3.6" why?

[Black Wolf]

I mean this sincerely, I'm not being facetious. Could someone explain why they would want the compact with the 3.6" bbl and the same size grip? For me, it is the exact opposite of what I'd want. I find grips the difficult part to conceal and I like a longer sight radius. If anything, I'd want a G17 size upper half on a G19 size frame. What attracted those of you who chose this new one to move in the other direction?

 

[45FMJoe]

The "Commander" style pistol concept originated by Colt appeals to a lot of people. To me, a full size frame and shorter slide balances better and there isn't as much weight hanging out front but rather the weight sits on top of your hands vs in front of them. I'm not sure I'm explaining that clearly. The Glock 19X balances better than a regular 19 for me, and I prefer my Colt Commander Rail Gun to my Government Rail Gun for the same reasons.

ETA - I just picked up an IOP M&P 2.0 Compact 4" on Wednesday along with a blue label Glock 19.5. I really like them both though I haven't had an opportunity to shoot either yet. When I can put eyes on a 3.6" M&P I might not be able to resist the urge to bring it home.

 

[CBStuard]

Lighter weight.

 

[MN2944]

I've never liked the "Commander" proportions. I agree that a long slide and short grip are much more appealing.

 

[stansdds]

I mean this sincerely, I'm not being facetious. Could someone explain why they would want the compact with the 3.6" bbl and the same size grip? For me, it is the exact opposite of what I'd want. I find grips the difficult part to conceal and I like a longer sight radius. If anything, I'd want a G17 size upper half on a G19 size frame. What attracted those of you who chose this new one to move in the other direction?

I dunno, but someone at S&W thought it was a great idea. For carry around the waistline or in a vertical shoulder holster, I agree, it is generally the grip portion of the receiver that is hardest to conceal. In a horizontal shoulder holster, the longer the barrel and slide, the harder it is to conceal.

One reason I have not traded my 6946 for an M&P (or even a Glock) is that it has a 3.5 inch barrel, which is a good compromise between concealment, a useful sight radius, and a barrel long enough to generate good velocity and the grip is short enough (especially with a modified 5906 magazine floor plate) to conceal. The only thing more concealable for me would be a 3913.

 

[photoman]

The shorter slide carries more comfortable IWB. The longer grip shoots better than a short grip for most.

 

[45FMJoe]

I've never liked the "Commander" proportions. I agree that a long slide and short grip are much more appealing.

It depends on what you're using it for. For LE use, the Commander model makes a lot of sense. Longer slides are a pain in the *** because the barrel tries to dig into the seat of your patrol car and that in turn tries to push your gun belt up. It's very, very uncomfortable. Having a larger frame with larger capacity magazines and a shorter slide is a Godsend.

 

[Flyingfool]

I carry the shield with either the 8 round mag, or have modified the 7 roind mags with a pinky grip extender. Which results in exact same height as the 2.0 compact height (see my other thread what would you do and why).

So for me, going to the 2.0 9c would result in an additional half in lomger barrel over the shield, plus the additional sight radius, plus an almost doubling of capacity. Adding another half and inch barrel would only add weight and a. It more sight radius. The weight gain from a shield to the compact is already a big jump. I would not want the additional weight for what I do not perceive much, or any benefit. In fact I view it as a detriment.

 

[Black Wolf]

Weight distribution, ahhhhh, that makes sense. Thanks.

The Commander did have a nice feel to it.

Still surprised that is what S&W decided to do next but I guess they do have to sell guns to people other than me.

 

[k31scout]

The shorter slide carries more comfortable IWB. The longer grip shoots better than a short grip for most.

Right, especially if you carry appendix. I carry that way and the wing claw on my Kydex holster keeps the grip in tight to my body so I like a full grip on a handgun. Bending over with a long barrel is the problem AIWB. For me anyway.

 

[Saudade]

Why not?

10char

 

[GKC]

I just bought the 4.0" 2.0 9mm Compact, and actually I'm glad I did. I thought at first I'd rather have the 3.6" model, but since I couldn't find one, I bought the 4.0, which turns out is an excellent fit and very comfortable (balance and grip) in my hand. 0.4" isn't much difference, and I definitely want the 15 round capacity (which both have, though.)

I like Commander length 1911s (4.25" barrel with full size grip) because they balance better for me. The 0.75" difference between the Commander and full size isn't that much, but it feels better to me. Same thing with the compact versus the 4.25" and 4.5" M&Ps. A lot of it is personal preference, and kudos to S&W for trying to accommodate everyone's preferences.

 

[okiegtrider]

Why not?

This. Different strokes for different folks.

 

[richbuff]

Method of carry determines whether the grip length or slide length is the bigger factor in concealability. Ho-hum cartridge in full length slide is not my personal preference. 3.6" bbl and modern, pressure-optimized cartridges in double stack are what I feel happy about.

 

[Flintlock1]

I'm in the "short barrel/full frame" crowd. Weight distribution, quicker rotation from the holster, better fit in a vehicle - where that last attribute matters since a full arm draw is not possible.

The Shield is my carry gun, and when they come out with a double stack version, I'm all in.

My 2.0C is for the house.

 

[touchoneoff]

I dunno, but someone at S&W thought it was a great idea. For carry around the waistline or in a vertical shoulder holster, I agree, it is generally the grip portion of the receiver that is hardest to conceal. In a horizontal shoulder holster, the longer the barrel and slide, the harder it is to conceal.

One reason I have not traded my 6946 for an M&P (or even a Glock) is that it has a 3.5 inch barrel, which is a good compromise between concealment, a useful sight radius, and a barrel long enough to generate good velocity and the grip is short enough (especially with a modified 5906 magazine floor plate) to conceal. The only thing more concealable for me would be a 3913.

Yeah, I would agree.

 

[Rastoff]

I find grips the difficult part to conceal and I like a longer sight radius.

I couldn't agree more.

However, the public doesn't agree with us. Most people look for a short barrel when thinking of concealment. I don't know why, but it's a fact.

The other reason could be to appease the AIWB crowd. When you carry a gun that way, you must have a short barrel or you won't be able to move.

 

[mikesal34744]

I mean this sincerely, I'm not being facetious. Could someone explain why they would want the compact with the 3.6" bbl and the same size grip? For me, it is the exact opposite of what I'd want. I find grips the difficult part to conceal and I like a longer sight radius. If anything, I'd want a G17 size upper half on a G19 size frame. What attracted those of you who chose this new one to move in the other direction?

Options. I have both. The 3.6 is quicker to draw and overall feels quicker to get the sight in target. It’s a great feeling overall fun.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[GKC]

Why are there different flavors of ice cream? Different models of cars? and so on...

It's trying to give consumers their preferences, insofar as it's practical and cost effective. If everyone wanted the same thing, then a manufacturer would only make that one thing.

 

[Truckin]

MP 45 Midsize with IWB holster. The perfect weapon for my big hands.