Thoughts on S&W M&P Shield in .40?

[Cal10]

I pee standing up and can hold a 10 lbs sledgehammer horizontal to the ground one handed from the end of the handle.



40S&W

Oh Yeah, I can hold a 15lb sledge! How about getting back to the shields?

[Mossy Man]

To ad to that OP:

There's plenty of guys in this thread who got the 40 shield and say they wish they got the 9.

There's zero who got the 9 and said they wish they got the 40.

Food for thought.

[Mossy Man]

It's actually the other way around. You refuse to face the reality of a bigger caliber transferring more energy. Instead, you keep referring to the agency, that fails to train their agents properly. Instead, they prefer to come up with a "scientific" excuse in order to downgrade the caliber. Check it back in 15 years. They will be advocating for .380, using the exact same arguments.

Link to proof that handgun rounds energy transfer is actually significant?

I may have only provided one source, but you've provided zero except insults.

[Cal10]

I was one of those, I had the 40, and shot the 9 and said I have to have it. Now that I do there is no major difference in recoil with standard ball ammo. Mixing +p, +p+++ and all sets the parameters out of whack for comparative analysis of the shields. Keeping it simple using the same brand ammo WWB in 9 and in 40 there is not a huge difference in recoil, there is a difference but it's not tremendous. If you can control the 9 shield you will be fine with a 40.

[riderr]

Link to proof that handgun rounds energy transfer is actually significant?

Why don't you advocate for a weaker .380? It's the same 9mm caliber. Since the energy transfer is insignificant, this is the way to go.

I may have only provided one source, but you've provided zero except insults.

FBI made their point clear. Their agents fail to pass quals with .40. It is the primary reason to switch. So, they did a research for the pre-determent conclusion.

P.S. I apologize if my words sounded insulting. I have had no intent to attack you personally.

[QuarterBoreGunner]

THIS IS A PUBLIC SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENT: Shockingly, there have been members flagging this thread as containing personal insults, personal attacks and general pissing and moaning. I've done a little clean-up and am leaving it open for now as the underlying debate seems relevant.

Remember, it's just the internet, it's not personal. Be nice.

[riderr]

I was one of those, I had the 40, and shot the 9 and said I have to have it. Now that I do there is no major difference in recoil with standard ball ammo. Mixing +p, +p+++ and all sets the parameters out of whack for comparative analysis of the shields. Keeping it simple using the same brand ammo WWB in 9 and in 40 there is not a huge difference in recoil, there is a difference but it's not tremendous. If you can control the 9 shield you will be fine with a 40.

In my humble opinion, the felt recoil more depends on the load/manufacturer.
WWB .40 from Sig P226 is really different than 9mm. However, Tula .40 from P226 feels like 9mm WWB.

[riderr]

And bring the recoil up.

Yep. Practicing with ball 9mm and then loading the gun with +P+ for SD/HD is a little strange in my opinion. The recoil will be different.

[riderr]

To ad to that OP:

There's plenty of guys in this thread who got the 40 shield and say they wish they got the 9.

There's zero who got the 9 and said they wish they got the 40.

Food for thought.

Not specifically related to Shield, but I went mainstream and got my P226 in 9mm. Then I had to by the .40 X-change kit with the slide. If I went the other way and got .40 gun in the first place, I'd only have had to buy a conversion barrel. That could've saved me about $170-$200.

[gun toting monkeyboy]

Yep. Practicing with ball 9mm and then loading the gun with +P+ for SD/HD is a little strange in my opinion. The recoil will be different.

Yes, the recoil will be different. But under stressful circumstances, I doubt most people will notice. I wouldn't load up a Shield with hot loads simply because I don't think you get enough extra performance out of the short barrel to make the increased recoil and wear on the gun worthwhile. However, I don't think that it will critically effect the overall performance of most shooters who end up needing to use their Shield defensively at the ranges it was designed for. Remember, most of the SD shootings happen at 21 feet or under. The difference in the point of impact is negligible at that range. And with everything going on if you ever have to pull a weapon, the added recoil will barely be a blip on your radar. Heck, anybody who has hunted knows that. In the heat of the moment, you barely register things like recoil.

-Mb

[SirBoomsalot]

I had this argument in my head for a while now. I finally went xd sc 40 even though I will most likely shoot mostly 9 out of a conversion barrel at the range.
My thinking after reading all of these arguments for just as long are as follows:
Conversions aren't as reliable for sd.....I will be switching back to 40 barrel after range cleaning for any sd possibility with the thought that any added energy is a good thing and after a friend was shot by a 40 the doctor said the 40 round really seems to cause a lot more damage ( sorry moss man no study to quote).
9 is cheaper for my frequent range time. Unreliability at the range... not a big deal other than annoying and will change my mind if that is the case.
Practice with sd loads....I agree this should be done to make sure your gun runs well with said load but other than some reliability checks and some comfort checks this not plausible for the amount of range time I do based on price and the simple fact that bay area ranges won't let you shoot anything other then ball and I have a couple hour dive to any blm space.
Even with a 9 I will still continue to be more comfortable with my gun and add to my muscle memory by shooting any round and as stated above by monkey in a sd situation generally up close point of aim and recoil will be the last thing you notice.
Xd and shield differ in capacity but that slim fit or more easily hidden profile is the trade off for a round or two.
So why not have a slightly larger bullet...why not have the ability to shoot two different rounds.....

[Mossy Man]

Yep. Practicing with ball 9mm and then loading the gun with +P+ for SD/HD is a little strange in my opinion. The recoil will be different.

Except that nobody has advocated shooting +p SD rounds in 9mm.

And as I've already stated, there are a lot of good std pressure 9mm SD loads that work really well.

[SocomM4]

https://youtu.be/ylS-sI_bspc

[Mossy Man]

I think people are overplaying the benefit of larger rounds, and underplaying the benefit of more rounds.

I think the most compelling statistic from the FBI research is the miss rate (70-80%).

That's huge.

I know you all think you're all Wild Bill Hickok, but your average ccw holder is much less trained than an FBI agent at worst, and about as good at best.

To say that "they just can shoot" is ludicrous.

Having those one or two extra rounds is a very worthwhile tradeoff for a very slightly smaller bullet.

As long as you get terminal performance, which is a depth of 12-18", shot placement and capacity are going to always be in your favor.

[UrbanResQ]

Thoughts on S&W M&P Shield in .40?

I have the shield in 40 and love it. Follow up shots for me are consistent. I also have the compact which I converted to a 9mm when I run low on 40. Can do the same with the shield but have to find a barrel for it.

Surprisingly enough the recoil management for the Shield in 40... For me... Is easier than the compact. Weird.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk