M&P 2.0 5" model. Anti-auto-forward feature fix - MP-Pistol Forum

M&P 2.0 5" model. Anti-auto-forward feature fix

This is a discussion on M&P 2.0 5" model. Anti-auto-forward feature fix within the MP Gunsmithing forums, part of the Smith & Wesson MP Forum category; Have a M&P 2.0 5" model and really see improved accuracy over my original M&P Pro. It's a better shooter. They re-designed the slide stop. ...


Go Back   MP-Pistol Forum > Smith & Wesson MP Forum > MP Gunsmithing

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old May 6th, 2017, 06:42 AM   #1
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 9
M&P 2.0 5" model. Anti-auto-forward feature fix

Have a M&P 2.0 5" model and really see improved accuracy over my original M&P Pro. It's a better shooter. They re-designed the slide stop. It no longer auto-forwards on aggressive mag seating. This was part of their intent when making a play for the military's new RFP for a pistol to replace the M9 Beretta...

I do miss the auto-forward feature of the old guns on aggressive mag seating...it would save me a fraction of a second here and there at matches (IDPA, Production, etc).

Anyone know from experience if this new gun has an easy mod to restore that auto-forward feature?

C
Clint007 is offline  
Old May 6th, 2017, 09:10 AM   #2
G56
Site Staff
 
G56's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 8,920
It was never a 'feature', if anything it was considered a safety defect, that's why they fixed it.

If you make any modifications to it, you would be making the gun less safe, if an accident ever happened it could be a liability, damaging your own defense.
G56 is offline  
Old May 6th, 2017, 09:24 AM   #3
Senior Member
 
Rick M's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Weeki Wachee, FL
Posts: 1,866
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clint007 View Post
Have a M&P 2.0 5" model and really see improved accuracy over my original M&P Pro. It's a better shooter. They re-designed the slide stop. It no longer auto-forwards on aggressive mag seating. This was part of their intent when making a play for the military's new RFP for a pistol to replace the M9 Beretta...

I do miss the auto-forward feature of the old guns on aggressive mag seating...it would save me a fraction of a second here and there at matches (IDPA, Production, etc).

Anyone know from experience if this new gun has an easy mod to restore that auto-forward feature?

C
Your best bet would be to try and fit an old model slide stop to the 2.0 gun.

That's why I have no interest in a 2.0, as I consider the auto forward capability a "feature" as you do.
Rick M is offline  
 
Old May 6th, 2017, 10:22 AM   #4
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 9
yes, this is a comp gun only....2 lb trigger, competition FO sights, etc. The autoforward feature is probably the least risky 'defect' of many comp-tuned guns. It's the light triggers that represent 95% of that issue.

C
Clint007 is offline  
Old May 6th, 2017, 10:53 AM   #5
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Washington State - +-94mi east of the Cascade Curtain
Posts: 755
Speed Shooter Specialties says they have a M1.0 slide stop in stock for $13, buy one and see if you can swap them out??
NCW Ray is offline  
Old May 6th, 2017, 03:25 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Behind the tree
Posts: 1,132
Modifying the gun as the OP inquired will not make the gun "less safe". Recognizing the Principle that the primary safety on any weapon is and always has been muzzle direction; ignoring this fact is the cause of untold gun-related misery. No mechanical safeties, not whether your trigger finger is on / off the trigger and certainly not simple retro-fitting modifications to a slide stop mechanism that is similarly configured on millions of M1.0 M&P's are as important as that First Principle of Gun Safety. If you find yourself in the unenviable position of having to defend a negligent / accidental discharge your primary mission is to find a clever response as to why the muzzle of the gun in your possession was not pointed in a safe direction at the moment of discharge.

Although quite simple, modifying the M2.0 slide will be crossing the mechanical Rubicon; once converted one will no longer to be able to use the M2.0 slide stop assembly and its patent-pending engineering benefits enjoyed by some.

The M2.0 can use the M1.0 slide stop assembly, however it would require two modifications:
1. mill / file the M2.0 slide stop notch to the same dimensions as the M1.0.
2. defeat the spring-loaded detent mechanism present on the M2.0 to allow the M1.0
slide stop assembly to function up / down freely.


The rearward location of the M1.0 & M2.0 slide stop notch is the same distance on both slides.




It is irrelevant that the M2.0 slide wall is 0.01” thicker than the M1.0.




The fitting of the M1.0 slide on the M2.0 frame confirms the relationship that must be created.



The M1.0 & M2.0 slide stop assemblies are dimensionally the same; basic construction is obviously different as well as the slide stop detent geometry, rectangular M1.0 v. semi-circular M2.0.



The M1.0 slide stop assembly fits properly in the M2.0 frame.



The M2.0 spring-loaded frame detent has to be defeated; always modify the least expensive or most readily available part, therefore cut a notch out of the M1.0 lever to clear the M2.0 mechanism from engagement. The M2.0 slide stop notch has to be restored to the geometry of the M1.0 slide stop notch.




You are welcome.

Caution: Pseudo-science and / or amateur photos may be embedded in this post.

Last edited by mp9werks; May 6th, 2017 at 05:28 PM.
mp9werks is offline  
Old May 6th, 2017, 07:11 PM   #7
Senior Member
 
Rick M's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Weeki Wachee, FL
Posts: 1,866
Quote:
Originally Posted by mp9werks View Post
Modifying the gun as the OP inquired will not make the gun "less safe". Recognizing the Principle that the primary safety on any weapon is and always has been muzzle direction; ignoring this fact is the cause of untold gun-related misery. No mechanical safeties, not whether your trigger finger is on / off the trigger and certainly not simple retro-fitting modifications to a slide stop mechanism that is similarly configured on millions of M1.0 M&P's are as important as that First Principle of Gun Safety. If you find yourself in the unenviable position of having to defend a negligent / accidental discharge your primary mission is to find a clever response as to why the muzzle of the gun in your possession was not pointed in a safe direction at the moment of discharge.

Although quite simple, modifying the M2.0 slide will be crossing the mechanical Rubicon; once converted one will no longer to be able to use the M2.0 slide stop assembly and its patent-pending engineering benefits enjoyed by some.

The M2.0 can use the M1.0 slide stop assembly, however it would require two modifications:
1. mill / file the M2.0 slide stop notch to the same dimensions as the M1.0.
2. defeat the spring-loaded detent mechanism present on the M2.0 to allow the M1.0
slide stop assembly to function up / down freely.


The rearward location of the M1.0 & M2.0 slide stop notch is the same distance on both slides.




It is irrelevant that the M2.0 slide wall is 0.01” thicker than the M1.0.




The fitting of the M1.0 slide on the M2.0 frame confirms the relationship that must be created.



The M1.0 & M2.0 slide stop assemblies are dimensionally the same; basic construction is obviously different as well as the slide stop detent geometry, rectangular M1.0 v. semi-circular M2.0.



The M1.0 slide stop assembly fits properly in the M2.0 frame.



The M2.0 spring-loaded frame detent has to be defeated; always modify the least expensive or most readily available part, therefore cut a notch out of the M1.0 lever to clear the M2.0 mechanism from engagement. The M2.0 slide stop notch has to be restored to the geometry of the M1.0 slide stop notch.




You are welcome.

Caution: Pseudo-science and / or amateur photos may be embedded in this post.
Excellent!

Of course; it's much easier just to not buy one of the damn things to begin with...
Rick M is offline  
Old May 6th, 2017, 07:22 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
PaPow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: NY
Posts: 1,320
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick M View Post
Excellent!

Of course; it's much easier just to not buy one of the damn things to begin with...
LOL.... oh man do i ever agree with THAT statement. I looked at the M2.0 again today, couldn't bring myself to buy one for the third time after checking them out. But i DID bring home a brand new standard Shield 45 today instead. ($319)
PaPow is offline  
Old May 7th, 2017, 08:27 PM   #9
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 9
Quote:
Originally Posted by mp9werks View Post
Modifying the gun as the OP inquired will not make the gun "less safe". Recognizing the Principle that the primary safety on any weapon is and always has been muzzle direction; ignoring this fact is the cause of untold gun-related misery. No mechanical safeties, not whether your trigger finger is on / off the trigger and certainly not simple retro-fitting modifications to a slide stop mechanism that is similarly configured on millions of M1.0 M&P's are as important as that First Principle of Gun Safety. If you find yourself in the unenviable position of having to defend a negligent / accidental discharge your primary mission is to find a clever response as to why the muzzle of the gun in your possession was not pointed in a safe direction at the moment of discharge.

Although quite simple, modifying the M2.0 slide will be crossing the mechanical Rubicon; once converted one will no longer to be able to use the M2.0 slide stop assembly and its patent-pending engineering benefits enjoyed by some.

The M2.0 can use the M1.0 slide stop assembly, however it would require two modifications:
1. mill / file the M2.0 slide stop notch to the same dimensions as the M1.0.
2. defeat the spring-loaded detent mechanism present on the M2.0 to allow the M1.0
slide stop assembly to function up / down freely.

The rearward location of the M1.0 & M2.0 slide stop notch is the same distance on both slides.


It is irrelevant that the M2.0 slide wall is 0.01” thicker than the M1.0.

The fitting of the M1.0 slide on the M2.0 frame confirms the relationship that must be created.

The M1.0 & M2.0 slide stop assemblies are dimensionally the same; basic construction is obviously different as well as the slide stop detent geometry, rectangular M1.0 v. semi-circular M2.0.

The M1.0 slide stop assembly fits properly in the M2.0 frame.

The M2.0 spring-loaded frame detent has to be defeated; always modify the least expensive or most readily available part, therefore cut a notch out of the M1.0 lever to clear the M2.0 mechanism from engagement. The M2.0 slide stop notch has to be restored to the geometry of the M1.0 slide stop notch.

You are welcome.

Caution: Pseudo-science and / or amateur photos may be embedded in this post.
WOW, thank you for this information. This will take awhile to digest...but I might try this....

I confess I shoot alot but don't have intimate knowledge of how each part of the gun works....why does the slide auto-forward on the 1.0, exactly? I know it was only with a loaded magazine, so assumed a round made contact with the slide stop mechanism somehow, and that they 'fixed' that for the 2.0.

Also, I've noticed that my grip frequently affects the slide stop in a bad way: slide fails to lock back on last round during matches, presumably because my grip is now strong enough on this 2.0 slide stop, whereas the 1.0 slide release almost requires two hands to drop the slide. I noticed that as a change, also, and figured it was all related to the same slide stop design changes...

C

C

Last edited by Clint007; May 7th, 2017 at 08:34 PM.
Clint007 is offline  
Old May 8th, 2017, 04:28 AM   #10
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Behind the tree
Posts: 1,132
The observation that when a loaded magazine is vigorously inserted into a semi-auto pistol slide can disengage its frame mounted slide stop / release lever from the slide stop notch and allow the slide to move forward, powered by the expanding guide rod spring, is neither a firearm "defect" or a "feature". It is a consequence of simple mechanical disturbance interrupting / overcoming the friction between the slide stop tab and the slide stop notch surfaces. As such, virtually every gun that has a similar mechanism warns of its Achilles heel.




The M&P M1.0, like most other semi-autos, have a spring loaded slide stop lever that is powered downward; when an empty magazine is present in the gun, the tab on the magazine follower engages the slide stop tab preventing its movement downward, thus locking the slide out of battery. This too is a simple matter of David v. Goliath, a small slide stop spring is no match for a magazine spring, the magazine wins every time.






Likewise, the force of engagement between the slide stop tab and the corresponding slide stop notch is the expanding effort of a 17 pound guide rod spring up front.

The M1.0 slide stop tab, like many other mfg., has only a small vertical surface to engage the slide stop notch. Any mechanical disturbance that allows the two surfaces to separate by just a few thousandths of an inch is the opportunity for the spring-powered slide stop tab to immediately move downward and it does just that almost every time.




The M2.0 slide stop mechanism is NOT spring powered, rather a cam-like motion of the slide moving rearward ~ 5/32" before the slide stop tab is driven downward, then the expanding guide rod spring can power the slide forward into battery. So, almost 100X more rearward motion as well as further guide rod spring compression is required to get the M2.0 released from its mechanism. It is a patent-pending design, however it still can be defeated by a very violent insertion of a magazine, and S&W continues to warn its users. The mechanism is also why it is much more difficult to release the slide with single thumb motion.



Caution: Pseudo-science and / or amateur photos may be embedded in this post.

Last edited by mp9werks; May 8th, 2017 at 04:34 AM.
mp9werks is offline  
Old May 8th, 2017, 10:11 AM   #11
Senior Member
 
Rick M's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Weeki Wachee, FL
Posts: 1,866
Excellent point made, Mr. Werks!

I've owned 1911's that would do the same thing..l
Rick M is offline  
Old May 9th, 2017, 11:11 AM   #12
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 9
What's very odd is that my 2.0 is easier to release the slide than my 1.0. With my 1.0 it required far more.

Unless...now that I think of it...awhile back, I changed out the spring to a lighter spring, b/c with my IDPA loads (lighter than factory) the slide wasn't cycling 100% of the time. Could this affect the ease with which the slide closes on pressing the slide lock button, AND also explain why the slide is more likely to close on the last round with a firm high grip which makes contact with the slide lock button?
Clint007 is offline  
Old May 9th, 2017, 07:52 PM   #13
Senior Member
 
Rick M's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Weeki Wachee, FL
Posts: 1,866
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clint007 View Post
What's very odd is that my 2.0 is easier to release the slide than my 1.0. With my 1.0 it required far more.

Unless...now that I think of it...awhile back, I changed out the spring to a lighter spring, b/c with my IDPA loads (lighter than factory) the slide wasn't cycling 100% of the time. Could this affect the ease with which the slide closes on pressing the slide lock button, AND also explain why the slide is more likely to close on the last round with a firm high grip which makes contact with the slide lock button?
Yes.
Rick M is offline  
Old May 9th, 2017, 08:28 PM   #14
Senior Member
 
PaPow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: NY
Posts: 1,320
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick M View Post
Yes.
What are you doin out of bed this late you ole coot... go take your geritol and get your rest


hehehehehehehehe
PaPow is offline  
Old May 10th, 2017, 05:44 PM   #15
Senior Member
 
Rick M's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Weeki Wachee, FL
Posts: 1,866
Quote:
Originally Posted by PaPow View Post
What are you doin out of bed this late you ole coot... go take your geritol and get your rest


hehehehehehehehe
Well, I was on the way!
Rick M is offline  
Reply

  MP-Pistol Forum > Smith & Wesson MP Forum > MP Gunsmithing

Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
M&P 2.0 Differences I See mp9werks MP Full Size Pistols 45 May 1st, 2017 06:40 PM



Powered by vBulletin 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.6.1
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright © 2006-2012 MP-Pistol. All rights reserved.
MP-Pistol is a M&P pistol enthusiast forum, but it is in no way affiliated with, nor does it represent Smith & Wesson Holding Corp. of Springfield, MA.