-
Forum Update: We've upgraded the software to improve security, performance, and the overall experience.
👉 Read why we made the change | Support the Forum
Subcompact discontinued
- Thread starter 10ring
- Start date
Register to hide this ad
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2007
- Messages
- 27,660
- Reaction score
- 21,272
It is still listed on their website. Who knows how often it is updated, however, and its appearance there doesn't guarantee there are any in the distributors' pipeline.
Sheepdogged
Member
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2015
- Messages
- 290
- Reaction score
- 300
I haven't heard that. It's a great gun. I know it's not as thin as a lot of new guns, but it handles recoil better and is small enough in my opinion. It also takes full-size magazines. I also think it's one of the best shooting M&P's (just my opinion). The trigger is superb, and like my Glock 26, this thing goes toe to toe with my custom SIG P229 and Langdonized Beretta PX4 Storm Compact. It's technically shorter than a G26 in its 12+1 configuration and even a P365. The extra girth and weight distributes recoil better than these micro nines as well. Seeming that they came out with the Subcompact long after the P365, I doubt they are discontinuing it but who knows.
Attachments
Last edited:
Sheepdogged
Member
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2015
- Messages
- 290
- Reaction score
- 300
There was another post in January pointing out that the .40 and .45 caliber subcompacts were discontinued, but it said nothing about the 9mm's, so perhaps that is where the confusion lies.
If its not discontinued yet, I'd not imagine it will be a priority for production for S&W, the shield plus offers the same capacity in a more compact package and will likely cannibalize those sales the way the 43x/48 are expected to cannibalize G26 sales.
Echo40
Member
- Joined
- Sep 25, 2017
- Messages
- 4,031
- Reaction score
- 7,821
I know that the M&P40 2.0 Subcompact was discontinued some time ago, and it wouldn't surprise me to hear that they discontinued the 9mm Subcompact too, seeing as the new Shield PLUS is thinner, lighter, and holds one more round in the extended magazine.
Yeah, I know, the Subcompact has a rail, potentially fits better in larger hands, and has potentially less felt recoil due to the thicker grip/heavier weight, but practicality has no bearing on trends/marketing whatsoever, and slimline doublestack 9mm micro-compacts are the latest trend, so nobody wants a larger/thicker/heavier 9mm subcompact anymore, regardless of the tangible advantages that it might have over a smaller, lighter gun chambered in the same cartridge.
Yeah, I know, the Subcompact has a rail, potentially fits better in larger hands, and has potentially less felt recoil due to the thicker grip/heavier weight, but practicality has no bearing on trends/marketing whatsoever, and slimline doublestack 9mm micro-compacts are the latest trend, so nobody wants a larger/thicker/heavier 9mm subcompact anymore, regardless of the tangible advantages that it might have over a smaller, lighter gun chambered in the same cartridge.
I found this today, and I guess it answers my question:
12481/12482 M&P(R)9 M2.0™ SUBCOMPACT | Smith & Wesson
12481/12482 M&P(R)9 M2.0™ SUBCOMPACT | Smith & Wesson
Geno44
Member
I wonder if it had some kind of problem? Seems like it would sell well in the current market.
Echo40
Member
- Joined
- Sep 25, 2017
- Messages
- 4,031
- Reaction score
- 7,821
Nope, the problem is that they're not selling well at all. The current trend is for slimline double-stack 9mm micro-compacts like the SIG P365, or in S&W's case, the Shield PLUS, making the larger, thicker, and heavier Subcompact pistols which were popular for so long like the Glock 26 or M&P9c appear old and clunky by comparison.
Furthermore, with much clamoring for a reinstatement of the Assault Weapons Ban going on amongst Gun Control advocates including the President himself, many find the standard 10 round capacity slimline micro-compacts a safer bet than subcompact 9mms which hold more than 10 rounds, and therefore could potentially end up restricted somewhere down the line.
It seems that even before the M&P Compact was updated as the M&P 2.0 Subcompact, the pistol had been supplanted by the M&P 2.0 with 3.6" barrel. The 3.6" model was essentially the same length and only 0.02" higher with a 15-round magazine than the Compact/Subcompact 12-round magazine with finger rest base.
Even though I am pretty much a died-in-the wool DA guy, I know the time will come when I will be forced into the striker-fired world. I ordered a subcompact today.
I tend to shoot guns better when they have slightly wider grips so I think this will suit me better than the shield. Most of what I own is not current, so it being discontinued makes it fit right in with the other kids.
I tend to shoot guns better when they have slightly wider grips so I think this will suit me better than the shield. Most of what I own is not current, so it being discontinued makes it fit right in with the other kids.
jjmIII_Ruger
Member
That's the gun to have. The 3.6 seems harder to find even before C19 though. I guess people prefer the 4"?
Did you try a Shield+? Grand Slam by S&W!!! I wear a size 11-12 glove too. That is a gun that fits many and lands shots!
Sheepdogged
Member
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2015
- Messages
- 290
- Reaction score
- 300
The Shield is NOT more compact. It is only a little thinner (and more or less so depending on the backstrap used in the Subcompact) and a little shorter length-wise (too short in my opinion). It is not as short in the grip. I owned a M&P40c before my Subcompact, and I've owned two Shields. Without a doubt the Subcompact fills the hand and shoots better (e.g. handling recoil) and is just as concealable OWB which is why I have the pistol (as the shorter grip makes up for the thicker slide IMHO). It also has an accessory rail and takes full-size magazines, something the Shield cannot do. This makes the pistol extremely versatile. It can have a full-size grip (17+1), compact grip (15+1) or the 12+1 pinky extension or flush configuration (I have all the above). It also has 1/2 inch more barrel length (3.6" vs. 3.1") to maximize velocity/energy. This can make a difference for expansion (though far from a deal breaker). The width is also not that different, but different enough that, along with the extra weight, the Subcompact distributes force from recoil better (with an increase in grip surface area). The grip is also adjustable on the Subcompact and it has an ambidextrous slide stop (something the Shield Plus also does not have). Lastly, if you like aggressive grip texture, it is FAR superior on the Subcompact. The Shield M2.0 has superior grip texturing to the Plus in my opinion, but the Subcompact has the same awesome aggressive grip texture as the full-size and compact M&P M2.0 pistols. For all these reasons I don't believe the Subcompact will be obsolete. Yes, the Shield and Shield Plus are great pistols in their own right, but so is the Subcompact, and it is capable of shooting better and doing more than either the Shield or the Shield Plus in my opinion.
Last edited:
Found a fun website for you, I'd pay attention to the dimensions rather than the graphics. Indeed, the shield plus is more compact in every dimension, and lighter. You can love the subcompact all you want, I've got no dog in that fight, just stating the obvious that the shield plus cannibalizes the market share the shield subcompact would have by providing a smaller pistol for similar practicality.
Smith & Wesson M&P 9 M2.0 3.6" Subcompact vs M&P 9 Shield Plus size comparison | Handgun Hero
You assume a result based on your preference for certain features; other do not necessarily share your feature preferences.
Miami_JBT
US Veteran
I don't own a Shield Plus nor a subcompact M&P. But I do own a GLOCK 17, 26, 43, and 48.
The 43 is the perfect BUG. Small, lightweight, thin, etc... the 48 is the best off duty CCW gun out there with the aftermarket 15rd mags. The 17 is the best duty GLOCK period. The 26 is the best jack of all, master of none gun.
It is small yet has a good magazine capacity, especially with the 12rd Magpul mags. It can use GLOCK 17 17rd mags and it is accurate and capable enough to be a duty gun.
The subcompact M&Ps are the same way. The Shield and Shield Plus are not intended to be duty guns. The subcompacts can be and are capable.
The 43 is the perfect BUG. Small, lightweight, thin, etc... the 48 is the best off duty CCW gun out there with the aftermarket 15rd mags. The 17 is the best duty GLOCK period. The 26 is the best jack of all, master of none gun.
It is small yet has a good magazine capacity, especially with the 12rd Magpul mags. It can use GLOCK 17 17rd mags and it is accurate and capable enough to be a duty gun.
The subcompact M&Ps are the same way. The Shield and Shield Plus are not intended to be duty guns. The subcompacts can be and are capable.
