Tell Me About The S&W Shield in 40 S&W

[peterg7]

I prefer my .40 S&W guns to be 4” double stack at least, but if I got a good deal on a .40 shield I’d buy it.

Right now I’m comfortable with a Shield9 as an EDC but would give a Shield40 a try.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[AgedWarrior]

I would say go for it! You like the shields, all three calibers is good.

[Forte S+W]

I checked on that. You end up spending enough to make it probably not worthwhile, vs. just buying a 9mm Shield.

Really? That's surprising, I'm used to seeing ordinary M&P Conversion Barrels for as little as $89, and M&P9 Shield magazines aren't very expensive, so I assumed that it would be as easy as buying a 9mm conversion barrel plus a couple 9mm magazines.

I guess I'm just used to the simple caliber conversion between a .40 and a 9mm Glock.

[Nanuk]

Not talking about FELT recoil. I was talking about the recoil shown in the close up videos. They look mislabeled to me.

You have to be careful about that. many people do not lock their wrist so it LOOKS like more recoil than it is.

[Carl the Floor Walker]

Originally Posted by AgedWarrior

Threads like this still make me sorta shake my head. Between 9mm, .40 S&W, and.45 ACP, they have all proven effective as defensive cartridges, and thus they remain popular. Though some speak of the eminent demise of the .40, I sincerely doubt it. Recoil varies between the calibers and can be mitigated or exaggerated depending on the weight and design of the firearm. Folks got to find what works effectively for themselves and stop criticizing others for their choices.
I have personally carried in all three calibers at one time or another. I do not find recoil of .40 S&W too much to handle, nor that of a .45 in smaller guns, but some folks do. I stopped carrying my .45 because I found the weight of my RO Compact a little more than I appreciated after a full day (partly because abdominal surgeries made the weight feel uncomfortable now), but the gun is excellent! It is accurate and dependable and I did not feel shorted by 6 round magazines. Carrying a spare mag gave me 13 with one in the pipe.

I changed to my XD Mod 2 sub-compact in .40 and got a slightly smaller firearm with a little less weight and 9 rounds per mag. This too is an excellent pistol, accurate and reliable and I still do travel with it.

A year ago I picked up a P365, and immediately loved it. It is by far the easiest to conceal on my skinny frame and the light weight makes it quite easy to carry all day long. The additional ammo is a plus with the slightly reduced power of the cartridge. It is as accurate as the first two and very comfortable to shoot with, and utterly reliable.

I have shot all sorts of light and small pistols in all three calibers. It is notable that it is not simply the weight or caliber that affects gun handling and perceived recoil, but the design/shape is significant as well. The caliber itself is often not the problem at all, but the design of the firearm. An example in how it relates to me (others may vary) is the difference between the SA Hellcat and the Sig P365. Though I enjoy several of SA offerings, the Hellcat is not one of them. To me the gun wants to roll upward a lot compared to the P365 making it harder for follow up shots. It is the design that makes it poor for my use...the cartridge is just fine.

And yet others much prefer the Hellcat. Not as snappy. Guns are like shoes, no perfect fit for everyone. I would say shoot both and make a decision. Better yet, shoot a lot of other guns and take your time before making that decision.

[CDW4ME]

I've got a Shield 40, like it.

[PolarFBear]

Can anyone "chime" in on the Shield 45? I think they are bit larger but seem a good servicable firearm.

[Forte S+W]

I also considered getting a M&P45 Shield. In my opinion, it's the best polymer framed single stack .45 currently on the market. It has comparable capacity to the other Shields and you don't have to fret over the whole M1 vs M2 deal because the only difference between them is a marking on the slide. Yes, the M&P45 Shield was the basis for the M2 configuration and thus has all the same features, S&W merely began making them with an M2.0 stamp later down the line once the M2.0 configuration was offered to the M&P9/40 Shields to avoid confusion.

Honestly, I like the M&P45 Shield so much that if I were going to get a Shield, then it would be the .45.

[Spats McGee]

Originally Posted by PolarFBear

Can anyone "chime" in on the Shield 45? I think they are bit larger but seem a good servicable firearm.

I've stayed out of this thread, largely because I have zero experience with the Shield 40. For that matter, I don't own a 40. With that said, I'm a big fan of the Shield 9mm. I've carried one for ~3 years and have about 500 rounds down the pipe. It's been flawless (so far) and has been a pretty remarkable pistol. In fact, more reliable than my Glock.

I've also just recently picked up one of these. It's not a standard Shield 45, but I splurged a little. I've shot a regular Shield 45, and it handles recoil remarkably well, just like it's little 9mm brother. The 4" Shield 45 (which is basically the same size as a commander 1911) is having some teething issues, but we'll get it all sorted out. It's had a few feeding issues, but it really shoots nicely, otherwise.

[dontcatchmany]

PolarFBear

See my previous post. The 45s are only slightly larger than the 40 and I do pocket carry them.