O.K. First, this is how I carry - on the belt. I'm 62, 6', 210. My normal carry is a Smith Model 36 snub. I don't like in the belt, etc. Carry on my right side and usually cover with a shirt tail or jacket. I can't remember the brand of holster I'm using - Bianchi maybe? - but it pulls the revolver in tight to my side and I have never had a problem printing.

The only semi-auto I have is my SR9. I sometimes carry that in a holster I made (I do leatherwork as a hobby) and it carries on the belt, high, canted forward. I've never had an issue with that printing either.

So . . . I thought I was "set" on a 9mm Shield. It would take the place of my Model 36 - exchanging 5 for 7 +1. The main reason is that I'm in MI half the time and southern AZ the other half - 40 miles north of the border and "things" do happen. When out on the less populated roads, etc., I'd just feel better having a few more rounds.

I have always been a revolver guy but am comfortable with the switch to semi - and i'm set on the 9mm as what I want.

My problem is that as I look and research, I've seen some videos where they have compared the Shield to the 9c. Yes, I know . . the 9c is double stack, a tad thicker (I believe around .30, a tad longer and a tad higher. But, more rounds with the double stack.

So . . . thoughts on which one? The 9c will run around $100 more based on MSRP, more rounds, thicker, longer, higher - but - for on the belt carry under a shirt tail or jacket, if the SR9 doesn't print, I'm thinking the 9c wouldn't either. In the end . . . is there anybody out there who owns both the Shield and the compact size who could give me their thoughts on it as far as "carry" - especially if they carry on the belt?


I would consider both the Shield and the compact a SD gun - certainly not "range" guns - i.e. good accuracy at 7 yards or so.

Are there any "issues" with a compact that they are prone to? I'm right handed so the ambi of the compact doesn't really come in to play. I have looked to see what holsters there are for the compact and it seems like there are more choices out there for the Shield. I'd rather buy one than make one. I have carried a Combat Masterpiece (pre 15) numerous times so I'm sure the compact thickness is less than the cylinder budge of a CM.

Just in a quandry - thoughts? Is there a good reason to buy one over the other?

Owning a 9c i could say one benefit it would offer over the shield is the ability to run a full size mag to increase the round count even higher if that would be desired. That may not be an option if conceal is the main goal.
Have you had a chance to try them both at a range yet for some side by side comparisons?

I have both a 40C & a 40 Shield. There's really not much difference in size, but there is enough of a difference to make the Shield a lot easier to carry. But if your going to holster it, you'll probably be fine with either. I pocket carry my Shield so the difference in size really matters. Good luck with your choice!

__________________
Lounge Lizard Extraordinaire

I have had the 40 compact as my EDC for about4 yrs now and we are good friends. you say it is not a range gun and I would disagree it is amazingly accurate. I really had no problem concealing it even in the summer but thought the shield in 9mm would be lighter and a little thinner, I carry inside the belt and in shorts with a t-shirt I always thought I was lucky getting away with concealing the 40c. I bought the 9MM shield and ordered the same exact Milt Sparks vmaxII holster and thought I was set. 40c for winter carry ( I like the 40 for penetrating heavy clothes) and the little 9 shield for summer carry. the only problem is a can not hit anything with the shield good for SD yes fun at the range not so much.it stays home for now while the 40c and I go for walks together all the time. I have about 600 rnds to the shield and while I am getting better with it, I have to THINK grip and THINK trigger control and Think site picture.... with the 40 I grab and shoot and the hole are where they need to be. while the compact at this point might not be as comfortable, it is more comforting. The shield might come around we will see. If I only had one though without a dought it would be the compact. good luck on your decision

I don't own either but despite my general dislike for Shield sized guns the 9c doesn't sit right in my hand. Grip is too short and the balance is off

I've got both. The Shield is my usual EDC. Not taking anything away from my 9c. I shoot both well, the 9c better. While the size/weight difference is negligible on paper, carrying is a different story. The Shield's much easier to carry and conceal.

For outside the belt carry, go with the 9c.
That $100 msrp difference is offset by the 3 free magazine offer that doesn't apply to the Shield.

If your considering the compact because of more rounds the use of full size magazines makes this even better .. I have a 40c which is 10+1 and full size mag is 15 rounds which I carry weak side. So 26 rounds and in Arizona I might carry 2 extra mags which would give you another 15. You could start a small war ! The full size mag with the X-grip spacer makes it look land feel like a full size, the 10+1 carries easily and think conceals as well as the shield !

Just got mine and like it very much the 40 doesn't have the recoil most think it does and follow up shots are easy to get back on target. You might consider the 40c instead of the 9 .

Let us know what you decide. Hope your as happy with your choice as I am !

I don't like the 9c because the grip feels fat and stumpy to me

__________________
Retired Career Security Guard

The Shield is my EDC, usually in my Lobo Gun Leather OWB pancake. Seems to me the somewhat lighter weight and narrower profile just make the Shield a better (choice for me) in a concealed carry gun. It is also (barely) small enough that I can pocket it in cargo shorts which is a nice option in summer.

A lot of people conceal M1911s, so obviously a 9c should conceal just fine. But I still think the Shield is going to be easier and a bit more comfortable for most people. And for EDC comfort counts too.

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

If pocket carry is not a consideration , then whichever fits your hnd/ shoot better. If you presently hve no issues SR9 , you won't with the 9c .

I considered a Shield when they first came out until I compared them to my 9c. I decided that the miniscule reduction in size was outweighed by the loss of capacity. I kept my 9c.

If I want pocket carry, my 642 goes in a Mika holster with a speed strip in my off side back pocket. I've never felt undergunned.

I have both and like to carry in IWB mode. I carry the compact way more often than the Shield using a good leather holster and belt. Think that is because of the shorter overall height with the compact making the grip seem to print less easily - I use the flat magazine base. Also like how the compact fills my hand and enjoy shooting the compact more at the range than the Shield.

However of the two if I was forced to choose only one of the two and could never get other, it would be the Shield. Mostly because of it's thinness it is likely more versatile in it's ability to pull off a wider variety of carry modes easier than the compact can.

If you already have an SR9, why not consider a SR9c? That way, you can use the full size mags from the SR9. I have a Shield (with Mag Guts +1 kits in all mags) 9mm and a SR9c. I carry IWB and if I had bought the 9c first, I would never have bought the Shield! The 9c conceals just as well for me and it's far more comforting to have on me. It shoots better, the trigger is better, higher round count, +P and even +P+ (if you like that) is no problem and it just feels more substantial in my hand. It's just more confidence inspiring IMO. The M&P 9c is very similar and I've shot the both side by side. The Ruger has a better trigger, fantastic trigger in fact. The Shield trigger is actually better than the M&P9c too, but not as nice as the SR9c. The Shield's a great gun and I do shoot and carry it often. But if it ever comes down to fighting for my life, I sure hope I have the 9c on me! yMMV...

I shot my friends Shield after my purchase of the 9c. The 9c fits my hand better as the shield felt too thin in my hand. Again, this is a matter of personal preference between the two but I sure like my 9c. I also purchased the 40c and I just like the way the compacts feel to me over the Shield. Both my compacts have been flawless without any modifications.
Just my 2 cents.

__________________
James
On the Llano Estacado

Very good observations...thanks!

__________________
911 never FORGET-never FORGIVE

ok, we see light vs heavier, thick vs thin, inside vs outside, round count as a sideshow. consider...bad guys are more and more roaming in groups. from what we can read in publications, single bad guys are probably the predominant threat, but....where do you want to be when you encounter say 3-5 baddies? reloading after 7, or after 15? consider the threat, then match the firearm to your preferred solution.

I own the full size, compact, and shield. All in 9mm.

The weight difference between the compact and shield is negligible.

The thickness does make a difference, but only when it comes to pocket carry and holster compatibility.

Picking between the two would come down to two things.

Do you plan on ever pocket carrying? Can't with a compact, well...Not well anyways.

And do you already own the full size?

If you don't ever plan on pocket carrying, and already own a full size, the compact is the way to go.

This. I have a 9c and so excited when I got my shield. The shield became my edc but one day I decided to carry my 9c and I couldn't tell the difference. On paper there's a big difference but when carrying there is none. Now I carry either one, depending on my mood.

I love carrying the Shield. OWB or IWB has been working for me this Summer. If I want to pocket carry I pull out my Ruger LCR .357 from the safe. I am a shorts and T-shirt kind of guy when I'm off duty. 6'1, 230 lbs.

Winter months will find me carrying my 45C IWB with a N82 Pro. Another awesome M&P!

NC

Got rid of my 9c. Replaced it with the shield 9. Much easier to carry and conceal.

Keep the shield for when dressing lite like when a t-shirt is just right then buy a 4.25" full size in stead of a compact when wearing a cover or square bottom shirt is practical . 6' tall and 210lb a full size should be no problem with any kind of cover if I can at 5-9 and 225lb .
I can wear a 4.25 full size one under a Guayabera or other square bottom shirts that hang a little loose .

Current CC a sig p320
http://i331.photobucket.com/albums/l...&1435271424566

Had a Shield and 9c I carried in Jason Winnie OWB holsters. Sold the Shield, if I am not carrying my 1911's, I carry the 9c. Like the extra ammo.

Kinda ironic, as my 1911's have 8+1 and 9+1 capacity...

Both the Shield and 9C are good guns. Don't think you can really go wrong with either, just have to pick one. I like the 9C because I sometimes take classes that are for the higher capacity guns.

Buy both, I did. There are advantages and disadvantages to both. They are both great guns. Sometimes you will want to carry the 9c, other times the Shield. No big deal. Guns and motorcycles are just like women - one will never due...

I pocket carried my Shield for 2 years. I thought the Shield was a pocket gun until I purchased a Taurus TCP 380 stainless. 12 oz loaded vs 24 oz loaded is a no brainer for pocket conceal and if money is not a concern you can purchase $2 per round machined 380 ammo that will deliver penitration and wound cavity in ballistic gel comparable to hollow point 9mm.

Russ
I

I have both a 9c and a full size, the 9c is going to be my carry gun once I get my permit. I never even thought to try the shield mostly because I was thinking capacity.

LCP for pocket carry great little gun, sometimes you just need small.
M&P9c for IWB carry always with outer shirt, love this pistol.
Stainless steel 1911 45 acp for open carry.

Looks like the OP cut and run !!