S&W finally did wht most of us thought with the Shield

Status
Not open for further replies.
The main reason I never carry mine is that it's kind of a "tweener". It's too big for pocket carry, and for the weight you might as well get a double stack compact.

That's exactly how I thought of it, the Glock 43, and the Walther PPS. If a gun required IWB carry because it wouldn't fit in my pocket, then why have only 8 rounds? At least for me...

I know people who carry the Kahr MK9 IWB and love it because it's so small and doesn't poke them...
 
I thought the op was saying the 2.0 didn't seem like a good value at $439 considering what a 1.0 cost a couple months ago and compared to what you can get for around $500.
I got the same impression, but also that he was just complaining to be complaining. Meh.
 
I'm not seeing even one "mistake". What am I missing? Smith & Wesson is in the business of making as much profit as they can and selling as many firearms as they can. If it's a mistake to make money then they are making "...a big mistake in many more ways than one." That's my thought for what it's worth.


Same way I see it. They are a business. Profit is what they are after. Personally I wouldn't buy a Shield for more than $300. I remember when they first came out they were close to, if not over ,$500

I have one in each caliber. The 45 out shoots the other 2. They are a good Summer carry gun. I use a P-07 in the winter or fall. The weight of it plus a magazine is not more than the Shield with 2 magazines.
 
Ruger discounted the LCP before introducing the new LCP II. Discounts are all part of marketing.

Taking one new reviewers negative comments isn't an all around best practice when new guns come out. Most of us wait it out to see what's up. Take the CZ 10C - oops, the striker rotates and jams the gun. Other than that, it's ok. Now compare that to the P320, which may - or may not - discharge if it is dropped from four feet on the back of the slide. Which is less safe for you to carry daily as a personal defense gun?

I can find a lot of reviews excoriating or praising either. It's not a reviewers opinion that will eventually cause the owner to decide to keep or sell off the gun, tho. It's up to the owner, alone, and he alone makes a decision based on his priorities. Now, a rotating striker but which will cause a random jam, and in some cases, twice in the same magazine, vs a gun which requires you to lose your grip to drop it in that one way?

I can't decided that for you. What do you think about the new 2.0, have you handled it yet, do you own the previous model, have you compared them side by side, shot them, carried them, and then made up your mind based on your experience?

Life isn't lived going along with the "hive mind" and you are responsible for your own decisions. Make the most informed one you can and even then it may not work out to your satisfaction. I did that - the LCP was soooo cool, man, tiny little pocket gun. Nope, not for me. First, I found it didn't like shooting it and there are better guns just another ounce heavier. Second, pocket carry isn't my cup of tea - too much EDC in habitual places. Sold it. Got what the general public dislikes - a Kahr CW380, with a magnificent single action trigger, inherently better recoil absorption, great sites, I could go on. The LCP was not the cat's pajamas for me, after all. The jammomatic inconsiderate poor customer service cheap but overpriced Kahr was the better choice. I carry it 95% of the time I carry, and I have done it for days at a time on the beach, shopping, restaurants, crossing state lines (legally) etc.

You don't know what you like until you try it. And the best opinion delivered by the most experienced and grizzled gun reviewer ever can still be wrong. Ask Jim Zumbo or Hickock 45 'bout that. We make the best decision we can - or not - and live with it - or not. There are no guarantees.

One thing to keep in mind, an old saying: observe the masses, do the opposite.
 
So the Glock 30S, is a lighter gun that carries 3 or 4 more rounds, which even I didn't expect until I looked
Is there some reason you'd insist on comparing apples and oranges? I believe you are comparing empty weights. It would be much more useful to compare loaded weights...since 11 rounds will weigh a bit more than 7

The correct comparison, if you're comparing design intent, is the Glock 36 and the M&P Shield 45.
 
Take a look at how many the sold at $400 to $450 when they first came out. They were only selling at $200 with the rebates because S&W dropped their dealer cost so they could get rid of the 1st gen before bringing out the 2.0's

The G43 is still $400 plus. The Shield is better gun so yes it will sell at $400/450.
 
I ditched my G26 and ended up replacing it with a Shield. Other than being a tad heavy it's almost the perfect carry gun. Thin enough to be carried OWB in a leather pancake, yet big enough to beat down plates at 25 yards with near 100% consistency.

I wouldn't mind a new 2.0, I've never minded the M&P trigger with my 9c or Shield, I just shoot it and hit what I want. I ditched the 9c because of it's useless size....big and thick and only holding 12+1. If they could shave 2 oz from the Shield it would be perfect.
 
I got a Shield over the summer. I am not surprised that the discounts were offered right before rolling out a new version, nor am I disappointed in the version that I got. Neither of those mean that I'd be opposing to shooting a 2.0 version, just to see what all the fuss is about.
 
I've been carrying a Shield 9 (no thumb safety) since they were available. I see no reason to replace it with the 2.0. I did buy a 45, and the trigger is a little better than the 9.
 
"and in this enviornment, when you gan get a Gen 4 Glock 19 for under 500"

Well, the M&Ps are far, FAR higher quality than a glock, so why wouldn't a higher quality gun for less price fly?

And I keep the thumb safety "off" and that's even carrying SmartCarry / PossumPouch / Thunderwear style at times.... yet I don't have a problem with it being there is it stays in the off position positively.
 
S&W has been doing something right with their Shield series.

They just shipped their 2 millionth Shield. It's broken every sales record ever recorded by S&W in its history. Like it or not, the Shield is the leader and dominates the subcompact class of single stack pistols in the market.

It's priced similarly, MSRP-wise, to the G43, and offers some interesting advantages (a stainless steel sub-chassis, reinforcing the frame, and a 7-rd & 8rd mag). It's also available in .40, at the same size, and in .45, just slightly larger (required for the caliber).
https://snwcdnprod.azureedge.net/si...nounces-New-MP-Shield-M2pt0-Pistol-Series.pdf

Earlier info for the .45's release.
https://snwcdnprod.azureedge.net/sites/default/files/press-release/MPShield45v5 final.pdf
 
It's priced similarly, MSRP-wise, to the G43, and offers some interesting advantages (a stainless steel sub-chassis, reinforcing the frame, and a 7-rd & 8rd mag). It's also available in .40, at the same size, and in .45, just slightly larger (required for the caliber).
I'd give a look to a Glock 42 styled gun in .45. They already have a single-stack in .45, called Glock 36, but that thing is quite chunky. You can be sure though that they'd ship with just 1 magazine size, and S&W at least gave us a factory +1 (as you mentioned).
 
I picked up the Shield 2.0 with night sights over the weekend. Nice shooter with a good trigger. I put 200 rounds of gold dots and HST through it. I'll take it out again for another 200 rounds in a few weeks.
 
I'd give a look to a Glock 42 styled gun in .45. They already have a single-stack in .45, called Glock 36, but that thing is quite chunky. You can be sure though that they'd ship with just 1 magazine size, and S&W at least gave us a factory +1 (as you mentioned).

Glock couldn't shoe-horn the .45ACP into something as diminutive as their G43, let alone their smaller G42. Even if they thought to try it with their namesake cartridge, the .45GAP, the thickness of the their frames, and them remaining wedded to the idea of plastic-clad magazines, would keep things a bit thick. Their G39 might be as small as anything they're going to consider producing in a .45 caliber. (They haven't even publicly committed to considering trying to chamber a .40 in something based upon the G43, for that matter.)

At least S&W produces their smaller Shield in a .40, and have enlarged it just enough to chamber the .45ACP. S&W's use of the stainless steel sub-chassis molded into their M&P frames helps them in producing some strong, but thin, frames.

Now that Glock has belatedly tried to follow the S&W Shield and Springfield XDs with their single caliber G43, it remains to be seen if they'll also attempt to follow the rest of the pack in offering a similarly small .40 & .45ACP, or even a .45GAP. The popularity of the smallish single stack 9mm may be enough to satisfy them. Who knows?
 
Thinking of those deep discounts makes me wish I'd bought another 1.0 when they were cheap. It's a fine pistol.

...another? These things can last a lifetime and with their warranty, you're covered for your lifetime (or S&W's lifetime)
How many do you need?

Yeah, I know. Just one more.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top