I was just thinking this morning how nice it would be if S&W packed a 9mm in the body of the M&P 22c. I have a 9mm FS, compact, and shield, and a FS and compact 22. Just based on proportions and design beauty, the 22c is a beautiful object. Since it is actually a little wider than the Shield, it seems an 8rnd 9mm version should be possible - and you would have the option of a thumb safety. I really think the 22c is the gun the shield should have been.

The 22c does appear to be a very nicely proportioned gun from the pictures but I have never handled one.

However, in my humble opinion it is absolutely NOT what the Shield should have been. It is over half an inch wider than the Shield, and that alone answers the question for me. It is also bigger than the 9c; about a quarter inch wider, nearly the same length, and an inch taller. Get the 9c with a Hogue grip wrap and a magazine extension and leave the Shield for people that want a compact carry gun.

__________________
Jim - M&P Pro 40L/Shield 40

Maybe I'm using the wrong terms. I have the 9c, Shield, and 22 compact. There is no way the 22 compact is 1/2 in wider than the Shield. You must be referring to width at the thumb safety - which really is not relevant with respect to concealment. If you ever actually held the 22 compact - I think you'd change your mind. As far as real life concealment - there is no difference between the Shield and 22 compact. If you get a chance try the 22 compact.

The shield without thumb safety is listed as .95 inches wide and the compact 22 is listed at a width of 1.48 . so the 22 is .53 wider a little over 1/2 inch .

The Compact 9&40 is almost the same size as the compact 22 and the 40c gives you 10+1 and looks exactly like the compact 22. S&W is not going to bring out a model between the shield which is their Sub-Compact and the Compact as its not needed.

I would not consider a 22lr for my concealed carry weapon and very few would !

Information from S&W.com on width measurements.

The 22c is not 'more than 1/2" wider' than the Shield. The measurement listed on the S&W site includes the thumb safety. Take the thumb safety lever out of the equation and they are not that different in width.

__________________
Freedom isn't free.

I'll try to post some side-by-side pictures this weekend. I think it will help illustrate the size differences.

The 22C is also not striker fired, which would more than likely kill your desire to use that frame. Internals for a 22 can't just be replaced by internals for a 9 mm. They'd have to work up a whole new gun.

I do wish that S and W would introduce a mid-sized gun to fit between the full size and the compact.

Why? What would it give you that toot don't have now?

__________________
Freedom isn't free.

A slightly bigger than compact yet not full size would apeal to a lot of folks. Or maybe slightly smaller than full size, depending on your point of view. Example: Glock 19

Attached are a few pictures of the Shield and 22 compact.

Attached Images

	IMGP0905__resize.jpg (24.6 KB, 41 views)
	IMGP0906__resize.jpg (31.9 KB, 47 views)
	IMGP0908__resize.jpg (28.6 KB, 41 views)
	IMGP0909__resize.jpg (20.2 KB, 37 views)
	IMGP0910__resize.jpg (29.5 KB, 32 views)

Attached is one more Shield and 22c comparison, all three together (Shield, 22c, and 9c), and the 22c and 9c.

Attached Images

	IMGP0912__resize.jpg (21.9 KB, 28 views)
	IMGP0889__resize.jpg (31.3 KB, 41 views)
	IMGP0890__resize.jpg (23.2 KB, 30 views)

Last two pictures. The Shield with the short mag and the 22c.

Attached Images

	IMGP0894__resize.jpg (23.6 KB, 32 views)
	IMGP0899__resize.jpg (28.8 KB, 31 views)

An 8+1 9mm single stack in something approximately the size of a M&P 22 compact would be fantastic! I own a M&P 9c and a M&P 22 compact. I use a Ruger LC9s as a daily CCW in the summer, and a Glock 27 for winter CCW. I also have a Glock 19 for use as a range pistol/vehicle pistol. After buying the M&P 22 compact, I felt it would be a great size for an all around comfortable and capable CCW pistol, if it were available in 9mm in 8+1.

What he said....

Sounds kinda like the Shield to me.... am i missing something?

"Slightly" is an ambiguous term. The full size M&P is almost exactly the same as the G19&23.

Personally I think S&W has done a great job with picking the size of the M&P line. The compact is large enough to use for regular range duty, but small enough to conceal easily. The full size also conceals fairly easily and is easy to manipulate.

Sure, the G19 is a tiny bit smaller, but now we're splitting hairs. If S&W made their guns to fit every individual who wanted one just slightly this way or that, they'd have to have a thousand models.

Still, variety is the spice of life. Who knows, maybe S&W will see this and come up with an M&P that's larger than the compact, but smaller than the full size. Anything can happen.

__________________
Freedom isn't free.

I personally know 3 self - professing "glock" guys who like the G19 size and would switch to M&P if they had one the same size. S&W will more than likely sell all the M&P series the make regardless of which one it is. My biggest thing now is do I want a 9C or a FS? If there was one in the middle, I'd get it.

Personally I think it's splitting hairs. The difference between the G19/23 and a full size M&P is so small as to be insignificant. The length difference is less than .25" and the height difference is about 1/2". The width is .02" different, but I'd have to measure that one myself to verify.

There are much more important differences between the Glock and M&P. If S&W made a gun as you're asking for, the Glock guys would find another reason not to buy it. The M&P fans would buy it just because they have to have every model. Those who only want one gun will buy the larger model of the two.

No, I agree with S&W. The boost in sales would be insignificant when compared with the cost to make it.

__________________
Freedom isn't free.