quote:

Originally posted by jljones:


Ran another range session in the rain today. Shot on the steel range again. Except venturing out into the downpour to shoot a couple of quick drills at the seven, I shot most all at the 25, 50, and a few shots at 75 yards.

I took three pistols to do a little comparison. A 2.0, a 1.0, and a 9c. I shot each at each yard marker as a comparison yardstick. At the seven, I shot bill drills, one and two shot drills from the holster, and failure drills. At distance, I shot mainly ones and twos from the holster. At the seven, the 2.0 reigned king. At distance, the 1.0 was the clear winner. The 1.0 does have an Apex barrel, but I don't know if that was the variable. I could still hit things with the 2.0, but I had to slow way down. I try to use a 1.75 par time on the draw at 25, and a 2.25 par time at the 50. With the 1.0 at 25, I was easily hitting 1.45-1.6 with confidence. The 2.0 I was struggling to make par, and in several cases it was taking me a full two seconds to make the hit.

Here is the kicker. The 9c was the best all around gun. I burned a couple of 1.9 bill drills with the gun, and never missed a par time out to 25. At 50, I did have to slow it down quite a bit, but the little gun just keeps chugging.

An interesting day to say the least. I guess I'll blame the rain?

quote:

Originally posted by evolution:

So seriously, what does today to your overall impression of the gun?

quote:

Originally posted by jljones:

quote:

Originally posted by evolution:

So seriously, what does today to your overall impression of the gun?

My personal impressions of the gun is that it is a well put together evolution of the 1.0. If your concerns are based upon my post from yesterday, you have to remember it is apples and Yamahas. There is NO WAY a stock box, or lightly modified 1.0 would have competed with my 1.0. It has an Apex barrel, Duty carry kit, and extractor. The old 1.0 would not all me to even hit a 50 or 75 yard target out of the box, no matter the speed. The fact that the 2.0 readily allows it, is an amazing feat. Remember that in the comparison as it is relevant. The fact that I had to slow way down to hit the target gives one take away. The gun will hit the target at the distance. The hows and whys just fall back upon me.
The 2.0 is a great out of the box pistol, and the Apex kit I had installed made it better. I'm not sure why I am slower with it. I have a hunch that it is the aggressive grip texture setting my hand in the wrong spot coming out of the holster, but we shall see. If it is, that is an issue I'll have to fix and doesn't reflect in a negative fashion on the gun.

All and all, I highly recommend the 2.0.

The real winner from yesterday was the 9c. It reminded me just how good the small package gun shoots. It has a full sized duty pistol's performance in a package smaller than a Glock 19.

quote:

Originally posted by jljones:

quote:

Originally posted by jjkroll32:
Thoughtful and helpful, as always.

Thank you for taking the time to test and compose your thoughts in such a manner.

No problem. I plan to keep shooting it in stock form for a while longer. Eventually, I will have an Apex gunsmith fit barrel installed, and will put in a duty carry kit.

quote:

Originally posted by jbourneidentity:

Thank you in particular for the accuracy report. I owned an updated M&P 1.0 9mm with the "dot" barrel, and its accuracy was atrocious, if not unforgivable on S&W's part. It was the inaccuracy of that M&P that has kept me away from the brand until your report has rekindled my interest in the model.

quote:

Originally posted by xray 99:
Does the 2.0 fit the same holster as a 1.0 if tightly molded?

quote:

Originally posted by xray 99:
Does the 2.0 fit the same holster as a 1.0 if tightly molded?

quote:

Originally posted by evolution:
I believe the dot barrel is the updated barrel that had the changed twist rate. The change in the twist rate was supposed to fix the accuracy issues some of the original M&P's experienced. If you purchase an updated barrel, or bought an M&P with an updated barrel, sometimes the accuracy was improved, sometimes it wasn't.

I had a very early production M&P 9mm and had no accuracy issues what so ever. Never the less the accuracy issues definitely existed.

If you google M&P updated barrel, or dot barrel you will probably find some images or links.

quote:

Originally posted by bubbatime:
I picked up my $409 version 2.0 today. Color me impressed. I like it much better than the version 1 pistol I had. The grip just sticks to your hand like glue. The trigger out of the box is very good for a service pistol. Great reset as well. The magazines have a very nice anti-friction coating. The magazine springs are very strong, on par with +5 or +10 wolf mag springs, a good thing in my opinion. A full 17 round mag easily seats, and doesn't need forced in.

I'm a Glock fanboy and to be honest, this pistol is better than a G17 in my opinion. And cheaper too. Smith did a great job on this version 2.0.

quote:

Originally posted by jljones:
Another 150 rounds today. Very solid pistol. I've got to get off the steel and back on paper. I've quit training and moved into "Let's see how fast we can go"(Which translates into "Let's see how fast we can miss target 4, 6, and 7" )

quote:

Originally posted by bubbatime:
I picked up my $409 version 2.0 today. Color me impressed. I like it much better than the version 1 pistol I had. The grip just sticks to your hand like glue. The trigger out of the box is very good for a service pistol. Great reset as well. The magazines have a very nice anti-friction coating. The magazine springs are very strong, on par with +5 or +10 wolf mag springs, a good thing in my opinion. A full 17 round mag easily seats, and doesn't need forced in.

I'm a Glock fanboy and to be honest, this pistol is better than a G17 in my opinion. And cheaper too. Smith did a great job on this version 2.0.