Can The S&W Shield 9 Really Be Called A Single Stack?

Joe_Pike

New member
Probably semantics, but is the Shield 9 really a single stack? I know I wouldn't call it a double stack, but if you look at the magazine it is staggered unlike a true single stack like a 1911.
 
Here's an image I pulled off the Internet:

lg_single-stack-vs-double-stack123455.jpg


In the single stack, of course, all the rounds are in a single line vertically. In the "double stack," the rounds aren't side-by-side, they are offset vertically and there is slight horizontal overlap. But ... each of the two vertical stacks has each round in that stack making contact with the round above it and the round below it. I would consider that to be the functional definition of a "double" stack. If a magazine is wider than what maintains all the rounds in a single, vertical row but isn't wide enough to allow rounds in each stack to touch the rounds above and below, then IMHO it isn't a single stack (obviously) and it also isn't a double stack. I have facetiously used the term "stack and a half" or "one and a half stack" to describe such magazines, but what would be a more technically accurate description?

"Staggered stack"?

"Staggered single stack"?

"Offset single stack"?
 
You guys made me do a double take on the shield mags. Yes they do swell out after the first couple of rounds. Interesting they did that as there is a bit of wasted space doing that.
 
Back
Top