Smith & Wesson Metal Carry Comp - Pretty big fail

The M&P Metal Carry Comp is a really cool idea for a gun - but a pretty big failure in how it was executed. It has design issues and execution issues - so even if the gun were sent back for servicing and was 100% it'd still be plagued with what I consider to be design errors preventing it from delivering on its promise.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xjFu52J9InY

So the Metal Carry Comp is a full size  gun aimed at the performance carry space building off of the M&P M2.0 Metal frame that introduces absolutely gorgeous slide cuts and the introduction of a hybrid comp – meaning that the rifling stops at the front sight and the barrel expands a bit and there is a port drilled in the top of the barrel at the end.  While the barrel is stated as being a 4.22” barrel on the website – the last half inch or so makes up the compensator (so It's not technically 4.22" or rifled barrel - It's probably like 3.75"-3.9").  The projectile stops gaining velocity as that point as the gas starts to blow by the projectile and escape the port in the comp.   It’s got a sticker price of $999 – roughly $100 more than the M&P M2.0 Metal. 

The problem is the aluminum frame they use is actually slightly lighter than the regular M2.0 full size with a polymer frame. Aluminum – as a material – isn’t amazing in the world of guns – because it’s got higher strength than polymer you can make things thinner with it – but effectively the M2.0 is a gun designed around being polymer  that now has an aluminum shell.  Aluminum frames don’t deform under recoil so the little bit of energy that is lost to the frame flexing is dumped into your arms directly. 

This is true on my Sig Sauer P320 AXG gun – it’s true on the M&P M2.0 as well.  The polymer version shoots a bit better. The Sig P320 AXG adds the functionality of removable grips – so you can re-contour the grip, and the traction of grips – by simply buying aftermarket grips (save 10% on LOK grips with code HUMBLE).  The M&P Metal frame uses basically the same palm swells as the polymer gun.  Rather than putting aggressive checkering into the metal on the front strap – there’s a plastic panel – while the texture is good on that panel – it’s merely clipped into place so it moves under load. 

notice that bare spot ont he frame above the back strap? That's where your support hand can't find any traction

Just so you’re following along – you’re spending roughly twice as much money on a metal version of a striker gun that shoots worse and all the bits you interface with are plastic – making it feel like a stiff plastic framed gun.   Other than added expense – I’m not sure what making the gun out of aluminum did for the platform.  Round it off with the critical spot on the gun for performance shooting – the area where the base of your support hand thumb meets the frame has zero added texture.  On the aluminum it’s actually more slippery there than the polymer frame.  So that sucks.  

The polymer texture is and has always been one of the best things about the M2.0 platform – I still maintain the polymer version of the pistol is an unsung hero.  The ergonomics on the pistol are second to none with shooters traction and a useable trigger.  And that same trigger is in the M&P Metal Carry comp as well – so the gun is very easy to be accurate with despite having the terrible frame.

It seems like I’m being really hard on the aluminum frame – and I am.  The point of a performance carry type gun is it’s supposed to be more stable and have enhanced functionality for high speed manipulation – but the metal framed M&P simply doesn’t deliver that.  In spite of adding the port – which is observable under slow motion to redirect gas properly – it just doesn’t have a great feel to it.  I’d rather have the non-compensated polymer version of the gun. 

So that’s the design issues with the gun – it should have not been metal – or should have been steel – they should have used G10 grips that bolt on and not the M&P back strap system.  The execution issues are something else. Remember when the M&P M2.0 first dropped and everyone immediately was kind of miffed that the slide stop couldn’t be used as a slide release?  They had that weird detent button that would not let you drop the slide using the slide stop – like every other modern duty/carry gun.  Well good news – they got rid of it.  Bad news – moving the trigger to the rear puts upward pressure on the slide stop and in some guns – like the one I reviewed  - it goes bolt action – meaning you fire one shot with a full magazine and the slide locks open as a result of the upward pressure on the slide stop from the trigger. After every. single. shot.

I thought certainly my grip was causing this – I tried it strong hand only with my thumb folded way down like a revolver.  Still happened.  I tried support hand only with thumb folded down with revolver.  Still happened.  I tried shooting it with one round in the chamber, no magazine in the gun, and thumb folded down like a revolver.  Same thing. 

So I have to wonder if that stupid little detent concealed a design issue with the M&P M2.0.  My metal framed Competitor does have the slide stop move up slightly when I pull through the trigger – but not enough to cause lock back like this particular carry comp.  Looking at my M&P M2.0 Compact with a polymer frame (15 round variety – love that gun) – it does have the slide stop move some – less than the metal framed guns – but it’s never been an issue for it either. 

I suspect there is a tolerance stacking issue at play here on a Friday afternoon gun causing this gun to be bolt action but it does point toward questions of the design.  So put simply – I don’t think the Metal Carry Comp gun is worth all the extra money – at that price point there are many performance carry guns that perform better.  They don’t look as cool – because the metal Carry Comp gun is one of the most gorgeous production guns being made – but they’re probably more functional.