M&P Shield Sights ?
- Thread starter Tundra5.7
- Start date
Register to hide this ad
e-jism
Member
I'm new to the handgun world, but it's my understanding that sight image 2 is the correct alignment. When I first got my M&P 40 I was using alignment image 3 and was told to use image 2. I'm not a great shot, but switching to image 2 did seem to make a difference/improvement.
TMorgan91
Member
I am almost certain it is sight picture 3 for all the M&P's. I believe there was another thread floating around like this. Anyways, I use 3. I believe it is the most accurate.
FWIW, I use #3 as well. Though I seem to remember using #2 on a Sig 229 several years ago.
zotzer
Member
At what distance?
bearfoot
US Veteran
my 2 cts., #1. although i was taught different. over the years i have learned to shoot a consistant POA, bottom of the circle produces better shot groups. w/ a pistol/rev., it doesn't matter, center mass/ POA is center mass/ POI. at any pistol distance. distance/ bullet grain, breathing, grip and tempurture all have effects.you still have to determine where you want POI. the bottom of the bull also helps w/ point shooting and front sight shooting.
Out to 25 yards.
zotzer
Member
My understanding is they are set to Point of Impact, which is your diagram #3
Glad you said that as that is exactly the way I wanted to word my question. I should have asked how the factory set the sights up. Thanks.
e-jism
Member
This is one of those "Depends on who you ask" questions. Another member recently posted that S&W uses sight #2 to sight their pistols, and today I found an article on Pistol-Training.com that says the difference is so slight that companies would use either #2 or #3. Next time at the range I'll make a conscious effort to compare the two again.
pistol-training.com » Blog Archive » Sight Picture
pistol-training.com » Blog Archive » Sight Picture
Last edited:
I had the chance to put a bore sight in my 9mm Shield tonight. Would not count on the cheapish bore sight to be 100% accurate... does not account for trajectory, bullet weight, windage, my ability to aim, or the phase of the moon. But between 7 and 15 yards, it looked like #2.
Hmmm, might have to try that myself. Thanks for the idea.
Haven't been able to find a definitive answer. Would be nice if S&W stated in their owner's manual how they DESIGNED these to work. (Even my kid's $25 Crossman pump BB gun had an illustration in the owner's manual for Pete's sake.)
I did find several blogs with PDFs of "US Marine Corps Pistol Manual of 2003". Looks like #2 is what they're using.
I did find several blogs with PDFs of "US Marine Corps Pistol Manual of 2003". Looks like #2 is what they're using.
drinva
Member
#2 on my shield 9 is DEAD ON
I think that is because the Sheild POA/POI is all over the place with no certain consistency.
VERY DISSAPOINTING
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2013
- Messages
- 1
- Reaction score
- 0
Same as my shield 9 #2
drinva
Member
Really???
Im by far no expert shooter, but been around and been shooting 40 + years. I took a brand new shield 9mm and walked a tin can out to 50 yards straight away. So did my son, same gun of course. My wife was even decent with it and she hadnt been to a range but once in many years. I found the Shield EASY to aim and a pleasure to shoot. I did alter the gun with Talon grips, but other than that it was stock from the box new. Could your inconsistency be a grip issue, the gun is thin.
DR
mustangman
Member
At 10 ft that seems pretty excessive, maybe its not the gun, but the way youre shooting it. The Shield can be tricky if you haven't shot a gun that size before. Here's a couple of charts that may help? Don't really know, just spitballin'. Hope you get it figured out, whatever it is. Be safe and have fun.
Attachments
Last edited:
photoman
Member
My suggestion would be to have two or three other persons try the gun. One foot low at 10 feet is ~very~ worrisome (if it really is the gun).
Most guns will shoot low at 10' and I'd bet you were flinching (we all do it at times) without realizing it.
ChiefStealth
US Veteran
In theory, I use sight image #2. However, since I am focusing on the front sight, the target is not really clear enough to discern the exact point of aim. So, I aim small. And, since I am aiming at a point that is much smaller than shown in the three sight images, the differences in the three images becomes immaterial.
goinfshn
Member
If you really want to see if you are doing anything wrong, grip, heeling or jerking, etc. Have someone load your magazine using snap caps randomly through out the magazine. When your round should go off, if you are doing anything wrong, the snap cap will point it out.
Gary
Gary
For those with M&P Shield's, which of the following shows the correct sight alignment for the Shield?
Assuming you are aiming for the bullseye.
I'm a new Shield owner, but 2 works for me
On the solution path...
Thanks Mustangman! The charts are a big help and pin point my grip, sight alignment, and trigger control. I have been focusing on them and shooting much better now. Yes! The MP Shield "IS" amazingly POA accurate at. Albeit I still have to work on consistent grip/sight alignment/trigger control, the shots where all three were "right on" we exactly POA with sight image #3. More range time and concentration is warranted.
Thanks Mustangman! The charts are a big help and pin point my grip, sight alignment, and trigger control. I have been focusing on them and shooting much better now. Yes! The MP Shield "IS" amazingly POA accurate at. Albeit I still have to work on consistent grip/sight alignment/trigger control, the shots where all three were "right on" we exactly POA with sight image #3. More range time and concentration is warranted.
Last edited:
Sight image #3 is for a combat sight which is what M&P's have mounted.
It is the same for Sig Sauer and Glock unless you mount some other size different from standard.
What works for you, the shooter, is all that matters, though.
It is the same for Sig Sauer and Glock unless you mount some other size different from standard.
What works for you, the shooter, is all that matters, though.
