S&W Shield Inadequate?

[jmhgv2]

So I'm in the process of buying a Shield, and it seems to be everything I want (i.e., single stack 9mm, small, light, and reliable).

First, let me preface my question by saying that based on the research I've done, a 9mm is more than adequate for carry. I've always felt safe carrying 9mm.

My concern is that the Shield in particular might be inadequate because it has only a 3.1" barrel. This means less power than 9mms with longer barrels. And I'm not going to use +p because the instruction manual advises against its.

So my question is this: are you aware of any studies/tests that have been conducted to assess whether standard pressure hollow points have enough expansion and penetration from such a short barrel? Thanks for the input.

P.S. For a variety of reasons (cost, recoil, etc.) I don't want the .40.

 

[richeyo2]

Some videos on youtube & I believe Guns & Gear did a episode on compact 9mm's & ammo.

 

[jmhgv2]

Just found this, and it concerns me: Best Choices for Self Defense Ammo. The relevant portion is posted below.


"BARREL LENGTH plays a role in this as well. While +P loadings may not be required in most cases, they can compensate for short barrels and the resulting loss in muzzle velocity. For example: In 9mm, the 124gr Gold Dot is a good choice in barrel lengths of 4" or more. In compact guns of 3.5" or less, a higher-velocity loading would be advised. This is Dr. Roberts take on the issue:
Actually, all our testing has traditionally been done in 4" barrels for 9 mm, .40 S&W, and 4.25" for .45 ACP, although recently most of the organizations we test for have been asking for 5" barrel data for .45 ACP. There is really no difference in performance between a 3.5" and 4" barrel in 9 mm and .40 S&W. In .45 ACP, we see a reasonably significant change in performance going from a 5" to 3.5" or less barrels. Since almost all viable pistols in 9 mm and .40 S&W use 3.5-4.5" barrels, there are no "short barrel" worries for serious end-users. Likewise, almost all .45 ACP platforms worthy of hard use use barrels greater than 4", so again, the short barrel question is moot...Please be aware that if you venture into guns with a barrel length of less than 3.5", you're in uncharted territory."

 

[Dean1818]

The bigger question would be..... What is YOUR intended purpose for the pistol?

If you are wanting a competition gun, the Shield isnt it.
Get a 1911

If you are wanting a show type gun...... The Shield isnt it.

If you want a comfortable to carry, light, thin, reliable, decent trigger, accurate to personal defense distances......... The Shield is an excellent choice.


I did a few ballistics tests with short barreled 9mms ...... Using milk jugs filled with wet newspaper, lined up, with 4 layers
of denim on the first jug. The round was CORBON DPX....... I was getting 13 inches of penetration and that little 9 mm expanded to nearly 3/4 inch...... Plenty of knockdown power

This was out of a 3 inch barrel.

I personally have the 40 Cal Shield, but wouldnt feel
Undergunned with a 9mm, with premium ammo.

 

[Dean1818]

As an added note, the recoil on the 40 Shield is very tame.

I have shot other 40 cal pistols that had much worse buck


Lastly, your Shield will not fall apart from shooting a small amount of +P
Ammo

When you go to the range, shoot WWB....... For carry...... Shoot the hot stuff.

Check to make sure the Shield reliably cycles a few rounds of the hot stuff, then
your time at the range would be with lower powered rounds

 

[Skeptic 9c]

I've always felt safe carrying 9mm.
My concern is that the Shield in particular might be inadequate because it has only a 3.1" barrel.

There are no inadequate calibers in self defense. The difference between a 3" and 5" barrel is negligible. Practice until you get the HITS.

Now, if YOU don't FEEL it is adequate, get something else. YOU have to have faith in your defensive system.

Geoff
Who does not compromise with a .357 Ruger under his right arm and a Colt .45 ACP CLW Commander under his left, and a S&W Model 38 in his pocket, and a .44 Magnum Ruger Super Blackhawk in his briefcase. (OK I did it once for a concealed carry class.) [Wife's comment, "By the time you decide which one to use, I'll be reloading my Sigma!]

 

[Maddmax]

So I'm in the process of buying a Shield, and it seems to be everything I want (i.e., single stack 9mm, small, light, and reliable).

First, let me preface my question by saying that based on the research I've done, a 9mm is more than adequate for carry. I've always felt safe carrying 9mm.

My concern is that the Shield in particular might be inadequate because it has only a 3.1" barrel. This means less power than 9mms with longer barrels. And I'm not going to use +p because the instruction manual advises against its.

So my question is this: are you aware of any studies/tests that have been conducted to assess whether standard pressure hollow points have enough expansion and penetration from such a short barrel? Thanks for the input.

The real answer to your question is very simple. Would YOU want to be on the business end being shot 7-16 times with it at close range ?

 

[JNewell]

If you are reading the document you linked to in formulating your decision, you need to do more reading from Dr. Roberts. He is totally happy with 9mm in a 3" barrel.

 

[MP1SG]

The Manual advises against +P+ ammo. It does say that "Use of "Plus-P" ammunition may result in the need for more frequest service."

I think a mag or two of +P ammo for a function check accuracy and reliability will be fine.

Just my 2cents

 

[RussC]

Just found this, and it concerns me: Best Choices for Self Defense Ammo. The relevant portion is posted below.


"BARREL LENGTH plays a role in this as well. While +P loadings may not be required in most cases, they can compensate for short barrels and the resulting loss in muzzle velocity. For example: In 9mm, the 124gr Gold Dot is a good choice in barrel lengths of 4" or more. In compact guns of 3.5" or less, a higher-velocity loading would be advised. This is Dr. Roberts take on the issue:
Actually, all our testing has traditionally been done in 4" barrels for 9 mm, .40 S&W, and 4.25" for .45 ACP, although recently most of the organizations we test for have been asking for 5" barrel data for .45 ACP. There is really no difference in performance between a 3.5" and 4" barrel in 9 mm and .40 S&W. In .45 ACP, we see a reasonably significant change in performance going from a 5" to 3.5" or less barrels. Since almost all viable pistols in 9 mm and .40 S&W use 3.5-4.5" barrels, there are no "short barrel" worries for serious end-users. Likewise, almost all .45 ACP platforms worthy of hard use use barrels greater than 4", so again, the short barrel question is moot...Please be aware that if you venture into guns with a barrel length of less than 3.5", you're in uncharted territory."

Your observation that most ballistic tests are done with 4 inch barrels is why I carry Gold Dot 124 grain +P short barrel. The powder in short barrel is designed to burn faster thus reducing the likelihood of powder exiting a short barrel before ignited.

I found a website that did ballistic tests with various barrel lengths and after reading the reports I decided not to purchase any snub nose revolver especially when my +P 9 mm from a 3 inch barrel neatly matched the mule kicking 357 from a 2 inch barrel and don't even look at the 38 from s 2 inch barrel. You will be lucky if the round will generate enough velocity to expand upon contact.

+P is not practice ammo. You will be ok to use in the Shield as defense ammo if you don't make it a habit to fire off multiple rounds at every range trip.

My +P usage in 800 rounds has been 8 rounds or 1% and at more than $1 a round I don't plan to shoot more than 1% +P rounds through my Shield.

Russ

 

[Turnedforgood]

Hornady critical defense is supposed to be designed for short barrels while their city line is for longer barrels.

The difference between Critical DUTY® & Critical DEFENSE® - Hornady Manufacturing, Inc

 

[spfortjohn]

I would not worry about it. If you put holes in the right place it will not matter if it is +P, Hollow Point, or ball ammo. Shot placement is the key.

 

[Wee Hooker]

I would not worry about it. If you put holes in the right place it will not matter if it is +P, Hollow Point, or ball ammo. Shot placement is the key.

Agree, and would add that any decent defense minded 9mm round coming out of a 3" barrel is going to have AT LEAST as much ME as a like designed bullet out of the venerable 2", 38 special "snubby". In most cases, significantly more.

BBTI - Ballistics by the Inch :: 9mm Luger Results

BBTI - Ballistics by the Inch :: .38 Special Results

Learn to place your shots and let physics worry about the rest.

 

[skip4309]

.40 cal or 9mm? Each has their own pluses. The .40 is a bit more snappy than the 9mm. Buy what you feel suits your needs. Shoot, shoot, shoot and train with it until you feel comfortable with it. I chose the 9mm. Ammo is somewhat cheaper and more readily available. The .40 is no better than the 9mm if you cannot place your shots in the kill zone. I carry the Shield9 and I am more than comfortable if I have to use it. The .40 is the better of the two...its just comes down to your confidence level and I prefer the 9mm (Speer Gold Dot 124gr) to do the job!!

The first rule of winning a fight is to have a gun!!!

 

[baccusboy]

This guy has tons of 9mm ammo tests from a small barrel pistol:

Pocket Guns and Gear: April 2012

 

[Number1gun]

My .02 to the OP. does not matter or matters little..gun, calliber, +P..?
You are having the same internal dilemma most of us go through at one time or another. Information overload. First try to determine what you are willing to sacrifice in comfort. Only you can decide what you are willing to put up with and works within your day to day life. If the shield fits this then next is calliber...ok pick one. Learn to shoot pretty well with it and....best wishes. At the normal defense ranges most of the well known bullet styles and commonly used defensive ammo will work just fine. Most likely another 50 foot pounds one way or another will make little difference. Which is right where you are with a stout 9mm at 400 ft/lbs and upper end .40 right at 500 ft/lbs. Terminal Balistics are a ...ch. you can not control it any way. Just stick with more well known loads.

 

[kbm6893]

You think the guy you shot with a 3 inch barrel is going to know the difference between that and a 4 inch barrel? Dead is dead.

 

[robkarrob]

Barrel length is not going to have much effect in short SD situations. What does matter is your ability to react and get reasonable accuracy. Many times it is more a situation of point and pull, versus aiming. At SD distances I don't think anyone would want to get shot with even lower power practice ammo, let alone with modern SD hollow point ammo. Be aware that very few SD shooting have one shot stopping effect. There have been many reports to that issue. Everyone thinks it just going to take one shot to stop, which is not so. There are those that are so sure of their ability that they are going to get one to the head and two to the body. Sounds great but see how your body reacts in a self defense situation. Taking it from the range to an actual SD situation, are completely different. Your body will go into protect mode, and the body movement will not react the same. Practice does help and ingrains the proper technique. Now if the body and mind would just cooperate.

Bob

 

[britgina1095]

The real answer to your question is very simple. Would YOU want to be on the business end being shot 7-16 times with it at close range ?

That is exactly what I was thinking. At the short distance I would be shooting the Shield at in a Self Defense situation the attacker is really not thinking oh he only has a 3 inch barrel not a 5 inch barrel. This won't be so bad.

 

[epj]

Bullet placement. Period. Little else matters.