Shield 9mm to 45acp, did you or would you?

[Nonuthin]

Back to the OP's question. I have one of each. My Shield 9 has 5200 rounds through it, and my Shield .45 has 3000. I can say unequivocally that the .45 is the better gun, and it's the one I carry. I'm not going to get into the ballistics argument about which round is a better stopper, because shot placement trumps all of that. Shot placement is better with the .45 because it is significantly more accurate than the 9. I might go so far as to say that it is astonishingly more accurate, considering that it has a barrel that is only .2 of an inch longer than the 9's. At 15 yards, I routinely place 65-70% of my shots from my .45 into a 4"x4" square. My 9 is less consistent with its accuracy, so I average a hit rate of about 45%. My .45 carries as easily, conceals well, and its longer grip makes it easier to pull from my holster. There's little difference in felt recoil. The 9's only advantage, as far as I'm concerned, is its capacity. If you have a 9 and it shoots well for you, and you like having that extra round, that's fine. But if you're looking for improvement in accuracy, check out the .45.

Same experience, far fewer rounds. 100% agree.
I keep my Shield 9 for the Apocalypse, I carry my Shield 40, but my Shield 45 is the MUCH more accurate gun and easier to place shots.
To each his/her/it's own.

 

[river251]

I have the 9 and don't plan to switch to 45. Nothing against 45 but I'd prefer the extra capacity of the 9 and I don't think that the 45 offers the advantages in terminal ballistics that some ascribe to, particularly in short barreled pistols.

Even though I'm fine with the function of my 9 Shield, ultratec00 makes some good points specifically about the 45 Shield that seem worth considering.

I'm not sure when the data was posted on Lucky Gunner, maybe it was after you posted this in '16 so was not available. But they show with a Kahr CS45, 3.64" barrel, very good effect with several types of .45 ammo, including penetration and expansion. The Kahr barrel apparently delivers the rounds with enough energy to cause them to expand, or penetrate, or both. That's gel of course. But wouldn't this suggest that the ballistics are still good with .45? Of course 9mm also shows good results, but so does even .380 so maybe gel isn't the final answer, but I question whether some .45 rounds aren't pretty effective in the Shield.

 

[river251]

Groo here
' The 9 mm lives on FPS , needed to open the HP.
The shorter the barrel, the harder it gets to get the magic 1000 fps needed.
The 45 , being larger, need not expand at all.
Also the larger bore looses less FPS by % than the smaller one.
This is why ,on my short barrel guns, I tend to use Flat point
or fpfmj bullets and I don't expect them to open.......

Does the larger bore lose a smaller percentage of its muzzle velocity than the smaller bore? Wonder why. Anyone know where there is a formula for calculating muzzle velocity?

 

[river251]

I own the Shield 9mm and there is no way I would switch to the .45 ACP.
It's true when talking about FMJ rounds the .45 ACP would be more effective, but this is really only applicable to military applications because expanding/flattening rounds are banned by the Hague Convention of 1899 (which means JHP aren't allowed).
However with regards to modern ammunition design, a 9mm JHP round made by a quality munitions company (Federal's HST rounds for example) is JUST as effective as a .45 JHP round when it comes to the requirements for stopping a threat (proper penetration depth of between 12-18 inches, proper expansion, proper expansion after passing through clothing, obstacles, etc.).
So that said, I cannot see any reason to switch to a larger, heavier round. I can carry more 9mm, it weighs less, and it's less expensive to purchase for practice. And on a side note, the 9mm kicks a lot less in a small polymer carry gun like the Shield (especially if you use the 147 grain rounds, and AmmoQuest tested the 147 grain Federal HST, it performed perfectly).

This assumes that the FBI requirements fully capture everything that stops an attacker. But imagine a 4" canon ball that penetrates to 8 inches and does not expand at all (under the FBI requirements ). Would it be more effective than an HST 9mm?

 

[Popeye77]

Does the larger bore lose a smaller percentage of its muzzle velocity than the smaller bore? Wonder why. Anyone know where there is a formula for calculating muzzle velocity?

It's not so much bore dia. as it is the weight and mass of the bullet. Heavier bullets retain velocity better. Also the higher velocity the round the greater the percentage of velocity loss in relation to barrel length.

 

[ken158]

Started with the Shield 9 and "fixed it" with Apex and fiber optics. Bought a 40 and didn't care for it. Traded for a 45 PC and like it a lot! The 9 and 45 are keepers.

 

[shotguntom]

I own both, but prefer the Shield 45. Not saying Shield 9 is a slouch, but I've found the 45 to be more accurate, better trigger pull out of the box, and conceals the same.

Same here. I own both and feel out of the box the 45 is a better choice

 

[Fulton722]

For those folks commenting that the Shield 45 has a better trigger "out of the box" when compared to a Shield 9, are you comparing the 45 with the Shield 9, 1.0 or 2.0 ?

 

[FloridaS&W]

Well, it's kind of a zombie-thread, like many on this forum. When the thread started there was no 2.0 9mm. The 45 Shield will always be the original 2.0. So now it's 2018 and the triggers are essentially the same on the newer Shields.

 

[Brannon]

I have a Shield in 9,40 and 45. Well, actually my wife has the Shield PC in 9. I have the 40 and 45. My 40 isf the 1 generation, although I did get a 40 in the 2.0 generation, which is a better shooting of the two 40s. I must say out of all the Shields, the 45 is my most favorite. I just like the recoil pulse of the 45 over the rest of them. There is just something about the 45 that just feels like coming home again. But, I will keep the 40s, and my wife will keep her 9. Why not have them all, right. But for me, the 45 is my favorite. Im just more accurate with it, and again, I prefer the recoil pulse of the 45. Thats the one I CCW the most out of them all. Its a keeper for sure.

 

[Brannon]

Yes, a 45 can knock a person down, and so can a 22, 380, 9, 40. etc. Its all about SHOT PLACEMENT people. Its been said and proven time and time again. The Caliber does not matter. Its where you place the freakin shot.

 

[Brannon]

If you are more accurate with the 9, shoot the 9. If you are more accurate with the 40, then shoot the 40. If you are more accurate with the 45, then shoot the 45. If you have all three, and can shoot them accurately, keep and shoot them. Its nice to swap up your CCW carry every now and then. Saying that one is better or more accurate then the other, is here say. Its what you like, and are more comfortable shooting. Some people like the 9, some the 40, some the 45. One is not better then the other when it comes down to it. Me, myself and I, having all three at my disposal, like the 45 out of all of them, but thats just me. I just like the recoil pulse, the size, the trigger, and the over all larger feel of the Shield 45, and thats what makes it better for me. Then again, thats just me, and what I have come to realize after owning and shooting all three caliber SHIELDS. To each his/her own. Shoot what you like, and like what you shoot.

 

[joeintexas]

I have the 9 and the 40, I tend to carry the 40 more often. I have considered the 45 mostly because that is the caliber I have been the most accurate with for over 40 years. I guess I'm from the old school but if I were told I only had one shot and could pick any handgun caliber I would take the 45acp or 357 mag over a smaller round. Shoot whatever you feel most comfortable with.

 

[45FMJoe]

I had a 9 and sold it for a 45. I like it a lot, but I would like to get a 2.0 Shield in 9mm as well.

 

[GKC]

I started out with the Shield 45, and then went to a 2.0 Compact 9, and now I've gone to a Shield 2.0 9mm, for my carry gun. I use Hornady CD as my SD ammo, and I'm satisfied that with shot placement, it will be an effective SD gun.

Make no mistake, I'm still a fan of .45 ACP, and it's what my 1911 is chambered in.

 

[Well Armed]

I have the Shield in 9mm, 40, and two 45s (regular and PC)... The 45 is my favorite. Keep the other two calibers, but do not carry them. The 45's ever so slightly longer grip feels better in my hand, and I prefer the size as well. I'll eventually will sell the 9mm and 40. I already replaced the 9mm with a Walther PPS M2 which is a much nicer and better shooting gun than the Shield....

 

[SATX]

I have the Shield in 9mm, 40, and two 45s (regular and PC)... The 45 is my favorite. Keep the other two calibers, but do not carry them. The 45's ever so slightly longer grip feels better in my hand, and I prefer the size as well. I'll eventually will sell the 9mm and 40. I already replaced the 9mm with a Walther PPS M2 which is a much nicer and better shooting gun than the Shield....

I did the same exact thing, owned all three calibers and now only own the 45. The wife still has a 9. The 45 feels great in the hand and is the accurate for me.

 

[Ken43]

I had a Shield in 9mm. I gave it to my daughter, and bought a Shield in .45. The 9 was a good gun, but the .45 shoots better and I feel more comfortable with the .45. But that is just me. Carry and shoot which ever caliber you can handle and like.

 

[Lab4Us]

There is some data here https://www.luckygunner.com/labs/self-defense-ammo-ballistic-tests/ that indicates brand and weight of ammunition is a bigger factor than .45 vs 9mm, at least when it comes to penetration and over penetration. All out of short barreled handguns!

That said, I had a Shield gen 1 9mm that I traded off long ago. Picked up a .45 PC Shield this year that I absolutely love. In fact, just ordered some Hi Viz lite pipe replacements (lost front last range trip and didn't realize it until home).

 

[imcrazy]

I used to think that 45 acp was the king of defensive calibers so I carried a 1911 for many years in 45 acp... Now based on my research of terminal ballistics I think that 9mm has enough power, 45 acp has a little more power but, not enough more power to justify the decreased capacity... I can get 70% rounds in a fullsize handgun by switching to 9mm over 45 acp... Obviously not the same difference in the shield but, the extra rounds in my opinion outweigh the extra weight and diameter of the 45 acp plus, less recoil = quicker recovery time and more shots on target in a given time which quite possibly = ending the threat faster...

Now w/ that said I think 45 acp is worth the trade off if you're in bear territory hiking...