I have a M&P Pro with the 5" barrel bought new in 2008. Mine worked fine never had any issues with reliability or accuracy. I did put in some Apex trigger parts and that was all I wanted to do. They are cheap on the used gun market now, I am keeping mine.

quote:

Originally posted by cajunmuscle:

quote:

Originally posted by iron chef:
I had an M&P 1.0 full size and Shield and hated both of them. If you like yours, then more power to you. Do you need others to validate your choice?

I have guns I like that other people seem to hate, e.g., Kahr, Taurus.

yeah douchebag...that's exactly what I need.

Well you posted in the Classifieds that you need a P365 15-round mag.
https://sigforum.com/eve/forum...0601935/m/2300065294

I was going to offer you one and maybe local pick-up too, but I'll pass given your attitude.

More specifically on-topic, I don't understand how a gun that for several years was the most common LE duty pistol second to Glock could be considered underrated.

The 1.0 9Pros with the 5” barrel really smooth out at about the 5,000 round mark. Apex is a shortcut (of sorts) to similar results.
The dimpled barrels were the “good” ones in the 5” guns. IIRC, the rifling twist rate was changed in those, compared to the non dimpled barrels.
My second 9Pro survived our recent house flood, and I need to get it out and put some rounds down range with it, soon.

Exactly what happened to me. I simply swapped out the barrel. Good to go.
I have 6 M&P pistols and all but one are Apexed.

quote:

Originally posted by jljones:
Some of the original 1.0s suffered some accuracy problems at extended distance. Back in the day it was a huge limiter for a serious shooter.

Today, if you get a 1.0 th hat suffers, you drop an Apex barrel in and drive on.

Huge fan and very under rated.

I had 2. Hated the trigger. Went Apex. Trigger was fine after that. Kept 1 mainly due t a ton of mags and they do not sell for much. It’s a fine gun. I don’t consider the MP’s to be underrated. They sold a metric shit ton of them. There were things that they improved on and the 2.0 was born. Also sold a ton. Under rated is probably the wrong word for a gun that sold as well as it did. 279 for a LE trade in is a good price but for me I would immediately have to drop another hundred bucks plus on Apex stuff. You want underrated? Shoot a Sigma. Lol

Not underrated in my mind. The op/ed on those guns is what it is. pedrocola is correct in that S&W did very, VERY well with them. I'd say that MAYBE they're underappreciated, if anything. But even that is questionable.

I had two myself. The triggers were creep-laden, spongy crap, the felt reset was worse. I 'Apexed' one and turned it into a nice enough shooter. Grip tape for me was a must; they were too slippery otherwise. The safety plunger spring hidden under the rear sight was a rude surprise the first time I went to change out the sights. But otherwise they were decent if unremarkable guns that to me didn't really stand out against any of their contemporaries.

Like any then-new pistol it had its share of problems, including some infamous frame failures that S&W initially wouldn't step up and take responsibility for. They also had a few problems with applying Melonite on their type of stainless used on the slides. But once they got over the learning curve the first-gen M&Ps were good pistols. But it was rather disconcerting in the early to mid 2010s seeing just how many LE turn-ins there were entering into civilian marketplace after what seemed then to be a relatively short service life. And there was also the notorious problems that NC and Texas agencies using 357SIG had with the M&P platform which led them to promptly switch back to their prior pistols (P226s, I believe).

So the way I see it the first-gen M&Ps are what they are: a decent, rather unassuming design that didn't stand out against the crowd. The 2.0 design addresses a lot of the concerns that the first-gen guns had, with changes to finishing, added reinforcing within the frame, better grip texture and noticeably better triggers...though not so good that Apex would be sweating bullets about their previous established business model servicing M&Ps.

I think a more accurate description nowadays would be they're probably the best value in the used gun market.
$279 for a 1.0 FS 9mm is a smoking deal. .40s are so plentiful they regularly go for mid to low $200s on GB.

As it's been mentioned, the early 1.0 9mm suffered in the accuracy-at-distance department because S&W used the wrong twist rate, and the barrel didn't have sufficient dwell time/unlocked too soon.
After two consecutive classes where my 25 yard groups and beyond looked like a shotgun pattern, I shelved my 5" Pro and went and bought two Glocks. (The .40s didn't see to have this issue since the gun was designed around the cartridge.)
Luckily, Apex (and other) have solved this problem. As a matter of fact I have an Apex barrel on my bench I'm about to install in my Pro.

I still have a few 1.0s - my wife carries my old CCW pistol, a 9mm Compact fully Apex'd with a set of HDs on it. There's the 5" Pro, and I have a .40S&W FS upper.
I'm looking forward to the Apex barrel in the Pro - the Apex trigger in that gun is one of the best trigger in any gun I own.

Out of the handful of M&Ps I've owned, the only real issue was I had a trigger pivot pin walk out on me once. Luckily someone caught it before it fell out.

If you don't already have the gun, does it pay to buy one and Apex it into shape, or would it make more sense to just by a current manufacture 2.0? This is especially true since there are more permutations and feature on the 2.0.

quote:

Originally posted by Snake207:
I think a more accurate description nowadays would be they're probably the best value in the used gun market.
$279 for a 1.0 FS 9mm is a smoking deal. .40s are so plentiful they regularly go for mid to low $200s on GB.

As it's been mentioned, the early 1.0 9mm suffered in the accuracy-at-distance department because S&W used the wrong twist rate, and the barrel didn't have sufficient dwell time/unlocked too soon.
After two consecutive classes where my 25 yard groups and beyond looked like a shotgun pattern, I shelved my 5" Pro and went and bought two Glocks. (The .40s didn't see to have this issue since the gun was designed around the cartridge.)
Luckily, Apex (and other) have solved this problem. As a matter of fact I have an Apex barrel on my bench I'm about to install in my Pro.

I still have a few 1.0s - my wife carries my old CCW pistol, a 9mm Compact fully Apex'd with a set of HDs on it. There's the 5" Pro, and I have a .40S&W FS upper.
I'm looking forward to the Apex barrel in the Pro - the Apex trigger in that gun is one of the best trigger in any gun I own.

Out of the handful of M&Ps I've owned, the only real issue was I had a trigger pivot pin walk out on me once. Luckily someone caught it before it fell out.

the fact that they came out with 2.0 should tell you something

BBMW:

All things being equal, I'd get a 2.0 - especially if you want it in 9mm.
Just it depends on what caliber you want, and what you want done to it.

For example - if you wanted a .40 pistol - you could snag a used one for $250. An Apex DCAEK will run you about $100 ($110 if you want the polymer trigger shoe - more for the metal trigger) and the Reset Assist Mechanism another $30.
With the right deals, you can come out ahead.
But if 9mm is what you want - yes - 2.0 all the way. I've seen them go for low $400. Sportman's had an ad the other day for FS 2.0 9mm for $419.

I have the FS 2.0 in 9mm currently, and owned the newer Compact 2.0 version for awhile.

The 2.0s have fixed the 9mm accuracy issue with new barrels, and also modified the slide release where it's damn near impossible to autoforward it. The grip checkering significantly better, and I would definitely say the factor trigger is way better than the 1.0s.
Apex triggers were almost mandatory in 1.0 pistols, IMO, but the 2.0 is so much better, that I actually left my 2.0 FS trigger stock.
(And that's coming from a trigger snob and huge Apex fanboy )

I don't think they are underated. I handled more than a few of the original M&P but never bought one to the less than nice trigger and many reports of accuracy problems with the 9MM.

The M&P 2.0 I find is a much nicer pistol and enjoyed shooting the couple I was able to at LGS factory shoot days.

I am seeing huge deals on some M&P 2.0 these days such as the Compact 4 inch verssion for as low as $349. I suspect being cleared out for the newer versions with optic cuts and/or newer trigger. style.

In general pricing on new and used pistols is pretty good right now and around here gun stores are very well stocked with pistols.

quote:

Originally posted by Snake207:


As it's been mentioned, the early 1.0 9mm suffered in the accuracy-at-distance department because S&W used the wrong twist rate, and the barrel didn't have sufficient dwell time/unlocked too soon.

What about the 357's and .40's ?

quote:

Originally posted by Ronin101:
the fact that they came out with 2.0 should tell you something

I agree the 2.0 is the better piece, but I don't think the first generation was necessarily bad. I think of it more like the gen4 vs gen5 Glock.

Is the gen5 better? Absolutely.
Was the gen4 junk? Absolutely not.

I recall some of the first ones had finish problems, some had instances of surface rusting with very minimal humidity, but I don't know how far back the serial range you have to go to find that happening.

I also remember the long range accuracy thing, but I think I may have heard that here from jones many moons ago. I'm certainly not good enough at distance to have figured it out on my own.

From a collector standpoint, I'd much rather have a gen3 S&W, but from a shooting standpoint - as a guy who prefers striker fired guns - I'd much rather have the original M&P.

I bought a M/P 9 L/E package 1.0 series contract over run of sum kind had a flat blk PVD coating over the fact finish from Smith , night sights , I never found out who ordered them , but gun had all the update's , slide lock , newer type barrel , shoots and works great never missed a beat , the only thing the front night sight went out called S/W told the serial number they sent me a new front night sight still have and carry and shoot all the time .

My .02 worth.

I had a positive experience with the MP 1.0, I got a new dedicated 357 Sig Compact in a trade.
That little pistol was very accurate, I removed the manual safety, installed an Apex trigger and changed the sights. Added Talon Grip tape.

It was always reliable, I bought a SW 40 cal. Barrel for it, which I never used. I had the slide treated in Ion Bond. I carried it for probably 2 years.

It was a powerhouse, a small compact 13 shot, easy to conceal and carry. In a bad move, not being able to get 357 Sig ammo, I sold it along with my Sig 2022.
A forum member purchased it, hope he enjoys it !

quote:

What about the 357's and .40's ?

No issues with those calibers in the accuracy department.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Snake207,

The early .357s had some dead trigger issues. The NCSHP ditched the 357 and went back to SIGs due to persistent dead trigger issues.

Believe that S&W upgraded the trigger bar and fixed it eventually.

My 1.0 CORE 9L has been stellar from day 1. It has the dot barrel and is very accurate. It's my primary match (local club) gun and has 15K documented rounds through it with 3 total malfunctions, 1 of which was in the first 50 rounds (FTE, likely limp-wrist) and 1 of which was with a young female shooter (FTE, likely limp-wrist). the OEM trigger was shootable but I put an Apex FSS sear and aluminum trigger in and the RAM reset assist doohickey, which helped a bit. I'd love to buy a backup 1.0 CORE 9L for these crazy low prices but I can't find one. I like the standard slide stop/release on the 1.0. I haven't tried the 2.0 but hear good things.

I also have a couple 1.0 Shields and have the Apex Duty AEK in them. The triggers were basically useless stock. No matter how carefully you pressed the shot, the front sight would jerk. But they've been reliable and are very shootable now.

The 9mm M&P fits my hand better than any other pistol ever made.

And I can't shoot it for crap! lol Ended up selling it pretty quick, so disappointed. It was me, not the gun.

The larger frame .45 doesn't feel anywhere near as natural, but I shoot it just fine.

I have an M&P Pro Series CORE 9mm with a 4.25" barrel that I bought right before the 2.0 models came out. I like it and the ergos are good but I prefer my Walther PDP Compact over the M&P.