[haertig]

To anyone who owns one of these or has shot one, how does the .45 Shield compare to the 9mm Shield? Recoil, trigger feel, size, etc.?

 

[Pinstriper]

I have the 9, the 40, and the 45.

The 9 is gentle in recoil. Shoot all day long gentle. The 40 is just this side of gentle, and is superb, more comfortable in my experience than a full size 40. Dunno why.

The 45 is another step again. Compared to the others, you know you are working with something more. It is NOT an all-day range gun.

OTOH, it is far from the "one magazine and put it away" experience you get with, say a really snappy .380 or subcompact 9. Or a .357 snubby.

You can easily run through a box at the range before saying "OK, that's enough of that for one day".

Compare that to a full-size 1911 and you'd be unhappy. Compare it with an Officer's ACP and you'll be thinking "Why didn't anybody think of this before ?"

All three fit in the same Galco Softuck IWB very nicely, thank you. I can tell a very slight increase in dimensions and would not expect the same experience with kydex unless it had adjustment screws.

Triggers: I am a big fan of Sheild triggers. I would rate in this order of preference: 9, 45, 40. The 9 and 45 are very similar. The 40 seems to have a...pause in the cycling. The action doesn't cycle as quickly as the 9 and 45 do, so you are more aware of the reset with the 40.

So while I prefer the Shield 40 over full size 40's for comfort (really !) I think when you compare the 9 and the 40, one more round versus a bit more power, it comes out a toss-up. When you compare the 9 to the 45, it's a lot easier to say "45, oh yeah". Obviously with the same capacity in the 40 and 45, it's 45 hands down.

It is my experience that none of them rides in any of my pockets. It's an IWB gun, and I've landed on the 45 for IWB.

 

[haertig]

Thanks for that excellent comparison!

I think what I'm trying to do, is justify to myself that I should spend the money on a Shield. They're cheap right now, places have them on sale, and to top that off there's the $75 S&W rebate.

But I don't NEED another small carry gun. Really, I'm perfectly happy with my PF9. Shield triggers are far better though, and I hit better with them - at least the 9mm ones I've shot.

So, to make this potential Shield purchase more distinct and not a near-duplicate of things I already have, I was thinking of either (1) a Shield in .45, or (2) a 9mm Shield with that green Crimson Trace laser on it. Just a standard 9mm Shield is quite close to my current PF9. Better trigger, slightly larger, heavier, won't fit in a pocket (the PF9 does - barely) and I'd need to buy a new holster for the Shield. I like custom leather ones, so that gets pricey. I'm not a fan of IWB carry, so I would go OWB with a cover garment for a Shield.

When it comes to .40 vs. .45, I generally like .45 better. The .45 recoil seems a tad heavier to me, but it's more of a push whereas the .40 is a snap. I can control the push better. However, I shot a full size M&P in .40 and that was a very nice gun. I shot extremely well with it - I surprised myself with how well I seemed to control the snap. Other .40's I've shot though, I didn't care for the snap as much as with that full size M&P. But for a Shield, I'm only considering the .45 and the 9mm at this point.

In a similarly purposed gun, we have both a Springfield XD/S .45 and an XD/S 9mm. Actually they're both the wifes guns. I like the 9mm better of those two, but the .45 is not bad. A bit more recoil, but not a large amount more. Both are easily controllable. The 9mm XD/S is more fun to shoot for long periods. We also have a full size XD/M in .45. With a double stack mag, that thing is as large and heavy as a school bus. You would think it would kick a lot less than the XD/S .45, but it feels about the same to me. Possibly because my hands are small and I can get a better grip on the single stack XD/S. A small gun feels more natural in my hands than a large one.

My son has a Shield in 9mm. I've shot it a lot, and I like it better than the XD/S. But that is personal preference. My wife likes the XD/S better than the Shield. To each his own!

 

[darkwriter77]

I considered it for a while, but I decided to stick with the 9mm Shield (specifically, the ported Performance Center version with factory tritium sights) because the Shield, by my estimation was going to be a lot like my experience with the 3.3" Springfield XDS and Kahr CW45: not bad, not painful, but WAYYYYY too much muzzle flip. The 4.0" version was a lot better, but the limited 5+1 capacity basically put it on par with your average old-school .45 Colt revolver (except, obviously, much flatter in profile), whereas the 9mm Shield and Glock 43 offered more rounds in the same size plus less recoil, soooooo...

I don't think you could really go WRONG with the .45 Shield, per se, but for the same size/weight, you could probably find something more pleasant to shoot that suits your needs/wants just as adequately. Heck, even my gal's Walther PPS M2 is a pretty nice alternative - VERY nice trigger and ergonomics, just kinda pricey. But anyway...

Haven't actually shot the .45 Shield, myself, but the physics comparison to the 3.3" XDS .45 is pretty much equivalent. Pretty similar bore axis, overall weight, width, and so on. Again, not bad, but not my favorite. And again, the 4.0" both shot and carried much better than the 3.3" version - I'm kinda weird in that I like that long barrel, short grip setup.

 

[Pinstriper]

Thanks for that excellent comparison!

I think what I'm trying to do, is justify to myself that I should spend the money on a Shield. They're cheap right now, places have them on sale, and to top that off there's the $75 S&W rebate.

But I don't NEED another small carry gun. Really, I'm perfectly happy with my PF9. Shield triggers are far better though, and I hit better with them - at least the 9mm ones I've shot.

So, to make this potential Shield purchase more distinct and not a near-duplicate of things I already have, I was thinking of either (1) a Shield in .45, or (2) a 9mm Shield with that green Crimson Trace laser on it. Just a standard 9mm Shield is quite close to my current PF9. Better trigger, slightly larger, heavier, won't fit in a pocket (the PF9 does - barely) and I'd need to buy a new holster for the Shield. I like custom leather ones, so that gets pricey. I'm not a fan of IWB carry, so I would go OWB with a cover garment for a Shield.

When it comes to .40 vs. .45, I generally like .45 better. The .45 recoil seems a tad heavier to me, but it's more of a push whereas the .40 is a snap. I can control the push better. However, I shot a full size M&P in .40 and that was a very nice gun. I shot extremely well with it - I surprised myself with how well I seemed to control the snap. Other .40's I've shot though, I didn't care for the snap as much as with that full size M&P. But for a Shield, I'm only considering the .45 and the 9mm at this point.

In a similarly purposed gun, we have both a Springfield XD/S .45 and an XD/S 9mm. Actually they're both the wifes guns. I like the 9mm better of those two, but the .45 is not bad. A bit more recoil, but not a large amount more. Both are easily controllable. The 9mm XD/S is more fun to shoot for long periods. We also have a full size XD/M in .45. With a double stack mag, that thing is as large and heavy as a school bus. You would think it would kick a lot less than the XD/S .45, but it feels about the same to me. Possibly because my hands are small and I can get a better grip on the single stack XD/S. A small gun feels more natural in my hands than a large one.

My son has a Shield in 9mm. I've shot it a lot, and I like it better than the XD/S. But that is personal preference. My wife likes the XD/S better than the Shield. To each his own!

It doesn't seem to me like the Shield 45 gives you anything you don't already have with the XD/S.

 

[HitManX]

Just bought one last night - http://www.thektog.org/forum/f100/s-ws-75-rebate-m-ps-thoughts-267713/

Still happy with the purchase this morning.



EDIT - shot it today, worked great. 100 rounds without an issue. Snappier than expected, but nothing like my snubnose 357 mag with full house loads.

 

[zaitcev]

It doesn't seem to me like the Shield 45 gives you anything you don't already have with the XD/S.

That is, sadly, not true, or at least not always and not for all users, because ergonomics are different. I had a very positive experience with XD(m) in .45 and I wanted to like XD-S, too. Unfortunately, it hurts like dickens, because it has a deep undercut and the trigger guard whacks me on the knuckle of the index finger. Until Shield 45 came out, I seriously considered filling up the undercut with JB Weld on XD-S. In addition, Shield is noticeably lighter, although neither is a true pocket gun.

 

[Pinstriper]

That is, sadly, not true, or at least not always and not for all users, because ergonomics are different. I had a very positive experience with XD(m) in .45 and I wanted to like XD-S, too. Unfortunately, it hurts like dickens, because it has a deep undercut and the trigger guard whacks me on the knuckle of the index finger. Until Shield 45 came out, I seriously considered filling up the undercut with JB Weld on XD-S. In addition, Shield is noticeably lighter, although neither is a true pocket gun.

There is truth in what you say, to the extent that a gun that has deficiencies is no solution, regardless the specification or how it fits into the solution spectrum.

But that's not the case here. He didn't say he wasn't happy with his XD/S .45, just wondering what the Shield would do for him. In that case, nothing.