Shield question

[Lumber]

Is there any real reason to get the 2.0 over the original shield other than the front cocking serrations and better trigger?

[Cyanide971]

Lumber, the 2.0 models also have a much better grip texture as well.

[Lumber]

I was just wondering because there’s $100 difference between the two and was wondering if I’d be better off just buying the original

[O4L]

I have owned and daily carry a Shield 1.0 for many years. I have handled and dry fired the 2.0 and although I would like to own one, I cannot justify the price difference for myself.

That being said, if I had a lot more gun money I would have a 2.0 version Shield along with many more guns that for now aren't financially feasible.

[TunnelRat]

The 2.0 triggers are better than the 1.0 triggers. You could always buy a 1.0 and drop an APEX kit in it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Nathan]

Lumber, the 2.0 models also have a much better grip texture as well.

This alone is worth something

[jmhyer]

As has been said, the main practical differences (to me) are improved grip texture and trigger on the 2.0 models. I am content with the trigger on my 1.0 model; however, I have a Talon overlay to make the grip texture to my satisfaction. If I were purchasing a Shield for the first time today, though, I would spend the extra c-note to get the 2.0.

[Spats McGee]

I've had a Shield 9mm 1.0 for about 3 years. I have never been able to justify upgrading to the 2.0. If I were buying new, I might get the 2.0. I also have a Shield 45 2.0, but haven't shot it enough to tell you whether the trigger is any better.

[Mackie244Bud]

Cyanide971 says,

Lumber, the 2.0 models also have a much better grip texture as well.

To which Nathan responds..

This alone is worth something

Unless you use Talon Grips or the Hogue Wrap on the Grip then this is Moot.
My M&P Shield 1.0 has a Rubber Talon Grip and if I purchased the 2.0 I would put a Talon Grip on it as well.

[tlm225]

I chose to buy the 2.0 because of the grip texture. In hindsight I would reconsider my choice and possibly buy the 1.0 and add the Talon grip. No regrets on the 2.0 however. IMO too much ado is made about the better trigger. It's a defensive handgun, not a target pistol and accuracy with the 1.0 trigger is plenty good for it's purpose.

[peterg7]

I carry 3 M&P pistols, Shield9, M&P40 are 1.0, M&P9C 2.0.

Triggers aren’t that different yeah 2.0 feels a bit better or maybe smoother but overall I can transition between them without issue.

So if I were doing in again I’d choose the same because I chased the bargins


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[223 shooter]

I have the 1.0 Shield 9mm and thought of buying the 2.0 mainly for the grip texture. I bought a 45 Shield after buying the 1.0 Shield and the 45s grip texture was much better to me.

Finally went with the above mentioned Talon grips for the 9mm , first the rubber and then the granulate. Grip is very much to my liking now. But I eventually got a P365 and the Shield has just sat unfired for at least a year now.

[bedbugbilly]

I have the 1.0 in 9mm - completely satisfied as far as function. My hands are not huge - but I found that for me, that putting a grip sleeve on it made it better for me to pull and get on target easily - not for the texture but for just the small increase it made in the size/grip thickness. You really need to handle both the 1.0 and the 2.0 - preferably side by side to determine which is best for you and if the extra $$ is worth it - both would be good pistols. Good luck!

[claydoctor]

I'm waiting on my 4th Shield. Yes, I like 'em. My first was the 1.0 9mm. I was so taken by that one, I bought the 45ACP version, which I later gave to my son. A few months back, I replaced that one with the 2.0 .45 and the 4 inch barrel. That one is a Performance Center but on that gun, for some reason, Smith deletes the ports. I thought I would like the slightly longer barrel but overall, the gun seems almost the size of a 1911 commander. The one I just bought is a 2.0 Performance Center model in 40 S&W. I don't see much difference in the triggers. The two 45's had the enhanced grip surface and my 9 has a Pachmayr grip sleeve. Unlike other small 9's, such as the Sig P365, which I also have, the Shield just fits my hand like a glove. What is most surprising is the small amount of felt recoil, even with the 45. I'm interested to learn how the 40 compares.

[Carmady]

I had a 9mm 1.0 and thought the trigger was just fine.

The grip was on the thin side so I sold it.

Still have the CM9. That's not going anywhere unless someone steals it.

[HighDesert]

Don't know if this is worth anything. About a week before the COVID lockdown and subsequent panic, a buddy of mine tried offloading his 1.0 version. The LGS said they couldn't give him much for it, because everyone wanted the 2.0 version and said they had one in the case that had been sitting for three months.

He got what he could for it. I'm sure a week later it wouldn't have mattered much.

I ran into the same issue with my Ruger LC9. Absolutely hated that trigger, so I upgraded it and a month later the LC9s came out. There were zero differences between my upgraded trigger and the new model, but mine was worth zilch. Perception matters, so I'd say either buy the 1.0 super cheap, or go with the 2.0.

The problem I see with some lines of guns is their constant state of flux. i'm sure there will be a 3.0 sometime soon too. They aren't like the timeless 1911 of CZ75 or others. Glock changes the slightest things and sales pick back up. Sig offers a new finish, chargers $300 more and sales pick back up. With some, if they aren't changing, they aren't selling, so change they will. Doesn't mean the previous one was flawed, but may lead to that in respects to perception. That may be worth something or not.

[lunger]

I agree with AZheat about the constant state of flux of some models. The gun that was the ultimate wiz bang carry selection is suddenly useless when the next gen comes out . Sort of like I phones.

If the deal is better on a 1.0 I would go for it.

[dontcatchmany]

I have three Shields.

Two 45s 2.0. A PC and one with a green integrated laser. Fantastic out of the box.

I also have a 1.0 40 that has been a great pistol after I put in an Apex Duty/Carry trigger kit. Also have a 9mm barrel and mags for it.

They all are carried on a regular basis. Never a failure with thousands of rounds through each. Liked them so much that I got the M&P 45 full size which has been fantastic out of the box.

[peterg7]

Originally Posted by AZHeat

Don't know if this is worth anything. About a week before the COVID lockdown and subsequent panic, a buddy of mine tried offloading his 1.0 version. The LGS said they couldn't give him much for it, because everyone wanted the 2.0 version and said they had one in the case that had been sitting for three months.

He got what he could for it. I'm sure a week later it wouldn't have mattered much.

I ran into the same issue with my Ruger LC9. Absolutely hated that trigger, so I upgraded it and a month later the LC9s came out. There were zero differences between my upgraded trigger and the new model, but mine was worth zilch. Perception matters, so I'd say either buy the 1.0 super cheap, or go with the 2.0.

The problem I see with some lines of guns is their constant state of flux. i'm sure there will be a 3.0 sometime soon too. They aren't like the timeless 1911 of CZ75 or others. Glock changes the slightest things and sales pick back up. Sig offers a new finish, chargers $300 more and sales pick back up. With some, if they aren't changing, they aren't selling, so change they will. Doesn't mean the previous one was flawed, but may lead to that in respects to perception. That may be worth something or not.

You’ve uncovered the modern marketing 2.0

if the product is affordable you can generate demand for new sales by tweaking current products and hyping the hell out of it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk