Captains1911
Member
The gun will be as accurate as you can shoot it.
How's the S&W Shield for accuracy?
- Thread starter tipoc
- Start date
- Status
Nope. What I am talking about is there are shooters who have abilities that exceed the mechanical accuracy of some pistols. Pretty simple concept. Then again if you suck at shooting more than the inaccuracy of a lemon pistol you will never know the difference.
Captains1911
Member
I'm sorry, but most shooters do not exceed the inherent accuracy of most handguns. Maybe some Olympic bullseye shooters do, but they are the exception. Furthermore, the Shield is a sub-compact concealed carry gun, not a match grade bullseye gun. It's accuracy is more than adequate for its purpose in the hands of anybody who can shoot it even reasonably well. Comparing accuracy of defensive handguns is silly, because 99.9% of the time the shooter is what determines how accurate they are.
edmo01
Member
I've owned a Shield 9 since they came out (a couple of years ago) and it has been a good one.
No malfunctions, easy to carry, and as accurate as any similar gun. Why did I pick a Shield? Because GLOCK doesn't make a single stack 9mm.
Below is a typical example of accuracy I get out of mine. This was fired slow-fire while standing with 51 year old eyes.
Edmo
No malfunctions, easy to carry, and as accurate as any similar gun. Why did I pick a Shield? Because GLOCK doesn't make a single stack 9mm.
Below is a typical example of accuracy I get out of mine. This was fired slow-fire while standing with 51 year old eyes.
Edmo
Oh O.k. Guess I just suck at shooting then.
We will leave it at that, I'm not too interested in further pursuit in this.
Bottom line, the only way the O.P. will know is the try it. The pistol is proven to be an accurate platform, it's up to the O.P. to see if it fits.
wally
Member
Old eyes and presbyopia = large sight on small gun.
Lasik monovision got me 5+ more years of using iron sights but the clock has run out. I can only use iron sights if I wear "reading glasses" which is a non-starter for CCW usage.
If I ever need to use my CCW I assume one of two most likely situations:
A) draw and fire quickly with "instinctive" point shooting (I practice this quite a lot at 3-7 yards)
B) element of surprise returning aimed fire from cover/concealment (think being in a place as its being robbed -- get down, be ready!)
Situation A the sights don't matter. In situation B, the RMR lets me shoot like my eyes are still 30 something
And the view as it is used focusing on the target and looking through the dot:
As you can see some dust accumulates from carry but doesn't interfere with usage. I clean it periodically with a micro fiber cloth, looks like it was overdue
Yes, I think its sad that the sights cost more than the pistol did
Attachments
Last edited:
smalls
Member
I assumed eyesight played a role in your decision. It actually doesn't look as bulky as I thought it would sitting in its holster. Hey, I'm glad you found a combo that works for ya!
ClickClickD'oh
Member
tipoc said:
Lol, wut? No. It's pretty common knowledge that any given firearm will shoot more or less accurately with variances in bullet weight and velocity. That's why hand loaders tune their load for a specific firearm.
See endless arguments under: Which rifling to stabilize XXgr bullet?
tipoc said:
I'm sorry, I must have missed the memo... what is the "standard bullet weight" for a 9mm?
tightgroup tiger
Member
That was pretty much my experience with my 9mm shield. It shoots very well for me.
I took mine apart and did some work on it and it is much easier to shoot. I couldn't afford an apex kit for it.
To answer the OPs question directly, I have shot 4 Shields on paper for groups after doing trigger jobs. They all shot remarkably well for their form factor. Two of the guys (that I know of) have Shield pistols and they are also getting good results. All six pistols are of the 9mm variety.
I don't really want to argue about this, but what I am saying is there are plenty of lemons coming out that don't shoot for beans. I owned a Glock 17 that was horrible no matter what ammo was tried. Anyone that could shoot a 2 inch group at 25 yards with an accurate G17 could tell right away that the pistol was having it's issues. The same was true of a 5 inch M&P that I bought to shoot production division.
It's accurate. I can't really focus on the front sight that well (same problem as wally), so in this case, the gun's more accurate than I am.
The following is a few shots from an isocoles, and strong and weak (left side, low) hands unsupported. I can't remember if 7 or 10 yards. Trigger was still really rough then. It takes a while to wear in. I think I have a bur in the plunger that the trigger bar pushes up. Local smith told me to just keep shooting it until it wore in, and it is getting better.
The following is a few shots from an isocoles, and strong and weak (left side, low) hands unsupported. I can't remember if 7 or 10 yards. Trigger was still really rough then. It takes a while to wear in. I think I have a bur in the plunger that the trigger bar pushes up. Local smith told me to just keep shooting it until it wore in, and it is getting better.
Last edited:
Captains1911
Member
What you mean is YOU will out shoot the Shield with your CW9. There are undoubtedly people who if handed your exact two guns would shoot the Shield more accurately. Like I said, it's the shooter and his or her fit to the gun that determine the accuracy of the shooter-gun combination.
Last edited:
OP
OP
tipoc
Member
- Joined
- Mar 9, 2006
- Messages
- 3,563
Except when it's not. I don't want to belabor this discussion which has been unfortunately full of some fellas repeating generalities mixed in with helpful things.
The early S&W M&P barrels in 9mm had a rather slow rate of twist about a 1:18 3/8". This produced accuracy problems for many with heavier and and therefore slower bullets, the 147 gr. bullets in particular. S&W made a change not long ago to about a 1:10 or so rate of twist. This, according to reports I've read and folks I've spoken to made the gun more accurate with the heavier bullets. There is some debate about why this is but all agree it is the case.
The most common (a person could say standard) 9mm bullet weights used are the 115 gr., 124 gr. and 147gr. A slow rate of twist means that the heavier and longer bullet, a 147 for example, will stay in the barrel longer and thus, as Jerry Miculek says require more ans sustained follow through.
The complaints about accuracy and the 9mm M&P came about because of decidedly poorer groups fired by competitive shooters with the 147 gr. pills. I found the same to be the case with my S&W M&P9c. Good accuracy with the 115 gr., acceptable with the 124 and not so good with the 147. This is quite different than what I've seen with my other 9mms as I said early on in this thread.
Here is what Jerry Miculek said on the subject, go in to about 11:13... (This is an added note, it's the first review of the CORE gun time of 25:24)
https://search.yahoo.com/search?fr=mcafee&type=B211US105D20140728&p=jerry+miculek+on+the+S&W+Core
There has been a wide ranging discussion on this for a few years now...
http://smith-wessonforum.com/smith-wesson-m-p-pistols/292369-barrel-twist-rates.html
10-8 MSW
http://modernserviceweapons.com/?p=3719
http://modernserviceweapons.com/?p=3830&utm_source=feedly
and you can Google it at a number of places and draw your own conclusions.
tipoc
Last edited:
They not ony changed the twist, they also changed the lock-up just a bit by making a change in barrel machining.
As for the triggers in the Shield, some of them are notoriously heavy with plenty of over travel. With my 9mm shield, no matter what I did, when the trigger broke during live (and dry) fire the barrel would wiggle ever so slightly like a little tuning fork. I reduced the pull by 2 lbs, smoothed everything up, and got rid of a bit of the over travel. Problem solved. I also did a trigger for an M class shooter who had the same issues in order to improve follow through.
OP
OP
tipoc
Member
- Joined
- Mar 9, 2006
- Messages
- 3,563
Yeah they did more than the twist rate. But I've heard fellas say they did fine with the M&P triggers as they were. I didn't and installed the Apex trigger group. Much better results.
The M&P line is a good line of guns. S&W improved on the mechanical problems that came up with them and apparently has improved their accuracy and shootability. It isn't always the shooter sometimes, rarely, it's the guns.
tipoc
The M&P line is a good line of guns. S&W improved on the mechanical problems that came up with them and apparently has improved their accuracy and shootability. It isn't always the shooter sometimes, rarely, it's the guns.
tipoc
- Status
