re: Better CC gun

quote:

---

M&P 9shield

---

where you got that from you bastard?

damn you, i had my hands on a 40 but didn't get it

i agree, i definitely want the 9mm

quote:

---

warranty claims

---

I know you use the Gen2 G19s a lot. The Gen4s had a recall for Christ sake...

quote:

---

1. I'm sure you're aware that John Moses Browning never intended for the 1911 to have a grip safety.

---

i am aware

quote:

---

2. And I'll try to forget about the warranty claims I've had with one of my 9mm M&P's.

---

everything will have issues

glock recall

quote:

---

Your training and experience with these three platforms is apparently superior to mine

---

did i say this?

quote:

---

Have a nice day, sir.

---

thanks

How much harder is it then the fullsize guns? I have the ram kit, dcaek kit and aek trigger on my 9c all of which I've done myself. It will also be a BUG for me. Ill use it a lot when i probably wouldn't carry my double stack gun.

quote:

---

How much harder is it then the fullsize guns?

---

I don't know. The trigger on my full size M&P is smoother, so I've never done any trigger work.

It probably seemd difficult to me becasue (a) I'm a dumb redneck and (b) much as I hate to say it, I've done trigger work on a lot of glocks (for CCW and for competition). On a Glock, even I can replace any trigger component if about 2-3 minutes.

On the Shield all I replaced was the sear. Replacing other pieces of he trigger system (like the striker blocker) require removal of the rear sight (the set screw for which is supposed to be (red) loc-tited in place.

p.s. While you're in there, you might want to Dremel off the safety. The videos show this as well. Easy to do.

No offense taken -- and wasn't referring to you as one of the "M&P fans." But there are a couple on this board (just like there are some Glock "fans," XD "fans" and 1911 "fans") and I figure some will feel compelled to "defend" their weapon of choice.

Some of the "fans" might benefit from A broader experience base. Most, fortunately, simply engage in good natured banter -- which is one of the benefits of a board such as this.

quote:

---

Only the grip safety.

They have really good triggers, and are reported to hold up well in intense training classes.

---

Fair enough. I was curious.
Accurate information of gun reliability is sort of a pet peeve of mine. It seems like the only availability reports of gun reliability are either: 1. Anecdotal ("My ________" ,fill in the blank, "went down after only 500 rounds."). 2. Based on a "torture test" on a specific gun, quite possibly sponsored by the gun maker, or 3. Reports, hopefully objective, by those who've observed a large number of rounds shot by a number of different guns. Of course, #3 is the most useful, but even it's not w/o potential problems. I wish us shooter had access to subjective and accurate information on gun reliability......

quote:

---

I wish us shooter had access to subjective and accurate information on gun reliability......

---

TOTH:

You and I agree.

I may have misplaced confidence in my primary source of info on this .......... defensive handgun academies.

But having attended numerous "big time, brand name" defensive handgun academies over the past 10-15 years, I have seen a lot of guns crap out during a class where we fire anywhere between 400 and 500 rounds per day for two or three days.

Of even better statistical validity is being able to chat periodically with those instructors, most of whom teach over 1000 students per year, and have done so for 15-25 years.

I already have pretty good clues about what guns are reliable, based on what I see these trainers and their staff members carrying. This is then validated in discussions, along with info about which guns malfunction with regularity over the course of a class.

The guys under whom I have trained rank reliability as a non-negotiable #1 criterion. All can afford to buy any gun they want -- and most could get paid by a gun manufacturer to carry a certain make, just for the PR value it would generate for the manufacturer. (The vast majority of these trainers also avoid guns with any sort of external safety.)

But on a board such as this, I think you and I are in a distinct minority of people who think reliability is the most important attribute. Based on the posts I see, internet reviews, and//or a "sexy" appearance (whatever that is), and//or a gun that their friends think is "cool" are far more important to a lot of (apparently insecure) people.

But since I don't plan to hire personal bodyguards off an internet forum, I really don't lose any sleep over the somewhat adolescent approach that some follow. But it is pretty sick to think that a "newbie" who is reaching out for advice would read and base a selection based on some of what I see posted here by "fans" (the ones who post "My ___[brand]___ is just as reliable as a ___[brand]___) and the "anti-fans" (the ones who post "I don't like _[brand]__ guns, even though they are reliable).

The fans and the anti-fans seem to feel compelled to defend their purchase decisions -- just like the guys who have to tell you why their Ranger is superior to a Skeeter, or their Allison is superior to a Bullet. In some cases they may be correct -- but in many they seem to be focused on avoiding buyer's remorse.

But again -- I'm just posting more internet opinions, which should be ignored, along with all other internet opinions.