Was wondering if that situation had gotten any better.Originally Posted by gruntjim
I picked one up a month ago. It shoots so much better than my 365X and 43X.
Was wondering if that situation had gotten any better.
I picked one up a month ago. It shoots so much better than my 365X and 43X.
Hey guys thanks for all the info so far.
I am considering picking one of these up but I was curious what kind of accuracy these new shields are capable of especially at longer distances (say 25 yards). I have no experience with the shield. Can I expect similar results to what I get with my g19 and g26 or is that asking too much from this subcompact.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I have had my Gen 1 Shield 9mm since they came out. I also have an M2.0 Shield 9 and a Shield 45. I also owned a Gen 1 40SW Shield. All have excellent accuracy from what I have experienced. I have even heard people say they are more accurate with them than the duty size M&P pistols. This review he shoots it out to 50 yards, so I would say it is good to go for you.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FD6pVXC3i-I
After having Ameriglo NS installed on mine, I did sight verification out to 25 yards. When I did my part (which was surprisingly easy given the trigger on the pistol), I was able to shoot 10 rounds into a 5" shoot-n-c standing off hand. For me, with a subcompact pistol, that's VERY good.
So I've got the 4in Performance Center model without optic and without porting. This model comes standard without a manual safety too. It shoots really well for me and I have plans to get a 507k milled in soon. I'm favoring this for carry over my j-frame because of the capacity and sights. Also preferring it to my PX4 because it conceals so much easier for my body type. After a quality holster, I find a gun's thinness to be the most critical factor in concealment for me. However, since I'm moving to this short travel striker trigger from DA/SA and J-frame triggers, I'm a bit nervous. I carry AIWB and practice slow and deliberate holstering, looking the gun in with a high finger register along the ejection port. But I'm still at bit sketched out by how light the trigger on this Performance Center model is.
I remember from my old Shield 1.0 (now sold), that the safety was easy to ignore if you didn't want to use it and not likely to get accidentally activated since it was so low profile and stiff. I'm wondering if the Shield Plus manual safety is similar. I haven't put hands on a manual safety version yet so can anyone chime in on this? I'm contemplating buying the model with the safety and using the safety equipped frame with the 4in slide. Then the plan would be to use the safety like an off/on "gadget." After a string of fire, engage safety, holster, and then disengage the safety once the gun is locked in the kydex. My JMCK holster has a mid height sweat guard so I think there's plenty of room. This all assumes that the safety is stiff and extremely unlikely to be accidentally activated by the gun pressing against my body.
I don't know. Maybe I'm overthinking it. But then again, extra layers of safety would be nice. Added benefit would be getting a backup gun/parts gun with two more magazines (seriously Smith, where are they?...)
Any thoughts?
Lacking Gravitas
I owned and carried a gen1 with the safety for several years and that is exactly what I did. I used the safety for holstering and then switched it off. I never had it accidentally switch back on.
I know a lot of guys cuss the Shield safety and some wish it was larger, but I always wanted the same type safety on my other M&P pistols rather than the awful flimsy feeling paddle safety.
I would not have one of those big thumb safeties but I never minded the safety on the Shield.
I am back to carrying Glocks for now and sometimes miss having the small unobtrusive safety to use when holstering.
The Plus TS is just as you describe. It's been quite some time since I manipulated a 1.0 TS, but going on recollection, I'd say they're about the same?
The safety is very much like the original shield.
I sanded down the surface of my safety and put a glob of epoxy on it. Been there for several years gives a much more positive index for on/off. I'm surprised there's not a larger aftermarket safety available.
Be careful with using a safety to holster and then disengaging the safety. If we stretch our minds a little bit what usually pulls a trigger is some kind of strap or piece of cloth that's in the trigger guard. Taking the safety off and then moving your body could still cause that piece of cloth or strap to pull the trigger.
The gadget or a hammer lets you know if there's any tension on the trigger as it goes into the holster a safety does not.
I have gadgets on my carry glocks and while it is a layer of safety it nowhere compares to a hammer. Meaning numb hands or numb senses due to adrenaline there's not much tactile feedback especially compared to a hammer.
For me personally I would rather have to hastily holster a shield with a safety than a G43X with the gadget. While the need to holster hastily is not likely I can think of several reasons why I may need two hands after using or nearly using a firearm. YMMV. (I miss 3913s)
Is anyone offering or using a small magazine pinky extension on the Shield plus 10 round magazine? I handled a Shield plus in the LGS recently and like the gun but with the 10 round magazine in it I only have a 2 finger grip whereas my 365 with factory 10 round magazine with pinky extension I can just get 3 finger grip. Looking at 10 round mag but full grip for ban state travel.
So I think there may be a problem with the 13rnd Shield Plus mag. In order to get away from the sliding mag sleeve/spacer of the old Shield, Smith redesigned the spacer to be held captive by a snap on basepad that clips into a metal piece with two front and back tabs that hold the sleeve/spacer secure. A smart choice but I don't think it's secure enough. Also please let me know if this doesn't make sense as I'm not very mechanically minded and may be not the best at writing what I'm seeing.
The basepad snaps into the metal piece and is held in by some small rounded edges that have to be overcome in the snap on/off. It seems secure but is easily disassembled one handed even if the mag is loaded. I noticed last week during a range session that practicing reloads caused the basepad to start gradually inching off because of the slight forward force that the heel of my support hand was imparting to the mag. If the basepad was ready to slide off, or if you had a particularly aggressive reload, I could see the basepad popping off and suffering an unscheduled disassembling of your mag. The mag spring might still be held in by the mag tube lips at the bottom, but I think it would quickly eject the spring and ammo if the gun fired. I tried to capture this on video and pics. And I do exaggerate the reload a bit, but even a normal reload imparts some of that forward force that can push the basepad off the mag.
I suppose if you carry with the 13rnd mag and no reload it's not really a concern. And you could solve this with some glue or epoxy but you would lose the ability to clean the mag tube and a better design would be ideal. IDK, maybe it's overblown, but not having to baby the mag would be better. So far the 10rnd mag seems great. Is this a design flaw or am I overthinking it? It's a better design than the gen 1 8rnd mags but I don't think it's as good as it could be.
edited formatting
Last edited by JoeTom; 06-26-2021 at 01:14 PM.
Lacking Gravitas
Reply With Quote