M&P T&E: Metal vs. Poly Shootout!
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 16 дек 2022
- Optics Planet Discount Code: HRFUNK (5% off your purchase)
HOP Munitions Discount Code: HRFUNK10 (10% off your purchase)
For T-Shirt info, contact: Warbirdbunker.com
Join this channel to get access to exclusive members only content:
/ @hrfunk 
Развлечения
For some time now, all M&Ps were polymer. I have to believe the new "metal" was introduced as an alternative with the added feature of being optics ready. As you stated, looking at all of the targets together, there really wasn't enough difference to make a difference. Thank you for a huge amount of work to make this review!
My pleasure. Thanks for watching!
I think you are correct, and the $270 is for it being optics-ready.
@@frankhinkle5772 If a manufacturer can justify that higher retail, they will most certainy do it. Price/availability is 'what the market will bear'.
So cool that you have a long law enforcement career and are a firearm enthusiast and knowledgeable expert and you share it with us. So glad for your channel. No hype. No BS. Great knowledge base. You keep up with new tech in firearms A fine sense of humor. I usually learn a lot from your videos. Good presentations. You are a good instructor!
How about a New Year HR Fudd video? I can't get enough of your Fuddy relative!
I’ll have to see if the Fuddster is available. He might already be into the New Year hooch! Merry Christmas!
I think this choice is mostly about aesthetics. The new long slide Metal may actually perform a bit different, and has a magwell which I assume can be replaced as it gets beaten up in competition.
Personally, I think rather than an aluminum frame, a tungsten infused polymer frame could've actually helped with recoil mitigation.
As well as price inflation.
H.R. always delivers the most straightforward and honest gun reviews on RUclips. I really appreciate the time spent on the accuracy part of the drills and the comparison aspects. Thank you H.R. and Merry Christmas to you and your family.
Thank you, and Merry Christmas to you and yours.
Just like buying a new model car,I would wait a year or so to see if any problems appear with metal frame. However, 200 + bucks-I think not.
Very interesting. A bit surprised you didn't experience or observa any real advantage over the poly guns. Appreciate the expertise & honesty. Very well done. Thanks.
You’re welcome. Thanks for watching!
Hrfunk: THANK YOU!
Metallica vs. Plasticated
The guy walking by with the trash barrel got spooked for a second. 🤣
He was trying so hard to stay out of the camera’s view.
Thanks for the analysis, Chief Funk. I'm not sure I would have bought the metal frame gun, but I have to admit I've been curious about it.
You’re quite welcome. Thanks for watching!
Marine’s definitely pay attention to detail. Good work on both videos! Merry Christmas HR!
Thanks Mark. Merry Christmas to you and yours.
@@hrfunk you and yours as well! 🌲
Absolutely correct!
As I sit in my Decermberish living room, having just watched this video, my M&P 1.0 police model (9x19mm, 4.25 inch barrel) is ten feet away . . . it’s generally my EDC, that’s how highly I rate it after many years of use and many thousands of rounds fired.
Okay, regarding all the tested M&P - representing all three generations of this highly popular and proven-excellent Smith product line - I’d like to offer one obvious (but I suggest important) comment. What was the intent of the designers?
I respectfully suggest it was to compete with Glock by offering an affordable, striker fired, polymer frame, stainless slide, alternative . . . with far better ergonomics, sights, trigger pull and it least comparable reliability, accuracy and durability. IMHO, these critical objectives certainly were accomplished, and the M&P line’s market share during the last decade-plus documents this assertion.
So - fundamentally - M&P’s are not intended to be “tack drivers,” to compete with autoloaders costing 2x, 3x or even more in various shooing contests, or to kill a buck at 75 yards. Rather, they basically are plinking, range fun, and especially defensive semiautomatics. The accuracy, reliability and functionality demonstrated by ALL THREE M&P’s in this video certainly (imho) exceeds the minimum standards for those design goals (especially for lawful defense). In fact, I’d wager considerably that Howard could fire all fifty state LEO qualifications with ALL THREE of these M&P’s, and pass all 150 tests.
In essence, a utilitarian Honda or Subaru isn’t intended to compete with a top-of-the-line Lexus or Audi . . .but it is intended to meet its design objectives very well. So, too, are the M&P’s.
I'd like to know what the intent was too.
I agree Roy. I think the original M&P pistols were/are very capable defensive firearms for the reasons you stated. I think the thing that’s bugging me these days is the constant repackaging of that basic design coupled with a price hike and a wave of propaganda. The latter of which is intended to convince consumers that the “new” version offers heretofore unequalled performance potential. Something about that seems dishonest to me.
@@hrfunk
Howard, my dear and extremely knowledgeable compadre, with profound respect, this sort of “repackaging, propagandizing and marketing” is (imho) essential standard in MANY industries. I don’t suggest it is virtuous or that you shouldn’t be irritated by it, however, it’s America’s capitalist way to squeeze every revenue dollar from proven - very successful - money-making products.
We both agree that the CZ 75B is a superb semiautomatic; how many variants - shorter and longer barrels and slides, steel and polymer frames, standard and enhanced triggers, ordinary and improved sights, defensive and competition focuses - has CZ evolved from the basic 75B? Similarly, aren’t the M17 and M18 fundamentally adaptations of the fundamental (and excellent) Sig P320 design? And let’s consider AR’s, how many enhancements and alterations - of countless types - have been developed from Stoner’s original design concept . . . not to mention Browning’s basic 1911 configuration, Beretta’s 92, or Smith’s and Colt’s SA/DA swing-out cylinder revolvers, or . . . . ?
I’d further respectfully suggest this fundamental paradigm is true in automobiles, hand and power tools, and countless other commodities. Even “over the counter” pain relievers, mundane cereals, soft drinks, - and this list is endless- FREQUENTLY advertise “NEW and IMPROVED,” when - essentially - a corn flake is basically a corn flake, aspirin is basically aspirin, and Pepsi and basically Pepsi.
I’d conclude by suggesting that capitalism - with all its deficiencies - beats the hell out of centralized, often dictatorial police state, governmentally planned economies . . . as you and I vividly experienced when the Soviet Union imploded 30+ years ago. S&W just moved to Tennessee, I suspect they lost good deal of highly experienced talent in the process (which, hopefully, will be redeveloped with time), and now they (imho, understandably) are trying to squeeze every sales dollar from a popular, easy to produce with reasonable quality, product-line - the M&P - to keep the ship afloat while their design, manufacturing and managerial teams (hopefully) get “up to speed.”
@@hrfunk ... Repackaging is the perfect description. Good pistols though, still above Glock and others. Looks like all the auto loaders today have reached their pinnacle in their respective classes IMHO.
A very honest review. S&W has taken a page from the glock play book, call something new and see who buys it. The company is definitely being run by MBAs and not gun people. As always, great video.
Thanks Scott!
Never shot an M&P , I like both Glocks & metal handguns . They each have their place .
I'm thinking that I'll watch the ending first to see if there is a tack in this video. If there is one then I'll watch the whole thing.
I think that without meaning to do so, you showed people how good both the original M&P 1.0 as well as the .40 caliber version really are. Sometimes the originals are better!
In a lot of ways more than one would think besides the obvious, The 2.0 metal lines up against a P226 as a competitor in size dimensions and weight. I would choose the P226 for the decocker related features and trigger design.
But the P226 is DA/SA. It actually lines up against the AXG P320’s as they’re striker fired as well.
@@moobutt Dude bro, I clearly said 'besides the obvious' like being striker fired. You do realize there's a full 1 inch difference in barrel length alone with your comparison. That itself puts them in different categories and definitely not comparable in weight (the biggest reason why they would designate it being metal in the first place). And I mentioned the decocker that should've registered to the DA/SA which is hand in hand. Lastly, at the price for the 2.0 metal they aren't trying to undercut the 1199 AXG, its really after the 999 226 elite. The AXG is more of a custom work gun for the modular fanatic trying to join the Legion program, hardly what S&W would position the Metal to go after 1v1.
I have both the M&P 40 and the P226 40. Both were law enforcement trade-ins at great prices and in beautiful shape. I'll be darned if I can decide which one I like best. Luckily, I don't have to.
Thanks for your service. Great video and Merry Christmas to you and yours!
Same to you Steven!
Another great video. I’ll keep my 2.0 with apex trigger and rubber talon grip. I don’t see the extra money for the metal.
After reviewing the video twice this was a great video! You were downright scientific on this one.
Thank you! As I mentioned, I have a bit of history with these pistols.
@@hrfunk I imagine that you would
Great part 2, very detailed thank you!
My pleasure Chris. Thanks for watching!
Nice video of the variety of the M&P line, my first M&P was the 40 S&W version and I found it very accurate in that I purchased the M&P 40c, then Shield came out for smaller footprint in CCW and finally Shield in 45 ACP (in my opinion a very controllable 45 in such a small pistol and holding as many rounds as a full size 1911). When I heard of the metal frame I asked the same questions of need, however it is to provide the consumer various options. After your review, I would save my money for a ‘Green’ Dot sight for the pistol to place on the polymer frame version, this is just my choice. I still tinker with the M&P 10mm purchase, however with primers for reloading impossible to find, hard to justify that addition. Best to you and everyone who reads this comment. 😊
I am in complete agreement with your comments on the Shield .45!
For some reason it feels better to me and even carries easier/better for me?
Would feel a bit better with more capacity but it is no problem to slip an additional mag into my pocket.
After all as a private citizen now, how much shooting am I going to do and how much missing am i going to do?
@@d7dun1010 You have hit on an excellent point about private citizen shootings as opposed to law enforcement armed encounters. I started looking at how these events go after I retired from law enforcement, and switched from carrying my 15 shot Glock 19 to carrying the original Shield 1.0 in 9mm.I began to take some flak from friends when I mentioned I saw no reason for me to "upgrade" to the Shield Plus to get extra magazine capacity.
In a police shooting, you may be dealing with a violent sociopath with nothing to lose, such that he will attack a uniformed officer. He has to know that this will result in other police coming to the scene, at least in most cases, who are fully committed to subduing and arresting him, or killing him, and they will not give up until they have done one or the other.
By contrast, as a private citizen, you are more likely to be threatened by an opportunistic crook who doesn't want a fair fight. Had he known you were armed, he would not have threatened you in the first place. When you deploy your concealed handgun and he sees it, he is likely to remember urgent business elsewhere. And if he doesn't, your job is to fire a couple of debilitating shots, break contact, and leave. Just about any repeating handgun with a decent grip, trigger and good sights will suffice. One wonders in what fantasy the private citizen is going to engage in a running gun battle with the bad guys, at least in an urban setting. I suppose one could make the case for more rounds in a more isolated setting, but if that is a concern, it is a simple matter to load up some more magazines and carry them. For that matter, if I'm in an isolated area, I'll take a rifle, please.
In short, I think you are fine with your Shield .45. Be safe.
Thank you for the complete and thoughtful response!!!
Thought I was the only one wondering where you are going to go to get in all these multi gun fights at multi distances that really seem quite unrealistic. Interesting enough, why don't we read and hear more about those over the top encounters more?Answer. They are rare but do sometimes happen.
Also agreed with you on a long gun if you are headed to isolated areas. AR Pistols or Fighting Shotguns fill that role for me.
Still have 2 old Shield 1.0 and 2 3913s and they haven't failed me yet!!!!!
I'm going to bet on the poly. Just because if it's metal I'd rather have hammer fired.
Another good one sir! But no tack? I am a big fan of Smith and Wesson! But I sold my sub compact shield very quickly, I’ve kept my 686 for over 20 years with no regrets so I understand the skepticism, great work
Thanks Tom!
Nice comparison. Interesting that the newer versions are really any improvement.
Thank you. Im not sure I would use the work “interesting.”
@@hrfunk :-) Interesting that they lost the formula for the trigger. IMHO, a good trigger is what makes a gun.
Your range gets superb sunlight coverage
Seems like the cycling mass would be about the same. Ergo, the recoil would feel the same?
I certainly didn’t feel much difference.
Thanks. You just saved me 900 bucks.
Great video as always HR!...
It would be interesting if perhaps they are tooling up to bring back 3rd Gen in both 9mm & .45. A poster on S&W forum said a dealer was told they were making parts again. A 6906 w safety or just w decocker even better could still be a decent seller (maybe 12,15,17 rd mags included). I put a vid on 2.0 .40 sucks out recently and filmed another 2.0 but w Apex last night (& that was really nice). I actually owned two gen 1 9c's and sold them.
There has been a clamor for the older pistols for years. So far, S&W has ignored it. I agree, if they are preparing to bring them back, they will be welcomed by shooters.
Awesome video HR! Thank you for your hard work and honest professional analysis and opinion. I trust your recommendation. Keep the videos coming.
Will do Tom. Thanks for watching!
I think what you demonstrated is that .40 caliber is more inherently accurate than 9 mm . (ducking incoming fire)
I remember easy very good groups similiar to your .40 cal.. using my baby glock 27. (Standing & unsupported)
Enjoyed your wife/ husband live session.
Thanks Jack!
"I think what you demonstrated is that .40 caliber is more inherently accurate than 9 mm ."
Huh?
I don’t really think it is. It’s just the random difference between these particular handguns.
I think that has a lot to do with round selection. For example, the old Winchester OSM 147 grain load, originally intended for use in a suppressed submachine gun, is a very accurate 9mm round that a lot of guys used in 50 yard matches where the oblong 10-ring is 6 inches tall by 3.5 inches wide. I shot a .45 at the time because I believed the caliber to be more accurate. That illusion was shattered by these guys shooting Performance Center metal frame hammer fired guns running this load who regularly cleaned my clock. This was in a competition where perfect scores were common and the winner determined by x-count.
I think what is true is that if you spend enough time you can find the best load for your pistol regardless of caliber.
@@PPISAFETY
Well said sir and not arguing "but" notice you're not finding the best accuracy in the lightest bullet for the caliber.
Thanks, Chief Funk for an awesome shooting comparison!
My pleasure!
Good review and very well presented , Thank you
Thanks Grandpa!
Solid review, HR. Maybe it's my inner Fudd coming out? I like the notion of an "all metal" pistol...but this is similar my preference for a wood stocked rifle over a darn plastic one. That said, I think your test proved what I guessed as soon as I heard about the "Metal."
Absolutely same impression.
My 2.0 was very bad and traded in. With the addition of apex trigger I hit the same price point invested as the metal with greatly increased accuracy.
Unparalleled accuracy.
Great video. Thanks for all of the effort you put into it.
My pleasure, Adam. Merry Christmas!
@@hrfunk . Merry Christmas to you also.
If they decide to come out with the 2.0 10mm in the metal frame I will definitely purchase. Thanks Howard and y'all have a merry Christmas
Same to you Nathan!
I love my M&P 2.0 4.25 inch barrel. polymer frame pistol.I got a chance to shoot the performance model of the metal,and that thing was like a tac driver.I was kinda blown away by it,but never got a chance to shoot the regular metal version of that gun.I was curious to see if there was a big difference also with it,thank you for this video,and nice shooting man!!!!
Thank you!
Thanks for an honest and useful video. It's too bad that the only thing that was improved was the looks. That can't justify the expense for me.
Another excellent, honest, unbiased review 👏! I really enjoy your videos, HR. Looks like the Metal 2.0 is all show, and no go. Just proves the 40 is still relevant today! I just got done fitting a new 40 barrel in my 10mm 1911. Going to be adding it to my edc rotation!
Good for you Jeff. Thanks for watching!
I'm not interested in any of the 3, but my take is you should definitely stick with the 40 cal. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Good video Sir. I appreciate your deliberate method.
My pleasure Troy. Thanks for watching!
Howard, I'm with you 100% on your evaluation of the metal framed M&P. I believe that its main purpose is to lighten your wallet by about $850. I have an M&P in .40 S&W that was purchased by the Detroit PD which has a "Born On" date of 2008. Through sheer luck I got one that had never been issued, in 2017. It came to me with a broken trigger, and even though I was not the original owner S&W fixed it at no charge. Mine shoots beautifully with Speer Lawman 180 grain FMJ averaging 3 inch groups at 25 yards.
I keep it loaded with Federal HST 180 grain hollow points, which are great rounds, but the best thing about them was that they were free. I did a class for a group of ICE agents, and since I couldn't really bill for it, when they left, a full case of the HST's just happened to be left behind as a "donation". I also have some 165 grain HST's but prefer to shoot them in a heavier gun, so those are reserved for my SIG P226. I think S&W got that pistol right the first time as a cop's duty gun, and all the changes since then have been done to placate demands of hobbyists. I noticed that you shoot your .40 best. I don't know how you dress in your new job role, but you might consider carrying that gun.
Now if I may be so bold as to offer you a small suggestion. I've been watching you through a number of videos having a little problem with the head shot portion of the failure drill, as did I until I went to a State Police course for contract personal protection agents. Our instructors were first rate, and on the range I was doing pretty much the same as I see you doing. All three of your shots are at the same cadence, as if all shots were of equal difficulty. They are not. My instructor made me slow down, just a split second to get a good lock in on the head shot, which ideally is in the face, below the brow line rather than in the skull. Think in terms of hitting a horizontal 3X5 file card stapled to your target so that it is just below where the brow would be. If you slow down just a tiny bit, you'll make that shot every time. Remember that if you are actually taking that shot in the real world, your day already sucks, the shot HAS to work, and an extra half second spent getting it right is time well spent.
Excellent job on the comparison. Be well and stay safe.
Thanks Tom. That advice on the headshot is precisely what I tell other shooters when I’m training them. Then I turn around and don’t do it myself! For qualifications, etc. when I HAVE to make that shot I do take the additional time to place it properly. I should probably start doing it in the videos too.
Great find on that Smith M&P. I’m glad they fixed it for you. Any idea how the trigger was broken on a pistol that was never fired?
@@hrfunk When I called in to S&W trll them I had an intermittent dead trigger, the customer service tech said "send it in right away. the pistol is unsafe" and sent me a shipping tag. It was clear to me that this was apparently a known production defect that affected some percentage of their production. This was going on at the start of hurricane Irma and I just got it in the hands of Fedex when the hurricane hit with vengeance. That ran 11 days without power. I was surprised when the package returned with the repair gun on the 11th day of the storm. S&W did not tell me exactly what they did.
Interesting. I seem to recall some complaints about that issue in the early days of M&P production. I never personally experienced it with any of our pistols, but I wonder if that’s what drove some of the changes that were made to the trigger components over the years.
Both Videos have excellent presentation and content! Thanks for all of your hard work in putting them together!
I fully agree with your assessment and for my money, the M&P 2.0 would be my choice.
Merry Christmas and Happy New Year, to You and Yours!!! 🙂
Thanks, and same to you!
outstanding . great review .
Thanks Dan!
Steel--1911
Aluminum--Beretta 92/96 and Sig P series
Poly--everything else
Thanks for your honesty, the others get paid and all they do is give good reviews, does not help the viewer.
Thanks again.
My pleasure Len. Thanks for watching!
Good review and insight with your knowledge of the M&P lineup . I do have to say, though, going from the 5in performance center 2.0 with the holosun optic. When i shot the metal M&P. I noticed a tremendous difference for the better. I am probably not going to use an optic on the metal. I actually love the standard steel sites. I didn't need to adjust them. I was shooting up to 50 yards within a 2 inch group. I will probably keep my performance center for range play and competition. The metal M&P is going to my edc.
I’m one of those folks you mentioned that doesn’t care for polymer framed handguns. I also tend to prefer traditional DA/SA designs So I thought initially that the 2.0 Metal might induce me to upgrade to a more modern design. But between the cost, timing of introduction, and past preference, I’m just not moved to “pull the trigger” on getting one.
I can’t say that I blame you. Stick with what works best!
I think the barrel on the Metal was breaking in and producing better groups as the tests progressed.
Great video!
Thanks Alfred!
It doesn't appear to shoot any better than the polymer versions before it, but it surely is a good looking gun. I'd like to get one, just to have an all metal version. If I come across one locally, I'll buy it.
Excellent video! I would feel wholly at ease carrying any of these three pistols but I think I'll stick with my M&P 9 2.0 4" polymer frame. The entire platform is more than sufficient for its intended purpose, and a killer value besides.
I shot my G20 10mm next to my Kimber 10mm same ammo the Kimber has a good bit more weight but has MORE recoil ! The barrel is 1/2 " longer & tighter chamber , could be more Vel is part of it , I think the frame flex is most of it from the Glock .
BTW I have a 2nt & 3rd gen G20 both tack drivers both are more accurate than the Match Kimber . All I can say is I might not have found what the Kimber likes , It did shoot lead SWC match bullet home loads very well , I don't shoot lead from the Glocks . I shot Silver Tips , XTP , Crit duty & Rem full metal case . I was shooting out to 80 yds .
It might be interesting to weigh the slide and barrel from both handguns (Glock &Kimber). I suspect the Kimber has more reciprocating mass and a slightly higher bore axis. Combining that with the more rigid frame would likely result in more felt recoil.
@@hrfunk I think you are right about that , the recoil is more than a 9mm but not too bad with a good grip .
While I don't plan to buy one of these pistols, I enjoyed the comparison so thanks!
You’re welcome. Thanks for watching!
Great information on both videos. I have the poly version of the metal frame the flat trigger and optics ready. Was thinking of getting the metal. I did fondle one in my local gs and I like the feel but not the price. After your honest and insightful review I myself am going to stand down. Thanks for great review!
You’re welcome!
U doing nice job thank u 🎉
My pleasure. Thanks for watching!
Another great video, HR. How about a match-up between your 39-2 & the MP 2 Metal
Maybe. Stay tuned!
I have the metal and love it. It has become my go to M&P and if they came out with a 4” or 3.6” I would buy it.
May I ask what you like better about the metal M&P as opposed to the polymer version?
@@hrfunk I also have the Metal and much prefer it over my 1.0's I also noted in your video that your 2.0 is a gen 1 2.0 not the current model with improved serrations and the newer trigger. My issue with the 1.0 is how far back the trigger breaks. I find it unnatural and uncomfortable whereas the metal has essentially a forward set sear type of feel. The other issue with the 1.0 with the trigger bar under the sear was that it could lead to a dead trigger due to sear flutter. That happened several times until I replaced it with an Apex kit and a new sear block
I actually prefer the trigger breaking farther to the rear. Reference the dead trigger, I never experienced that in the many thousands of rounds I fired in those pistols.
Excellent review thanks for saving me $
My pleasure. Thanks for watching!
It might just be me thinking this, but it almost looks like the 2.0 Metal has slightly less rise in it's recoil pattern than the 2.0 polymer. The optics ready capability is cool, but S&W is offering the polymer framed in optics ready now, so I'm not sure if that really matters. I know the 1.0 9mm had some issues due to a poor choice in barrel twist rates, but other than that? I see no reason not to get a standard 2.0 or 1.0 if you can get one for a good price. I do like the color of the metal, but they could easily color the frames
Great video! However, I must say that I do not believe people prefer the new trigger because it looks cool. It’s a comfort thing. Many complained that the hinged trigger design pinched their finger. I didn’t experience that myself but at the same time I do believe the new design is physically more comfortable than the old hinged design. That was one of the biggest reason why I traded my older 2.0 polymer frame for the metal. That and I just prefer metal, or aluminum, over polymer. I’m a younger guy with old school thinking. I have been searching for a metal framed striker fired pistol ever since I missed my opportunity to purchase the Hudson H9 before Hudson went out of business
For what it's worth, in all my experience with the M&P and people who shoot it, I've never heard anyone complain about the trigger pinching their finger. I've noticed that with other handguns (most recently with the Beretta APX A1), but I never noticed it with M&P.
Good job 👍 your content is appreciated 👏 enjoy the season 🙏🌲be safe carry on 🔫🇺🇸
Thanks Lance. Same to you!
This is the video I have been waiting for. I really enjoyed it! HRFunk does such a great job of reviewing a pistol. 2 surprises for me. 1) Surprised the recoil was the same when I expected more recoil with the Metal frame as I thought it would transmit more force into the hand. I.E. My Kimber Micro 9 (1 oz. lighter by my scale) has noticeably more recoil than my P365 & hurts a bit to shoot it. I've shot my P365 at IDPA competitions & is very easy to shoot all day. 2) Was surprised that the trigger in the 2.0 Metal wasn't better, as I have a PC S&W Shield Plus 4" ported barrel with a nice clean no creep 4 to 4-1/4 lb. trigger pull with fiber optic sights. Only my CZ P10C & Springfield Ronin Elite 1911 in 10 mm is better. The Shield's better trigger is more much more accurate than my P365XL's 4-1/2 pound mushy but very smooth trigger break (Smooth after polishing the striker assy. & sear with Flitz & firing over 1K of rounds). Much easier to hit 8" steel targets at 25 yds! My P10 C shoots a little better as it is a larger heavier pistol with a slightly longer sight radius as well as a slightly better trigger, unlike HRFunks P10C, which reminds me of my 1st Gen P10C with a mushy trigger. Would like to see a comparison of the original Shield compared to the Shield Plus & PC Shield Plus in both 3 & 4" barrels, ported & regular barrels. Would make for an interesting video! Paid a lot for my Shield Plus, but after watching Jerry Miclek's video I decided to buy the ported long barrel version. Happy I did!
Good for you! I hope it serves you well for a long time to come!
I may have to finally give in and get 1 m&p pistol next year
Another great comparison! I just perused S&W's website. Unless it's an agency/leo purchase, perhaps the Metal is now the entry point for what S&W wants to offer/charge for an optics ready pistol?
I don’t think so. I suspect the poly-frame options will be here for a long time to come.
Exellant insights on the differences between these pistols. I think the .40 might shoot a bit softer because of the heavier bullet and may also be more accurate because of that. I think the 9mm is a bit of a rover on accuracy in any pistol compared to .40.
It’s a nice pistol, but for me I’ll stick with my 5” M&P 2.0 9mm. I like the way it shoots for me 👍
I just purchased a new M&P 2.0 with polymer frame and it was optics ready. Maybe S&W got the message that the polymer frame 2.0 needed optics capability? I had a red dot sight installed at the time of purchase. I was looking for a metal frame because of the trigger (having shot a friend’s metal frame the other day), but could not find one - I am now glad I didn’t. Time will tell once my pistol is broken in as to whether I am comfortable with the trigger or not.
Let me know after you shoot if some more.
Still all good standing shots at 25 yards.
Its 200 more bucks for optics ready, and a metal lower. Its allot more machining so they did do pretty well for keeping the price down. People who also do allot of shooting and actually using the pistol ive seen allot of mag wells being torn up in plastic 2.0s. This can midgate some of that. Not only all that it set the stage for a really sweet competition version. Just my two cents them not changing much while actually changing half the gun they did very very good. Its one of the most reliable hand guns ever created so its a good thing not a bad thing.
To each his own.I think it’s an over priced waste of resources.
2.0 9mm polymer... 4" compact. 4.25" fs, 4.25" fs optics ready, 5" , hqve tons of mags & holster. No reason for me to change or get rid of them. Thousands upon thousands upon thousands upon thousands of rounds through the M&P all the way from the gen 1 & literally zero issues with any of them!
That's pretty much my experience as well.
I have the 1.0 M&P in 40 S&W also have a 357 sig barrel for it and I have a 2.0 in 9mm. Both pistols shoot good, I'm not sure the 1.0 has a better trigger, but I really don't see the need for a metal M&P. Think if I'm going to spend $900 on a metal pistol, I'll get another 1911.
They should have made it a full Stainless Gun. Like my old 4006. Yes it's a tank that's one of the reasons I like it. Seconded owner of a 2 year old Park's Authority trade in over 20 years ago and I can still put all 12 inside the 10 ring at 25yds. with 158 grain hollow points. No it's not my conceal carry it's a duty pistol some will say (Heavy Duty) just the why I like it.
Interesting comparison, especially given the inclusion of the older 40. I still carry 40 pretty regularly (gen 1 40C and a gen 1 Pro CORE that I believe the 2.0 was based on), and it's nice to see that I'm not the only one still rocking 40 these days. I've made hits out to 100 yards with my Pro CORE on several occasions in the past, so I'm certainly happy with it.
I like mine too!
One interesting observation you made was about the (semi)flat-face trigger being...pardon the paraphrase, but..."meh". That has been my experience on several pistols in general. Every 29 year old John Wick gushes about how flat face triggers are the be all end all saviors of the shooting sports. Well...maybe I'm just too old, or maybe just not great at drinking Kool-Aid, but I have shot S&Ws, Sigs, and Glocks that had them or that I added, and by in large, I give them the same response. Where I added them, I usually went back to OEM. They aren't bad, and if they rock your world, more power to you. Rock on. But I personally find them to be kind of "whooptydoo". 😊
Me too. I can take them or leave them.
I don't really care for flat faced triggers either, definitely liked the hinge one better on the Shield than the Flat one on the Plus for instance.
HR,
I think this is a good example of S&W building things that no one asked for, and for the most part, nobody wants. I don't know who's in charge at S&W, but they certainly are making a lot of things that aren't very useful in the overall scheme of things.
Cheers,
Zeke
I agree that there little or no reason to spend the extra money on the metal 2.0 pistol. I just love the way the 2.0 polymer pistol feels in my hand. So my question is would a after market trigger be worth the investment? Love to hear your thoughts on the mater.
Not to me, but if you’re a race-gunner it might be worthwhile for you. For defensive use, the factory trigger should be fine.
I have put over 2000 rounds through my M&P 2.0 since purchase. The problem I'm currently having is that the lower slide rails are starting to fray and splinter. The polymer isn't holding up....I plan on ordering the metal version for myself as a Christmas gift. Then I'm going to "everyday carry", for a year as well as take it to the range weekly to see how it holds up. I'm willing to bet the all metal version will prove to be superior.
I’m a little confused about the issue you mention regarding the lower slide rails. The rails in the frame are steel. They are part of the front locking block and the sear housing block. None of the plastic frame should contact the steel slide, so I don’t know how anything could fray/splinter. My original 1.0 M&P has cycled several thousand rounds with no damage to the frame and minimal wear to the rails.
@@hrfunk Just in front of the metal rails on the 2.0 is two small plastic “nubs”. The right side nub splintered two weeks ago. I used an exacto knife and cut the splinter off. I honestly forgot about the issue until, as I was tooling through your video catalog I saw that they now make full metal versions…obviously the damage to those nubs is my fault. I carry it everyday and clean it every two, so it’s getting a good bit of wear and tear.
Looking at getting a mp 2.0 9mm just not sure if it's worth the difference in the compact size enough to get it over the 4.25 inch do you have any experience with the compact is there a difference in profomance as far as handling recoil in for lack of a better term shootablity if that's even a word.
I have all 3, compact/4.25 & 5", if you have big hands, get the 4.25", if you have med to small hands then get the compact. Shoot ability wise, they Shoot the same and can't tell the difference. The .25 extra barrel/slide length is not noticeable unlike jumping from the 4.25 to the 5.
I have a 1.0 M&P 40 Compact (3.6”). It’s a good shooting handgun. The recoil impulse isn’t bad. It may have slightly more muzzle-flip than the full size pistol, but it’s not difficult to manage.
You're right, it's not worth the extra needed to obtain one. And, I also agree that the polymer frame probably absorbs some of the recoil. I';m a Sig fancier and don't have any metal framed P320's.
On another subject, do you have any plans to evaluate the new FN High Power? Or at least shoot one?
After finally seeing/handling one of the new FNHP’s, I’m not sure I’ll be reviewing one. I was rather underwhelmed. Maybe if I can borrow one I’ll review it.
I've been wondering something that i don't think I've ever head anyone speak to and that is say 100 or 150 years down the road will those polyomer frames still be functional compared to metal frames. I mean looking all the way back to early 1800s we still have metal frame pistols with us that are still safe to shoot will we be able to say the same for polyomer down the road? Just been wondering as plastic especially that exposed to UV always breaks down.
I don’t know if that really matters. These handguns are intended for use in the present. As to whether our descendants will be able to shoot them? I don’t think manufacturers care about that.
Good morning, HRFUNK and family. ❤🙏 9/11 🙏❤️💪🇺🇸💪. I finally watched this video. Took awhile. Yea, I don't see a HUGE difference between all three M&P's. I guess it comes do to maybe the feel of the metal pistol. I'll admit to it. The 3 things that sold me on buying one was, looks, feel, and. 💪🇺🇸 Smith&Wesson 🇺🇸💪 brand. Since December 2022 I've owned mine. Not one problem with it. I have around at lest going on 3,000 rounds on it.Beautiful pistol to shoot. Especially now with the DC tactical aggressive grip kit on the frame and slide, and the Floyd's edc magwell and mag base plates. 👌. Get out to 7 yard's and blow out, a 3inch diameter target . ❤ Smith&Wesson ❤
Good. I'm glad you like it. I hope it serves you well for a long time to come!
@hrfunk yes sir. It's a 💪🇺🇸 smith&wesson 🇺🇸💪. I'm looking at their 4.6 inch 15 round 10mm to add to my collection. I've been wanting a 10mm. Have you had a chance to shoot that 10mm yet. If so, do you have a video on that model smith&wesson
Enjoyed the video Chief. Hopefully the timney trigger replacements on my polymer 2.0s will bring the accuracy up to snuff of the 1.0 design.
I hope so. Thanks for watching!
Quick question, why did you chose the timney trigger instead of the apex?
@@douglassalley9117 RUclips acting funky didn't see your question faster, sorry. I went with timney because after looking at the product page vs apex, timney using all stock parts and springs was important to me. As a novice to things beyond basic field stripping a firearm (just got into the game at age 30 four years ago); I was very impressed and more confident with the timney instructions and install video provided from the company themselves than what I could find by apex.
@@762x69 Thanks for the information. I also have only been shooting for about 4 years. I couldn't follow an instal video jf they were in stereo!! I'm lucky I have a local gunsmith that has a pretty quick turnaround.
@@douglassalley9117 Sounds good, the gunsmith will have an easy job. I was able to do it by myself on two m&p guns and I can be pretty neanderthal according to the wife. The written instructions are pretty much in line with the video (I prefer video to see the proper angles for reassembly). Wish you the best on your choice :)
What m&p do you have?
I've been trying to decide between the 2.0 and the metal 2.0 and this doesn't help haha! What I need to know to decide is which if any is more prone to failures, and what the longevity of each pistol is over the long haul. Great demonstration and reviews, thanks!
I don’t know if anyone has conducted a “shoot to destruct” test. I suspect the metal frame would look last longer, but I really don’t know.
@@hrfunk That is my suspicion as well. Maybe I just need one of each!!
With the minimal weight difference and not allowing for the same flex, I expected a similar or slightly more felt recoil. I think they just want a bit of the steel frame market, maybe making it easier to edc for those avoiding polymer handguns without the cost of steel frame production while they can market it differently. It'll last a long time without fractures with the added insert mentioned in the first video.
Could you do a test putting both in an ice box to see how they perform based on material pairing or how they heat/cool after rapid strings? Those different pasties are helpful.
Having carried and shot the poly M&Ps in temps well below freezing I can tell you that I’ve never experienced a frame fracture under those conditions. I’m not sure it would be particularly easy to shoot the poly-frame pistols to destruction.
I've got a 1st Gen M&P .40 as well. Mine has an Apex trigger because it isn't a *very* early M&P with the good trigger pull like your factory model, it's a later one that was a little more mushy. But I have to say, I'm perfectly content with it (aside from the fact that it maybe needs new night sights as the tritium ampules are getting dim) and honestly I could've lived happily with the factory trigger. That said, I'm not really underwhelmed or surprised the metal M&P isn't all that different from it's polymer counterpart. I was hoping the trigger would match the 1st gen in terms of quality. But given enough time I'm sure Apex will come up with a solution for that too. If S&W puts out a .40 S&W version I might consider it, but I already have a 9mm 2.0 with optic cut so it looks like I wouldn't get much out of adding a metal variation to the stable.
Thanks for the review. Great work, as always.
My pleasure. Thanks for watching!
Great review HR. I don't see the metal frame as being superior in any major way. Just a lot of hype for a new model of handgun.
I think you’re right Dan. Thanks for watching!
The intended market for the m&p metal is competitive shooters. Most people that shoot USPSA are using shadow 2s and 2011s that weigh upwards of 46 ounces. I personally use a performance center m&p 2.0 but I rarely see anyone else using the same setup. I thought I would be getting m&p metal but your video has convinced me I don’t need it. It doesn’t add enough weight to reduce muzzle flip… they should have gone with a heavier frame if they really wanted to reach their intended market. Maybe it would be good for IDPA but just as you said there is no real world improvement between this and the polymer frame equivalent. It’s a shame their R&D department is using the shotgun approach on their new designs, instead of taking their time to produce a few really good new products.
I agree. I don't know it it would make any difference for you, but there is a competition version of the metal frame M&P.
Good morning HR. Good comparison video. Are tacks in short supply like primers?😀 It looks like the snappier recoiling 40 beat the softer shooting 9s.
Higher price doesn't always mean a correlating increase in performance. A high end 1911 may group better in a Ransom rest than quality mid level one. But in actual use most shooters won't do much better. Is it worth the $1000 or more difference in price? Depends on what the individual wants.
Agreed. Thanks for watching John!
I think shooting the three guns in the same order each time, gives an unfair advantage to the very last gun that’s shot each time. In this case, the 2.0 metal was fired last each time.
I could be wrong (as I usually am), but I think switching up the “batting line-up” of all three guns and for each test might have given a different and perhaps a more accurate result with each pistol’s performance.
I think you’re absolutely right. I was trying to give the metal pistol every chance to excel. In the end, even with every advantage, I was still rather underwhelmed.
@@hrfunk It was a great video as always.
Thank you!
👍
S&W sights on the M&P series are often misaligned. I even e-mailed them about this because I have seen it on my own pistols as well as a few RUclipsrs. Looks like this is still a QC issue.
Yep. You would think that would be an easy thing to correct.
The only thing I have against a polymer pistol is (And for reference I carried a polymer 40cal as a duty weapon for eleven years) one of our officers on the southern boarder fell off his ATV and fell directly on his side arm. The polymer frame broke completely rendering the pistol totally unusable. Fine accuracy and reliable just don't fall on one...
What pistol was he carrying?
I like it but I can't get one in California 👍
Too bad. Maybe someday.
Try a Canik! Super triggers!
I have one and I agree!
I wonder if an Apex or Agency Arms trigger would significantly improve the performance of either of you personal pistols.
I sorta doubt it. I think the stock triggers are adequate for defensive use.
With respect to Apex triggers, I can't say for hr's 1.0 in .40 S&W, but it was a decent difference for mine. My factory trigger was adequate for defensive purpose *but* it was a later first gen model after the trigger group took a downgrade, not an early one. The apex trigger made the take up short, gave it a crisp break, with very little over travel. It went from a good trigger to a great trigger.
Now, with respect to the M&P 2.0 I put an Apex trigger in my example of that as well. It was mostly a side-grade and not really an upgrade. The M&P 2.0 trigger has a decent wall and a crisp break, but a long take up and longer over travel than the 1st gen. The apex trigger breaks the same as the factory trigger, and I set both of mine up to break at 4.5 lb like their factory counterparts, but it did take about a third of the take up out and shortened the over-travel just a hair over the M&P 2.0 factory trigger. For practical accuracy the take up means nothing after getting the trigger to the wall for the first shot, and a shorter reset might help with faster follow ups, but we're talking hundredths of a second at best. I would say it went from a good trigger to a slightly better trigger - but I still prefer the 1st gen trigger setup.
Maybe you can make the argument that if the triggers were rigged to break with a lighter pull some accuracy could be gained, but my pistols are defensive guns not competition guns so that's out the window. I still like the Apex triggers, they're going to stay in the guns I've put them in. But we're not talking about a large upgrade, S&W really does have some good triggers in the M&P series (if the factory ones sucked I wouldn't have bought the guns). YMMV.
@@cavalieroutdoors6036 Thanks for the detailed description. I have a Gen 1 45 with a clean but heavy 8 lb pull, which is why I asked.
The idea of having to drop an additional amount of money into a new handgun (not to mention doing the work myself, voiding the factory warranty, and potentially incurring a liability for altering the fire control) just to get a descent trigger offends me.
@@hrfunk It is irksome and unnecessary, but the lawyers and bean counters always seem to outvote the engineers and shooters. Even the much praised new Colt Python has a cheesy rear sight. For a few hundred shekels you can replace it with something better. Mind you, we're talking about at $1500 dollar revolver.
Not sure if I can still stick with my tennis analogy. Tennis rackets moved from wood to aluminum to graphite frames. With each new generation of rackets, they got lighter and generated more power with less vibration in the players elbow and arm (recoil ha). The power is determined by the loads not the individual pistols and it didn't seem that there was less felt recoil with the metal based on your video. Is this just S&W trying to market something that really isn't ground breaking just a marketing gimmick? Trigger also not improved? Thanks for great video HR.
My pleasure KD. I really tend to think this is a lure intended to catch fishermen rather than fish.
Great stuff Sir! I will pass on the Metal. Ya cant give me anything Shiny, I will muck it up!😂 I dont like commemorative/Special type guns. If I have to be concerned with scratches I wont even mess with it. I will just dtick with the "plastic fantastic". The M&P 2.0 Metal is not worth the extra money to me.
I know this is purely cosmetic but what about clean ability and durability. For example, when dropped in the dirt or in gravel by accident.
As far as just cleaning off loose dirt and debris, I’m not sure there’s an advantage one way or the other. Similarly, when it comes to being scratched, dinged, etc, I’d say they are about the same. The poly frames might be a little more “ding resistant”, but that’s just speculation.