Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: Shooting the M&P9 -- My Experience

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    961
    Feedback Score
    8 (100%)

    Shooting the M&P9 -- My Experience

    A total of four range trips have now put ~400 rounds through the M&P9, with a similar number through a G19 alongside for comparison.

    I don’t have any photos of shot groupings, MOA calculations with various load-range combinations, etc. (although those are all very important and worthwhile forms of evaluation). What I am reporting on is how the pistol performed during close-up, action style shooting. More specifically, making double-tap head shots on IDPA targets from 10 yards. The criterion was to see how effectively I could from the first shot return back on target for a clean follow-up shot. Effectiveness was subjectively judged by the smoothness, precision, required amount of time and effort, and similar impressions gained in making the second shot. This story is somewhat convoluted, so don’t bother reading on unless you’re really interested.

    As I posted in another thread, I was impressed by the M&P on its first range trip by its smooth and easy handling, compared to the snappier feeling G19.

    Impressions on the second trip were a lot more mixed, and more confusing. That day, the G19 was feeling crisp and precise, returning for the follow-up shot more quickly and easily than the M&P, which now felt spongy and wobbly between shots. I’m not sure what grip insert I had on the first trip, but am certain that by the second trip I was using the small size, chosen on the basis from dry handling the gun as the one that just felt “best”. (This turns out to be significant -- see below).

    By the third trip I thought I knew what was going on. The G19 is more snappy, punchy, and blasty, as you would expect from its lighter weight and shorter barrel, but still returns to point-of-aim as needed. The M&P’s substantially more massive slide imparts the smoother feel, but also contributes to what I would call being “out of tune”.

    I recalled the concept of “tuning” from the decade+ I spent monkeying around with 1911’s, which among their many fine attributes can be fitted with various weight recoil springs to adjust the return cycle of the slide to end precisely back on target. Too light a spring leaves the muzzle pointing up, and too heavy creates an over-travel that makes the muzzle wobble around (just as the M&P was now doing). The overall effect is from the 3-part gun-grip-ammo combination. Change any one of these components, and the “tune” will be affected. With my 1911’s for example, proper tuning would require a lighter recoil spring for match loads versus a heavier spring for defense ammo. This isn’t just to absorb the greater recoil (although it also does that), but mostly to get the gun to automatically return to point-of-aim. The same gun and ammo with a different shooter (with a different grip) could require different “tuning”.

    With these thoughts I returned with the M&P for the fourth range trip. I have only the one weight recoil spring, but this time brought two boxes of Speer Gold Dot -- one in normal loading and the other in +P -- in addition to the WWB I had so far been using. I know these loads differ appreciably in ballistics, but in shooting they really didn’t make any difference to me (certainly not like regular .38 versus +P, for example). So damn, I thought, what else is there? What about those other grip inserts…..?

    Well low and behold, this turned out to be the ticket all along. The large size made it hard to securely hang on, but the medium worked out to be perfect. Recoil return was every bit as precise as with the G19, and with the greater smoothness of the M&P was now actually easier. Apparently -- which is somewhat amazing to me -- the different size insert in effect “re-tuned” the gun by altering the shooter’s grip, one of the components in the 3-part combination. The medium insert provides just enough additional drag to compensate for what would otherwise be a too heavy recoil spring. So even though the small insert seemed better from dry handling, the medium insert makes the gun perform better while actually shooting.

    I am finally settled on spending available practice time solely with the M&P, which now looks fully able to nail double taps as well as anything else I’ve shot.

    Moral? Test your M&P grip inserts at the range, not at home or in the store. “Ride before you decide.”

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    44118
    Posts
    340
    Feedback Score
    2 (100%)
    Thanks for the info. ...very timely for me as I am minutes away from giving Grant a call to buy 2 M&P's

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    VA
    Posts
    4,829
    Feedback Score
    3 (100%)
    Having owned a German produced Walther P99 for several years, I can testify to the truth of this. I also noticed a big difference in how the weapon handled with the various backstraps installed.

    Personally because my fingers are rather short (shorter than the length of my palm, which is freakishly large) I found the smallest grip to work best on the P99.

    On the full sized M&P 9mm I run the medium grip.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    VB
    Posts
    4,879
    Feedback Score
    8 (100%)
    Great report!

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    6,023
    Feedback Score
    13 (100%)
    Quite interesting.

    I put another 100 rounds through my M&P45, and I found I was having grip issues.

    The first time I shot it I had very thin gloves on and I shot with the small and medium backstraps. The heavy trigger gave me more issues than the grip, which seemed okay. The second time out I had the heavier Vickers gloves on and the medium backstrap. I had a tough time maintaining my grip between each shot; I found myself milking it.

    I took off the medium backstrap and just shot with none installed - immediate improvement.

    This requires much more range time for me to get a handle on.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    42
    Feedback Score
    0
    I was trying to decide between the small and the medium on my .45. I finally took a medium backstrap, took some material off, and re-textured it. It has proven to be a great compromise. It will be interesting to see if anyone makes some aftermarket backstraps in the future.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    C.A.
    Posts
    38
    Feedback Score
    1 (100%)
    Blackscot great post. I found the same thing with my M&P 40. I felt that the medium backstrap was probably what I'd use, but the pistol kept moving in my hand during recoil. I threw the large backstrap on and it was a completley different feeling. The large feels to me like a 1911 with an arched mainspring housing (my preffered configuration). I really like the M&P I have been shooting it pretty much to the exclusion of all my other pistols for the last year.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    961
    Feedback Score
    8 (100%)
    Forgot to add: One FTE somewhere around the first 100 rounds, otherwise flawless so far (using mostly WWB).

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •