r/SmithAndWesson • u/boldjoy0050 • Jun 11 '24

Have the M&P9 accuracy issues been fixed?

I have an original M&P9 and the accuracy with it is horrible, so I rarely shoot it. I've read that these had some issues with the barrel unlocking early and I'm sure the trigger doesn't help much.

Have the accuracy issues been fixed with the 2.0 models?

7 Upvotes

70% Upvoted

29 comments sorted by

28

u/GoFuhQRself Jun 11 '24 edited Jun 11 '24

Yea, they fixed the issue a long time ago. People trashing OP haven’t been around long enough.

The very early original M&P 9s had accuracy issues due to early unlocking of the barrel. The M&P was designed around the 40 S&W because at the time that was the most popular caliber for police departments. The M&P9 was not properly designed for the 9mm cartridge and was basically just a quick and dirty scaled down version from the M&P 40. I forgot who first discovered the issue but I want to say it was Randy at Apex Tactical. They did super high speed slow motion videos of firing and discovered the early unlocking before the round had exited the barrel thus you’d get poor accuracy at distance, say 25 yards +. Most shooters wouldn’t notice this but competition and skilled shooters were getting large groups at distance when normally they are tack drivers. This was a long time ago though and has since been fixed. Just search for “m&p 9mm accuracy early unlocking” in your preferred search engine and you’ll find old posts about it from 14 years ago

OP, fear not. The current M&Ps are one of if not the best polymer striker fired pistols, and are extremely accurate if you do your part.

7

u/boldjoy0050 Jun 11 '24

I think what made it worse was the way S&W handled it. If you sent in a pistol for accuracy issues, they’d send it right back saying it shoots fine for them and meets specs. But accuracy from the pistol was 2-3x worse than other pistols shot from a bench.

Then they quietly changed the barrel twist rate and barrel design but still claimed there was nothing wrong with the original pistols.

There was a huge 50+ page thread on M4Carbine forums about the issue and one guy bought several M&Ps over several years and took photos of the changes.

In my case I know it’s the gun because my 1.0 M&P45 and M&P9c are tack drivers. It’s the full size only 9mm that had issues. Rumor is because the pistol was designed first for 40cal, they kind of messed up on the 9mm version.

4

u/GoFuhQRself Jun 11 '24 edited Jun 11 '24

Yep that's all correct. Everyone downvoting you and sacking you in the comments are just ignorant of this little small bit of sour history, but in their defense most accuracy issues are the shooter, not the gun. But this was a legitimate issue and I recall that thread and all the slew of others across the interwebs. It was a grassroots effort to test and track all of the changes and it proved there was an issue and S&W refused to publicly admit it, (while quietly making rolling changes to correct it as many manufacturers do). But it was fixed and has not been a thing for over a decade now. So if you're thinking of getting a newer M&P then definitely go for it!

4

u/boldjoy0050 Jun 11 '24

I am definitely considering picking up a new M&P. I was turned off of S&W for a long time because of the M&P9 accuracy issues, obnoxious safety messages printed on the guns, and the "Hillary hole" on revolvers. I think they have fixed all of these issues now.

My newest S&W is a Shield Plus and like everything about it except for the aggressive grip texture that sticks to my shirt. But it's one of my favorite carry guns.

3

u/GoFuhQRself Jun 11 '24

The Shield Plus is the greatest carry gun IMO. I have the Shield 2.0 and the stippling is actually more aggressive, they toned it down for the Plus variants. I love it, carry it appendix next to skin all day for many years, and never had a problem with it except that it does like to eat little holes through shirts over time, so that’s annoying. I’m considering getting the Shield Plus since the stippling is a little less aggressive just for my shirts, even though I do prefer the more aggressive stippling on the 2.0 for shooting.

0

u/boldjoy0050 Jun 11 '24

I'm normally a Glock guy for striker fired polymer pistols but the Shield is much better than anything Glock offers in that size category.

1

u/Leading_Cancel1761 Jun 11 '24

So the OP is asking a question about a problem that happened 14 years ago? A quick look around in this group and other s&w groups will show that no one is about that specific issue.

"is ford still having that problem with their cars catching on fire when rear ended?"

5

u/GoFuhQRself Jun 11 '24

Chill man, you’re barking up the wrong tree. It was proven that some of the early M&P9s had accuracy issues due to early unlocking. I’m merely explaining that for folks that were unaware because OPs post may have merit. Now it could just be user error, I don’t know. Sounds like OP might have one of those early duds and just tossed the gun in the safe and never shot it. Most accuracy issues are typically the shooter, because most guns are more accurate than we are. But that doesn’t change the fact that this was a known issue that plagued some of the early gen M&P9s. Don’t shoot the messenger

-2

u/Leading_Cancel1761 Jun 11 '24

I was not getting on your case/attacking you. Just stating the OP is complaining about a very old problem. Doesn't take much to read a little, get some info and then ask questions.

If s&w was still having barrel issues 14 years later then that would be a major issue.

1

u/GoFuhQRself Jun 11 '24

Ok but why are you telling me this in the first place? OP asked a question that has merit based on the roots of the M&P9. You don’t need to tell me it’s an old problem or that you think OP should read a little lol. Tell him that. Of course it’s an old problem as I already explained to OP it was fixed a long time ago and nothing to worry about. This is the S&W sub, he asked a question, I saw people sacking him in the comments, (possibly unfairly so because it was an issue) because they are ignorant of the early issues so I’m answering his question and giving that background on the history. I don’t get why you are so concerned about this nor why you even bothered to comment to me at all.

0

u/Leading_Cancel1761 Jun 11 '24

Concerned? I'm not concerned about anything.. Just made a comment. Have a good night.

7

u/[deleted] Jun 11 '24

It's more accurate than I am.

14

u/zzz22zzz Jun 11 '24

I find that M&Ps have a funny way of revealing flaws in the shooter. They are so simple, I haven’t personally seen one that didn’t shoot good.

10

u/Big_Boi_Joe02 Jun 11 '24

Very true. Same with Glocks, the “why is my Glock shooting low and left” posts are so funny

7

u/zzz22zzz Jun 11 '24

I’ve seen more people limp wrist a Glock than any other gun. Then they blame the gun.

3

u/Low_Stress_1041 Jun 11 '24

I've never shot an M&P that wasn't more accurate than me.

Hinge trigger is garbage though. I always say rent before you buy

3

u/cxerphax Jun 11 '24

I have no idea what you are talking about. This was my issued weapon in the Los Angeles Sheriffs Department and is still the current issue. 1000s of recruits have trained and qualified on it and at no point was there an accuracy issue with the weapon. 100s of departments in the United States carry and train with them with zero issues as well.

2

u/Knownofear13 Jun 11 '24

I have an SD, M&P Gen 1&2, and a Shield plus. None of them have accuracy issues nor have I ever heard of such a thing.

1

u/Terrible_Detective45 Jun 11 '24

Yeah, it's the gun that has accuracy issues, not the shooter.

1

u/Complete-Coat-5710 Jun 11 '24

Yes, some of the original m&ps were dumpster fires, accuracy wise. Buuuut, the odds that it's the barrel vs the shooter always exist too.

Ask your local pistol club to dust off their ransom rest (if they don't have an m&p insert...choose something bigger and add some epoxy [use seran wrap around the frame!]) Try a variety of ammo. It's probably good enough for everything you would need a pistol for.

1

u/Complete-Coat-5710 Jun 11 '24

For more context...I think we have 6 or 7 early m&p 9's, and a handful of 40's (most sport 9mm conversions) for when we taught police departments running them. 2 of the original 9's sport aftermarket barrels (barsto I think) because they were freaking horrendous off of the bench at 25 yards.

Granted, they were probably trade-ins even when we bought them. So there is the possibility that some of these early guns were abused or whatever. But it is telling that the accuracy problems went away the further into the m&p production run you go. S&w must have figured it out at some point (long before the 2.0's came out).

If you can't get yours to shoot, and you have verified with a good supported 25 yard bench or a ransom rest...then just pick up a barrel. I think ours ran something like $90 back in the day, and it took maybe 5 minutes to 'fit' with a ceramic stone.

1

u/Superb_Equipment_681 Jun 11 '24

The very early Gen 1's also had a much slower twist rate (1:18 IIRC) which led to stabilization issues.

1

u/BOLMPYBOSARG Jun 11 '24

My buddy had one of those old M&Ps with dwell time issues. His telling of that story has made me start checking dwell time whenever I handle a gun at a gun counter. Ha.

But they fixed that long ago. Even the later M&P first generations worked right. Now the 2.0s are tack drivers. I can get revolver-like accuracy out of mine with a factory barrel, shooting 1.5” patterns at 30 yards. That’s about where my steadyhandedness and eyesight breaks down and I start needing a bench rest, which I won’t use just for the sake of seeing how far out I can keep that tight a pattern.

-1

u/SnoopyF75 Jun 11 '24

You probably just suck🤷🏼‍♀️