MP-Pistol Forum banner

1 - 8 of 8 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
12 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
hola MP Nation,



I'm ready to pull the trigger on a new MP45. The last time I bought a SW auto pistol was way back in 94 or so when I purchased a .40 Sigma that I hated with a passion.



Times have changed.



I'm a .45ACP guy all the way and have been a 1911 fanatic since 1996 or so. For the first time since then I'm seriously thinking about the MP45. Ergo's, weight and a tad bit more capacity has me really wanting this pistol.



So now I'm stuck figuring out do I want the manual safety (1991 deal I know), or the base model and I just can't decide. Not sure if I like the dark earth or just plain black. So... My question!



Are the triggers the same on the Side Safety models vs. the base ones?



Has anyone tried Truglo's fiber otpic/Tritium sights on one?



If so, are the sights the same height as factory so the POM does not change? Thats really important to me as I have had to dork around with POM's moving from a six o'clock hold to a center mass hold.



What POM is the MP45? 6/12/Center Mass?



I found this site the other day and really value MP45 Owners Opinions. Nothing beats hands on experience.



Thanks!



 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,361 Posts
Sorry I can't answer most of your questions but I figure input from a die heard 1911 guy might be of some assistance. I've been a 1911 kinda guy since I bought my first in the mid 80s. I now have two, a full sized Springfield Armory Government Model similar to what they now call the Mil-Spec and a Kimber Ultra Carry. I'm now a whole 3 weeks into being the proud owner of a M&P45 w/thumb safety and so far I like it a lot. The M&P is only my second foray into the world of plastic pistols the first being a Kahr PM40.



First off don't let the trigger pull put you off. Stock it's a whole different animal than a 1911 but that isn't necessarily a bad thing. I'll be the first to admit that at first I was dubious as hell because the trigger on mine was sooooo heavy. Right out of the box mine pull tested at roughly 9-1/2lbs!!! I say roughly because it was off the scale of my RCBS trigger scale - holy crap Batman! Well just like everyone says it took roughly 200 trigger pulls for the trigger to wear itself in and now it's a buttery smooth 7lbs. I know for us 1911 types that still sounds awful but it's not. It's so smooth and gradual that it doesn't feel heavy at all like a 1911 with a 6-7lb trigger would. It's more like the Kahr with a buttery smooth buildup to a totally predictable bang. I went into this purchase fully intending to have trigger work done but now I'm rethinking my plans. This .45 will primarily be a defensive pistol and if I do go ahead with those plans I won't want the trigger much lighter. Certainly not any lower than 5lbs. Anyway I'm beginning to like the trigger just as much as the tuned triggers in my 1911s even if they are a whole different animal. And if you must have the feel of a 1911 there are two smiths here that specialize in bringing the M&P's trigger close to that feel, and I would definitely go that route if it were to be primarily for competition. The 1911's bang button (at least for me) is just a whole lot faster than a stock M&P trigger, but IMO doesn't lead to any greater accuracy. My stock M&P feels like it'll be as accurate as I am.



I can't tell you how well Trijicon sights work on the M&P but based on having Tritium sights on three other pistols I'm convinced of their value. I have a second M&P (a compact 9mm) on order and both will get Trijicon SA37Y sights (Y=yellow rear inserts) as soon as they come off backorder.



That's about all I can help you with right now. But I'm sure somebody will be along with answers to the rest of your questions.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,396 Posts
Fatty said:
Has anyone tried Truglo's fiber otpic/Tritium sights on one?


I haven't tried them on an M&P but shot a SIG P226 equipped with them quite extensively (just shy of 30,000 rounds).



First: the rear sight is ridiculous; it completely overpowers the front. Stick with a standard rear sight (tritium or not, depending on your taste).



As for the front sight, it's a great concept but the execution just isn't there yet, in my opinion. The fiber optic tube cannot be replaced, so as it gets dirty and scratched you lose both the fiber optic's daylight and tritium-powered brightness. Also, the sight is very long (cutting your sight radius substantially) and very wide. All of the problems are a function of design requirements (to get NRC approval, the sight must prevent you from getting direct access to the tritium), but the result is a so-so sight at best.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
Thank you,



Thoughtful responses! I appreciate your time very much and value your experiences.



Enjoy Thanksgiving!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,316 Posts
Longtime 1911 shooter since I was first issued one in 1977 at the age of 17. I gravitate to .45 pistols because there is no question about the round and I like the recoil impulse. My prior favorite .45's, other than 1911, (I favor Les Baers) were Glock 21 SF and P220 SAO. As to the thumb safety make sure you try it out first. Unless you want to rest your thumb on the safety as many people do with a 1911 it may be in the way of your thumb and even pop up inadvertently. As far as the pistol itself goes I have never enjoyed shooting any .45 as much as this one. The ergonomics are very good and the beavertail is just right for me to spread recoil, index the pistol, and reduce muzzle rise. I can hammer 10 rounds through more quickly quickly and accurately than any other .45 I have owned. I just bought my second one and the trigger is very good requiring little break in compared to my first. Ditto on the tru-Glo's. They are way overkill. I would consider a Warren tactical or 10-8 rear sight and a fiber optic front.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
Thanks Steelshooter,



I too enjoy the .45acp recoil. It just feels like I'm shooting a worthy handgun. I don't really like recoil on rifles. Strange huh?



Regardless, I did handle one with the thumb safety and now that I think about it, my thumb was away from the pistol in a strange 11'clock position in the air when I was drawing the pistol and naturally, not thinking about it. Now that you said this, The safety position and physical aspects might have caused that. Hmmm....



I think I will get one with Factory Night Sights on it and see how that goes.



Some else posted either here or elsewhere that they 1911 felt so thin after handling the MP45. i agree and I'm a die hard true and blue 1911 fanatic. In fact my SA Professional that I paid $2,145.00 for 3 years ago felt like a thin unbalanced heavy steel pistol. That shows how well the ergo's are on this MP.



Lastly with the thumb safety is that an additional safety to the striker fired built in trigger system?





Think I'm ordering mine on December 1st!



Again,



THANK YOU
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
43 Posts
^ That may have been my comments regarding how I thought the 1911 grips felt thin compared to the M&P45 after shooting them back to back. And before the M&P45, I had thought that the 1911 grip was a very good one. I may have to change my thoughts now!



From what I recall the thumb safety is an additional one added to the gun, and the rest of it will be exactly the same as a non thumb safety gun in regards to the rest of the safeties.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
Great, Thanks D-man.



I dont like the 1911 grip no more. Damit S&W



I think I'm going to get mine without the safety. One less thing to snag up on, and I don't like what it does to my natural grip on the pistol.











I'll post up a pic when I get it and when I do my range report if anyones interested.



Have a great Thanksgiving all!
 
1 - 8 of 8 Posts
Top