Does anyone have a good comparison of recoil between the SHIELD 9 vs 40 ?
- Thread starter dr g
- Start date
Register to hide this ad
Houdini1953
Member
OK I will try to answer your question but this will merely be an opinion. I own the 40 fullsize as well as the 40 compact that I carry daily! I also own three 9mm's two full size and one a subcompact!
The recoil of any 9 mm to me is kinda like a air bb gun which is not really much but the 40 is snappy regardless of its size. A 40 caliber handgun will recoil upwards where a 45 will push back this make getting your sights back on target more difficult with a 40 caliber gun.
I once owned a 9mm KelTec PF9 which I traded for a full sized 45 M&P mostly because I just did not like the little gun and its grip in my hand, so I guess a Shield 9 should not be that difficult to control.
I look at a 9mm like a good gun for getting used to the recoil of any weapon, but I have been shooting pistols since 1974!
The recoil of any 9 mm to me is kinda like a air bb gun which is not really much but the 40 is snappy regardless of its size. A 40 caliber handgun will recoil upwards where a 45 will push back this make getting your sights back on target more difficult with a 40 caliber gun.
I once owned a 9mm KelTec PF9 which I traded for a full sized 45 M&P mostly because I just did not like the little gun and its grip in my hand, so I guess a Shield 9 should not be that difficult to control.
I look at a 9mm like a good gun for getting used to the recoil of any weapon, but I have been shooting pistols since 1974!
Excellent question. I was wondering the same thing. My common sense is telling me that a small thin pistol like the Shield is really designed and intended for the 9mm round. Another well known thin pistol is known to blow out it's extractor when chambered in .40S&W.just interested in some real life range expierences
thanks
Contollability is the other question when considering a Shield in .40S&W
This is the very first video posted on YouTube which clearly demontrates that the Shield appears to be handling the potent .40 just as well as the M&P40c does.
Go to YouTube and type in M&P40 Shield. Awesome.
mazdaspeedrx8
Member
I just got my .40 shield this week. The recoil is not bad for such a small pistol alot less than i was expecting actually. great gun cant wait to get a 9mm shield too!
Follow up shots pretty accurate?
i rented both of them and shot them side by side to figure out what i wanted to buy. Like Houdini said, the .40 was snappy and the recoil pushed the barrel up compared to the 9mm. Although I liked the kick of the .40 better and it was a lot of fun to shoot, i could get on target and fire a second accurate shot much faster with the 9mm... and thats what i came out of the store with.
charlie9280
US Veteran
On Thursday 5/10/12 I got the first Shield .40 from my LGS. My daughter and I went to the range on Saturday and I put 260 rounds through it without any FTF/FTE. I already have an M&P 40C and brought that with me as well. I put 30 rounds through the 40C to re-aquaint myself with the recoil, sighting, etc. for comparison.
A few things to note here. I'm a big guy, so I may be less affected by recoil. I love my 40C, so I may be a little biased (I also have a full size M&P .45 as well as a M&P15T AR-15, so, yes, I'm biased toward M&Ps). I also own a Kahr PM09 (9mm).
My impression is that the new Shield 40 has no more recoil than the 40C. It is extremely accurate at 5-7 yards. Re-acquisition of the target was not an issue, even in rapid-fire sequences (the range does not allow double-taps, but my rapid fire is very close to double-taps).
Since I already own the Kahr PM09 I was not interested in another small 9mm. That's why I got the Shield 40. I also like the idea of more fire power.
The grip is very comfortable. The sights are adequate, but I wonder if anyone actually uses the sights when things go really bad. Thank God I have no experience here, but from what I've read, you tunnel vision anyway.
My daughter brought her LCP .380. That gun had more kick and sting than the Shield 40.
Hope this adds some insight. It is strictly my opinion. Bottom line for me is that I love this gun. I'm glad I got the 40 and not the 9mm.
A few things to note here. I'm a big guy, so I may be less affected by recoil. I love my 40C, so I may be a little biased (I also have a full size M&P .45 as well as a M&P15T AR-15, so, yes, I'm biased toward M&Ps). I also own a Kahr PM09 (9mm).
My impression is that the new Shield 40 has no more recoil than the 40C. It is extremely accurate at 5-7 yards. Re-acquisition of the target was not an issue, even in rapid-fire sequences (the range does not allow double-taps, but my rapid fire is very close to double-taps).
Since I already own the Kahr PM09 I was not interested in another small 9mm. That's why I got the Shield 40. I also like the idea of more fire power.
The grip is very comfortable. The sights are adequate, but I wonder if anyone actually uses the sights when things go really bad. Thank God I have no experience here, but from what I've read, you tunnel vision anyway.
My daughter brought her LCP .380. That gun had more kick and sting than the Shield 40.
Hope this adds some insight. It is strictly my opinion. Bottom line for me is that I love this gun. I'm glad I got the 40 and not the 9mm.
I have had my Shield in 9mm for two weeks now. I do not have the Shield 40 but I do have a Taurus 740 slim. I have carried the Taurus in my pocket even though it is a hair bigger than the Shield but for practical purposes the size difference is so minor to make a real difference. The 740 has a bit more noticeable felt recoil, yet manageable and not unpleasant. The Shield 9mm is a very nice handling gun. If I did not have the 740 I probably would have gotten the Shield in .40 S&W.
Ah man...after hearing all these positive comments from Shield .40 shooters, now i'm leaning back that way. (I think) Got my M&P40c, which of course is awesome. Got my PPS 9mm, and Kahr CM9.hmmmm decisions decisions...
SMMAssociates
Member
I haven't played with a Shield yet.... On the list....
I have an M&P9C, 40C, and 40FS. The 40C is very snappy, but as a 1911 guy, not much, and really no worse than my Officer's-sized 1911s....
The 9C's a popgun....
However, I swapped off a PPS40 because the grip was too narrow, and rather uncomfortable, but not too terrible. The deal-breaker was a very narrow trigger which my pudgy finger wrapped around, and got seriously pinched by each shot. The M&P40C & FS (and the 9C) have a fairly wide trigger, and more than enough grip width.
I think I could live with a slightly narrower grip with no problem - I probably wouldn't shoot the thing as much as I do the others, but I need to see what they did to the trigger - my understanding is that the Shield's trigger is narrower....
(BTW, the PPS9 seems like it'd be a good choice, too, but the new Shield is a LOT smaller, and lacks that goofy safety setup based on the magazine base. Pretty easy to defeat, but....)
Really a "gotta try it" thing, I think, for most people, but if you're used to .40's or .45's (particularly the smaller ones), nothing to run away from.
Regards,
I have an M&P9C, 40C, and 40FS. The 40C is very snappy, but as a 1911 guy, not much, and really no worse than my Officer's-sized 1911s....
The 9C's a popgun
....However, I swapped off a PPS40 because the grip was too narrow, and rather uncomfortable, but not too terrible. The deal-breaker was a very narrow trigger which my pudgy finger wrapped around, and got seriously pinched by each shot. The M&P40C & FS (and the 9C) have a fairly wide trigger, and more than enough grip width.
I think I could live with a slightly narrower grip with no problem - I probably wouldn't shoot the thing as much as I do the others, but I need to see what they did to the trigger - my understanding is that the Shield's trigger is narrower....
(BTW, the PPS9 seems like it'd be a good choice, too, but the new Shield is a LOT smaller, and lacks that goofy safety setup based on the magazine base. Pretty easy to defeat, but....)
Really a "gotta try it" thing, I think, for most people, but if you're used to .40's or .45's (particularly the smaller ones), nothing to run away from.
Regards,
mtnsmithguy
Member
- Joined
- Sep 20, 2009
- Messages
- 40
- Reaction score
- 5
Roger S&W,
I have several handguns, retired LEO, shooting handguns regularly since 1977. I took my new Shield .40 to the range today for the first time. I usually carry a G27 or PF9 for EDC. The Shield's perceived recoil is equal to or lighter than the G27, usually the same ammo, IMO. My petite wife hates the G27, but loved the Shield today. Very manageable recoil for follow- up shots. I almost bought a Shield 9, since I thought the recoil would be worse. Glad I got the .40. My G27 and PF9 may be warming the bench more. The Shield is first team material.
I have several handguns, retired LEO, shooting handguns regularly since 1977. I took my new Shield .40 to the range today for the first time. I usually carry a G27 or PF9 for EDC. The Shield's perceived recoil is equal to or lighter than the G27, usually the same ammo, IMO. My petite wife hates the G27, but loved the Shield today. Very manageable recoil for follow- up shots. I almost bought a Shield 9, since I thought the recoil would be worse. Glad I got the .40. My G27 and PF9 may be warming the bench more. The Shield is first team material.
MacDanny
Member
dr g,
Not sure if you've made a decision or not yet since this thread is old, but I just purchased a Shield40 yesterday. I agonized over it thinking that the kick would be too much both for me and in such a little gun.
For context, I am a midwest shotgun/rifle guy. Never had handguns. Only shot my dad's (XD40, G26). Shot the 40 well and liked that round in a bigger gun but needed something that my wife could handle as well.
Gotta say, the Shield40 is incredible. The NRA instructor that just gave me my first handgun training this AM shot it and was amazed. I put 2 of my first 7 rounds through the same hole at 7+ yards! Kept the group inside of a few inches. Similar shooting with the shorter clip too (my pinky kind of fits).
No extensive shooting yet since my focus was on technique/learning and not the gun, but I am relieved and happy with my decision to go with the 40.
Roger S&W,
I've got no advice for you as a rookie handgun shooter but can honestly share, as embarrasing as it is, that I pretended to be on my phone heading into the gun store so I could take a few more minutes to decide between 9mm and 40 Shield. I don't plan on getting a lot of guns, and given my personal situation this was a big decision. My LGS has a much longer wait list for the 9mm and I happened to be around when they got in a 40. It was spoken for, so put my name on that list as I "decided" whether it would be 9 or 40. The LGS called me as I was calling them to switch me over to the 9mm list telling me the 40 guy walked away. It was mine.
I debated for 2 days, thinking that the litte gun wouldn't handle well and would be too much for me. The 9mm wait list was long and I need to have something for personal protection. Ultimately I decided to get the gun, even though it was a different and more-expensive round.
I just shot this AM during a planned handgun training that I intended to be with my Glock19 only. Just to pick up the basics. Shot the Shield40 and am SOOOO excited at how well I shot that I joined this forum. How crazy is THAT?!
I'm 5'9", 175lb. Coordinated, but obviously not a super-shot. I group my G19 within 4 inches at 13 yards and felt really comfortable with that round. Now I can keep this Shield 40 inside 2 inches at 7 yards.
Am a happy Shield owner. Gonna get my wife the Shield9 soon.
Unbiased. No history. No agenda.
Not sure if you've made a decision or not yet since this thread is old, but I just purchased a Shield40 yesterday. I agonized over it thinking that the kick would be too much both for me and in such a little gun.
For context, I am a midwest shotgun/rifle guy. Never had handguns. Only shot my dad's (XD40, G26). Shot the 40 well and liked that round in a bigger gun but needed something that my wife could handle as well.
Gotta say, the Shield40 is incredible. The NRA instructor that just gave me my first handgun training this AM shot it and was amazed. I put 2 of my first 7 rounds through the same hole at 7+ yards! Kept the group inside of a few inches. Similar shooting with the shorter clip too (my pinky kind of fits).
No extensive shooting yet since my focus was on technique/learning and not the gun, but I am relieved and happy with my decision to go with the 40.
Roger S&W,
I've got no advice for you as a rookie handgun shooter but can honestly share, as embarrasing as it is, that I pretended to be on my phone heading into the gun store so I could take a few more minutes to decide between 9mm and 40 Shield. I don't plan on getting a lot of guns, and given my personal situation this was a big decision. My LGS has a much longer wait list for the 9mm and I happened to be around when they got in a 40. It was spoken for, so put my name on that list as I "decided" whether it would be 9 or 40. The LGS called me as I was calling them to switch me over to the 9mm list telling me the 40 guy walked away. It was mine.
I debated for 2 days, thinking that the litte gun wouldn't handle well and would be too much for me. The 9mm wait list was long and I need to have something for personal protection. Ultimately I decided to get the gun, even though it was a different and more-expensive round.
I just shot this AM during a planned handgun training that I intended to be with my Glock19 only. Just to pick up the basics. Shot the Shield40 and am SOOOO excited at how well I shot that I joined this forum. How crazy is THAT?!
I'm 5'9", 175lb. Coordinated, but obviously not a super-shot. I group my G19 within 4 inches at 13 yards and felt really comfortable with that round. Now I can keep this Shield 40 inside 2 inches at 7 yards.
Am a happy Shield owner. Gonna get my wife the Shield9 soon.
Unbiased. No history. No agenda.
bsp212
Member
I purchased the Shield .40 a few weeks ago. Did a side by side comparison with my Glock 27 using WWB 165gr ball ammo. IMHO, the shield was more manageable than the Glock, and I'm a Glock guy. I liked it enough to buy another Shield in 9mm today.
Mule88
Member
I have both and shot both side by side, yes the 40 is a bit snappier, but not significantly so, i shot equally well with both and plan to keep both, but usually carry the 40.
I bought a Shield .40 and have aound 200 rounds through it. I also own a full size M&P .40 and previously owned a Glock 23 and an FNP .40. I would rank perceived recoil in the four guns as follows, from most to least - Glock 23, Shield, M&P and FNP. The difference between the Shield and the fullsize M&P is minimal.
Of the four weapons, the only one that had what I would call unpleasant recoil was the Glock 23. With the other three, including the Shiield, the recoil is not an issue.
Bottom line - if you can handle a full size M&P .40, you should be able to handle a Shield .40. Not sure how they did it, but the recoil is very manageable for such a small gun.
Having said that, my Shield drops mags repeatedly. This is the first handgun that I've owned that was not reliable out of the box. Hoping S&W can fix the problem, because otherwise I love the gun. My left hand is bruised from doing "tap/rack" drills at the range.
Of the four weapons, the only one that had what I would call unpleasant recoil was the Glock 23. With the other three, including the Shiield, the recoil is not an issue.
Bottom line - if you can handle a full size M&P .40, you should be able to handle a Shield .40. Not sure how they did it, but the recoil is very manageable for such a small gun.
Having said that, my Shield drops mags repeatedly. This is the first handgun that I've owned that was not reliable out of the box. Hoping S&W can fix the problem, because otherwise I love the gun. My left hand is bruised from doing "tap/rack" drills at the range.
Tom Goodrick
Member
I have compared a lot of .40's with 9 mm's. I prefer the .40 as a probable man-stopper. Accuracy of a quick second shot with a .40 is generally harder to achieve than with a 9 mm. But it is unlikely to be as necessary. I would go with a 9 mm only when it gives me a substantial reduction in size. If you are going to buy a 9 mm and then go looking for +p++ ammo, get the .40 instead.
SMMAssociates
Member
Tom:
It might also make sense to buy several more of those 9mm's in this case. The M&P guns can take only so much abuse
....There probably is a little to be said for +P loads, but at some point it becomes bragging rights. A good SD load in anything nastier than a .380, presuming a solid hit, and no winter clothing issues, should be more than enough to ruin the BG's day. "Plastic tip" SD loads should solve the clothing problem, leaving only the issue of a follow-up shot, and that's got too many variables to really predict.
(That said, go with a caliber/gun mix you can handle well enough to get in that follow-up, should it be needed. IMHO, those ultra-light .357's, for example, are a "where the hell did my hand go?" situation for most shooters after the first round, even if you can stand the pain....)
Lest I get nasty flames, the newer SD round for the .380 aren't bad, either, but the guns are generally not fun to shoot, and that's part of the problem: If you can't comfortably shoot the thing, you won't practice with it, and the best you can expect, besides luck, is a nasty flinch. The 40FS and 40C are a little snappy, but comfortable for me. So's the 9mm, but given the mix, the 40's a better choice for me. "Outside", it's an Officer's-sized 1911. Actually slightly better for me, but the M&P is a better carry in grubbies.
IMHO, the .40 Shield would be about the same as the 40C - maybe a little less comfortable, but I've yet to try it.
Buy several of each....
Regards,
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
