New Shield 380 EZ... Nope. Junk.

[Wee Hooker]

I believe the gun will sell well based on my experience. We have had ALLOT of women ( more than 1/2 of them elderly/limited physical capacity) come into the shop in the last year or so looking for their first carry/ home defense gun. Many have strength issues that prevent them from working the slide on many of the small 9mms with light slides and STIFF springs. Yet,many of them seem to be against a revolver ( often because revolvers don't have safety's.)
I can see the market S&W was aiming for here. It's not you, me or any other experienced shooter who likely frequent a gun forum. It's newbie's with recoil sensitivities and /or strength issues who still want a semi auto handgun. I think this one will be a good fit for them.

 

[iowaMallard]

Looks to me the grip safety is the trade off for no trigger blade and a really light trigger. No, this is not an upgrade for current shield owners, but it targets a new demographic for s&w.

 

[fallhunter]

I can see that you might not have a use for it, but why do you think it is junk?

Its a worthless design. A backstrap safety? Really? Why? This is the reason I absolutely refuse to ever own a Springfield.

Sent from my SM-T580 using Tapatalk

 

[gc70]

Its a worthless design. A backstrap safety? Really? Why? This is the reason I absolutely refuse to ever own a Springfield.

Yeah, a grip safety, like those worthless old 1911s have. What kind of wimp needs a safety to carry around a pistol with a fully cocked hammer and a light trigger?

 

[GerSan69]

If you don't want one, don't get one. No one is forcing you to buy it.
I'm relatively certain that S&W didn't develop this pistol for the experts on the Forum.
There's a market for a gun that's comfortable to handle in a caliber that's accepted for self-defense. That market is currently dominated by Ruger, Glock, and some of the less-expensive brands. This looks like it's geared toward first-time buyers who want something that's super-simple to use but has safety features that will make them less-fearful of using it. It will be interesting to see how well it sells.

 

[bnolsen]

I really wish we would have just gotten a Shield chambered in 380 with just a new mag, barrel and reocoil spring.

 

[swsig]

Even though it's called a Shield, it appears to be based on the M&P 22 Compact. A marketing move, I guess. This would be a perfect gun for my wife. She's small and not very strong, and can only rack .380s. She has a SIG P250 .380 DAO. It's easy for her to use, but it has a long trigger pull. She'd prefer something lighter with a single-action trigger that's just as safe and simple to operate. The no-thumb safety version appears to fulfill that requirement. Now, if it's only reliable...

 

[Cheapskait]

Yup, like others have said, this is not targeted at us. This is for first-time, non-gun people and oldsters. I wish S&W good sales.

 

[martybee]

I have read it is hammer fired, But is it DAO or DA/SA? No spec's on that or trigger weight. Maybe I missed it? Also... Locked Breech or Blowback?

 

[Bamabred]

Lots of people wanted a 380 Shield. I did. There's a whole thread in here about it somewhere.I wish it were a true Shield though

 

[bigwheelzip]

At first glance, I think the .380 Shield is brilliant because it should be more user friendly to the novice, recoil averse, and hand strength challenged.

My first foray from revolvers to semi-autos was a SIG P238 because I could rack the slide easily. That SIG is a great but snappy platform. The larger Shield .380 should be less snappy thus easier to shoot, and the .380 ballistics have to benefit from the longer barrel.

If it had a decocker instead of the thumb safety, I'd consider it myself.

 

[Rule3]

Why!? This is the gun NOBODY asked for. Especially with a grip safety. Sorry, but nope. Keep ot.

Do you have one? Have you shot one? Why is it junk?

Some folks like 380 in a larger size?

You have a "Sent from my LG-H932 using Tapatalk"??

Who wants one of those, compared to Apple they are junk

OH look! There is a thread on these a few posts down!

 

[Shield 9 WV]

I can see that you might not have a use for it, but why do you think it is junk?

You are asking a rational question to somebody who wrote a click-bait headline. It was just a troll trying to get some attention IMO.

You can't have an intelligent conversation with someone like that.

 

[Seven High]

I would guess that the 380 Shield was also developed for sale in foreign countries where it is prohibited for civilians to posses pistols of military caliber. I would like it better if the grip safety could be deactivated by pinning it.

 

[markmiela]

Looks like a great gun and if my wife would get into guns would be a good one for her. Probably not as snappy as a shield 9 or 40. If accurate and reliable why not.

Don't like it don't buy it but don't say it is junk until you shoot it or have seen it. Smh.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Jim1392]

This is not "junk"... it's a viable option for women and the elderly who want the advantages of a semi-auto but have trouble with racking and loading. Lots of people like this, including my mother in law who has arthritis but would love a Shield for her home defense.

This would be the same reason I'm interested in the gun. My wife has no hand strength and now we have a M & P 22C in the house for her. She can rack the slide and shoots it quite well, but I've yet to find a gun in higher calibers that she can rack. She also has to use a Hilljack quickie loader to load the magazines. This could be the answer. And it would make me happy that she had something other then rimfire for protection.

 

[dusty3030]

How many threads a week do you see "what is the best handgun for someone with limited hand strength?"

This ain't for run and gun IDPA, jumping out of airplanes special forces, high speed low drag super ninja, etc etc.

Great idea and I hope that it exceeds expectations and does well. I like it has an ample rail for a light / laser.

 

[Boudiepitbull]

Even at more than twice the price I think I'd still go for a Beretta Cheetah.

 

[bearman49709]

Yeah, a grip safety, like those worthless old 1911s have. What kind of wimp needs a safety to carry around a pistol with a fully cocked hammer and a light trigger?

1911's have a thumb safety so a grip safety is not needed!
In fact JMB designed the 1911 without it but the Army demanded one be added!
Since the 1970's I've shot at least twenty 1911's and none had a "light trigger"!

 

[Rule3]

1911's have a thumb safety so a grip safety is not needed!
In fact JMB designed the 1911 without it but the Army demanded one be added!
Since the 1970's I've shot at least twenty 1911's and none had a "light trigger"!

Guess it depends on what you define a "light" trigger as?