M&P Shield, why are there no doubters?

[Plan2Live]

My question is, why is no one posting "let's wait and see" comments about the Shield?

Honest question here, not a hater thread, I am actually intrigued by the Shield. I have read many other posts about new pistols, like the Sig 938, where over half the posts say they are skeptical of first run pistols. But I am not seeing such comments about the Shield. Why?

 

[jon_in_wv]

I would say you haven't been looking. I've seen dozens. Check any thread about the Shield and you will see many interspersed with the inane arguments over the manual safety.

 

[Plan2Live]

Yes, I have seen dislikes for the manual saftey but I'm talking about the design in general. The Sig 938 is nothing more than a slight redesign of the 238 yet it is drawing a lot of skepticism with many posters saying they would never buy an early example of anything. I'm simply not seeing that with the Shield and am curious why. I would have expected 100% acceptance if it was a a single stack Glock but am surprised at the overwhelming acceptance of the Shield. And no, I'm not trying to encourage such, just asking why.

 

[crracer_712]

While most talk is from those that already have them, I do see a post or two within those threads from people that say they will wait and see after the intial batch gets some time on it.

 

[beatledog7]

I usually stay away from the first run of any new model of anything. But as for the manual safety? Sure.

If I were marketing a handgun specifically for concealed carry, given the current political climate, I would strongly consider adding a manual safety. It serves no practical purpose on a DAO firearm, but is seen as more "safe."

I would imagine many Shield buyers will never use it.

 

[basicblur]

I'd be much less inclined to wait out a model run on something like a gun than a car etc - a gun is much less expensive, much less complicated, and much easier/less hassle to correct should something need it.

Then ya gotta consider the manufacturer...I'd probably be much more inclined to buy a first run item from S&W than something like Keltec's KSG or some of the new SIGs (it sounds like SIG may have had/has? a bean counter CEO somewhere along the way).

Going from a Sigma to an M&P to a SHIELD is nothing radical or revolutionary - it looks more like evolution.

Getting the SHIELD right the first time shouldn't be that tough.

 

[HKGuns]

"Nearly" every firearm I own has a manual safety. What the heck is wrong with a manual safety? Oh, I suppose it isn't OK because those who have shot nothing but gLoCk will object? Give me a break. Looks like an M&P to me.....I don't see the big deal.

 

[montgomery381]

I am one of those people that is waiting to see how the shield does. The fact that people can find these guns for as little as $380 I think contributes to people being willing to take the leap on the first run of this gun as opposed to the 938 which is a $900-$1000 gun. If I had extra money and I came across a shield I would be tempted to buy it. As it is now if I decide to get one I will have to sell my current EDC. Also the M&P is a very popular gun and the shield seems to hold as true as possible to that line. I think we would see the same reaction if Glock came out with a comparable gun. The Slimline is not comparable.

 

[beatledog7]

HKGuns:

Nothing's wrong with a manual safety. Many of my guns have them, too.

A gun I'm going to carry for last resort, save-my-life defense has to be stupid simple. I want a round in the chamber and only one switch to make it go bang. The Shield, like its M&P brethren, is safe to carry with a chambered round without a manual safety.

 

[mgmorden]

"Nearly" every firearm I own has a manual safety. What the heck is wrong with a manual safety? Oh, I suppose it isn't OK because those who have shot nothing but gLoCk will object? Give me a break. Looks like an M&P to me.....I don't see the big deal.

No, my Glock doesn't have a safety.

Of course, neither does my Ruger LCP. Neither does my SIG P6, or any of my 4 revolvers.

As a matter of fact - neither does my M&P.

And if you look at similar guns in this category, guess what? The Kahr P9, the Kel-tec PF9, the Bersa CC, and the Beretta Nano all lack a thumb safety.

The Ruger LC9 and the Taurus 709 were the only ones of the polymer single-stack 9 category that came with one.

Don't try to make out the desire for no thumb safety to be some "Glock fanboy" thing. People have legitimate reasons for wanting a kill-switch left off of their defensive firearms. If others want one I see no issue with them having one - but make it an OPTIONAL feature. Heck I'd pay them an extra $50 just to leave off such gimmickry, but alas - it's not an option. As such despite being an M&P fan I'll not be buying the shield. Same actually goes for Ruger. I like their guns and bought the LCP for concealed carry but because of the safety I will not buy an LC9. At this point I really want to get the Bersa CC 9mm but its hard to find them in stock. If they don't show up somewhere soon I'll likely settle for the Kahr CW9.

 

[The Lone Haranguer]

My question is, why is no one posting "let's wait and see" comments about the Shield?

I would like to wait and see one first. But, it is a derivation of an already existing, proven design, from a reputable company, not a brand new design from an upstart.

 

[fastbolt]

I'm typically reluctant to become a Beta tester for a brand new pistol model. BTDT.

That's why I waited until '08 to order my first M&P (it was released in Jan '06), and after I'd attended an armorer class for the model line and had a chance to learn a little more about it.

This isn't like it's a brand new design, though, but just a subcompact variation of the M&P line, with a couple of refinements. They've been working on it for a while, benefiting from their continuing experience and success with the M&P platform.

I've been told I probably won't be able to get to an armorer class which includes the new Shield info until later this year, but after my experience as an owner, user and armorer with the existing M&P pistol models, I'm going to be buying one as soon as the LE models are released within the next 1-2 months.

I'll be buying the 9mm version, myself.

 

[balance 740]

But, it is a derivation of an already existing, proven design, from a reputable company, not a brand new design from an upstart.

I've never heard of another pistols using single-stack staggered mags. I think they make it more efficient size-wise than my PPS, but I'm one that is "waiting and seeing" how they hold up.

As for the manual safety, I would have rather that they made it either optional, or ambidextrous. I'm a lefty and I will not buy a Shield.

 

[Goomba]

External safeties on striker fired guns are silly, unless you're running a 2lb Apex kit or something.

 

[jon_in_wv]

I would say you haven't been looking. I've seen dozens. Check any thread about the Shield and you will see many interspersed with the inane arguments over the manual safety.
__________________

I think you missed the point of my post. I wasn't making a point about the manual safety other than it is a topic of discussion as well.

 

[12131]

There are plenty folks around with the "let the beta testers have at it" mentality. I'm one of them. Just happen not to care about it to even mention it. But since you asked, I'm letting you know. Same old crap with anything new coming out on the market.

 

[9mmepiphany]

I have read many other posts about new pistols, like the Sig 938, where over half the posts say they are skeptical of first run pistols. But I am not seeing such comments about the Shield. Why?

I would think it is because the Shield is based on a basically sound design while the 938 isn't

 

[The Lone Haranguer]

I too am of the opinion that a manual safety is superfluous on a DAO pistol. But there are a great many people who do desire one. You don't have to use it. The "semi-staggered" magazine does seem odd, but is not unheard of - the Glock 36 uses them.

 

[9mmepiphany]

I've never heard of another pistols using single-stack staggered mags.

The tapered magazines make magazine changes easier. The taper funnels the magazine into the magwell and is least sensitive to mis-alignment than a single stack magazine. It is also easier on the lips of the magazines as there is less pressure on them from the magazine spring

 

[gfanikf]

I would say you haven't been looking. I've seen dozens. Check any thread about the Shield and you will see many interspersed with the inane arguments over the manual safety.

One guy said he wouldn't get it for that reason, as it wouldn't trust his life to a "kill switch."

 

[basicblur]

One guy said he wouldn't get it for that reason, as it wouldn't trust his life to a "kill switch."

What'd Dirty Harry say...A man's gotta know his limitations!?

Anywho - I've never seen such a bunch of whiners in my life.
For years my HD gun was a 1991-A1 Compact (previously owned a Gold Cup) - reaching up to swipe the safety became so instinctual that I usually have to tell myself not to do so with my current crop of guns sans thumb safety.

I guess if they weren't whining 'bout manual/external safeties, they'd be whining 'bout trigger pull lengths/anything over a 3.5 lb. trigger, and magazine safeties...

 

[jon_in_wv]

Yeah, gjanikf and you didn't get the part where I said it was an "inane" argument. Get what you prefer. With or without I would still get one.

 

[aryfrosty]

M&P 9 Shield

Probably a reason there are less doubters is that this is a tried and proven handgun. All M&Ps have been available with or without thumb safeties all along. I stayed away from the M&Ps for several reasons but spotted a .45acp with two barrels from the factory and handled it...and once handled I like it. One of the barrels is threaded for a suppressor. I felt that S&W had something coming when the M&P 9 and 40 compacts disappeared from their new catalogue and the .45C stayed in it. The Shield looks like a winner.

 

[gfanikf]

Yeah, gjanikf and you didn't get the part where I said it was an "inane" argument. Get what you prefer. With or without I would still get one.

Oh just saying I had seen that too. Personally my first gun was an M&P I bought that had no safeties what so ever, so I won't be surprised if S&W makes one like that anyway. Granted I tend to prefer them, but I don't think it's a huge impact either way.

 

[jon_in_wv]

I get it. I apologize if I came off rudely. I just have no interest in the manual safety argument. I've carried many weapons over the years and training to use the manual safety it not that difficult. Some people make it a big issue. If that is the case, buy something else. I don't get the desire they have to convince everyone else too.