M&P 3.0?

[oss117]

I've been reading and watching reviews on the new M&P Shield 9 EZ and yesterday I had a chance to handle one in a LGS. It has me wondering if it's a harbinger of the future for the main M&P line.

The internal hammer-fired action requires less strength to rack and the rear of the slide provides better purchase. The tabs on the sides of the magazine seem to really work for loading it. I even liked the grip safety, though some may find it controversial. It certainly has advantages re-holstering.

Why would the design, once fully vetted in the Shield 9 EZ, not be incorporated into the professional grade duty pistols? What is the possible downside to a slide that's easy to manipulate or magazine that's easy to reload? How about a disassembly procedure that's even easier to accomplish w/o pulling the trigger (vs. striker M&P's)?

What is the advantage of old-school striker systems or basic magazines?

 

[JTQ]

... not be incorporated into the professional grade duty pistols? What is the possible downside to a slide that's easy to manipulate or magazine that's easy to reload?

Generally speaking, the folks using "professional grade duty pistols" don't have an issue with racking the slide.

I'm not that familiar with the Shield EZ, and if that lever is a real grip safety, but grip safeties aren't that popular. I'm not sure there an LE agencies that issues the Springfield XD, and the grip safety is one of the main complaints with that gun. Even with 1911 fans, while the grip safety does have advantages, many would just as soon not have it.

 

[Walt Sherrill]

I'm also unfamiliar with the Shield EZ, but do have a 1.0 S&W M&P PRO which I really like. Does the EZ have a way to decock the weapon after a round is chambered. That could be a concern for some possible buyers; the grip safety is an added safety function that offsets that concern a bit..

If there's no way to decock -- manually or through the use of a lever -- the minute you properly grip the weapon it's (at least in theory) ready to fire. I have an XDm Competition, which is striker-fired, and it has the same basic functionality. The lack of a decocker for that model doesn't really bother me, and that same issue,(if it is an issue with the Shield EX) might not bother some potential purchasers.

 

[climbnjump]

How about a disassembly procedure that's even easier to accomplish w/o pulling the trigger (vs. striker M&P's)?

It isn't necessary to pull the trigger on the striker fired M&Ps in order to disassemble.

But maybe that isn't what you were saying...

 

[oss117]

It isn't necessary to pull the trigger on the striker fired M&Ps in order to disassemble.

But maybe that isn't what you were saying...

There's a lever inside to push down to disengage the striker (at least on the shield..). The EZ doesn't require that. That's what I was trying to say.

I guess where I'm coming from is that there does not seem to be a downside the internal hammer system or mag design regardless of how strong a person is. What is the case for the striker system or traditional magazines? Why would they be better?

Walt mentioned some people being concerned with the fully cocked hammer. That's legit, but you can't see it. Kind of like the fully cocked strikers in P320's or M&P's bother some people, but not most.

I just like looking at designs with an open mind and this one is something new to ponder.

 

[sigarms228]

The EZ line does not have a firing pin safety block which is why the grip safety it is required for the EZ line in order to be drop safe, I don't see that happening to the rest of the M&P line as a grip safety is something that the vast majority of shooters seem not to want on a poly frame striker fired pistol. The grip safety also would make it difficult to incorporate additional grip modules like the M&P line already has.

 

[94045]

The fact that the EZ Grip safety is reversed makes it pretty much impossible to fail to engage it when getting a proper high grip.

The grip safety eliminates the need for a two piece trigger (M&P Striker,) or Trigger Safety Bar (Glock)

It does offer an extra layer of safety when re-holstering. If you thumb the back of the slide it allows it to be re-holstered without the possibility that something getting into the trigger guard could cause an accidental discharge.

The trigger seems to be better than the striker fired guns.

In my opinion it does what it's supposed to do. The .380 EZ has been very popular with female shooters at the ranges I frequent and I suspect the 9 EZ will be as well.

I doubt we will see the design spread to the.more mainstream products. It has a targeted demographic. Those with reduced hand strength and new shooters and seems to be succeeding in that nitch.

 

[Jonesy814]

Some of the features mentioned may very well end incorporated into a 3.0 version M&P but I doubt that all of them would. The original M&P was around a long time before 2.0. It may be 5 or 6 years before a 3.0 is introduced and it's really hard to say what buyers will want by then

 

[Zendude]

I think the 2.0 went overboard with the grip texture. If there’s a 3.0 in the near future, my bet is the grip texture will be the main driver of the change.

 

[94045]

I think the 2.0 went overboard with the grip texture. If there’s a 3.0 in the near future, my bet is the grip texture will be the main driver of the change.

Of the hanguns I own the .45 Shield has my favorite texture. The M&P M2.0 Compact .40 S&W seems a little less aggressive but still okay.

The problem is no two people can agree on proper texture.

 

[1KPerDay]

I think the 2.0 went overboard with the grip texture. If there’s a 3.0 in the near future, my bet is the grip texture will be the main driver of the change.

OOOOooo I hope they add finger grooves...

 

[toivo]

I think the 2.0 went overboard with the grip texture.

Me too. I have a Gen 1 Shield, and I rented a 2.0 at the range just to see if I wanted to trade up. I don't.

 

[Robbins290]

I agree. I bought the 2.0 compact when it came out. Hated it and it destroyed t shirts. It was way too aggressive.

 

[Kendahl]

OOOOooo I hope they add finger grooves...

Finger grooves fit one size of hand. They rule the gun out for anyone whose hands are a different size.

 

[Kendahl]

OOOOooo I hope they add finger grooves...

Finger grooves fit one size of hand. They rule the gun out for anyone whose hands are a different size.

 

[94045]

Finger grooves fit one size of hand. They rule the gun out for anyone whose hands are a different size.

I suspect his post was sarcasm.

As you noted a G17-4 appears molded for my hand. A G19-4 by comparison appears to have been molded for a lady's hand.

 

[Mike J]

I have a 2.0 Compact. The only time the grip texture bothers me is when I carry IWB. It rubs on me a little if I spend a lot of time sitting down.

 

[LaneP]

I don't see why they wouldn't incorporate features on the model in question into duty pistols of the future, so long as they prove functional, durable and reliable. As to the 1911 grip safety, that was an Army mandate for the design. John Browning eliminated it on his next major service pistol design, the Hi Power. Newer grip safety designs on many 1911's now incorporate a "speed bump" on the lower section to ensure deactivation with a less than perfect grip.

 

[1KPerDay]

Finger grooves fit one size of hand. They rule the gun out for anyone whose hands are a different size.

THE DEVIL YOU SAY!!