Mossberg MC1SC pics UPDATED w/ Range Report (post 7)

[ImperatorGray]

Just bought the new Mossberg pistol. I don't usually beta test firearms, but I got to handle and field strip one a few days ago and was impressed. I prefer the trigger tab to the Shield, and the short reset to the PPS M2.

So today I went back to the store with one of my Glock 43 holsters, telling myself that if it fit I would buy one. (I own two Glock 43's, one for everyday carry and another to fill the holster on my hip while I practice with the carry gun at the range. And to wear on my weak side when I enter a situation where I'm more likely to find myself grabbed by my strong arm. I figured if the Mossy fit the same holsters I already had, it'd fill the role of the second G43 just fine.)

My main itch for getting it is to put it through its paces and see how it stacks up. I won't be ditching the 43 for serious use, but I work with a lot of people just getting into carry. Most of them don't want to spend $500 for a good first carry pistol, so if the Mossy proves roughly as capable as the 43, and at $350, I'll be recommending it to a lot of people.

It comes in a modest cardboard box, steak-wrapped like the Shockwave totally-not-a-shotgun from the same company.



While there are other things I'll be looking for once I take it out for live fire, my main qualm at this point is the unlined magazines. With no steel to be seen, will they hold up long-term? The feed lips seem especially likely to fail at some point. But the mags are awful pretty.



And unlike the Glock 43, which comes with two six-round mags, the MC1 comes with a six-round and a seven-round. In this respect, what you get in the box is superior with the Mossberg, but the potential you can unlock with additional cash is greater with the Glock. (I carry mine with eight loaded - one in the pipe and seven in a MagGuts'd magazine - and eight in a reload via a Taran Tactical +2 baseplate and spring. I prefer that, but again, most beginners don't want to shell out a bunch of extra dough just to make a pistol do what it should have done from the jump.)

Similarly, the Mossberg has better sights out of the box than does the 43, but I'm still not quite happy with them. The MC1sc has steel sights to the baseline Glock's plastic garbage, but they're three-dot and "snag-free," two things I'm not a fan of. Standard three dot sights are confusing in low light and at speed, where your brain doesn't automatically know which dot to put in the center. Even in flat-range conditions, they waste processing power. And snag-free sights don't leave you much option for one-hand problem solving once you've been shot up or have found yourself thrown to the ground with an assailant wrapped 'round an arm. Then again: I just read that the Mossberg uses Sig's #8 dovetail for the rear sight, which means I already have a Von Stavenhagen rear for it in a parts box somewhere.

The Mossberg mags take down a lot easier than Glock's, if that matters to you.



Once you get inside the pistol it's, well, basically a Glock:



As already hinted at, it works just fine in a variety of G43 holsters, including the Jason Winnie J101 leather OWB's I'm partial to. Various leather IWB's and synthetic "sticky" holsters fit perfectly. (Kydex and others of its ilk will almost certainly be a different story, of course.)



I won't own a pump shotgun other than Mossberg for serious work, but I consider their rifles overrated. Those bolts... /shudder/

So I wasn't really expecting their foray into another new area to grab my attention so quickly. The problems I've seen with other companies' much-hyped new pistols certainly didn't help. But getting up close and personal with this market entry has me smiling an optimistic smile, even if cautiously.

I'll plan to follow up with a range report when I've got some live fire on which to comment.

 

[ImperatorGray]

Something I forgot to mention on the theme of what's in the box vs. what potential you can unlock by throwing money at accessories: The MC1sc is supposed to be compatible with Glock 43 magazines which are, of course, steel-lined. My limited experimentation so far: The Glock mags lock into place perfectly, but not with a TTI +2 baseplate installed.



The Taran Tactical Innovations pad hits the pistol's heel. Said heel could be shaved down easily, but many may balk at this particular mod.

I'll be interested to try swapping the two manufacturer's magazines to see if any feed issues can be induced in either firearm.

 

[Odd Job]

Thanks for the pictures and info!
I look forward to hearing how it performs on the range.

 

[Sovblocgunfan]

This is the first owner review I’ve seen outside of the gun writer reviews.

Thanks for putting this out there. Was very curious about the holster fit myself.

Since you have both, ergonomically, is it the same as your glock?

 

[ImperatorGray]

Ergonomics...

The vague palm swell of the MC1sc is just enough to subtly improve on the fit of the 43, gluing itself to more of my hand's surface area. Better than the PPS M2, as well.

The combination of trigger guard shape and the mild finger grooves also helps guide the meat just behind the second knuckle of my middle finger into its nook really, really well. Better than either the 43 or the PPS M2. The oversized loop, designed for gloves, pushes the support hand a little farther down than on the Glock, though, which I didn't notice until I started gripping the pistols in rapid succession to figure out how to answer the question. But now it annoys me ever-so-sightly. (The PPS does the same thing.) I'd say the feeling of a good two-hand grip is worst on the Walther, and that the Mossberg slightly edges out the Glock, actually.

Repeated gripping tells me that the MC1 is going to blister/callous the inside of a new shooter's middle finger faster than either of the other two, but not near as badly as, say, a Shield 2.0.



The fore slide serrations are a nice touch and in my estimation won't chew up your holster like some I've dealt with before. Comparing them just because I can, the Walther's front serrations are slightly more of a force multiplier, but the Mossberg's are executed well and I've never struggled doing condition checks on the Glock without any there at all.

The grip angle? That's smack dab in the middle between that of the Glock and the Walther. It's almost identical to a 1911.

Pushing out suddenly from a relaxed low ready, my thumbs-forward grip guides me onto target perfectly with the MC1sc - even better than with the Glock 43, which surprised me as the 43 is what I have drilled with heavily since December 2015. This may have to do with the thousands of hours I had on various 1911's prior to that time, and/or the idea many have that the 1911 is simply the most natural grip angle of any pistol because John Moses Browning was, well, The JMB.

For what infinitesimally little it's worth, the slide finish is the most pleasing to me of the three, as well. Indoors the eye picks up less difference than my camera did, but the Mossberg's finish is more in line with the DLC of a Gen 5 Glock than with the 43's slate chalk. Personal Defense World reports that the MC1 slide is in fact diamond-like carbon over stainless steel; few will find something to complain about there.

 

[Sovblocgunfan]

Well done, and thank you for the input.

 

[ImperatorGray]

Back from the range.

First and foremost, my interest was (is) reliability. So I threw a bunch of different ammunitions at it, loading the magazines as poorly as possible (noses riding against front edges of the mags), and then fired with as poor form as anyone ever has without killing themselves.

"Limp wristing" would be an understatement. Sideways, upside down, you name it. Couldn't get the blame thing to choke. I was surprised that no combination of weak ammo, poor loading, and utterly incompetent form could stop it.

Ammunition thrown at it:
Fiocchi 9AP (115-gr. FMJ)
Fiocchi 9APC (124-gr. truncated cone FMJ)
PPU 115-gr. FMJ
Remington L9MM1 (115-gr. JHP)
Winchester USA9JHP (115-gr. JHP)
Winchester USA9W/USA9MMVP (115-gr. FMJ)

Those range from loaded hot and fast-burning as is ideal for short barrels (USA9JHP) to stuff that mostly burned after it left the muzzle (most of the non-Winchester stuff). Oddly long and pointy (9AP) to "normal" to short and squat to just plain weird (9APC).

I ran these extensively in both of the factory mags as well as a MagGuts'd G43 magazine. I own a bone-stock G43 magazine somewhere that I wanted to try, but it wasn't in its home this morning and I didn't want to waste too much time in pursuit. After the MC1's performance with the others, though, I'm not worried. Ran through about 600 rounds.

Once I was sufficiently awed on the reliability front, I switched exclusively to white-box FMJ's and threw up a target with 30 one-inch dots at seven yards to see how well I could actually use the pistol. I won't call this "accuracy testing," because the vast majority of modern handguns will outshoot the user any day of the week. Practical handgun "accuracy" is more about how it interfaces with the user, and so is subjective: Hand fit, sight picture, trigger, etc.



As you can see: Could be better, could be worse. For a first try with a new pistol, I am absolutely happy. It hits lower than I'm used to, and you can see where I tried different things and/or reverted to my natural point of comfort. Basically, at seven yards the hole goes through what the front dot is covering up. (Keep in mind, as with everything in this write-up, that we are dealing with a sample of one.)

I followed up with some rapid-fire. Here's one of those targets - same distance, five shots as fast as I could kinda-sorta reacquire the sights:



Not my best day, but I'd wager it's mostly thanks to my discomfort running three-dot sights. My right shoulder's also been knotted up today, but I don't actually think that made much difference. Anyway, I'm convinced that a better shooter - or a Ransom rest - could have put every round through the same hole.

Another thing I was curious about was striker drag. So I grabbed up 50 cases at random after doing all that reliability testing. Then policed up the area before switching to the Glock (which ran fine with both MC1 magazines, though I didn't bother going as nuts this time) so I could grab some cases from it to show a comparison. I also made sure to run a few different ammos through the 43, so everyone could see that some deformation is just brand-specific primer flow.



Nothing too crazy. Unlike my two colleagues' P365's, which sometimes wipe all the way into the headstamp. This bodes well for the Mossberg's striker holding up over the long haul, though of course only that haul itself will tell. (For the record, a Sig rep said last year that the P365 breakages were due to a single batch of undersized strikers, and further "bragged" that only 1 in 200 P365's had been returned for such breaks. A 1-in-200 fail rate did not reassure me, given how many people buy a new firearm based on advertising and then don't really do much with it.)

OK, let's start cleaning up some random notes so we can wrap up...

1. Slide lock / high grip.

When shooting a small carry piece like this one, you generally have to choose between placing your thumb low and risking inadvertently locking the slide back mid-string, or putting your thumb higher and forward where you risk failure to lock back on the last round. I'll always recommend the latter, as it gives you more control and because it's far better to get into a fight and have a single click after seven or eight rounds than to have a dead trigger after two.

(Some may remember that Sig asked for a bunch of the P365's back after people complained of the slides locking back prematurely. I call "operator error" on that one.)

I basically never see my Glock 43's slide lock back during live fire, and that's a compromise I'm perfectly fine with. The Mossberg MC1(sc), however, has an interface that seems to magically keep my strong-side thumb from riding the slide lock the way it does on every other small pistol. (This may be specific to my hand size.) Yet when I began testing it, it wouldn't lock to the rear. I tried a few mags with hot ammo, thumbs tucked, and otherwise proper form and, still, it wouldn't lock itself open from recoil.

Then, maybe 150 or 200 rounds in that magically went away. Springs broke in a bit, or something polished itself up. Whatever it was, it's a nice little added feature that I can expect to fire this thing all day long and have it lock open the way I expected years ago when I ran with a Government Model Colt.

2. Trigger.

Good duty-pistol break, short reset.

I don't place the value on pull weights that many consumers do, because there are so many other variables in what makes a trigger feel good. But because I know it's gonna be asked: My Lyman digital clocks the MC1 at an average of 5 pounds, 0.5 ounces. The same tool clocks a similarly fresh Glock 43 at 5 pounds, 4.5 ounces.

The Mossberg trigger feels a tad lighter, but it also has noticeable creep after the reset, whereas the Glock builds to and resets to a shorter, crisper wall. Both have a relatively short, intuitive, and tactile reset, which is non-negotiable to me in a pistol I'll actually use.

I prefer the Mossberg's trigger face to the standard serrated G43 one, which is why I run a Glock 17 trigger pad in my daily-carry 43 (not the one I measured for the number above).

On the whole, I'd call it basically a draw. Maybe even give the edge to the Mossberg, as what creep it has doesn't bother me as much as you'd expect from an old 1911 aficionado.

3. Mags.

You can try loading an extra round into the Mossberg plasti-mags, and they'll get about halfway down the feed lips before being spit out. No visible signs of damage so far, but then I haven't tried to abuse them too much at this point.

Honestly, as much as I threw at these magazines, I won't trust them until they've seen a lot more use. Even crappy magazines work great until they don't. And they look too similar to the ETS-brand Glock mags. (Made there under contract for Mossberg, mebbe? I'd be curious to find out.) Those don't have a stellar reputation in my circles.

An autoloading pistol is only as reliable as the magazines feeding it. So: Will these feed lips chip? Spread out? Will the body break halfway up after you've landed on your mag pouch one too many times? Will the magazine springs give up sometime soon? We won't know 'til we know.

Which makes me extra disappointed that the TTI +2 doesn't run with it. It took me a long time to get there, but I trust Taran's current setup with my life, and the MC1 even has a channel in the backstrap that seems purpose-built to make way for the TTI's retention pin. It'd be nice to carry this thing in 7+1 configuration with 8-round backups.

4. Pipe dreams

Sights that work with your brain, and with the eye's inability focus on more than one plane, instead of against them like the "industry standard" three-dot? Nope. Sights that make one-hand cycling possible? Also nope.

Or what about a truly ambi mag release, instead of one that you have to pick one side or the other? Maybe an ambi slide lock, too. (Right now, even on duty pistols, you have to choose one or the other. I'll take the slide lock, because it's a lot less intuitive to manually lock open left-handed to problem solve on a right-handed pistol than it is to drop a mag with the index finger of your weak hand.) These should be standard on anything you trust your life to, because the nature of situations begging that trust come with the possibility of having to unexpectedly operate one-handed, and to face various failures in that mode.

With the MC1sc, Mossberg had the potential to make the leap to what a serious-use concealment firearm should be. Instead, they've released what could still prove to be basically everything that makes me run with the Glock 43 but for a $150 less. Which is pretty awesome by itself.

 

[Sovblocgunfan]

In all, are you happy with your purchase?

If you did not have the glock what would you want from the pistol in order to trust it enough for CC? Magazine concerns too.

 

[ImperatorGray]

Definitely happy. Honestly, at this point my only real concern is the mag reliability. Which I'm just generally paranoid about anyway. I see no signs of the pistol itself having issues of any kind.

Pending ugly discoveries by myself or others, this is going to be one of my new most-recommended single-stack 9mm's for concealment. As in, neck-and-neck with the one I own two of and that's noticeably more expensive.

 

[<*(((><]

My goodness @ImperatorGray, some people on this board (myself included) could take a lesson, save up the posts for meaning thread such as this one. What a great rundown on a new firearm, very succinct and complete.

Thank you for the time you put into it.

 

[<*(((><]

I know people love to hate on Mossberg's recent bolt actions. But my MVP in 5.56 is a very accurate gun. If Mossberg's R&D group keep it up with these new releases it will be great for the consumer.

 

[Texas10mm]

They had the Mossberg where I bought my Sig P365 last week. The Sig is a little bigger and of course is 12+1.

 

[tercel89]

Can you let us know if the rear slide plate is made of polymer or metal ? The plate that is removable . OR is it polymer and metal ? I know it is what keeps the slide from coming off the frame. I am just curious as to what it is made out of .

 

[ImperatorGray]

No prob. It's steel.

 

[tercel89]

No prob. It's steel.

Thanks ! I took one apart at a shop few weeks ago but forgot to see if it was steel or polymer. Glad that it's steel cause its what holds the slide on the frame. This simple design sure looks great in my opinion. I'm just waiting for my wife to give me the go ahead since she runs our budget.

 

[tercel89]

ImperatorGray , I sure like that leather OWB holster ! Looks sturdy and stitched great !

 

[ImperatorGray]

Thanks, Tercel89. It's been my constant companion for a couple years now. I own three J101's, one being a left-hand version of the G43 for times when I've busted my right hand/arm up (and for circumstances where it's prudent to have a firearm easily reached by either hand).

Mr. Winnie does fantastic work, selects great leather on which to do it, and maintains communication when anything keeps him from filling an order as fast as he feels is right.

His holsters are available in brown or black, but be warned that his brown tends to be more burgundy - I customized that one with a touch of chocolate dye.

http://www.jasonwinnie.com/

 

[Jeb Stuart]

Sounds like Mossberg really got serious on this gun. Congrats to the OP and thanks for the Report. Looking forward to doing a test drive. I did handle one in the store. Although you cannot tell much from that, I was hoping it would be different than the Glock in the low bore grip. Sadly I thought it felt about the same. And I do feel that it is a little too long for the Micro class. For Myself, and my preferences, he would not change me from getting rid of my mild shooting SR9C which is just a ounce and a tad more in weight or small Micro 9mm the Nano.
That said, it really sounds like it has a lot going for it. Especially when compared to the Glock. I personally like the way Mossberg made it so easy to clean the striker channel.
Bravo to Mossberg on this fine new gun. I am sure it is going to be a huge success.

 

[ImperatorGray]

Thanks, Jeb. By my measurement the bore axes on the MC1 and the G43 are virtually identical - maybe 1/20" higher for the Glock. I don't get too hung up on bore axis unless it's extreme; say, CZ P-07 (great) vs. Sig 2022 (less great). There can be super low axes that sacrifice other elements of shootability in that pursuit. A few examples here: https://www.guntweaks.com/pistol-bore-axis-comparison-what-is-low-bore-axis.html

The Nano's not an option for me for the lack of external slide lock. No way, for example, to clear with urgency should adverse conditions create a double feed. Also just not a fan of how it points for me. YMMV, obviously.

And I absolutely agree on easy access to the striker channel. And the striker, for that matter. Oft-neglected, and they need to be cleaned/inspected more than some other elements.

 

[Jeb Stuart]

Thanks, Jeb. By my measurement the bore axes on the MC1 and the G43 are virtually identical - maybe 1/20" higher for the Glock. I don't get too hung up on bore axis unless it's extreme; say, CZ P-07 (great) vs. Sig 2022 (less great). There can be super low axes that sacrifice other elements of shootability in that pursuit. A few examples here: https://www.guntweaks.com/pistol-bore-axis-comparison-what-is-low-bore-axis.html

The Nano's not an option for me for the lack of external slide lock. No way, for example, to clear with urgency should adverse conditions create a double feed. Also just not a fan of how it points for me. YMMV, obviously.

And I absolutely agree on easy access to the striker channel. And the striker, for that matter. Oft-neglected, and they need to be cleaned/inspected more than some other elements.

Not trying to get away from your review. but will have to disagree with your statement on the slide lock. Just not needed, but that will be for another thread.Regardless, I was not trying to compare the two guns other than Grip and size.
Many folks do not like the grip on a Glock or the way it points in their hand. (noting wrong with the gun, just individual taste) and that has always been one of the negatives for folks that wanted a Glock. In past reviews they said the new Mossberg had more of a 1911 style grip and actually more comfortable than the standard Glock. I did not see that, although I do not shoot Glocks very often. And you mention the CZ 7-07. Now that gun also has a grip I like. These are all things that make for a decision for a individual owner or future owner. My interpretation of the past reviews were quite different when actually handling the gun.
The New Sig 365 can be compared to the Mossberg, in size and weight. The 365 is a true Micro Pistol, where I feel the Mossberg is a little too large for my cup of tea. And that is just personal opinion and others may feel completely different. That is why I compared it to the Ruger SR9C.
The Mossberg did feel lighter than it's actual weight and the balance felt very nice. Like I said, And do not misunderstand what I am saying. I like this new gun. And it looked like a whole lot of quality. But, I really want to try one out at the range.

Did you get the crossbolt safety?

 

[ImperatorGray]

No crossbolt safety for me. If one of my pistols is going to have a manual lock, it will be thumb-operated and facilitate a thumbs-high-and-forward grip. Preferably ambidextrous, too. Basically, a Mossberg 500 rather than the Maverick 88 they put on the MC1.

 

[JONWILL]

Watching a video of it being taken apart I have a question? I appears the rear slide plate also retains the slide on the frame. Is that correct?

 

[ImperatorGray]

I appears the rear slide plate also retains the slide on the frame. Is that correct?

Yes and no. Like a Glock, the striker pedestal engages the rear of the trigger's cruciform. This is why dry fire is involved in stripping a Glock - that lowers the cruciform out of the way. But the Glock slide is still being retained by the backplate, because the backplate is what retains the striker assembly. The Mossy gets the striker out of the cruciform's way, rather than the reverse, by making it easy to remove the striker.

That said, the Mossberg's backplate would retain the slide by itself, were one to reassemble the firearm without the striker. Same cannot be said for a Glock.

 

[ImperatorGray]

Another, maybe clearer, way to think of it: The lowered backplate of the Mossberg serves the purpose of the Glock's plastic slide lock, which is basically to retain the slide during dry fire. Otherwise, the bolt (slide) could just, well, slide off the frame rails as soon as the cruciform had dropped out of the striker's way and sent it forward.

If you dry fire a glock, you'll see the slide leap forward a tiiiny distance until the guide rod impacts the plastic slide lock. Same thing happens in the MC1, except the slide is leaping forward that tiny distance until the backplate impacts the rear of the frame.

 

[Jeb Stuart]

Ergonomics...

The vague palm swell of the MC1sc is just enough to subtly improve on the fit of the 43, gluing itself to more of my hand's surface area. Better than the PPS M2, as well.

The combination of trigger guard shape and the mild finger grooves also helps guide the meat just behind the second knuckle of my middle finger into its nook really, really well. Better than either the 43 or the PPS M2. The oversized loop, designed for gloves, pushes the support hand a little farther down than on the Glock, though, which I didn't notice until I started gripping the pistols in rapid succession to figure out how to answer the question. But now it annoys me ever-so-sightly. (The PPS does the same thing.) I'd say the feeling of a good two-hand grip is worst on the Walther, and that the Mossberg slightly edges out the Glock, actually.

Repeated gripping tells me that the MC1 is going to blister/callous the inside of a new shooter's middle finger faster than either of the other two, but not near as badly as, say, a Shield 2.0.

View attachment 829859

The fore slide serrations are a nice touch and in my estimation won't chew up your holster like some I've dealt with before. Comparing them just because I can, the Walther's front serrations are slightly more of a force multiplier, but the Mossberg's are executed well and I've never struggled doing condition checks on the Glock without any there at all.

The grip angle? That's smack dab in the middle between that of the Glock and the Walther. It's almost identical to a 1911.

Pushing out suddenly from a relaxed low ready, my thumbs-forward grip guides me onto target perfectly with the MC1sc - even better than with the Glock 43, which surprised me as the 43 is what I have drilled with heavily since December 2015. This may have to do with the thousands of hours I had on various 1911's prior to that time, and/or the idea many have that the 1911 is simply the most natural grip angle of any pistol because John Moses Browning was, well, The JMB.

For what infinitesimally little it's worth, the slide finish is the most pleasing to me of the three, as well. Indoors the eye picks up less difference than my camera did, but the Mossberg's finish is more in line with the DLC of a Gen 5 Glock than with the 43's slate chalk. Personal Defense World reports that the MC1 slide is in fact diamond-like carbon over stainless steel; few will find something to complain about there.

I find it interesting to compare the subtle differences of different models of firearms in the same class. This is just a general overview below. A lot of shooters in this world, finding the best fit, is out there. Of the Glocks, I have always like the model 26, although I am not a Glock Fan. I am hoping today to shoot the Mossberg. It seems to have a lot going for it.





https://www.genitron.com/Handgun-Database

For comparison only. Please disregard defense factor. which always seems to get folks riled if theres is not listed as the higher number. I use to block out this factor, but Igmur has lost some editing features.