M&P 9c vs M&P Shield
As prospective first time gun owner, I would not classify myself as new to guns. I served in the US Military as a Military Police Officer, so in that aspect I am familiar with their use. However, I have never purchased one for myself or tried to carry concealed. As an officer, I carried, but it was always openly and while on duty. However, with the recent events transpiring around the country and having worked, and to an extent still work in public safety, I understand that these incidents transpire extremely quickly and are typically dealt with by the people already there. So anyway, enough of the boring background and on to the good stuff.
So as I began my search for a compact semi-automatic pistol, in either a 9mm or .40 caliber, I narrowed it down to four:
So I have listed them in order of preference. Starting from the bottom here are my thoughts on how the Smith & Wesson made it to the top. While the Taurus is a sharp looking gun and has the lowest cost, after browsing the internet I have discovered the disturbing remarks by other gun owners regarding the quality control and customer service. It seems to be either hit or miss, with some Taurus owners claiming to have had a gun for 15 years and never having a problem and other gun owners claiming to have sent it in for repairs only after a few hundred rounds. Moving on to personal preference, the Taurus has a thumb safety that I would personally prefer not to have. While I carried a Baretta M9 as an MP which had a thumb safety, I felt it was one more unnecessary movement I had to make in order to use my weapon to defend myself. Yet, besides these two issues, it remains on my list, albeit the very bottom as the economical contender.
- Smith & Wesson M&P 9c Compact
- Smith & Wesson M&P Shield Sub-Compact
- Springfield Armory XD(m) 3.8" Compact
- Taurus PT24/7 G2 Compact
Next I put the Springfield Armory XD(m) on my list. One of my friends went out to buy a Glock as his concealed carry weapon, but returned with an Springfield. However, two things have made me put it in the bottom middle of my list; Price and Bore Height. First off the XD(m) was the costliest of all the guns I selected, so for that reason I marked it down a peg. Finally someone pointed out to me that it also has a higher bore height which supposedly translates to greater recoil felt and a higher barrel flip, delaying the return to target.
So now it comes down to the Smith & Wesson's and here is where I'd like some input from owners who have either had both or fired both. I personally feel like I would prefer the larger 9c versus the Shield, however, I do like the idea that the Shield is narrower and will probably fit more comfortably with less of a profile while concealed. In your opinion, is the difference in size and comfort noticeable while trying to conceal? I realize this is a opinion related question and nothing statistical, however, I have yet to hold or fire either of them. I plan to fire the XD(m) 3.8" and M&P 9c tomorrow, however the range doesn't have a Shield to rent and I don't know anyone who owns one.
Also, if you have any other opinions regarding to two Smith & Wessons, things I should be considering, please let me know. Or, if you have any input with the other two guns I mentioned, that would be great too.
Thanks in advance for any input.
1) good luck finding a shield
2) dont get a taurus
3) M&P 9c LIKE!!
4) XDm not bad
5) Wheres the Glock 26???
Your first choice is in my opinion the best one.
The shield may hide marginaly better but doesn't carry enough rounds. I have no trouble hiding a full size IWB so am not considering obtaining a Shield.
M&P 9c vs M&P Shield
I have been looking for M&P shield in 9mm for amount a month. I stopped in mega sports on Tuesday and they had six. 3 in 9mm and 3 in 40mm. I bought a 9 on Tuesday waited the three days. Picked it up yesterday and they only had 2 40mm left.
I haven't shot it as of yet. Mega sports was packed Saturday and you couldn't even find a place to park. The range had a waiting list.
Only one thing about the 9mm shield. The magazine release in not reverse able.
It terms of the trigger regarding the M&Ps, the trigger is a little smoother (stock) on the shield. Only downside to the shield is that it doesnt carry enough rounds compared to the 9c. The 9c may require a trigger as it's a bit longer... M&P is the way to go my friend!
Thank you for serving this country!
Isn't S&W incorporating the new trigger of the shield in all their current striker fired pistols?
I have shot a newer fullsize M&P. It had a newer trigger. It is different than the older mod and better. But, it was not the same as my two shields.
I have owned many subcompacts over the years. The shield is by far my favorite. Less recoil than many of these doubles tacks. And, I shoot it better too. Plus, the size and weight is fantastic. Even bought a second one...
I am in the same situation as you and have decided on the M&P 9C.
Some of my reasoning:
9C can take the 10 round, 12 round or the full size 17 round clip. This makes it nice for a concealed carry or with a larger magazine it can be a nice range gun.
Shield and 9C are actually very similar in size with the Shield being a little narrower.
I currently have the M&P 9C and it is a great gun. I have had no issues with being able to conceal it. The reason I choose the 9C over the shield is its magazine capacity.
If I get a Glock, I think I will go with a Glock 19 or Glock 23.
Originally Posted by jakeleinen1
This is the direction I am leaning, though I still haven't held a Shield, I have since gone and held a 9c and the size seems just fine. The carrying capacity doesn't seem to worth the miniscule size difference.
Originally Posted by TOF
Luckily I'm right handed, so in most situations that shouldn't be a problem when it comes to the magazine release. I'm curious though, had you fired or held the Shield before you purchased it? Or are you so impressed with the other M&P's that it didn't matter.
Originally Posted by aeronaut
Based on what I've heard, read, and experienced, I'm leaning heavily towards the Compact because of that very reason.
Originally Posted by shamrock62
If they are, I wonder how log it will be before they do that. Should I hold of buying one hoping that they'll be putting the Shield trigger mechanism into the compact?
Originally Posted by denner
When you say the Shield has less recoil, are you comparing it to the M&P compacts or other manufacturers? If its compared to the M&P 9c, I wonder why your perception is that it recoils less. I thought the bore height was about the same, but with a shorter barrel, I would have imagined it would have had a miniscule increase in recoil, not the other way around.
Originally Posted by Shipwreck
I believe I have come to the same conclusion.
Originally Posted by dean25
I think capacity is a game changer in this. If the shield carried a little more, I think it would have been preferable, but by holding half of the compact, it doesn't seem worth it.
Originally Posted by FloridaGuy
The triggers initial roughness can be fixed for around $35 by replacing the drop safety plunger with one from Apex Tactical. There are other items available but the plunger fixes 95% of the trigger complaints. The remaining 5% are not significant for the average shooter IMHO.
M&P 9c vs M&P Shield
I did a lot of you tube watching and reviews on the m&p shield before I bought it. Sometime during last year when i was in mega sports they had a demo plastic one that they were showing me, and it just felt right.
I still haven't gone to the range yet. Christmas time has been busy for me. But soon.
M&P is Ok but trigger sloppy , Glock angle of backstrap is not right for everyone and the XDm is probably the better choice don't need to buy special ammo to fit like some glocks Pease stay away from Tarus not as good quality anymore.
Originally Posted by Ender911
I am comparing it to the P99c and Glock 26... It also has less recoil than a Kahr PM9.
I've shot fullsize 9mm and 45 M&Ps - and I have always hated the stock trigger. Had zero interest in M&Ps, honestly. Tried the rental Shield as an after thought. I was hooked. Due to the different trigger, I liked it a lot more. A friend has one of the newer, fullsize M&Ps with the new trigger. To me, its better - but its still not quite the same as the trigger in the Shield. He agreed as well.
I have not shot the M&Pc, as the Shield is the only M&P I like enough to own. I was just originally stating that it has less felt recoil than many other slightly larger double stacks.