9mm vs 45 ACP in a Shield single stack EDC pistol

I am the owner of a Shield 9mm and a Shield .45 which I just shot today. I shot 50 rounds of Remington 230 grain H.P. through it and all I can say is this thing is a *****cat. The trigger is vastly improved and the new grips flat work. I shoot it he best of my 3 single stacks. Rapid double taps are a breeze. If you have to rent or borrow one of each and shoot them to see what you shoot best. Don't assume the .45 will be hard to control until yo try one.
 
CoMF
great point (Run out of time before we run out of ammo) great analogy to a gun fight.
I also prefer the Shield 45 to the Shield 9mm/40 (Yes I have both and have shot both) The 45 version is totally controllable, more so than one might imagine, for some reason this shield 45 fits my hand better, even though the Shield 9mm was a good fit the Shield 45 is a great fit.
I also think and will take this to my grave that the 45 regarldess of barely length or bullet weight out performs any 9mm on the market today. Thats just my opinion
 
CoMf
you make a great point by stating "you'll run outta time before you run outta ammo"
I to prefer the Shield 45 over the Shield 9mm/40 (Yes I have both and have shot both)
The Shield 45 is totally controllable even with the SXT 230+P rounds. The shield 9mm fits my hand good, But the Shield 45 fits my hand much much better. And I'll take this to my dam grave, The 45 acp REGARDLESS of bullet weight or barrel length will out perform the 9mm. And REGARDLESS of the FBI findings and tests.
 
Reliability is first and foremost in a defensive handgun. The 9mm shield has been around awhile and proven whereas the .45 ACP version is much too new to make that declaration.

I would also assert that 9mm's are generally more reliable overall than .45's, especially in smaller weapons. Just my opinion based on observation, experience and input from others over the years rather than based on hard evidence and stats, so take that what's it's worth. Research it and see what you come up with.

And "shoot better" can mean very different things depending on who you ask. It should be in context of what you would likely have to do in an actual defensive scenario rather than static range work. For me, it essentially means being able to dynamically access the weapon and reliably put multiple rounds on target quickly all while in movement, including one handed firing at relatively close range. Nearly everyone can do that better with a 9mm then they can with a .45 ACP in equivelant sized guns and similar platforms.
 
The M&P platform is a great platform be it a Shield 9mm 40 or 45 acp. Full size or compact. Its an M&P period a tried and proven weapon.
Dynamically access the weapon?? I can dynamically access my Jframe as easily as i can access my Shield. Multiple rounds on target? I'd much rather put 3 45 acp rounds on target than 3 9mm rounds on target. And if those 3 45 acp rounds were 1/3 of a second slower than the 9mm, I'LL gladly take that. and the fact that the 9mm is more reliable in a smaller weapon than the 45acp is totally and absolutely inaccurate. My shield 45 is every bit as reliable as my Shield 9mm. My 3 1/2" Kimber 1911 is just as reliable as my 5" government model. Thats kinda like saying my 2 1/2" S&W Md 66 is Not as reliable as my 4" Md 66 totally absurd statement
 
Reliability is first and foremost in a defensive handgun. The 9mm shield has been around awhile and proven whereas the .45 ACP version is much too new to make that declaration.

I would also assert that 9mm's are generally more reliable overall than .45's, especially in smaller weapons. Just my opinion based on observation, experience and input from others over the years rather than based on hard evidence and stats, so take that what's it's worth. Research it and see what you come up with.

And "shoot better" can mean very different things depending on who you ask. It should be in context of what you would likely have to do in an actual defensive scenario rather than static range work. For me, it essentially means being able to dynamically access the weapon and reliably put multiple rounds on target quickly all while in movement, including one handed firing at relatively close range. Nearly everyone can do that better with a 9mm then they can with a .45 ACP in equivelant sized guns and similar platforms.

My XDM 45 5.25 barrel has always done better accuracy wise, than any of my 9mms. Have had three. S&W, Glock, & Beretta. When I picked up the 45 Shield, I was hoping for the best, but didn't expect it to be near the level of the XDM. As it turns out, and has turned out for so many other Shield 45 owners................is that accuracy far exceeds what I expected.
Re-coil is a non-event. So I'd say no, nearly everyone doesn't do better with a 9mm. It appears that many other Shield 45 owners are saying the same.
 
And REGARDLESS of the FBI findings and tests.

Shoot what you want, both will get the job done I believe but don't forget that the FBI findings were based on studying what happened in actual situations one where human being shot another. And it considered more than just the effectiveness of a single shot on target. In fact it focused on the fact that most shots fired were NOT on target and therefor completely ineffective in stopping the threat. Being able to reliably hit the target and make accurate follow-up shots proved to be more important than the terminal performance on target.
 
And how many FBI findings & tests involved the new M&P Shield 45?
Probably zero. Much can be said about shots not hitting the target, and follow up shots.

Thing is, this new 45 is easy on recoil. It packs a punch, and is amazingly accurate for a short barreled 45. Findings of the past, mean nothing at this point, since it's a new gun with exceptional characteristics, that we're all discussing here.
 
I don't really know how old the OP of this thread is but I will be 74 tomorrow. I am about 5 ft. 9 in. tall and weigh 175#. So I'm not huge by any means. At present I am wearing denim cargo shorts and carrying a 45 Shield in a Jel Tec Holster AIWB and a M&P 9C in my right front pocket. That's not something I plan on doing all the time but it is not uncomfortable. Not sitting at my desk as I type or up walking around or moving around. So I suppose I don't really understand the problem. Carry what you like and shoot well and don't worry about it. After all you may well be a part of the majority who carry every day and never have to draw your pistol in self-defense. I pray that you are.

To answer your question I happen to be 70...71 in Feb 2017. Not that I can understand why age has anything to do with this post ??????
 
Shoot what you want, both will get the job done I believe but don't forget that the FBI findings were based on studying what happened in actual situations one where human being shot another. And it considered more than just the effectiveness of a single shot on target. In fact it focused on the fact that most shots fired were NOT on target and therefor completely ineffective in stopping the threat. Being able to reliably hit the target and make accurate follow-up shots proved to be more important than the terminal performance on target.
if more shots were NOT on target Perhaps they should spend more time on the range. So if there were shots NOT on target it dosent matter if it was a 9mm 45 5.56mm or a rifled slug if the rounds don't hit the intended target then they are useless.
again I'd rather have 2 45acp rounds on target rather 2 9mm rounds on target
 
I know that some people need to carry an EDC pistol which carries 15 or more round, but for me, I just can’t carry a brick very long. I like the S&W Shield single stack for a pistol which I would carry every day. I am OK w/ a 7 or 8 round pistol. Saying that, with the same number of rounds, would the Shield 45 be a better choice over the 9mm.

Looks like lots of rabbit holes around here to run down...

As far as YOUR question;
My EDC is a 9mm shield. I feel like it is the biggest gun I can CC everyday. Fits my hand pretty well.

I like the 9mm because I can shoot it better than a 45.
Perhaps because 9mm is cheaper and I shoot it more often so I have more practice.
Maybe because my other full size is a 9mm and I didn't want to stock another caliber.

One shot more or less had little if any effect on my decision.
I don't happen to carry a spare mag on me, but I do have one in my daily driver.
 
It might be the vastly improved trigger feel and grip, and I know it is hard to fathom, but I think it is eaiser to shoot rapid than the 9mm. It would be interesting to shoot a 9mm with the new grip and trigger however.
 
if more shots were NOT on target Perhaps they should spend more time on the range. So if there were shots NOT on target it dosent matter if it was a 9mm 45 5.56mm or a rifled slug if the rounds don't hit the intended target then they are useless.
again I'd rather have 2 45acp rounds on target rather 2 9mm rounds on target

One of the findings of the report was that more shots were on target with 9mm which is what that is what was chosen. Yeah, more training is always preferred but that's also kinda like saying the best way to not get sick is to stay healthy. If, even with more training, the 9mm still delivers more shots on target due to being more manageable then it is still a reasonable choice. Or perhaps the position is that the amount of training current being received is either considered sufficient or the max of what is reasonably possible (because there is more to being an FBI agent than shooting a gun) so they need to choose the tool (handgun) that works best in that reality.
 
having been a firearms inst for the fed govt and a current local LE fire arms inst I can assure you we usually train to the LCD (Lowest common denominator)
I think handling or managing recoil is an individual officer / person thing, some can shoot the 40/45 as fast as some can shoot the 9mm. If i remember correctly the only 2 handguns on scene were a 9mm and a 38 special. Also I believe on of the agents had a 12 Ga. Also the agents were totally out classed and out gunned by Platt and Matix. Being a LEO i say that with the ut most respect to those who were killed and injured I wanna make the clear.
 
Last edited:
Tried the new 45 Shield, felt good in my hand, the recoil felt is less than you would think, I like it, will own one soon.

Arik, living in the Philly area, you should probably have a BAR close by.

I'm also a believer in a NEW YORK/CHICAGO RELOAD, a Semi-Auto and a Snubby carried together.
 
I have both the 9 & 45 Shield. Both are sweet shooters. I carry both with confidence.
 
With 7 rounds of 230 grain Federal HST (full 6 rd mag plus one in the chamber) my .45 Shield weighs 28.0 ounces.
 
I know that some people need to carry an EDC pistol which carries 15 or more round, but for me, I just can’t carry a brick very long. I like the S&W Shield single stack for a pistol which I would carry every day. I am OK w/ a 7 or 8 round pistol. Saying that, with the same number of rounds, would the Shield 45 be a better choice over the 9mm.

The shield 45 recoil is easy. Of course, recoil is subjective to the shooter or whatever, but it's easy to shoot. I carry and shoot the shield 45, 6+1 ready to go, extra 7 tucked away on me somewhere. With hornady critical defense 185gr at 1000fps, I'm confident I'm protected. Just practice coming from the holster and swiftly firing 2 on target.
 
With 7 rounds of 230 grain Federal HST (full 6 rd mag plus one in the chamber) my .45 Shield weighs 28.0 ounces.

For comparison, my 9mm Shield with 7+1 of the 147g HST rounds weighs 24 oz, with 8+1 it's just under 25 oz. It is as comfortable to shoot as my Glock 19 - something I could NEVER say about any of my J frames, even with light loads, unless they were wearing big rubber grips.
 
Back
Top