I like the idea but wish it was more the size of the Kahr PM9. I would sell my Kahr in a heartbeat if it was but the Shield is too big for pocket carry. While it is considerably smaller than the MP9c I find the 9c is perfectly fine to carry with lighter clothing in the hot Arizona summers so it really wouldn't fill a role that I don't already have covered.
Last edited by BMcDonald7; 04-22-12 at 17:49.
First I guess I will note what the M&P Shield actually is: A striker fired pistol, ala glock/M&P/WaltherPPQ/etc. It has the same safety mechanisms as the above. No "double-strike" capability.*1 Notably it includes the trigger bar striker channel block feature and will not fire w/o the trigger depressed*2
The slide houses a double spring similar to compact glocks and other manufacturers reduced format pistols.
The take-down lever has an internal extension that marries with the cut out in the slide, not as in most full-size pistols where the external lever fits. The slide goes farther to the rear of the cutout than one may initially think.
The safety is quite positive and unobtrusive. I find it easy to sweep off. However, I imagine many experienced striker fired pistol users will keep their usual manual of arms, during holster carry, and will leave it off and be confident in it staying there.
The slide release is indeed on the Left side only. I can't imagine how this would dissuade any user, as few proficient pistoleers use a release for reloading procedures.*3
The sights are metal with white painted three dots, and could serve well w/o replacement. Nice in this day of usual plastic crap-tacular freeware. The dovetails look as if they might take regular M&P sights, but I haven't checked. At a later date a tritium front might be a nice touch. The rears, if they fit, from a standard M&P would likely be too wide w/o modification.
So how does it run? I always put 500rd through a weapon before declaring it's fitness. Also include a grouping test within the first and last 25rds. When time permits will let you know.
*1 Double-strike capability= gibberish. Certainly pulling the trigger twice is not part of any reasonable remedial action procedure.
*2 IMO necessary for confident appendix carriers. You can take a baseball bat in the gut and not worry about a discharge.
*3 Some malfunction drills indeed use a release. IMO this is contrived circumstance in modern pistols with integral smooth feedramps. Esp striker fired ones with little jump from mag to chamber. In several hundreds of thousands of rounds I have never seen this actual malfunction when not induced.
I put another 200 rounds through my Shield today for a total of just under 800rds. I had 1 failure to extract with a Blazer aluminium 115gr ball round. It made it about 1/2 to 2/3 of the way out of the chamber. I reduced the malfunction and went on shooting without examining the fired case. The FTE occurred halfway through my 200 round session and there were no problems with the other rounds. May have been a bad round or a fluke, but I'm going to shoot the gun quite a bit more before I carry it.
I also painted the dot on the front sight orange and blacked out the rear two dots to make the sight picture more like what I am used to until the night sights come out.
I have no doubt our definitions of proficient or pistoleer diverges widely.*
This thread is about the technical merits of the pistol. If you wish to discuss the merit of some particular technique a PM is a more appropriate venue. There are a litany of reasons (tactical, diagnostic, speed & efficacy of motion) the release is not preferred by some. The bullet and clock tell the truth & are excellent sounding boards.
If I knowingly go through a door in in armed conflict, I choose a pistol more optimized for use, not carry or concealment. Something with a decent reserve of smartpills, complete with all modern accoutrements, that could be used by either hand w/o significant penalty.
However, a pistol optimized toward carry.. is exactly that.
For example, the Diamondback 9mm at .80" & 11 oz and no external controls is certainly optimized for concealed carry but may be a bit light in ergonomics for some once employed. The M&P Shield is angled more toward shootability, and thus bulkier, but is an excellent position in the shootability/concealability slope.
* I would count the top 5% of the top tier users.
Totally understandable. I won't say it can be done, because I haven't confirmed it and haven't seen anyone else confirm it, but I'm pretty positive the safety can be safely removed.
Another issue - which sucks because it's such a low capacity pistol - but I would most certainly down-load any spare mags by at least one round for my wife. It's damn near impossible to seat a fully loaded mag on a closed slide.
And yes... I've tried hitting it with my purse, my eyeliner, and my sandy vagina - that's not the issue - before anyone goes there...
I will confirm that it will fit in holsters made for the M&P compact, but not very well (this could vary by maker). It rattles a lot, but it does click in place. I had my favorite holster maker whip this little diddy up though. Lucky for me, they had them in stock...
Maybe it's just that I'm used to Glocks, or maybe I'm an idiot, but the Shield I checked out at a local shop, I couldn't get the slide to lock back on every attempt when safety checking it.
Is it a bit of a pain to lock back the slide on a Shield or is it just me?
Based on my experience with it, I have no idea how my wife would manage that since she can barely lock back the slide on a Glock and those are pretty easy.
And yep, as others have noted, the trigger was a bit gritty, but not terrible.
Last edited by feedramp; 04-23-12 at 14:04.
I have no problem locking the slide to the rear on my Shield.
Presence/absence of magazine and safety on/off doesn't impact slide lock on the Shield, correct?
Couple of comments.
The dual recoil spring has stages to it so like another poster said, make sure you retract the slide fully. There is a "hitch" to the slide travel because of the progressive spring system.
I took photos of the sear housing block for inquiring minds. Please note, the sear present in the photos is not the factory sear, it is a spare Pro sear i had lying around. I am in the process of experimenting with the gun to see what parts it will take.
For anyone that thinks this trigger is "good"...uh..meh.
It is a step in the right direction but it still sucks. The triggers are VERY gritty and VERY heavy out of the box. My sample was reading 6.5 lbs before i started to dry fire it.
Smith STILL hasnt gotten the clue that their striker safety plunger geometry sucks whale balls. You can feel the grit and the hitch as the trigger bar rides over the plunger. Now, having said this, due to the new geometry on the trigger bar AND the physical trigger itself, pre travel is lessened so the overall feeling is better since you're not crunching through as much travel.
The best part about this revision if we can call it that is the physical trigger. The new hinge makes the pre travel FEEL significantly shorter so prepping and pressing through your break is awfully easy with this thing.
The next best part is the fact that a dimple has been added to the trigger bar which puts tension on the bar as it rests underneath the sear. There is also something else at work here that is contributing to the slightly more forceful reset. Is it a Glock? No, but the trigger now resets with a little more authority. I dont care if i "feel" it, i just want the trigger pushing against me rather than hanging anemically in space like on a factory M&P.
The gun has a lot of potential but Apex parts are still a HUGE boon to the platform.
More to come as i get more time on the platform.
Last edited by Magsz; 04-24-12 at 00:16.
I thought the trigger was very workable and the money spent on more Apex stuff would be better spent on ammo.
I hope people don't end up trying to make this gun something it's not...
There is that too... Do I want a 4# Apex trigger in my pocket?
I am just fine with a slightly heavier trigger on a gun that is sized just right to really lock it the **** down. Small guns, to an extent, are much easier to clamp in your hands negating the heavier trigger.
Sack up and just shoot it.
I think I see what the lock-back catch problem was now: The slide lock doesn't line up with the groove in the slide that I thought it should, like it does with most guns, where the lock fits up into the visible groove. Instead, the lock position is actually further forward in an indeterminate spot with no visual cue. Weird. Maybe an M&P thing? I've not handled one before.
Im sorry guys but this is not necessarily a BUG. It is whatever you make it and BUG or not, why would you NOT set the gun up for success?
Why fight a trigger if you dont have to? The gun weighs 19 ounces, you CANNOT dispute that a 6.5 lb trigger makes it harder to shoot. Im sorry but fundamentals are exercised in a critical incident, they are NOT practiced during that time...
Most of you guys sit here and talk endlessly about which connector you run in your Vampire Slaying Evil Doer Defeater Glock yet we cant talk about modifying a gun of this size? Puhlease.
I appreciate the pep talk and i will harden up, tough it out and work on my ninja rolls and tactical backflips.
Or...i think i am going to make this gun as shootable as i WANT to make it so long as there is no compromise in reliability. The DCAEK comes to mind and works marvelously in this capacity while providing a 5.5 trigger for those of you worried about "light" triggers.
Yeah...my observations still stand