Current state of S&W M&P15’s?

[opngrnd]

S&W ARs can go pound sand. I helped a guy on a budget get into ARs before the last election. He stretched his budget to be able to afford a M&P Sport ll. Eventually he upgraded the upper, which went to a different buddy of mine and had short stroking issues. When we narrowed the issue to the BCG, they told me the entire rifle would have to be sent in if they were to test and warranty the BCG. It's a BCG. I can swap It out with and watch the ejection pattern change for the worse and have lockback issues in other rifles that work great. (I reassembled the Sport's upper and barrel, and it'll be someone else's first upper.)

My first AR was an M&P15 bought in 2008. I believe it was made by Stag Arms. It ran well, but ate gas rings and needed the Blue Sprinco/H2 buffer for even weak ammo. I eventually chopped the gas block, put a BRT gas port insert in to reduce the gas flow, and installed an ALG rail before moving the upper on to a buddy as his first AR. I'll give it props for being accurate, but was definitely 2nd Tier compared to the Colt 6920 I owned after that. Also 2nd Tier compared to any rifle I've built with Sionics, Colt, BRT, or Centurion Arms components.

If it's all you can afford, I understand. But a Tier One rifle, M&P15s are not. That said, I really like my M&P Shield.

[robbins290]

I still have 2 sports. one sport ii and one ORC with that crimson trace red dot. I know they are not combat weapons. But i do pound the crap out of them. And when something breaks. S&W will fix it. They will even replace a burnt out barrel. for a sub $500 complete rifle. they are great if you use it as a range toy only. Saves me from replacing the barrels on my colts every 2 years.

[Colt Carson]

If it's all you can afford, I understand. But a Tier One rifle, M&P15s are not. That said, I really like my M&P Shield.

I would consider S&W AR15s mid-level if you bought one with a few extras, similar to their semi-auto pistols.

[Fly8791]

S&W ARs can go pound sand. I helped a guy on a budget get into ARs before the last election. He stretched his budget to be able to afford a M&P Sport ll. Eventually he upgraded the upper, which went to a different buddy of mine and had short stroking issues. When we narrowed the issue to the BCG, they told me the entire rifle would have to be sent in if they were to test and warranty the BCG. It's a BCG. I can swap It out with and watch the ejection pattern change for the worse and have lockback issues in other rifles that work great. (I reassembled the Sport's upper and barrel, and it'll be someone else's first upper.)

My first AR was an M&P15 bought in 2008. I believe it was made by Stag Arms. It ran well, but ate gas rings and needed the Blue Sprinco/H2 buffer for even weak ammo. I eventually chopped the gas block, put a BRT gas port insert in to reduce the gas flow, and installed an ALG rail before moving the upper on to a buddy as his first AR. I'll give it props for being accurate, but was definitely 2nd Tier compared to the Colt 6920 I owned after that. Also 2nd Tier compared to any rifle I've built with Sionics, Colt, BRT, or Centurion Arms components.

If it's all you can afford, I understand. But a Tier One rifle, M&P15s are not. That said, I really like my M&P Shield.

This has been similar to my experience as well.
I have a M&P15 (not the sport) from around the same time. It has been reliable with any ammo I feed it, but it is also over-gassed. Came with the 1 in 9 twist chrome barrel that shoots 2-2.5 inch groups at 100 yards with Federal 55grain and green tip. I've beat the piss out of it. I have a 6920 and a 6720 that are my "go-to" and backup rifles. So the Smith and Wesson has wound up being my tinkering gun. Got some new kit to try out? Throw it on the M&P to see if it works for me before it makes it to a serious gun.
Besides being over gassed, the front sight base VERY canted. To get a zero you have to drift the rear sight almost all the way to the right. This causes another issues where you cannot use a red dot with a lower 3rd co witness if the emitter is in the 5 O-Clock part of the window. The emitter of the sight blocks your front post from view.

Again, it's been reliable despite rough treatment. But it was clearly Smith and Wesson rushing to get something to market.

[opngrnd]

This has been similar to my experience as well.
I have a M&P15 (not the sport) from around the same time. It has been reliable with any ammo I feed it, but it is also over-gassed. Came with the 1 in 9 twist chrome barrel that shoots 2-2.5 inch groups at 100 yards with Federal 55grain and green tip. I've beat the piss out of it. I have a 6920 and a 6720 that are my "go-to" and backup rifles. So the Smith and Wesson has wound up being my tinkering gun. Got some new kit to try out? Throw it on the M&P to see if it works for me before it makes it to a serious gun.
Besides being over gassed, the front sight base VERY canted. To get a zero you have to drift the rear sight almost all the way to the right. This causes another issues where you cannot use a red dot with a lower 3rd co witness if the emitter is in the 5 O-Clock part of the window. The emitter of the sight blocks your front post from view.

Again, it's been reliable despite rough treatment. But it was clearly Smith and Wesson rushing to get something to market.

Their timing was almost impeccable. With the M&P Series of handguns entering the scene and the M&P15 series of rifles, they ran the potential to gather business from entire departments of LE. It would have been interesting to see how they would have fared had they increased quality control instead of decreasing it for a profit. Glock was in the throes of its Gen 4 problems, and I think they could have ran away with a lot of the market. Instead they chose to frustrate customers beyond the point of time Glock figured out its problems. Little things like twist rate and overgassing their rifles and not owning up to M&P9 accuracy issues sunk them would have made a big difference.

[ThreeFingerPete]

S&W ARs can go pound sand. I helped a guy on a budget get into ARs before the last election. He stretched his budget to be able to afford a M&P Sport ll. Eventually he upgraded the upper, which went to a different buddy of mine and had short stroking issues. When we narrowed the issue to the BCG, they told me the entire rifle would have to be sent in if they were to test and warranty the BCG. It's a BCG. I can swap It out with and watch the ejection pattern change for the worse and have lockback issues in other rifles that work great. (I reassembled the Sport's upper and barrel, and it'll be someone else's first upper.)

My first AR was an M&P15 bought in 2008. I believe it was made by Stag Arms. It ran well, but ate gas rings and needed the Blue Sprinco/H2 buffer for even weak ammo. I eventually chopped the gas block, put a BRT gas port insert in to reduce the gas flow, and installed an ALG rail before moving the upper on to a buddy as his first AR. I'll give it props for being accurate, but was definitely 2nd Tier compared to the Colt 6920 I owned after that. Also 2nd Tier compared to any rifle I've built with Sionics, Colt, BRT, or Centurion Arms components.

If it's all you can afford, I understand. But a Tier One rifle, M&P15s are not. That said, I really like my M&P Shield.

Why would a company who sold a complete firearm warranty a piece of it if it had been split up and assembled into other parts? Think about how absurd that sounds.

[opngrnd]

Why would a company who sold a complete firearm warranty a piece of it if it had been split up and assembled into other parts? Think about how absurd that sounds.

It is only absurd if we refuse to think it through. I asked them to specifically test a bolt carrier group that was completely stock to how they sold it. Just the bolt carrier group. If they can take their unmodified bolt carrier group and see that it has an obvious problem specific to only the bolt carrier group, they should be able to identify and replace it. It did not function properly in their rifle, or any other rifle that I have tried. When I replaced it with a Sionics BCG the problem was solved. It is ultimately a wash the bigger picture, but they lose a few dozen customers for it. Unironically, this is a thread about how they fare as an AR manufacturer.

TLDR version: If you sell a defective BCG, replace it.

[robbins290]

So you are made at smith and wesson for not checking a bcg only? for which it was sold in a rifle that it was head spaced for?

Try taking just a motor back to nissan for defective gas and piston in just the motor after you just bought a care. and tell them a chevy motor worked just fine in the car. Makes just as much sense to me.

I stand with Smith and wesson on this. And they would most likely pay for the shipping of the whole rifle. so why not send the whole rifle. If they are fixing it "FOR FREE"

[opngrnd]

So you are made at smith and wesson for not checking a bcg only? for which it was sold in a rifle that it was head spaced for?

Try taking just a motor back to nissan for defective gas and piston in just the motor after you just bought a care. and tell them a chevy motor worked just fine in the car. Makes just as much sense to me.

I stand with Smith and wesson on this. And they would most likely pay for the shipping of the whole rifle. so why not send the whole rifle. If they are fixing it "FOR FREE"

Not mad, just don't reccomend 2nd tier equipment, nor that level of customer support. I offered to ship it, and was more curious about what was actually wrong with it than anything else. Not worth their time. It is no skin off of my back in the least, as evidenced by my ability to replace my buddy's upper with a Sionics upper, rectify the issues with the S&W product, and let it be someone else's free burner as they make their way to a better product. The burn is that S&W was not even willing to take their own product back, inspect it, and replace it if faulty. I'm not sending the whole rifle back if the upper and lower are owned by two different people. Having rectified the issue of the faulty BCG, S&W's involvement is done, but I do not recommend the company for it's ARs based on both product and service, particularly when unquestionably good to go products are available in the same price range. My criticism of product is not based on the BCG, it is based on what they call a duty grade rifle not being a duty grade rifle.

[robbins290]

"The burn is that S&W was not even willing to take their own product back, inspect it, and replace it if faulty. I'm not sending the whole rifle back if the upper and lower are owned by two different people."

Why the hell would they take there rifle back to inspect it when you blatantly admitted you butchered there rifle? Any company would says that its voided its warranty.

As far as smith and wesson goes. i have owned about 2 dozen over the years, from early 1900's revolvers to the M&P line. only a 2 had to go back. and they replaced them, no questions asked. I have 3 of there rifles. a mil spec (or the one thet "call" milspec), a Sport II and a ORC sport that came with a shitty optic. I use them as barrel burners. never had a issue. and if i did have a issue like you did, maybe you should have sent it back then, instead of butchering it.