Can't decide between a Nano, Shield 9, or Shield 40

[Quackerbacker]

Anyone shot both?

Have the Nano FTE issues been resolved?

Read More

 

[stmcelroy]

Get the Shield in 9mm, or .40 if you can't find the 9mm.

The Nano feels terrible in my hands and the Shield is an awesome gun.

I have both the Shield in 9mm and an XDS in .45acp, both are way better than the Nano IMHO.

 

[RBid]

It only matters if you can actually get the one you want. If you can, get the Shield in 9mm. It's too small to be able to rapidly put multiple rounds of .40 on target with, but is controlable in 9mm. The trigger beats the Nano trigger, and the Shield has a little more real estate in the grip, as well as a lower bore. The Nano sits REALLY high above the hand.

In case it matters, this isn't speculative, or based on Internet reviews. I've handled them quite a bit.

 

[stmcelroy]

It only matters if you can actually get the one you want. If you can, get the Shield in 9mm. It's too small to be able to rapidly put multiple rounds of .40 on target with, but is controlable in 9mm. The trigger beats the Nano trigger, and the Shield has a little more real estate in the grip, as well as a lower bore. The Nano sits REALLY high above the hand.

In case it matters, this isn't speculative, or based on Internet reviews. I've handled them quite a bit.

Spot on. I've messed with a Nano a bunch and have a dummy gun that I handle a bit, and it does nothing for me that the Shield doesn't do much better.

 

[Quackerbacker]

I can get any of them.

Right now they are all three neck & neck.

I like the Nano (i've handled it) for how compact it is. It's just a bit more compact than the shield and could probably go in even a back pocket where the shield is just a touch too big.

The shields don't seem to have a big issue with them. They had some issues with mags that got resolved. The nano is kind of up in the air as far as FTE's with lighter ammo.

As for the 9mm vs 40 in the shield, i've seen people shoot the 40 pretty well. I have pretty strong hands and i have an SR40C that's very controllable. I'm almost leaning towards a shield 40 and i could always trade it for a 9 if it's too snappy.

I really need all three

 

[Netspirit]

Anyone who can shoot a small gun in .40 well can shoot the same gun in 9mm equally well or better. I fail to understand why anyone would want higher ammo price, harsher recoil and lower capacity in a concealed gun when modern 9mm JHP 147gr (like Win RA9T or Fed HST) does the job so well (even without going +P).

The only reason why I would choose Shield .40 over 9mm is if I already had a bunch of pistols in .40. Having to manage multiple calibers in the family would be too much hassle.

 

[hondakilla98]

I would go with the shield if those were my only two choices. But I wanted smaller and lighter. So I bought a Kahr PM9. And I still don't regret it. I can easily pocket carry or IWB. The shield does have a lot nicer trigger, it takes some time to get used to the long DA pull on the Kahr.

 

[nwtech]

I have a shield in .40 and it shoots nicer and has less recoil than my Walther P99 in .40. After about 400 rounds though, the recoil spring broke on my shield. I called Smith and Wesson and am still waiting on the replacement spring. Also, I ad to polish the feed ramp or it wouldn't shoot Golden Sabre JHP.

 

[RBid]

When people say, "I shoot X well", or "I've seen people shoot X well", it generally means "their targets look decent/good".

What matters is how they handle when you shoot at realistic defensive shooting speeds. What your target looks like after a 3-5 yard rapid fire string is more relevant than a 50 foot to 25 yard slow fire group.

I strongly encourage people to consider the reality of shooting .40 from a subcompact, in rapid fire. It's not impossible to control, but it will require training to stay sharp with it. The 9mm version is far easier to control in rapid fire strings.

I'm not against the .40 as a round. It's my second favorite caliber to 9, and I often shoot and carry it. When I do carry it, it's in a Glock 23. I wouldn't carry it in anything smaller, because I'm notably more efficient with 9 in smaller pistols.

The goal is as many quality hits as you can get, with speed.

 

[Blitzkrieg]

Depends on your intended purpose.. I'm buying Nanos for my gal and I for BUG pocket guns, and the nano is better for that IMO. I see lots of reviews with no FTE so it must be an uncommon QC issue. Satisfied customers often don't speak up, dissatisfied ones do.. but I will bet Beretta will make it right if you get a lemon

As far as caliber, I too would not want a .40 smaller than a G23. We're going with 9MM Nanos

 

[Quackerbacker]

All good points. No question that good hitsAt present 40 is my only pistol caliber and i'm all set up for reloading. I'm assuming though, that at some point the hysteria will be subdued and 9 will once again be cheap & plentiful.

Having said that check out this review of the shield 40. At 3:13 he demonstrates the controllability on rapid fire.

 

[Quackerbacker]

Also, for those that haven't yet seen this method of recoil management, check it out. It was a new concept to me and i've been training with this grip for over a year now and i can really control my sr40c well now. At combat ranges, this is my chosen method and while it took a couple sessions to get used to, my rapid fire shooting improved in the first half hour by orders of magnitude:

Having said all that, i'm starting to lean towards the Nano just for that extra edge in portability & concealment. I find myself leaving the sr40c at home too often, and my goal at the outset was to replace my 380 with a larger caliber sub-compact. The nano is the smallest of the bunch.

 

[RBid]

Quakerbacker,

He demonstrates the controlability of the Shield in .40 when fired by someone who has trained properly. That's exactly what I was getting at in my earlier post. It is absolutely possible to control it, provided you put in the time necessary to manage it. Even then, the same shooter with a Shield in 9mm is going to look impossibly tight.

The second vid makes me smile. That's my grip, and my warm weather/light clothing pistol is a Ruger SR9c. I pick my carry pistols based on efficiency. The SR9c has a very low bore, and a fantastic recoil spring assembly, as well as a very nice trigger for a striker fired pistol. The instructor in the vid does a great job of explaining why this grip is good.

A perk of the grip in that second vid: for instinctive shooting, thumbs-forward allows you to aim with your support hand thumb, which is oriented at the target. This speeds up target acquisition and transitions, and can cut down the time it takes to get that first hit on target. There is a video of Rob Leatham floating around where he does a demonstration at a range, and during one of his demonstrations, he makes a remark that he "actually aimed, that time". Rob is one of the first guys who went to this grip. Not surprisingly, he has had a bit of success in shooting sports

 

[Blitzkrieg]

All that looks great guys.. but having been there and having seen the beast up close as well as being a JKD instructor, I can tell you that many if not most times you are never going to get the offhand into play except as a stiff-arm, point blank.. you may even have to shoot thru your off hand, unintentionally in a struggle. Train with both hands fighting independently, NO support hand as well as the El Primo two hand perfect presentations

 

[RBid]

All that looks great guys.. but having been there and having seen the beast up close as well as being a JKD instructor, I can tell you that many if not most times you are never going to get the offhand into play except as a stiff-arm, point blank.. you may even have to shoot thru your off hand, unitentionally in a struggle. Train with both hands fighting independently, NO support hand as well as the El Primo two hand perfect presentations

I agree.

There are really three categories of defensive handgun use, as I see it:

1. Contact distance. One hand, instinctive shooting, with the target so close that missing is less likely. Retention is critical.

2. Close quarters, non contact. Two hand grip is very doable, recoil management comes into play, speed is key, aim and stance are likely to be neglected.

3. "Other". Actual aimed shooting (likely to shoot to save another person), suppressing/cover spray to disengage, etc. This is the "far less liky" stuff.

My own experience was in category 2. I'm glad that I practice punching out on target by aiming through my off hand thumb.

 

[nautox]

Anyone shot both?

Have the Nano FTE issues been resolved?

From what I've read the Nano likes 124gr and higher ammo.

I was all ready to go and buy a Nano... until I held it. It's not that bad, but it was a lot larger than I thought it was going to be. There's just too many options for a gun that size. I'd rather have a SCCY than a Nano, holds more ammo, cheaper and feels better in my hand.
The XDs in 9mm is supposed to come out in June?

Until then my vote would be for the Shield in 9mm.

 

[Medic!]

I like the nano a lot. The features and build quality. Yes it dose sit high in my hand. But dose not feel bad to me. I just like the XDs and glock 26 more. No matter what I try. I allways come back to the 26. It's bigger than the new herd of tiny nines that are now replacing the heard of .380's that we all fell in love with. Then out of love with. The Nano is smaller in hand than than the glock. It dose not feel like it carry's smaller.

 

[hariph creek]

Of those? Shield 9mm.

 

[2Wheels4Ever]

I still love the p380. I know it is not as powerful as a 9mm, but it is really comfortable gun to wear and shoot. I like it more than the nano, and it is a good deal smaller than the shield.

 

[Blitzkrieg]

Just bought a Nano, will give a range report