S&W Shield - no thumb safety version - thoughts?

[Cool Breeze]

Hello all,

Forgive me being late to the party. I just realized that the shield is now coming out with a version that doesn't have a thumb safety. I am buying a shield in 9mm before the end of the year and I am just trying to figure out which one. I know most of you probably carry it with safety off anyway...but may use the safety to holster the pistol then flip if off. But I do worry about it coming on accidently. I carry glocks so no safety doesnt seem like that big of a deal, but I wanted to see if I was missing something.

Also, any thing else I should be aware of when purchasing this littlle guy?

Thanks.

[Charlie Foxtrot]

It seems the CCW community has strongly gotten behind the no thumb safety Shield. In a life and death situation, the thumb safety is just one more thing for Murphy to play with. When fractions of a second count....

I've got a M&P45 with a thumb safety - I've inadvertently engaged the safety when firing full house SD loads with a high - thumbs forward grip. That was not happy making. I'm considering sending it back to S&W to have it converted into the non-thumb safety variant.

The Shield - without the thumb safety - is on my short list for a CCW. If Remington ever pulls their head out of their corporate assets and fixes the R51, that will also be on the list. It has a very interesting grip safety.

[Kyle Reese]

The example that I borrowed from a friend in 9mm had the manual safety, but it was stiff enough (in either position) that I was not worried about actuating it inadvertently. That said, if shopping for a Shield right now, I would select the variant w/o the safety.

[Up1911Fan]

I have an older one with the safety and it has never accidentally moved in either direction. I don't use it, but have no concerns about it engaging either. I'd get the no safety model if you were buying new and have no plans of ever using it, if it's something you may use, I wouldn't worry much about it.

[Palmguy]

It seems the CCW community has strongly gotten behind the no thumb safety Shield. In a life and death situation, the thumb safety is just one more thing for Murphy to play with. When fractions of a second count....

I've got a M&P45 with a thumb safety - I've inadvertently engaged the safety when firing full house SD loads with a high - thumbs forward grip. That was not happy making. I'm considering sending it back to S&W to have it converted into the non-thumb safety variant.

The Shield - without the thumb safety - is on my short list for a CCW. If Remington ever pulls their head out of their corporate assets and fixes the R51, that will also be on the list. It has a very interesting grip safety.

The likelihood of such an inadvertent activation of the safety is orders of magnitude lower on the Shield than the standard M&P due to the design of the safety. I'd be more concerned with failure to deactivate the safety when you're trying to.

That said, mine have the TS; if I were buying today, I'd opt for the non-safety version.

[WOLFIE]

I have the non safety version and like it. Now many of the AIWB guys and gals prefer a manual safety.

[ragnar_d]

The likelihood of such an inadvertent activation of the safety is orders of magnitude lower on the Shield than the standard M&P due to the design of the safety. I'd be more concerned with failure to deactivate the safety when you're trying to.

That said, mine have the TS; if I were buying today, I'd opt for the non-safety version.

Ditto to this. I've got a TS model, but if I were buying another it would be the non-TS version.

[EChryst]

I also have purchased the NON-TS version - I waited specifically - the gun didn't interest me with a thumb safety.

From the ones I borrowed and shot, I agree that the thumb safety is stiff, hard to accidentally engage. But the location of the thumb safety - for my big hands, was in such a fashion that I had to really mess around with my hands to actually be able to disengage it. There's really no width to the thumb safety, or shelf like on a 1911, therefore I really had to concentrate to disengage the safety. Other people with short thumbs were able to easily disengage it, but the positioning put the thumb safety awkwardly below my thumb pad and first knuckle. So I was definitely not a fan. I really like the Shield, so I was thrilled to see the NON-TS version come out.

[Makarovii]

I also have purchased the NON-TS version - I waited specifically - the gun didn't interest me with a thumb safety.

From the ones I borrowed and shot, I agree that the thumb safety is stiff, hard to accidentally engage. But the location of the thumb safety - for my big hands, was in such a fashion that I had to really mess around with my hands to actually be able to disengage it. There's really no width to the thumb safety, or shelf like on a 1911, therefore I really had to concentrate to disengage the safety. Other people with short thumbs were able to easily disengage it, but the positioning put the thumb safety awkwardly below my thumb pad and first knuckle. So I was definitely not a fan. I really like the Shield, so I was thrilled to see the NON-TS version come out.

I'm in the same boat with big hands. The safety was about even with the fold of the first knuckle of my thumb, difficult to reach. The non-safety Shield is on my want list, but it's a toss-up between the Shield and CZ Rami.

[GK17]

Gentlemen, I'd appreciate your input as well. For a primary EDC my list is down to the Shield9 NTS, Ruger LC9s & Springfield's XDs 4.0. The Shield has a 3 length lead at the final turn and looks to be the likely winner. Still need to shoot all 3 but am I on the right track?