Shield 45 vs M&P 45c

[shooter1911]

I realize this is a strange comparison question, but I'm asking because my beloved M&P 45c might have to be replaced.

As you can tell from my name I am a 1911 guy, but the only plastic gun I have ever owned is the 45c, and I have to admit I we have really become close friends. The issue I'm having with this incredible shooter is a physical issue to no fault of the gun. It seems that with age my thumb knuckle on my shooting hand has changed to the point the 45c is become painful to shoot. This does not happen with my 1911s due to the use of beaver tails. The 9mm Shield does not hurt me, but I want to stick with a 45.

That's why I'm asking about the Shield and 45c comparison. Any input would be appreciated.

 

[dben002]

I guess a lot depends on usage? CC or no ? M&P 45 in my opinion does not lend itself to CC due to length and weight.

The Shield 45 seems to me perfect for CC in both categories.

Can't say enough good things about my Shield 45, but again never owned the M&P 45. Just know that for me a 7" 40oz gun on or inside my belt is not for me.........

 

[Rastoff]

I don't really understand your thumb issue. However, if the 45c hurts, it's likely the Shield 45 will hurt more.

 

[edubbie]

I guess a lot depends on usage? CC or no ? M&P 45 in my opinion does not lend itself to CC due to length and weight.

The Shield 45 seems to me perfect for CC in both categories.

Can't say enough good things about my Shield 45, but again never owned the M&P 45. Just know that for me a 7" 40oz gun on or inside my belt is not for me.........

Think he's asking about the 45c vs the Shield 45. Looks like the 45c is a tad bit bigger - 4" barrel and 8 rounds in the clip. I visited the S&W site and didn't see much more. I haven't seen a 45c but I thought it was a double stack which is a wider handle. I too have a issue with my right hand from a car accident 35 years ago. I can't get a good grip on a wide handle nor can I disengage any rear handle safeties like on the 1911 or XDs. Funny thing is a narrow handle is somewhat difficult as well. My single stack Kahr P-40 is almost too narrow. This Shield 45 feels perfect for me. I just picked it up yesterday afternoon and have not popped a cap yet but it's got a friendly feel to it for sure.

 

[Bonephish]

That's why I'm asking about the Shield and 45c comparison. Any input would be appreciated.

I have a 9C and a .45 Shield. I like the grip on the Shield better and shoot the .45 as accurately as the 9.

 

[shooter1911]

Think he's asking about the 45c vs the Shield 45. Looks like the 45c is a tad bit bigger - 4" barrel and 8 rounds in the clip. I visited the S&W site and didn't see much more. I haven't seen a 45c but I thought it was a double stack which is a wider handle. I too have a issue with my right hand from a car accident 35 years ago. I can't get a good grip on a wide handle nor can I disengage any rear handle safeties like on the 1911 or XDs. Funny thing is a narrow handle is somewhat difficult as well. My single stack Kahr P-40 is almost too narrow. This Shield 45 feels perfect for me. I just picked it up yesterday afternoon and have not popped a cap yet but it's got a friendly feel to it for sure.

The weight is not a factor as the Shield weighs approx 20 oz, and the 45c weighs 26 oz. after looking closely at all of them, I might need to go with the full size 45 to get the beaver tail. That would bypass that thumb knuckle. My 1911s work perfectly, including my Range Officer Compact with the thin grips. Thank goodness for beaver tails. The Sheild in 9mm is no problem, so maybe I'll consider that one or the full size in 45.

 

[larbike]

.45c vs .45 shield

I own both and I can tell you that the grip on the shield is significantly thinner and transmits more recoil force than the .45 compact. The shield overall thickness is just under an inch and has a single stack mag. The .45 compact is several ounces heavier than the shield and thicker, so the physics dictate that the recoil force will be more concentrated in the shield. I have to say that for a small pistol, the .45 shield is fairly comfortable to shoot, however the wider grip on the .45 compact is more comfortable to shoot overall. It all boils down to what you want to do with the pistol. If you are thinking of concealed carry, the shield is the way to go.

 

[shooter1911]

I own both and I can tell you that the grip on the shield is significantly thinner and transmits more recoil force than the .45 compact. The shield overall thickness is just under an inch and has a single stack mag. The .45 compact is several ounces heavier than the shield and thicker, so the physics dictate that the recoil force will be more concentrated in the shield. I have to say that for a small pistol, the .45 shield is fairly comfortable to shoot, however the wider grip on the .45 compact is more comfortable to shoot overall. It all boils down to what you want to do with the pistol. If you are thinking of concealed carry, the shield is the way to go.

This is some great information, mainly because you own both. I probably didn't make myself clear regarding the issue so let me try again. Recoil is not the issue, the problem is where the gun pounds my boney thumb buckle. When I shot the 9 Shield, I noticed the back strap misses my nuckle due to the thin frame. I'm wondering if the 45 Shield would also be thin enough to miss the nuckle. If so I have a winner to add to my carry rotation. Speaking about recoil, I also carry a 340 PD and that beast totally misses the nuckle, therefore it has nothing to do with recoil.

Unfortunately I haven't been lucky enough to find a 45 Shield in stock to compare. From your experience is the new 45 Shield considerably thinner than the 45c at the frame where it meets the web of your hand?

Your input would help me a lot.

Thanks

 

[berudd]

Really the only way to know for sure it to shot one and see how it goes. Maybe you can find a range in your area that has one for rent.

 

[DHart]

I own both and I can tell you that the grip on the shield is significantly thinner and transmits more recoil force than the .45 compact. The shield overall thickness is just under an inch and has a single stack mag. The .45 compact is several ounces heavier than the shield and thicker, so the physics dictate that the recoil force will be more concentrated in the shield. I have to say that for a small pistol, the .45 shield is fairly comfortable to shoot, however the wider grip on the .45 compact is more comfortable to shoot overall. It all boils down to what you want to do with the pistol.

I very much agree with this.

For my money, the 45C is about as small a platform as I enjoy shooting with .45auto. Great pistol.

If you are thinking of concealed carry, the shield is the way to go.

This part I don't agree with. I find it easy to carry and conceal the 45C. And it's enjoyable to practice with. It also can take the 10-round magazines. More versatile. Longer barrel for a bit better ballistics. Easier to control than the Shield.





The Shield is a little lighter and a little smaller, but lighter and smaller makes for less capacity and not as easy to shoot well. Kind of a big trade off, in my view.

If for some reason you need to go smaller than 45C, down to Shield size, 9mm makes a lot of sense in those little guns - better capacity and easier to shoot well - and quickly.

 

[kthom]

We are all different, with different sized hands. The same gun feels different for different folks. About the only way you can tell what works for you is to handle and shoot different guns. I own a FS M&P .45 with a 4" barrel. It is the easiest shooting .45ACP I've ever shot. It is a pleasure to shoot. I have no experience with the .45C, but I'd guess it would be generally the same size as far as CC goes, less some grip length.

I also own both a 9MM and a .45 Shield. I have shot the 9 extensively and have about 500 rounds through the .45. When shot one after the other, I can tell that the .45 has a bit more recoil than the 9, but I do not find the recoil of either one to be in any way objectionable. If you asked me which one of these guns I'd rather shoot a thousand rounds through, I'd pick the FS .45 in a heartbeat. Ask me which one I'd rather carry every day all day long and still be able to take good care of business, I'd take either one of the Shields. For me, it would depend on whether I felt like carrying the larger or smaller caliber. I have zero problem with either caliber as far as personal protection is concerned. The 9 gives me an extra round over the .45 depending on which mags I use. I generally carry the shorter mag in the gun and the longer one for a back up. I carried six rounds in a Model 19 for very many years on the job, so I'm good with the 6+1 and 7+1 in the .45 Shield, especially since I can reload the semi auto more quickly than the revolver, given that I don't prefer to carry a speedloader for a back up reload.

I really like the grip on the .45 Shield. Yes, the Shield's both have a smaller thinner grip than the FS M&P but I have no problem shooting them well with good shot to shot recovery on each. I think the .45 Shield is an excellent EDC gun, FOR ME! I have fired it enough now that I'm carrying it without concern. It's been completely reliable so far. The shot count through it includes about a hundred premium rounds from among three different brands. The gun is more accurate than I am these days, and it is comfortable to shoot. I've said all this to tell you my experience. I say try to shoot all the guns your are interested in and make your own choice. Recoil and grip size and shootability is a subjective matter. You need to carry what you shoot the best and the gun that fits YOU the best. Only hits count!!

 

[shooter1911]

We are all different, with different sized hands. The same gun feels different for different folks. About the only way you can tell what works for you is to handle and shoot different guns. I own a FS M&P .45 with a 4" barrel. It is the easiest shooting .45ACP I've ever shot. It is a pleasure to shoot. I have no experience with the .45C, but I'd guess it would be generally the same size as far as CC goes, less some grip length.

I also own both a 9MM and a .45 Shield. I have shot the 9 extensively and have about 500 rounds through the .45. When shot one after the other, I can tell that the .45 has a bit more recoil than the 9, but I do not find the recoil of either one to be in any way objectionable. If you asked me which one of these guns I'd rather shoot a thousand rounds through, I'd pick the FS .45 in a heartbeat. Ask me which one I'd rather carry every day all day long and still be able to take good care of business, I'd take either one of the Shields. For me, it would depend on whether I felt like carrying the larger or smaller caliber. I have zero problem with either caliber as far as personal protection is concerned. The 9 gives me an extra round over the .45 depending on which mags I use. I generally carry the shorter mag in the gun and the longer one for a back up. I carried six rounds in a Model 19 for very many years on the job, so I'm good with the 6+1 and 7+1 in the .45 Shield, especially since I can reload the semi auto more quickly than the revolver, given that I don't prefer to carry a speedloader for a back up reload.

I really like the grip on the .45 Shield. Yes, the Shield's both have a smaller thinner grip than the FS M&P but I have no problem shooting them well with good shot to shot recovery on each. I think the .45 Shield is an excellent EDC gun, FOR ME! I have fired it enough now that I'm carrying it without concern. It's been completely reliable so far. The shot count through it includes about a hundred premium rounds from among three different brands. The gun is more accurate than I am these days, and it is comfortable to shoot. I've said all this to tell you my experience. I say try to shoot all the guns your are interested in and make your own choice. Recoil and grip size and shootability is a subjective matter. You need to carry what you shoot the best and the gun that fits YOU the best. Only hits count!!

Good information indeed. You are absolutely right when you say shoot the guns under consideration, and carry what you are most comfortable shooting.

The M&P 45c used to be in the carry rotation, but I have standardized on my 1911s for cc. I like the M&P, but as mentioned, with age (72) my shooting hand has changed which made my 45c uncomfortable. It's not a recoil issue, it's a bony thumb nuckle issue. I will probably consider trading my 45c for a mid size with the beaver tail or sell the gun and consider a Shield in 9 or 45.

Thanks to all for all the comments.

 

[DHart]

It's a blessing that we have such a huge variety of pistols and a few good calibers to choose from. No single platform, nor caliber, is good for everyone, for all applications. But there are good options for every need.

If finances allow, having several choices available for defense purposes and carry duty is nice.

I place a high value on carrying at least mid-size CCW pistols, for the greater capacity and better control that they offer.

The pistol that I prefer to carry when I can't carry a Sig P320, or an M&P40 or M&P45C, thus going with "small", is the M&P40C. 10+1=11 rounds of 180 gr. Federal .40S&W HST. Awesome pistol. Small enough for very easy carry, large enough to shoot very well and quite enjoyably. At this size, higher capacity than .45auto and more power than 9mm. It's the Goldilocks "just right" option of the many (9mm, 40, 45auto, etc.) that I have to choose from in the safe.





But some people can't or won't carry anything but a small single stack. That is certainly much better than carrying a knife! Especially considering that most of us, anyway, are quite unlikely to ever need to pull a carry gun in a defensive situation.

Main thing is be proficient with your choice!

 

[larbike]

Shield .45 vs .45 C grip differences

I measured the grip thicknesses on my shield and .45 compact. Here is what the micrometer calipers showed:

.45 Shield Top of grip = 0.886 inches
.45 Shield bottom of grip = .950 inches

M&P .45 Compact
Top of grip = 1.091 inches
Bottom of grip = 1.157 inches

I snapped some quick pictures of both pistols side by side. Sorry for the poor quality of the pics.

 

[shooter1911]

larbike- that's a tremendous help, and I think you hit the nail on the head. Due to the thickness of the frame of the 45C it rides right on the side of my nuckle as I squeeze the grip, and that's what's causing pain. When I shot my buddies Shield 9mm I noticed it is much thinner at the rear grip, as you have mentioned, therefore the frame does not ride my nuckle. This is also the reasons my 1911s are so comfortable to my grip.

I hate to say it, but I think I'm going to have to sell/trade my 45C for a Shield 45, should I ever get one in my hand. So far no luck, but they will become more available soon.

Thanks for the help. Your comments and picks verified my theory as to a solution.

If you have time please put your calipers right on the end of the little beaver tail under the sights on both guns. This is the guy that smacks my thumb.

Thanks

 

[DHart]

I have been quite tempted to jump on the Shield acquisition band wagon a number of times, but every time I go look at them, hold them, and realize that the difference in size is so little as compared to the M&P Compacts, which have greater capacity and less-felt-recoil, I put my credit card back in my wallet and continue on enjoying carrying my M&P Compacts (M&P45C and M&P40C).

M&P45C


M&P40C

 

[shooter1911]

I have been quite tempted to jump on the Shield acquisition band wagon a number of times, but every time I go look at them, hold them, and realize that the difference in size is so little as compared to the M&P Compacts, which have greater capacity and less-felt-recoil, I put my credit card back in my wallet and continue on enjoying carrying my M&P Compacts (M&P45C and M&P40C).

M&P45C


M&P40C

I always felt that way also, until my 45C began murdering my thumb. Sad story because I love my 45C, but it just doesn't fit my hand anymore. I've always thought the 40C is a great size, but I don't want to reload another caliber. I'm not even sure I need a Shield. My rotation currently consists of a full size Colt Series 70 that has been heavily modified to meet my specs, a SA Range Officer Compact 45, and a S&W 340PD. Needless to say nothing out shoots my 1911s in my hands. How many more does one need in a rotation?

 

[DHart]

I always felt that way also, until my 45C began murdering my thumb. Sad story because I love my 45C, but it just doesn't fit my hand anymore. I've always thought the 40C is a great size, but I don't want to reload another caliber. I'm not even sure I need a Shield. My rotation currently consists of a full size Colt Series 70 that has been heavily modified to meet my specs, a SA Range Officer Compact 45, and a S&W 340PD. Needless to say nothing out shoots my 1911s in my hands. How many more does one need in a rotation?

I totally understand that your changing anatomy is necessitating a change From your beloved M&P45C.

If I were you, being a major 1911 lover, I'd go for a Colt Wiley Clapp Commander. Gives you full size 1911 magazines, 4.25" barrel and is a step up from the SA Compact. Novak combat sights, Commander hammer, beavertail grip safety, and the Pete Single front-strap checkering alone takes this Commander to the top-shelf, in my view. I love mine. They're selling for only a little over $1k.

Since you're already totally bonded to the 1911 platform, this would make a lot of sense for you, would it not?

 

[shooter1911]

The WC Commander is an excellent choice, an I considered one when they hit the market. Instead I sunk a lot of money getting my Series 70 exactly where I wanted it, and it cost more than I anticipated because I had to deal with reliability issues as well as custom features. After spending more than I wanted I purchased the ROC, and with no regrets. I made a few changes like swapping the safety for a Gunsite Lo Mount Safety, and removing the ILS and adding a flat MSH with no lock. As with all of my 1911s I swapped the trigger for a short Videki style. This gun has been 100% reliable after shooting hundreds of 230gr HST, and thousands of rounds of ball ammo. No need for a WC. Mine is smaller, less expensive, and perfect to carry. Which brings me back to the question, why do I need any more plastic guns?

 

[DHart]

The WC Commander is an excellent choice, an I considered one when they hit the market. Instead I sunk a lot of money getting my Series 70 exactly where I wanted it, and it cost more than I anticipated because I had to deal with reliability issues as well as custom features. After spending more than I wanted I purchased the ROC, and with no regrets. I made a few changes like swapping the safety for a Gunsite Lo Mount Safety, and removing the ILS and adding a flat MSH with no lock. As with all of my 1911s I swapped the trigger for a short Videki style. This gun has been 100% reliable after shooting hundreds of 230gr HST, and thousands of rounds of ball ammo. No need for a WC. Mine is smaller, less expensive, and perfect to carry.


Which brings me back to the question, why do I need any more plastic guns?

At this point, it sounds like you don't. Just get on with enjoying what you have.