First gun - Compact 4" vs Shield 9mm?

[NewToGuns17]

The shield was my first carry gun. And that's what it's good at. I don't think you'll enjoy range days with it. Can you shoot it at the range and enjoy it, yes, sort of. It's not a spend hours shooting it gun but you do need to shoot it a bit to get good with it. I think if you're wanting a range gun and carry gun go with the 2.0 compact. I went the route of shield and 2.0 full size. Honestly, I can hide a full size 2.0 or also my h&k vp9 comfortably without my girlfriend even noticing half the time. Do I prefer the shield for comfort and ultimate concealing, yes. But you can easily conceal the compact with a quality iwb holster. It'll tuck right in. So if you only want one gun right now, go for the 2.0 compact.

 

[murphydog]

Yes, I'm talking about the 2.0 4" barrel version.
I'm not considering the 3.6" since it's basically 4" one except the shorter length.
Original 9C that has 3.5" barrel is a maybe option but if I'm going double stack, I'd rather go with 4".

The shield is on sale for $250 at palmettostate.
However, it adds tax for my state and shipping plus FFL will bring it to around $320 so not that cheap after all.

I see the 4" with no safety on sale for around $350 while the ones with safety is over $400.
I'm waiting for it do go down. If it doesn't go down in few weeks, I'll buy it regardless.


As for CCW, I already took the class and have certification.
I'm not comfortable to carry yet so haven't applied for the permit.
It is very easy to get a CCW certification.
Attend a class and viola, you are certified.
Sheriff's office doesn't even have a requirement of live fire practice.
It's so scary that there are many carrying a deadly weapon and all they did to be certified is attend a 4 hour class, most don't even use live fire in that class.
God forbid if they have to use it with that paper certification.
They are a liability and will put more lives in danger than saving.

I'm planning on getting a membership and practice so need my own gun. I can rent but that'll add quickly, specially with the ammo price as I have to buy it there if I rent.

As for training, I took a intro to pistol class and went to range few times.
So far, I only used 22lr and I really liked the feel of M&P 22lr pistol.
That's another reason why I wanted to get a M&P in 9mm version.

Let's see if grab a gun drops price on 2.0 compact.

It sounds as though you have covered all the basics, good for you!

Depending on your hand size, the thinner single stack Shield may work better for you, but since the grip frame of it and the 2.0 Compact are about the same length concealment will probably be a wash between the two aside from the weight.

 

[mrgreenjeens]

My first gun was a Shield 1.0 a couple of years ago. Maybe it’s not the ideal first gun, but no gun is ideal for all things. It does make a great carry gun once you get some training and practice. Don’t worry about those who say you won’t shoot it well. If you have the grip strength to work the relatively stiff slide and control the relatively snappy muzzle flip, you won’t have a problem being as accurate as you need to be.

I haven’t shot a compact or a shield 2.0, however I just don’t understand some people’s obsession with triggers. The 1.0 trigger is just fine for a defensive weapon. Good luck in your decision, I don’t think you can go wrong with an M&P.

 

[bigwheelzip]

One question on FFL, the ffl transfer only charges transfer fee, it does not add tax right?

Correct, tax if applicable is collected by the seller.

 

[hardluk1]

Mystery being new to handguns buy the 4" 2.0 compact . Its larger size will make for a easier to shoot well handgun and it is concealable .
By a safariland 27 iwb holster for it as it will carry ta pistol high on your belt and is cant adjustable in both directions . I carry a m&p 4.25 or 1911 in this holster at 3:00 with no concealment issues . My wife carrys a Kimber ultra 9mm in the same holster . Do not buy the cheapest bargain ammo out there to start with something like speer lawman .
Speer Lawman 9mm Ammo 115 Grain Total Metal Jacket

 

[Wee Hooker]

I have owned multiple Shields and (1.0) Compacts. I like the Compact allot. I find (all but the 45 ACP version)of the Shields are too thin to shoot accuratly in rapid fire. My groups (and felt recoil) shriks by half with the Compacts vs Shields. The shields have long since been sold.
When layed on top of each other, they are almost identical in footprint. It is only in width and weight that they differ . In my experience a good quality holster can absorb that difference so it's in the weeds.

FWIW, I have no interest in a 2.0 Compact as it is bigger / less compact than my 1.0 .

 

[apd9216]

As a guy that owns and carries both, here is my two cents...

Compact 4" is easier to shoot and manipulate and will have less felt recoil given it's mass. The longer slide makes for an increased sight radius and longer barrel makes for increased velocity and kinetic energy. It also holds 15+1 out of the gate as opposed to 8+1 of the Shield.

The Shield is smaller, lighter, and easier to carry than the 4" Compact. As such, you may feel more inclined to carry something that is easier to carry. I carried a Shield on a road trip from WI to TN (most of the time there spent in Memphis) and didn't feel undergunned at all.

I carry the 4.25" M&P 9 2.0 on duty and the 4" Compact off duty to and from work as I drive a take-home Squad and the 4" Compact will accept the 17 rd. mags I have on my heavy tac vest. However, on my off days when I usually have one or both of my kids, I usually just carry my Shield with two spare 8rd mags; the logic behind that being that I am less inclined to stay and fight it out if SHTF unless a threat is directly between me and getting my kids out of there.

You really can't go wrong with either gun. I use both depending on what I am doing and who I have with me.

 

[stonebuster]

OP, regarding the price of Shield 9 1.0 version: If you've got a Cabelas or Bass Pro within driving distance you can pick it up and avoid shipping and other additional costs. Cabelas is selling 1.0 Shields for $269 and Bass Pro will match it. I got a 1.0 performance center Shield 9 w/tritium nights sights advertised at $399 out the door price of $425. You should be able to pick up a standard Shield for under $300.

 

[Rastoff]

The compact 4" looks good but I feel it's too big for conceal carry.

Yes, many feel this way, but it's not true. I carry a full size M&P .45 without trouble.

In fact, the M&P 2.0 Compact is the perfect size for an all around gun. You can always buy a Shield later.

Any thoughts on shield as a jack of all situations gun?
thanks

It's not. The Compact is.

I see the 4" with no safety on sale for around $350 while the ones with safety is over $400.
I'm waiting for it do go down. If it doesn't go down in few weeks, I'll buy it regardless.

You've made several comments on the price of the gun. We all want the best product for the least amount of money. Yes, $400 may seem like a lot, but in the world of quality guns, it's really very inexpensive. You will spend many times this figure on ammo.

It's unlikely this price will get any lower.

One question on FFL, the ffl transfer only charges transfer fee, it does not add tax right?

Taxes are a funny thing. Sales tax is collected by the state and varies by city and county. Some states require that taxes be collected at the time of sale and some do not. If you buy something from out of state and no taxes are collected on it, you are required to report this on your tax return as "use tax". Most people don't.

 

[kbm6893]

Get the 4" Compact and learn to shoot. You can conceal it. Later, when you get serious about concealed carry and get your CWP, get a Keltec PF9.

The Shield is a terrible first gun to shoot and is too fat and heavy to conveniently conceal.

So get a shooter to have fun with and get a serious CC weapon to actually save your life with.

IMHO of course.

You are the only person I have ever heard call the Shield fat and difficult to conceal. Sure, there are some that are slightly lighter, but they’re all in the same class for a subcompact 9MM. I carry my Ruger LC9S more than the Shield but I don’t notice either one when I do carry them.

 

[dla]

You are the only person I have ever heard call the Shield fat and difficult to conceal. Sure, there are some that are slightly lighter, but they’re all in the same class for a subcompact 9MM. I carry my Ruger LC9S more than the Shield but I don’t notice either one when I do carry them.

When you get serious about CC weapons, weight and thickness matter more than shooting comfort. The Shield is a bit tubby compared to it's competition.

 

[Flyingfool]

The OP ruled out the 3.6” compact. Dismissing the difference as meaningful.

I would disagree. The weight saved and the barrel length while not a huge difference could make andifference when appendix carry comfort.

I have a 1.0 shield and a 3.6” 2.0 compact. I shoot the 3.6 compact better. But the weight is the main difference in carry weight. Concealment difference between the shield and 3.6” is zero. But how it feels after waking around 8 hours is a different story!

The OP may also want to look at the thumb safety difference. The shield safety is small and maybe harder to manipulate but also won’t snag etc for carry. The compact thumb safety are what I would call elephant ears! Huge and obnoxious. (Again personal opinion)

On a carry gun I PERSONALLY do NOT want a safety on it. For the most part the gun should always be in holster unless a threat is immediate and you are almoat certain you are going to fire anyhow. And a safety is just one rhing that you could possibly forget when adrenaline is pumping. Again just MY opinion.

For a person new to shooting, and a mostly range gun I understand the thumb safety desire and many people have zero problem even on a carry gun.

I would just say that the 3.6”2.0 compact is about the perfect compromise. It is only 1/2” longer barrel than the shield. Yet has the longer site radius and weight to make easier and more accurate to shoot at the range. The higher capacity and weight helping at the range, and slightly hindering it as an easy carry gun. Yet it is small enough to easily carry and conceal.

I also love the texture of the 2.0. And if I if currently in market for anshield I would get the 2.0 shield for the grip texture. Some of my less accuracy with the shield 1.0 compared to my 2.0 compact may be due to the smaller shield and slippery grip moving on me between multiple shots. The 2.0 texture is awesome. Once in the hand it is like glue as the gun doesn’t move an single iota between shots.

The 3.6” compact (other than weight) does EVERTHING the shield can do for carry only more/better (including more weight). To the point where I have thought about selling my shield and getting a true deep cover back up gun for a pocket (like and LCP size). For my body size and build. I cannot pocket carry the shield except for cargo pants or possibly heavy winter jacket.

Don’t “rule out” the 3.6”. It cpuld be the best of both worlds that you are looking for.

The $50 difference in price is only the price of a few boxes of ammo. And that cost difference can be spread over a lifetime of ownership, making it a total nonissue in the long run.

 

[Rastoff]

The OP ruled out the 3.6” compact. Dismissing the difference as meaningful.

I would disagree. The weight saved and the barrel length while not a huge difference could make andifference when appendix carry comfort.

I would never carry a loaded gun in that manner anyway so, the "comfort of carrying AIWB" is moot. It's a bad place to carry a gun. Just because a lot of people do it doesn't make it a good idea.

 

[Smoke]

It is very easy to get a CCW certification. Attend a class and viola, you are certified.
Sheriff's office doesn't even have a requirement of live fire practice.
It's so scary that there are many carrying a deadly weapon and all they did to be certified is attend a 4 hour class, most don't even use live fire in that class.
God forbid if they have to use it with that paper certification.
They are a liability and will put more lives in danger than saving.
version.

Something is rotten in Denmark

 

[southerncomfort]

OP, the 4” compact is a fine gun, a good first choice, you might even consider a full size M&P to learn to shoot on. It’s easier to learn on a larger gun, and then downsize to a more concealable model when your skills and confidence are more developed. Only you can determine what fits you best. I graduated from larger pistols to a Shield 1.0 for summer carry, and love it.

The people here who want to map out your whole future for you in one post, or badmouth certain gun models, should be taken with a grain of salt.

 

[stonebuster]

When you get serious about CC weapons, weight and thickness matter more than shooting comfort. The Shield is a bit tubby compared to it's competition.

Less than 1" wide=tubby? I wouldn't want it any thinner than it is. I guess if I was serious I'd get it.

 

[dla]

Less than 1" wide=tubby? I wouldn't want it any thinner than it is. I guess if I was serious I'd get it.

Try pocket carry - thats where the thickness is a problem.

 

[kbm6893]

When you get serious about CC weapons, weight and thickness matter more than shooting comfort. The Shield is a bit tubby compared to it's competition.

I’ve been carrying concealed for nearly 30 years. I think I might have it figured out.

OP, try the Ruger EC9S. Like $250 new. Slimmer and lighter by a few ounces than the Shield. You can get it with a manual safety or without. Since I see you want a safety, you will love it. Safety lever on the Ruger is a hair wider so much easier to disengage. That model also comes with a magazine disconnect, so even if there’s a round in the chamber the gun won’t fire without the mag in. I like that feature but if you don’t, the mag disconnect t is easily removable. The trigger on the EC9S is fantastic.

 

[kbm6893]

Try pocket carry - thats where the thickness is a problem.

What are you suggesting? Glock 43? Less ammo and more expensive. Kel-Tec PF9? I’d never carry a Kel-Tec for defense. Not when there are much higher quality guns available for a few dollars more, if that.

And I have pocket carried the Shield and the LC9S. Doable, but not what is was designed for. M&P Bodyguard much better choice for that role. And I would definitely not recommend a micro pocket gun for first time shooter to learn the ropes. I shoot a lot and do pretty well with the the Bodyguard, but never more than 50 rounds a range session. Just not fun to shoot.

 

[Mystery]

Thanks for replies.

@Flyingfool, I'll keep 3.6 in mind.
However, I can't even imagine aiwb.
A metal gun pointing at my gun is scary.

Why I'm looking for safety is, first I'm comfortable thinking there's one extra layer of safety in case.
I don't want to have a death sentence for one time slip on safety.
Another reason is that for home defense, I want one with safety as there'll be enough time compared to self defense.
Of course my mind may change after I get training and practice but for now safety it is.