I don't think Paul was being unclassy (probably not a word). Paul was simply stating the truth about what the gun will face. He is obviously confident in their product more than Smith's. Who can blame him? It is the Sigforum after all. I'm also confident in Sig's as I"m carrying my 229R with a Langdon Trigger Job on duty right now. However I will probably switch eventually to a M&P. Now that it seems the .45 may come out soon, I'll probably wait until it hit's the market. Most new guns will have some problems or kinks when they first come out, and the M&P has had some like any other completely new model.
My uncle is a State Trooper for the IA State Patrol. He is a Smith fan and liked their issued 4046's, and had no problem switching to a new Smith. I was at my cousin's place a few weeks ago and my uncle was there. My uncle told me they had many problems with the M&P's and most of them out of his group of 25 had to be sent back to Smith. My uncle stated the gun's had feeding problems with their practice ammo, so most of the guns were sent back. So switching over to the M&P for my uncle and some other's in his class were delayed. It didn't appear to be a problem with the lott of ammo either, however I believe they were using CCI. I recall if my memory serves me correctly the cheaper ball ammo made by CCI doesn't always provide the best luck.
I'm not bashing the M&P, as my boss carries one on duty. I have tried to make it jam and couldn't. I limp wristed, shot weak handed and had no problems. My only complaint was the trigger made the pad of my finger sore after only a hundred rounds, and one of the mags broke after being dropped once on the range floor. Alot of mags would break after being dropped on the floor, even though my Sig one's haven't. His gun also developed rust very quickly on the take down lever. The trigger making my finger pad sore wasn't a big deal, just something different. I shot a 98% on the qualification my first attempt. I shot a 98% with my Sig also. I will most likely switch to an M&P because it seems to be slightly lighter, and I like the consistent combat trigger on the M&P. I would say though, Sig is the company to beat when it comes to pistol trials and long term endurance. The IA State Patrol did not test any other firearms besides the M&P. I also personally didn't think it sounded like they put them through much of a testing process. From my understanding the firearms instructors got together and shot a few thousand rounds through them. His brother is one of the firearms instructors for the IA State Patrol. Personally if I were to adopt a brand new firearm for hundred's of troopers to carry that was relatively untestested I would certainly put the firearm through more of a testing process than that. I am not aware if Cincinnati PD and Columbus tested other firearms either. I don't believe Cincinatti did. I believe the M&P has yet to really be put through it's paces in a large number of pistols at once and with many thousands of rounds. If someone knows otherwise I would be glad to be corrected. I know there are individuals here that have put many thousands of rounds through their guns successfully,but that's not on a large scale basis. I'm not saying the M&P isn't worthy of adoption by other agencies, I just think it's to new yet to say, and I believe it's still relatively untested.
Anyway, I would love for Smith to take back the market it use to dominate. I actually like the idea of Smith, Sig, and Glock sharing the LE Market. I believe the competition makes better firearms for all of us.
For myself I think I'll actually buy a compact model first, now that I think about it. I wouldn't mind something light and concealable for off-duty carry. This will give me a chance to thoroughly test the gun for myself. I"m sure it will be awhile before they make the Safariland 070 for the M&P .45. This will give me ample opportunity to put the compact .40 through it's paces. Can't wait to get my hands on a M&P again.
