First concealed carry pistol purchase

[astettler]

Hey everybody,

Just got my LTCF and I'm looking for my first pistol for concealed carry. My online research led me to the S&W MP 9 Shield. I checked out my local gun shop and the Shield feels nice, but the Ruger LC9 also piqued my interest. It feels lighter and smaller (which it is, but only by a very small margin). More research made me seriously consider the LC9S version. I have access to a Shield that I can shoot. Can anyone give pros/cons for the LC9S and Shield 9? The number one reason for purchase is CC self defense. Fun at the range is a far distant second.

[QuackXP]

Take a look at the CW9 as well. Very similar in size and price. Its also what I decided on among your choices.

If you do go down the LC9 route make sure you look at the LC9s or LC9s PRO.

*NOTE* I have since reversed my below opinion about the LC9 assuming you are purchasing the LC9s or LC9s Pro model. Buying the LC9 in a state that does not require the internal lock I sill believe is supporting anti-2a legislation.

The LC9 is a abomination of nanny state feel good "safety features". As soon as I first read the tech specs I immateriality took it off my list of possible purchases in the single stack compact 9mm category.

Top of the list is the internal lock mechanism. This "feature" only exists on any firearm because of anti-2a nanny state legislation. Anyone responsible enough to secure their firearm would have already done so with a external lock or a gun cabinet/safe. Anyone who does not secure their firearms would not use this feature. The only thing this feature can possibly do is fail at the wrong moment and render your firearm useless.

It has a mechanical loaded chamber indicator. Another anti-2a nanny state feature. First off all firearms should be treated as loaded anyway. I don't need another mechanical complexity to tell me something I should already know. Now if you want to insure that your firearm is loaded a simple cut into the slide and/or breach can show you. Sans that a simple press check will answer your question.

Magazine disconnect. This feature has some merit basically that only comes down to a gun grab type situation where you can drop the mag and render the firearm useless during a struggle to maintain control of it. Good for those who carry a full size firearm openly. Not so useful for a firearm nobody should even know you have on you. Personally I see it as just another failure point.

Manual safety. You defiantly need one on a SAO only type firearm like the 1911 to safely carry with a chambered round. But on a DAO firearm that you carry in a quality holster it comes down to personal preference. My preference is not to have one on a DAO firearm.

Ruger does not make a model without ANY of the features so its automatically a non starter for me.

The Ruger does feel good in the hand and the trigger is adequate, although not as good as the Kahr pistols.

For about the same price and maybe cheaper now look at the Kahr CW9, very similar size, same capacity, Made in the USA and soon to be made in PA.

I have the Kahr and have been nothing but happy with it.

I thought of you when I read about the lc9s pro today. It might have taken awhile, but it looks like Ruger is listening.

Glad my opinions reached someone.

The LC9s was move in the nice direction. It was nice that with the LC9s they got rid of the nanny-state internal lock and mechanical LCI.

Now that the Pro is out there really is choice in this segment from Ruger.

To bad for Ruger its a day late and dollar short for this customer. I am very happy with my Kahr CW9. I'll have to handle the new LC9s Pro and see if they upgraded the trigger to be in line with the Kahr trigger.

But I have changed my mind about them now that there is a choice for the consumer.

Link to the whole thread from the above quotes.

http://forum.pafoa.org/concealed-ope...ruger-lc9.html

[sprrdhawk44]

IBTG43.



Of those two, the Shield. Hands down.

[Hodgie]

I agree with the above statement. I have shot both and own only the Shield in 9mm and regret giving it too my wife. The Ruger isnt bad for what it is but the Shield is great at everything which is rare for a smaller concealed carry pistol.

The prices are way down on these right now in the $325.00 to $350.00 range and they also come with 2 mag's as compared to the 1 Ruger gives you and at $30.00 to $40.00 a POP any small difference in purchase price is going to be lost right there.

The shield also offers better sites and no other nanny state features other then an optional thumb safety if you choose that model. The LC9s Pro is also offered which excludes all nanny state features Ruger has to offer.

The LC9s has a nice trigger as compared to the orig DAO and may possibly be just a tad bit crisper then the Shield but it's not enough to change my mind over the greatness of that S&W. I realize I am coming off as a S&W Fan Boy and to show I am not I currently edc a Glock 26 and all of my other purposed pistols are Glocks, but If I was only going to own 1 pistol for both HD, SD and normal every day range plinking it would be a Shield upgraded TFX sights.

Fanboy speech over.

[harp28]

I did not care for the Ruger LC9, but the LC9S and the LC9S pro are much better, IMHO, with very nice triggers. I would have been happy with either, or the Kahr CW9, which ended up being my second choice, but I bought and carry a Shield 9mm. It feels like more gun to me, although all 3 are virtually identical in size. I do not regret my decision at all. A lot of people, more experienced than I am, seem to agree.

[smoke-wagon]

I have the shield for when my g19 is too big and I love it! I bought 2 extra mags from magcommander online for like $25 a piece and an appendix IWB from blade tech and it has been awesome with no problems whatsoever.

[Cyclops]

I am going to piss odd some critics of the Lc9 with my post, but here goes.

I bought an Lc9 and found it OK from a size/weight perspective. It is a double action hammer fired pistol, and that means a longer trigger pull, and that means not being nervous and jerky in a firefight. With lot's of experience with an M1911 in Nam, I had no problem adapting to the Lc9. It has 3 safety features so it is a good gun for the inexperienced. The M1911 had 3 safeties too, but they were different from those of the Lc9. The Lc9s had has the same safety features as the Lc9 but has a better trigger pull. Now there is the Lc9s Pro that has only a trigger pull safety. That makes it a faster shooter but more dangerous for the inexperienced shooter. I now carry the Lc9s Pro, and keep the Lc9 in my night table drawer.

The Lc9 series guns are reliable and accurate. With the right ammo they will drop an aggressor. If you are an experienced gun handler, then the Lc9s Pro is the best choice. Otherwise, I think the Lc9s is best.

The original Lc9 and the Lc9s pro require gun handling experience for different reasons, but the Lc9 series is a really great set of guns for CC.

If you want to discuss it, PM me. I am not going to get into an online debate with those who have different opinions.

[astettler]

I greatly appreciate the responses so far and as expected the Shield is getting the most nods. I would just like to emphasize that I'm looking more for pros/cons of the two carry pistols than simply what each of you would choose. I'd like to know why you all have or would choose one over the other. Cyclops, Hodgie and QuackXP, your responses are more what I am looking for, extra thanks!

[Hodgie]

I am going to piss odd some critics of the Lc9 with my post, but here goes.

I bought an Lc9 and found it OK from a size/weight perspective. It is a double action hammer fired pistol, and that means a longer trigger pull, and that means not being nervous and jerky in a firefight. With lot's of experience with an M1911 in Nam, I had no problem adapting to the Lc9. It has 3 safety features so it is a good gun for the inexperienced. The M1911 had 3 safeties too, but they were different from those of the Lc9. The Lc9s had has the same safety features as the Lc9 but has a better trigger pull. Now there is the Lc9s Pro that has only a trigger pull safety. That makes it a faster shooter but more dangerous for the inexperienced shooter. I now carry the Lc9s Pro, and keep the Lc9 in my night table drawer.

The Lc9 series guns are reliable and accurate. With the right ammo they will drop an aggressor. If you are an experienced gun handler, then the Lc9s Pro is the best choice. Otherwise, I think the Lc9s is best.

The original Lc9 and the Lc9s pro require gun handling experience for different reasons, but the Lc9 series is a really great set of guns for CC.

If you want to discuss it, PM me. I am not going to get into an online debate with those who have different opinions.

Different opinions are great they bring up things that others may have never considered or thought of in the past. Online pissing matches are because of close minded morons who cant get past the brand name rather then learn something or except the fact that there actually maybe something better then what they have out there.

I should have added more about my personal use of the LC9 after firing it. The DAO trigger sucks when compared to DAO offerings from other brands such as Kahr or Sig. It's fairly light and snappy epically with +P ammunition so it will not be very easy for a lot of shooters especially ones used to striker fired pistols to remain on target after their 1st shot. Mixed with the smallish sights and that kind of ended it's deal for me.

As far as the LC9s the trigger is great and it makes up for all short comings in the LC9 standard including the sights which may just be my personal opinion. So what we had to look at when considering one for my wife VS the shield was shootability, build quality, after market upgrades and comfort.

Now I was unable to shoot the LC9s so did not get the pleasure of firing rounds down range with that trigger but the standard pistol did have a fair amount of recoil compared to the Shield that's not going to change with a different trigger, and after getting the DAO trigger down I could honestly say I wouldn't be taking it to the range for a plinker day very often.

Build quality well I see no major issues with either or in 9mm being reported on the interweb so that's a hard one to compare. From inspecting, firing, and handling both they both appear to be made well with no really obvious cut corners.

After market upgrades for the shield are there, ton's of offering in sights, .40's can be down converted to 9mm and mag's are easy to come by. I have not seen much as far as night sights offered for the LC9, I have not gone out of my way to look specifically for them but going through sight manufactures lists when it hits Ruger it's typically the SR series of pistols that are being made.

Over all comfort and value I give it to the Shield and so did my wife and please believe me I wanted her to get a LC9s mainly because I wanted to keep my Shield for me and it's always fun to have a new gun in the pistol safe but she was sold on the S&W after the 1st mag was empty. I will also add that it's one of the only pistols I shoot well with the shortened mag inserted in it. Rolling that pinky under the 7 round mag comes natural to me as compared to other offering including my 26 which I shoot rather crapily without an extended magazine.

The Value part is strictly based on cost and I think you would be hard pressed to get a better CC pistol that can double duty as a fun plinker or that one can run a comfortable 500 round 1 day class with for less then $325.00 with 2 mags. The fact that Ruger only provides 1 mag with most of their pistols and rifles really chaps my ass as well as the lack of availability and the $30.00 to $40.00 price they go for from most online retailers, but again that's a personal complaint and has no baring on the quality of the pistol.

Now I have owned a CW9 and I if I had to choose between the LC9s pro and the CW9 I would purchase the Ruger, but that's a different thread for a different day.

[jthrelf]

I haven't fired a shield, but I've owned an LC9s Pro for a bit now and can tell you that it's awesome. The trigger is very good. It has a long reset, but really works for me. It's been reliable and quite accurate in my hands.

Tanner's in Bucks has Shields w no safety and two mags for 349 right now (if they haven't sold out). That's a better value than the Ruger - but I'm still very happy I went with the Ruger.