S&W M&P Shield


I think I’d be interested in this in .40… I like it. An improved trigger, which the M&P line needed, in a size factor that S&W needed to get into. Julie’s hair looked fantastic too.
Okay, let’s take a closer look at the gun. I think it could have been 1/4 inch longer in the barrel… I know they wanted to hit a size point, but I think the took the barrel length dimension a bit too short. The addition of the thumb safety is unnecessary. Oh sure, it’s small enough to be unobtrusive, but it’s also too small to be really useful. It’s like a 3rd Nipple. Still, overall, I like this gun and look forward to trying it out.
Other guns it’s competing with… PF9, Nano, 938, LC9, PPS, PM9… Yeah, I think S&W nailed a Home Run Winner.

15 thoughts on “S&W M&P Shield”

  1. IMO a manual safety should not be on a gun of this type. Also, I am sure that it is just me, but the trigger safety looks like a weak design. I have never heard any issues with the M&P trigger safety. It just looks like a point of failure as compared to the glock design. I wish the glock would do a gun like this in 9mm.

    One of these days I will change from a 380 to a 9mm for daily carry, but other than the ~$8 Kahr elite I havent found one worth saving for.

  2. Well, I plan on getting a pocket 9mm soom=n for backup/high summer carry in Texas. I want to see this pistol and see how likely it is to fit in my pocket with a pocket holster before I make a decision whether I want it.

    1. My Kel Tec P-11 is on the large side for pocket carry, I can only carry it in oversized pockets without looking like I am shoplifting a small dog.
      The Shield is .5″ longer and .25″ taller and appx the same thickness.
      I WILL be looking into one… I shall also await their slim singlestack .45 Shield.

      Jim

  3. I’ve been watching this sector, like a like of people, but haven’t pulled the trigger on the buy. When it becomes available in CA I’ll take a close look at it and compare it with the Kahr and Ruger competition. At first glance this should be a big winner for S&W.

  4. The manual safety is a deal breaker for me as I can’t stand them on a defensive gun (except for a 1911, and ONLY on a 1911). If they could bring down the price by 100-150 then I think it would be a viable CCW option, but at the current price I would choose something else.

    1. Not arguing your standards, but its almost flush. Functional and out of the way. No I don’t work for S&W.

  5. I just don’t see much over the Kahr 9094N and almost as chunky as the SWaMPy 9c
    Geoff
    Who will feel one for touch

  6. I picked up a Nano recently which I really like – darn if the S&W didn’t come out 1 month later! It’s bigger than my Rorhbaugh was (sold it) but more fun to shoot

  7. We managed to wrangle one for the store I work at. Didn’t last long something like a total of 12 hours in the store. We liked it. It was thin had a good trigger, much better than the Kel-Tec PF9, which is our number one seller behind S&W J frames. We had it for around $429.99. I liked the fact that it uncluded two magazines, one flush and one that extends a little. We liked it an felt it was worth the $100 more it cost than a PF9. It is much better than a Kahr IMHO.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>