A S&W Squeeze Cock?

[marine6680]

This was in my FB feed. (https://www.smith-wesson.com/firearms/mp-380-shield-ez-0)

Basically seems to be a 380 chambered shield.

The dingus on the back of the grip... It's called a grip safety... But the pistol is also said to be easier to rack...

So it makes me wonder if they reduce the effort by having the pistol cock when gripped, reducing the tension needed when you rack the slide. Or maybe it's just simply that it's chambered in 380...

Not 100% on all that... As putting a grip safety on an M&P seems pointless. They already offer a version with a manual safety, no need for more safteys thrown in...

So it makes me think the grip "safety" is more than just that alone.

I guess we will find out sooner or later.

[carguychris]

The M&P is cocked on the forward return stroke, not on the initial backwards stroke of the slide. Hence, I presume that the easier slide force is the result of a less stiff recoil spring tailored to the .380 round, and not because of anything having to do with the cocking action.

I suspect that the pistol cocks just like a standard M&P and the grip safety works by tripping the sear deactivation lever built into the M&P sear assembly. Clever design concept IMHO. :)

[EDIT: Further information indicates that the pistol actually uses an internal hammer and not a striker.]

[rkammer]

Looks like S&W is trying to take advantage of the popularity of the Shield by offering it in .380 caliber and also making it more friendly for new shooters or those that are recoil sensitive when shooting a 9 mm. The grip safety might comfort those users that think the single action trigger isn't safe enough. Just my observations for what it's worth. :)

[HighValleyRanch]

overall length is 6.7"??
Isn't that bigger than the shield?
Why go lower caliber and bigger gun?

[carguychris]

overall length is 6.7"??
Isn't that bigger than the shield?
Yes. It has a 3.675" barrel rather than a 3.1" barrel.

[EDIT TO ADD] I also just noticed that the gun is only offered with an 8rd flush-fit magazine rather than 7rd flush-fit and 8rd extended mags like the 9mm Shield, so the grip is also taller.
Why go lower caliber and bigger gun?
Dunno. Perhaps to increase slide and barrel mass and allow a softer recoil spring?

FWIW S&W is apparently also offering a thumb safety version (https://www.smith-wesson.com/firearms/mp-380-shield-ez-manual-thumb-safety) for those belt-and-suspenders folks.

[marine6680]

If it is bigger than a shield... Or longer anyway... That may mean a spring that is even softer.

I just can't wrap my head around a grip safety though. A manual safety is enough to make most people more comfortable with a firearm.

That is why I am wondering if there is something more to that grip safety than simply being a safety.


Either way... It's either a neat concept, or a needless complication.

[carguychris]

I just can't wrap my head around a grip safety though. A manual safety is enough to make most people more comfortable with a firearm.I'll give them credit for exploiting a new market niche. :)

Also note that the thumb safety version doesn't use the low-profile tab of the standard Shield; it uses the big lever from on the Compact, FS, and long-slide. I surmise that this was done so that the safety lever stands out more in the display case, and because the pistol's buyers are likely to actually use it. :)

[reddog81]

I don't know anything about the gun, but I'd be willing to wager that the grip safety functions strictly as a grip safety and does nothing else. I highly doubt the grip safety has anything to do with the spring tension of the recoil spring. Typically a recoil spring rides underneath the barrel and a grip safety spring seats on the rear part of the frame. It would be needlessly complex to tie the functions together.

I like the theory behind a grip safety, but i'm not sure how useful they actually are. Unlike the more common John Moses Browning designs the grip safety on this gun looks needlessly large and out of place.

I'm guessing the gun will be relatively easy to shoot given the size and the fact that it's chambered for .380. Gun designers have been chasing the smallest gun possible for the better part of the last decade. These tiny guns are easy to conceal, but much harder to learn on. I was at the range last weekend and the guy next to me was trying to teach a lady to shoot for the first time and he had a J frame 38 special, a tiny 9mm and a 1911. The training did not go well.

[HighValleyRanch]

I wish they had left off the tacticool rail, and put the squeezer on the front.
That way it would have resembled a HK P7 and I would want it!:D

[Don P]

I'll give them credit for exploiting a new market niche.
Springfield Armory beat them to the punch when they introduced the XD series pistols some 10-12 years ago;):eek::D

[carguychris]

I don't know anything about the gun, but I'd be willing to wager that the grip safety functions strictly as a grip safety and does nothing else. I highly doubt the grip safety has anything to do with the spring tension of the recoil spring. Typically a recoil spring rides underneath the barrel and a grip safety spring seats on the rear part of the frame. It would be needlessly complex to tie the functions together.Indeed, hence my guess that the grip safety simply trips the sear deactivation lever already built into the M&P sear housing block.

I'm familiar with the basic M&P design, and it would be far easier (and cheaper) for S&W to design the pistol this way than to somehow link the grip safety to the recoil spring or mainspring, and/or to change how the sear functions; any of these options would create more parts exclusive to the Shield EZ, thus increasing mf'g costs.

[EDIT: Further information indicates that the pistol actually uses an internal hammer and not a striker.]
I'm guessing the gun will be relatively easy to shoot given the size and the fact that it's chambered for .380.
Yes. They're aiming at a market niche currently occupied only by the Walther PK380.

The Shield EZ promises the benefits of the PK380—small enough to conceal but large enough to be easy to hold, comfy grip, generous sight radius, big easy-to-see sights, a reasonably good trigger, easy slide operation force, negligible felt recoil—without the drawbacks of DA/SA complexity, non-standard safety operation and decocking, no external slide stop, and the need for a proprietary takedown tool (not to mention the Walther's lousy Umarex assembly quality and its tendency to jam :rolleyes:).

[carguychris]

Springfield Armory beat them to the punch when they introduced the XD series pistols some 10-12 years agoNot a .380. ;):eek::D

There's also the Remington R51, but it's also not a .380, and the S&W is more likely to work properly. :p;)

[Lohman446]

New to guns, wants something to have "in the house" just in case, and needs to be able to rack the slide. Can also sell the .380 as more recoil friendly. I bet they sell more of these than you would think.

A lot of first time buyers are intimidated by racking the slide and making it easier helps. Putting in another automatic but visual safety for them to see and feel while fondling the gun in the store does not hurt. The elderly gentleman who no longer feels he can rack the old trusted .45 might find that grip safety welcoming.

I think they know exactly what they are doing with this. The members of this board, for the most part, are not likely the target market.

[Jim Watson]

Yup
Something to recommend for the non-enthusiast, dainty, or arthritic besides the usual revolver.

[T. O'Heir]

A grip safety isn't the same thing squeeze cocking. That'd be a good thing since it didn't work worth beans on the HK P7. Mind you, it's lever was on the front strap. Weak hands had trouble squeezing the thing.

[marine6680]

Yeah... I doubt it's a cocker...

That early in the AM, and my brain was trying to justify it's existence... If it provides no additional functionality... They why?

Still think a grip safety is dumb on this pistol.

Having an easier to use pistol for those with weaker hands, that's a good niche to fill though.

[fastbolt]

Folks, think back to the popularity of the Colt 1903 "Hammerless" (covered hammer), with its grip safety feature. Borrowing a page from history for folks who like the added safety feature of a grip safety.

Also, there's probably a huge market of folks who might really appreciate a mild-shooting centerfire pistol, chambered in a caliber less "powerful" than a 9mm, which they can more easily manipulate and operate.

Face it, women shooters are seemingly the fastest growing market group, and .380ACP has been the fastest growing caliber. This is what we were told in the first Glock recert class I attended after the release of the G42. Glock had decided to go after part of the fast-growing market of women shooters who wanted a lighter recoiling .380ACP. (We were told that Glock had observed that the hottest selling caliber to commercial buyers - not LE - in the 3 years leading up to their decision to design the G42 had been .380, and that women were the largest demographic of that market.)

A decently sized single stack .380, ala the Walther, Bersa, Browning/Beretta, and the growing number of new models by SIG, Colt, Ruger (LC380), would seem to indicate S&W has probably wisely interpreted the market to bring a new product to it.

There's plenty of increasingly diminutive .380's for the folks looking for really pocketable pistols, secondary/backup pistols and for the dedicated "shooters" (LE & private citizens, alike) who don't mind the recoil of the increasingly smaller and lighter .380's.

It wouldn't surprise me if this new medium-sized .380 pistol strikes chord with a lot of buyers who aren't interested in shooting "duty/service" calibers, but still want something chambered in a defensive caliber above that of .22LR, .25 or .32 ACP.

As has already been mentioned by someone else, it might also find a ready market internationally, in the countries where ownership of "military" calibers is either prohibited or heavily restricted. (Think of Glock's G25 & G28, and why they were created and marketed internationally.)

Also, the simple observation that it's marked "EZ", referencing the ease of loading magazines and retracting the slide, is no doiubt going to be a favorable marketing feature that appeals to a lot of folks who aren't able to easily do either manipulation with a number of other popular pistols.

[Bart Noir]

They're aiming at a market niche currently occupied only by the Walther PK380.

As just pointed out by fastbolt, the Ruger LC380 is also a 9mm-sized pistol chambered in .380. That size of locked-breach gun in that caliber will prove rather popular, I predict, and S&W is smart for getting into that market.

I'm just disappointed they did not call it the: Safety Hammerless Even Newer Departure 6th Model :D

Bart Noir
Who thinks the Lemon Squeezer nickname would just not be understood.

[Jim Watson]

What?
I still haven't forgiven them for the Plastic M&P.

I like the way it shoots but a Military & Police is a blue .38 revolver.

[GarandTd]

Seems like 380 is gaining in popularity. It would be nice if the prices of 380 ammo would come down a little, but I'm not sure that's gonna happen.

[sigarms228]

No mention of a grip safety but a "load assist button" though that sounds like it might be part of the magazine. It would not makes sense to offer a pistol with a grip safety and then an option for a manual thumb safety but you never know. Looks like regular trigger with no safety dingus. We should find out more shortly. Glad they are coming out with a pistol tailored for those who have issues with hand strength and/or hand pain.

https://www.americanrifleman.org/articles/2018/2/5/smith-wesson-introduces-mp380-shield-ez-pistol/

In the past when a pistol manufacturer touted a new gun entry as having easy slide manipulation—even with a .380-cal.—we have taken the assertion with a grain of salt until we’ve had some hands-on experience. In the case of the just-announced Smith & Wesson M&P380 Shield EZ, we can attest that indeed, the pistol lives up to its claims.

American Rifleman editors had some early range time last fall with the new .380 ACP addition to the very popular M&P Series, and have been eagerly awaiting its announcement. We’ll be putting the pistol through our regular test and evaluation protocol in the coming weeks, but here’s what we can tell you in terms of features:

The pistol, which offers an 8+1 round capacity, ships with two 8-round magazines that include a load-assist button, as well as a Picatinny-style rail for accessories. Barrel length is 3.675”, and the pistol is outfitted with white-dot front and adjustable white-dot rear sights. Along with tapped rear slide serrations, a one-piece single-action trigger and audible trigger reset, it also features an 18-degree grip angle for a natural point of aim, as well as enhanced, textured grips. A tactile loaded-chamber indicator, a reversible magazine release, and available ambidextrous thumb safety round out its many ergonomically friendly features. The pistol will be available nationwide at the end of Feb. 2018 at an MSRP of $399.

“When we set out to design the M&P380 Shield EZ pistol, our goal was to deliver an all-around, easy to use personal protection pistol—from loading and carrying, to shooting and cleaning,” said Jan Mladek, General Manager of M&P and S&W Brands. “... We focused on key areas that customers told us were important—the ease of racking the slide and loading the magazine,” he said, “allowing consumers of all statures and strengths the opportunity to own, comfortably practice with, and effectively utilize this exciting new pistol“ for both first-time shooters and experienced handgunners alike.

[gc70]

Yeah... I doubt it's a cocker...

That early in the AM, and my brain was trying to justify it's existence... If it provides no additional functionality... They why?

Still think a grip safety is dumb on this pistol.

Having an easier to use pistol for those with weaker hands, that's a good niche to fill though.

John Browning favored the grip safety in his pistol designs until the Army made him put a thumb safety on the 1911.

A grip safety makes sense as an automatic safety on a gun with a short, light, single-action trigger. And a grip safety hinged at the bottom (Browning 1910 or Colt 1903) seems to be more easily reliable than one hinged at the top (Colt 1911).

Just looking at the distance between the S&W's trigger and its trigger stop makes it obvious that the gun has a short trigger travel. As to a light trigger, in this video (https://www.facebook.com/projerrymiculek/videos/1742814589115455/) Jerry Miculek says the .380 Shield has "the lightest trigger I have ever seen on a Smith & Wesson product."

Since the .380 Shield is available with or without a thumb safety, the grip safety seems to be intended as the primary safety and the thumb safety is the extra.

[DaleA]

"easier to rack slide..."

How many times have we been asked, right here in this section of the site, to recommend a semi-auto that was easy to work the slide? (Answer: a lot.)

S&W might well have found a real niche.

Anybody know how 'easy' to rack the slide it really is?

[James K]

In the early days of auto pistols there was another concern that was addressed by a grip safety. Many shooters tended to grip a revolver high and carried that habit over to an auto pistol. But if the hand grips a pistol too high, the slide gouges the thumb web, a painful result. So a grip safety had a secondary purpose for some shooters, keeping the hand down on the grip away from the moving slide.

Jim

[sigarms228]

Guns and Ammo first look including pictures of internals and accuracy comments - 2.25 inch group at 25 yards, uses internal hammer, built in "wings" at rear of slide for easy racking, and 4.5 LB trigger pull.

http://www.gunsandammo.com/first-look/first-look-easy-to-rack-sw-mp-380-shield/

[Sgt Pepper]

sigarms228 beat me to it, but i too was going to point out that the EZ pistol is advertised as a single action with internal hammer and not striker fired like the other M&P's.

[sigarms228]

That probably explains the need for the grip safety then. A glance at the picture inside the slide it does not look like it has a firing pin block safety either or at least the typical plunger kind I am used to seeing. The magazine looks like similar design to my Ruger Mark II.

[Jim Watson]

John Browning favored the grip safety in his pistol designs until the Army made him put a thumb safety on the 1911.

Poor Mr Browning, he gets blamed for so much.
Actually, his 1900 FN had only a thumb safety, his 1900/02/03/05 "parallel ruler" guns had no manual safety (except the odd rear sight safety on the 1900, soon dropped) and his "hammerless" guns had both thumb and grip safety (except for early 1906 .25s.)

[carguychris]

It's interesting that S&W seems to have completely dispensed with the standard M&P striker design! I stand corrected on my earlier posts. :)

The load assist button—shown in the G&A link—looks pretty clever.
They're aiming at a market niche currently occupied only by the Walther PK380.
As just pointed out by fastbolt, the Ruger LC380 is also a 9mm-sized pistol chambered in .380.
I stand by my assertion. :D

Shield EZ:
L: 6.64" (from G&A article text)
H: 4.98" (ditto)
18.5 oz.
8+1 capacity
4± lb SA trigger, cocked-and-locked is the only trigger mode

Walther PK380:
L: 6.5"
H: 5.2" (with pinky rest FWIW)
18 oz.
8+1 capacity
4± lb SA trigger, can be carried cocked-and-locked

Ruger LC380:
L: 6"
H: 4.5"
17.2 oz.
7+1 capacity
7± lb DA trigger, no SA option

The Ruger is smaller and lighter, albeit not drastically so. The Walther and the Smith are virtually the same size. The main points of comparison, however, are the full-length grip and the trigger. The PK380 SA trigger is really short, light, and crisp, and the early reviews of the Shield EZ indicate the same. This is a big selling feature for people with hand strength issues.

IMHO the Walther PK380 used to effectively exist in a class of one, as the only inexpensive locked-breech .380 with a full-size grip and "full-time" SA trigger option. (The EAA Witness Pavona is not locked-breech in .380, the RIA Baby Rock isn't either, and while the Browning 1911-380 is locked-breech, it's substantially pricier.) The PK380 is remarkably pleasant to shoot if/when it cycles properly. :rolleyes::p However, I can't bring myself to recommend the PK380 due to its numerous serious flaws, and I'm not alone in this regard. :(

I think S&W has a winner on their hands, although I'll heartily concur that "gun guys" are NOT this pistol's target market.

[turtlehead]

It's sad and gross.

Shame.

[disseminator]

The gun looks great, but that grip safety.......... UGLY.

That doesn't mean it won't be a big success, I think it will.

[Bart Noir]

chris, you are right. When considering the trigger methods, the Ruger is not in the same category as those others. Thanks for putting together the specs for us.

I rather like that Browning .380 you mentioned. But since I have 9 Parabellum 1911-inspired guns in roughly that size, I don't think I will get one.

But that new Smith is going to sell well. Now, will they build a 9mm version? That would be interesting.

Bart Noir

[marine6680]

Not a striker design... I was curious about that. Mystery solved I guess.

[Jacket67]

I think S&W did a good job putting out a product to fit a niche. I was confused by the pistol's existence at first, but then I think about my girlfriend's opinions on my 9mm shield and it starts to make sense. She just can't get over the fact mine has "no safety", and sometimes has trouble racking it due to the stiff spring. Loves how it shoots, but those are some of her complaints. If I was in the market for a gun just for her, I'd definitely give this a look.

That grip safety is incredibly ugly though. Should've just stuck with a 1911-style one, unless SA has that style patented.

In essence though, this is basically a polymer, internal hammer-fired 1911 chambered in .380. It's single stack, has a grip safety AND a manual thumb safety, and the grip angle is similar. Could be a good gun...just wish they hadn't called it a "shield". Especially since that name still belongs to the sub-compact carry gun. It's just plain confusing.

[sigarms228]

That grip safety is incredibly ugly though. Should've just stuck with a 1911-style one, unless SA has that style patented.

From what I have been reading the grip safety connects to the internal mechanism lower on the grip and will work even partially depressed. Keep in mind this a pistol designed to be functional for those that have impaired grip strength/mobility.

[SonOfScubaDiver]

Been doing a little comparison. This gun is comparable in size to my Thunder 380, but it appears to have a thinner grip. I'm a fan of 380, but not so much the really small pistols chambered in it. I wouldn't want anything smaller than my G42, and the Thunder 380 is just about perfect for me. So, this new offering by S&W is something I wouldn't mind having, but without the manual safety. I agree that the grip safety is pretty much ugly though. They should have continued its curve going up until it met the bottom of the frame under the slide. Still, that wouldn't be a deal breaker for me. I'm definitely going to check this new gun out the next time I visit a local gun store, but I'm gonna leave mah credit charge at home! I have enough trouble deciding between the three EDC guns I already have. Adding one more would just add to the trouble. Then again, I could just get seven different EDC guns, one for every day of the week! :D

[Bart Noir]

Jacket, your girlfriend might be interested in the Springfield XDe. The slide is amazingly easy to rack, even without first cocking the hammer. It has a combined decocker & safety lever in the traditional 1911 location.

I intend to hang onto mine for the days when I loose my strength, as I have seen my father do.

It doesn't have the best trigger but it is quite usable.

Bart Noir

[Bart Noir]

Should've just stuck with a 1911-style one, unless SA has that style patented.

There is no patent protection on a century-old design. And S&W has been making 1911s for years.

But I agree that the grip safety is rather ugly.

Bart Noir

[kozak6]

It looks like a really great product for women, the elderly, and anyone else who might have difficulty operating a traditional semiautomatic.

The slide wings are a neat feature. It has wings like a VP9, except they're integral to the slide and even match the fishscale serration pattern.

It's completely bizarre that it's hammer fired. The G&A article suggests the arrangement is to retard motion of the slide, but it seems a little drastic to design a completely different FCG just for that. I wonder what it looks like on the inside?

I suspect it might be a market failure since the intended userbase is too small. That would really be a shame, though. S&W definitely ran the numbers and knows what they are doing, but still...

[gc70]

It's completely bizarre that it's hammer fired. The G&A article suggests the arrangement is to retard motion of the slide, but it seems a little drastic to design a completely different FCG just for that.

Cocking a hammer during the rearward movement of a slide is different from cocking a striker during the forward movement of a slide. Demands on a recoil spring also differ significantly between the designs. The pistol's design objectives of ease of use are probably easier to achieve -or maybe only possible- with a hammer-fired design rather than a striker-fired design.

[adamBomb]

I just ran across this. Seems very cool. I like what SW is doing. Yea the grip safety is ugly but with their market being purse carry and such it seems like a good call. I also like the idea of being an easy shooter and easy to rack slide. So many people ask for that easy to rack slide.

Will I buy it? I'm not really the market. I've got the bodyguard as my EDC and am planning on getting a new MP20 for times I want to carry more. So probably not at this time. But I like what I read and I am really falling for MP's. Great guns, good $, and I like that they offer the choice of safety vs no safety unlike glock.

[gc70]

I was surprised to find a Shield EZ in my LGS today. It was priced at $369.95 - a modest discount from MSRP.

I tried to get the web of my hand between my thumb and forefinger above the grip safety as I gripped the gun, but I couldn't do it. I had thought that might be a problem with the grip safety hinged at the bottom.

I was very surprised at how easy the slide was to rack. I ended up racking the slide by holding it between two fingers and pushing on the frame with one finger of the other hand.

[moosemike]

Anybody know how 'easy' to rack the slide it really is?

One of the gun channel YouTubers tested it and he showed that it's even easy to rack with only your thumb and index finger.

[glockman55]

106998 The True Squeeze cocker

[Martowski]

I agree, Smith and Wesson really put the ug into ugly when they designed this grip safety. The XD style is much more pleasing.

I, for one, love the grip safety concept and own four XD models as a result. Why? With a manual safety, you may forget to flick it off in the heat of the moment. A grip safety helps protect against the trigger catching on something and resulting in an AD while still providing the safety of essentially needing to have an actual shooting grip on the pistol for it to discharge.

[Sharkbite]

A grip safety helps protect against the trigger catching on something and resulting in an AD while still providing the safety of essentially needing to have an actual shooting grip on the pistol for it to discharge.

I guess i dont see the advantage. If the gun is carried in a proper holster, you have to deactivate the grip safety during the draw....so the grip safety has no ability to stop a ND

If its still in the holster, nothing shold be able to touch the trigger

When putting it back in the holster, again the grip safety is still depressed by the shooting hand.

Now, im a 1911 guy from WAY back. Carried one as a duty gun for years. Taught with one for decades. I understand grip safeties, just not this comment.

[Mackie244Bud]

Hi all,

YouTube Review...Shows the Hammer @9:30

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cofcm6G8RJU

I've been thinking about a 380 for awhile...maybe this is it.

Mackie244 / Bud

[Martowski]

Sharkbite, isn't that the entire purpose of a grip safety? To prevent a firearm from discharging unless there is a firm shooting grip?

When a manual safety isn't employed and a handgun doesn't have a long and heavier pull like on a da auto or revolver, I like the idea of a grip safety preventing discharge in the event the trigger were to catch on something.

[Sharkbite]

Sharkbite, isn't that the entire purpose of a grip safety? To prevent a firearm from discharging unless there is a firm shooting grip?

When a manual safety isn't employed and a handgun doesn't have a long and heavier pull like on a da auto or revolver, I like the idea of a grip safety preventing discharge in the event the trigger were to catch on something.

My point is that anytime you are holding the gun (and thats when ND’s happen) the grip safety is already disengaged. So a grip safety is not going to prevent a ND.

The grip safety on a 1911 prevents the trigger from moving to the rear if the pistol is dropped with the manual safety off and the gun lands muzzle up.

That is a whole different thing then saying a grip safety make the gun safer to handle.