IWB Question

Status
Not open for further replies.

slide

Member
Joined
Jan 7, 2006
Messages
148
Location
South Texas
I've been licensed and carrying for years now but using subcompact .380's in a Sneaky Pete holster. Due to some incredibly bad luck, I've had to draw twice in less than a year. The second time especially I felt even while the incident was underway, under-gunned. I decided to move to an S&W M&P Shield in 40 S&W. I didn't consider a 10 mm because of the Harold Fish incident. I live in a state where some DA's are screaming liberals.

Obviously, a Sneaky Pete carry, even if they made such a holster, is laughable in even this, a compact, pistol. I decided to try IWB carry and purchased two holsters to try both out to see which worked best for me. The two I got are a Harry's Executive and an Alien Gear Shapeshifter. So far I'm only experimenting with the Harry's.

I've found a carry where the holster is in between my pants and the belt to simply fall into place. It has the advantage of insulating my skin from the holster rub too. I can't see a disadvantage of this carry but I'm concerned there must be since I've never seen it demonstrated or heard of anybody carrying this way.

I do find this position to be easier to get the holster on and more comfortable than the true IWB carry. I'd like to hear from others who may have a comment on this modified IWB carry.

Thanks.
 
Some people like that since there are holsters made in such a manner such as these Mitch Rosen models

https://mitchrosen.com/products/holsters/between-waistband-belt-holsters/

While I've never used them, they seem like the worst of both worlds. It is outside the pants, so you lose the concealability of an IWB holster, and they are inside the belt, so you lose the comfort of an OWB holster. Generally speaking, IWB gives more concealment at the expense of comfort, and OWB generally gives more comfort at the expense of concealment.

We do have a guy on the forum, I can't remember his screen name, who is a big fan of this style. We've debated this subject, and he disagrees with my observations.

However, a little gun like a Shield may not extend much below the belt line, and your belt may provide quite a bit of concealment itself, so IWB concealment probably isn't that much of an advantage. Think of carrying a longer barreled gun like a 1911 or G34, and think of how long a cover garment would need to be to cover those guns in an OWB holster. This is where IWB has an advantage, it allows you to carry a bigger gun with less cover garment.

If you may want to consider OWB carry, while you're at the Mitch Rosen site, take a look at the Upper Limit holster. It is pretty much designed for OWB carry of those small pistols.
 
I will since I've carried OWB extensively in the field and find it works well for me using even larger firearms than the S&W Shield. Part of my experimentation has been to see I'm getting printing and so far, even using t-shirts, it's not an issue. It never occurred to me to go OWB for concealed simply because the debate I've seen isn't IWB or not for we civilians but which IWB setup and where to wear it. I do understand that something like my 1911 long slide in 10 mm would pose a major difference in concealment difficulty over my current Smith.

Anyway, even if you don't think much of this carry, I do appreciate your reply which has me thinking I'm not completely off base after all for having fallen into this carry style. I'll check out Mitch Rosen's site too.

Thanks
 
It never occurred to me to go OWB for concealed simply because the debate I've seen isn't IWB or not for we civilians but which IWB setup and where to wear it.
Thanks
My point was, if you're going to wear your IWB outside your pants, there really isn't much advantage to that holster as far as concealment goes. If you can conceal that gun/holster combination between your belt and pants, chances are good you can conceal that gun in the right OWB holster.

A slightly different point, with some of those very short barreled guns, wearing them IWB may cause them to roll over the belt since there sometimes isn't enough barrel below the belt to keep the gun stable IWB. Some folks, often AIWB folks, wear a G17 holster with their G19 or G26 just to provide the extra stability.
 
This is why I'm experimenting with various carry styles. I need to learn what works for my pistol and body.

I do have a query into Mitch Rosen's company regarding two Upper Limit choices. I'll go with the one he recommends as a third possibility. All seem feasible but one will be best but I need to personally try to find out which works best for me.

I'm guessing the belt itself in my current carry will form a bit of a bridge breaking up the possibility of printing to some small extent but that's not going to be the case with the OWB. Still, despite me trying with not too loose t-shirts, there's been no danger of printing. I do have an advantage that my shirts fit me tightest in the shoulder / arm / upper chest area and are loosest at the waist giving me plenty of extra space there.

So far there's been no indication of the rolling you describe with very short barrels. My guess is the 3.3" barrel of the Shield is long enough to be retained well.

Again, thanks for your comments.
 
I do have a query into Mitch Rosen's company regarding two Upper Limit choices.
Is your question about the Full Detail or the Express Line?

Here's a video review of Mitch Rosen holsters. I don't think there is an Upper Limit in the review, but he talks about the difference between the Full Detail (he calls them Full Dress in the video) and the Express Line.



I'd more than likely choose an Express Line version. If you find it's great, maybe go with a Full Detail next time around, but I'd be hesitant to spend $145 on a holster I wasn't sure about. While the Shield is fairly common, it's probably not as easy to get rid of a Shield holster as say a 1911 or G17 holster.
 
While the Shield is a little gun and it may not make much difference, what are you using for a belt?
 
Is your question about the Full Detail or the Express Line?

Here's a video review of Mitch Rosen holsters. I don't think there is an Upper Limit in the review, but he talks about the difference between the Full Detail (he calls them Full Dress in the video) and the Express Line.



I'd more than likely choose an Express Line version. If you find it's great, maybe go with a Full Detail next time around, but I'd be hesitant to spend $145 on a holster I wasn't sure about. While the Shield is fairly common, it's probably not as easy to get rid of a Shield holster as say a 1911 or G17 holster.


Yes, so thanks for the video. My Shield in 40 is the same in holster size as the 9 so it's fairly common. My local gun store does take holsters in on trade and gives a reasonable price for them too. I'm really not worried over resale. My concern now is finding the rig which is ideal for me.

As to spending $145, I don't want to on anything but will if that's what the fare is. Half that is twice as appealing.

My belts are all 1.5" thick leather. I've given the holster, with the pistol in it, good shoves both top and bottom away from my body. There's on roll at all.
 
Vedder iwb holster has satisfaction guarantee. That and a good belt you should be good to go.
 
Mitch Rosen is only one of quite a large group of quality gunleather makers.
There are many top leather holster makers, and Milt Sparks is certainly one of them, but the context in which Mitch Rosen was brought up, was they are one of the few makers that offer a "between the belt and pants" holster line, and the OP's request for comments on this style of carry.
 
I'm the OP. I figure I may need to try various holsters and carry methods to arrive on one which works for my body and clothes. I ordered a Mitch Rosen and will give it a try for a few weeks to see if I settle into it.
 
Upper Limit Express just as we discussed. He said he had one in stock for immediate shipping. It'll be here later this week. Thanks for the recommendation.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top