Shield Plus 3.1 and 4 inch Advice Needed

[S&WGuns]

I need some advice on my next purchase(s). I am trying to decide between the S&W M&P 9mm Shield Plus 2.0 3.1 inch vs. 4 inch ported and non-ported models. The pistol would be for concealed carry. I was able to rent the Shield Plus 3.1 non-ported but no ranges have the other models to rent.

I would greatly appreciate any opinions on the differences between the 3.1 inch and 4 inch: 1) Regarding recoil and accuracy etc.? 2) Do the ported models reduce recoil significantly and are ported barrels safe for concealed carry, e.g., when shooting from retention? I ask since I keep meeting many people who are carrying ported handguns for self-defense.

Thanks, and have a nice day.

 

[gunny4053]

While I haven't had the Shield Plus, I have had Shields both 1.0 and 2.0, as well as both ported and non-ported models with the 3.1" barrels. I haven't had a 9mm version of the PC 4" Shield, but currently have one in .45acp

Let me start by saying any Shield you choose will serve you well. They are very accurate and soft shooting firearms. The Plus versions give you the advantage of larger capacity, and it's rumored they have a somewhat improved trigger. Beyond that, there isn't that much difference between them and the 2.0 models.

As for porting, I've had both and wouldn't hesitate to carry a ported gun. The stories about huge flashes from the ports and being more difficult to clean are highly exaggerated. Proper ammo reduces any issues you might encounter as far as flash.

Now, the 4" PC version is great. Better trigger, better balance, just as if not more accurate than its predecessors. They can be had ported, non-ported, and with or without red dot optics. The PC's are a real step above.

Good luck in your search.

 

[S&WGuns]

While I haven't had the Shield Plus, I have had Shields both 1.0 and 2.0, as well as both ported and non-ported models with the 3.1" barrels. I haven't had a 9mm version of the PC 4" Shield, but currently have one in .45acp

Let me start by saying any Shield you choose will serve you well. They are very accurate and soft shooting firearms. The Plus versions give you the advantage of larger capacity, and it's rumored they have a somewhat improved trigger. Beyond that, there isn't that much difference between them and the 2.0 models.

As for porting, I've had both and wouldn't hesitate to carry a ported gun. The stories about huge flashes from the ports and being more difficult to clean are highly exaggerated. Proper ammo reduces any issues you might encounter as far as flash.

Now, the 4" PC version is great. Better trigger, better balance, just as if not more accurate than its predecessors. They can be had ported, non-ported, and with or without red dot optics. The PC's are a real step above.

Good luck in your search.

Thanks for the information I found it quite helpful and appreciate your responding to my post. I am curious if you ever shot the ported versions from retention? Some fellow gun folks that I know claim the blast from the ports will burn you if one shoots a ported gun from retention. Thanks.

 

[gunny4053]

Not sure I understand what you mean by shooting from retention.

Are you talking about something like shooting from a pocket? In that case, you're no more likely to get burnt from the ports than you are from the muzzle blast. Realistically, if you're defending yourself, being burnt by the port blast is the least of your worries.

If you're saying shooting from the holster, forgive me for being blunt, but that's just stupid. Carrying in a holster that gives you access to the trigger without un-holstering is not only stupid, but incredibly unsafe.

If the ports are that much of a concern, don't get a gun with them. I find I shoot my Shields, with or without ports, equally well.

 

[S&WGuns]

Shooting from Retention is a term used in all the firearm classes I attended. The gun is pointed forward, one's elbow is behind oneself to the side, one's forearm is parallel to the floor. The inner side of one's wrist is near but to the side of one's rib cage. One's arm is an about a 90 degree position. Best that I can explain it.

 

[gunny4053]

Now I understand. Unless you're doing this wearing gym shorts and naught but your bare skin protecting your ribs, I doubt it would be an issue. To be honest, I get more muzzle blast shooting CCI Stingers from my 22 than I see with my ported guns. This again points to proper ammo selection. Since the Shields only have two small ports, one on each side of the barrel, there's only one port to be concerned with. Based on your description, this should place the muzzle forward of your stomach, hence the port as well.

 

[sotexas]

Own both and have zero issues. Really it's your call on your preferences

 

[MSD2343]

I’m a big Shield fan, having owned and carried the 1.0, 2.0, and now the Plus 3.1 inch which I have 5k rounds through and is my daily carry. I’ve long thought about moving up to the 4 inch (non-ported) but the quoted weight by S&W has kept me from doing so. The 3.1 inch Plus is quoted on Smith’s website as having a weight of 17.9 ounces while the 4 inch is quoted at a whopping and hard to believe 23.8 ounces.

I can’t imagine how less than an inch of barrel and slide length could possibly add that much weight. All the major shotgun manufacturers quote a two ounce weight gain for adding two inches to an over & under shotgun. So how does adding less than an inch to a barrel and slide possibly create a gain of nearly six ounces, making the four inch model a full one-third heavier?

So my question to those who own both lengths: Does the 4 inch model really feel that much heavier?

 

[gunny4053]

I just looked at S&W's website and they have the "4 PC Shield 9 listed at 20.9 oz, the same as the PC Shield 3.1 9. What's odd is listing the Plus at 17.9 oz. A gun with a slightly larger grip and by default a slightly larger magazine. The 4" OR PC Shield .45 is listed at 23.8 oz and the non-OR 4" Shield .40 is listed at 48.8 oz. I think someone's scales are a bit off. I have the 4" PC ported Shield .45, and the difference between it and my Shield 9 1.0 is mainly the weight of the ammo. The 4" Shield carries fine for me.

 

[Infidel137]

I have a 4" Shield Plus (13252) which weighs 22.9 ounces including a 10-round magazine with a Pearce grip extension, 23.2 ounces with a factory 13-round magazine.

 

[MikeNV]

For the OP, I would recommend reading S&W's warning on firing ported barrel pistols in close proximity to any part of the body (screen shot attached). I realize they have to take a very conservative position for liability reasons, but they specifically mention not firing from a retention position.

With that said, I own two ported Performance Center pistols, a M&P 9 Shield 2.0 with 3.1" barrel, and an M&P 9 Shield Plus with 4" barrel. I also have other M&P pistols that are not PC or ported, including a 9 Shield Plus with 3.1" barrel. Both ported pistols shoot well and as accurately as my old hands can control them. There is definitely less recoil and muzzle rise from the ported ones. How much is hard to quantify and somewhat of a personal opinion. I have seen analytical tests that show recoil and muzzle rise is about 30% less across the same model gun. You can google it and see there has been a lot of testing. You should also know that porting can lower muzzle velocity as much as 5% - probably not a significant factor.

Of all my pistols, my favorite carry gun is the M&P 9 Shield 2.0 with 3.1" barrel, the PC ported one. It's lighter weight, limited to 7 or 8 rounds, but easier to conceal. My 4" PC has an optic and is just a larger, heavier gun, especially with a 13 or 15 round magazine. I like shooting it but not carrying it. You can see the holstered size difference below.

As for safety when carrying, fortunately, I've never had to use mine in self-defense. I also don't believe in shooting from the hip. So as long as you can get your weapon out of the holster extend your arms to get it away from your face, it shouldn't be a problem.

 

[Telecaster]

I’ve owned a gaggle of M&Ps and I wouldn’t call any of them accurate. Combat accurate, sure. But if you want to shoot tiny groups I’d look elsewhere. Maybe that’s just me, though.

The 4” Shield with the new style trigger is a great gun, otherwise. The regular size Shield is good too, maybe more concealabe.

 

[Groo01]

Groo here
I have many ported pistols, some are called "Revolvers"
If you are ok with a revolver from retention don't think about an auto
as auto ports are way out on the barrel not at the cylinter.
I always though this was much to do about nothing unless your gun spits lead.

 

[Marshal Tom]

If shooting a ported gun from retention, all you have to do is slightly cant the gun away from your body when firing and it should work just fine. A revolver held close to the body or fired from inside a coat pocket would be the same issue, just use caution.

 

[TM44]

I own a 5" 9L core performance center ported. Never again. First I don't believe the porting does much at all to reduce flip in 9mm. Second, the porting results in the front of the gun becoming filthy in only a few mags. It actually obscures the front site. Not a problem for carry only but a pain for a range gun. This gun is the most inaccurate hand gun I've ever owned. Throws a 9" "pattern" at 25 yards and that's with it bench rested. It's bad when your 3" Shield is way more accurate than your 5" "performance center". Smith & Wesson thinks that's in spec. They returned it with a target that had a vertical string 2.25" shot at ten yards. Did nothing to the gun even though the barrel rattled in the slide. The solution to both problems was a Apex barrel. Front end stays clean and now shoots a group under 2 inch benched.