Thanks guys. A910, believe me I / my department am not perfectly fine with the VP9, nor are we necessarily hesitant with the M&P. Frankly I wish it were easier sometimes to make some changes at an agency like mine, but that is not the case. I want to make sure all our homework is done here, and all our ducks in a row before I recommend anything to our officers that their lives may depend on. It's simply being thorough.
To share a little more info: Our firearms are officer-owned. We allow Glocks in 9, 40 and 45. A few old timers carry other guns that were grandfathered in, mainly Smith and Wesson 5906s. We aren't looking to replace guns en masse, simply to allow officers another option or two. Currently, all our recruits must buy Glock 17s or 19s when they start. I'd like to see them all start and train on a department gun, and when they finish academy, field training and we know they are going to "make it" give them a few months to check out one or two of the other options before they finally make a purchase.
The criteria was really put into place by Glock's shortcomings (and don't get me wrong, I like Glocks a lot). The well-documented .40 caliber / WML issues was something our department struggled with. Two years ago we were a 60% .40 cal shooting department. We gave our officers a chance to buy new Gen 4 17s or 19s with a payroll deduction option, our vendor paid each officer $300 for their G22s and G23s, and all but a handful took advantage of it. We are now a 90%+ 9mm shooting agency (and we have a ton of .40 cal sitting in our armory collecting dust now...). We have had a few sporadic issues with trigger reset on the Gen4 Glocks, nothing widespread though. The biggest turn off was their complete lack of willingness to address or even acknowledge the problem with their .40 cal guns when used with WML. We had dozens of these guns not running right, and were told that officers were limp wristing, that we were running the wrong light, etc. It seems they had adopted the "we hate you, you suck" customer service policy that once ruled HK.
The other criteria is grip size / modularity. As much as we have generally been pleased with Glock, their innovation is actually not that impressive. Their grip panels change length of pull, but that's it. Both the M&P, VP9 and some others allow a greater range of grip adjustment. Even with all the Glock grip pieces removed, the Gen 4 Glocks are still far too large for many of our smaller officers. Some officers have gotten grip reductions on their own dime with special approval and more and more need them done, as we aren't just hiring military vets and 602 / 200 lb men anymore.
Anyways, the VP9 proposal was floated by another officer. I was skeptical myself at first, but after really diving into it, I walked away quite impressed. So impressed I went out and bought one to check out - and I haven't bought any pistol but a Glock for the last 12 years. The gun has been out for over a year, and I have yet to find any complaints of reliability or fit/finish issues. As mentioned, the gun has been in development for several years, and the magazines and other design features come from the P30. Barrels are hand-fitted, accuracy is excellent. Frankly, HK has a solid reputation for reliable handguns.
As for the M&P, the reason I ask because in my research, and now in a few messages I have gotten from this board and others, there have been some problems where departments have not been satisfied with their purchase and sent a whole bunch back. I realize every gun has potential problems, but I want to know what those issues are BEFORE experiencing them. Doesn't mean I'd say no to an M&P either. What I don't want to happen is hear that it's all rainbows and unicorns, and then run into a WML issue like we had with Glock, where they blow smoke up my ass.
There are other pistols out there, but without a doubt, Glock, M&P are the market-share leaders, and the VP9 has some pretty nice features that is appealing. I'm not against looking at other guns, but on initial look these seem to be the best options out there. Of course, some of that is subjective. And as I said, we aren't replacing all our guns, simply looking to have another option or two to better serve our officers.
