Shield 2.0 in 9, 40 or 45?

A semi auto carry pistol?

9mm...

Always 9mm.


I look at caliber wars like this... You can smash a watermelon with a baseball bat that weighs 4lb, or one weighing 5lb... Sure technically, the 5lb bat can do more damage... But does it really matter if the end result is the same... A smashed watermelon...

9mm is plenty, especially with modern HP ammo, and you get more efficient size to capacity ratio.
 
Smerks said:
My understanding is the .45 Shield is more similar to the 2.0 than the 1st gen even though its not a 2.0.
Click to expand...
In a way, yes.

The 45 has had the forward slide serrations and the M2.0 grip texture from the get-go, and the gun press has reported it as having an upgraded trigger, although it's unclear how this may compare to the M2.0 trigger.

FWIW I expect that a 45 Shield M2.0 is coming, if only for the sake of consistency with the remainder of the line, although it may amount to a re-badge only. I expect it to appear after the Christmas season to give dealers a chance to draw down their stock of the "M1.0," and so that people who have already bought 45 Shields as gifts won't be irate.
 
Last edited:
I own a M&P 40 Compact and while I find the 40 cartridge to hell of a lot of recoil, the Compact fits my hand so well thatmi find the recoil almost tame. Mist the easiest shooting .40 I've ever fired.
 
Big difference in the compact and the shield grip.

I love 45s. But for a carry gun, I see no practical justification for the 40 or the 45.
Same lethality but more rounds. Make mine a nine!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top