M&P 9 Shield -vs- M&P9c

[kyf]

So now what happens to the M&P9c and M&P40c? Isn't this similar to what S&W did with the Sigma -vs- SD line? I understand the Shield is slightly smaller and lighter but am I the only one confused by this new line-up?

Given the dimensions of the M&P 40 Shield are similar to the 9 Shield, why do I carry the Shield -vs- 40c? Because I can't handle the extra 1.3" length, .3" width/height or an additional 7 oz? I understand S&W is going after a very popular CCW market right now but does this mean that the 9c & 40c is going to slowly die off? What am i missing here?

Shield: (edited mag capacity, oal, oah, oaw, weight)
Caliber: 9mm
Capacity: 7+1, 8+1 (magazine with grip extension) M&P9c 10+1 (CA) 12+1
Operation: Trigger cocking DAO; lock breech; "Browning - type" recoil lug; passive striker block; no magazine disconnect
Barrel: 3.1", polygonal rifling; 1 - 10 right-hand twist
Length O/A: 6.1" M&P9c 6.7" (+.6")
Height: 4.6" M&P9c 4.3" (-.3")
Slide Width: .95" M&P9c 1.2" (+.25")
Weight: Pistol 19 ounces, Magazine 1.9 ounces M&P9c 21.7 oz, Mag 9.1 oz
Grips: Textured polymer
Sights: Drift adjustable, white bar-dot combat sights
Finish: Black polymer frame, matte stainless steel slide
Magazines: 1 each: 7 rd flush floorplate & 8 rd extended grip

[vista461]

On Smith's site the OAL is listed as 6.1, where did you get 5.42?

Product: Smith & Wesson M&P SHIELD

I think the M&Pc's will sell to people who want the ability to use full size mags, like myself. But I know on various forums there has been call for a single stack M&P for a few years.

I don't see myself buying one only because I already have the 9c and can conceal it fine.

Smith seemed to have no problem selling the 3913 and 6906 at the same time. I guess time will tell.

[thomasinaz]

Your numbers for the 9mm capacity are off by one: it should be 7 and 8 for these. It's the super small vs small choice that's being given another option.... For deeper concealment the super small Shield may "fit" better. I don't think one will replace the other, just another choice in the M&P line-up which I think is good. I plan on buying a Shield for backup and maybe deeper concealment, when needed.

[toocool]

I see it as competing with the Ruger LC9. I have an LC9 and it's much easier to carry/conceal than any flavor M&P. I sold my M&P compacts because I didn't care for the shorter double stack grip, preferring my full-sized M&Ps instead. That being said, while I like the LC9 (a lot!) I prefer the S&W format and like the M&P triggers more than the Ruger. I will likely have a Shield as soon as I can persuade my LGS to get me one...

[Kanewpadle]

Originally Posted by toocool

I see it as competing with the Ruger LC9. I have an LC9 and it's much easier to carry/conceal than any flavor M&P. I sold my M&P compacts because I didn't care for the shorter double stack grip, preferring my full-sized M&Ps instead. That being said, while I like the LC9 (a lot!) I prefer the S&W format and like the M&P triggers more than the Ruger. I will likely have a Shield as soon as I can persuade my LGS to get me one...

I agree. S&W hasn't made a single stack pistol that could compete with Kahr, Ruger, and Kel Tec. Now they have.

The concealed carry movement is and has gravitated to small, thin, light weight guns.

Let's hope they hold up!

[kyf]

Sorry about the errors in OAL and capacity. I took the information from another post without looking the information up for myself. Has anyone found a price point for the Shield? My LGS didn't know anything about it when I called him today.

[darksideemt]

Originally Posted by Kanewpadle

Let's hope they hold up!

If they are made the same way their bigger siblings are, which is how it looks, I don't see why they wouldn't.

[doby]

On Smith's site the OAL is listed as 6.1, where did you get 5.42?
^^^^ This and that the weights are off.

[Tommato]

To me, the shield models are hugely different than the Compacts. Carried IWB, the shield would feel a lot more comfortable to carry than the 9C or 40C. I do realize that more than a few CC the Compacts, but for me thin and lighter is in. I was seriously thinking about the Walther PPS before this came out - but purchased one of the first Shields online at Gunbroker today.

Tommato

[Hairlesswookiee]

Originally Posted by Tommato

To me, the shield models are hugely different than the Compacts. Carried IWB, the shield would feel a lot more comfortable to carry than the 9C or 40C. I do realize that more than a few CC the Compacts, but for me thin and lighter is in. I was seriously thinking about the Walther PPS before this came out - but purchased one of the first Shields online at Gunbroker today.

Tommato

Did you get the 9mm or the 40?? I'm thinking about getting the 40 myself. Just as soon as they start shipping them out.

[crracer_712]

Originally Posted by kyf

Sorry about the errors in OAL and capacity. I took the information from another post without looking the information up for myself. Has anyone found a price point for the Shield? My LGS didn't know anything about it when I called him today.

Price point initially seems a little better than that of the Ruger LC9 when it was released. I believe they are both at a retail price of 449, but the LC9 was often selling for close to that initially and for the first 6 months. I bought the shield today for under 400 bucks shipped, plus another 20 bucks FFL when it gets here.

I'm going to a gun show this weekend in Wichita, KS. Called two of the dealers that I know of that will be there, they both have the shield and are both offering it at 399.

[crracer_712]

The 40 isn't available yet

[Danno_man]

Originally Posted by doby

On Smith's site the OAL is listed as 6.1, where did you get 5.42?
^^^^ This and that the weights are off.

Those numbers in the OP look like they are for a Kahr CM9

Sent from my ADR6425LVW using Tapatalk 2

[Twoboxer]

In addition to all the good reasons above . . . colas, fries, and 9mms come in small, medium, and large

[GaryS]

How about M&P 9 Shield vs S&W 3913/3914?

I know which way I'd vote.

[ultratec00]

Other than comparing size and weight, not sure it is fair to compare a Gen 3 vs. M&P. To me they are two totally different animals. My Gen 3s were retired when I started carrying M&Ps. Not so much from a reliability or capability standpoint, but more so for commonality and familiarity. Didn't want to mix carry between a double action auto and two stage system. Totally different trigger pulls. Not to mention my M&Ps have the thumb safety as well.

Originally Posted by GaryS

How about M&P 9 Shield vs S&W 3913/3914?

I know which way I'd vote.

[Tommato]

Originally Posted by Hairlesswookiee

Did you get the 9mm or the 40?? I'm thinking about getting the 40 myself. Just as soon as they start shipping them out.

All they had were 9's. Haven't heard of 40s being available right now, but they might be. For me, 9mm is easier for me to shoot well.

Tommato

[omgur2]

I received the E-mail from S&W this morning. This is great news, I have been looking for a CCW 9 and as soon as $$ were available I was going to buy a LC9. Now I can put another S&W in my safe and on my hip. I wonder if they will offer it with and without the thumb safty? I bought my full size M&P9 without and I am not sure it was the right choice, but I did not buy that gun to carry. The thumb safty is the reason I was going to choose the LC9. Will it have a key trigger lock? I like them on my j frame and TCP.

[kyf]

Lots of interest here for the Shield!!! Anyone interested but shying away from the first production run to let the bugs get worked out?

[Silversmok3]

The M&P9c and the Sheild serve two different customers.

The Sheild is meant for ultra deep concealed carry.When you're carrying a gun in a private business that's run and staffed by full time hoplophobes,or in a similar sensitive area where its legal to carry but a printing gun can cause cultural complications;you had best believe every millimeter of mass counts.

The M&P compacts serve as backup weapons to their full size counterparts.They're great for that purpose in Law Enforcement,but for a citizen its just big enough to not be truly concealable like the LC9s and whatnot.

The women see the value instantly in something like the Shield;The modern fashions are unforgiving for women looking for a concealed carry setup.Skin tight jeans and shrink-wrapped tees mean a gun that's the size of an iPhone would print OWB.If there is any category of citizen that needs to bear arms,its women.

[Hairlesswookiee]

Originally Posted by Tommato

All they had were 9's. Haven't heard of 40s being available right now, but they might be. For me, 9mm is easier for me to shoot well.

Tommato

I should've been a little more informative. When I called my LGS they were taking orders for the 9mm and starting a list for people wanting the .40. Hmm....I might also go with the 9mm, but I'm not allowed to get another gun (stupid wife) until Sept./Oct.

[Simmy952]

Gunbroker has them for $399 to $449.

[Danno_man]

Slickguns has them for $395 shipped

Sent from my ADR6425LVW using Tapatalk 2

[Fastbolt]

Not the first time S&W has run compact & subcompact models in the same general model line. The compact 3rd gen's were run alongside the subcompact Chiefs Special models. They only ran approx half an inch less in barrel length difference, too, and with only a round less in mag capacity compared to the slightly larger compact guns.

I see this as pretty much the same concept, and S&W obviously feels there's a market for a slightly slimmer & shorter M&P model.

If this new trigger is as good as I've been hearing (for a plastic gun), and the practical accuracy is similar to the other M&P's some of the other guys and I own and have been using, it'll be a welcome addition to the M&P concept.

It might not be as nice as the triggers in my SW99's (the TDA-type actions), and it may run half a pound heavier than the trigger of the 99 variation Walther is selling as the PPQ ... but Walther doesn't make a compact or subcompact in the PPQ line, and the Shield is smaller than the M&P compact series. Being in the M&P model line, it ought to be a bit less complex than the PPS, too (from a an armorer's perspective).

I'll have to get one in my hands, though, to really assess what it's like. The LE distributor said they can't order the commercial release models, and they can't order the LE version until S&W has them in inventory.

[andrewcdub]

Originally Posted by kyf

Lots of interest here for the Shield!!! Anyone interested but shying away from the first production run to let the bugs get worked out?

I'm waiting for the (I really hope they do), 45 version. I carry the 45 full size with ease but would love to have a single stack version.

[Phil W]

Bought mine for $399 from LGS. I have a M&P 9c and also a LC9, but still gravitate towards my M&P 340. I want to pocket carry in the summer and the M&P 9c is a bit too large. Anyway, I plan to pass them all down to the kids in the end.

[dallascj]

I just got mine today from my LGS for $390 + tax. I really like this gun and was seriously considering the LC9 before this came out. I think the Shield is far superior to the LC9 and in no way replaces my compacts. The compacts have more fire power, can use full-size mags, and will be more comfortable to shoot for extended periods. I will carry the Shield as a BUG or when it is difficult to carry a larger gun.

[cmbtengr71]

Hello all, first-time M&P9 owner and loving it. Was recently searching for a CC 9mm and kept bouncing between the 9c and the Walther PPS. Now that I've seen the Shield, it will be a toss-up between it and the 9c. If they offer the Shield without the thumb safety, I'll be all over it. Was also looking at bar-and-dot tritium sights for my full-size 9. Found a good looking set from AmeriGlo. Now I will definitely have to get both the 9c AND the Shield - with AmeriGlo sights for all. And then prepare myself for the laying-into the wife is going to give me over it.

[joes4570]

I have a 9c and bought a Shield this morning, had a chance to shoot both this afternoon.
They really are quite different, more than you would think given they are both M&P series pistols.
The shield of of course slightly shorter in slide, very nearly the same height in the butt, of course its quite a bit thinner.
In shooting, the 9c shoots softer, the Shield has noticeably more snappy recoil, hardly unmanagable, its only a 9mm after all but its noticable.
I've always liked my 9c but its just a weeeeeeeeee bigger in grip than I would prefer. I really like single stack pistols, my Sig 239 SAS, Beretta Nano and now the Shield and I think how they feel in the hand will be the decision maker for a lot of people.
More of a choice would be between something like the Shield and the Nano and in truth they handle and shoot somewhat similarly. The Nano is just a skosh shorter in the butt but slide length is quite similar.
The Nano trigger pull is longer which is worthy of consideration in choosing between the two and the Nano lacks an external slide stop lever or manual safety. It is slightly 'slicker' as far as portrubances go. Myself I like the trigger on the Shield better because I am used to the M&P system and it is consistent with those pistols (a bit heavier than my others on this particular sample). For my money they could have left the manual safety off, I see no need of it. I think I might have advocated for chopping another half inch or so off the butt for even better concealment but most people freak at not having a place to put their pinky so I see the wisdom in not doing it.
The Shield will be a big hit I think, amazing to me they hit this price point with it. I paid $419 for mine, exactly what the same store sells the Nano for.

[Avery11]

Originally Posted by Hairlesswookiee

I'm not allowed to get another gun (stupid wife) until Sept./Oct.

SERIOUSLY? Have a little class - that's your wife man.

[DreamWeaver88]

Originally Posted by kyf

Slide Width: .95" M&P9c 1.2" (+.7")

My math has never been the greatest, but I believe the difference is +.25"

DW

[kyf]

Apparently my math isn't that great either?!?!?

[Kanewpadle]

Originally Posted by darksideemt

If they are made the same way their bigger siblings are, which is how it looks, I don't see why they wouldn't.

I agree. But they had their problems too.

[taseal]

Originally Posted by DreamWeaver88

My math has never been the greatest, but I believe the difference is +.25"

DW

LOL, I got confused here for a sec... hahhaa

anyways... I just saw a thread about someone comparing this to a PM9 for pocket carry. it seems like it fails in that point, and won't be replacing my PF9

[IllinoisCCW]

Currently I have 6 M&Ps...want to add the Shield in 40 & 9 to my collection. I'm not a big Beta person but from what I have read, the Shield should have little to no issues since the M&P system has been perfected. Understand no line is completely free of bugs.

Is anyone concerned with buying the first batch? I'm like the kid in Willy Wonka...I want one and I want one now!!! Actually want both. 🔫. 😉

[Dean1818]

The shield is NOT a deep concealment piece.

What does deep concealment mean to you?

It means pocket carry to most everyone.

Most people carry apendix when they dont have to
Tuck thier shirt in.

With the proper holster, you can actually comfortably carry a thicker heavier pistol.

When i have to tuck in a shirt, i pocket carry.


Why couldnt sw use less rounds, keep the pistol at a height of 4 inches
And give an extended mag

For me.... The shield would probably have retired my CM9, (and MANY ) other peoples)



I looked forward to this announcement, because i thought that they would offer a thin pistol

[blujax01]

Originally Posted by Dean1818

The shield is NOT a deep concealment piece.

What does deep concealment mean to you?

It means pocket carry to most everyone.

...

Funny thing:
I pocket carry my longer, wider, taller, heavier M64 snubby all the time. I could easily "deep conceal" this pistol.

When it comes out in a forty.

[packinaglock]

Reading quite a few complaints about the size of the shields. One possibility is that it could not be made any smaller and still have the same reliability that people have come to expect from the M&P line of pistols. Other manufactures have made smaller 9mm pistols and some have had spotty reliability issues. Look how many people bash Kahr PM9's, mine runs 100% but it seems there are a few that don't. If M&P wan'ts to corner the LEO bug market and become king of the hill with CCW'ers it has to be very reliable. Hell look at the tarnishing that Glock has taken over the gen 4 line. I have four gen 4 Glocks that all run 100%. The few that don't work well has left Glock with a very bad taste in it's mouth. I love all my Glocks and don't plan on selling them, but I do see the M&P line for what it is. A great pistol with a great up and comming future striving to be #1 in the LEO/CCW community and I'll bet they are trying to avoid any setbacks at any cost. Just my two cents, which is worth nothing in this economy.

[EPWrangler]

My new shield cost was $399.00 +Tax and is my 4th M&P. I own a 9mm FS, a 9mmc, a 40c and a 357sig barrel. The fs 9 has a threaded barrel option. I find my new Shield a very nice gun to shoot and bought it to replace my PF9 which is not easy to shoot as it rapps my trigger finger very hard with each shot. The shield has no such problem. By the way I also have a a new Taurus PT738. I turly love that gun and the handy little Bulldog case. That is slick and much easier to carry and draw from than I thought it would be. It is also very comfortable to carry. I now carry it much of the time with Critical Defense loads.

[bobkarno]

Originally Posted by kyf

So now what happens to the M&P9c and M&P40c? Isn't this similar to what S&W did with the Sigma -vs- SD line? I understand the Shield is slightly smaller and lighter but am I the only one confused by this new line-up?

Given the dimensions of the M&P 40 Shield are similar to the 9 Shield, why do I carry the Shield -vs- 40c? Because I can't handle the extra 1.3" length, .3" width/height or an additional 7 oz? I understand S&W is going after a very popular CCW market right now but does this mean that the 9c & 40c is going to slowly die off? What am i missing here?

I see no jeopardy for the M&P compacts (especially since carry capacity is a big issue for a lot of people), and I see the Shield as S&W simply offering people another choice in their product line.

[kris7047th]

Originally Posted by ultratec00

Other than comparing size and weight, not sure it is fair to compare a Gen 3 vs. M&P. To me they are two totally different animals. My Gen 3s were retired when I started carrying M&Ps. Not so much from a reliability or capability standpoint, but more so for commonality and familiarity. Didn't want to mix carry between a double action auto and two stage system. Totally different trigger pulls. Not to mention my M&Ps have the thumb safety as well.

I am getting so tired of these vs threads .. well this gun is better than that gun etc. Why can't people just decide on what the particular model offers and if it fits their criteria or not? We are not all alike and why there are SOoooo many different styles of weapons.

I have the M&P9c and I do not compare it to the Shield (except the trigger work I had done is nearly identical on both .. and that is good) Will I get rid of my 9c now that I have acquired the Shield ?? Heck no!

[deebosc]

Originally Posted by joes4570

I've always liked my 9c but its just a weeeeeeeeee bigger in grip than I would prefer.

This.. as much as i loved my 9C it was just not comfortable IWB for me. It was a great gun but the Shield is a perfect fit and feels so much better tucked compared to the compact. Doesnt bother me sacrificing a few rounds, im happy to know i can comfortably sit, stand, kneel, drive, etc and hardly notice its there. I initially thought i wanted the PPS but the Shield feels MUCH better in hand and if its anything like its big brothers, reliability will not be an issue.

[Lee in Quartzsite]

It's a good thing I have a good gun belt...9c in my Crossbeed Supertuck, a Shield in my right pocket, 642 in my left pocket, two Mags on my belt......

[LOBO]

Does the shield have an internal key lock?

[ponchsox]

I love my M&P9c and added its little brother, the Shield. Both are great guns in their own rights. The Shield will become my primary carry in no time.

[Lee in Quartzsite]

Originally Posted by LOBO

Does the shield have an internal key lock?

No, and no Mag Safety as well. It does have a Thumb Safety. The trigger and trigger reset are just like the other M&P's. I actually installed an Apex kit on my 9c and the Shield trigger feels just as good right out of the box. Impressive gun...now my wife wants one. She put a hold on one today, picking it up tomorrow. She had an LC-9 that she grew to dislike immensely so she traded it in for a LCR.

[Water-Man]

Originally Posted by kyf

Lots of interest here for the Shield!!! Anyone interested but shying away from the first production run to let the bugs get worked out?

Me. Also, I really don't want the safety. We'll see.

[LOBO]

Originally Posted by Lee in Quartzsite

No, and no Mag Safety as well. It does have a Thumb Safety. The trigger and trigger reset are just like the other M&P's. I actually installed an Apex kit on my 9c and the Shield trigger feels just as good right out of the box. Impressive gun...now my wife wants one. She put a hold on one today, picking it up tomorrow. She had an LC-9 that she grew to dislike immensely so she traded it in for a LCR.

THANKS!!!!

[jdh]

Did Ruger stop making/selling the SR9C when they released the LC9?

As has been said different uses, both are still needed. The M&P9c makes a better back up for the full size then the Shield because it allows you to use the mags for your full size in the compact. Can't use them in the Shield.

[smithkowitz]

Originally Posted by kyf

I understand the Shield is slightly smaller and lighter but am I the only one confused by this new line-up?

What am i missing here?

I am not sure what there is to be confused about, or what you could be missing? The Shield is designed for those who want a lighter, smaller package to carry conceal. If the gun holds anywhere from 3 to 10 rounds less than it's larger brothers, that in itself can amount to a reasonable amount of weight. It is also for those who have smaller hands and cannot handle the larger Compact or Full Size. There are also states that do impose 10 round magazine restrictions. A Compact 9 packs 12 in standard issue. I have both a Full size and Compact 9 and 40, I do not carry any of them. I carry a Kahr MK40. I am looking to purchase the Shield 40 to become a new carry piece. I only pack one of the larger M&P's during winter, when I wear a heavier coat; or I pack it in a backpack as backup when I hike. At home, the larger M&P's are nice nightstand companions.