9mm vs 40s&w Shield

[feelinlucky]

I have a Shield in both calibers. I compare them regularly at the range. Hot loads, cold loads, JHP, FMJ, even lead.

I'm told that the 40 is noticeably snappier and harder to control than the nine.

I can't tell that much difference between them.

Am I the only one?

 

[alleycat7002]

Like the nine ammo 11 bucks a box looked at forty both same price..later down road i get one to match nine..these are awesome guns

 

[Jakpro]

I own both and I don't see much difference in recoil between the Shield 40 in 165gr and shooting +P 124gr in my Shield 9. I have little difficulty in managing the recoil for follow up shots.

However, there is a noticeable difference between shooting the 40 and the 9 with regular load 124gr. It is still controllable, though

But, I feel less flip and recoil in the Shield 40 than my Glock 23. My Sig P229 in 40 S&W is less recoil than both of them--probably due to the metal frame weight.

I am wanting to sell the Shield 40 mostly due to having too many small guns, but the prices have dropped so badly on them, I am keeping it for now.

 

[dfhawkins]

Same experience here as feelinlucky and Jakpro. Though I carry the Shield in .40S&W most of the time I enjoy the less expensive 9mm ammo prices. These days, when practicing on the range, I put more rounds through the Shield 9 but still run a box through the Shield40.

 

[V0OBWxZS16]

How are you measuring the differences between them? Are you using a timer? What types of targets at what ranges? What accuracy level? What are your splits and transitions? Are you shooting only two-handed or are you also considering strong- and weak-hand only and unconventional positions?


The one time I shot a Shield .40 I thought it had significantly more felt recoil than the Shield 9. I deliberately shot a couple rounds weak-hand only and the reduction in speed and control was obvious.

 

[Smoke]

I never really noticed a huge difference in recoil until I took my 9mm Shield and my 4006 to the range together. Even though the 4006 was (obviously) the heavier pistol I actually did notice the difference after a day of shooting the 9mm. My groups were significantly bigger with the 4006 than they were with the Shield.

The only subcompact .40 I ever owned was a CZ RAMI (Heavy steel gun) and it was literally painful for my wife to shoot, it left bruises on her hands after she shot it once or twice. I've said this before but my preference is to carry similar guns and not to have to stock a bunch of different calibers. So when I decided to get another subcompact gun (the much lighter M&P Shield) I went with a 9mm so that my wife could shoot it if need be. When I got a full Size M&P I chose 9mm because I don't want to have to stock a bunch of different calibers.

I still like my 4006 and I intend to keep it as a fall back in case of another (inevitable) ammo panic but I can't see my self ever buying a .40 S&W caliber gun just because it's a .40 S&W.

 

[JMichaelTX]

I have a Shield in both calibers.

I'm told that the 40 is noticeably snappier and harder to control than the nine.

I can't tell that much difference between them.

I've seen this reported numerous times.
If you actually compare a Shield 9mm with a Shield 40, there is little difference in recoil.
Of course, it also depends on which specific rounds you are using in each.

The key, it seems to me, is making a apples-to-apples comparison.
If you compare a Shield 9mm with some other model that uses .40 cal, then you may see a difference.

It seems to me that S&W has engineered the Shield 40 to produce a lot less recoil that is usually expected.

As always, regardless of what one reads here or elsewhere, it is important that each person actually test fire the gun they are considering before they buy it. Then buy the gun & caliber that works best for you.

 

[colstontc1]

In the Shields, I definitely prefer the 9 mm, I had a 40 And was not to happy with it, then started reading and hearing of continual issues with quality issues with smith shield 40's, I definitely felt more recoil compared to my g23
Now my go to 40 will be my g23

 

[MyDads38]

Own both and couldn't be happier. No issues with either and both are very accurate. Just don't have enough time to get to the range to shoot more! I had always read about the 40 being "snappy", but I don't find it to be unpleasant or uncontrollable.

 

[PirateJim]

About the time I was getting serious thinking about buying a Shield, the LGS had the S&W crew in for a M&P demo day and sale. Naturally, I jumped on that idea and was there bright and early fully expecting to come home with a 9mm.

Now, over twenty years ago I read the ballistics and mixed my own 40 S&W Kool-Aid and I owned a couple of 40 Glocks at the time, but I figured, given its size, I'd be wanting the Shield in 9mm. Fortunately, I got to shoot both and was pleasantly surprised that the 40's recoil really wasn't much worse than the 9. Noticeable? Yes, but not much worse. I came home with the 40.

I haven't tested follow-up shots against a timer. I haven't compared 40 vs. 9 off-hand. But I feel real good about having my 40 Shield close at hand.