Expygator
Member
Why no Shield .45 acp? Go!
Why no Shield .45 acp?
- Thread starter Expygator
- Start date
Register to hide this ad
A little much cartridge for the size of the size of the platform.
ajamesp51
Member
I have been predicting this for two years. Each Shot Show hoping they finally release a 45acp.
OP
Expygator
Member
If they do, that could be my new edc.
Rastoff
US Veteran
What's wrong with the 45c?
i often wondered the same thing. As an owner of the XDS 45 and a Shield 9, there should be no reason SW couldn't do it. The only reason i bought an xds was because it was a 45.. They would sell tons of them just like Springfield did.
and for me the XDS or shield is about all i can conceal. A 45c is too big for me to conceal.
and for me the XDS or shield is about all i can conceal. A 45c is too big for me to conceal.
Won't buy any XD and the G36 is the only Glock that I don't really like the feel of in my hand. Would buy a 45 Shield (preferably w/o safety) in a heartbeat.
Note: I've got a number of small 45's and even a 325PD snub, just want more guns and choices...
it's not an either or proposition.
Note: I've got a number of small 45's and even a 325PD snub, just want more guns and choices...
it's not an either or proposition.Smitty357
Member
Because a .45 acp isn't going to make u a better shooter in a self defense situation.
May as well just stay with 9mm or .40.
But i'll be the first to admit. If by some crazy chance i could have a Shield in 5.7mm then i'd be on the waiting list today.
May as well just stay with 9mm or .40.
But i'll be the first to admit. If by some crazy chance i could have a Shield in 5.7mm then i'd be on the waiting list today.
While it would be interesting to see them release a Shield 45 to replace the niche left empty by the discontinued CS45, I'm not holding my breath.
Sure, the small segment of the market that likes the little XDs 45 would probably find a similar echo among S&W enthusiasts.
How many folks really want a 5+1 (or maybe, 6+1) capacity .45 that's thicker and probably a bit longer than the Shield 40, though?
"Never say never" with S&W, however, and they've been getting much better at keeping new projects close to their vests.
Sure, the small segment of the market that likes the little XDs 45 would probably find a similar echo among S&W enthusiasts.
How many folks really want a 5+1 (or maybe, 6+1) capacity .45 that's thicker and probably a bit longer than the Shield 40, though?
"Never say never" with S&W, however, and they've been getting much better at keeping new projects close to their vests.
Smitty357
Member
Shield 1911 in .45 acp.
Ok i lie, i'd buy that for sure.
Ok i lie, i'd buy that for sure.
catcus-jack
Member
Becsuse they can't keep a .40 together.
Lee in Quartzsite
Member
My 45 Compact holds 8+1 rounds; I would estimated a Shield 45 would hold 6 max, more like 5 rounds. Plus the recoil spring would be so tight racking the slide would be a challenge, not to mention just holding onto it for a second shot. Thanks, but no thanks, I'll keep my 45c
Last edited:
millisec
US Veteran
That's probably up there on the list with the 5" M&P 45 they will probably never make. To maintain the same Shield form factor it would probably have to be single stack and capacity would be too small. As it is if all the stories are true I'm glad I bought a 9mm Shield and not the 40 let alone a 45.
Funny. (Meaning snide)
Over-pressure events resulting from bullet setback, obstructed bores, ammo quality & other ammo related influences (reloading, "hot" loads, etc) can sometimes happen. I've seen other brands/models of plastic guns experience significant damage in 9mm & .45 ACP, had a family member experience a plastic .40 violently disassembling itself (with what was later felt to be an isolated ammo production problem, according to what the ammo company later released), and I've learned (as a firearms instructor & armorer) of it happening with 9, .40, .357 & .45 ACP (not GAP, at least not yet) guns.
I've even seen and learned of the results of such problems in metal-framed guns, too, but the plastic guns tend to get the most attention.
Gotta agree.
My 4513TSW and CS45 aren't all that different in overall size. The 4513 is easier to shoot, all things considered.
Shooting the CS45 so much tends to make the 4513 seem a lot easier to shoot, too.
Kind of like mastering the .40's makes 9's & .45's seem downright relaxing (even the +P & +P+ 9's). 
I'm wondering how much slimmer they could make a M&P Shield 45 slide than a 45c slide, let alone the frame.
The shield 9/.40 is a nicely slimmer alternative of the 9c/40c's, but I'd have to wonder if the same virtues would be able to be realized in a similar pairing of the 45c and a hypothetical Shield 45.
Dunno.
I can say this, though, which is that between the CS9 and CS45 I own, I much prefer the CS9 ... so it wouldn't surprise me if I ended up preferring a M&P 45c for a .45 (as if I need another .45), but a Shield 9 or 40 for the subcompact.
Last edited:
It would have to be a whole new platform. You can not cram that round into a 9mm - .40 size pistol. You would sacrifice round count. and the width would be a little wide on the grip. It would not be the same gun.
But a compact 1911 would defiantly have a huge cool factor.
And as far as the post about Smith keeping the .40 together, I call BS, that is an ammo problem that has been over hyped. Forums tend to over exaggerate non existent problems. I shoot my S&W .40's with confidence, including my Shield.
But a compact 1911 would defiantly have a huge cool factor.
And as far as the post about Smith keeping the .40 together, I call BS, that is an ammo problem that has been over hyped. Forums tend to over exaggerate non existent problems. I shoot my S&W .40's with confidence, including my Shield.
