Shield killer

otis24

Member
Joined
Feb 14, 2004
Messages
2,125
Reaction score
1,930
Location
Central SD USA
I've read some reviews of Glocks new offerings. If I were looking for a new pistol (I'm not) I would take a look at Glocks. Of part of interest is the Glock Model 45 (9mm) and the Glock 43x.

The Glock 43X offers 10+1 magazine capacity but still remains a very slim profile. Some writers are calling it a Shield killer. I presume because of the increased capacity. The one thing they don't factor in is price. From what I've seen online, it is pushing the $550 range. I can purchase a new Shield for $350.

I suppose there are a significant number of gun buyers that can go out and buy every new gun that comes out. And maybe the guy or gal that will have only one gun will shell out the extra dough. Were I in the market, price alone would push me towards the Shield. I don't see the Glock offering enough advantages over the Shield to justify THAT high of a price.

Shield killer? Probably not. It may force S&W to upgrade the Shield perhaps?
 
Register to hide this ad
I own a G43 which is a great little pistol. I shot my new Shield 2.0 9mm today, wow! This pistol just feels right in my hand and is very accurate for its size. I fed it 115g and 147g hollow points, it eat it all. For the money, I do not see how you can beat it. I saw a G43x for $448, which is still $43 more than my Shield with three mags and factory night sights.
 
I am looking at this a bit different with Glocks new Model 48. The 43X frame and a 4" barrel. IMHO; I think the Glock 48 will be popular, and a good seller because it is thin, has a 4" barrel and holds 10 +1. I am not a fan of Glocks in general because they feel like a 2X4 in my hand, and although I have not personally seen or handled the new Glock 48, from what I have seen on line, it looks desirable. For folks that are not a LEO, and/or live in a magazine restricted state, this pistol make a lot of sense. I for one am not a fan of these tiny pistols and prefer a 4" barrel for ballistic performance instead of "How short of a barrel can you get" and 10 rounds is acceptable for the average concealed carrier. Full disclosure, I do currently own and usually carry the Shield in 9mm but have opined for something a little larger in a single stack. Now with all this said, once I get the 48 in my hand, I may have a different opinion, but for today, the 48 looks great!
 
Saudade, I like your assessment. Probably lots of truth to this. Not knocking, Glocks. I like some of their concepts. As a matter of fact, I had never considered a Tupperware pistol until I purchased my Shield. I was an all steel handgun type of guy. I finally reasoned that Glocks had been around forever and had held up well and had proven reliable. This convinced me to consider a "plastic pistol". I chose the Shield over the Glock due to better ergonomics and price.
 
I have a Shield 9mm 1.0...10+1 mags and a 3.6 polished stainless steel barrel...how can that be you might ask(?)...lots of money is how...$800+. I like my Shield...if you like your Glock...good for you.
 
I have a fair number of Glocks too. I appreciate their simplicity and reliability. I'm not a rabid fan. I currently carry my 9mm Shield V1 more than anything else. It's been my experience over the years that Glock is the most reliable full size duty gun and compact. Smiths polymer guns haven't always been as reliable. However, the Shield is a keeper. Maybe the other newer M&Ps are too. I don't have any experience with them.
 
I've read some reviews of Glocks new offerings. If I were looking for a new pistol (I'm not) I would take a look at Glocks. Of part of interest is the Glock Model 45 (9mm) and the Glock 43x.

The Glock 43X offers 10+1 magazine capacity but still remains a very slim profile. Some writers are calling it a Shield killer. I presume because of the increased capacity. The one thing they don't factor in is price. From what I've seen online, it is pushing the $550 range. I can purchase a new Shield for $350.

I suppose there are a significant number of gun buyers that can go out and buy every new gun that comes out. And maybe the guy or gal that will have only one gun will shell out the extra dough. Were I in the market, price alone would push me towards the Shield. I don't see the Glock offering enough advantages over the Shield to justify THAT high of a price.

Shield killer? Probably not. It may force S&W to upgrade the Shield perhaps?

Palmetto State Armory will sell you a NIB 9mm Shield for $249.99 right now.
 
LOL... Yet you have the Signess!!
Yes, the SiGness goes back to the days Pre-Cohen when the "To Hell and Back Reliability" was not just a slogan. The old handle has stuck over the years but on my side as I type is my new Shield 2.0 9mm. Put 68 test rounds through it today including 147g hollow points and it ate it all.

I did also fire my G17 Gen 3, amazing, accurate pistol. If the SHTF the G17 would be my Secondary Weapon of choice.
 
Is there a more unimaginative gun company than Glock? For a product that started its life as innovative, it's been stuck in neutral ever since. I'm not a Glock hater. They are good guns, but there are better guns for less money, IMHO.
 
I prefer the standard Glock 43 over the Shield. The 43X doesn't appeal to me.
 
I've never seen the appeal for small pistols with long grips for Concealed Carry.
1. The grip is what people seem to have the most problem with, when concealing.
2. A sort barrel with a long grip just feels awkward (and looks strange {even though looks should not be an issue with defensive pistols})

I have no problem concealing my G19 and I would think the G48 (as a 'G19 Slim') might be a better option than the G43X.

Glock seems to be targeting the Nanny States that restrict Mag Capacity to 10 rounds and little more. If I were to travel to one of those States (and take my Glock, rather than my Shield), I'd get a couple 10 round G19 mags, rather than buy a G48.

Shield Killer??? I seriously doubt it.... Grip Length, Comfort, Price...
and with the MagGuts Z-Spring kit, the Shield holds 10 rounds.
 
Last edited:
Many years ago I sent Gaston Glock a letter and told him that he was missing the boat, that he needed to produce a single stack pistol and discribed what is now the 43 type of pistol for concealment and for those with smaller hands that did't need or want the thickness of the 17/19. I never heard anything back from this and it was years before Glock produced a single stack.
 
While I'm guessing that Marshal Tom's post was in jest, here's a bit of background as to why Glock 'waited so long' to get into the Single-Stack market.

'Many years ago'
, Glock did not manufacture pistols in the U.S.A. and was required to meet a minimum score on the Import Points scale. At that time, the G26 with 'adjustable target sights' (which were cheap/flimsy and quickly replaced once received by U.S. distributors) was the smallest pistol they could import. See this file: https://www.atf.gov/file/61591/download

Now that Glock also manufactures (frames, barrels and slides) in the U.S.A., the ATF Import Points no longer apply.
 
Last edited:
As Smith was late to the party with the 2.0 Compact (basically the same size as the Glock 19 and the gun they should've made initially) Glock is now trying to get in on the market of the Shield-smart move, don't blame them.

I'm one of those guys that can't get any model of Glock to feel right in my hand, love their reliability, but they don't work for me. I really appreciate the M&Ps especially the 2.0 versions.

One of my local shops has the 43X and the 48. I really wanted to like the 48 but the backstrap just positions the gun wrong for me.
 
Back
Top