Suppressors Department switched sidearms

[i_Adam_i18]

So my department just switched from H&K USP .40's

to S&W M&P .40's.

I wasn't excited about the switch all up until I shot the Smith and Wesson. I was really only able to find one change between the S&W and HK that I did not like, and that was the mag release. I love the HK ambidextrous release being right below the trigger guard. The Smith has the plain one side or the other type release.

Other than that a few of the good things I noticed:

<span style="text-decoration: underline">Grip</span>. The S&W is way more comfortable, also, there are 3 different sized back straps for the grip that you can change out.
The HK was hard plastic and felt like wrapping your hand around a meat tenderizer. The S&W is a different type of plastic (or polymer if you want a fancy word for plastic) that just feels more comfortable.

<span style="text-decoration: underline">Sights</span> --- The S&W has novak night sights that are more of a combat sight than the ones on the HK. They have a bit more space on either side of the front sight post during sight alignment as opposed to the HK sights which when lined up, was pretty much a solid block.

<span style="text-decoration: underline">Recoil spring </span>--- The recoil spring on the HK is a 2 stage spring, with a softer spring on the first stage and a heavy spring on the second. This caused the gun to recoil normally until it gets to the heavier spring. At that point it flips the gun upwards and conscequently flips it back downwards making it difficult to control and stay on target for a followup shot.
The S&W is a single stage spring, making it much more controllable.

<span style="text-decoration: underline">Action</span> --- The HK is single/double action so the trigger pull changes from something like 12 pounds on double action to 5 pounds on single action.
The S&W uses a striker instead of a hammer and firing pin and is DAO (double action only) and has a pull of about 6.5 pounds.

<span style="text-decoration: underline">Trigger</span> --- I've always loved my HK, but to be honest, the trigger is crap. It feels like pulling on a sponge. Like a soft piece of plastic that is about to break. trigger creep was horrible.
The S&W is simply crisp. When you pull the slide off the frame and look at the workings of the trigger, it's smooth polished metal on metal which = good.

I think I covered the most of it. Oh besides the fact that the best score I ever shot with the HK was about a 260/300 (and that's after many quals) and the first time qualifying with the Smith, I shot a 297/300 (tossed one about .5 inches into the black, probably while firing support hand only).

 

[Downzero]

Re: Department switched sidearms

Your experiences mirror mine. I'd also add that the bore axis of the M&P is lower and so it is easier to control due to that fact as well.

I hated my USP Compact and I love my M&P. It's a real joy to shoot compared to any other polymer pistol I've shot.

I'd also add that striker fired is not DAO. There are similarities between striker fired pistols and single action and double action firearms. They are a form of hybrid between the two, allowing the lighter (but not as light) trigger pull like a single action and the safety of an incompletely cocked striker of a double action. They also lack the second strike capability of a double action, which in my opinion is a totally useless feature.

Are you carrying an M&P with a safety or not? What variant was your USP, and how did you previously carry it? I'm assuming it was carried hammer down/safety off, but I just want to make sure.

 

[i_Adam_i18]

Re: Department switched sidearms

Our M&P's don't have safeties, unless you consider the little swivle on the trigger a safety, I would say that would only stop the gun from firing if you dropped it off a building or something.

The HK's we carried were varient 3's, no safety, and we carried them (of course one in the chamber) hammer down. My personal HK is a varient 1.

Thanks for the info on the DOA. I just assumed that no hammer was pretty much DAO. My misknowledge.

 

[Vinroc_1]

Re: Department switched sidearms

My Dept uses the M&P9, and I carry both the fullsize and compact. When I first got mine, the triggers were all gritty, but after 200rds or so, they broke right in. For the compact, I had a friend do a trigger job, and its even nicer now. A lot of guys bash the M&Ps, but they are very accurate and reliable, and the 9mm recoil is very manageable.

 

[i_Adam_i18]

Re: Department switched sidearms

Yeah I was one of those guys, well it's not that I bashed them, I just thought they were crap because I had heard stories. But after shooting it, I'm thinking about buying one for my self (I can't use reloads in my dept issued gun).

 

[rkgsmith]

Re: Department switched sidearms

Actually the M&P does have a safety, internal firing pin block. It cannot go off unless you pull the trigger. Take off the slide and push on the firing pin with a punch, it won't protrude thru the firing pin hole unless you press up the plunger on the underside of the slide. Look up Burwell Gunsmithing for complete details on the gun.

 

[i_Adam_i18]

Re: Department switched sidearms

Well I think most pistols use firing pin blocks now, I was thinking more of a manual safety.

 

[Chilo]

Re: Department switched sidearms

I've shot the M&P, but not much. The "safety" of the two-part trigger concerned me a little. Does anyone have any experience with that part going bad, getting bent, filled with dirt or grime and not functioning? I've got no real reason to dislike the M&P, but that part sure caught my attention.

Maybe it's the best thing since sliced bread...it's just not been proven to me yet.

 

[Vinroc_1]

Re: Department switched sidearms

I burned through 500rds of wolf 115gr in my duty gun as fast as me and my buddies could load ammo. It was filthy, but functioned flawlessly. The trigger safety had never given me issue, and feels just as secure as day one.

Oh, like someone else said, for gunsmithing the M&P, Burwell, and Bowie tactical are some of the better smiths. I plan to have my compact sent to Bowie for a few changes

 

[Downzero]

Re: Department switched sidearms

Only reason I asked about the safety is the one you pictured has a thumb safety.

I love my M&P. It's a great gun for a police officer.

 

[Spazz.]

Re: Department switched sidearms

I love my M&P as well - I have the .40 compact. It points very naturally and it's accurate for a shorter barreled gun. I shoot it better than a Glock.
My wife had an issue with hers (a .40 compact as well) where the slide would lock with one or two rounds left in the mag. We sent it in to S&W (for free) and got it back under 2 weeks later (for free) with a new slide lock. Hasn't function tested since she got it back, but from what I've read elsewhere it seems that this is one of the very few issues with the gun, and S&W will fix it right up. I've been pretty impressed with them.

 

[Kilosierra]

Re: Department switched sidearms

I carry my own on duty. Department issue was a Glock 35 until four months ago when they went to Glock 22's. Everyone I've let shoot it shot much better with it than the 35's, which they shot better than the 22's. Everyone was complaining about the worn out 35's until the new 22's came in.

 

[[email protected]]

Re: Department switched sidearms

Looks like more and more departments are switching over to these guns. Not sure if they are even close to touching Glock, but I am sure they will make a dent if agencies keep switching.

I have one question about the series:

Is there any truth to the "false reset"? I have read that there is a first click before the trigger fully resets, and the shooter needs to allow the trigger forward to the second click, being the true reset.

This is something that an HK I had used to do, I had to send it back because it bothered me so much (they fixed it BTW).

I am really on the fence about a 45 version.

 

[Rookie]

Re: Department switched sidearms

Wish we would make the switch!

 

[Downzero]

Re: Department switched sidearms

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Apollo11</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Looks like more and more departments are switching over to these guns. Not sure if they are even close to touching Glock, but I am sure they will make a dent if agencies keep switching.

I have one question about the series:

Is there any truth to the "false reset"? I have read that there is a first click before the trigger fully resets, and the shooter needs to allow the trigger forward to the second click, being the true reset.

This is something that an HK I had used to do, I had to send it back because it bothered me so much (they fixed it BTW).

I am really on the fence about a 45 version. </div></div>

I've never experienced that. The only problems I've had with my M&P have been related to ammo that I've loaded. They don't like 147 grain bullets at 1.145". I have since shortened them to 1.120".

 

[Hooper]

Re: Department switched sidearms

Was the Glock considered in the choices to switch to?

 

[i_Adam_i18]

Re: Department switched sidearms

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Downzero</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Only reason I asked about the safety is the one you pictured has a thumb safety.

I love my M&P. It's a great gun for a police officer. </div></div>

Yeah I noticed that after you said something about the safety. Ours don't have them though, it's just the first pic I came across.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Apollo11</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Looks like more and more departments are switching over to these guns. Not sure if they are even close to touching Glock, but I am sure they will make a dent if agencies keep switching.

I have one question about the series:

Is there any truth to the "false reset"? I have read that there is a first click before the trigger fully resets, and the shooter needs to allow the trigger forward to the second click, being the true reset.

This is something that an HK I had used to do, I had to send it back because it bothered me so much (they fixed it BTW).

I am really on the fence about a 45 version. </div></div>

I'm not 100% on the false reset, but I found myself several times pulling the trigger to fire off another round and nothing, then realizing that I didn't let it travel far enough forward for reset. I don't know for sure if it was because I felt a false reset or if I just wasn't used to the length to reset.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Hooper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Was the Glock considered in the choices to switch to? </div></div>
Not sure if glocks were considered, I imagine they were though.

They said we switched because HK's customer service sucked. When we needed something fixed, they weren't in any hurry to do it and our department was told we weren't a large enough customer for it to be a big concern for them.

And S&W said they would swap us out 1 for 1 on holsters and new guns along with a lifetime warrantee. Anything breaks for any reason and they will replace it no charge. So it was basically no cost to the dept and I think S&W wanted our depts name as part of their marketing is why, not sure though.

 

[Kilosierra]

Re: Department switched sidearms

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Apollo11</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I have one question about the series:

Is there any truth to the "false reset"? I have read that there is a first click before the trigger fully resets, and the shooter needs to allow the trigger forward to the second click, being the true reset.</div></div>

Mine doesn't do anything like that. My only complaint is the where the reset is and how far back the trigger is when it releases. When I first got it, I occasionaly would start to let up on the trigger to reset it thinking I hadn't reset it when in reality I hadn't actually taken the slack out of the trigger yet. After a few hundred rounds I got that fixed and the trigger now is very smooth, and doesn't have the gritty, spongy feel of every Glock I've ever used.

 

[gunnut284]

Re: Department switched sidearms

I like the M&P and would carry one on duty without reservation. They have a very nice feel and my buddy's shot quite well. I'm a Glock guy but the M&P has been calling to me and I'll probably pick one up soon. Never really warmed up to the HKs. The comments about HK's customer service is consistent with my dealing with them and many others I know.

 

[E3C3H3O3]

Re: Department switched sidearms

Just had to add a one more +1 for smith & wessons m&p, I use a MP40C as my personal carry, and I also love just shooting the thing, very smooth and extremely reliable. I've put at least 1500 rounds through it and not a single problem yet. If I were LE, it is what I would want my department to use.

 

[sierra6]

Re: Department switched sidearms

MY department just made the switch to the M&P as well. I am the Sr Firearms Instructor and was instrumental in the transition. We were carrying Glock 23's for the last decade and I convinced our new Chief that a full size duty gun was more appropriate. With his endorsement I acquired T&E guns from Smith in 45acp. and .40S&W We had a Glock 21 SF and a Glock 21 as well as a Dept Glock 22 for the test. I might add that previous to the Glock 23 we issued the Glock 21 and had issues with smaller Officers, primarily females, who could not physically handle the weapon with any level of proficiency. I'll also note that both myself and the other department Firearms Instructor are hard core Glock advocates. I've been carrying one since 1990
when we left thet the S&W 681 .357mag for the auto pistol.

Test guns arrived in both 40S&W and .45acp as I requested. Testing was done on several different occasions during different weather conditions so gloves and winter gear could be utilized. We also allowed members of other neighboring departments the opportunity to participate in the T&E sessions and many did. There was quite a variation in the size and experience level of the Officers and Deputies who eventually tested out the various guns. We literally dropped the pistols in water, mud and subjected them to unmentionable conditions. We fired over 1k rounds in each piece without cleaning as a benchmark. In the end we were totally impressed all of the pistols tested. The Glock 22, 21 and the S&W M&P .40 and .45 Any of the 4 pistols tested would make an outstanding service pistol and that is very much what I expected. All 4 weapons were ultra reliable and we literally could not induce a malfunction with service ammo in any of the weapons.

After all the smoke cleared the decision was unanimous. The S&W M&P in .45ACP won us over and was the recommendation to the admin to be adopted as our new service pistol. The agency accepted our proposal and we just recently received our shipment of pistols. Members have yet to be transitioned to the new weapon. The transition will take place in during our April range cycle.

There were several factors What separated the M&P from the Glock. ERGONOMICS. The Smith .45 with it's adjustable back strap fit our smaller testers as well as the two .40's in the group, and all of the testers felt they preferred the grip on the Smith. The Glock 21 is just plain big. The SF version offers little advantage in grip size and compared side to side with the standard 21 it's negligible. It was not used in the range testing as it did not prove to be of significant difference. SIGHTS. We requested the guns be equipped with factory night sights. The Smith sights offered a better profile and many of the testers commented on this detail. ACCURACY. We did NOT Ransom rest the test guns, but it was clear that during scored drills during the test phase the clear majority of shooters had higher scores shooting both the S&W guns when comparing apples to apples. This was an easily quantifiable advantage. RELOADING. During timed reload drills virtually all shooters posted faster times with the Smith pistols. The steel magazines were clearly a factor in this function. PRICE. Both Reps from Glock and S&W were spoken to and the quote by S&W put it way ahead per unit in price. This was done with a trade in of our model 23 Glocks. Last but not least....MADE IN THE USA. I know I felt good about that and the new Chief commented even before the testing started that it would be nice if we could find an American made pistol that could stack up to the Glock. I'm confident we found one!

In conclusion I would gladly carry any of the four pistols we tested and all of them proved to be as reliable as a mechanical device can be expected to be. A BAD choice would have been impossible. The best choice for us collectively was the S&W M&P .45





s6

 

[Vinroc_1]

Re: Department switched sidearms

Hey Sierra, count that as another Dept switching to the M&P. I'm with corrections down in Valhalla and use the M&P9, and I know County PD uses em also :}

 

[Spazz.]

Re: Department switched sidearms

Thanks for the review, Sierra6. What made you choose .45 over .40? I don't want to start a caliber war, I'm just curious as to why you switched from shooting .40s to .45s.

 

[300WSM]

Re: Department switched sidearms

M&P great for carry and LE - terrible for military and in the crap. Glock would be the best if all uses we're required.

 

[Downzero]

Re: Department switched sidearms

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 300WSM</div><div class="ubbcode-body">M&P great for carry and LE - terrible for military and in the crap. Glock would be the best if all uses we're required. </div></div>

What military has used it?

 

[300WSM]

Re: Department switched sidearms

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glock_pistol#Users

 

[300WSM]

Re: Department switched sidearms

M&P is a nice gun but the mag disconnect. The trigger bar safety mech. the hole in the top of the side/barrel. Are all poor designs. Not a fan of the 2 piece trigger either.

But it's not like glock couldn't use some improvement.

 

[sierra6]

Re: Department switched sidearms

We ordered ours without the magazine disconnect. I don't care for that feature and feel it's merits do not outweigh it's disadvantage.

Spazz.....To answer your question: We went back to .45 simply because we could. The M&P offers a full size package in a manageable size that allows even our smallest Officers the benefit of a major caliber handgun round. In the deadly force game accuracy is always first, but when all else is equal, bigger is better.

s6

 

[Spazz.]

Re: Department switched sidearms

Fair enough

. What kind of ammunition are you running through the .45s? Are you having any feed/ejection issues with different kinds of ammo? I'm interested in the M&P .45s, I'm comparing those with the Springfield XD .45s right now. I'd just like a little real-world knowledge. Feel free to PM me if you'd rather.

 

[Downzero]

Re: Department switched sidearms

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 300WSM</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glock_pistol#Users </div></div>

I meant the M&P. I'm not aware of its adoption by any military (yet), so I am not sure how anyone could conclude that it'd be no good for military use.

The Glock's reputation isn't in question here. Its ergonomics definitely leave something to be desired, though.

 

[Kilosierra]

Re: Department switched sidearms

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Downzero</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> The Glock's reputation isn't in question here. Its ergonomics definitely leave something to be desired, though.</div></div>

Just my personal experience with the four Glock's I've been issued and some department guns I've shot or examined and a Glock I saw being shot at church fish fry.

1. Brand new straight from sealed container Glock 23. Fell apart on the range one day. Was alternately looking at the grip with the mag hanging halfway out and the slide, barrel and recoil spring on the ground five feeet in front of me until the rest of the people on the line got through firing. Gun also wouldn't consistantly stay half-cocked like it was supposed to, and had severe feeding problem with the then current(#5 follower) factory mags. Fed much better with older generation mags, but still not 100%. Shot 18" groups from a rest at 25 yds. NY1 trigger was did not have a consistant pull weight and varied from 11 to 15 lbs and was very spongy and gritty. Returned to Glock where it was replaced because it "did not meet specifications" or some other phrase with the same meaning. The gun was a replacement for another 23 that had to be replaced.

2. Brand new Glock 23 also came straight out of sealed box. Was not 100% with the included factory(#5 follower) mags. Never tried it with others. Pins holding frame insert into grip had to be pushed back into frame after every 50 rounds. Shot 12" groups from rest at 25 yds. Trigger was the same as #1. Don't know what happened to it because I quit working at that department. Gun was a replacement for another 23 and came in same shipment as #1.

3. Used Glock 35. Stock factory trigger measured a consistant 4.75 lbs with slightly spongy feeling when I got it. Barrel was oversized causing bullets to impact target sideways at 25 yds when barrel was hot. Gun was not 100% with department issued mags(#4 follower) until I had over 1000 rounds through it. Then current(#5 follower) mags would not feed hollowpoints, but were 100% with ball. Shot 8" groups at 25 yds from rest when it was issued to me. Shot 12" groups from rest and trigger measured 7 lbs and was very spongy after I had around 2000 rounds through it. Department traded it and the other 35's in for new 22's. Replaced with #4.

4. Brand new mid-2009 production Glock 22. Had a lot of brass shavings inside of gun when field stripped. Had very little powder fouling inside of barrel. After cycling one mag of duty ammo through it, there was the amount of nickel plating inside of gun was comparable to the amount of brass. Trigger was very gritty and felt like #3's trigger after 2000 rounds. No rounds have been fired through it since the factory due to qualification with and carry of my personal M&P40 in 2008.

5. Brand new mid-2009 production Glock 22. Was issued to new officer attending ALETA on Sunday due to guns arriving on Friday while he was at ALETA. Gun consistantly failed during range week and another gun had to be borrowed to qualify. The trigger would not consistantly release when I examined it. Department armorer detail stripped and cleaned it. Gun functioned much better but was still nowwhere near 100%. Gun was exchanged with dealer for another one.

6. Brand new mid-2009 production Glock 22. Shot 6" groups from a rest at 15 yds. Trigger was very gritty and felt like #3's trigger after 2000 rounds. No functioning problem.

7. Brand new mid-2009 production Glock 22. Gun wouldn't fire at all. Detail stripped, cleaned, and parts swapped out of a functioning gun with negative results. Gun was exchanged with dealer for another one.

8. New mid 90's(this happened then) Glock 19 with unknown number but very few rounds through it. Would not consistantly fire M882 rounds that did feed and frequently jammed regardless of ammo used. Round I saw being used were commercial Winchester and Remington 9mm and "surplus"(straight from the local ANG armory) M882 ammo. Ammo that misfired had light marks from striker. All ammo including the misfired ammo fired from a Beretta 92(commercial, privately owned) and S&W 9mm on first try. Owner traded it to someone for a S&W .357 and $200.

As to the ergonomics, after firing 50 rounds through a Glock .40, my hands feel like I took a aluminum bat and hit it against a brick wall as hard as I could. After range week at ALETA I could barely write. After firing one full mag through #6, my hand felt like I had dragged it across a piece of 60-grit sandpaper. Most companies are working to make their guns more ergonomic, Glock seems to be working to make theirs less ergonomic.

 

[mefly2]

Re: Department switched sidearms

No flames, please; this is my first post. Some of us are fortunate enough to have a department that allows personal choice ... not the USPc, rather the 1911 platform. I started back in 1978 and many sidearm "switches" were mandated (yes, wheel guns at first) and now we've mostly moved into the 21st century.

 

[vanilla_gorilla]

Re: Department switched sidearms

I absolutely love my M&P9, and I was initially a very vocal critic of the platform. I'd love to be able to carry one on duty, but all agencies in my area are pretty much Glock-issue.

 

[msuhunter]

Re: Department switched sidearms

In my opinion your department made a drastic improvement, because they are saving more money for other toys, and the M&P is easier to shoot. I won one, but did not shoot it till after I sold it to my buddy, I wish I had not sold it now.

 

[GracieSymon]

Re: Department switched sidearms

I fired a Smith M&P 9mm for the first time past weekend. My recollection is I fired only two magazines clearly not enough to form an informed opinion. That said one thing about the gun that potentially concerned me. The metal the magazines are formed from seemed to be thin. It was my impression that the Smith M&P magazine might be prone to crush or deformation damage in much the same way that USGI M-16 magazines are.

Martin

 

[WRM]

Re: Department switched sidearms

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: arterg</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I fired a Smith M&P 9mm for the first time past weekend. My recollection is I fired only two magazines clearly not enough to form an informed opinion. That said one thing about the gun that potentially concerned me. The metal the magazines are formed from seemed to be thin. It was my impression that the Smith M&P magazine might be prone to crush or deformation damage in much the same way that USGI M-16 magazines are.

Martin </div></div>

You gotta be kidding me.... If you can't think of something bad to say you're going to make up a "potential" problem? Are you some kind of magazine design engineer or something?

Bill

 

[sierra6]

Re: Department switched sidearms

The magazines that we have with our M&P 45's are very sturdy and seem to be as durable as any I've ever used.

 

[[email protected]]

Re: Department switched sidearms

Pretty sure Mec-gar can make a damn magazine and make it durable.

 

[Kilosierra]

Re: Department switched sidearms

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: arterg</div><div class="ubbcode-body">That said one thing about the gun that potentially concerned me. The metal the magazines are formed from seemed to be thin. It was my impression that the Smith M&P magazine might be prone to crush or deformation damage in much the same way that USGI M-16 magazines are.

Martin</div></div>

I can assure you that they are quite durable. If they can survive me doing a belly flop to get prone as quickly as I could and then crawling as ungently as possible to get to a different position when the original one turned out to suck with my mag pouch on the front of my duty belt on one occasion and accidently dropping a loaded one five feet onto a concrete where it landed on the back of the feedlips first on another occasion, I would think they would survive any reasonable amount of abuse that could be handed out. Just remember to use common sense and if it occurs during duty to check the mag if time permits or to stick it somewhere out of the way until to you can.