S&W Shield Coming in 45 ACP!

**jedi391** · 05-23-16, 13:45

Originally Posted by Norseman

While I highly doubt this would replace my Shield in 9mm for CCW, at least S&W is at least trying to be innovative and bring new stuff to an all ready saturated market. But I will be curious if it suffers the same lack luster response that the G36 seems to have suffered in terms of having a limited following.

Like Will stated above, choices are good.

I agree choices are good and if someone is happy this gun was released I'm glad for them, but I would prefer they leave the releasing of niche guns out and figure out what should be their most effective fighting platform, the standard size 9mm. I'm just irritated that they haven't released the GD barreled full size 9mm......which is probably making me more irritated wth this release then is fair.

**jedi391** · 05-23-16, 13:56

Originally Posted by tacticaldesire

People who want a subcompact .45

I don't get why this is such a concept. The market for this exists. Like is it really that confusing a major OEM would release a subcompact handgun in one of the top 3 service calibers?

I see your point but I wonder how much longer there will actually be a top 3 in practice. The .40 is fading pretty fast in a remarkably short period of time and the .45 as king is changing also at a remarkably rapid pace. Now that the military is beginning to abandon the .45 as well as most LE Agencies I think it will see a marked reduction in usage. I'm not saying it may all but disappear like I think the .40 will, the 1911 alone will ensure its continued use as well as history and nostalgia, and the fact that it's a solid performing round, but I could see it seeing just a fraction of service/duty use as compared to the 9mm. You can only fight progress so long. The only thing keeping .45 in my safe is the 1911. If I become convinced that 9mm 1911's are just as reliable as the .45, or I go to anything other then the 1911, I just can't find any performance based reason to go to anything other then 9mm.

**Norseman** · 05-23-16, 14:08

Originally Posted by jedi391

I agree choices are good and if someone is happy this gun was released I'm glad for them, but I would prefer they leave the releasing of niche guns out and figure out what should be their most effective fighting platform, the standard size 9mm. I'm just irritated that they haven't released the GD barreled full size 9mm......which is probably making me more irritated wth this release then is fair.

Forgive my ignorance, but what is the bolded?

I do agree the standard size 9mm handguns are the most efficient defensive firearms in today's world when looking at it with a wide optic and most people are very well served with this combo in terms of overall benefit. But, that does not render the 45 obsolete, at least not to my way of thinking.

But I also think that we(as in the shooting community) have a tendency to overthink these things. Lord knows I am guilty of that.

**jedi391** · 05-23-16, 14:24

Originally Posted by Norseman

Forgive my ignorance, but what is the bolded?

I do agree the standard size 9mm handguns are the most efficient defensive firearms in today's world when looking at it with a wide optic and most people are very well served with this combo in terms of overall benefit. But, that does not render the 45 obsolete, at least not to my way of thinking.

But I also think that we(as in the shooting community) have a tendency to overthink these things. Lord knows I am guilty of that.

It's referring to the 2nd Gen M&P that Smith has reportedly developed for the Army trials. They have contracted with General Dynamics to make the barrels, many think this is because the Army specified accuracy of 4 inches at 50 meters which the current full size 9 has no chance of meeting. A few agencies around me are expecting to be fielding them instead of their .40 M&P's in about a year.

Out of curiosity what do you feel the .45 brings to the table that modern 9mm doesn't? I was surprised by it a few years ago to, but in all my research round for round....take Federal HST for example, the .45 doesn't do anything better then the 9mm except create heavier recoil, slower follow up shots, and a reduced capacity. Now you go FMJ and this changes significantly and I know some report shooting the .45 more accurately.

**Norseman** · 05-23-16, 15:13

Originally Posted by jedi391

It's referring to the 2nd Gen M&P that Smith has reportedly developed for the Army trials. They have contracted with General Dynamics to make the barrels, many think this is because the Army specified accuracy of 4 inches at 50 meters which the current full size 9 has no chance of meeting. A few agencies around me are expecting to be fielding them instead of their .40 M&P's in about a year.

Out of curiosity what do you feel the .45 brings to the table that modern 9mm doesn't? I was surprised by it a few years ago to, but in all my research round for round....take Federal HST for example, the .45 doesn't do anything better then the 9mm except create heavier recoil, slower follow up shots, and a reduced capacity. Now you go FMJ and this changes significantly and I know some report shooting the .45 more accurately.

Thanks for the clarification, I have not been paying much attention to the handgun trials and was unaware of the finer details.

As to what the 45 brings to the table that 9 does not, nothing really from a practical standpoint. Yes, the 45 in FMJ flavor is probably, albeit only slightly, better ballistically speaking. But not enough to really matter in the real world in my humble nobody opinion. I could say that in my hands the 45 is more accurate, but that would not be a fair comparison for me to make, since all my 45's are relatively high end 1911's and my 9's are not, so not really fair in that regards.

But the reason why I feel that the 45 is far from being obsolete is because we (again, generally speaking) as a shooting community continue to make it relevant. It is still a good defensive round for those that choose it, regardless of the reasons as to why and if it is agreeable to all. The 9 has gained a lot over the years, but the 45 has not really lost any of its performance. Speaking to on target performance of course. Now when considering weight, capacity, etc. etc., well that is a whole separate topic.

The one place that I do think the Shield 45 will shine is for those folks that have hands large enough to not be able to truly be able to operate guns the size of the smaller Shield or 43 to their best potential. This will give those folks another option to look at and that is a good thing.

**C4IGrant** · 05-23-16, 15:35

I touched it at the NRA convention. Really liked the new frame texturing.

C4

**tacticaldesire** · 05-23-16, 15:49

Originally Posted by Chrisreedrules

The market for a subcompact .45 exists mostly due to the fact that people who want them or "swear by" the .45 round is rife with the uneducated and the relatively inexperienced. 9mm is the new gold standard round for ccw and defense and it has been for years. If you like .45, buy a 1911. Otherwise, meh...

I will agree that for most people and situations 9mm is king. I'm not one of those cliche neckbeards "cause they don't make a .46 shootin twice is stupid" guys but I do acknowledge the purpose behind this new offering. Theres still a number of agencies issuing .45s, mine included, and this offers agencies and individual officers an off duty/back up option that uses their duty load along with those who still carry 45s for whatever reason be it personal or professional. It's not going to tickle many here's fancy but there is a legitimate market.

**JC5188** · 05-23-16, 16:10

Originally Posted by jedi391

I see your point but I wonder how much longer there will actually be a top 3 in practice. The .40 is fading pretty fast in a remarkably short period of time and the .45 as king is changing also at a remarkably rapid pace. Now that the military is beginning to abandon the .45 as well as most LE Agencies I think it will see a marked reduction in usage. I'm not saying it may all but disappear like I think the .40 will, the 1911 alone will ensure its continued use as well as history and nostalgia, and the fact that it's a solid performing round, but I could see it seeing just a fraction of service/duty use as compared to the 9mm. You can only fight progress so long. The only thing keeping .45 in my safe is the 1911. If I become convinced that 9mm 1911's are just as reliable as the .45, or I go to anything other then the 1911, I just can't find any performance based reason to go to anything other then 9mm.

What do you base these assumptions on? Do you have any data to back them up?

The .40 all but disappearing? .45 relegated to only 1911's? Yes, 9mm outsells the others, but that doesn't mean anything is disappearing.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk