M&P Shield 2.0 vs 1.0 vs 1.0 with the Apex Trigger Kit

[Fat B]

My original M&P Shield has served me very well over the years. Its a main part of my EDC rotation and it's the only pistol that I have 2 of. One has been fitted with the Apex trigger kit (Springs, Sear and Striker block) and Dawson fiber optic front and blacked out rear sights. The other Shield I have left bone stock. When the Shield 2.0 was announced, I jumped at the chance to purchase one as soon as I could. Would it be the improvement that I hoped it would and take the Shield to the next level?

My first impressions: it looks like someone combined the aggressive stippling and the weird machine marks of the Shield 45 with the original shield. Yes I think those machine marks are weird and useless for press checking. Past that... hmmm... I don't see too much of a difference. More on that in a second. The new Shield came with everything I expected and nothing I didn't. Cardboard box and a 7 and 8 round magazine. Plus instruction booklet and gun lock.

When it came time to find the external differences between the two guns, they were few and far between. External dimensions are exactly the same. As a kydex holster maker, I was eager to see how well the 2 guns matched up for holster purposes. Exact same dimensions. The slide has the same profile and the curves are all in the same places. The width, length and height are the exact same. Sights, yep they are the same. I don't really know what I was expecting but I was very surprised it was so similar. Now that I've reflected on this, I'm not sorry they didn't change much. I like the profile of the Shield.

Exterior pics

Minor change: They have moved the over travel trigger stop

It looks like they added a very small QR Code to the serial number. I'm guessing it will cut way down on errors

Minor change: the angle at the top of the barrel chamber is slightly different

Internally the components looks the same. There are some very minor changes that I dont' know have any bearing on the function of the firearm.

New Shield:

Old Shield:

Now to probably the most important part: the trigger. Noticably the Shield 2.0 is a huge improvement over the Shield 1.0. The trigger isn’t nearly as hard to pull and is much crisper. The reset is also more defined on the 2.0. The 1.0 suffers from the same mushy feeling resetting as it does pulling the trigger. Compared to the 1.0, the Shield 2.0 shines.

Unfortunately when comparing the Shield 2.0 to the Shield 1.0 with the Apex trigger kit, the benefits disappear. Before I go any further, I want to add my disclaimer. My Shield with the Apex kit has hundreds and hundreds of rounds through it. My Shield 2.0 has 40. To have a smooth trigger like the 2.0 has right out of the box is a testament to the good work Smith and Wesson has done with this pistol. I’m not saying this is a fair trigger comparison, it’s probably not.

With that being said… The Apex trigger has a longer pretravel (slack in the trigger) to take up but when it actually engages the sear, the trigger pull is shorter. This helps the Apex have a slightly shorter reset than the 2.0.

Overall I would call the 2.0 and the 1.0 with the Apex Trigger a tie. I wonder how the 2.0 would do with the Apex Striker block.
I measured the trigger from a full rest to the point where the slack (or pretravel) is all taken out. I then measured how far the trigger needed to be pulled to fully work the sear.

My unscientific numbers are:

Shield 2.0: ¼” of pretravel and ¼” of sear engagement

Shield 1.0 Stock: 5/16” of pretravel and 3/16” of sear engagement

Shield 1.0 with Apex Kit: 7/16” of pretravel and 1/8” of sear engagement.

It seems the Shield 2.0 has shifted to a shorter pretravel to lighten the total trigger pull.

I used a hand-held Wheeler trigger pull tester pulling at the exact middle of the hinged part of the trigger (or ¾ of the way down the total trigger)

Shield 2.0: 5 ¼#

Shield 1.0: 7 1/2#

Shield with the Apex Kit: 5 ¾ #

I would fully expect the Shield 2.0 to lighten up after a break in period. I also have to say that the Shield with the Apex kit feels lighter. Something that I would attribute to the polished striker block

Overall the Shield 2.0 is an improvement over the Shield 1.0. But a huge improvement it is not. My opinion is that if you already have a Shield it's not worth it to upgrade to the 2.0 unless you desperately want to have the latest and greatest. Go buy an Apex kit instead. If you don't have a Shield at all? Save yourself the trouble, buy a Shield 2.0 and have a fantastic pistol right out of the box, no modifications needed.

 

[akdude]

Thank You, for the great info & pictures!

 

[jejb]

Thanks, great review. Seems your conclusion matches most of what I've read so far, that the Shield 2.0 is not as big a change as many of the 2.0's are.

I'd also add that if you want to improve the grip on the 1.0 to make it more 2.0 like, Talon makes some great options that are very reasonable.

 

[Ranger17]

yep thanks for the comparisons!

Quick question: any noticeable feel/accuracy differences when shooting the 2.0 vs 1.0; from trigger to how it holds with the aggressive 2.0 grip stippling?

just curious.....

 

[Hhenry]

Great review! Thanks!

My 2 cents worth. I simply cannot imagine the 2.0 Shield outperforming the PC Shield. I added an Apex trigger shoe only to mine, and the Talon "GRANULATE" grip tape. Hands down, the best shooting single-stack 9mm I've ever owned! Bottom line, the Shield is KING of the pistols in its class!!

TALON Gun Grips for Smith & Wesson M&P Shield 9mm/ .40

 

[C0LUMB0]

Great review!

I was wondering how much of a difference there would between the two. The 2.0 shield is my first shield I have owned and I thought of getting the 1.0 and apexing it but I figured I might as well get the latest and greatest model out now. I figured if I didn't like the trigger in the 2.0 now I would just upgrade it at some point later on. I have only dried fired it so far and it feels crisp and maybe even better than my 2.0 full. I hope to hit the range after work today to really give it a go.

 

[Shield9mm]

thanks for the review, that confirms me that I don't need a 2.0. I'm very pleased with my shield.

 

[greeenteeee]

thanks for the review, that confirms me that I don't need a 2.0. I'm very pleased with my shield.

I expected this was the case, when we got a hint of the 2.0 with the Shield 45's release.

Great review! Thanks!

My 2 cents worth. I simply cannot imagine the 2.0 Shield outperforming the PC Shield. I added an Apex trigger shoe only to mine, and the Talon "GRANULATE" grip tape. Hands down, the best shooting single-stack 9mm I've ever owned! Bottom line, the Shield is KING of the pistols in its class!!

TALON Gun Grips for Smith & Wesson M&P Shield 9mm/ .40

I've a PC9 Shield and a Standard Shield with an Apex sear, both sharing close to 1500 rounds through them and each are NICELY worn in.

It's kind of like the Glock 19 Gen 3 vs Gen 4 debate that I went through recently... (yes I've heard of the Gen 5). I went with the Gen 3. Though I did check out the Gen 4s today.

 

[Fat B]

yep thanks for the comparisons!

Quick question: any noticeable feel/accuracy differences when shooting the 2.0 vs 1.0; from trigger to how it holds with the aggressive 2.0 grip stippling?

just curious.....

In a semi-slow fire (no drawing from the holster at the local indoor range) I definitely shot the Shield 2.0 better than both the Shield and the Shield with the Apex trigger kit. Not too much better but it was noticeable. It wasn't a completely fair test with the Apex kit shield because I have sights set up on it for quick target acquisition and not for accuracy. For me the stippling is nice but not as influential as the trigger. The Shield 1.0 has 7.5# of mush and the 2.0 has 5.5# of crisp. I also understand the shield is not a target gun so I'm interested to see how well double taps drawing from concealed compare.

On a side note, nice to see you're from Wisconsin Ranger!

 

[Ranger17]

In a semi-slow fire (no drawing from the holster at the local indoor range) I definitely shot the Shield 2.0 better than both the Shield and the Shield with the Apex trigger kit. Not too much better but it was noticeable. It wasn't a completely fair test with the Apex kit shield because I have sights set up on it for quick target acquisition and not for accuracy. For me the stippling is nice but not as influential as the trigger. The Shield 1.0 has 7.5# of mush and the 2.0 has 5.5# of crisp. I also understand the shield is not a target gun so I'm interested to see how well double taps drawing from concealed compare.

On a side note, nice to see you're from Wisconsin Ranger!

Thx for the feedback. Not sure i'm a fan yet of the stippling (been keeping me on the fence for other 2.0 models); but I could always see adding another MP to my slowly growing collection lol.

And yes being in WI now that the cold is truly here, am looking forward to the area Gander opening back up to get to 'my' indoor range again.

 

[dben002]

If the 2.0 shield trigger is same same as the shield 45 trigger then after about 200 to 300 rounds down range the trigger will be just perfect for a self defense carry weapon. My 45 trigger loosened up very nicely after this kind of break in and I would not want a looser trigger at all in a SD carry weapon...........IMHO the Apex trigger upgrade is not needed.

 

[Smakmauz]

great post!! Thank you!

it looks like they didn't switch to the sear actuator trigger system like they did in the full size 2.0's. Looks like it probably still has the candy cane loop on the trigger bar?

The 1.0 shields had a ton of over travel. To get my over travel down to a respectable amount after installing the apex sear, I actually trimmed down the trigger bar loop so I could close it more. which in turn makes the pre-travel longer. don't mind the pre-travel because my break is absolutely beautiful and super short reset.

With the 2.0 having a built in over travel stop that is more prominent, you can have the trigger loop adjusted more open to take out more of the pre-travel... depending on where the sear breaks I guess.... I'd love to play with one these... just don't really have a use for another shield.

if they put the same trigger bar in the 2.0 without the new actuator system, they must have just made a sear with different geometry to make the stock trigger lighter.

 

[greeenteeee]

great post!! Thank you!

it looks like they didn't switch to the sear actuator trigger system like they did in the full size 2.0's. Looks like it probably still has the candy cane loop on the trigger bar?

The 1.0 shields had a ton of over travel. To get my over travel down to a respectable amount after installing the apex sear, I actually trimmed down the trigger bar loop so I could close it more. which in turn makes the pre-travel longer. don't mind the pre-travel because my break is absolutely beautiful and super short reset.

With the 2.0 having a built in over travel stop that is more prominent, you can have the trigger loop adjusted more open to take out more of the pre-travel... depending on where the sear breaks I guess.... I'd love to play with one these... just don't really have a use for another shield.

if they put the same trigger bar in the 2.0 without the new actuator system, they must have just made a sear with different geometry to make the stock trigger lighter.

I'm not brave enough to attempt modifications like that but yes all the pre/over issues with the 1.0 weren't nice at all.

SD situation may not matter.

 

[220-niner]

I have had a 1.0 for about 5 years and am one of the ones that is happy with accuracy and trigger feel in a stock gun.
I've changed the front site to a higher visibility night site and added a grip sleeve. The grip now feels perfect for my hand.
The desire is still there at times for the 2.0 but so far not strong enough to get me to make a change.
In the real world, for my intended use, it's still a great gun.

 

[Sheepdogged]

Thank you for the thorough comparison as the data is very helpful. That said, we all have different personal experiences and unique quirks when interfacing with firearms, so my opinion is a little different.

I owned a standard 1.0 Shield back in 2014. I had it for only a few months to decide between that and another recent gun I had purchased at the time, a Gen4 Glock 26. I really struggled between these two as I loved aspects of both but decided that if I was only going to have one subcompact it was going to be the G26.

Well, earlier this year I wanted to replace it with something else, so I thorough researched everything available in the market, including the SIG P365 and SA Hellcat, and I came to the conclusion I wanted another Shield. I was going to get the Standard M2.0, but at the last minute I decided to go with a Performance Center Shield M2.0.

First off, I need to be honest about it. This was the worst M&P trigger I've ever owned, and I have owned at least a half dozen since circa 2005 when they first came out 15 years ago. When I say worst, I am a firm believer that the only way to truly judge a trigger is to 1) see how still the front sight remains when dry firing, and 2) how quickly & accurately a trigger works for an individual during live fire. I do NOT give a rip about trigger travel, grittiness, overtravel, etc. I see virtually ever gun review point these things out and never mention what happens to the front sight when the dry practice and I think that is a big mistake.

Luckily, I have one of those trigger fingers that loves almost all triggers. I had a Bodyguard with a trigger that was as accurate as the single action of my SIG P229 Enhanced Elite. I had a SIG P250 DAO that was even better feeling but equally effective at keeping the front sight absolutely still. The only downsides to these guns for me is that I cannot do fast follow up shots on a DAO trigger. I know some can slap them fast, but that is not a skill I posses, but by carrying DA/SA in my P229 and Beretta PX4 Storm I am just as accurate in DA as any stock M&P or Glock.

That said, my Performance M&P M2.0 Shield trigger was horrible. It pulled at 6.5-7 lbs. and the front sight ALWAYS vibrates when I pulled the trigger. Even after a 1000 rounds, it remained heavy and horrible, and I am used to DA/SA pulls in excess of 10 lbs. I have owned 23 carry guns, and I have never had a trigger that was consistently this bad. I sent it back to S&W and unfortunately they sent it back no defect found. After putting hundreds of more rounds through it, it is finally good but not great (and still probably the worst M&P trigger I have owned after having both multiple 1.0 and 2.0 non-Performance Center pistols. I just measured the trigger pull and it was finally down to about 5.5 lbs. for the first time, and it took a lot of dry practicing to help that along.

The reset, however is better than what I've had on any of my M&P's, but my new M&P9 M2.0 Subcompact still has a better trigger pull, and I just measured it and it has a 6.5-7.0 lb. trigger pull! I only have 100 rounds through it, so I expect it to improve, but like I said, I love DA trigger pulls, so the extra weight doesn't bother me and unless it interferes with accuracy, I want the heaviest trigger I can shoot well.

Part of this might have to do with ergonomics. I love the Shield's ergo's, but I think the increased surface area of the M&P Subcompact's wider frame helps with more than just recoil. This is also why I selected buying the Shield & Subcompact earlier this year in lieu of an all-in-one solution like a SIG P365 or SA Hellcat because with my body and method of carry, I don't see a benefit of a pistol that has both an extremely short grip AND a thin profile, I only need one or the other for certain applications unless I am pocket carrying in which I carry my RUGER LCP II which has a better trigger pull than the Shield for slow fire (and maybe even my P229. It's weird, but that LCP II trigger is amazing. It's only downfall is it's long reset. I think if it was even .001 longer I'd hate the thing).

So where do I fall on the 1.0 vs. 2.0 Shield overall? For me I infinitely prefer the 2.0 over my old 1.0 because of the grip texture. I had my grip strength measured and it is above average for a man at any age, but my skin texture and the shape of my hands seem to prefer an aggressive texturing. For example, I get absolutely no benefit from a rubberized Talon Grip over a Gen4 or Gen5 Glock (having owned both), so I currently use a granulated Talon Grip on my PX4 Storm Compact with is not the most comfortable for summer carry. The M&P M2.0 texturing is perfect, especially on the subcompacts which are more aggressive than the one on the Shield. But everyone is different. I truly believe this is an overlooked aspects of individual hands. We do not appear to have the same grippiness as far as skin texture is concerned, so I much prefer the M2.0, but that's me personally.

What I don't like about either the M2.0 or M1.0 Shield is twofold. One, I sometimes grip my pistol so high I get a rough spot on the trigger. Both Shields have this problem, but I never experienced this on my other four M&P's ranging from Subcompact to full-size. The second thing I don't like is that they break a little too far to the rear for my preference. I am hoping an Apex trigger improves both aspects, and if you or anyone else can speak to that I'd appreciate it.

Holy ****, I apologize for writing so much. It just got away from me!