S&W m&p45 shield has landed!

Status
Not open for further replies.

jjones45

Member
Joined
Aug 21, 2013
Messages
935
Location
Ohio
https://youtu.be/eCU8wY06V7g

Yes the 45 shield has finally arrived and with 6+1 and 7+1 mags w/without the thumb safety this puppy is sure to make a splash. If they keep it even close to the size of the 9/40 it should be a hell of a hit. I knew I was holding off for a single stack ccw gun for a reason and I may have found it. What do you guys think?
 
Never tell your wife that. I've been called a compulsive liar just because of that lol
 
Have you thought about the XDS 3.3 45. Fits in my front pocket in a Desantis Nemisis Superfly. And I love it!
 

Attachments

  • 20160516_200610.jpg
    20160516_200610.jpg
    83.1 KB · Views: 36
Have you thought about the XDS 3.3 45. Fits in my front pocket in a Desantis Nemisis Superfly. And I love it!
Yes I've entertained the idea of a xds and many other single stacks and always decided against them because I carry midsize gun very well and prefer more capacity. But I do see the benefits of a smaller gun and may end up finally grabbing a single stack ccw in 45
 
I've got the 9mm version. Picked it up from Quantico Tactical a year and a half ago for $299. The gun is nice and small and feels good, but the trigger has something to be desired.

I've got the XDS45 and I really like it. The trigger is better than the Shield. However, the new Shield 45 will outclass it in terms of magazine capacity. I wonder if S&W will improve the Shield 45 trigger?
 
It's cool and all, but it's just too short a barrel for the .45 round, to get anywhere near it's potential. I think the Shield is most practical in 9mm.
I was tempted by a little Springfield XD sub-compact in .45 that was on my local Armslist recently, but after looking into it and seeing all the lost velocity, I passed. Plus you lose another round in an already limited capacity magazine.
(this is right about the point that some genius always predictably [and stupidly] says something like, "oh yeah, how about you let me shoot you with mine and see how you like it".)
 
It's cool and all, but it's just too short a barrel for the .45 round, to get anywhere near it's potential. I think the Shield is most practical in 9mm.
I was tempted by a little Springfield XD sub-compact in .45 that was on my local Armslist recently, but after looking into it and seeing all the lost velocity, I passed. Plus you lose another round in an already limited capacity magazine.
(this is right about the point that some genius always predictably [and stupidly] says something like, "oh yeah, how about you let me shoot you with mine and see how you like it".)
If velocity is the major concern with short barrel 45's then you could look into some higher velocity, lighter weight ammo offerings. While I agree with your statement, these guns are designed for up close and personal business where it won't matter much
 
I have a Shield in .40, I love it. Took a moment to break in but great little gun.

I have the XDs in 9mm, great little gun as well.
 
If velocity is the major concern with short barrel 45's then you could look into some higher velocity, lighter weight ammo offerings.

Wouldn't it be a fair assumption that I already have ??? :banghead:
I was citing some obvious problems with the platform, not begging for advice on what to do.
 
It sounded like a reasonable response, certainly not something to get upset about.

A short barrel hurts any caliber, and I agree that they are intended for "up close and personal business where it won't matter much".

I often carry a 3" .45, so I guess I feel differently that it is an obvious flaw. :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top