[TexasPOff]

Wanted to give a little report on the M&P compared to a Glock. for kicks and grins I borrowed an M&P 40 to runit throught my qualification course for my PD. I carried a .357 till about three days ago then went back to my .40 long story. Anyway course is as follows: 30 yards 6 rounds, mag change 6 more rounds in 30 seconds. 20 yards 6 rounds, mag change 6 more rounds, 20 seconds. 10 yards 6 rounds, mag change 6 rounds, 15 seconds. Load remaining rounds in second mag, 5 yards 6 rounds, mag change fire all remaining rounds 8 seconds. we use a modified b.27 style target, has no numbers listed but looks just like a b-27. Our agency and several others don't score by numbers, court liablility issue, longer story. Anyway 48 out of 60 must be fairly center mass of the body. I ran the course with my Glock 23, all 60 were in what would normally be the X, and 9 ring areas. No FTF/FTE. what a suprise for a Glock right. OK now for the M&P. Same course of fire, no FTF/FTE. Score was about the same, grouping was better with the M&P. No issues of any kind. Couple of our swat guys were there and tried it out. Nothing but positive comments. everyone who picked it up liked it. One guy there carries a S&W 19, we give him hell about it all the time. He even like the pistol and shot it well. He said see it took "smith" to make a plastic pistol right. All in all nothing spectacular about the outing, but that is what you want in a good reliable duty weapon, everything just needs to work all the time.

 

[toocool]

Not to detract from the thread, but I'd like to hear the stories about the .357 to .40 switch and the liability issue about scoring with numbers...

 

[TexasPOff]

There were no issues with my .357. The liability issues that were discussed with my former department, and my current department, and many others I know of are as follows. If an officer is involved in a shooting, during the grand jury hearing, and trial it has been brought up before that if an officer scores marksman, or expert, then why didn't they just wound the BG, or shoot the gun out of his hand. As obsurd as this sounds, it has been brought up. With a pass or fail system, then it is assumed that the officer is proficiant with his duty pistol, and nothing else is assumed. In law enforcement you have perception and reality. Reality is what we deal with, perception is what the public thinks. In a trial setting be it grand jury or not, the people are civialians not cops, their perception is not usually the reality of what happened. the best senario is that they come to the same conclusion as the administration of the department, ie good shoot, no billed.

I believe in keeping my skills up, so I shoot quite a bit. Usually about three times a month 300 plus rounds each time. I took my Glock 32and my new Glock 23, found I really missed the 23 and went to the range. I had 300 rounds of 165 40 and 300 rounds of 125 .357. I found that over a period of time while shooting fatigue set in with the .357 faster, at least with me. I agree the .357 will handle intermediate barriers better than the 40. I like the .357 round and I believe it is more accurate than the 40, albeit not by much. But there are two things I considered before switching back to my 23 40 cal. There is only one other officer in my department carring a .357, and he works nights. If a situation arose where i might need a few more round on the street, and it has happened, will be easier to just grab a mag form another officer. The other is the cost, it is more than the 40 and I haven't reloaded my own ammo in years. It is probably personal preference more than anything. I was also weened on a colt 45 acp and I do like a larger caliber bullet myself. I am not trying to start a caliber war here by any means and I like the .357. I like the 40 just as well. I feel just as comfortable packing a 40 as I do packing a .357. As a side note, I was able to shoot the M&P 40 just as well, accuracy wise as my .357 Glock.