S&W Shield in 45

Has anyone shot the new Shield in 45acp? How does recoil compare to the 9mm version? Does it work with current Shield holsters in spite of the small changes in dimensions?  Enquiring minds want to know. 

Original Post

I haven't even handled one, but I do know that when I was shopping for a holster for the 9mm shield , I came accross holsters specifically marked for the .45.  This leads me to beleive that unlike the 9mm and .40, the .45 is not dimensionally identical.  Also, when you look at the barrel and slide combo in the 9mm vs. .40, I'm not sure  where S&W would pick up those extra milimeters.

Holsters.  When I got my 9mm Shield, we didn't have any holsters in stock.  I tried it in a DeSantis leather pancake holster made for the G26, which has a thicker slide.  It works just fine.  So if you go leather, a common holster between the .45 and 9mm is probably doable.  Not kydex.

-------------------------

Mark

Swear allegiance to the flag Whatever flag they offer

Never hint at what you really feel

Teach the children quietly For some day sons and daughters

Will rise up and fight while we stood still

 

Joined:  2/24/2003                          Location:  Nevada, USA

CWM11B posted:

The .45 is bigger. I shot one at an event. Meh. If you are locked in to  .45 ACP by logistics/preference/policy, go for it. Otherwise, I would get a 9.

CWM how 'bout some feedback, decent muzzle rise, semi-snappy like a .40 would be or ......

Joined: 3.28.09            

Location: NETX

As CWM11B alludes, this version of the gun may struggle to find relevance.

I still think that a longer and taller version in 9/40 would sell very well to those who appreciate slimness, and are realistic about capacity needs. A slim full or mid sized pistol would be a joy to carry IWB or OWB.

It would fill a gap between the duty sized M&P, and the ultra discreet sized Shield. The M&P FS is at it's best in a overt duty holster. The Shield is at its best as a BUG or for restricted environment carry, but is not an ideal choice for everyday CCW. The Shield fills the same role the J frame use to. The M&P "Compact " is not compact- it is just short- and thick.

A Shield variant with a 4-4.5" barrel and 1.0-1.1" longer grip would be ideal for all purpose CCW and field applications.

Basically a G19 sized pistol but with the slimness of the Shield. Slim is a virtue.

 

Longeye posted:

 

A Shield variant with a 4-4.5" barrel and 1.0-1.1" longer grip would be ideal for all purpose CCW and field applications. 

I would buy one of those!!!! I like my M&P 9c but as Longeye stated it is just shorter than the full size M&P 9.

MG in TX posted:
CWM11B posted:

The .45 is bigger. I shot one at an event. Meh. If you are locked in to  .45 ACP by logistics/preference/policy, go for it. Otherwise, I would get a 9.

CWM how 'bout some feedback, decent muzzle rise, semi-snappy like a .40 would be or ......

I shot one magazine through a .45 Shield.  Just 230gr ball.  Big time .45 guy but I can't see it unless as mentioned you are hip deep in .45ACP ammo.

The .40s are , to me, way too snappy and fire the most expensive of the three rounds.  They also compose the overwhelming majority of the Shields that have gone BOOM.

As mentioned ad nauseum and with departments flocking back to the 9mm, modern ammo has pretty much made 9/.40/.45 a wash ballistically.  This IMHO, pushes me to the 9mm.

In addition to mine being ghetto fabulous, there is a mod to the 8rd mags that I am trying out that reliably adds an additional round.  That means I can have 10 in my pistol and 18 more on me.  Very Connecticut attractive.   I do CCW my Shield quite a bit because of my needs.  I see the attraction of the Shield Plus or whatever you want to call it but if I don't have the Shield, I have my 1911.

-------------------------

IT'S A COLT.  THEY'RE LIKE THE HK OF GUNS.

 

I find it ironic that the colors RED, WHITE and BLUE stand for freedom until they are flashing behind you.

 

The Most Reverend Consig

 

"F**K YOU, I'M MILLWALL!!!"  Roy " The Lion of London Bridge"  Larner

 

 

 

 

Joined: 28 Nov 2004: 0037hrs        Location: The worst run state in the U.S

I could definitely see a "Commander size" Shield being real popular. Kahr made the T9 but it never quite sold as well as they thought it would, despite this being near identical to the size we're talking about.

 

A "Commander" size Shield would work well for people with small hands like my wife (the Shield with 8 round mags is a perfect fit for her, but she has issues gripping a G19 or similar, though the M&P with small backstrap works).

For those who just absolutely have to have a .45 I can see the attraction, otherwise....eh.

 

I've been carrying a .45 for 14 years and started switching to 9mm. I carry a .45 on duty now, because it's issued.....and we're slowly going to 9mm. Unless I got one free, you won't see me getting a Shield .45.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So low speed, i'm in Park.

"I could stand to hear a little more.." Jayne

Training is brief. Death is forever. PAY ATTENTION.

Joined: 6/14/03 1:02 PM

My friend has one. May get to shoot it this weekend. Anyone have a plug for spare Shield .45 mags?

"To be born free is an accident; to live free is a privilege; to die free is a responsibility." - Richard Secord

Joined 08/25/2008.   Location: Northest WI

MrMurphy posted:

I could definitely see a "Commander size" Shield being real popular. Kahr made the T9 but it never quite sold as well as they thought it would, despite this being near identical to the size we're talking about.

 

A "Commander" size Shield would work well for people with small hands like my wife (the Shield with 8 round mags is a perfect fit for her, but she has issues gripping a G19 or similar, though the M&P with small backstrap works).

For those who just absolutely have to have a .45 I can see the attraction, otherwise....eh.

 

I've been carrying a .45 for 14 years and started switching to 9mm. I carry a .45 on duty now, because it's issued.....and we're slowly going to 9mm. Unless I got one free, you won't see me getting a Shield .45.

Exactly what I was thinking.  I can't tell you how many women come into the store looking for a good, relatively inexpensive semi-auto that fits their hand.  The double stacks don't do it for persons with small hands.  I try very hard not to put guns into a "woman" category.  As someone I miss very much used to say, "Mission drives the gear".  That said, I think the two most popular guns for women, if they were made, would be a 9mm "Shield" with a 4" barrel and a longer grip.  Purely for manufacturing cost issues, if the grip was extended to fit the "extended" 8 rd magazine, that would probably be good.  Possibly a 9 or 10rd mag if it didn't make it too long.  And, a 4" .38 spl on an aluminum or scandium K frame, round butt. 

The concealed carry market has a lot of selections available, but they also come with the burden of more felt recoil and harder to use effectively.  At least half of the women who come in want something for the home, not for concealed carry.  But the full size pistols still don't fit them and K-frames are like finding hen's teeth now.

-------------------------

Mark

Swear allegiance to the flag Whatever flag they offer

Never hint at what you really feel

Teach the children quietly For some day sons and daughters

Will rise up and fight while we stood still

 

Joined:  2/24/2003                          Location:  Nevada, USA

prestonoconnor posted:

I was hoping for a pocket sized 45. I'd take it with a five round mag to make it more suitable for a pocket. I'm asking for a pocket 45 that takes 1911 mags for a reload and is reliable. I was already disappointed by a Kahr pm45

AMT 45 ACP Back-up. I have two that have never had issues, but they have a 'reputation'. They will take 1911 mags with a mode (slot in back of mag). Trigger pull on both new was 17lbs plus (the joke was they were the deadest gun, as you could run your trigger finger through a full grown man after firing 200 rounds because it was so strong (AKA Popeye finger). I love mine, some hate them, so YMMV.

Double action only, gutter sights, butt mag release, 24 oz unloaded. Small smooth package. Gutter sights have never been a problem (I've qualified many times with mine). Think thinner, smaller snub nose revolver with an extra round (6 total with one in the chamber) in a 'real' caliber. 

Heck, they are the same size as a Zippo lighter*, you can't beat that for 6 rounds of 45 ACP.

 

As far as the OP's question. I can't speak to the S&W, but my G-30 has fit in any holster labeled for a G-19, sometimes 'tight', but after a while, the fit and draw is just fine. 

 

 

 

*- I was saving that for April 1st, but figured I'd slip it in now. That is one giant-ass Zippo it is laying on.

________________________

"It's paranoia until something happens, then it is preparedness"

"It is not whether you're paranoid, it whether you're paranoid enough"

"When did you get so paranoid?" …When they started plotting against me.

Longeye posted:

As CWM11B alludes, this version of the gun may struggle to find relevance.

I still think that a longer and taller version in 9/40 would sell very well to those who appreciate slimness, and are realistic about capacity needs. A slim full or mid sized pistol would be a joy to carry IWB or OWB.

It would fill a gap between the duty sized M&P, and the ultra discreet sized Shield. The M&P FS is at it's best in a overt duty holster. The Shield is at its best as a BUG or for restricted environment carry, but is not an ideal choice for everyday CCW. The Shield fills the same role the J frame use to. The M&P "Compact " is not compact- it is just short- and thick.

A Shield variant with a 4-4.5" barrel and 1.0-1.1" longer grip would be ideal for all purpose CCW and field applications.

Basically a G19 sized pistol but with the slimness of the Shield. Slim is a virtue.

 

No surprise here, Longeye summed up my feelings nicely as it seems we've all been waiting for a G19 sized M&P.

Add the Shield's slimness & I'll have a new AIWB but until then it'll remain either one of my Shields or my 4.25" CORE, both in 9 & with optics.

Slight lane veer but Dorsai do you or any other SME's have a real feel for what Smith is planning w/ the M2.0 trademark?

Perhaps new M&P's intro'd @ SHOT to keep up w/ Gaston's new 17M or ......

Joined: 3.28.09            

Location: NETX

I shot one magazine of hardball 230 through it, hardly a workout. S&W manufacturer's event at a local indoor range. Paid five bucks for a magazine full. 

Prior to shooting it, I finger banged it a bit. The trigger felt better than on my 9, supposedly S&W polished these up a bit. Most notable was the grip stippling. Very nice and reminiscent of the Performance Center backstraps for the FS M&P (as an aside, I have asked our LE rep why those grips aren't standard on all the guns. Tried to buy one, he told me unobtanium, and that the PC held on to them with the passion of a hoarder, and did not want them out in the wild. Bureaucracy and territory protection are everywhere. I told him S&W could sell them at 10.00 a piece and cops would buy them like crazy. I scored one and every one who tries it wants one.)  I asked the commercial rep if all future iterations of the Shield would have the same pattern, and he did not know. If any one from Smith is watching this thread, do it.

Recoil was heavier than the nine, obviously, but not unmanageable. Much less snappy than the .40s I have shot. I am beyond over caliber discussion, so whatever floats your particular boat is what you should go for. Locked in to .45, get one, if not I would choose the 9 all day long. It should be a fine pistol with S&Ws excellent warranty, but I won't be buying one. 

Location: North Carolina

Ditto on the Pro Series Performance Center backstraps. They could be $20 a pop and they would still be a cheap upgrade.

The difference in gripability truly has to be experienced to be fully understood. It is not as good as a Ben Simonsen stipple job, but for a snap on upgrade, it is quantum leap forward.

At this point your only option is finding buddies with Pro series guns and talking them out of one of the two out of three grips they are not using.

Shot one today with 230+p and some reloads.   With the +p, recoil was stiff!  With the reloads, it was mild, actually pleasant and much nicer than .40.    Never get one on .40....   The stippling was significantly improved over my 9mm.   That needs to get spread around the M&P line.  

As far as accuracy, I shot 6 rounds of the +p into  a 6 inch group at 25 yards, albeit left of the bullseye.   It's a good shooting backup gun.  

"To be born free is an accident; to live free is a privilege; to die free is a responsibility." - Richard Secord

Joined 08/25/2008.   Location: Northest WI

So I picked up a Shield in .45 ACP with no thumb safety, added a set of Ameriglo night sights as well.  As a side note, had an issue with the MGW Shield sight pusher and could only use it to start the sights out of the dove tails and then used a brass punch to remove them.  Used a brass punch and homemade delrin/polymer punches to install the new night sights.

Shooting:  Fired approx. 300-350 rounds at first time shooting it, Winchester white box 230 grn, FMJ and Winchester 230 grn. JHP Ranger (duty ammo) for ammo.  It shot pretty good, a bit snappy compared to my 9mm Shields and G43, no hiccups or failures at all, not bragging, just didn't experience any issues.  The new trigger is quite improved, not gritty at all all, smoother take up, similar to an APEX in an M&P.  The new grip texture (factory stippling) was much improved, felt good and was definitely aggressive enough for my tastes that I won't need to send it to BoreSight Solutions...at least not now.   Just about everyone in our dept. training unit and range staff have  bought one, qualified with and are carrying the Shield .45.  Overall, it was pleasant shooting and shot well for me.

The reason I bought it- currently issued and carry S&W MP .45 full size with TLR-1 lights and .45 ammo is provided, so a small compact .45 was an easily justified addition for me.  It's still a bit big for BUG pocket carry (weight fully loaded is more than a 9mm Shield loaded), ankle carry is probably ok, but have not found an acceptable (to my standards/preferences) ankle rig, maybe I will contact John at 5 Shot Leather to see if he can accommodate me. So, I'm pleased with it for when I'm needing/wanting to pack  a smaller gun.  Still dig my 9mm Shield.  Just my thoughts and experience thus far.  It has not been carried much, still awaiting some Milt Sparks leather and JM Custom Kydex.

Add Reply

Copyright Lightfighter Tactical Forum 2002-2016
×
×
×
×
×