comiskeybum
Member
- Joined
- Jul 27, 2015
- Messages
- 359
- Reaction score
- 277
Especially +p 9mm
Sent from my Pixel XL
Sent from my Pixel XL
Looking at 45 shelds
- Thread starter Groo01
- Start date
comiskeybum
Member
- Joined
- Jul 27, 2015
- Messages
- 359
- Reaction score
- 277
They all do the job.
Sent from my Pixel XL
Sent from my Pixel XL
Colonel
Member
The repeated statement about the effectiveness of 9mm ammo.... "With todays ammo and bullet technology, there is no difference between the 9mm, 40 S&W and .45 ACP." Followed with "Thats why the FBI switched back to 9mm"
My response is that the same ammo and bullet technology that improved the 9mm also improved the 40 S&W, 45 ACP and every other round.
The FBI went back to the 9mm because of the lowered physical requirements of their agents that could not attain a qualifying score. Also, 9mm cost less and is easier on the pistols for service life.
Wait until there is another Miami type situation and history will repeat itself and the FBI will be back again to larger calibers.
IMHO; 9mm's have a place, but they don't equal a 40 S&W or a 45 ACP in effectiveness, no matter how you spin it.
Last edited:
FloridaS&W
Member
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2015
- Messages
- 307
- Reaction score
- 353
Love me some 45 ACP
230 grain slow movin energy train BAM!
230 grain slow movin energy train BAM!
comiskeybum
Member
- Joined
- Jul 27, 2015
- Messages
- 359
- Reaction score
- 277
They all do the job.
Sent from my Pixel XL
Sent from my Pixel XL
I have the .45 non pc version. It did replace my 9mm shield as my EDC after some time testing and comparing. I was more accurate with the .45, much to my suprise. I went with TFX sights, as PC were Fiber, but not illuminated. I hope I never need to use my gun, other than at a range or having some fun in the woods, but having the sights illuminated to have sight reference in low light is important to me.
gunny4053
US Veteran
A .22 will do the job, but it's a matter of how well it does the job. I want to stop the threat now, not wait an hour for him to bleed out. The new ammo is better, but it is better in everything. Take a look at the ARX ammo being marketed by Ruger. It doesn't expand at all, but fluid dynamics tends to make it act like a Cuisinart, and it's accurate. 9mm is nasty, but .45 is nastier, I'll stick with nastier.
Plain old NTS .45. Also an old wheel gunner who appreciates a nice controllable DA-style trigger.The little thing is ridiculously easy to shoot, accurate, and feels about like a 9mm with 185s. I find it less noticeable to wear all day in a De Santis OWB than my J frame in a "pistol pocket", and a lot quicker to get to.
Tired of all the winning...
Tired of all the winning...
ultratec00
Member
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2011
- Messages
- 762
- Reaction score
- 347
To my knowledge the two are identical other than porting and fiber optic sights. Wouldn't surprise me if a person can swap slides between the two with no issues.
The decision may depend on what are your requirements. If your preference is for tritium night sights, then you may be better off buying the model with them already installed vs. buying a PC and swapping out the fiber w/ tritium. I prefer apex triggers so it is a wash for either.
It's debatable the benefit of porting for a short barreled 45. I have a standard Shield 45 that is very controllable with the loads I carry. If someone is bound and determined to shoot +P+ fire breathers out of a short barreled 45, porting may have its advantages.
The decision may depend on what are your requirements. If your preference is for tritium night sights, then you may be better off buying the model with them already installed vs. buying a PC and swapping out the fiber w/ tritium. I prefer apex triggers so it is a wash for either.
It's debatable the benefit of porting for a short barreled 45. I have a standard Shield 45 that is very controllable with the loads I carry. If someone is bound and determined to shoot +P+ fire breathers out of a short barreled 45, porting may have its advantages.
Spot on!! how can one say a bigger faster heavier bullet will not do more damage??? The Shield .45 and .40 were hard to chose between and went .40 as I pocket carry a lot and the .45 was a tad bigger. AND I got a great deal on a .40 Shield PC and I love it!!
I just ordered SA XD-S MOD2 in .45 for my son. (which he wanted).
I think it will be interesting to shoot Shield & SA back to back.
Davidsons has just received them. The SA comes with a tritium front sight & non tritium rear.
I have always bought my S&W's from them especially all my PC S&W's . I got my JM 627 V8 from them,
646 40 cal., 629 V-Comp ( non- cataloged, 1 of 300)+ a few other limited or special runs.
I think it will be interesting to shoot Shield & SA back to back.
Davidsons has just received them. The SA comes with a tritium front sight & non tritium rear.
I have always bought my S&W's from them especially all my PC S&W's . I got my JM 627 V8 from them,
646 40 cal., 629 V-Comp ( non- cataloged, 1 of 300)+ a few other limited or special runs.
Last edited:
Whenever someone asks for an opinion between the regular and PC versions of the Shield, the guys that answer should own both, or at least have put a bunch of rounds through both, before answering.
I suspect that many of the PC haters have never even fired or held one.
I have a PC .40, and had a regular Shield in .45 and 9mm.
I bought the .45 after hearing so many good things from guys here.
When I hear some say that the .45 has less recoil and is more pleasant to shoot than the 9mm they shot, I have to wonder if they are living in a parallel universe, where the rules of physics are reversed.
The 9mm Shield I gave to my daughter was very pleasant to shoot, she is petite, so I wanted her to have the 9mm.
My PC .40 is almost as enjoyable as the 9mm, with just a bit more muzzle rise and push back in the hand. That is with R-P 165 grain FMJ.
When I shoot some of my 180 grain HST's, recoil is more noticeable.
The .45 I had was a bit more accurate at longer (25+ yards), but these compact handguns are meant to be used closer up.
Had my .45 been a PC, I might have kept it. And if my .40 wasn't a ported model, maybe I'd have traded it off and kept the .45.
I've shot mine at night, shot it close in to my waist, no issues there.
And cleaning ?
It takes all of about 10 extra seconds to clean the little bit of fouling from the inside of the slide and outside of barrel. Not a huge chore like some of the naysayers make it out to be.
And the PC models have a great trigger. I could replace with Apex parts but I doubt I could tell much difference.
I don't like the term "snappy" that many apply to the .40 in general, but find my fullsize M&P .40 is "snappy", while my smaller, lighter ported Shield is not. The porting is enough to be noticeable.
If you can snag a PC model, get it. Getting your sights back on target quicker is a good thing.
I suspect that many of the PC haters have never even fired or held one.
I have a PC .40, and had a regular Shield in .45 and 9mm.
I bought the .45 after hearing so many good things from guys here.
When I hear some say that the .45 has less recoil and is more pleasant to shoot than the 9mm they shot, I have to wonder if they are living in a parallel universe, where the rules of physics are reversed.
The 9mm Shield I gave to my daughter was very pleasant to shoot, she is petite, so I wanted her to have the 9mm.
My PC .40 is almost as enjoyable as the 9mm, with just a bit more muzzle rise and push back in the hand. That is with R-P 165 grain FMJ.
When I shoot some of my 180 grain HST's, recoil is more noticeable.
The .45 I had was a bit more accurate at longer (25+ yards), but these compact handguns are meant to be used closer up.
Had my .45 been a PC, I might have kept it. And if my .40 wasn't a ported model, maybe I'd have traded it off and kept the .45.
I've shot mine at night, shot it close in to my waist, no issues there.
And cleaning ?
It takes all of about 10 extra seconds to clean the little bit of fouling from the inside of the slide and outside of barrel. Not a huge chore like some of the naysayers make it out to be.
And the PC models have a great trigger. I could replace with Apex parts but I doubt I could tell much difference.
I don't like the term "snappy" that many apply to the .40 in general, but find my fullsize M&P .40 is "snappy", while my smaller, lighter ported Shield is not. The porting is enough to be noticeable.
If you can snag a PC model, get it. Getting your sights back on target quicker is a good thing.
Last edited:
SATX
Member
- Joined
- May 7, 2017
- Messages
- 292
- Reaction score
- 264
Sandog, my belief is not that the 45 has less recoil than the 9, but rather it's quite controllable for a subcompact 45. I also believe that the impulse of the 45s recoil is more controllable than the 40s snap. I simply get better groupings with the 45 over the 40, but the 9 does get back on target faster.
I believe that the M&P series handles the 40 way better than a Glock, but others disagree on that statement. When it comes to gun manufacturers and calibers, it all boils down to each individuals preference.
I rented a 40 Shield at a range which required me to use their ammo I never heard of and it was a sweet shooter, so I bought one. When I shot my 40 Shield using brand ammo and SD loads, it was not like my rental experience, I was all over the paper target. After applying some rubber Talon grips, it was much better, but still not as good as the 45.
It's all individualistic in nature.
I believe that the M&P series handles the 40 way better than a Glock, but others disagree on that statement. When it comes to gun manufacturers and calibers, it all boils down to each individuals preference.
I rented a 40 Shield at a range which required me to use their ammo I never heard of and it was a sweet shooter, so I bought one. When I shot my 40 Shield using brand ammo and SD loads, it was not like my rental experience, I was all over the paper target. After applying some rubber Talon grips, it was much better, but still not as good as the 45.
It's all individualistic in nature.
Yes, I realize it's all subjective, and we all have varying degrees of perception.
I took my .45 and .40 PC to the range 3 weekends in a row, and fired maybe 300 rounds through each gun. Each time, I came away liking the PC .40 better.
If my .40 wasn't ported, I'd probably agree about the "snap".
And had I had a PC version of each to compare, I might have kept the .45 and parted with the .40.
A friend brought his compact Glock .40 (G27) to the range one day, and was impressed with my Shield. I shot his Glock some, and thought the Shield handled way better than the Glock, but to be fair my S&W is ported, and his Glock was not.
Bottom line, you can't go wrong with any version of the Shield !
I took my .45 and .40 PC to the range 3 weekends in a row, and fired maybe 300 rounds through each gun. Each time, I came away liking the PC .40 better.
If my .40 wasn't ported, I'd probably agree about the "snap".
And had I had a PC version of each to compare, I might have kept the .45 and parted with the .40.
A friend brought his compact Glock .40 (G27) to the range one day, and was impressed with my Shield. I shot his Glock some, and thought the Shield handled way better than the Glock, but to be fair my S&W is ported, and his Glock was not.
Bottom line, you can't go wrong with any version of the Shield !
GSD2053
Member
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2017
- Messages
- 34
- Reaction score
- 15
Sandog, I have the 9mm and the 45 Shield. Neither is ported. There is no parallel universe. Everyone I have herd compare the two side do side have said the same thing. The 45 Shield is much more softer felt recoil. The lower pressure seems to result in less muzzle flip. I like the 40 round. If I had the shield in 40 I would likely opt for the ported too.
