M&P Shield 380 EZ

Status
Not open for further replies.
The target buyer for this gun is most likely first time gun owner, probably female. They are really stressing that the slide is easy to rack, the magazines are easy to load and the gun is easy to tear down to clean. Recoil should be pretty soft and the grip safety will make a gun newbie feel more comfortable with 1 in the chamber. It has an internal hammer and the mention a light, crisp trigger so the slide action must cock the hammer most of the way. It does not have the trigger with the center blade so the grip safety probably blocks the hammer from falling if its dropped It actually looks a lot like and is dimensionally pretty close to the M&P compact 22. Statistically, females are the fastest growing segment of gun ownership . A smallish, but not too small easy to operate, light recoiling gun is just what they are looking for. I bet they sell a bunch
 
ah, I don't think this will be a good seller at all. The lc380 is hard to move, gun stores wont give much on trade in for them either. Now if that grip safety was a cocking mechanism, allowing for a great trigger... that's another story.
 
That grip safety looks like someone struggling to put a Ruger Mkiii back together. I don't mind the gun but that looks a bit goofy imho.
 
I think this one's going to be a "miss." As mentioned, the LC380 has that caliber-to-size option covered, and there still doesn't appear to be throngs of people lining up for them (though I found it intriguing, but never explored as I already have a Bersa in that category.)

This would make more sense to me if it were done either as a simple Shield caliber change, or as it is now with a manual safety and no grip safety. But, with the BG already out there in .380, I don't see this one doing any better than Ruger's "second" .380 pistol.
 
ah, I don't think this will be a good seller at all. The lc380 is hard to move, gun stores wont give much on trade in for them either. Now if that grip safety was a cocking mechanism, allowing for a great trigger... that's another story.
Its supposed to have a light trigger
 
I'm not sure that the LC380 is a serious competitor. In a couple of consumer tests I've seen, the LC380's looong trigger pull made it an absolute no go. Some thought the gun was broken because they pulled the trigger but not all the way back far enough to fire.
Plus, trying to fumble with the tiny thumb safety was a deal beaker.
 
The closest match in specifications (size, weight, barrel length, capacity) is Walther's PK380. It's actually bigger than a 9 mm Shield. If it matched Kahr's CT380, I'd be interested.
 
What a strange pistol. 380acp single stack, midsized, internal hammer and grip safety. I was hoping they would just make a 380 option for the normal shield.
I want. Sounds like a perfect companion for these .380 (one even has a grip safety!):

a1.jpg
 
I don't think they're going to be an any danger of selling too many of those!
 
I think this one's going to be a "miss." As mentioned, the LC380 has that caliber-to-size option covered, and there still doesn't appear to be throngs of people lining up for them (though I found it intriguing, but never explored as I already have a Bersa in that category.)
I think this pistol will be a huge home run for S&W. The LC380 is actually too small to appeal to the S&W pistol's target market, which is mainly casual users looking for a self-defense gun for the nightstand, glovebox, or purse rather than an on-person concealed carry pistol. The S&W also apparently has a short, light, single-action trigger, which will be more appealing to the target audience than the LC380's longer, heavier trigger.

This would make more sense to me if it were done either as a simple Shield caliber change, or as it is now with a manual safety and no grip safety. But, with the BG already out there in .380, I don't see this one doing any better than Ruger's "second" .380 pistol.
I suspect there would be substantial engineering challenges involved in a straight caliber conversion of the striker-fired Shield from 9mm to .380.

The grip safety makes a lot of sense as a simple automatic safety on a hammer-fired pistol with a short, light trigger; the thumb safety is the extra -and optional- safety.
 
Based only on my experience of shooting and gun shopping with my wife, what is going to make or break this pistol is the Trigger Reach. If they are going to market that the controls are easily manipulated by someone with limited hand strength, might as well make it really fit someone with smaller hands. This gun is already not going to be popular with men and women that comfortably grab onto and operate your average 9mm pistol anyway... so I hope it REALLY fits smaller hands! Let the small handers know what good ergonomics feels like. A gun that fits your hand perfectly is a great feeling.
 
Last edited:
I have an older female friend who wants low recoil, easy to rack, and doesn't like a gun without a safety (except revolvers of course). I think she may be the target market, and I just suggested she look into it for a future carry option. To me this looks like it fills a niche.
 
I'm not sure that the LC380 is a serious competitor. In a couple of consumer tests I've seen, the LC380's looong trigger pull made it an absolute no go. Some thought the gun was broken because they pulled the trigger but not all the way back far enough to fire.
Plus, trying to fumble with the tiny thumb safety was a deal beaker.

That's my thought. The LC380 is not in the same league as this Smith, which is more along the lines of a Beretta 84, Sig 232, CZ83 in terms of size and purpose. This Smith strikes me as targeting the more recoil-sensitive who want a gun that can be carried, but it still pleasant on the range. Being locked breech, I bet it shoots softer than either of those premium metal framed blowback guns, too.

It also occurs to me that S&W may have their eye on the European market with this, too. It's definitely more that speed, those similar .380s pretty well all coming from there.

Frankly, I'm not sure what Ruger was trying to do with the LC380. It's in between the class sizes of deep concealment .380s and range friendly .380s, making it not great for either.
 
Last edited:
I'm sure that S&W did some serious market research before designing a new gun. They know exactly what demographic group they are trying to reach and I bet they have done the research to find out what that targeted group wants in a gun.
 
Anybody else notice that the S&W email that went out about this used 'M&P' as the brand, with 'Smith and Wesson' nowhere to be found? Seems almost like they're trying to do what Dodge did with Ram, or Yamaha did with Star, and turn the line into its own brand... jpeg.jpg
 
I'm not sure that the LC380 is a serious competitor.
+ the Smith has a Picatinny-style equipment rail for lights which many folks will say is a good idea for home defense gun.

I know of 4 new female shooters that bought sig P238's based on the sole factor that they could manipulate the slide. If the M&P has as easy to operate slide at a price point under the sig then i have no doubt they will sell to that type of consumer.
 
Last edited:
They are paying attention to buyer demographics. Marketing will be key. With no disrespect intended, a "Lady Smith" version in different colors might do well.

It's a business; their goal is to make money.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top