M&P .380 Shield

smith46wesson

smith46wesson

Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2015
Messages
131
Reaction score
66
Location
Hanover, PA
I certainly won't be holding my breath for this to happen...but I wouldn't mind seeing a S&W M&P pistol chambered in .380 and essentially built like a shrunken Shield. Slightly smaller than the Glock 42, but slightly bigger than the Bodyguard. Make it striker fired with a nice trigger. Build it with a 3-3.25 inch barrel for a little more velocity. Maybe incorporate a grip that can use the current 6 round Bodyguard mags or something similar, with optional 7 and 8 round mags set up in the same manner as the Shield extended mags. Keep it under .85 inches in width and under 15 ounces. Put some 3 dot sights on it, or at least a dot front sight with the blacked out rear. Keep the optional safety switch so people could purchase it as they prefer it.

With as many people that seem to dislike the the bodyguard's recoil and trigger but tolerate it because it serves as their pocket/ankle gun I would think something like this could gain some traction. It would be more shoot able for more people than the bodyguard, along with being smaller and lighter than the shield. They up sized the Shield for .45, so I would think a downsize would be possible.
 
Register to hide this ad
Don't see a market for it. The Bodyguard serves its role well. Feather light pocket or ankle gun. Ruger tried something similar. First they had the LC9, then the LCP in .380. Then they came out with the LC380. Same size as the LC9 but in .380. Who wants that? Same size as the LC9 but shoots a less effective, more expensive round?

I have an LC9-S and always though it was such a small gun, but it feels huge now compared to my BG380.

Better to downsize the Shield. I owned one. Nice gun. But not the smallest 9MM out there. Bought my LC9-S because it was smaller and lighter.
 
Last edited:
I carried an M&P bodyguard .380 for over a year. Very easily concealable and never had a mechanical issue. I had it loaded with barnes Tac-XPD ammo. The doubt about the .380's effectiveness came when i hit a deer with my car and had to put it out of its misery. The bullets didnt hardly penetrate him.
 
akguy1985 said:
I carried an M&P bodyguard .380 for over a year. Very easily concealable and never had a mechanical issue. I had it loaded with barnes Tac-XPD ammo. The doubt about the .380's effectiveness came when i hit a deer with my car and had to put it out of its misery. The bullets didnt hardly penetrate him.
Click to expand...

But that would be an ammo issue, correct? Better options out there for penetration while still having some decent expansion:

http://www.luckygunner.com/labs/self-defense-ammo-ballistic-tests/#380ACP

Barnes TAC-XP was a poor performer in these tests...
 
Last edited:
"Same size as the LC9 but in .380. Who wants that? Same size as the LC9 but shoots a less effective, more expensive round?"

You're right, I would not want a gun the size of the Shield in .380. That's why I'd propose it being a smaller gun, much closer to the size of the Bodyguard in fact. I'd make it smaller than the Glock 42, which sits solidly between the Shield and Bodyguard. I'd make it pretty much the same as the Shield, but smaller.

"Bought my LC9-S because it was smaller and lighter."

Those are good reasons to switch up. I also assume you purchased the LC9-S and not the LC9 because you preferred the trigger. This forum is full of complaints about the Bodyguard trigger. That's why I'd make it striker fired with the newer style M&P trigger. And if someone prefers the DAO hammer fired gun for pocket carry then they can buy the bodyguard, no worries.

Like I said, I don't see it happening. But Ruger did make the LC9-S because people didn't want the LC9 trigger.

I tolerate my Bodyguard for what it gives me in terms of concealability and I can hit fairly well with it because it has real sights. If I had laid eyes on the LCP custom when I swapped my LCP for the Bodyguard I might be pocket carrying that. I wouldn't give either one of them another thought if I could get a striker fired Shield .380 that was smaller than the Glock 42.
 
I bought a Sig P938 9mm. Very small 9mm, will fit in my pocket and is very reliable. Its now my carry gun and I have an M&P body guard, a 9mm shield and an LC9s.
 
Dragon Leather Works in TN, makes a great pocket holster for these. I love mine(holster and pistol). When i can carry it is one of my first choices, sadly I work on a Federal Instillation so I cant carry at work, or even in the car. but everywhere else, I am at least if not in addition to carrying the 380.
 
I want to add a Bodyguard 380... but also getting a Shield 9mm (maybe the PC version if I can find it locally)...

I am afraid that if I buy the Bodyguard first, the Shield would have to wait another year... arghhhh... yeah, I have a Nano that fills the CC job... but I want both...

Do not care for a 380 in the size of the shield, that would be a waste of material... :)
 
smith46wesson said:
"Same size as the LC9 but in .380. Who wants that? Same size as the LC9 but shoots a less effective, more expensive round?"

You're right, I would not want a gun the size of the Shield in .380. That's why I'd propose it being a smaller gun, much closer to the size of the Bodyguard in fact. I'd make it smaller than the Glock 42, which sits solidly between the Shield and Bodyguard. I'd make it pretty much the same as the Shield, but smaller.

"Bought my LC9-S because it was smaller and lighter."

Those are good reasons to switch up. I also assume you purchased the LC9-S and not the LC9 because you preferred the trigger. This forum is full of complaints about the Bodyguard trigger. That's why I'd make it striker fired with the newer style M&P trigger. And if someone prefers the DAO hammer fired gun for pocket carry then they can buy the bodyguard, no worries.

Like I said, I don't see it happening. But Ruger did make the LC9-S because people didn't want the LC9 trigger.

I tolerate my Bodyguard for what it gives me in terms of concealability and I can hit fairly well with it because it has real sights. If I had laid eyes on the LCP custom when I swapped my LCP for the Bodyguard I might be pocket carrying that. I wouldn't give either one of them another thought if I could get a striker fired Shield .380 that was smaller than the Glock 42.
Click to expand...


Actually, I had the LC9 first, then the Shield. Lc9 was fine, but I got caught up in the Shield hysteria when it was new and sold the LC9 for the Shield. But I sold the Shield for the LC9-S. Better trigger, but the standard LC9 trigger wasn't bad for what it was. And I wanted a smaller and lighter gun than the Shield, plus I liked the mag safety on the Ruger and the manual safety was much easier to engage on the LC9 and LC9-S than the Shield. Truth is, I wish I still had my standard LC9. The LC9-S trigger is much better than the LC9, and it's better than the Shield too. But it is super light, and in a close up carry gun, I don't feel it is such a necessity.

And I know you said a smaller gun than the Shield in a new Bodyguard Shield hybrid, but even halfway in size between the Bodyguard .380 and the Shield isn't enough of a drop in size to justify redesigning a whole new weapon. I know I wouldn't get rid of my Bodyguard .380 for a BG Shield .380 that is slightly bigger and more comfortable to shoot. The BG is an up close defensive weapon. It does what I need it to do. And thin and light is what I need above comfy to shoot.

The LC9-S is between the Shield and the Bodyguard. Why not try one of those? or do you want even smaller than the LC9? The Glock 42 is about the same size as the LC9.
 
Last edited:
The LC9-S is between the Shield and the Bodyguard. Why not try one of those? or do you want even smaller than the LC9? The Glock 42 is about the same size as the LC9.[/QUOTE]

It's funny how the quest for the next best thing goes sometimes, lol. I had a Glock 42, but told myself if I could carry that I might as well carry the Shield so I really didn't need it (or I could borrow my wife's if I still really wanted to carry one, lol). I have a bodyguard because I thought I'd prefer it over the LCP as my deep concealment, but I sometimes have to wonder about that.

If the Glock 42 would have been Bodyguard size and the Glock 43 would have been Glock 42 size this conversation would be over...but then again that might have been the thought that started it.
 
The LC9S is a very good looking piece. I almost bought one in the Pro model, but choose the Shield instead. I like the shield very well, but may still get the LC9S-Pro as another 9mm. Like they say, "You can never have too many guns"!

mb
 
martybee said:
The LC9S is a very good looking piece. I almost bought one in the Pro model, but choose the Shield instead. I like the shield very well, but may still get the LC9S-Pro as another 9mm. Like they say, "You can never have too many guns"!

mb
Click to expand...

I need to see them side by side... but most likely, I will get both. An LC9S for my daughter and the Shield PC for me. I just do not feel comfortable getting the BG380 for my daughter with so many reviews showing it failing to fire...
 
The BG380 is a fantastic, slim pocket gun with big gun features. I think a Shield in .380 would be more logical instead of making a new size.

I have a lot of women and some older men in my family that can't rack the slide nor take the recoil of the current slim 9mm carry guns out there. Going to an even smaller .380 is just as bad. Ruger had the right idea with the LC380 even if most people with normal hand strength don't see why it exists.

A shield in .380 wouldn't be a huge seller, but it would be exactly what some people are looking for. Lighter recoil spring=easier to rack and a bigger gun in a smaller caliber=less recoil.
 
Last edited:
I think a .380 Shield would sell just fine, even without downsizing. There are those recoil sensitive individuals who who feel a 9mm is too much. (or maybe they just THINK it is) Those same people who have tried a gun like the Bodyguard or LCP have been disappointed to find out that it's snappier than a large 9mm. For them, a Shield .380 could be just the ticket. I wouldn't buy one, because for me shooting the 9mm Shield is very comfortable, but I bet a lot of people would.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

B
M&P Shield 45 Serial Number
Replies
5
Views
917
hyena
H
D
PC M&P Shield RDS compatibility?
Replies
2
Views
237
Beju
B
D
First impressions of my new optics ready 3.1" Shield Plus 13+1 2.0
Replies
1
Views
121
M1A4ME
M1A4ME
D
Finally first range trip with my 4" Shield Plus P/C
Replies
3
Views
167
Beju
B
P
.380 bodyguard 2.0
Replies
6
Views
3K
Tomac
T

Latest posts

Back
Top