|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Member
Another vote for the Shield, IMO it handles the 9mm better. I also am not a fan of the LC9' trigger. I have prob close to 1000 rounds through my Shield 9mm without an issue. I have an INCOG for my G19 and was thinking about grabbing one for my Shield, that holster is amazing.
Senior Member
I carried a Centennial J-Frame as a back up and off duty gun for over 15 years. There are so many great options now. This is a great problem to have. Who remembers when a Detonics was a small gun!
I do and I am glad I have my 9mm Shield!
I carry a 9mm Shield in my right front pocket off duty and in my left front pocket on duty. It was my first 9mm carry gun. I shot the .40 and 9mm side by side and there was enough of a difference in follow up shots that I chose the 9mm. I carry it with the flush 7 round magazine and carry the 8 round mag as a spare with another in the arm rest of my vehicle. I am more accurate with he Shield at distance than the J-Frame or the G27 over 20 years combined. I feel like the Shield is a sweet spot for me. The Shield is a much thinner gun and more comfortable in my pocket. Carries enough rounds and my 12 year old shoots it well too. The .40 was fine with me but would have been unbearable for him. He is my shooting buddy!
Last edited by usmcvet; 04-24-15 at 09:11.
"Real men have always needed to know what time it is so they are at the airfield on time, pumping rounds into savages at the right time, etc. Being able to see such in the dark while light weights were comfy in bed without using a light required luminous material." -Originally Posted by ramairthree
Dealer
Shield.
C4
Site Sponsor
I look forward to trying the Tuck when Brown delivers it. I'm pretty sure my Shield does slide lock after the last round strong hand only with either of the mags. If it doesn't lock back I'll report back in a few days.
Originally Posted by yat-yas
Senior Member
Downsize further and get a P238. Same size hole, smaller package. Shot placement is key. No more polymer frame handguns for me.
I'm gonna turn on broken-record mode to state that Smith and Wesson, IMHO, has not produced a superior semi since the 59/69 series. It started with the "Me too!" (Glock) Sigma, and in my opinion hasn't gotten any better. Shield loving haters gonna hate. Just speaking my mind.
Dealer
We have seen to many of these pistols (P238) not run. Pass on them.
The Shield is one of the best pistols to come out in a long time. We sell a lot of them, use them personally and rarely seen any kind of issues with them.
C4
Senior Member
My experiences with my P238s have been flawless (except for the one I bought with a sticky trigger). I don't doubt that S&W makes a quality gun. I would buy a Shield over a Kel-Tec, Ruger, etc... any day. I trust my life on numerous occasions to a 638. Maybe I'm just old fashioned, but I think that polymer framed handguns are NOT here to stay, and as the cost of superior material processing continues to plummet, they will eventually become a forgotten chapter in firearm history. The future are MMCs my friends.
Here's a recent quote from Superman Costa:
"The past few handgun classes I’ve taught I’ve seen a quality issue with Smith an Wesson M&P handguns. This is the 3rd gun in 9mm I’ve seen shotgun the target at 7 yards. Barrels are breaking apart at the crown an numerous malfunctions. No mods were done to the weapons an all 3 were newer weapons with less than 500 through them, so keep a watchful eye."
Ammo was a combination of Fed, CCI, and PMC.
EDIT: I realize that isn't a quote about the Shield, but I felt it relevant enough to post since they're in the same family.
Last edited by Shao; 04-24-15 at 10:09.
Senior Member
I personally own three Shield's. My first Shield was out of the initial batch of guns shipped when the Shield was announced at the 2012 NRA show. The second was purchased for the wife in late 2013. The last is one of the guns without the external safety.
All three guns function without issue. The triggers were workable as they came from the factory, unlike the full size M&P9's of the same generation. I installed APEX hard earn in each gun though, just because I wanted to make a good thing better.
My agency has about 90-100 officers who have qualified on personally owned Shield 9mm's as either a BUG or an off-duty gun. No issues noted by the range staff or the armors so far. These officers would go to one of the armors with issues first. Mainly because department armors are FREE. They maintain over 1,100 full size M&P9's, so they are well trained with the system from the factory.
The Shield feels and shoots like a full size gun, that happens to be smaller.
I have only about 100 rds on a Ruger LC9s. it was "ok", but not even close to the Shield in my opinion.
Dealer
If you look at the fact that the 1911 design is typically not as reliable as say a Glock or M&P and then you miniturize it and change the caliber, you are kind of asking for a gun that won't run over the long haul (or at all).
I am as well a fan of the old school S&W metal guns (own some). They are great. They are however heavy and most people are seriously into saving weight. If I see one more 280-350lbs fat guy tell me that he cannot hide a G19 or M&P compact, I am going to explode!
There is a long run of M&P's with inaccurate barrels. I know this because I fit barrels to them so they shoot sub 1" groups at 25yds. With that said, S&W has been making several changes to their barrel over the last 6-8 months that has improved their accuracy. We also see inaccurate Glock's that shoot 10 inches high at 25yds too. The shields have never exhibited any accuracy issues to our knowledge. Mine (with factory barrel) shoots 1.5" groups at 25yds.
C4
Senior Member
Glad you added the adverb typically in there. Comparing Glocks to the gamut of 1911s out there in reliability terms just isn't fair. With so many manufacturers, aftermarket parts, incompetent smiths, and ridiculously tight tolerances that rule the 1911 market today, you'll never know what you're going to end up with until you've put enough rounds dowrange to trust it. I don't think that the 1911 is an inherently less reliable design - it's just the fact that everyone and their mothers are making them or piecing them together from parts that may not totally be in-spec. I will agree that out of the box, a Glock is almost guaranteed to work flawlessly every time and that greatly helps its reputation of reliability. Not all 1911 makers are going to have the same level of quality control as the next.
A Glock and a high-end 1911 are like machetes to me. Both tools. The Glock is a Cold Steel - it will do the job and do it well but it feels cheap in my hands. A high-end 1911 is like a Bark River Golok - it will do the job, do it well, and feels great while you're doing it.
Anyway, it's a never-ending debate and I feel like I'm turning this into a 1911 vs Glock thread. It's really all about the polymer to me. I've been on a serious anti-polymer frame handgun campaign since my best friend's 1st Gen Glock 21's trigger guard just snapped for no apparent reason during a shoot in the woods. I have my own stories, but I don't feel like repeating them again. I have and use polymer framed handguns, but I consider them disposable tools - like a hardware store machete, they get the job done.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks