So it’s no particular secret that I’m a ravening Smith and Wesson M&P fanboi. I have four M&Ps right now, a fifth on the way, and am presently shooting my M&P9 Pro 5″ in both USPSA Production and 3-Gun competition. I like my M&Ps.
So, when I read about Caleb’s magazine problems, it does not exactly fill me with excitement. Particularly when I’ve just ordered a dozen new M&P magazines to replace some old worn-out ones…
I haven’t seen any of the new magazines in the wild yet, but looking at those pictures is worrisome. Moving the locking pin hole that close to the read of the magazine baseplate seems like asking for trouble, and changing the locking pin hole from round to square? Huh? How could this seem like a good idea? These are magazines, people. They are going to be dropped on the ground, handled roughly, and occasionally kicked and stepped on. The magazines need to be built to take some abuse.
What really gets me, though, is that I cannot for the life of me figure out what benefit the engineering department at S&W was trying to obtain. Cheaper to manufacture? Maybe. Better feed reliability in the magazine stack? Doubtful. They sure as hell weren’t trying to make them stronger.
Anyway, as soon as the new magazines are in my mitts, I’ll put them through the wringer. In the meantime, I’m going to go shop for some old-style Compact baseplates. Not to go all sour grapes, but I really do like the Compact baseplates better.