I like the Shield but I will stay with Kahr.
Mr. 357Sig just because Springfield released their gun in a more traditional fashion doesnt mean they screwed the pooch, especially since S&W had an atypical release and impeccable timing.
I do give S&W big kudos for putting their customers first, its refreshing.
I do give S&W big kudos for putting their customers first, its refreshing.
I disagree. If you are going to release a product at SHOT, why not have it ready to distribute to ride the PR wave? If they weren't ready to distribute at SHOT, they should have waited until the NRA convention or later to release it. SA is getting smoked and they don't have anyone to blame but themselves.
SiginBoots bought one a few days ago, and I am extremely impressed with it from what I could gather from mere handling. She even took it to class last night at H&H and Will Andrews told her she just cost him $400 after he shot it, too!
She should be along shortly with her shooting review.
She should be along shortly with her shooting review.
New kid on the block with zero credibility here, I know, but...
Loving mine.
Up to now, I've had a Sig P228 as my only handgun. I love that gun. My shooting buddy calls her "the magic gun" because she's so easy to handle and so accurate, and she set the bar quite high for what I expect from a firearm. However, she's a bit big for me to hide effectively for concealed carry and I've been looking for something smaller. Having handled Kahr's subcompacts I knew I didn't care for them, but aside from a stiff slide I wasn't sure why. I'm still new at this, you see. I very much enjoyed shooting the Sig P238, a tiny .380 which was loaned to me by a stranger at the range, but have no interest in carrying a .380. To my great disappointment, the Sig P290 turned out to be a beast of a little gun and I ruled that out the first time I fired it.
Last week, H&H called to say they'd received their first shipment of the new M&P 9mm Shield and I dashed over to pick one up. I've fired M&P's 9mm and .40s before and like them well enough, but as their size doesn't give them much of an advantage in terms of concealed carry over my Sig, I haven't yet purchased one. $409 plus tax for gun with regular and extended mags. The next morning I met my sister at the range with her Kahr CW-9. We compared the guns visually and were convinced that they were almost identical in size, the most notable difference being the more upward slope of the Kahr's trigger guard toward the barrel and the subtle bend there as well: the Shield has a more squared-off trigger guard.
I put a couple of magazines through the Shield and immediately loved it. When my sister finished firing a couple of mags through her Kahr, she picked up the M&P. After three shots, she turned and said, "Ok, I'm just going to exchange guns with you forever."
Uh, no.
But having compared the CW-9 and Shield by alternating each for about an hour, this is what I came up with. I'm sure I'll get terminology wrong, so bear with me.
Trigger and sight picture: the trigger pull on the M&P is short and quick. Unlike my P228, there's no real discernible difference (for me, anyway) between the first shot and the subsequent shots with the M&P (yes, I realize this is inherent in the differences between the two guns), which I find pleasant and which gets my first shot on-target with improved accuracy (a skill issue, sure, but there it is). It's easier to sight in on the M&P than on the Kahr. Someone else can explain why, maybe? The Shield is easier to sight in than the P228, which surprised me (I tried them both in rapid succession last night; perhaps because the tritium sights on my Sig are a million years old). The trigger pull on the Kahr is longer for all shots, and the link more subtle and harder to catch, so sight picture re-acquisition is diminished considerably as is holding the sight picture during the trigger press. Obviously, effective targeting with the Kahr would simply require better technique and more practice, but for new shooters, this is frustrating. Target re-acquisition on the Shield, however, is all but intuitive: she just snaps right back to the place from which she started. I watched a much better and far more experienced shooter than I unload a magazine in her last night and, firing rapidly, put several rounds through the same two holes. He then exclaimed that I'd just spent $400 of his money because he was going to get one, and perhaps liked the Shield better than his full-size M&P.
The slide lock on the Kahr gave us trouble. First, its squared off edges are a bit sharp and kept biting our thumbs. If we positioned our thumbs stacked on top of each other behind the slide lock lever, it "bit" the inside of the left thumb with each shot. If we positioned our thumbs stacked on top of each other along the frame, the slide lock level "bit" the inside of our right thumbs. Putting the left thumb low along the frame and the right thumb vertical behind the slide lock lever didn't help, either, due to barrel flip which ended up driving one thumb or the other into the lever, but I'll get to barrel flip in a minute. The slide lock lever on the Shield, while still squared off on the outside edges, is less prominent and poses no such problems.
The beaver tail at the back of the Kahr is shorter than that of the M&P, making the M&P feel more secure in the hand when gripped and less jumpy when firing. The short Kahr beaver tail allowed for more movement during firing and allowed grip to shift more readily. Whether this is the result of more barrel flip inherent with the Kahr because of how it's made, or barrel flip is increased due to the less stable grip, I'm not sure. But as stated above, barrel flip in the Shield was minimal.
I don't mean to bad-mouth the Kahr. I'm told that they are excellent guns and I know a number of people who own one or another of the smaller models and some who carry them as back-ups to their primary. But having compared the CW-9 side-by-side, round for round with the Shield, its the latter that is a much more perfect fit for me and I'm entirely enthusiastic about it. To the ladies specifically, I'd suggest giving this a try over a .380 you might be considering carrying. The Shield's lines are trim for easy concealed carry, and the kick is entirely manageable. It's been months since I fired the Sig .380, but the kick seems comparable from this far out. The only other .380 I've ever fired was a tiny Kel Tec, which was unpleasant to shoot to say the least (and the trigger tricky to get to because even my short fingers overshot the trigger guard with finger in register); the Shield beats that out in my opinion by leagues.
You'll have to get in line behind my sister if you want one from H&H, though. She put her name on the list for the next shipment of Shields before we left the range that morning.
If you've gotten this far, thanks for reading, and happy shooting!
Loving mine.
Up to now, I've had a Sig P228 as my only handgun. I love that gun. My shooting buddy calls her "the magic gun" because she's so easy to handle and so accurate, and she set the bar quite high for what I expect from a firearm. However, she's a bit big for me to hide effectively for concealed carry and I've been looking for something smaller. Having handled Kahr's subcompacts I knew I didn't care for them, but aside from a stiff slide I wasn't sure why. I'm still new at this, you see. I very much enjoyed shooting the Sig P238, a tiny .380 which was loaned to me by a stranger at the range, but have no interest in carrying a .380. To my great disappointment, the Sig P290 turned out to be a beast of a little gun and I ruled that out the first time I fired it.
Last week, H&H called to say they'd received their first shipment of the new M&P 9mm Shield and I dashed over to pick one up. I've fired M&P's 9mm and .40s before and like them well enough, but as their size doesn't give them much of an advantage in terms of concealed carry over my Sig, I haven't yet purchased one. $409 plus tax for gun with regular and extended mags. The next morning I met my sister at the range with her Kahr CW-9. We compared the guns visually and were convinced that they were almost identical in size, the most notable difference being the more upward slope of the Kahr's trigger guard toward the barrel and the subtle bend there as well: the Shield has a more squared-off trigger guard.
I put a couple of magazines through the Shield and immediately loved it. When my sister finished firing a couple of mags through her Kahr, she picked up the M&P. After three shots, she turned and said, "Ok, I'm just going to exchange guns with you forever."
Uh, no.
But having compared the CW-9 and Shield by alternating each for about an hour, this is what I came up with. I'm sure I'll get terminology wrong, so bear with me.
Trigger and sight picture: the trigger pull on the M&P is short and quick. Unlike my P228, there's no real discernible difference (for me, anyway) between the first shot and the subsequent shots with the M&P (yes, I realize this is inherent in the differences between the two guns), which I find pleasant and which gets my first shot on-target with improved accuracy (a skill issue, sure, but there it is). It's easier to sight in on the M&P than on the Kahr. Someone else can explain why, maybe? The Shield is easier to sight in than the P228, which surprised me (I tried them both in rapid succession last night; perhaps because the tritium sights on my Sig are a million years old). The trigger pull on the Kahr is longer for all shots, and the link more subtle and harder to catch, so sight picture re-acquisition is diminished considerably as is holding the sight picture during the trigger press. Obviously, effective targeting with the Kahr would simply require better technique and more practice, but for new shooters, this is frustrating. Target re-acquisition on the Shield, however, is all but intuitive: she just snaps right back to the place from which she started. I watched a much better and far more experienced shooter than I unload a magazine in her last night and, firing rapidly, put several rounds through the same two holes. He then exclaimed that I'd just spent $400 of his money because he was going to get one, and perhaps liked the Shield better than his full-size M&P.
The slide lock on the Kahr gave us trouble. First, its squared off edges are a bit sharp and kept biting our thumbs. If we positioned our thumbs stacked on top of each other behind the slide lock lever, it "bit" the inside of the left thumb with each shot. If we positioned our thumbs stacked on top of each other along the frame, the slide lock level "bit" the inside of our right thumbs. Putting the left thumb low along the frame and the right thumb vertical behind the slide lock lever didn't help, either, due to barrel flip which ended up driving one thumb or the other into the lever, but I'll get to barrel flip in a minute. The slide lock lever on the Shield, while still squared off on the outside edges, is less prominent and poses no such problems.
The beaver tail at the back of the Kahr is shorter than that of the M&P, making the M&P feel more secure in the hand when gripped and less jumpy when firing. The short Kahr beaver tail allowed for more movement during firing and allowed grip to shift more readily. Whether this is the result of more barrel flip inherent with the Kahr because of how it's made, or barrel flip is increased due to the less stable grip, I'm not sure. But as stated above, barrel flip in the Shield was minimal.
I don't mean to bad-mouth the Kahr. I'm told that they are excellent guns and I know a number of people who own one or another of the smaller models and some who carry them as back-ups to their primary. But having compared the CW-9 side-by-side, round for round with the Shield, its the latter that is a much more perfect fit for me and I'm entirely enthusiastic about it. To the ladies specifically, I'd suggest giving this a try over a .380 you might be considering carrying. The Shield's lines are trim for easy concealed carry, and the kick is entirely manageable. It's been months since I fired the Sig .380, but the kick seems comparable from this far out. The only other .380 I've ever fired was a tiny Kel Tec, which was unpleasant to shoot to say the least (and the trigger tricky to get to because even my short fingers overshot the trigger guard with finger in register); the Shield beats that out in my opinion by leagues.
You'll have to get in line behind my sister if you want one from H&H, though. She put her name on the list for the next shipment of Shields before we left the range that morning.
If you've gotten this far, thanks for reading, and happy shooting!
Last edited:
Why, thank you for your thorough review! And, may I say, in my totally unbiased opinion, your shooting buddy sounds like a prince among men!
In all seriousness, though, I hope that the ladies of OSA and more than a few of the gentlemen read your review before they make their decision on a concealed carry purchase. I was at best neutral towards the M&P full size guns I have fired, but I'm itching to try out your new baby next time we hit the range. Like..this weekend?
In all seriousness, though, I hope that the ladies of OSA and more than a few of the gentlemen read your review before they make their decision on a concealed carry purchase. I was at best neutral towards the M&P full size guns I have fired, but I'm itching to try out your new baby next time we hit the range. Like..this weekend?
Better be. Shame to waste gorgeous weather.
I've met her shooting buddy. He's a doofus.
What...no comment on the ridiculously thorough and well balanced gun review by OSA's best looking new member?
Similar threads
- Sub Category: Handguns
- Sale Price: 500$
- Caliber: .40
- Sub Category: Handguns
- Caliber: 45 ACP
Oklahoma City
- For Sale
- For Trade
- Sub Category: Handguns
- Caliber: 45 ACP
Oklahoma City
- For Sale
- For Trade
- Sub Category: Handguns
- Caliber: 45 ACP
