Hello All. I'm new here. I have followed the forum for many months now. I just wanted to share my experience with the purchase of a new Shield .40, 1.0, in September of this year. I am retired LEO and carried the full size M&P 40 as a duty weapon for many years. I currently own another M&P 40. I love that gun!
When I received my Shield, I immediately had an issue with the gun failing to eject a spent round without the magazine inserted in the gun. I ran three different types of ammo through the gun and experienced the same result. I returned the gun back to the store that I had purchased it from and they in return sent it back to Smith and Wesson. Smith had the gun for 5 weeks ,then returned it and advised that they had repaired the ejector and fired the gun and it passed inspection. I cleaned the pistol and then put about 50 rounds of 4 different types of ammunition through the gun. I had the same malfunction. The round would not fully eject out of the chamber without the magazine inserted in the gun. I had a certified firearms instructor and a former gunsmith look at the gun. They both suggested that there was possibly an issue with the extractor. I called Smith and Wesson and was advised that my gun had been repaired, but they did not give me any further details. I returned the gun to the store, received a full refund. I then purchased a new 2.0 Shield .40. This was very disappointing to say the least. Sorry for the long post.

How often do you fire a round without the magazine inserted, and why . . . ? I'm asking because I have no idea if any of my pistols will do this or not. Never tried it, never needed to. Just trying to learn . . .

__________________
Wisdom comes thru fear . . .

I'm not sure that is relevant. I don't fire the gun often without the magazine inserted . A live round could not be fully ejected from chamber without the magazine inserted, not just when I fired the gun.

If I were unloading without firing, I certainly would not want the mag inserted. If you did, you would have to cycle the whole mag through just to clear the weapon. Sounds like an unsafe practice to me.

__________________
SWCA 3417 HF 642 NRA-TC

"I immediately had an issue with the gun failing to eject a spent round without the magazine inserted in the gun."

Is that a drill you're practicing? topping off a 1/2 empty to make a full magazine during a gun fight?

I have never fired a pistol without the magazine inserted. even when practicing topping off a 1/2 empty magazine, but I can see where you would want it to eject the brass if needed during the task of topping off a magazine.

This is what you originally posted. You didn't post that it also would not eject a live round until just now. That makes a big difference in the question:

__________________
Wisdom comes thru fear . . .

Okay, maybe I didn't describe the problem with the gun clearly. The round, either spent or live would not fully eject from the chamber without the magazine when clearing the gun. I was not "topping off" the magazine. So, if I dropped a fully loaded magazine out out the gun, the chambered round would not fully eject from the gun when racking the slide back to the rear.

Guess I'm a little confused. So, when you say:

"I cleaned the pistol and then put about 50 rounds of 4 different types of ammunition through the gun. I had the same malfunction. The round would not fully eject out of the chamber without the magazine inserted in the gun."

Were you firing these four different brands of ammo through the gun at the range, and the gun was failing to eject the spent casings..... or just running the live ammunition through by cycling the slide by hand??

__________________
Ret. LE, FA Instr, S&W Armorer

This sounds like a known fault that sometimes occurs in a 1911. The extractor is marginal on hook or tension and the top round in the magazine guides the fired case or unloaded round to the ejector. Last round or no magazine will fail to eject.
So I think your instructor and gunsmith were right. A new extractor and spring might have fixed it and the warranty clerk didn't do it.

Jim Watson,
You are correct! I realize that man/machine made instruments will fail. I was posting my concern because Smith and Wesson did not fix the problem and reported that firearm was repaired and passed inspection.

Now I'm really confused ... !

Welcome to the Forum!

I've sent a couple of my guns back to S&W for service, and my suggestion is that instead of going through the dealer, work with customer service directly. Phone calls work best in my experience, but emails can be useful, especially when photos or videos can clearly show what your problem is. It is also important to include an extremely detailed written description of the problem with your gun when you send it back. That way whoever works on it will know exactly what they're dealing with. I'm glad it ultimately worked out for you. In any case, your dealer sounds first-rate.

__________________
What, me worry?

So does the 2.0 Shield .40 do the same thing as the 1.0, or does it function like you expected?

You have to wait 7 days,(background check), in the state of Maryland before you can pick up your firearm. I am very confident the 2.0 will not fail. That is why I purchased another Shield!
SWSIG,
I did take numerous pictures of the malfunctions on the 1.0 and gave them to the dealer to send back with the pistol to Smith.

I am glad the dealer took care of you. Hope the 2.0 is issue free.

Oh, yea we recently got a new 10 day waiting period here so I understand.

Anyway, maybe you could post those pictures here so we get a better idea of what you are describing?

I'm playing with my 1.0 Shield .40 right now, trying to imitate the problem you had, but not really sure what you're describing.
(dummy rounds of course)

Hopefully, all will work well for you.

Hey welcome to the forum!

I'm disappointed with S&W's warranty service. Sent a 5967 back that had a problem of the hammer following the slide into battery during firing and a cracked recall-notice grip. Got it back with the problem not fixed and the wrong replacement grips. This was in a way to my advantage since the wrong grips in this case were easily replaced via Ebay and I got a pair of brand new factory decocker double-stack grips, I also ordered a part from Numrich which fixed the battery issue as well. Love the vintage guns they made, not very confident in the customer service.

Good point. I've had problems with dealer service writers failing to properly detail the problem for the mechanic. Had a brand new car, intermittently would not crank. I had the service manual trouble shooting guide, knew the purple wire was getting voltage and no crank, so starter motor was bad. Car was returned with just a new battery. I looked at the write-up, "car won't start".
Next time I dropped it off, started it a few times until it stopped at the dead spot, left it there blocking the service entrance. As I left, I saw them pushing it in.

Here is something to try. Take the slide off. Pull the spring and barrel out. Take a dummy round and slide it under the extractor. The extractor should hold that round firmly against the breach face and you should be able to wave the assembly around and the dummy round should stay there.

I used to be a Glock armorer and I know that you can do this with a Glock. That shell would stay there no matter how you waved the slide in the air.

If the shell falls out, then there isn't proper spring tension on the extractor.

Now I am curious, I am going to go check my M&P 40.

Jayman

I just checked mine as I described above. It held a round on the breach face perfectly. I had to shake the slide pretty hard before it round came loose.

Something to try anyway.

Jay

Thanks Jayman. I had to send my new 2.0 Shield back to Smith and Wesson for failure to extract rounds. This is the second Shield I have had with the same problem. Unbelievable! I did send a detailed letter describing the issue and pictures with the gun when it was sent back to Smith. Something is not right with that extractor.

I have heard pf scattered issues with the compact and EZ M&P models including the recent recall of a part of production for one model. I am sure there are some good firearms in this category. I suspect the rapid fire introduction of numerous models has stretched the design and testing teams however (or maybe because of) much they may be computerized. The regular full size M&P's seem unaffected. Just an observation from an old guy.