S&W shield ez in 9mm released

[Duelist]

True. In addition, a striker-fired gun needs to cock the striker at the forward motion, while hammer-fired gun cocks the hammer at the rearward motion. This means that even with the same mass of the slide, the recoil spring of a hammer-fired gun can be lighter.

Also, I think that the secret sauce of racking of the 9EZ is actually "wings" at the rear of the slide. They are not evident in photographs taken from the side, but they certainly work. IIRC, HK had those on something like P30 first, but I may not remember right.

VP9 was what I saw HK put wings on.

[spyderco monkey]

I haven't messed with a Five seveN in quite a few years but I seem to recall that gun has the wings.



Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

Yes, the Five Seven has the slide wings. I believe it was the first pistol to incorporate them. Really a bold and innovative design all around.

[TheNewbie]

I am seeing these from $360-$400 online.

[BigT]

Isn't this the bit where we complain about them launching the 380 first?

And then possibly about the mag capacity on these?

[Hambo]

https://youtu.be/xdb7OuZqGWM

The big question is at 15:45 in the video.

[BobLoblaw]

As long as you continue to thumb the back of the slide like you would with an external hammer, the trigger will still be bound up due the grip safety. Not as good as an external hammer (obviously) but still noteworthy. I'd like to know how "positive" the grip safety is and how easily a poor grip could lock up the trigger.

[Wingate's Hairbrush]

I wish they'd gone with an exposed hammer but whatever.

I do, too, but my guess is -- among other possible considerations -- S&W elected to avoid visible cocked-and-locked that some find off-putting.

The big question is at 15:45 in the video.

For me, that question is answered by the 1911-style thumb and grip safeties. For striker or SAO, on a firearm I'll be carrying IWB day-in-and-day-out, I like these options. In fact, given that it's SAO, I'm surprised they offer it without the thumb safety.

It's good of S&W to handle the new Glock rollout in the manner I'd hoped. This is much more relevant to my needs and preferences than a .22 trainer, and although not legendary, much closer to it (with zero hype) than Glock's extremely loud piddle.

Much more info'll roll in soon enough, I'm sure, but I'd love to know what if any passive safeties the 9EZ employs: inertial firing pin; firing pin block; etc.?

[TheNewbie]

I do, too, but my guess is -- among other possible considerations -- S&W elected to avoid visible cocked-and-locked that some find off-putting.

For me, that question is answered by the 1911-style thumb and grip safeties. For striker or SAO, on a firearm I'll be carrying IWB day-in-and-day-out, I like these options. In fact, given that it's SAO, I'm surprised they offer it without the thumb safety.

It's good of S&W to handle the new Glock rollout in the manner I'd hoped. This is much more relevant to my needs and preferences than a .22 trainer, and although not legendary, much closer to it (with zero hype) than Glock's extremely loud piddle.

Much more info'll roll in soon enough, I'm sure, but I'd love to know what if any passive safeties the 9EZ employs: inertial firing pin; firing pin block; etc.?

I read a post on another forum that the grip safety activates the firing pin block.


Would this have the potential issue that 1911s with this type of firing pin block have?

[RevolverRob]

Would this have the potential issue that 1911s with this type of firing pin block have?

What is the issue you're thinking of in this regard? Like a failure-to-fire where you depress the grip safety enough to allow the trigger to release the hammer, but not depress the firing pin block?

It's hard to know, without looking at the internals how much depression it takes on the grip safety to release the trigger vs. firing pin block.

I guess my response to this is - the reverse hinged form of the grip safety found on the EZ generally deactivates cleanly and totally if it's not sprung so hard you have to grip the shit out of the gun to deactivate it (like you do on a 1908 Vest Pocket Colt).

Seems like folks are not having grip-safety issues with the EZ380 and it doesn't look like much has changed (if any) for the EZ9 in that department.

[TheNewbie]

What is the issue you're thinking of in this regard? Like a failure-to-fire where you depress the grip safety enough to allow the trigger to release the hammer, but not depress the firing pin block?

It's hard to know, without looking at the internals how much depression it takes on the grip safety to release the trigger vs. firing pin block.

I guess my response to this is - the reverse hinged form of the grip safety found on the EZ generally deactivates cleanly and totally if it's not sprung so hard you have to grip the shit out of the gun to deactivate it (like you do on a 1908 Vest Pocket Colt).

Seems like folks are not having grip-safety issues with the EZ380 and it doesn't look like much has changed (if any) for the EZ9 in that department.

Like a Swartz (sp?) system.

You have a good point, it’s not really an issue. Just more of my curious mind wandering and wondering.