M&P 2.0 Magazine Over Insertion?

[TomJ]

I've become a fan of the M&P 2.0's and picked up a subcompact 9mm today. I had a chance to put a couple of hundred rounds through it and like my other ones it's accurate, a soft shooter and had no malfunctions. It's now my primary carry gun, and I always carry a couple of extra magazines. It came with 2 magazine sleeves to use with 15 and 17 round magazines and I don't see where additional sleeves are sold. I was wondering if using the 15 or 17 round magazines without the sleeve can cause the magazine to be over inserted. Sig tells me that can happen with their P320's, where per Glock and HK it's not an issue. I called S&W but they're closed for the holidays.

 

[LNK]

Take the slide off and barrel, then try it without fear of damage. Do it slowly so you don't bend the slide stop tabs.

 

[TomJ]

Take the slide off and barrel, then try it without fear of damage. Do it slowly so you don't bend the slide stop tabs.

Thanks. I did that, and there's a metal tab that prevents that from happening.

 

[LNK]

Sounds like you would have to hold the mag release in order for something bad to happen, but who does that?

 

[Robbins290]

I have pounded some mags in my 2.0 when i had it. Used the full size mags. Never had a problem.

 

[Robbins290]

Naw that i think about it. Only one that could cause a problem was a P99c, and i assume the PPQ series.

 

[LNK]

Thanks. I did that, and there's a metal tab that prevents that from happening.

Quick question, does the 2.0 have the same feature as the 1.0 when you slam in a new mag with the slide locked, that it releases the slide for you?

 

[JTQ]

Sounds like you would have to hold the mag release in order for something bad to happen, but who does that?

I don't think the mag release is a factor. The M&P uses a double column mag that tapers to single column at the top, which is what the mag well does.

The late Paul Gomez with Glock's



Over insertion is typically only an issue with single column magazines.

 

[JTQ]

Quick question, does the 2.0 have the same feature as the 1.0 when you slam in a new mag with the slide locked, that it releases the slide for you?

I don't have an M&P, but one of the key features of the 2.0 is the new slide lock with a detent, that should prevent auto forward. It may happen, but S&W went to some lengths to prevent this.

 

[Robbins290]

JTQ, i always thought that was a neat feature. Always worked for me.

 

[LNK]

I don't have an M&P, but one of the key features of the 2.0 is the new slide lock with a detent, that should prevent auto forward. It may happen, but S&W went to some lengths to prevent this.

That is a shame, one of the things I really like about the 1.0. I guess I won't get a 2.0 now. Not that I need one anyway. At my age I probably have enough. I know, blasphemy!

 

[oss117]

I don't know about the regular M&P's, but if you do this on a Shield (long mag w/o sleeve) you can bend the extractor.

 

[LNK]

I don't know about the regular M&P's, but if you do this on a Shield (long mag w/o sleeve) you can bend the extractor.

Did you mean the ejector?

 

[JTQ]

I don't know about the regular M&P's, but if you do this on a Shield (long mag w/o sleeve) you can bend the extractor.

The Shield uses a single column mag, doesn't it?

 

[oss117]

Did you mean the ejector?

Yes. Sorry, brain let me down for a second there LOL.

 

[Walt Sherrill]

I don't think the grip extensions are intended to limit magazine travel -- they're just there to make the grip more user friendly or to make the gap showing a bare magazine more attractive. (If the grip extension is too long it will keep the mag from engaging with the mag release and not lock into place. That happens sometimes if you run different mag base plates, and sandpaper on the offending part often solves the problem.)

I made an earlier attempt to respond to this topic (in this same message #) and reworked that after response re-reading what I wrote and re-examining my M&P Pro. Without X-ray vision, some of these things are hard to see and understand.​

The magazine itself, by how it butts against the slide stop on the front and how it is positioned by the mag release in the grip, seems to be limited in its upward travel by at least those two items. (There are probably other parts of the frame design also limiting the magazines upward travel that I can't see and clearly don't understand). I'm sure part of the mag would hit the underside of the slide if it moved up too high and rounds wouldn't feed properly. for the slide simply wouldn't be able to move forward.

Remove the slide and try it with your gun. I suspect that if you insert a mag with an extension mounted it will not position the mag any differently than if you didn't use the extension (unless the extension was too long and kept the mag from engaging the mag release.

Many of us have used longer (higher capacity) mags in our compact guns, (or 33 rounders in our 9mm Glocks) without slide extensions, and never encounter a problem. (I have a souped up Kel-Tec 9mm sub-2000 that runs Glock 17 mags -- and it will shoot beautifully all day long using Glock 33 or aftermarket 32 round mags without a hitch -- no mag extensions required.)

If something IS out of spec -- that out-of-spec condition would have to allow the magazine to move up and additional 1 to 2/16ths of an inch or more before the ejector or extractor are at risk -- and it looks as though the extractor would be at greater risk than the ejector. But, I've never heard of that sort of malfunction or breakage happening with any gun, but it may be a possibility.