They have VERY limited aftermarket support (i.e. holsters, magazines, sights), they are a pretty large handgun, and in my experience owning an FNP 46 non-tactical, they aren't very reliable. The magazine interior length isn't long enough to feed 230 grain ball ammo from many manufacturers consistently.
Now, they are very comfortable an ergonomic, and with 185's they can be very accurate.
Personally, I'd get an HK45 tactical or USP 45 tactical.
I generally agree with the above post. They are big. Really big. As such, most feel they are very soft-shooting.
There are also known issues with some "American made" factory ammo not fitting in the mags.
Why? The truth is they made that pistol to a NATO standard. But not all ammo is equal. Especially in America. The concepts of "target" ammo and low-power charges caused some issues. But the truth is that is more a reflection of US bastardized ammo. Not the FNP.
I'm not totally up on all the model iteration from FN but I believe the magazine issue was found in the FNP-Tactical. I think the FNX is an update from that line with different dimensions. But I could very well be wrong.
The FNP-45 Tactical is a very interesting pistol when you realize why it was built. The US Army issued a RFP for a JSP (Joint Service Pistol) a few years ago. The yelling and bitching about the Beretta's finally got someone at DoD to look for a JSP replacement. The funny thing is, that RFP had too many chiefs and not enough indians. They started from the concept of 45 since that seemed to be the most pubic complaint about the M9. Then they went and added all the supposed "features" one would like in a MODERN 1911. Ambi-controls. DA/SA & Cocked & Locked. Polymer frame with strong checkering. Trigger-guard that accommodates gloves. And why we are at it, threaded barrel for suppressor options and RDS capable with BUIS factory standard. External hammer, etc. etc, etc.
I am sure I am forgetting some things since I haven't seen the RFP for a while. But...FNH basically said, "OK. Let's give the Americans what they want". So they built the FNP-45 Tactical. My memory fails me, but the RDS might not have been on the list. And there might have been a grip-safety option in the RFP.
Regardless...what you get is a pistol that is a Frankenstein. Features from a 100 year old design that Looks good on paper, but in reality isn't practical for service use.
What ultimately killed the JSP project was when certain SME's from various Army units were asked for their input. Those groups indicated they liked a different platform and a different caliber.
That (plus money) killed the program. The project managers realized the specs of the RFP weren't really what was wanted by the experts, which equals asses hanging in breezes. The program was shutdown with the commentary, "We (The Army) are a rifle service. Let someone else select a JSP".
My only advice on getting one would be to buy a F-ton of mags. Just incase it gets shut-down by FN. Which it will one day.
What would save the mags from disappearing would be if FNH comes out with a FN-45 that is striker-fired using the same mags. I can't recall if they have or not.
I'm not even sure if the FNP-45 will fit in IDPA / USPSA size boxes. I think it does not.
TTR