# Looking for suggestions for a full sized .40



## Stoney (Jul 21, 2013)

Sorry I had this posted in he wrong section somehow. Hopefully a mod can delete the one in photo gallery.

Looking for a full sized frame for home protection. My budget is $500-$800. So far my short list is S&W M&P Pro, Walther PPQ and a Beretta PX4 Storm but not in that order.

Thanks in advance..


----------



## DJ Niner (Oct 3, 2006)

Glock model 22 in the Gen4 model would be my choice. Gen4 Glock .40s work flawlessly, and the examples I've shot seemed a bit more accurate than similarly-sized GlockGen3 pistols, although the differences were small.

Of the ones you listed, the S&W M&P Pro would be my choice.

I see absolutely no advantage in selecting a DA/SA design nowadays with all the fine SA, striker-fired, or other single-firing-mode pistols available. Time spent training and practicing the DA/SA transition and decocking-before-holstering (or-you'll-shoot-yourself) is better used on other items, or returned to the agency/user as a bonus for earlier competence with the simpler action types.

(Your other thread has been deleted; thanks for the heads-up.)


----------



## denner (Jun 3, 2011)

My advice would be not to discount the Beretta PX4 Storm before you shot one, especially in .40. As far as re-holstering the pistol your chances are much higher shooting yourself with a striker fired design than with a DA/SA design w/ a de-cocker. :smt083. I've never heard of "Beretta Legged, Sig Legged, or H&K Legged", not that it hasn't happened. In my opinion the Storm DA is shorter and lighter than the standard 92/96 series of pistol. It shouldn't be that hard to get accustomed to. But in all fairness striker fired pistols are carried by more law enforcement and perhaps more civilians than any other pistol and for good reason.


----------



## SouthernBoy (Jun 27, 2007)

DJ Niner said:


> Glock model 22 in the Gen4 model would be my choice. Gen4 Glock .40s work flawlessly, and the examples I've shot seemed a bit more accurate than similarly-sized GlockGen3 pistols, although the differences were small.
> 
> Of the ones you listed, the S&W M&P Pro would be my choice.
> 
> ...


Don't know of any such thing as a SA striker fired pistol. Don't you mean DAO? That's what the Glock, M&P, and XD is along with a host of others (Kahr, Kel-Tec, some Rugers, etc).


----------



## Gruesome (Apr 30, 2013)

Stoney said:


> Sorry I had this posted in he wrong section somehow. Hopefully a mod can delete the one in photo gallery.
> 
> Looking for a full sized frame for home protection. My budget is $500-$800. So far my short list is S&W M&P Pro, Walther PPQ and a Beretta PX4 Storm but not in that order.
> 
> Thanks in advance..


I had the Px4 on my list as well, but bought an FNX 40 instead. Great gun, made in America, easy disassembly, 14+1 in 40, comes with 3 mags...what's not to like? Do try to find a place to rent one first, if you can. I really like my FNX but it bites me badly (hits a nerve in my thumb.) I've got odd hands so that's unliklely to be a problem for most people, but it's always better to try before you buy.

As to striker vs DA/SA hammer - I think it is most important that you be comfortable and confident with the weapon and it's operation. Pursue the wisdom of experienced people, but beware those who most loudly proclaim "X style is better."


----------



## DJ Niner (Oct 3, 2006)

SouthernBoy said:


> Don't know of any such thing as a SA striker fired pistol. Don't you mean DAO? That's what the Glock, M&P, and XD is along with a host of others (Kahr, Kel-Tec, some Rugers, etc).


Sorry; poor writing on my part.

I meant that as a list of action types: SA (traditional single action, as in 1911), striker-fired (Glock, XD, M&P), or other single-firing-mode (HK P7, for instance). I can't speak for others, but I usually differentiate DAO from striker-fired guns in two ways -- most (but not all) DAO actions originally were DA/SA pistols that were later modified to DAO; and most "true" DAO designs utilize a hammer, where Glocks, XDs, and M&Ps do not.

Glocks and M&Ps are considered DAO actions for the purposes of categorization for some pistol competitions, and perhaps are listed that way in Law Enforcement agency "approved weapon" lists, but otherwise they really are neither fish nor fowl. If I remember correctly, IDPA even separated the XD and Glock into different categories based on the fact that the XD striker was fully cocked when the pistol was loaded and readied to fire, whereas Glocks and similar designs utilize the initial movement of the trigger to complete the cocking step just prior to the pistol firing. Under this rule, the XD was treated as a SA design, and the Glocks and other Glock-ish pistols were not.


----------



## SouthernBoy (Jun 27, 2007)

Really all you have to remember is what task(s) the trigger performs in firing the gun. Exclude moving a safety block up to free the striker in the definition. If that trigger has to cock a striker or hammer, or complete the cocking process, and then release the striker or hammer to fire the gun, and if this is all it does, it is a double action only design. I had written previously that technically the M&P should be designated as a SAO pistol because the striker is held in a fully cocked position and all the trigger does is rotate the sear via a cam to release the striker. The XD is a similar design. However to my knowledge the label SAO does not exist so that ain't gonna happen. Glocks are different from the XD and M&P in their design and action. Quite a bit simpler.

Whether or not a DAO has second strike capability does not alter its DAO label. What is does do is afford the user a chance to try that round again before working the slide to eject and feed the next round for use. BTW, a DA revolver does not have second strike capability as a few have argued.

A word about the newer label of DA/SA. I refuse to use this ridiculous designation since it is redundant and completely unnecessary. For example the Beretta 92FS years ago was sold as a double action (DA) pistol and that is exactly what it was. The pistol's action has not changed at all so why has its action type changed? I'll tell you why.

It's because people got confused between all of the action terminology and this was right around the advent of double action only (DAO) pistols. New gun owners couldn't seem to get the minds around these labels. So instead of them learning the proper terminology and companies staying the course, the new term DA/SA was introduced. Now think about it. A double action pistol, like the Beretta 92 series, has two distinct trigger tasks, or actions, that it performs to fire the gun. If the hammer is at rest, a long pull of the trigger cocks the hammer (action #1) then releases that hammer to fire the gun (action #2). After that first round is fired, the movement of the slide ejects the spent case, fully cocks the hammer, and feeds a new round for the next shot. At this point the trigger only does one thing; release the hammer which is now in single action mode.

That is how a DA pistols operates. The fact that it is a double action automatically implies, means, that it is also a single action pistol so the new label of DA/SA is a bastard child. The offshoot of all of this has given rise to new confusion regarding DAO pistols. People get confused about them now because they either don't understand what defines the action of a pistol or revolver, or they want to create new terms to define slight differences between guns like Glock and M&P and XD and striker vs hammer and a host of other things.

So with pistols, what we have is SA (1911), DA (Beretta 92), and DAO (Glock, Kahr, M&P, etc.). Hope all of this has helped folks.


----------



## DJ Niner (Oct 3, 2006)

I suppose if you only deal with highly knowledgeable shooters, then the old "DA" designation is all that is needed when discussing various action types, but I've found when dealing with newer shooters that the DA/SA term is more descriptive, helping them remember the difference between that and a DAO, and therefore more useful. Not sure about how "new" it is, though; DA/SA, along with TDA (Traditional Double Action) have been around and commonly used for 20 or more years, at least in my neck of the woods. You can find examples of TDA being used in the catalog sections of 20-plus-year-old Gun Digest/Illustrated books.

As for the S&W M&P striker being held in a fully cocked position; well, I don't think that's quite accurate, and at least at one point in the past, the S&W factory seemed to agree with me. Here is a good cross-section of the S&W M&P pistol lineup, and links to their pages on the S&W web site:

S&W M&P full-size .45:
Product: Smith & Wesson M&P45 - Dark Earth Brown - Thumb Safety

Smith & Wesson M&P 40 Carry and Range Kit:
Product: Smith & Wesson M&P 40 Carry and Range Kit

Smith & Wesson M&P357 - Full Size, Thumb Safety:
Product: Smith & Wesson M&P357 - Full Size, Thumb Safety

Smith & Wesson M&P9c - Compact Size:
Product: Smith & Wesson M&P9c - Compact Size

Smith & Wesson M&P SHIELD™ .40 S&W:
Product: Smith & Wesson M&P SHIELD? .40 S&W

Smith & Wesson M&P9L Pro Series C.O.R.E.:
Product: Smith & Wesson M&P9L Pro Series C.O.R.E.

All the above S&W models are listed in their S&W specification sheets as "Striker Fire", "Striker Fire Action", or "Striker Fire (Double Action)". The .22 caliber M&P is shown as being hammer-fired, not striker fired, so I will exclude those .22 models from this discussion.

On page 9 of the older S&W M&P Owner's Manuals (REV:M&P120605), there is a Nomenclature listing, which includes definitions of the various action types. Both the DAO and Striker Fire action types include descriptions which include the trigger causing further rearward movement in the striker prior to firing. Partial screen capture of this page is shown below; the red outlines are mine.










A copy of this older manual can be found here:
http://stevespages.com/pdf/s&w_m&p_pistols.pdf

Now, having said all that, in the interest of full disclosure, I will mention:
- The current S&W M&P Owner's Manuals (which can be found online at the S&W website) do not include the above-pictured Nomenclature page.
- Several of the M&P pistols listed on the S&W website do not have an Action type listed in their Specifications listing.
- It would not surprise me in the least to find out they have changed the action on some M&P pistols to a fully-cocked-at-rest-type striker, although I can find no evidence that this is the case.

I know the M&P striker doesn't move very far rearward before firing, especially compared to a Glock, for instance, but >0 is still greater-than-zero.
As I said above, the XD is (rightfully, I believe) treated as a SA-type design, and the Glocks and other Glock-ish pistols (including the M&P, according to S&W), are not fully cocked at rest, complete their cocking stroke with the trigger immediately prior to firing, and are therefore correctly placed in a different category.


----------



## SouthernBoy (Jun 27, 2007)

DJ Niner said:


> I suppose if you only deal with highly knowledgeable shooters, then the old "DA" designation is all that is needed when discussing various action types, but I've found when dealing with newer shooters that the DA/SA term is more descriptive, helping them remember the difference between that and a DAO, and therefore more useful. Not sure about how "new" it is, though; DA/SA, along with TDA (Traditional Double Action) have been around and commonly used for 20 or more years, at least in my neck of the woods. You can find examples of TDA being used in the catalog sections of 20-plus-year-old Gun Digest/Illustrated books.
> 
> As for the S&W M&P striker being held in a fully cocked position; well, I don't think that's quite accurate, and at least at one point in the past, the S&W factory seemed to agree with me. Here is a good cross-section of the S&W M&P pistol lineup, and links to their pages on the S&W web site:
> 
> ...


Notice their definition of a DAO pistol. That is what the M&P is according to their designation. As for the striker being in a full cock or partially cocked position, it is held in a fully cocked position until released by the trigger bar. I have three of them and have thoroughly examined their internals and how they operate. The sear acts as a rocker arm, or seesaw if you'd rather. I holds the striker until the end of the trigger bar rocks the opposite side upward, forcing the sear end downward to release the striker.

One explanation of the M&P design says that Smith and Wesson says the striker is cocked to 98% of its full position and that the first stage of the trigger completes the cocking. I don't believe that at all having carefully examined my M&P's. I defy them to prove that statement. If you measure the movement of the sear. I suspect that at best, any further rearward movement may be in the thousandths or perhaps ten-thousands of an inch. I have a high quality set of calipers. Maybe I'll try to exact some sort of measurement with them.

When you read S&W's website info on their M&P pistols, it tends to be all over the place. There is not real structure in their information. Still, they had to come up with a designation for the action type of their M&P so striker fired DAO seems to be it.

*"I suppose if you only deal with highly knowledgeable shooters, then the old "DA" designation is all that is needed when discussing various action types, but I've found when dealing with newer shooters that the DA/SA term is more descriptive, helping them remember the difference between that and a DAO, and therefore more useful."*
And I believe this is what has happened over the past 15-20 years. Instead of educating newer owners and shooters, manufacturers and perhaps instructors took the easy way out and just made up a term theretofore non-existing and not necessary, to describe something that had not changed one bit. Makes no sense to me at all.

Change is inevitable, but change for the sake of change is always bad.... even when it works because you only got lucky when it does work. Adding or changing unnecessary terminology to something that since its birth has had a perfectly good descriptive label has to make one wonder why.

But we're good. Nice going over this with you.


----------



## DJ Niner (Oct 3, 2006)

Thanks for the response. If you ever get around to measuring that striker movement (if any), I'd be interested in hearing the results. I don't personally own a S&W M&P handgun (although I've fired several) or I'd do it myself. A buddy owns a Shield, but I'm pretty sure he wouldn't be thrilled with me stabbing my depth caliper into the guts of his primary carry gun and snapping the trigger. He's funny that way...


----------



## DJ Niner (Oct 3, 2006)

Stoney said:


> Sorry I had this posted in he wrong section somehow. Hopefully a mod can delete the one in photo gallery.
> 
> Looking for a full sized frame for home protection. My budget is $500-$800. So far my short list is S&W M&P Pro, Walther PPQ and a Beretta PX4 Storm but not in that order.
> 
> Thanks in advance..


In poking around the S&W site recently, I see that they now make a M&P that's pre-cut for a miniature red-dot optical sight. It looks like it might be mounted low enough to still see/use the iron sights right through the optical sight window. That right there might be cool enough to get me to add one of those darn M&P things to my meager little collection.


----------



## SouthernBoy (Jun 27, 2007)

DJ Niner said:


> Thanks for the response. If you ever get around to measuring that striker movement (if any), I'd be interested in hearing the results. I don't personally own a S&W M&P handgun (although I've fired several) or I'd do it myself. A buddy owns a Shield, but I'm pretty sure he wouldn't be thrilled with me stabbing my depth caliper into the guts of his primary carry gun and snapping the trigger. He's funny that way...


The M&P pistol fully cocks the striker when the slide is racked either manually or from the recoil action of a fired cartridge. The striker is held in this position by the raised sear. When the trigger is pulled, it lowers that sear by raising its other side. It does this because the sear operates like a rocker arm in an automobile engine. The cam raises one side and the other side pushes a valve stem down, opening a valve. Same thing occurs with the sear on the M&P. The trigger bar raises one side of the sear causing the other side to lower thereby releasing the striker.

This morning I was thinking about what we have discussed here and I have to admit I made a mistake. I had mentioned that technically the M&P trigger action was a Single Action Only (SAO) when in fact no such designation exists to my knowledge and anyway, it would not be necessary for the M&P. It's proper designation should be Single Action (SA) just like the 1911. I say this because the trigger does not finish cocking the striker prior to releasing it. The sear is in a fixed position on an axis (pin) which is fixed within its housing so the sear does not move.... unlike the Glock design. When the striker is cocked, its lug engages the sear and is held there until the sear rotates downward to release it. There is no action from the trigger bar which moves the striker, i.e., the are not in physical contact with one another.

I'll pull up one of my M&P's and take some measurements, but frankly I don't see where this necessary since the trigger bar never contacts the striker.


----------



## DJ Niner (Oct 3, 2006)

See, I didn't know that stuff about the sear/rocker, either. I really should get inside one of these little buggers and learn what makes it tick. 
Sometimes there's just no substitute for getting the 'ol hands dirty and seeing with your own eyes exactly what's going on inside a mechanism.


----------



## SouthernBoy (Jun 27, 2007)

DJ Niner said:


> See, I didn't know that stuff about the sear/rocker, either. I really should get inside one of these little buggers and learn what makes it tick.
> Sometimes there's just no substitute for getting the 'ol hands dirty and seeing with your own eyes exactly what's going on inside a mechanism.


This is true.

I also noticed I had a typo in my last post;

"It's proper designation should be Single Action (SA) just like the 1911. I say this because the *trigger does finish *cocking the striker prior to releasing it."

This should read;

"It's proper designation should be Single Action (SA) just like the 1911. I say this because the *trigger does not finish* cocking the striker prior to releasing it."

I'll go down in my basement and get one of my M&P's out of my safe to check the sear movement with my calipers. These are digital calipers which measure to within a ten-thousandth of a inch so if there is a way to do a measurement, I'll try. But really it isn't necessary given the explanation I gave of how the M&P system works.

You are no doubt familiar with how the Glock system works. It's beauty lies in its simplicity. It is truly an elegant arrangement of just a few parts and how they work. Gaston Glock is a genius and his design is utterly phenomenal when viewed in the light of so many other designs. Now I am no Glock fan boy but what I am is someone who admires and respects quality and believes in the saying, "form follows function". The M&P is a fine pistol. Accurate, reliable, and for those who care, very attractive. But it is a bit more complex than the Glock and a bit more difficult to detail strip. I have torn apart my Glocks, and those of others, probably well over 100 times to install after market parts, OEM parts, and to do the well known "25 cent trigger job". It is a joy to me to do this because it is so darned simple and easy.

When I purchased my M&P 45 4" barrel at the end of 2011, I had an Apex Tactical DCAEK installed at the store while I waited. When I got home, I just didn't like the trigger. I came in at 6.5 pounds which for me is too heavy for a carry gun. Everything else with the Apex kit was fabulous. So I removed the trigger spring which came with kit and re-installed the factory OEM spring for a beautiful 5 pound trigger and a break which can only be described as 1911-like. Re-installing that trigger spring was not a fun and simple affair. Nothing like switching out Glock trigger springs which takes all of maybe 5 minutes and is a piece of cake.

The M&P's I have will not be sold. I really do like them and they are excellent shooters. I'm just not wild about detailing stripping them. And what rides on my hip when I leave my home for things out and about? One of my gen3 G23's which I have modified to my specific wants and needs. There are other guns in my carry stable, of which the M&P's are members. But nearly always, it is that G23 that finds itself as my companion.

Now as a side note, if you don't mind. This has been a good discussion and one of the things I can't help but comment upon is the fact that it has remained completely civil. Every other time I have gotten into a discussion about this subject with people on other websites, it has turned quite uncivil. You would think that I was insulting their manhood or calling their wives foul names. But this one here has been completely above board and I find that has become the exception more than the rule. We all come here to learn from others and that is a very good thing. None of us knows everything and there is never any shame in saying, "I don't know". Humility is one of the marks of an honorable man.

So thanks for the great discussion on a valuable topic. I truly enjoyed this.


----------



## SouthernBoy (Jun 27, 2007)

Okay, I just took some measurements of the sear's movement as it rotates to release the striker on an M&P pistol. My subject pistol is an M&P 40 standard size with the 4.25" barrel purchased in December 2009. The calipers are Mitutoyo Digimatic. I used the rear of the frame just behind the sear for one point and the sear release face for the other point.

The amount of rearward movement of the striker as the sear rotates to release it is .0095" or 95/10,000ths of an inch if you will. Does this constitute completing the cocking of the striker prior to firing by the trigger bar? No because the trigger bar is never in physical contact with the striker. Does the striker move at all? Yes because the sear rotates on an axis (pin) and that imparts an arc movement will push the striker lug as the sear slides down the lug to the point where it no longer captures that lug. Would this comprise 2% of the distance the striker moves, as one article claimed? Nope.


----------



## BigCityChief (Jan 2, 2013)

My vote goes to the PX4 Storm - a beautiful and accurate Beretta.


----------



## maineff (Jul 13, 2013)

my vote is for the Springfield XDM .40. my wife is a novice shooter and she loves it. she originally bought it for ccw I tried to explain the folly in this she (being a woman jk) wouldn't listen has seen the difficulty in this and is saving up for her next purchase. the XDM is reliable and easy to use. two things I like in a gun.


----------



## rex (Jan 27, 2012)

"The amount of rearward movement of the striker as the sear rotates to release it is .0095" or 95/10,000ths of an inch if you will. Does this constitute completing the cocking of the striker prior to firing by the trigger bar? No because the trigger bar is never in physical contact with the striker. Does the striker move at all? Yes because the sear rotates on an axis (pin) and that imparts an arc movement will push the striker lug as the sear slides down the lug to the point where it no longer captures that lug. Would this comprise 2% of the distance the striker moves, as one article claimed? Nope."

I agree with your assessment that it's a SA.Technically,the 1911 does the same thing to the hammer.At least an original pattern spec does.The sear is partially captive of the hammer hooks,and partially cocks the hammer ever so slightly as the sear escapes.That is where people get into trouble doing trigger jobs,finding the neutral release that really isn't hard to do,but many don't see or understand the geometry of everything.

Here's one to screw things up with DA/SA,an HK.The USP,P30 and HK45 can act as a true SA aka C&L 1911 or traditional DA with SA following shots.It can also be converted to SA permanently or DAO.Modular trigger action?Sorry,had to have a little fun with this.

The P7 series I'm not sure of.The frontstrap cocks the striker and has a sweet trigger,but there may be a little overcocking going on in there.Don't know on those because the trigger pull is longer than a 1911 but considered a SA.It could be a leverage thing like the M&P bar that releases the stiker,the trigger side is longer than the striker side to gain leverage to keep the pull weight down at the expense of a longer pull.

To the OP:I can't pick one of those from personal experience.I'm not a striker fan but of those I would look at the M&P and Walther from their reps,I know nothing about the Beretta.A P30 or USP can be had for or near your top end and definitely a nice used one.Mags are expensive,but not real bad under a 45 caliber.They also use a cover hold on factory sights but that's easily corrected.A used one will have a better trigger if it's had around a case of ammo through it.


----------



## SouthernBoy (Jun 27, 2007)

Stoney said:


> Sorry I had this posted in he wrong section somehow. Hopefully a mod can delete the one in photo gallery.
> 
> Looking for a full sized frame for home protection. My budget is $500-$800. So far my short list is S&W M&P Pro, Walther PPQ and a Beretta PX4 Storm but not in that order.
> 
> Thanks in advance..


First, I must apologize for my causing a deviation in your thread. It is my fault and for that I am sorry. You asked a perfectly good and valid question which deserves a proper answer.

Of the three pistols you asked about, I only have experience with one of them; the M&P. I have three M&P's, one of which is an M&P 9mm Pro Series with the 4.25" barrel. I shoot this gun a lot and it is quite accurate, very pleasant to shoot, reliable, and just a general fun gun to own. I know there are a lot of people on these forums who have bought the Beretta and love it. Of course the Beretta is a double action hammer fired pistol whereas the M&P and the Walther are both classed as double action only striker fired designs.

So since I only have knowledge of the M&P, I'll go from there. The three I own include the above mentioned Pro Series, an M&P 40, and an M&P 45 full size with the 4" barrel. All are superb shooters. All carry well and all are reliable guns. The feel in the hand has been written as one of the best of the modern combat pistols and I have to agree with that. It is, in a word, excellent. They have replaceable backstraps and frankly the M&P is one darned good looking pistol. Pretty easy to take down, not as easy as a Glock, and easy to clean.

If you go with the M&P Pro, get the 4.25" barrel version and you will get true night sights. I haven't handled any recent versions of the M&P, so I can't speak of any improvements they've done to the trigger. I will say that when I got mine, the trigger was in dire need of smoothing out of its first stage (they have two-stage triggers). This is very simply done by installing an Apex Tactical USB (Ultimate Safety Block). The difference is phenomenal and totally worth it. But like I mentioned, it's quite possible that S&W has already corrected this. As for poundage, my 9mm Pro and my 40 both measure in at around 4 pounds 12 ounces to 4 pounds 14 ounces.

Good luck in your search and let us know which one wins you dollars.


----------



## berettatoter (Sep 1, 2011)

Well, as usual, I would go with the Beretta.


----------



## Donn (Jul 26, 2013)

This thread's gotten a little off track. Stoney asked for suggestions, not Gunsmith 101. Kind of like asking what time it is, and being told how to build a watch. Stoney, get a Glock or an M&P, whichever fits best. Both are dependable as the day is long.


----------



## SouthernBoy (Jun 27, 2007)

Donn said:


> This thread's gotten a little off track. Stoney asked for suggestions, not Gunsmith 101. Kind of like asking what time it is, and being told how to build a watch. Stoney, get a Glock or an M&P, whichever fits best. Both are dependable as the day is long.


Did you see my post #19 where I acknowledged my part in deviating from this thread's subject matter? While the information offered by myself and a few others is indeed valuable to people who may be new to all of this, it was a mistake to take the thread in that direction.


----------



## Stoney (Jul 21, 2013)

Actually, it's all good. I'm trying to absorb all of this and learn. Feel free to continue.

And thanks for your time and info.


----------



## Bisley (Aug 24, 2008)

I have no experience with the pistols you listed, so all I can suggest is that you also check out the Springfield XD and Glocks. Also, try some .45's. I prefer them to .40 S&W, personally, because they are more pleasant to shoot, over a long range session.


----------

