MP Shield vs Ruger LC9

Has anyone had experience with both these guns to give a comparison. I have narrowed my gun search to the shield or the lc9 would like some help in making my decision. The price is roughly the same. I like the manual safety on both guns there about the same size other than that I don't anything about either. Are they both easy to conceal? How do they compare on the range? I have found the shield is harder to find. Thanks DK Smith.

These links have it covered. IF you prefer striker fired you may not like the Ruger trigger but if you are a revolver guy, the Ruger trigger is ridiculously easy. The Shield trigger is very nice with positive reset.

http://smith-wessonforum.com/smith-wesson-m-p-pistols/244765-m-p9-shield-ruger-lc9-pics.html

http://smith-wessonforum.com/smith-wesson-m-p-pistols/244145-shield-ruger-lc9-size-comparison.html

The Shield simply annihilates the LC9. Better trigger, accuracy, caliber selection. Concealment is about the same. Trigger is waaaay better on the shield

I own both. Bought the LC9 as soon as it came out. Can't stand the trigger. Bought the S&W Shield 9 as soon as it came out. Fantastic pistola right out of the box. Added TFO sights, talon grips and the Apex DCAEK and the pistol is now my EDC.

Get the Shield and pass on the LC9. You will be glad you did.

I agree with OpsMgr 100%. I had the same exact experience. No comparison.

Shield vs LC9

Shield wins hands down. I have got both. First got the LC9, nice size etc. But, terrible trigger. I never would have got the LC9, if the Shield was already out. My advise us get the shield 40 and then get a 9mm barrel for it. Best of both worlds.

I have both. I like the LC9 except for the trigger. Can't understand how any firearm company could produce such tripe. I have large hands & the Shield fits me better. Trigger is much better too.

I have a shield and my best friend has an LC9. As stated above the trigger on the LC9 isn't too great. It has a looooong hard pull. It also seems to be much snappier, with a fair amount of muzzle flip. My friend says he wishes he would have waited for a shield. The LC9 is just a tad sleeker it seems, and weighs a couple of ounces less. If you are used to firing double action revolvers, the LC9 trigger would be kind of familiar feeling though.

I've always thought that Ruger triggers were designed by lawyers, not shooters. This also applies to their rifles and revolvers.

Ruger makes tools, while S&W makes jewels.

The Ruger has too many safety features.

Magazine disconnect the mailbox flag chamber indicator the trigger that makes Massachusetts triggers feel like hair triggers all collectively turn me off.

Russ

P.S. Forgot one - Key lock. If there was a home intruder we would all be dead before I could find the key and disengage the lock. A better solution is a quick access gun safe on the night stand like my Gunvault.

No comparison between the two at all....just the choice between 9mm and 40 cal vs 380 sets them apart and the Shield handles both of them extremely well

As others have said above, I got an LC9 before the Shield existed. It was good for what it was intended to do; great for concealment. The trigger was long, but smooth. I didn't have a problem with it. However, when the Shield came out, I was lucky enough to find one early, even in California. The Shield felt so much better in my hand, and the trigger pull was what a semi-auto should be. Shootability and accuracy are similar, but I'll give the edge to the Shield.

I own a Shield.

I've tried the LC9. The sights are pretty much nonexistent and the trigger sucks. I hate the way it feels in my hand, too.

When comparing both, I feel that right off the bat, I shot more comfortably with the Shield. I also noticed that I immediately had a tighter grouping.

I think that if you're comparing by size, the LC9 wins, but only in that area. The Shield is definitely larger. As a small woman, it's harder for me to conceal the Shield than it would be for me to conceal the LC9. I can work around that, though.

I've had both, and the Shield is the best of the two, IMO. In fact, when the Shield came out, I sold my LC9 and bought a Shield in 9mm. My wife won't part with her LC9, though...it's the TALO Gold model, and she thinks it's "pretty." She also can rack the slide on it easily, which she can't do on most other pistols, including the Shield. The trigger on the Shield is much better. I also like it that I can take the striker out of the Shield without knocking out pins, etc. I like to clean out the striker channel on occasion, and both the field strip and slide detail strip are easier to do on the Shield. Field stripping a LC9 isn't hard, but I don't like it that the take down pin isn't retained in the pistol. It's small and says "lose me" on it. (I ordered a few spares, just in case.)

Both companies have great service, so it's hard to go wrong with either choice. For my money, the Shield is the better choice.

RussC said:

Forgot one - Key lock. If there was a home intruder we would all be dead before I could find the key and disengage the lock. A better solution is a quick access gun safe on the night stand like my Gunvault.

Click to expand...

Solution: don't use the lock. I don't even know for sure where the key to my wife's LC9 is...I guess it's in the box, but we've never taken it out or used it. I use a small punch to push out the take down pin, not the key (as suggested in the manual.)

I've never read of any instance in which the LC9 lock engaged unintentionally, and frankly, until I read your post, I had forgotten the LC9 even had a lock (which is, I agree, a useless feature on any gun.)

I have tested both. The Shield would be the one to stay around. Here are a few observations:

For all practical purposes, they are the same size.

S&W has a more durable finish.

The S&W trigger is better. This is subjective, but I prefer the shorter lighter trigger of a Glock/M&P rather than the looooooong DA stroke of a Kel-Tec.

Subjectively, the LC9 seems like a "cheapie," an upsized LCP .380, the LCP being, admittedly a top tier Kel-Tec. The M&P seems more "professional grade," and reminds me more of the Walther PPS.

I do not care for the magazine disconnect on the Ruger. Removal of the offending device would be a big chore. (There are some rather poorly done videos out there, but at most, they give you an idea of what you are supposed to do, you cannot see what is being done at some critical stages, and I got the feeling that the maker of the video was sort of "making it up as he went along" or "learning how to do it at the expense of his pistol"). The Shield, fortunately, does not have this feature.

I don't care much for thumb safeties on this type of pistol, and neither seemed to work its way to the "on" position.

I also do not like the key lock on the LC9.

Shield has, to my eyes, superior sights.

Shield has stainless magazines, which seem like a better idea for a deep cover type of pistol which might be exposed to more perspiration.

As far as shooting, I prefer the Shield, with its M&P type trigger, as opposed to the LC9, with its long, Kel-Tec type trigger. My wife and adult daughter found the Shield remarkably easier to shoot accurately than the LC9 because of the shorter and lighter M&P trigger. Re-set is not important to me as I do not "stage" or "prep" any trigger. I am old, and still shoot revolvers, and that will lead to "short-stroking" and failure to cycle and fire in a revolver. It is, at best, a practice left to "action shooters" range types OR those who NEVER use a revolver of ANY type for defense. To my surprise, there are a great many younger folks, and almost all of the LE officers coming up these days, who have no experience with revolvers, including the skills to unload or decock a revolver safely. This is unfortunate, but a sign of the times and of my age.

The Shield and the LC9 work in a pocket holster equally well.

I think that's all I can remember. I hope it was helpful to you.

I DO believe the jury is in.