The shield 45 is a great CCW, but not for me.

[Groo01]

Groo here
The recoil difference between the the 9mm and 45 are large.
The kick,slide speed,and rotation are flat out different.
I also find that I shoot 45 better [read group better]
Having shot 45's [1911] early and 9mm[glock]later
I find the 45 easier to "ride the kick" where as the 9mm
I have to fight due to slide speed.
The argument , that both are the same with modern ammo,
is some what miss leading.
If all works as planed , this is correct,
BUT if the gun will not feed, or the Hp open up [or too fast or slow]
there is a big difference.
I always said , with similar ammo and shot. I expected to
shoot #2 9mm for each 45 and carried as such.

 

[Holmes375]

Given the minimal difference in terminal ballistics against a human adversary between the popular service calibers it strikes me that trying to make a 45 feel like a 9mm accomplishes nothing. The 9mm still gas the advantage of capacity. And using specialized ammo to tame the 45 does little to address the the large number of rounds one needs to expend in practice and training unless one can afford to drill with the specialized ammo.

I have both versions of the Shield and I adore the 45 ACP cartridge. But I think the 9mm may well be a better solution in small sub-compact pistols. And maybe even in their full size service counterparts, too

 

[Dave Nowlin]

Actually Bill Wilson recommends the type load I spoke of for 4 inch and shorter 1911s. With the shorter slide stroke he opines that 160 or 185 grain bullets are a better choice. He claims these are the loads he carries for self defense in his personal 4 inch 1911. I happen to have a 4 inch Kimber Pro Carry HD that I stoke with these rounds also. I fired 5 rounds rather quickly at a copperhead the other evening. I didn't pay much attention to the recoil. Maybe it's because I'm 73 years old but I don't really pay that much attention to the recoil. Then again I have fired cast bullet handloads using 325 grain LBT design bullets from a 44 mag that will penetrate 12 inches of seasoned oak. I've fired similar loads from a 45 LC as well. To me the Shield doesn't really recoil that badly.

 

[z28lt1scott]

I fired a buddy's shield 9mm and my shield 40 back to back, I felt the recoil was much worse on the 9mm. I have since then fired my shield 40 back to back with my shield 45 and there was no noticeable difference in recoil. I am much more accurate on the second shot with the 40 or 45, not as accurate with the 9.
I do have one complaint about the shield 45, the coarse grip is ripping my side to shreds. If anyone is carrying one, what do you do to correct this?

 

[Holmes375]

....I do have one complaint about the shield 45, the coarse grip is ripping my side to shreds. If anyone is carrying one, what do you do to correct this?

I took the "bite" off mine with 400 grit wet sandpaper. Buff it lightly and check it often to get just the texture you want.

My 45 now has an excellent high traction grip that I can carry against bare skin all day long.

 

[ABMI]

I find I also shoot a little better with the 45 although my groups open up faster than the 9, after 20-30 shots. But I don't think that has a lot to do with an EDC & self defence situation. If I pick up the 45 I can hit better than the 9 for at least 3-5 mag's. I only carry 14 rounds with me & any situation where I'm going into my 2nd mag I'll be looking for an escape route. I think statistically I think most of the time you won't make it out of the first mag, it will be over. Just my opinion.

 

[DocB]

Since you're not going to be using ear plugs if you really "need" to use your pistol, why would anybody opt for the 45 ACP. The 45 is the only gun I've ever fired that absolutely destroys my ears. The ringing starts immediately followed by slight pain. I've been around a long time, never used ear protection, fired thousands of rounds in virtually every gun a normal person might own (skipped the 460 and 500), and still hear just fine. Maybe it's just me, but since I was a teenager, the 45 is the caliber I avoid.

 

[kthom]

That's interesting to me, Doc. I haven't intentionally listened to a gun fired in a long time, but for me, either the .357 Mag or the 40 S&W are much worse than the .45. That difference is noted even with hearing protection for me. All of 'em are loud, and all of 'em require hearing protection to avoid hearing damage. Unfortunately, I fired way too many rounds before there was much ado about the need for hearing protection, so all I can do now is to keep from making things worse for myself. BTW, I feel the same way about recoil as compared between the rounds listed above. For me, the .45ACP is preferable to either of the other two as far as recoil and shooting comfort is concerned. Of course, some of this depends on the platform used and the grips involved, but in general, for me, that's my preferences and observations.

 

[GerSan69]

Old-school, thanks for not getting a 45. It sure makes it easier for the rest of us when you disinterested folks don't get something new just to toss it in the safe!
Got mine last Monday at a decent price, the "last one in stock for now," no "premium" or whatever you'd like to call it on the price, either. I haven't even cleaned it yet, but I expect to put a couple boxes thru it this week. I will say the looks of the firearm and feel of the grip are impressive!

 

[ABMI]

I tend to agree with you kthom, I think it's being a higher pressure cartridge they have a louder report, the magnums & the 40 & .357 Sig seem ouder than the 45 to me. I think it also depends on where you are, indoors or outdoors seems less traumatic to my ears outside.

 

[rwsmith]

I'm not going to buy one...

...but I'm glad S&W recognized the need and filled it. The .45 is a great, reliable, time tested round, but I believe good, modern ammo makes the smaller calibers almost as effective and with more capacity. You guys that like them, though, more power to ya.