat accuracy, but not what I want in a competition gun. I want to know that the shot was me and not the gun.

I like the idea of a .40 if I can't get the 9mm where I want it. Does anyone know if it's possible to convert my 9 to a .40? Could that solve the problem?

[munsonbw]

Thanks, TR.

I could tell as soon as I started looking here to research the accuracy topic that the responses would not be the typical fanboy vs. hater ones that are all too prevalent elsewhere. When you hear guys/gals talking about changing bullet weights, types and powder charges it says to me there is a greater level of understanding about what makes a pistol part of a system and not a singular source of accuracy.

I appreciate your candid response, as well as that from Brian. I guess I need to dig into the XDm a little more and make sure similar issues are not there too. I am not a fan of Glocks, though have admittedly never shot one. They just do not feel right in the hand and since I am starting with a new platform as a beginning competitor I see no reason to use something I don't like.

I keep hearing about the .40 and it sounds great, but I already have a full Dillon setup for 9mm and that adds another $100 to the mix. Maybe .40 next time.

Thanks,
Ben

Edited April 4, 2016 by munsonbw

[BrianKr]

Playing with cartridge length might also help and so far I haven't done any of that.

[ddc]

FWIW my M&P experience is as follows:

My wife and I were both shooting PPQs. Both IDPA/SSP and USPSA/Prod. She had a 4"; I had a 5". I thought the guns were both close to the most accurate I've ever shot. Part of that is because they were so easy to shoot with their nice trigger.

We both found the PPQ to be a bit flippy in recoil and she decided to try an M&P Pro Core 5". She picked one up about a year ago. It was accurate enough but the trigger was stout. Installed the Apex CAEK. That really helped. She was quite happy with the gun at that point.

There were a few things about the PPQ that I was not thrilled about and after shooting her M&P I decided to pick one up for myself. Installed the Apex kit from the start. That was about 6 months ago.

I shoot the M&P every bit as good as I shot the PPQ. We are both quite satisfied with the gun.

After reading Randy Lee's (Apex) description of how to fit their barrel to an M&P I went and checked both of ours for lockup. As far as I can tell with my incredibly limited gunsmith talents the lockup is as solid as I could hope for from a factory gun. Maybe we both got lucky and the tolerances just worked out in our favor.

I like the platform and have no plans to change. We will probably pick up a third so we have a backup. The Apex barrels are intriguing but as far as I'm concerned ours shoot well enough that I don't feel any need to go in that direction. I might at some point, just because I'm curious and like to tinker, but the money could probably be better spent elsewhere.

[Hi-Power Jack]

DDC, what kind of accuracy are you getting with the S&W's?

What bullet type are you having best success with?

[ddc]

HP Jack,

I've not bench rested any of my pistols so my accuracy data is no way scientific, lol.

A pretty good day for me with either the PPQ or the M&P would be something like:

From an isosceles stance, untimed slow fire, say about 1 round/sec, 10 shots, 40 feet, 2.5".

My load is MG 124 FMJ/CMJ, Silhouette 5.3, COL 1.135. PF is just below 130 with the M&P.

Was just above with the PPQ. Temp about 50F. I am going to be bumping it up a bit to get more of a cushion.

I just got my chrono recently and have only chrono'd the 5.3 load but prior to that had loaded that same bullet and COL up to 5.6ish.

I've noticed no obvious accuracy issues at that bullet and COL for any Silhouette load between 5.3 and 5.6.

I just started playing around with Blue Bullets 147 RN. 4.15 Silhouette, COL 1.145, chrono at 915 fps, PF about 135, temp about 60F. Seems ok so far, but I haven't done any side by side testing with the MG 124 load. Maybe this week.

Hope that helps.

[Ray_Z]

I've got a M&P pro that I shot for a long time in production division without any complaints. But it seems that I'm in a minority. Went to a Springfield 5.25 just for giggles and love it. Can knock the lint off a flies ass with that one.

Edited April 4, 2016 by Ray_Z

[ddc]

Friend of mine shoots a Springfield 5.25 with a tweaked trigger and loves it. I've shot it and it is very nice. I only put 5 rounds through it at about 5 yards but they were all one hole; perhaps a rather large hole, lol...

[TacticalReload]

I wish I could get into the XD line... there is something about the grip safety that bothers me. In my limited experience, a high grip sometimes fails to deactivate the grip safety. It's just one more thing on there that I have to worry about. I've been familiar with the pistol since way back when I worked at a gun shop during the HS2000 days. Back then, people would snap those guns up and hardly anyone would ever bring one back with problems. They were one of the worst kept secrets when it came to budget guns that actually worked, especially coming out of a country like Croatia. Springfield really stepped into something good when they entered into that deal to start stamping their name on the gun. I wonder where they would be right now without their agreement with HS Produkt

[ddc]

Good question; they lucked out for sure. I've wondered if Springfield had anything to do with the XD line other than import it and stamp their name on it. Have there been any product improvements or is today's XD the same as yesterday's HS2000? (Maybe a question for another thread or sub-forum, oh well....)

Edited April 4, 2016 by ddc

[Daft]

I like a long sight picture which means a longer barrel, and the bullet gets more time as well. Glock 40 gen 4 i want.

[TacticalReload]

Good question; they lucked out for sure. I've wondered if Springfield had anything to do with the XD line other than import it and stamp their name on it. Have there been any product improvements or is today's XD the same as yesterday's HS2000? (Maybe a question for another thread or sub-forum, oh well....)

Not sure. For the original HS2000, I would assume they had almost zero input since it was out well before Springfield jumped on board. For the newer XDM and Mod2, I don't know. If you go to HS Produkt's website, you can see the exact guns (sans SA markings) available for the world market. I would assume that they might have had some input, but ultimately it's a case of SA being the importer / marketer of the gun for the US market, as far as I understand it. With the success of its relationship with IMBEL, it probably made sense to them to go this route with HS Produkt. It's got to be much cheaper and easier than making them in the US themselves, as long as the quality is good. A lot of people probably have no idea that all of the XD's and most of their 1911's aren't fully American-made guns.

[thermobollocks]

Randy Lee has an excellent writeup on the Smith and Wesson forums:

http://smith-wessonforum.com/smith-wesson-m-p-pistols/451019-accuracy-coming-apex-m-p-barrels.html

[BrianKr]

Yes it is! Thanx for the link. It was much appreciated.

[DS26]

I bought a M&P pro in 9MM I got it for competition I installed an Apex trigger I loved the feel of this gun and it was the best trigger on any gun I have ever owned! However I couldn't get this gun to group I tried all different ammo I fired from a ransom rest at 25 yards I had 8" + groups it was horrible! I sent it back and told them the issue I was having I asked them to test it out and return it with a test target and tell me what ammo they used to get the gun to group. I got the gun back several weeks later with no test target no info as to the best ammo to use but I note telling me they replace the barrel. Once again I set up the ransom rest and couldn't get the gun to group so I sold the gun and bought Glock 17 I still have to do a trigger job on it but at least I shoots straight.

[B585]

I ordered a 5" PC 9mm a while ago and it is getting in today so I am picking it up after work. I am going to disassemble and lube it and then headed to the range. I am hoping this will be a "good" one...I will post the results either way.

[TacticalReload]

I ordered a 5" PC 9mm a while ago and it is getting in today so I am picking it up after work. I am going to disassemble and lube it and then headed to the range. I am hoping this will be a "good" one...I will post the results either way.

Good luck to you. I really hope you get a good one. Let us know how it goes. I'm very curious.

I bought a M&P pro in 9MM I got it for competition I installed an Apex trigger I loved the feel of this gun and it was the best trigger on any gun I have ever owned! However I couldn't get this gun to group I tried all different ammo I fired from a ransom rest at 25 yards I had 8" + groups it was horrible! I sent it back and told them the issue I was having I asked them to test it out and return it with a test target and tell me what ammo they used to get the gun to group. I got the gun back several weeks later with no test target no info as to the best ammo to use but I note telling me they replace the barrel. Once again I set up the ransom rest and couldn't get the gun to group so I sold the gun and bought Glock 17 I still have to do a trigger job on it but at least I shoots straight.

This is exactly why I didn't bother sending my M&P back. The forums are littered with people who sent it back and the "fixes" ranged from nothing (gun is claimed to be "in spec" and returned untouched) to drifting the sights (how this fixes large groups is beyond me) to, at best, replacement of the barrel with possibly better results but only marginally. I will go so far as to give S&W the benefit of the doubt and say that they probably don't put enough ammo through the gun to really see the extent of the issue. On my factory barrel, some of the rounds find their mark but some of them are so wildly off target that it's possible to shoot two three shot groups -- one right after the other -- that have three rounds touching on one and a 10" spread on the next. I'm guessing that if they find a gun to be "accurate enough", it gets sent back. If they find it to group left, right, up or down, they adjust the sights. If it is "too inaccurate", they just change the barrel and call it a day. The problem is that if you're just putting a few rounds through the pistol, it could literally show all these possibilities based on the luck of the draw. I will say, however, that I find it damn near impossible to believe that S&W management isn't aware of the mechanical inaccuracy of some subset of the M&P9's leaving their facility. This is just speculation on my part, of course; but I feel like the bean counters at S&W probably did some sort of cost-benefit analysis of the issue (a la, Ford Pinto) and determined that it's cheaper to deal with the complaints than it is to actual fix the problem for real (I'm not talking about simply changing rifling rates or whatever). Who knows what the truth is, though.

I had a thought when I was at the range the other day. The owner of the range came out to watch people shoot. I'm not sure if he does it to help or if he like to micro-manage but either way, he's not shy about talking to the customers. He came over when I was trying to shoot groups offhand at 10 yards with the factory barrel. He complimented me on my shooting... to which I said that I was extremely unhappy with how the gun was grouping. He didn't understand why I was complaining since I was getting maybe 4-5" groups, which apparently he thought were great for offhand shooting at 10 yards. I picked up my Glock and slow-fired three shots that were almost touching, and then told him that the M&P shots were not going where I "called" them.

I'm not the best shooter in the world. I absolutely could be way faster and I tend to get sloppy when I ramp up the speed. My draw is way slow, and the time to the first shot is longer than it should be because even to this day I often have to hunt for the front sight after the draw. However, during basic offhand slow fire at 10 yards and in, I'm experienced enough to know what's my fault and what is the fault of the pistol.

So that exchange with the range owner made me think. So many people are quick to blame the shooter... saying that their skill is not up to snuff and that's why the gun seems inaccurate. I would argue that the OPPOSITE is also true. Some people's skills are not up to snuff and that's why the gun seems more accurate that it really is. What I mean is that if novice shooters can generally keep shots somewhere within the borders of a silhouette target at 7 yards and that's about it, then the odds of really feeling that the gun is the problem are low. After all, a Glock or XD or SIG or whatever is going to give them roughly the same shotgun pattern. It's only when you can out-shoot your pistol that you can realize the limitations of its mechanical accuracy. I can't out-shoot almost every gun I have owned... until I got my M&P.

[B585]

I should preface this by saying that although I have been shooting for 30 years (mostly long distance precision rifles) until a little over a year ago, I didn't shoot pistols on a regular basis. I definitely do not consider myself a marksman with a pistol. I got to shoot 100 total rounds of factory ammo (Lawman 115 and Geco 124). For testing, I did shoot off of a bag with my wrists and and butt plate resting on the bag. I did all of my testing with 8 rounds. I wasn't rushing, but I also wasn't taking my time due to it getting dark outside. Anyways, the first 8 were at 10 yards and they were horrible. I then shot my Glock 27 at the same distance and it grouped a lot better than the M&P. I did a second round at 10 yards and found the M&P to be improving while the Glock stayed the same. I then moved my target to 28 yards (that was the only distance available). This time the M&P did better than the Glock. The M&P did seem to continue to slowly improve. Certainly, I can't completely rule-out myself as part of the accuracy problems, but the there was NOT a pattern to the groups and I did shoot the Glock good so I think more of the inaccuracy was due to the gun itself. On my last 5 shot group at 28 yards, I got it down to a little over 4". That was without an optic. I am hoping that I will continue to see improvement as it gets broken in. I really need to test other loads to see what it likes.

[TacticalReload]

Hopefully it works out for you. I think a lot of he initial improvement is probably getting used to the trigger. Once you stretched the distances, I'm sure the added sight radius vs the subcompact Glock probably helped.

If you can't get it to group, I'd be a little concerned... Especially at close range (10 yards). Make sure you test from the bench if that's an option. Also, I see people reporting better accuracy with hot / +P ammo... Not exactly great for competition though.

Oddly enough, I found the accuracy improved (very) slightly the more rounds I shot in a session. Maybe it was an expanding barrel or carbon fouling (ported barrel) that was actually taking out some of the slop. Or maybe it was just dumb luck. Either way, they were still abysmal.

Report back when you can.

Edited April 7, 2016 by TacticalReload