Shield 40 vs 45acp

[DHart]

Absolutely. Real world is NOTHING like standing at the range on a balmy Saturday afternoon slowly and carefully squeezing off rounds trying to make a perfect little group.

As for Shield vs. Compact. Of course the Shield is going to be a smidgen more comfortableto carry because it's, what 1/4" thinner than a Compact and a couple of ounces lighter? And if that little bit is more important to someone than having higher capacity and a somewhat more controllable weapon... Go for it and train like real-world situations. Your life, your choices, enjoy!

 

[kannonvaggon]

Yep, I'm just mostly not a big fan of the .40 shield. I never did like shooting .357s much either. I don't care for that particular type of muzzle flip for some reason although I like the .44 mag and .50 AE mag just fine.
I "like" to shoot the 9mm Shield and I also like the .45acp Shield but I do NOT "like" the .40 Shield. Just a personal taste thing probably....

 

[old-school]

"Of course the Shield45 is going to be a smidgen more comfortableto carry than a Compact 45"- and that why it is allways wih me and not home in the safe!!

 

[DHart]

Eenie meenie miney mo

 

[edubbie]

You know there are about as many opinions and tastes out there as there are gun manufacturer models. Any one of them from a .22 short to a .50 cal can stop a threat (or not). That's what makes this so wonderful. There does seem to be quite the following for the Shield and momentum for the Shield 45, which I happen to be part of, but just like with automobiles, everyone has slightly different tastes. I would never try to talk another person out of one over another. Just like when my wife asks "why do you need another gun?", my 2 responses are "it has nothing to do with need" and "why for you need another purse?".

 

[CoMF]

I'm a little late to the discussion, but the "mighty" .45 is pretty tame out of the M&P Shield. S&W really did their homework on the ergonomics and optimally matching spring rates, the result of which is a concealable pistol that is not at all punishing to shoot.

It's the old "brisk snap" versus "modest push" kind of deal. And honestly, you can do a lot worse than the .45 ACP in such a small platform. (Try 10mm or .357 Sig on for size!)

The only caveat to firing such a heavy round out of a stubby, muzzle light pistol is muzzle rise; you can't cheat the laws of physics. My particular .45 Shield is superbly accurate, but I find controlled pairs to be somewhat of a challenge. Fortunately, the Shield is easy enough on the shooter that dedicated practice is very much possible.

As for ammo of choice, I'm a big fan of Federal HST. Even from a 3.3" barrel, it still seems to be within a sufficient enough velocity envelope to still expand after passing through heavy cloth.

Side note: I'm not even really a big fan of the .45 ACP, but I acknowledge how well it "works" in this particular pistol.

 

[dben002]

Eenie meenie miney mo

Sorry, Eenie meenie and miney are looking tall .......I missed Mo...he must have left before I got here.

 

[DHart]

Sorry, Eenie meenie and miney are looking tall .......I missed Mo...he must have left before I got here.

You're right. Actually, I have Meenie, Miney, and Mo.... Eenie missed out on the photo session, but I'll get him in the next one!

 

[DHart]

Eenie, Meanie, Miney, Mo... 10, 45, 40, 9

I keep these rounds as "desk decor" on my desk. They're enjoyable to look at.



I carry .40S&W most of the time, and have a G21SF 45 with light on the nightstand. Every once in a while I'll exercise some 10mm and 9mm, but they are not my favorite calibers.

 

[PSC617]

I went back and forth in trying to decide between the Shield 40 and 45. The only reason I slid toward the 45 was because of the equal capacity and I actually like the feel of the bigger frame on the 45. Otherwise...I love the 40, I shoot it extremely well and have put thousands of rounds down range with my EDC firearms -- all 40. Albeit there is snap, I'm not old, nor scared, nor weak wristed nor concerned with saving the extra dollars with the 9mm.

I just feel better punching bigger holes into center mass. End of story. Good luck.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[DHart]

The key to a pleasurable experience shooting .40S&W is to choose the 180 gr loads. And when it comes to choosing a platform, pass on the platforms that were initially 9mm, then modified to accommodate .40S&W (like the Glocks). If you shoot 180 gr loads from dedicated .40S&W platforms (like the M&Ps, Sig P320, PPQ, HK, and others) shooting .40S&W is not only enjoyable, but shows what a great blend of capacity (from the 9mm side) and potency (from the .45auto side) that the .40S&W caliber creates. For me, .40S&W is the "Goldilocks" caliber with just the right blend of power and capacity. Where people go wrong with .40S&W is in choosing a platform that handles forty poorly (Glocks) and choosing 155 and 165 gr loads.

Another benefit that the .40S&W has is that (along with 9mm) it performs well even from very short barrels, where .45auto has a more difficult time in maintaining great terminal ballistics. I like .45auto from a 5", even a 4.25" barrel. But when you get down close to a 3" barrel, .45auto is more challenged than .40S&W and 9mm are.

 

[snowman.45]

.40 for two reasons.

U can have a 9mm barrel for it. And get both in 1 gun.

Plus most grown men can't handle the recoil of the .40. So they get a 9mm. Which means there no use for a .45acp with more recoil.

Recoil in the .45? The .40 S&W is snappier than .45 ACP ever thought about being. I've shot both. The .45 is easily better. IMHO, with significantly less muzzle flip.

 

[CoMF]

I like .45auto from a 5", even a 4.25" barrel. But when you get down close to a 3" barrel, .45auto is more challenged than .40S&W and 9mm are.

Ehh, not quite.

What the 230 gr. lacks in velocity from that stubby 3.3" barrel, it more than makes up for in sectional density.

There are also a few loads that work just fine from a short barrel that can be realistically expected to expand after passing through heavy clothing while penetrating a minimum of 12" The ones that immediately spring to mind are Federal HST, Speer Gold Dot (non short barrel), and Winchester Ranger-T. With the exception of perhaps the third, these are rounds that are readily available; no exotic "boutique" ammo necessary.

 

[DHart]

Ehh, not quite.

What the 230 gr. lacks in velocity from that stubby 3.3" barrel, it more than makes up for in sectional density.

There are also a few loads that work just fine from a short barrel that can be realistically expected to expand after passing through heavy clothing while penetrating a minimum of 12" The ones that immediately spring to mind are Federal HST, Speer Gold Dot (non short barrel), and Winchester Ranger-T. With the exception of perhaps the third, these are rounds that are readily available; no exotic "boutique" ammo necessary.

Ehh, whatever.

Make sure you run your trusted rounds and that stubby short barrel through a chrony to be sure your velocity hasn't dropped below the optimal velocity window that your chosen carry round was designed to perform properly at.

230 gr. HST, Gold Dot, and Ranger are among the very best choices with a 5" barrel. They were designed to perform optimally with a muzzle velocity of around 870 fps, which can be obtained with a 5" barrel! Not that I would want to stand in front of them coming from a 3" barrel, either.

Of course, these little Shield pistols are primarily designed for close range use. They are not "service pistols". At longer ranges, your velocity is going to suck with .45. But up close and in-your-face personal, they can get the job done.

OP asked about the "Best" performing .45auto loads with super short barrels. They would be Barnes all-copper. And those babies are really going to cost you!

But you carry what you like and I'll do the same. And we'll be ok leaving it at that.

 

[DHart]

Recoil in the .45? The .40 S&W is snappier than .45 ACP ever thought about being. I've shot both. The .45 is easily better. IMHO, with significantly less muzzle flip.

180 gr. .40S&W loads are not harsher than 230 gr. .45auto loads - assuming the same platform. You will feel more recoil from that 230 gr. .45 than you will from the 180 gr. .40S&W. I shoot both of these on a regular basis.

 

[DHart]

....Also for the 45, because of the short barrel what ammo is best for cc ?

Best? With the short barrel, the best performing loads are going to be the Barnes loads, like the 160 gr. Barnes. This is what I would load with if I had to carry a .45 with a 3.3" barrel:

BUFFALO-BARNES 45 ACP LOW RECOIL, STANDARD PRESSURE Pistol & Handgun Ammunition

 

[CoMF]

But you carry what you like and I'll do the same. And we'll be ok leaving it at that.

I'll stick with my HST, thanks.

Handgun Self-Defense Ammunition - Ballistic Testing Data

Handgun Wounding Factors and Effectiveness

 

[Maxshield]

HSTs expand to .875" in gel, with the nastiest Death Star I've seen. Have not seen any tests where they failed to. Plus more than adequate penetration

Definitely my choice

 

[Arik]

The key to a pleasurable experience shooting .40S&W is to choose the 180 gr loads. And when it comes to choosing a platform, pass on the platforms that were initially 9mm, then modified to accommodate .40S&W (like the Glocks). If you shoot 180 gr loads from dedicated .40S&W platforms (like the M&Ps, Sig P320, PPQ, HK, and others) shooting .40S&W is not only enjoyable, but shows what a great blend of capacity (from the 9mm side) and potency (from the .45auto side) that the .40S&W caliber creates. For me, .40S&W is the "Goldilocks" caliber with just the right blend of power and capacity. Where people go wrong with .40S&W is in choosing a platform that handles forty poorly (Glocks) and choosing 155 and 165 gr loads.

Another benefit that the .40S&W has is that (along with 9mm) it performs well even from very short barrels, where .45auto has a more difficult time in maintaining great terminal ballistics. I like .45auto from a 5", even a 4.25" barrel. But when you get down close to a 3" barrel, .45auto is more challenged than .40S&W and 9mm are.

Not sure where the Glock and 40 is an issue. The only one I know for a fact that was designed around the 40 was HK. Their USP and P2000. Thousands of G22/23 out there with no issues. Early on they had so.e problems but that was what...25 years ago? Been shooting my G22 for years. Took it to many classes. Don't see an issue

Recoil and loads are different to each person. I find no problems with 155/165/180. They all shoot and feel about the same TO ME. On Sunday I took a brand new gun to the range and for comparison brought a 40. The new gun was a USP45c and the 40 was an HK P2000. Both fairly easy to shoot, recoil was about the same....to me! Ammo was a mix of stuff. Did 250 rounds of 45, 200 rounds of 40 and finished of with 500 rounds of 9 from my carry gun.

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

 

[DHart]

.45 HST is my choice as well... It is an awesome choice with barrel lengths for which it was designed (5"). Not so bad from 4". With 3" barrels, and especially at longer range, don't expect it to perform as well as it does with a 5" barrel.

I wouldn't want to stand in front of it from ANY barrel. But what you guys are missing is the reduced velocities from stubby barrel lengths. Chances are you'll never need to use the gun anyway, so it probably doesn't matter anyway. Use a 2.5" barrel with .45acp if you really want to; I don't care what you choose.

Mdad asked what the BEST load out of the short 3.3" barrel is. And while HST is awesome from a 5" barrel, it is not the "BEST" from a 3.3" barrel. Barnes is. Got it now?