ctxcummins
Member
- Joined
- May 11, 2017
- Messages
- 113
- Reaction score
- 158
The 2.0C is also a half inch shorter in height while only sacrificing two rounds. To people like me, that half inch makes a huge difference. It carries better, points better, balances better and shoots faster than the full size. Which is why my 45 2.0 stays in the night stand.That may be, but it's still kind of stupid of them to abandon those of us that find the original compact's to be the perfect size gun. Personally, I consider the Shield's to be sub-combact, and the 1.0 C to be a compact, but I'm talking real world use, not some standard set by ITPA (or whomever).
The 2.0 C is so close to a 2.0 FS (only .1" shorter), that anyone not shooting in competitions in the compact class might as well just get the FS, it would seem like.