Should I Replace My G43 With a Shield?
- Thread starter vjp
- Start date
Before I purchased my single stack 9mm I tried the Shield, G43, XDs, and PPS M2 side by side at LGS range. I didn't like the way the 43 felt in my hands, so I didn't buy it. The XDs was nice but I didn't like the grip safety. I bought the Shield and PPS M2. I recently sold the Shield 9 not because I didn't like it, but because I got the Shield 45 and someone offered me a good price for the 9. The Shield 45 is about the same size, has the same capacity, but packs a bigger pop. I kept the PPS M2 as my single stack 9mm.
Seriously OT, but every time I see G43, I think of this:
(The rifle in the middle.)
Can't help it. It was my first German rifle, bought way back in high school.
Makes for a very hard to conceal EDC weapon....
(The rifle in the middle.)
Can't help it. It was my first German rifle, bought way back in high school.
Makes for a very hard to conceal EDC weapon....
Last edited:
MCorps0311
US Veteran
I don't own a M&P 45, G43 or M&P 9 Shield,I do own a M&P 40 Shield,and a G17 9mm,I like them very much. I don't have the answer to your question.
CBStuard
Member
I am in the 'if you have extra money and want a Shield go for it' camp. OTOH, shifting from a double stack of any brand to a single stack of any brand is different enough that it won't make much difference if you are also switching brands. The one big difference between Glocks and other brands is the grip angle. But I notice this is not so noticeable in the pocket size guns. I have a PF9 I shoot fine. I have also shot my SIL's Shield and my nephew's G43, and I shoot them both fine.
LD-Ordie
Member
I personally own a 9mm Shield and a G42, but have fired a G43. Like many have said, they are both fine weapons, so it's down to a personal preference. I personally enjoy my Shield more. Mainly because of the trigger. So there appears to be several options for the Shield, which I installed the Appex Sear and it made a big difference for a minimal amount of $$. The trigger assemblies are the same for the G42 and G43, but not interchangeable with other Glocks. I could only find a kit from Ghost for my G42, which lowered the trigger rate by 2 or so pounds. Still, after firing 50 rounds or so, I found it no longer enjoyable to shoot. For a CC, this may not be an issue for some. I also found the Glock to be around $100. more than the Shield when I was shopping. Adding a Shield instead of replacing your Glock is a good option IMHO 
So I am now considering adding a 9mm compact Sig, to my current carry pieces. As we all know, Sig's are a lot more $$$, but boy are they nice!. Of course, there is nothing wrong with having one of each 
So I am now considering adding a 9mm compact Sig, to my current carry pieces. As we all know, Sig's are a lot more $$$, but boy are they nice!. Of course, there is nothing wrong with having one of each 
Chief Illiniwek
Member
That's what I did and both see time as my EDC.
Steved13
Member
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2016
- Messages
- 330
- Reaction score
- 202
It's pretty easy to debate from either side. The FS will shoot differently than the Shield...someone could say 2 FS will shoot differently from each other, and someone else could say; Don't we align the sights on all guns and then squeeze the trigger while holding the sights on the target...making the argument that we shoot every gun the same way.
It also depends on how much time you spend shooting and how many guns you own. If you own 50 guns, and shoot everyday, then you wouldn't be asking the question...it wouldn't even come into mind. If you have 2 guns, and want to have similar controls, because you don't get to shoot but once a week or month or every once in awhile...It makes a lot more sense.
Since you have already voiced the concern and desire to have both be more similar platforms, I think you've answered your own question.
I carried the G43, and it was fine, I could hit center mass no problem. Then I decided on a FS PC 9l, as a range gun, and I wanted similar platforms, so switched to the Shield. I absolutely love how the Shield fits me, and how I shoot it, and I can't imagine carrying anything else (Except maybe a 9c?).
It also depends on how much time you spend shooting and how many guns you own. If you own 50 guns, and shoot everyday, then you wouldn't be asking the question...it wouldn't even come into mind. If you have 2 guns, and want to have similar controls, because you don't get to shoot but once a week or month or every once in awhile...It makes a lot more sense.
Since you have already voiced the concern and desire to have both be more similar platforms, I think you've answered your own question.
I carried the G43, and it was fine, I could hit center mass no problem. Then I decided on a FS PC 9l, as a range gun, and I wanted similar platforms, so switched to the Shield. I absolutely love how the Shield fits me, and how I shoot it, and I can't imagine carrying anything else (Except maybe a 9c?).
Have you considered a compact M&P? I have a Shield 9 and an M&P 40c, and I carry the 40c. Not only does it carry more rounds, it is more accurate than the Shield. Its double-stack grip will feel just like the grips on your full-size M&Ps, and, if you have them on your M&Ps, the safeties will be the same. My 40c is also easier to rack. (I own six semi-autos, and the Shield is by far the hardest to rack.) Yes, the 40c does weigh more than the Shield, but to me, the advantages contained within those few extra ounces outweigh the liabilities.
wwit
Member
I own the exact same duo and have the same opinion exactly with this sentiment. I carry my PC 9mm Shield with the 8 round mag also. Mainly due to the fact that the 9mm Shield was my older CCW and have gotten used to it. Thankfully I live in a relatively violent crime free area and shootouts are not common at all, so no real need to carry the fill size double stack.
Both are great guns. At the range, the full size I find to be a tad more accurate at 25 yards. Mainly because the full size fits my catchers mitt hands better then the Shield.
wwit
Member
Why not carry a ported firearm?
I own both the M&P 9mm Shield(single stack) PC as well as the full sized M&P 9mm (double stack) PC. Both have ported barrels. The full size came with a TB also. I bought both at different times, but in both cases I was able to buy them for only a small upcharge over the non-ported version. Both come with Apex Enhanced Triggers, which was worth far more than the slight upcharge I paid.
So you didn't answer why. I get that they come with upgrade triggers, sights.... but why carry a ported barrel?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Glock: hammer. Shield: not a Glock.
Lima26
Member
I prefer non-ported for my EDC. Even when you replace the ported barrel with a non-ported barrel the ports cut into the slide could potentially get jammed up. The other issue is the slide ports also reduce weight and increase slide speed in an already small pistol.
Just my 2-cents
Just my 2-cents
I owned a Glock 43 for several months and never warmed up to it. It was stone axe reliable, but it was not as precise as my other concealed carry pistols.
I purchased a Shield 9mm last fall and I like the way it handles and shoots better than the Glock 43. I had to send the Shield in for warranty work when I first bought it and I have been tracking other threads about magazine spring issues. If I don't have any more breakages, I'll stick with the Shield. If I do have another issue that affects reliability, I won't be able to recommend the Shield as a personal protection firearm to my students.
I purchased a Shield 9mm last fall and I like the way it handles and shoots better than the Glock 43. I had to send the Shield in for warranty work when I first bought it and I have been tracking other threads about magazine spring issues. If I don't have any more breakages, I'll stick with the Shield. If I do have another issue that affects reliability, I won't be able to recommend the Shield as a personal protection firearm to my students.
wwit
Member
Why Not? was my answer. For me ported makes no difference at all for a CCW. Its very simple, or so I thought. I CCW a ported barrel gun because it came that way. I got a good price on it at the time and the upgrades other than the ported barrel far outweighed the upcharge to get a PC vs. a standard model. I recall it was only @ $20-25 upcharge then. Prices have come done a lot since then though. I clean my firearms frequently. My PC 9mm Shield gets cleaned once a week. I'm highly confident that it will be good working order should I ever need to draw it in any potential SD or HD situation.
If you prefer the non ported model, then that's the one for you.
Last edited:
"Why not" explains nothing. I get the "cool" factor of ported guns. But for a short barrel like the Shield has, and porting it, you are making something more dangerous to the person shooting than anything. This gun is meant for SD, and most likely would be used in close contact.... if you shoot from the hip with it, you risk being burned by the muzzle flash being directed back at you practically. If you use it at night, the extra flash could temporarily blind you. Also, with the porting it seems you lose some of your velocity. So short barrel, with the extra decrease, is limiting the punch of even your best defense round. I'm not saying these guns are bad. I just don't think they are the best choice for a CC weapon.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
