Probably not.
The M&P is 10+ years old and has a pretty good reputation for reliability.
Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk
Printable View
Smith & Wesson was the first competitor (IIRC) to get booted from the MHS effort. So whatever the "fail" was it must have been fairly substantial.
Could have been anything really. We'll probably never know.
Regardless there is a decade of M&P experience in LE. Only regular gripe is with accuracy. But some of that might be the shooter too. People generally blame gun or ammo first. Myself included.
Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk
I have some very, very limited experience with competing for a government contract. My initial impression [no, I don't do impressions..] was that one's bid could be rejected for minuscule errors in submission paperwork/requirements.
I was wondering if there was a known more substantial reason, reliability, durability, etc.?
My 2.0 .40's trigger is getting better with each round I shoot through it.
Any body with the 5 inch model able to find a decent holster for it anywhere?
Has anyone put the apex 2 dot sear ONLY in their 2.0 yet? Was it worth the $40 or is the stock sear good enough?
I don't seem to be having any accuracy issues with the 9mm M2.0 at all. It also happens to have a faster twist barrel that stabilizes the 147 grain+ bullets better. They went with a 1 in 10" twist rather than a 1 in 16". Not as accurate as a Apex barrel but definitely satisfactory for a factory duty type firearm at it's price point. Here are some pics of some strings of shots I did at 15 yards off hand.
Attachment 46890
I would say by the picture the pistol at least for you is dead on! Nice.