M&P 2.0 Compact vs Subcompact

Hey, guys. I carry concealed a Shield 2.0 and a 2.0 Compact 3.6in, both in 9mm.

I prefer to carry IWB (Alien Gear), and I find the Compact just a little more uncomfortable than I’d prefer. It’s manageable, and I love having the extra capacity. I could try to carry it exclusively OWB, but the times I have I just feel like I’m printing too much, especially in warm-weather clothing.

I’ve been unable to get my hands on the new Subcompact to be able to compare it to the Compact. I know both have a 3.6in barrel.

For those who have handled both what are your opinions as to whether you find the Subcompact to be a much better carry option or only a slightly better option? Would you suggest it wiser to try some different carry styles, holsters, etc., to see if the Compact could become a more comfortable carry option for me? Or in your opinion should I not waste any additional time or money and just get the Subcompact?

I appreciate any feedback, thank you.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I have a 2.0 Compact in 3.6" and a 1.0 Compact (same as a 2.0 subcompact). Have you determined what causes the discomfort with the 2.0 Compact? If it is the barrel width, a subcompact won't help you. If it's the grip length, then possibly going to the subcompact may/may not help. They're basically the same firearm, different capacity. The Shield has a thinner slide and grip area, which would tend to make it less obtrusive.

ultratec00 said:

I have a 2.0 Compact in 3.6" and a 1.0 Compact (same as a 2.0 subcompact). Have you determined what causes the discomfort with the 2.0 Compact? If it is the barrel width, a subcompact won't help you. If it's the grip length, then possibly going to the subcompact may/may not help. They're basically the same firearm, different capacity. The Shield has a thinner slide and grip area, which would tend to make it less obtrusive.

Click to expand...

I think the width and possibly my IWB appendix carry method. My Shield is easy to carry IWB, I just like the extra capacity of the Compact.

I really think I’m leaning towards exploring different methods of carry. Thank you for your response.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Try carrying somewhere other than appendix. If it doesn't work for you or doesn't work with a particular firearm, you don't have to carry that way just because its trendy.
Try an iwb at 4 o'clock and see how it does. If you unload your pistol, try sticking it in your pants just behind your hip, at 4 oclock, cant it forward a little and see what it feels like.

The majority of my collection is full size firearms. I only have a few different guns that I put in carry rotation. A Gen 5 G19, a 2.0 Compact 4", a 1.0 Shield 40, and the 2.0 Subcompact. The Shield is the most comfortable of them all, but I'm not too fond of its capacity, so it gets carried on a quick trip to the store here and there. The G19, and Compact 4" carry about the same. But I also carry IWB @ 8:00 (I'm a lefty.), and while I love the 15+1 capacity, I found myself often pulling my pants up, unless I tighten my gun belt too tight to be comfortable. I bought the 2.0 Subcompact in 9mm about a month ago, and I have found my perfect carry gun. While it's not as easy to carry as my shield, the small grip size with the flat base plate 12 round magazine makes printing an absolute nonissue, and I am completely happy with 13 loaded, and an extra 12 in a mag pouch. This small gun is insanely accurate also. Even with the flat mag, I'm shooting 1 1/2" groups at 10 yards. With the pinky extension mag, strings of rapid fire are easily controllable. Plus, it comes with adapters for the 15, and 17 round mags. I love the Sub 2.0 and highly recommend it to anyone looking for something easily concealable, and still have good capacity.

I have the M2.0 3.6" Subcompact, I've had the 1.0 "Compact" and I've had the 4" M2.0 Compact. I also have an M2.0 Shield (and I've had full-size M&P's as well). In my opinion, just like the difference between my G19 and G26, the Subcompact is significantly easier to carry OWB or IWB to avoid printing anywhere between 3 o'clock and 4:30 because of its reduced grip length. The subcompact also comes with the grip sleeve to give it nearly the same profile as you 3.6" compact, however, I wouldn't expect the grip sleeve to secure the magazine quite as well as the compact accomodating a 17 round mag. It's slightly less stable. This likely doesn't affect shooting in my opinion, but pscyhologically just be aware of it if that kind of thing bothers you. Like I said, I didn't have the 3.6" compact, but my 4.0" had the same grip and it is much easier to avoid printing with the Subcompact. In fact, I've said this before, but the Subcompact is shorter than a G26 in any configuration other than its flush mag, but even then, it is only a difference of 0.13" (12+1 vs 10+1). The G26 with a 12+1 Magpul mag (it's shortest 12+1 configuration), is still 0.325" longer than a M&P Subcompact with its flush 12+1 mag. The various +2 base plates are even taller for the G26. In other words, if people see an advantage of running a G26, and many do as I did for years, and if they find themselves carrying it in a 12+1 configuration or with any kind of grip extension, the M&P Subcompact is even better for avoiding printing unless you run a flush mag in a G26. But even then it is a small difference and the holster would make more of a difference than whether you're carrying a G26 vs. a M&P Subcompact in my opinion. I use the G26 as an analogy because so many are familiar with its carrying advantage.

The Shield is even longer (albeit slightly) in the grip for the subcompact, so while there is a significant width advantage, the extended length uses up most of that benefit as far as avoiding printing is concerned. After owning six M&P's and just as many Glocks (and many many other pistols), I carry a M&P M2.0 Subcompact and a Shield. They tend to work well for most of my needs though I do carry other larger and smaller guns as well. I carry the Shield appendix and I carry my Subcompact at the 3 o'clock position. The Subcompact would carry nearly as well appendix, but I don't have a safety on it (so I don't). I have DA/SA guns for that, but I still use the Shield because, if I have to holster it with the holster on, I prefer parking it with the safety and then taking it off (which has never accidently turned itself on again). I would carry the Subcompact appendix, but I only have money for so many holsters, so I preferred my Subcompact for the 3 o'clock and the Shield for appendix, but everyone is differnt. What I will say is that I finally found an advantage of the pinky extension. It does bode well for appendix because of the angle of the floor plate, so I might splurge for a Bravo Concealment Torsion holster eventually just for more versatility, but in the final analysis, I do believe the 3.6 Subcompact will carry significantly better than the 3.6 Compact for most people so long as the width wasn't a problem for you. The Subcompact is a hell of a gun IMHO. MrGunsngear seems to think so as well as he also replaced his G26 with it. Here's a few pics to give you some scale. I have the Subcompact next to a Beretta PX4 Storm Compact which is the same 5" height as your 3.6 Compact. The other pics compare the Shield and the Subcompact.

I have been carrying my 1.0 compact for 4+ years now. I use a Crossbreed OWB holster. I buy the one w/ the largest piece of leather
CrossBreed(R) Holsters | SuperSlide OWB Holster
Then I go to work on it. First I cant it more. See how in the picture the butt of the grip is way further back than the end of the barrel. That kills me sitting in a car seat because the bottom of the grip jams into the back cushion and tries to slide the gun and holster forward. I also raise the gun slightly compared to the belt. I drill out the rivets and then use these to attach it at my new angle/position.
3/8" Long, 8-32 Truss Head Screws - DIY Holster LLC
Hardware - Threaded Posts - Slotted Post Back - DIY Holster LLC
Then I start cutting away some leather leaving just enough to keep the slide/hammer area away from my skin but leaving most of the grip unprotected so I can get my fingers around it.
20200610_123756 by craig stuard, on Flickr

If you get the 9mm Subcompact, it comes with a magazine sleeve so you can use the longer high capacity mags with it also. I carry it weak side IWB upright 9 o'clock so the grip faces forward.

Sent from my Moto G (5S) Plus using Tapatalk

Sheepdogged said:

I have the Subcompact next to a Beretta PX4 Storm Compact which is the same 5" height as your 3.6 Compact.

Click to expand...

Can you post a pic or two comparing the widths of the shield and compact to the beretta storm? The storm had intrigued me for a while now.
I currently aiwb a shield 1.0 but have considered going back up in capacity with a compact 2.0 or storm. Considering the sa/da option. I’ve rented a full size storm and it was an amazing shooter.

Thanks.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I have a 1.0 compact (same as the 2.0 sub compact) which I also have and a 3.6" 2.0 compact. I love all of them...My feelings are that I like the capacity and size of the 2.0 subcompact the best. However because of the shorter grip magazine changes are all but impossible without my stripping the magazine. Too much of the magazine is in contact with my hand and prevent the mags from dropping. The 2.0 compact is perfect so it has become my go to carry gun with some modifications to holsters and dress to accommodate the slightly longer grip...

obiwankabaldi: why buy a 2.0 compact when you can use the 2.0 magazines in your 1.0 compact. Just add a mag sleeve and they are the same. If money grew on trees I would buy a 2.0 compact myself but since it doesn't I just buy the 2.0 15 round magazines for my 1.0 compact and save myself ~$400.

2 issues with that Raisin. I live in NY and can only carry 10 here but winter in Florida and carry 15 there. Also my 1.0 compact (now a sub compact ) does not drop mags at all because of the short grip. Kind of a premdonna here and if the mags won't drop free without some help I decided I wanted the 2.0 compact.

obiwankabaldi said:

I have a 1.0 compact (same as the 2.0 sub compact) which I also have and a 3.6" 2.0 compact. I love all of them...My feelings are that I like the capacity and size of the 2.0 subcompact the best. However because of the shorter grip magazine changes are all but impossible without my stripping the magazine. Too much of the magazine is in contact with my hand and prevent the mags from dropping. The 2.0 compact is perfect so it has become my go to carry gun with some modifications to holsters and dress to accommodate the slightly longer grip...

Click to expand...

I have 1.0 shoeld and 2.0 3.6” compact. I have the same issue with the shield. Never really knew it until I switched to the 2.0 compact. Then went to my shield and the mags never drop. I have to strip them. And I have small hands. The 2.0 compact I don't have that problem as my palm is completely on the grip.

So the subcompact with the extension I suspect would have my palm would be in the extension and hinder the mag ejection. Just like my shield.

The longer sight radius and I think the weight, I also shoot the 2.0 compact more accurately. It is not the grip length or the width. It is the weight of the 15+1 compact is what gets to me after a while. And tend to have to keep hiking up my pants.

Just one mans experience.