What are your thoughts on the Diamondback DB9 vs the S&W Shield 9?
For all the reviews I have read sbout the DB9, it seems to be unreliable.
Most reviewers tend to recommend it with a caveat or two. Rarely do they come right out
and say it is not recommended.

The manufacturer says not to use it solely for target practice as it was meant to be a CCW.
There are restrictions on using, +P, +P+, Bullet weights over 124gr., JHP's and foreign ammo.
(will void warranty!)
Can anyone supply info that is creditable on the reliability of this piece?

mb

If you have seen that much questionable info about the DB9 why bother. The Shield in 9mm has a very good track record.

A friend that I frequently shoot with had a DB9. Quality was poor as were function and reliability. I'm acquainted with others who have had the same experience. Although I've (luckily) not owned a DB9, I've had the opportunity to shoot one. Not impressed.

IMO, the Shield 9 is a top notch quality pistol with unrivaled function and reliability. Mine shares CC duties with a Kahr PM9.

I am hoping for a new CCW by S&W in 9mm. I have the BG380 and it is very reliable.
I'd like it in a 9mm

mb

The DB's, Keltec's, Taurus Slim, & others like them are lower cost 2nd tier guns that were developed to be at a specific price point. They are for people who don't want to, or can't shell out $350+ for a gun. Where I work, we sell a few, but we also take in some used ones, as the owners aren't happy, want to get rid of them, & end up losing $ & spend more than if they bought a quality gun in the 1st place. If I won a gun like this in a raffle, I'd immediately sell it & use the $ to buy ammo. Since these are "pocket guns" used to possibly save your life, isn't your life worth an extra $100? GARY

Get the DB9 if you want cheap and unreliability. Get the Shield if you want quality and reliability. You might really have a hard time making that decision (LOL).

Bob

Every Diamondback I've seen in any caliber has has multiple issues. I would avoid them like the plague. The $300 to $450 range gives you about 6 different new or used options like the Nano, CM9, Glock 26, LCP, Shield, Bersa, BG etc

Nothing but good results from my DB9. I have put 500 rounds through it with not a single problem. I do plan on checking out the MP shield though and comparing the two. From what I have seen, nothing out there beats the compactness of the DB9. Mine has served me well.

9mm BODYGUARD

I've heard many stories from Shield owners. Most are positive, the few negative stories were quickly resolved by Smith & Wesson. I've only heard one DB9 story that didn't involve complaints and excuses. You get what you pay for.

There are two pistols right now that come to mind that I would suggest for CCW, A M&P Shield 9 MSRP $449.00 and a Kahr CM9 MRSP $460.00.

Both pistols are striker fired, however the Kahr has a very smooth, but long DAO trigger pull, no external safety, comes with one mag and has the bar dot sights. The Shield's trigger is shorter, and very crisp, comes with 2 mags and 3 dot sights.

What I like about the CM9 over the CW series pistols is its size. It's smaller & shorter than the Shield, almost Kimber solo sized. Me personally, I'm a Shield owner and I feel it is the better choice, but the Kahr is worth checking out...

I've havent heard many good things from the guys at the LGS about the DB9. Apparently a few customers have brought them back.

Ha ha, yeah and sometimes you don't! I can tell you this much, over the years I have seen many folks bend over backwards to support their brand of choice no matter what. I've heard the Harley vs jap bike crowd yack for years. Both types are good. Regarding these firearms, It is sad that you must BUY before you shoot. Every S&W revolver I have ever owned has been top shelf in my opinion. I can not say that about their "sliders". I just do not know but I can say this much, I have a DB9 and I trust my life to it. I can shoot it very well. Some can not, it is a little gun.
Most of the time, limp whistling ANY semiauto causes jams. The DB9 is no different.

I wish HK made a nice pocket model in 9mm. I carry a HD compact 40 for duty but I still like my Glock 23 better because I can shoot it better.

From the majority of opinions expressed on this thread, about the DB9,
I must concur the cons, beat the pros!

mb

Well Marty since this thread has been resurrected from the dead we anxiously await the result of your purchase decision

While it was not me, who resurrected this thread, I will respond.
I am going to purchase the Shield 9. I have checked it out at the LCG&S. This is a very nice piece and priced very reasonably!
Also get a free membership. This alone would cost &200.

mb

My friend gave me an EXO DB9 as a gift since he knows I collect. Shot it twice and gave it back to him. Multiple FTF. I'll keep my shield 9 for off duty use and rotate with my Glock 19.

One of my friends in my shooting club had a Db9 for a bit. 'Had' being the operative word. Just about everyone who tried it, after one of the matches had problems with it. It kicked like a Mule... And that's coming from someone who owns a PF-9.
Granted... Some of the guys Limp-Wristed it, but it was prone to both FTFeed, FTExtract, even with bench/vise firing.

After 3 trips back to the factory, he traded it for a Shield.

I agree with this, I made the change suggested by one of the sites ( Pocket guns and gear) which was to change the spring on the DB9 Magazine to the Keltec PF9 spring, cut off two rungs and then put it in the DB9 magazine. Presto this little baby feeds HST like a champ.
I carry my DB9 in an ankle holster and my Shield with the APEX trigger on my strong side in a De Santis holster.

I forgot about the recoil on the DB9. It was a little monster. I too have a PF9 and was surprised by the DB. If the DB had a face I would have punched it lol

I would stick with the top brands like the S&W Shield, Walther PPS, Springfield XDS, PM9/CM9 Kahr and of course the new Glock 43.

__________________
Loyalty Above All.. but Honor

Probably the one issue I've seen with people having trouble with new subcompact semi autos is their failure to first clean and lube them before running down to the range to shoot them. The root of that problem, I believe, was because with the polymer pistols developing a reputation for being so reliable from the get-go, the rumors spread that pistols such as Glocks did not require ANY lubrication (or cleaning) to operate 100 percent reliably. Writer John Connor penned an article in "American Handgunner" when the S&W Shield was introduced. He made a point to stress cleaning and lubrication before heading to the range, and subsequently had a positive range session during his evaluation, including break-in. Now whether or not proper lube on a Diamondback and some of the other affordable-priced pistols will reduce or eliminate malfunctions remains to be seen, but any semi auto needs a break-in, even if it is for the owner's piece of mind. In my experience, if I clean and lube my Glocks and M&Ps before heading to the range and they work flawlessly through the first 300 rounds, which include hollow points, then I can rely on that pistol. I've only had one such polymer pistol that has given me fits beyond what I consider a decent break-in period, and that was a 9c that ended up going back for some work.

I have no experience with the Diamondback, but the last time my interest was perked on a small cheaper priced pistol not manufactured by Glock or S&W, I encountered a lot of problems. Fortunately, the gun was not mine, but I had sufficient time to put a few rounds thru it to see how I liked it. Even with lube, the gun never did seem to want to work reliably. Even after a trip back to the factory, it still was not reliable, and finally blew up - the only gun I've ever seen do that. Granted, it had received a steady diet of +p and +p+ ammo thru it's short, 500 round life, but I never thought that would cause any more damage that accelerated wear and tear. Cracking the barrel all the way from the chamber to the muzzle was another thing. What I would recommend is that you take into consideration a lot more factors than just carrying the gun for CCW - such as how it will hold up when you train with it. That said, I would go with the Shield over the DB9.

Incidentally, a friend recently brought a new Glock 42 to the range. He had three factory magazines with it. I have fired another 42 and noted it to be reliable and sort of fun to shoot - almost making me start to appreciate the .380. This particular 42, however, did not want to fire thru a magazine without a failure to feed. I checked the gun and noted that it did have some lube on it, but I added a bit more. It still did not seem like it wanted to function. Granted it was being fired for the first time, and the shooter was using a box of cheap .380 FMJ ammo, so that may have been the problem. It also seemed to run a little more reliably when the magazines were not loaded to capacity. Nevertheless, I emphasize my point that any semi auto needs a break-in before being relied on for self defense.

Thanks for the information!

mb

I don't need to hold, fire or own a gun to know I don't want it if the manufacturer says this.

There are a ton of people out there that use the wrong criteria to pick their concealed handgun. At the top of their list is small and light rather than accurate and ability to hit the target. This is one of those guns.

A concealed carry gun should be shot a lot. The user should be comfortable with it. They should know how it works and shoots. They should be intimate with its operation and manipulation. They should be able to hit the target easily with it.

Most of all, the gun needs to be reliable. Functional reliability is the absolute top requirement for a carry gun. If it doesn't work, it's not a gun, is it? Being able to hit the target is a close second. If you can't hit the target, it's unlikely you'll stop them.

So, the gun should be shot a lot to verify reliability. It should be shot a lot to practice accuracy and increase speed. If the manufacturer says to not shoot it a lot, it's a pile of excrement and not something I'd trust my life to.

__________________
Freedom isn't free.

I am in complete agreement! My BG380 has been shot well over 500 rds. and has never shown any issues with reliability or lack of function. It is quite accurate at the range and is very easy to breakdown, clean and lube.
I just wish it was not quite so snappy to shoot! I am getting used to it though and hopefully after another 500 rds., The snap wont bother me as much.

mb

Heh... you know, back in the old, old, bad old days, in places like New York and Philly, before policing had the high level of integrity that it does now, guns like the DB9, RGs, etc., were considered "throw-downs", kept for those "Oops" occasions when they shot someone that turned out not to be armed after all. 27veer's comment that he keeps his DB in an ankle holster reminded me of that little bit of cop trivia (because the ankle rig is perfect for storing and planting the thrower...)

In the American Civil War, a contract for Union Army boots was given to an individual because he was a close friend to War Secretary Stanton. The boots fell apart after a single mile of marching. When asked why, his reply was "They were meant for the Cavalry."

I refer to the DB9 as a "get off me" gun. Changing a tire by the side of the road or whatever, it is something I can literally put in the watch pocket of my jeans easily. These guns MUST run 115 grain ammo.

It WAS Lazarus that said something about it being "deja vu all over again", wasn't it?

Back from the grave: twice!

And right after Easter as well!

Cheers!

P.S. I just couldn't resist...