Sorry if this has been discussed before, but has anyone heard if S&W will be offering the M&P 45 Compact 2.0, or do they consider the Shield 45 the final answer to the compact 45 of the future? Thanks.

If they 2.0 the C line, I imagine it would start with the 9C, which hasn't happened. That being said, I've been considering the 45C for some time, but am pretty content with the Shield .45 for now.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Thanks for the perspective, and you are probably right on track. The 45C becomes pretty versatile because you can install the X Grip and 10 round magazine as I have, making the compact a full size M&P. That has become my bedside and traveling gun. I'd like to see a compact 2.0, but honestly I'm not sure if I would give up what I have at this point. Just curious. As you can tell from my name, I usually carry a 1911 full size or Compact 4".

Yep, giving one a hard look now. Gonna make a decision this weekend.

With the 45c only holds one more round than a 45 Shield. The shield is much more Compact and concealable.

I much prefer the shield 45 for carrying over one mor round.

I spent an entire Sumer comparing, shooting and T&E'ing the M&P45C to my HK45C, Glock 30 Gen 4 and peripherally other compact .45ACP pistols. When all was said and done I sold the HK and decided upon the M&P45C which I have just acquired as my "retirement" gun. I traditionally carry Glock pistols but the .45's are not comfortable to me and the 45C just fits. It didn't hurt that I have a total of $285 invested at this point but it does need Night Sights.

The 2.0 would be a definite must see.

I agree, if you plan to carry a 45c the shield45 will be a better option.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

__________________
M&P 9, Shield9.

I would like to see the 45c 2.0. I prefer the 45c size over the shield size.

So do I being that I carry a 1911 compact 45 which is plenty thin and discrete for concealment. I like my 45C because I can convert it into a mid size high cap M&P by inserting a 10 round magazine along with an XGrip. That becomes a very versatile hand gun for carry, bedside, travel, etc. That's what I have done with mine which meets all of the above criteria. Now if we can just get a 2.0 compact all would be good.

I can tell you that there is nothing in the works for a compact 2.0 or a 9mm/.40 Shield in a "2.0"/something like the .45 Shield.

I was hoping for something like the Glock 19 in a 2.0 with ever so slightly less aggressive stippling on the grip. I would purchase one sight unseen.

Sent from my Z983 using Tapatalk

I'd be curious if S&W doesn't offer the 45C in a 2.0 as the only difference between the full size and compact is the length of the grip. If I were only buying one M&P 45, it would be the compact as it can be converted to either midsize or full size with either a mag adapter and/or slide. Note I don't include the 45 Shield in this conversation because they are two different/distinct animals.

So still no word on M&P 2.0 C in 9mm or 40 S&W? I am selling my M&P 9c. I plan to buy a M&P 40c. I have the crimson grips for it. I bought a M&P 40c 4.25" and love the improvements. I would wait for the 2.0C if it was coming out by Spring. Does any one have an update.

45c for me
Shield is less capacity and NOT mag compatible with the M&P 45 / 45. 2.0
That alone is a HUGE strike against it.
Same way with the 9c. Mag compatible

You can't go from a 9mm to a 40S&W because the FBI told us the 40 is no longer better than the 9mm. Personally I'm having trouble understanding the logic. Just because the 40 has a bigger and heavier bullet that travels faster than a 9mm, penetrates deeper, and also has more spread, that's no reason to switch to the 40. The fact that professionals recommend +P or +P+ in 9mm ammo, especially in the shorter barrels, speaks volumes to me. Sorry, I got a little off track. I just couldn't resist. No flaming please.

I wish I knew when all the 2.0 models were coming out, but I guess an announcement would kill pre-2.0 business pretty quickly. Sorry again for the rant.

Looks like the 2.0c comes out next Monday. It was on another post today on this forum. Not sure on inital calbers. BTW, no experts recommend +P in short barrels. Short barrels do not have enough "time" to leverage the powder, +P is innefective even in mid size barrels from everything I have seen and read. The reason 9mm is displacing .40 is because terminal performance of 9mm with current ammo is very similar to .40, but with a much softer recoil implulse (IMO).

So its a bad idea to run +p ammo through my M&P M2.0? But Glocks can/are ok to run +p AND +p+, I don't believe Glock barrels/frames are any better then my M2.0. Besides who are these experts anyways??

It is not the make of the gun, it is the length of the barrel. Tons of actual testing verifies this.
400 Bad Request

Lucky Gunner Offers Handgun Ammo Ballistics Data Dump - The Truth About Guns
Lots more if you actually read it and look at the results of multiple tests. I am talking about compact guns, generally 4" barrel or less(depending on round). Just because your gun is rated for it does not mean +p is better.

By +p i mean Underwood Ammo & Double Tap.

I don't think you understand. Underwood or Double Tap could be +p or not. Short barrels do not, in general, perform any better, or in some cases worse, with +p ammo.

I get what you're saying, but why can't the M&P M2.0 handle +p or +p+ regardless of what the "Experts" say is what I'm asking. Who are these experts??

The M&P can "handle" the +p ammo; there probably is just not enough or very little gain in velocity from a short barreled gun to justify the cost of the +p ammo.