Smith and Wesson M&P 2.0 Compact 9mm - Finally. I'm home.

Who I know will chime in
Click to expand...

Oh hai. That's me. :) Yesss. I'm also in love with my 2.0 Compact. It does everything I ever wanted from the M&P's I've had in the past. The size is perfect.

For those that notice the right side doesn't function as a slide release, it's designed NOT to. It is not s defect, it means the pistol is doing what it's supposed to do.
Click to expand...

Where did you hear this? I didn't see anything in the manual about it. Why in the world would they make a non-functioning part ambidextrous? lol. Mine works just perfectly with my left hand. It requires about 5-10% more pressure than the left side release. Sure, it was a little tight out of box, but many guns are. After working it in a little bit, it's smooth and easy to depress.

I see a lot of people talking about this. "Oh, it's too tight. It's not supposed to be used to release the slide." Balogna. It works great. I mostly practice with overhand power strokes, but those levers work just fine with a little use.
 
What you can't do with a hammer fired gun that you can with a striker (and as TunnelRat said, relax) is if you're in a tussle situation with your firearm, you press the back of your pistol into the threat, therefore being able to squeeze off one round, step back, tap, rack, bang as the situation dictates.

A hammer fired gun won't be able to do that, as the hammer sits back behind the slide.

Also, 2 of the guys who had hammer fired guns, got debris in the hammer channel which hindered function until cleared.


At a family function. Didn't read much else aside from that one comment upsetting people. I'll respond better later.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
 
Yea I know Yeager really makes a big point about that. I get it's a point, but if I have enough space to get my offhand behind the slide I also have enough space to retract the pistol more, say provide retention with the magazine floor plate up against my side, and still be able to deliver rounds on target. The benefit of the second method is I can also deliver consecutive rounds without a malfunction. If you're really worried about a gun grab scenario up close there are also some good hand to hand techniques for recovering a pistol. I get where Yeager's point comes from, I just think it's a bit oversold.
 
Last edited:
Yea I know Yeager really makes a big point about that.
Click to expand...

If im in a “tussle” my second hand has other things to be doing besides holding the slide closed. Its a ridiculous concept to even consider using my off hand to push on the back of the slide.
 
Wow, I'm entirely unclear what I said or did to give the impression that anyone was upset about anything. I simply asked what things striker guns can do that hammer guns can't, and you've answered that for me. There are mechanical considerations that can affect hammer guns that won't affect striker guns. I believe I agreed that the 2.0 S&W is a really great gun.

I fail to see what there is to get upset about, or why I would be upset about anything. The only guns I own are striker fired. I've put a total of maybe 100 rounds through hammer guns ever, out of thousands. I don't have some romantic attachment to any guns, any more than to drills or saws or screwdrivers.

I suppose there are so many people on forums who get into personal insult wars over perceived insults to their favorite guns, that simply asking for an explanation may have come across as "Hey man, quit insulting hammer guns, cuz #GlockSucks" but I can assure you, that was not my intent and I am perfectly calm :p
 
I must have missed the part where he said using your off hand to press the slide into your opponent. I'm on my phone, so maybe I missed it.

I took it as meaning pressing your thumb against the rear of the slide into the body ensuring it is in battery, allowing you to get a round off. Something the hammer wouldn't be able to do.
 
Ah okay. I've seen Yeager in a video where he covers the offhand as well. I still think my comments about moving the point of retention hold. I'm not looking to get into a pissing match about which instructor is all knowing. Each one has/her methods for various reasons. That's also a different sub forum.

Thumb/hand method
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gGqxS1Jddf8#t=2m33s

One minor gripe I have is how he classifies a "modern designed pistol" as one that is striker fired. The Borchardt pistol in 1893 was striker fired. But I get his point and that's nit picking.

Hand method close up
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gGqxS1Jddf8#t=5m33s
 
Last edited:
Yea I know Yeager really makes a big point about that. I get it's a point, but if I have enough space to get my offhand behind the slide I also have enough space to retract the pistol more,
Click to expand...

This is the post i was refering to.

Even so, breaking my firing grip to move my thumb behind the slide while in a contact fight doesnt sound smart either.
 
I'm waiting for my local range to have one to try. I've been long unimpressed with M&P triggers (yes, even APEX and 2.0 FS) due to the hinge in the trigger design.

IF the 2.0 Compact feels sufficiently awesome I may be able to get over it. Still waiting on that LGS to get a CZ P10 as well.

Until then I'll stick with my Glocks.
 
I've been long unimpressed with M&P triggers (yes, even APEX and 2.0 FS) due to the hinge in the trigger design.
Click to expand...

Until then I'll stick with my Glocks.
Click to expand...

:confused::confused::confused:

If you dont like the two piece trigger design, the Apex does away with it. At which time the physical trigger is very much like a Glock. All of my 1.0’s have Apex FSS triggers. No hinge in the middle.
 
To each his own. I love the hinge design. It's far more comfortable on the trigger finger. To me the Glock trigger shoe has always felt like crap designed by someone that has never shot a gun..
 
Sharkbite said:
:confused::confused::confused:

If you dont like the two piece trigger design, the Apex does away with it. At which time the physical trigger is very much like a Glock. All of my 1.0’s have Apex FSS triggers. No hinge in the middle.
Click to expand...
2 points.

1. Yes APEX does away with the hinge but there is something still off. I could live with it but...

2. I prefer not to replace trigger parts for carry guns.

So, if the new compact ia sufficently awesome in my hand I can maybe see investing the time to learn a new trigger, not to mention the money to invest in a new gun/mags/holster.

M&Ps feel GREAT in my hand abd I love the size of the new compact on paper, so its got a real shot at me buying one, but I gotta shoot it first

Clear as mud?
 
I dislike the Glock trigger, and won't go with an aftermarket conversion that uses one, unless the factory trigger is sooooooooo bad that it really needs it.

It's a small personal quirk, but I also won't use that type of trigger on a rifle (Savage started a minor trend with its Accu-Trigger that other makers have borrowed).

I prefer hinged & a little bit of gritty take-up over the "two-trigger" Glock set-up. :)
I'll live with the grit on this Compact sample while the trigger breaks in.
The reset, I really don't care about as long as it's positive, and it is.
The break is just fine.
Denis
 
What you can't do with a hammer fired gun that you can with a striker (and as TunnelRat said, relax) is if you're in a tussle situation with your firearm, you press the back of your pistol into the threat, therefore being able to squeeze off one round, step back, tap, rack, bang as the situation dictates.

A hammer fired gun won't be able to do that, as the hammer sits back behind the slide.
Click to expand...

First, I am not upset. Not sure why that came up.

I figured this is what you were driving at but really, if you can have a free hand to push the gun into battery, you can use the same hand to push away from subject and then fire.

Also, 2 of the guys who had hammer fired guns, got debris in the hammer channel which hindered function until cleared.
Click to expand...

This is a thing. You can see this happen in the Military Arms Channels function tests but IMO is not a real issue for a conceal carry holder at all.
 
You can see this happen in the Military Arms Channels function tests but IMO is not a real issue for a conceal carry holder at all.
Click to expand...

If you can guarantee that in the process of carrying concealed you never walk over or are near sand, dirt, or mud, then I agree. Depending on the distance of the conflict you might find yourself knocked on your butt in those elements. Now will it happen to the extent of the MAC tests? Probably not but I wouldn't dismiss it completel. A fair counter is that striker fired pistols also tend to not do as well in water.
 
OP, the one necessary item I don't see in that pic is a holster. What are you carrying that beauty in?
Click to expand...

Hello! It's actually in a T5 Custom Kydex holster at the moment. An NSR Tactical Holster will also be on the way. Both are fitted for the Inforce APL-C (I know, the Surefire fan boy with several Surefire products, including 2 X300U light, is giving Inforce a shot. Why? The XC1, which is a light in its own class, is sub-par IMO. So I prefer the APL-C. Let's see how this pans out!)


And for anyone saying that M&P 2.0 trigger isn't good, it's a world above the standard M&P! Of course, to each their own. I had to add an APEX Trigger Shoe to the SHTF M&P 9L w/ the X300U. It has improved the reset a bit.

Okay, now I'm rambling again.
 
I've tried the 2.0 triggers. I think they're good. The 1.0 triggers have come a long way as well to the point where I stopped putting APEX kits in them. I do still like the APEX replacement trigger part itself over the hinged design, but that's a preference not a need.

I think a lot gets made about triggers. I don't want an abysmal trigger either, but most everything out on the market currently is certainly doable to me. I've shot my stock trigger Glock at 100 yes and gotten repeated hits. Anything shot long enough will develop proficiency.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
My next pistol should be another M&P. The two I've owned (still have the Shield) were bullet proof and accurate, not to mention so great feeling in the hand.

I almost got a 5" 2.0 back in the spring, but opted to find a CZ p-01 omega instead. Now that I have another CZ, I really want a 2.0 in 45 ACP since I sold a 45 to buy the 2.0 I was looking at. I need to pickup a LCPII also.

I guess the real question is do I need a 380 or a 45 as my next pistol...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top