I don't understand the popularity of the M&P Shield guns.

[KarateHottie93]

I just picked mine up earlier and it's a 40 Shield M2.0. It's used but not well used. I got it next to my only other polymer striker fired at the moment, the XD-S 45. Well actually it's on top of it because I was amused by how well the sights fit together on these two guns...like a little puzzle.

Me being a dumbass out the way though, it just feels cheap compared to the XD-S. Trigger is bad (at least to me) and pulling the slide back feels clunky when you get to the last bit of travel. The plastic itself looks and feels to be of a lower quality. Even the slide stop is incredibly stiff, due to the actual slide stop being a ways out from the super tiny button itself. I've shot both of these models of firearms quite a bit. I bought the XD-S 45 because I've wanted one ever since falling in love with shooting someone else's. I saw this one go up for auction on a local FFL's website and I had to pay over $100 extra out the door vs what a brand new one would've cost when it was still being made. I bought the 40 Shield because I needed a small 40 S&W and I won it on the same website for $276 out the door. These guns had a similar MSRP at launch.

I like S&W. I think their revolvers in general are the overall best of the mass produced ones. These M&P's feel overrated though. I'm not saying they're bad guns or that they're unreliable. I just don't get how they sale so well when the MSRP isn't far off from other guns I think look, feel, and shoot way nicer. Plus the used market is so flooded with them that you can find all but the latest and greatest (which changes quite often with these guys) for next to nothing quite often.

 

[WheelGunMan]

When you've put some rounds down range with it and carried it a bit then you'll see.

 

[NIGHTLORD40K]

Also not a fan. Feels crude and cheap next to a Glock or XD, terrible triggers.

My buddy has one, wouldn't fire brand new out of the box. The trigger bar cam was out of spec, and you could pull the trigger all the way until it bottomed out on the frame and it wouldn't trip the sear.
There are Ytube videos on how to fix it, which we did fairly easily, but the fire control unit design doesn't impress me at all.

 

[tactikel]

I have a SA XD-45 with 5K rounds thru her. I prefer the Shield (Gen 1) for my EDC over SAs because: manual safety, no grip safety, slimmer, decent round count 8+1, great selection of holsters and aftermarket upgrades.
It points true, is very accurate, last FTF was 2500 rounds ago. My Wife’s EDC is a Shield too, we share magazines and holsters.

 

[jmr40]

I like the M&P well enough. Never shot the Shield. If I were looking for a less expensive option I've been impressed with some of the Ruger's.

 

[Spats McGee]

I’ve had a 9mm 1.0, a 4” 2.0 .45, and a Plus. Originally, the biggest selling point was the ergonomics. Shields fit me as though they were specifically made for my hands. After carrying the 1.0 for a couple of years, I was sold on them. It was 100% reliable, and I shot it better than my g19. The .45 and the Plus have been “good” and “excellent,” (respectively) in reliability, recognizing that I don’t have as many rounds through them. And there’s a 4” Shield Plus on my Want List.

I freely admit I’m a fan, but it’s no skin off my nose if your mileage varies.

 

[KarateHottie93]

When you've put some rounds down range with it and carried it a bit then you'll see.

Well I plan on carrying it a good bit because I like the 40. I just don't know what's gonna blow my mind about it. I've shot a lot of different Shields at the range. They all just seemed good and reliable, but basic and somewhat lacking.

 

[KarateHottie93]

I have a SA XD-45 with 5K rounds thru her. I prefer the Shield (Gen 1) for my EDC over SAs because: manual safety, no grip safety, slimmer, decent round count 8+1, great selection of holsters and aftermarket upgrades.
It points true, is very accurate, last FTF was 2500 rounds ago. My Wife’s EDC is a Shield too, we share magazines and holsters.

I don't care too much for manual safeties but grip safeties don't really bother me. To me it's just there.

 

[Ethan Verity]

This M&P bashing thread is hurting my feelings, lol... I love mine! I do agree about the triggers though, I ended up putting Apex triggers in mine (like most people do with them). They are excellent now! 5k+ rounds through my Shield, and 7k + through my compact with no malfunction; they are reliable, accurate, and feel great to me. I wouldn't want a grip safety anyway, seems like unnecessary complexity in my opinion.

 

[marvin02]

They all just seemed good and reliable, but basic and somewhat lacking.

You answered your own question.They are popular because they are good, reliable and basic. Every one I've owned or shot just worked, nothing spectacular but they do what they are supposed to do. The Shields have a nice form factor for CC.

I have never had to pay MSRP for a new M&P pistol and there are bargains to be had in the used market. Factor in that they are made In the USA, backed by a dependable company and accessories are readily available.

Plenty of folks don't want a $1,000 gun for concealed carry.

 

[GarnetandBlack]

I have Glocks and Sigs and a XDM-E, and my two M&Ps are the best pistols I own, in quality and in design. I have Shield Plus and an M&P Metal. They are both stellar, and the Shield Plus is the most shoot-able micro 9mm on the planet, or at least amongst the ones I have shot. The triggers on both are fantastic (both the new flat style 2.0 trigger). They are both 100% reliable. My XDM-E is very, very well made, but I can't believe you say the polymer feels better on that thing than the M&P. There is no comparison on that aspect. Either way, you like what you like, but the M&Ps are fantastic, and the Shield Plus in particular is best in class for me...by far. But you have choices, by something else.

 

[Old Dog]

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

I find it interesting that the OP sees the Shield as feeling cheaper, more clunky, worse quality and a bad trigger compared to the SA XD-S -- because I feel the exact opposite. Especially with the ergonomics, the trigger, the grip texture, the fit and finish and the "clunkiness" factor. Shield, to me, is hands down a superior pistol. As I was carrying the M&P full-size on duty for many years, I developed a sneaky fondness for these S&W plastic pistols.

I just like the SIG P-365 series a bit better. (I also like my Glock 43X.)

My SA XD-S went away after my first couple shooting sessions with it. Hated the grip, the trigger dingus and the grip safety. And the distinctly more snappy recoil than other comparable pistols.

Now, if you wanna talk the Hellcat, I'll listen. I like that little guy a lot.

 

[.455_Hunter]

The entire Shield series seems pretty silly compared to a 3914DAO.

 

[Old Dog]

The entire Shield series seems pretty silly compared to a 3914DAO.

Um, apples to oranges. We're talking much lighter, higher capacity, striker-fired, polymer framed compact/sub-compact pistols. (Although I too like the 3913/3914 pistols).

 

[.455_Hunter]

We're talking much lighter, higher capacity, striker-fired, polymer framed compact/sub-compact pistols.

Exactly- It's easy for an orange to be better than a rotten apple.

 

[gc70]

I like S&W. I think their revolvers in general are the overall best of the mass produced ones. These M&P's feel overrated though. I'm not saying they're bad guns or that they're unreliable. I just don't get how they sale so well when the MSRP isn't far off from other guns I think look, feel, and shoot way nicer. Plus the used market is so flooded with them that you can find all but the latest and greatest (which changes quite often with these guys) for next to nothing quite often.

Several million people have liked the Shield's package of features enough to buy the gun. While you complain about the Shield, it met your needs enough to buy one in .40 S&W, so ask yourself which features prompted you to choose it over other guns.

 

[JDeere]

I bought the full size 2.0 10mm because it fit my little hands better than a G20 and the trigger was so much better. The 100 buck rebate was a plus. I really do not like that billboard on the slide but I got past it. Moving forward it is now at the mothership because it would not feed reliably using 4 different brands of ammo in the factory mags. She would strip at least one round in every mag and send it pointing up holding the slide open. We shall see what becomes of this trip. I have been shooting and buying firearms for 60+ years and this is the first one I have ever had to return for warranty work. I guess my luck ran out. It may get sent down the road when it is returned depending on the outcome...

 

[CDW4ME]

The plastic itself looks and feels to be of a lower quality.

This is low quality plastic.

 

[Skribs]

I can't speak to the shield and the XDs, but I can to their big brothers the M&P and the XDm. I have an M&P 9 compact, an XDm 40 compact, and used to have an XDM 40 3.8" (compact slide, full size frame).

The XDm 40 3.8" was my first gun. I had wished at the time they had a XDm 40 compact...and it came out like a month or so later. So I got that and gifted the bigger one to a friend. Some time later, I decided a 9mm was fine, and carry-ability was more important than capacity, so I got the smaller M&P compact. I like the XDm. But it doesn't really feel like it was designed as a carry gun compared to most of the others. Right now it's my home defense pistol, sitting in the safe by the side of my bed with a light on it.

The M&P 9C is my carry gun. The first thing I did when I bought it is replace the trigger with an APEX trigger kit. I ordered the kit before I bought the gun, because I knew how bad I did not like the M&P trigger. For 99% of the population, that's apparently a DIY thing, but for me I took it to a gunsmith. (I tried it myself first and that made it a more expensive trip). The M&P with the trigger kit was my favorite handgun for a long time.

 

[FL-NC]

I have an old one I carry daily. It works for me.

 

[entropy]

My Dad had several of them at one point. I shot most of what he had, the .22, 9mm full size and compact, and .45 full size and compact, and later the Shield in 9mm. Got nothing against them, but as the corporate speak goes, " I went another direction with this."

 

[DeepSouth]

Never underestimate the power of marketing, billions are spent because it works.

 

[Tallball]

Mine is fine. It's polymer. The ergos aren't any better or worse than my Glocks and most of my other polymer pistols.

It fits my hands okay and goes bang every time and I can shoot it decently.

I'm kinda meh on polymer pistols anyway, so I don't pay much attention to the subtle differences between them.

 

[Zendude]

I don’t own a Shield, but their popularity is probably due to these factors:
Availability, price, aftermarket support, good reviews, and name brand recognition.

 

[unclenunzie]

I liked your OP just because of your cat's face while your M&P and XDs were doing acrobatics

I don't own a shield because first time I held one I couldn't get past the original hinged trigger. Having gone in another direction I never did pick one up. As to popularity, they work, are made in America by a familiar name, and are not out of reach of the average man or woman. The average man or woman (not gun person) looking for a carry gun knows Smith & Wesson and will trust them more than brands they don't know. Everyone knows Colt but they're not going to buy a 1911 because it is heavy and complicated what with all those levers and things. Ruger has a good rep for revolvers but until recent days their pistols were clunky and heavy (even if solid).

Once you get to where you have a familiar name, good field record, police acceptance, you are going to sell a lot of them. A massive aftermarket such as the shield line has means you have arrived.