Tell Me About The S&W Shield in 40 S&W

Forte S+W said:
Felt recoil can be funny that way. Sometimes folks perceive recoil impulses as less or more than they actually are, hence why some folks insist that .40 feels no different than 9mm while others insist that it has more recoil than a .45.

For example, I see folks all the time talking about how "snappy" the Ruger LC9s is, yet I myself consider it to be among the most pleasant handguns I've ever shot. How could that be? Because admittedly most of the handguns I own have heavy recoil, ergo by comparison the LC9s is pleasant to me.
Click to expand...

Recoil perception is very individual, and dependant on the gun you're shooting.

The vast majority of .40 I have shot has been through one or another of my XD-s. The XD guns tend to run heavy for their size, and I find .40 to be non-obnoxious through it.

I shot a few rounds through an XDS in .40, and really didn't care for it. Yes, that was uncomfortable.

There's a used Shield .40 that's been sitting in a local FFL's case for months. Decent price. Do I want it? "Eeeeehhhhh....."
 
Last edited:
lee n. field said:
... There's a used Shield .40 that's been sitting in a local FFL's case for months. Decent price. Do I want it? "Eeeeehhhhh....."
Click to expand...

Worst case scenario, you could take one for the team. Buy it. Go shoot it with a bunch of different loads. Let us know how it goes. You know, for science.
 
I'm pretty sure that the M&P40 Shield can be easily converted to an M&P9 Shield with just a barrel swap too, so even if you end up disliking it, you could always buy a cheap conversion barrel and turn it into a softer-shooting pistol.
 
Forte S+W said:
I'm pretty sure that the M&P40 Shield can be easily converted to an M&P9 Shield with just a barrel swap too, so even if you end up disliking it, you could always buy a cheap conversion barrel and turn it into a softer-shooting pistol.
Click to expand...

I checked on that. You end up spending enough to make it probably not worthwhile, vs. just buying a 9mm Shield.
 
Last edited:
Threads like this still make me sorta shake my head. Between 9mm, .40 S&W, and.45 ACP, they have all proven effective as defensive cartridges, and thus they remain popular. Though some speak of the eminent demise of the .40, I sincerely doubt it. Recoil varies between the calibers and can be mitigated or exaggerated depending on the weight and design of the firearm. Folks got to find what works effectively for themselves and stop criticizing others for their choices.
I have personally carried in all three calibers at one time or another. I do not find recoil of .40 S&W too much to handle, nor that of a .45 in smaller guns, but some folks do. I stopped carrying my .45 because I found the weight of my RO Compact a little more than I appreciated after a full day (partly because abdominal surgeries made the weight feel uncomfortable now), but the gun is excellent! It is accurate and dependable and I did not feel shorted by 6 round magazines. Carrying a spare mag gave me 13 with one in the pipe.

I changed to my XD Mod 2 sub-compact in .40 and got a slightly smaller firearm with a little less weight and 9 rounds per mag. This too is an excellent pistol, accurate and reliable and I still do travel with it.

A year ago I picked up a P365, and immediately loved it. It is by far the easiest to conceal on my skinny frame and the light weight makes it quite easy to carry all day long. The additional ammo is a plus with the slightly reduced power of the cartridge. It is as accurate as the first two and very comfortable to shoot with, and utterly reliable.

I have shot all sorts of light and small pistols in all three calibers. It is notable that it is not simply the weight or caliber that affects gun handling and perceived recoil, but the design/shape is significant as well. The caliber itself is often not the problem at all, but the design of the firearm. An example in how it relates to me (others may vary) is the difference between the SA Hellcat and the Sig P365. Though I enjoy several of SA offerings, the Hellcat is not one of them. To me the gun wants to roll upward a lot compared to the P365 making it harder for follow up shots. It is the design that makes it poor for my use...the cartridge is just fine.
 
I prefer my .40 S&W guns to be 4” double stack at least, but if I got a good deal on a .40 shield I’d buy it.

Right now I’m comfortable with a Shield9 as an EDC but would give a Shield40 a try.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I checked on that. You end up spending enough to make it probably not worthwhile, vs. just buying a 9mm Shield.
Click to expand...

Really? That's surprising, I'm used to seeing ordinary M&P Conversion Barrels for as little as $89, and M&P9 Shield magazines aren't very expensive, so I assumed that it would be as easy as buying a 9mm conversion barrel plus a couple 9mm magazines.

I guess I'm just used to the simple caliber conversion between a .40 and a 9mm Glock.
 
Not talking about FELT recoil. I was talking about the recoil shown in the close up videos. They look mislabeled to me.
Click to expand...
You have to be careful about that. many people do not lock their wrist so it LOOKS like more recoil than it is.
 
AgedWarrior said:
Threads like this still make me sorta shake my head. Between 9mm, .40 S&W, and.45 ACP, they have all proven effective as defensive cartridges, and thus they remain popular. Though some speak of the eminent demise of the .40, I sincerely doubt it. Recoil varies between the calibers and can be mitigated or exaggerated depending on the weight and design of the firearm. Folks got to find what works effectively for themselves and stop criticizing others for their choices.
I have personally carried in all three calibers at one time or another. I do not find recoil of .40 S&W too much to handle, nor that of a .45 in smaller guns, but some folks do. I stopped carrying my .45 because I found the weight of my RO Compact a little more than I appreciated after a full day (partly because abdominal surgeries made the weight feel uncomfortable now), but the gun is excellent! It is accurate and dependable and I did not feel shorted by 6 round magazines. Carrying a spare mag gave me 13 with one in the pipe.

I changed to my XD Mod 2 sub-compact in .40 and got a slightly smaller firearm with a little less weight and 9 rounds per mag. This too is an excellent pistol, accurate and reliable and I still do travel with it.

A year ago I picked up a P365, and immediately loved it. It is by far the easiest to conceal on my skinny frame and the light weight makes it quite easy to carry all day long. The additional ammo is a plus with the slightly reduced power of the cartridge. It is as accurate as the first two and very comfortable to shoot with, and utterly reliable.

I have shot all sorts of light and small pistols in all three calibers. It is notable that it is not simply the weight or caliber that affects gun handling and perceived recoil, but the design/shape is significant as well. The caliber itself is often not the problem at all, but the design of the firearm. An example in how it relates to me (others may vary) is the difference between the SA Hellcat and the Sig P365. Though I enjoy several of SA offerings, the Hellcat is not one of them. To me the gun wants to roll upward a lot compared to the P365 making it harder for follow up shots. It is the design that makes it poor for my use...the cartridge is just fine.
Click to expand...
And yet others much prefer the Hellcat. Not as snappy. Guns are like shoes, no perfect fit for everyone. I would say shoot both and make a decision. Better yet, shoot a lot of other guns and take your time before making that decision.
 
I also considered getting a M&P45 Shield. In my opinion, it's the best polymer framed single stack .45 currently on the market. It has comparable capacity to the other Shields and you don't have to fret over the whole M1 vs M2 deal because the only difference between them is a marking on the slide. Yes, the M&P45 Shield was the basis for the M2 configuration and thus has all the same features, S&W merely began making them with an M2.0 stamp later down the line once the M2.0 configuration was offered to the M&P9/40 Shields to avoid confusion.

Honestly, I like the M&P45 Shield so much that if I were going to get a Shield, then it would be the .45.
 
PolarFBear said:
Can anyone "chime" in on the Shield 45? I think they are bit larger but seem a good servicable firearm.
Click to expand...
I've stayed out of this thread, largely because I have zero experience with the Shield 40. For that matter, I don't own a 40. With that said, I'm a big fan of the Shield 9mm. I've carried one for ~3 years and have about 500 rounds down the pipe. It's been flawless (so far) and has been a pretty remarkable pistol. In fact, more reliable than my Glock.

I've also just recently picked up one of these. It's not a standard Shield 45, but I splurged a little. I've shot a regular Shield 45, and it handles recoil remarkably well, just like it's little 9mm brother. The 4" Shield 45 (which is basically the same size as a commander 1911) is having some teething issues, but we'll get it all sorted out. It's had a few feeding issues, but it really shoots nicely, otherwise.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top