SIAP or if S&W has confirmed/denied this (sorry, I don't keep up with the news)

It seems there is a new trend for even smaller guns, and I have especially noticed it with 9mm's.

For example, the Sig 290 and 938 as well as the Ruger LC9 and Beretta Nano.

For concealed carry, would you like to see an even more compact version of the M&Pc (any caliber)?

I was just thinking yesterday...I sure wish that my M&P40 FS was thinner...Closer to the width of a 1911. I personally wouldn't buy a M&P compact single stack 9mm. If they could thin out the .45 I'd seriously consider it.

Sorry, I should have clarified that this would apply to all calibers.

I voted no, If the grip was much smaller it would be hard for me to get a good grip. I carry the M&P9c with the flat base mag.

__________________
M&P .40, M&P 9c & Shield 45

Last Saturday, I bought a competitor's single stack pistol because S&W just doesn't make one (except for the 1911) that fits my hands well.

Tried owning a Sigma, almost bought an SD last week (except for the grip size), and ended up buying a Kahr for this very reason.

A real shame that there are so many gun owners/shooters out here that are looking for a slimmer grip that will accommodate all of their fingers (3rd-pinky), and S&W, Ruger, and others just don't seem to care about that market.

Glocks are sent off for grip reductions, M&P owners are complaining about the size of the CT grips' additional girth on their pistols' frames making the pistols once again too large for their hands, and on and on it goes.

Not all of us are concerned about magazine capacities exceeding 8 rounds, especially those of us who grew up with 5 and 6 shot revolvers.

In a way I kind of did. I bought a Beretta Nova which is a single stack, polymer 9mm. Its getting on towards the level of almost being too small to get a reasonable grip on and isn't nearly as easy to shoot well as an M&P C is.
Ain't no free lunch, smaller size comes at a cost in how easy a pistol is to handle and shoot.
Now personally I wouldn't mind a single stack M&P that was the same height and length as a compact. I don't really care about the extra rounds and 7 or 8 would be enough.

I open carry, so I dont see the point in, nor do I care for, small guns.

I would be all over a thin single stack M&P. Smith & Wesson was late to get into the .380acp craze and they are way behind schedule to get into the "slim" 9mm craze. Hopefully whatever they finally come up with is worth the wait.

I would seriously have to see how it fits my hand. I'd definitely be interested a smaller single stack M&P but it all comes down to how it feels in my hand.

I have already whined about this several times. I got all excited during the SHOT coverage when I would have sworn that S&W was about to offer a single stack compact M&P45c. I would rather see an offering in the 9mm or .40SW of the same thing though. But it turned out it was an XDm that was made. I'm still waiting for a S&W Kahr killer.

I voted no, I had a M&P 40 FS and sold it to buy a M&P40c (wish I was richer Then I would have kept the full size) I am fairly accurate with the compact and it conceals easy enough. I have come to the conclusion this is the smallest pistol I want. With that said if a smaller pistol fit my hand and I could be accurate with it I might give it a try. Like sinkhole30 said theres no free lunch and if its real small and carrys real easy but I cant grip it to hit what I am aiming at, I might as well throw it at the target.
Cracker

I would buy one. I thought of all the folks that carry snub nose revolvers (me included) and what that really means to me. Concealable. Light weight. Reasonable stopping power with proper shot placement. Six or seven rounds an issue? No way. Remember the snub's capacity. Grip size an issue? Well could be, but, slip on grips are easily available and work for me. I enjoy and value and carry my full size pistol, but, there are times when my snub is better suited in weather and or clothing applications. The market is ripe for S&W to introduce one. It has a proven performer and a strong following. It would be a shame to waste it on waiting. Just a my thoughts.

Aren't questions no's 2 and 4 essentially asking the same thing? Shouldn't question no.4 read "YES if it were NOT a single stack" or "YES if it were a Double stack"?

If so that would have been my choice.

I currently carry a Kel-Tec P11 (double stack 10+1 rounds) and it is more compact and lighter than the current M&P 9c .

__________________
Life Member B.A.S.S., NAFC

I think that a very small 9mm along the lines of the S&W BG 380, would be a success--I'd buy one. I think that they should offer such with and with out the laser that the BG380 comes with. Like the BG380, I feel a finger/pinky rest extension is very important for most people to effectively control the gun.

You start going bigger than 9mm and you have too many other considerations to worry about. Other companies have done it successfully in 9mm. You get into 40 and 45 loads and besides recoil concerns, the gun has to be built quite sturdy. Small handguns, sturdy, small, thin and reasonably priced, rarely go together well.

Hopefully S&W is working on it and trying to 'get it right'. Somehow, if they DO come up with a subcompact or 'true' compact 9mm, I don't think S&W will tie it into the M&P line, although I hope I'm wrong! It would be sweet!

Some of the most significant advances in semi automatics have been in effectively reducing their size and in improving the performance of the critical defense ammunition they can use. Some experts feel that ammunition improvements have shown the greatest gains overall--again namely with high performance/critical defense ammo. There will always be cheap ammo of questionable performance available.

I voted "No." I do not like guns that are too small, specifically, short length barrels. From my research, the shorter barrels result in slower rounds, and less expansion of rounds. The current 9/357/40 compact frame is sufficiently small and easy to conceal.

If I wanted a pocket gun, I would go with a brand other than S&W.

-T

If you want anything smaller go for the Bodyguard. I just don't like larger caliber's in small guns, they are just wildly inaccurate in the end.

__________________
This Signature is too Short!

yep.

size of my K9 with trigger of M&P would be my perfect CCW.

__________________
NRA life member

Sure, if they could make something in the M&P pistol line to fill the gap left when they discontinued the CS9/40/45's, I'd probably order at least one of them. After they'd been out in the hands of shooters for 1-2 years.

The CS45 had a 3.25" barrel, the 4513/457 was 3.75" ... but the smallest the M&P 45 goes is the compact with a 4" barrel (making it pretty much akin to the 4513/457, albeit the M&P has 8-rd mags). Maybe a 3.25" M&P 45sc would be a good idea?

The hypothetically half an inch reduction in length of a M&P 9/40sc might not seem like much, but the CS9 felt lighter and smaller in the hand than the CS40/45's.

Maybe they could more easily shoehorn the .40 into a small 9mm frame/slide, unlike when they were having to use the alloy .45 frames for the 4013/CS40 for strength (although the short-lived 4040PD, with its Scandium aluminum frame, for greater strength was the exception ). I'd think the plastic frame concept, utilizing an integral steel sub-chassis and a steel locking block, ought to mitigate such concerns, though.

Nice thought.

I haven't heard anything, myself, but the company has become really good at keeping such new projects under wraps in recent years. They weren't even dropping subtle hints about the M&P until it had apparently been underway for at least 3 years.

Now, if they decide to go the way of the Bodyguard pistol line for a smallish 9mm? I'm not sure that would interest me so much. That's a "busy" little pistol (inside the frame). Not so sure I'd be interested in a 9mm version until they'd really ironed out any remaining kinks.

Maybe a .40 Bodyguard would serve to bring any remaining design weaknesses to the surface ...

__________________
Ret LE Firearms inst & armorer

They arent going to beat the XDS.

How about similar to its cousin the Walther PPS in 9 and .40?
Wouldn't it be like that?

With my big hands I would like to see a 3"-3.5" M&P45 with a full-length grip (10 round) for CC. But I might be interested in a 3"-3.5" M&P with a 7-8 round single stack with the same length grip as the FS M&P.

__________________
Marty 4513TSW 13-1 642 60-10

I would be all over a single stack 9mm if they'd make it about the same size as the Kahr PM/CM9 or Ruger LC9. There are times that the CM9 is just more comfortable to carry and easier to conceal than the 9c.

I have been looking seriously at the 9c, but after a lot of thought I am now trying to find a BG380 for a reasonable price. I like the smaller size and I think with the right ammo it will still be effective for my use.

I'd be very interested but it's not just the frame but also the slide I'd like to see reduced. My favorite carry is my 3953. I recently bought an M&P9c and really like it a lot more than I thought I would. Even though they both have a 3.5" barrel, the 9c is slightly shorter in both length and height. My issue is that both the frame AND THE SLIDE are a little chunkier on the 9c. Not a big difference to look at, and if you actually measured it wouldn't seem like much, but IWB it does make a difference. Thinner is better for a carry gun! I know if the 9c was just a little thinner, the 3953 would be in the safe and the 9c would be in my belt. I'm sure I will carry the 9c on occasion, anyway, but if it was a little thinner it would be my 'all-the-time' carry gun.

I would very much like S&W to offer an M&P the size of the Glock 19/23, and carry the same number of rounds.

Their fullsize guns are pushing the limits of what I can conceal in Southern summer heat with a t-shirt, and their compact models are too small for me to run effectively in a combat scenario.

The 45 compact is close in size, but there you don't have the capacity.

Simply......yes

Well, Ruger does have the LC9...with the extension floor plate on the magazine, I can get all my fingers on the grip very comfortably. Also Kahr has the CW9, which is also very comfortable for me, and I can get all my fingers on the grip.

Glock has the 36, which is a single stack .45, and SA has the XDS..****ger and S&W need to come out with something similar. Ruger and Kahr have single stack 9mms, as do several other makers...Glock, SA, and S&W need to produce something as well. The CCW market is really looking for single stack pistols.

While the M&P9c is very comfortable to me, I would really like to see something in that size with a single stack magazine and a Kahr-like trigger. That would be a sweet carry gun!

We'll probably eventually see 9mm 'guns' so small that they are also Zippo lighters!! But I think that if you're trying to shoot anything 9mm or larger out of a gun that weighs less than a pound unloaded, your hand is in for some major sting and hurt if you shoot very many rounds.

It's basic physics--lighter guns and more powerful bullets equal more challenging (and usually more painful and inaccurate) shooting.

Even the little Rorbaugh R9 (ONLY $1195!) which is 15 ounces unloaded and 18 ounces loaded (7 rds) is only able to minimize 'hurt' just a bit, because of their unique spring and a few other features (no +P ammo, etc) and they strongly suggest you replace their special spring ($5) every 200 rounds. The Rohrbaugh HQ recommends you shoot it enough to get familiar with it, and be sure your carry ammo works in it, then stop firing and carry it.

So if they can't make a small gun for that price that's comfortable enough to practice with say, shooting 50 rounds at a time, it's a tall order for any manufacturer!

For a reasonable price, even though I've never been a fanboy for Taurus, their PT709 9mm model--(the Taurus 9mm Slim), and the 40 varient the PT740 (same size & weight) are two of the better guns in this segment, coming in at about 19 oz, and they conceal rather well. I couldn't believe my gunsmith when he spoke well of them for C&C and as shooters, but as usual, he was right.

I have a Kahr CM9 for carry and it has been flawless after the 200 shot suggested break-in period.

__________________
USN Ret-M&P 9 M2, 9C, Shield 9

Yes.
I bought a Kahr MK40 for the compact size. It is much more concealable than my M&P40C.

I love my M&P40c, but unfortunately in some situations it is too bulky to carry concealed. That's why I went out and picked up a Beretta Nano and absolutely love it. It might not be the best range pistol there is, but thats not what I bought it for. It is easy to conceal, is an accurate shooter, and shoots the 9mm with manageable recoil. The frame was also designed, originally, for the .40 cal so I'm hoping Beretta comes out with the Nano in that caliber soon.

But to answer the question, I would purchase a S&W M&P single stack pistol. I value my S&W's greatly so I would love to own another.

Just because YOU can't shoot a small gun well does not mean the gun is in accurate.

Bob Mundan made an awesome shot at 200 yards with a snub nose revolver, and Jerry Miculek, not to be outdone, shot a baloon at 200 yards with a snub nose, UPSIDE DOWN!

I don't consider myself a very good shot, and KNOW that I can't shoot a small gun as well as a full sized, but, I regularly shoot 2" groups offhand with my Kimber Solo, at 20 yards, which is the same size as my Bodyguard .380. The Bodyguard's trigger has to be the toughest trigger I've ever tried to shoot accurately with, and about the best I can manage with the Bodyguard is consistent head shots at 16 yards.

Smith already has had a single stack 9, the 3913 or 3914. Both carry well, are flat, easy to carry, and fire any high performance 9 mm offering. It's too bad they are out of production now but can be found at lgs or gun shows. 8 round should be enough for most problems. That being said I still like my Sig 239 or my M&P 9c lots. Stay safe....

I dont see why S&W would add a slim 9 when they have the Walther PPS, As a S&W guy I looked at the PPS when looking for a new auto, but went with the MP 9cause of the high cap mags, however itsto big to carry, so now I am going to go for a LC9 which has the size I
want for summer carry but its still twice as heavy as my 342PD. Oh well

I could carry an LC9 if need be. 8 rounds should be enough but who knows. It is super easy to conceal and very light! Yup....I could carry the LC9.

This. I bought and M&P9c to carry and still favor the CM9. It's just light and slim. I would love it if their was an m&P of similar size.

Yep, a Bodyguard 9mm would be nice or a slim M&P9! I like the BG380, but prefer the 9mm.

__________________
~ "JJ"

Already have the Ruger LC9 and she gets a lot of pocket time.

I actually traded in a Ruger LCP because it was so small i didnt like the way it felt in my hand , also felt a little underpowered with a 380. I had my choice narrowed down to a used XD subcompact, new M&P9C, new Glock 27 and new Walther PPS. I didnt care for used so ditched the XD, Glock didnt feel right and even though i really thought i wanted the PPS, it just felt too thin and just not right either. If it felt better than the Walther i would highly consider a smaller M&P, absolutely

__________________
M&P Shield 9mm

The market is flooding with slim line guns 380 to 9mm, I would not be surprised if SW put out a Bodyguard/M&P version soon and would be interested.

Id buy a single stack .40 if they brought one out.