Is S&W retarded?

mac1911 said:
Nothing new, how many years did it take for the M&P 45 pistol to come out....ling enough I lost interest.
So for SW the newest pistols I have are a early model 41 and a 4013...
Click to expand...
Funny thing, two weeks ago I picked up a M&P45 gen1 2014 safe queen. I love it.
I had 5 Shields, 2 BG, 1 M&P9 gen 1, 2 M&P9 2.0 and a 2.0 Compact ....sold all of them.
 
Ruger revolvers are built like tanks. Ugly stupid old Russian tanks. They are cheaper because they are less refined. The grip design on Ruger revolvers sucks. A very good friend of mine says his .44 Ruger super blackhawk will "Make a grown man cry", but I can shoot my 29 all day.
If you like revolvers, S&W has many more configurations and options and, apples to apples, are just more accurate and easier to shoot. Ruger triggers are atrocious.

Neither company currently makes a decent semi auto, but S&W has in the past.
 
jkelly1229 said:
Is anyone else confused? The shield isn't a terrible gun

I don't own one but they're reasonably popular.
Click to expand...
At the gay parade. That's what I hear.

I remember when NES was drooling all over the Shield, when they first came out everyone here wanted one, the SW marketing machine worked.
 
Rant 2/10

Smith focuses on massive production numbers with a low price point geared towards first time buyers and the casual shooter. They've cornered that niche market.
Kit guns with a sizeable aftermarket margin, but a Glock or a SIG or any other plastic-fantastic they are not.
APEX made trainloads of cash off of the M&P trigger kits.
You can redesign a striker fired polymer so many times, so don't hold out for anything new and innovative.
So many better options out there for rmr cut slides or optics ready out of the box.
Decent entry level shooting games guns, but after a year you're most likely moving on to a better bottom feed anyways.
Sizeable selection of wheelguns in almost every caliber out there, not the same 2 or 3 "old standbys" in different frames. You can only re-hash .357 and .44 so many times.
 
kalash said:
The only reason to buy an M&P is that you can't figure out how to get a Glock in MA.

The only reason to buy a S&W revolver is that you haven't shot a Ruger.



FIGHT ME! [laugh]
Click to expand...

the M&P feels better in my hand than that pretentious Austrian brick

it's easier to remove they cylinder on an S&W for cleaning than it is to worry about a ruger detent sailing into oblivion

Eat that borscht, Ivan.;)
 
jkelly1229 said:
Is anyone else confused? The shield isn't a terrible gun
Click to expand...

Yeah I don’t get it either. It’s cause there is something else out there to catch their eye or the internet tell them to hate this or that.

I have a Gen 1 Shield I gave the full apex treatment to. Shoots really well, it’s my go to carry semi auto. Same for the wife, and she shoots hers well for an inexperienced shooter.

I will say I don’t like the fact I can’t attach a light that has more than 100 lumens to it.

I also have a Gen 1 M&P45, has a free state trigger, and I must have gotten one of the good ones because the trigger is fantastic and the pistol is incredibly accurate. I’ve never done a damn thing to it expect clean it. Out of all my pistols and revolvers, it’s been shot the most. The only time I ever had a hiccup with it was when I had a squib round. And that was my fault when reloading the ammo.
 
Fully agree that the M&P semi autos are crap. Had a 1.0 M&P and I sold it as I just didn’t like it. It even had the Apex1 trigger installed.

Now I fully disagree about the revolvers. They are hands above Rugers for just about all qualities. Better triggers, sleeker lines, better ergonomics and just damn sexy revolvers. The Rugers by comparison are just big blocks of wood that shoot.
 
Broccoli Iglesias said:
At the gay parade. That's what I hear.

I remember when NES was drooling all over the Shield, when they first came out everyone here wanted one, the SW marketing machine worked.
Click to expand...

That was a combination of mass retard gun owner factor (bruh if FS doesn't sell it its 3we3egull!) as well as skinflints, those things were like $299 or some shit.

ETA: I agree that the marketing was good though but they didn't really have to do much they produced like one ad what's some halfway decent chick going jogging or going to work or some s*** while carrying that gun.
 
at the time the shield was a "latest and greatest" gun. 6 months wait, everyone had one. other companies answered the call with their "latest and greatest" and so the cycle begins again. but i thought at the time s&w marketing was due a raise, can't remember ever the hype created like this before a product was introduced to the public creating what i call a pre-demand. like everything else, sales slowed, something else overtook the shield and it fell out of favor.
 
jkelly1229 said:
Is anyone else confused? The shield isn't a terrible gun

I don't own one but they're reasonably popular.
Click to expand...
Gun owners.

When the Shield came out, they were all like "OMG, NEVA BEN DUN BEFO" ... when there were other options, more reliable and thinner single stack 9mm. But the Shield was new so it was "AWESOME!".

Now that other new stuff came out, the Shield is the old toy and all the new stuff is "OMG, NEVA BEN DUN BEFO".

But, I think we can all agree the Shield was never a great gun. People just creamed their pants for no reason.
 
Just my take, but I think this would be largely redundant for S&W. They already have the M2.0 Subcompact. Yes, it is larger than a P365, but not by much. 0.14" wider. 0.68" taller. 0.8" longer. The biggest difference is weight, where the M2.0 is 25oz vs P365's 17.8oz. But with that you have 12 rounds standard in a free state and a slightly longer barrel.

But now consider many opt to go with the P365XL. Then things are almost the same. Same length. Nearly the same height. Negligible difference in width, and same capacity. So for S&W to split hairs between the Shield and the M2.0 Subcompact might not make sense. They could increase the grip width on the Shield to allow for 10 rounds, but they might cannibalize their M2.0 sales at that point.
 
I'd be more apt to pick one up of they made a M&P in 10mm. I shoot my wife's Gen 1 M&P9 pretty well, it fits my hand pretty well. Just wish they would bring 10 into their lineup, as I have a G29 and had a G40 and they are fine, but not exactly a favorite of mine.
 
Broccoli Iglesias said:
Gun owners.

When the Shield came out, they were all like "OMG, NEVA BEN DUN BEFO" ... when there were other options, more reliable and thinner single stack 9mm. But the Shield was new so it was "AWESOME!".

Now that other new stuff came out, the Shield is the old toy and all the new stuff is "OMG, NEVA BEN DUN BEFO".

But, I think we can all agree the Shield was never a great gun. People just creamed their pants for no reason.
Click to expand...
I just honestly have no idea what the dude who opened this thread means....
 
Broccoli Iglesias said:
Gun owners.

When the Shield came out, they were all like "OMG, NEVA BEN DUN BEFO" ... when there were other options, more reliable and thinner single stack 9mm. But the Shield was new so it was "AWESOME!".

Now that other new stuff came out, the Shield is the old toy and all the new stuff is "OMG, NEVA BEN DUN BEFO".

But, I think we can all agree the Shield was never a great gun. People just creamed their pants for no reason.
Click to expand...
39137922-853C-42CB-9124-D638698197A6.gif

I have Glocks, HK USPs, and Sig Legions in the safe and still carry a Shield 2.0. It’s been a great carry gun and I couldn’t possibly GAF less if it’s not “cool” anymore.
 
You know smith beat glock to market by a lot on the optics ready guns. The core cut is usable unlike the MOS cut which is kind of arguably trash.

The shield was infact way ahead of sig and glock, now years down the road they cought up.
 
wmassregulators said:
You know smith beat glock to market by a lot on the optics ready guns. The core cut is usable unlike the MOS cut which is kind of arguably trash.
Click to expand...
Lol, that's not that meaningful considering most RDSs are a dumpster fire. The industry can't even standardize a hole pattern. Not to mention Smith doesn't even sell that many guns by volume that have RDS plates on them.
 
Grendizer138 said:
View attachment 459580

I have Glocks, HK USPs, and Sig Legions in the safe and still carry a Shield 2.0. It’s been a great carry gun and I couldn’t possibly GAF less if it’s not “cool” anymore.
Click to expand...
The Shield 9s work great as long as you managed to get a no-safety one that doesn't have pins that wander out.
 
drgrant said:
Lol, that's not that meaningful considering most RDSs are a dumpster fire. The industry can't even standardize a hole pattern. Not to mention Smith doesn't even sell that many guns by volume that have RDS plates on them.
Click to expand...
Look at what OP was complaining about.
The invention of the guns going after the shield and how slow smith was into the optic ready market when in fact they beat glock by literally years
 

Similar threads

Where is a Signal 9 Reliant???
Replies
11
Views
221
Mountain
Mountain
What kind of Beretta 1934 is this?
Replies
1
Views
71
Marty McFly
Marty McFly
Trigger job on a S&W Bodyguard 380?
2 3
Replies
67
Views
990
kalash
kalash
Is there a reason.......
2 3
Replies
66
Views
2K
CMEBoston
CMEBoston
Mass. out-migration study. Everyone is leaving!
2 3 4
Replies
113
Views
3K
yogi
yogi
Back
Top Bottom