Best 9mm Sub Compact for Concealed Carry?

[GMFan]

Thanks all again for the recommendations. I do agree with the folks here who said a conceal carry and HD gun is trying to fit 10lbs of [censored] in a 5lb bucket. My shotgun is what I use now for HD. For now, my primary wants in a handgun are to conceal carry in the near future. If I want a pistol as a nightstand gun I'm better off with full size with large magazine.

I watched hickok45 on YouTube late last night and he was comparing the Springfield XD-S to the S&W Shield. They're both extremely similar but I will say the thumb safety on the S&W is a plus. Both of these guns are on my list to check out to see how they feel.

The Sig Sauer and Glocks are also good choices as well as the Ruger. I'm going to stick with a sub compact. I will buy a full size down the road. Therefore I have rethought my requirement of an accessory rail and will now say it's not a requirement.

 

[aquariuscsm]

Originally Posted By: billt460
Originally Posted By: CapitalTruck
All those Glocks have for safety is the trigger safety, I don't like it.


Glock's employ the best... and the ONLY safety there is, or is needed.... The SHOOTER.


This!!

 

[aquariuscsm]

One of my fave things about my Glock is the very short trigger travel and the extremely lightweight pull,almost like a hare trigger. And the gun feels impeccably precision.

 

[Hokiefyd]

Originally Posted By: GMFan
I watched hickok45 on YouTube late last night and he was comparing the Springfield XD-S to the S&W Shield. They're both extremely similar but I will say the thumb safety on the S&W is a plus. Both of these guns are on my list to check out to see how they feel.


If you like thumb safeties, certainly look at the Shield and the Ruger LC9s. I own a Shield, and I do not use the thumb safety. I sort of like what Smith did, here, as someone who prefers no manual safeties on a carry gun. It's physically there, and they can check that block for places that require it and for people who do want it...but I feel that it's not really usable as a safety because it's SO flush to the gun. I feel that it may as well not be there. I bought my Shield just as the ones without thumb safety were being introduced (called NTS - No Thumb Safety - by the Smith crowd), and I went ahead and bought the one with the TS because it was my first carry gun and I wanted to get a feel for what I was comfortable with. I quickly moved to carrying it with the safety off, and that's how I always carry it today. It rides in a Kydex holster that covers the TS, so there's virtually no chance it will flip on by accident. I do train to flip it off, and when I do have it on for practice, I get it flipped off about half the time when I hurry my presentation. If I bought one today, I'd buy the NTS model.

I certainly can't make the decision for you on whether to use a safety or not -- that's your decision alone and shouldn't be made by anyone else. But I say all that to say that if you do really want to use a safety, I find the Shield's safety to be difficult to use because it is so flush. If you are interested in a manual safety, Ruger's LC9s has a more pronounced manual safety, and it may be easier to get to on a quick presentation.

My full-size M&P 9 has a TS, and it's SUPER easy to use. It's patterned after a 1911's TS, and it works exactly the same as one. I bought it with a TS because I had plans to put a really light trigger in it and make it a fun range gun, but I've sort of lost interest in that...and it's a gun that I no longer really shoot much...but that's a different story. If you are interested eventually in an M&P 9 full-size for your night stand, and want a low mileage one with FIVE magazines included, give me a call...

 

[Hokiefyd]

Originally Posted By: aquariuscsm
One of my fave things about my Glock is the very short trigger travel and the extremely lightweight pull,almost like a hare trigger. And the gun feels impeccably precision.


Have you worked on the trigger? A stock Glock trigger is about 5-6 pounds...not really a "hair" trigger in my opinion. And, while Glocks have superb reliability, I wouldn't really say it has a precision feel. That's part of the reliability -- parts fit loose and can accomodate wear and grit and grime that tighter guns can't always do.

Hold an STI Edge or even a stock Beretta 92 -- those feel like a Swiss watch dipped in 10W-30 compared to something polymer like a Glock or an M&P.

 

[GMFan]

Thanks again for the latest replies. Everyone's input is helping me tremendously. Also I'm thankful for the excellent reviews of firearms available on Youtube.

So this is my list right now:

S&W M&P Shield - All around a nice package. This gun has grown on me a lot from what I've seen.

Ruger LC9 - Nice gun. I do like the sleeker package in a hammer fired gun but I'm not too keen on the little key needed to break the gun down. I see that as an inconvenience - you never know if you will lose the key or you get stranded somewhere and the key is at home and you can't break it down. Does anyone see this as I do or am I over-reacting about this?

Springfield XD-S - Sleek gun and is on par with the S&W Shield. What are people's thoughts on the grip safety?

hokiefyd, interesting point about the safety vs no-safety M&P Shield. I can see your point. I felt the same way when I bought my shotgun way back when and my lever rifle...having a safety is like training wheels and makes you feel a little safer but once you get familiar with your weapon it's something you don't find necessary.

So those are the top 3 on my list right now. I have to do more research on the Sig Sauer sub compacts. My goal is to narrow my choices down before I head to the store to handle them. I'm sure once I get my hands on them I will be better able to narrow down my choice.

Thanks again everyone.

Oh, and believe me I've already been debating what my full-size gun will be. Believe me it's not too far in the distant future.

 

[Hokiefyd]

The Shield is a fantastic little gun. It's a compact and reliable package and holds 7+1 or 8+1...both magazines are included by Smith. Despite being Melonite'd and looking black, the slide and barrel are both actually stainless steel -- you could really expose this gun to a lot of unfavorable conditions, and it just won't rust. The M&P series (and the Shield is no different) feels like a natural extension of my hand...both in how the gun points and how it feels in the hand. Smith did a fantastic job with its M&P series. I liked the Shield so much, I bought its full-size cousin. Both have treated me well, with no failures to speak of...none I can even blame on ammunition. And I practice with the cheapest Winchester White Box or steel-cased Russian Tulammo 115 gr rounds I can buy. Both of mine shoot a number of JHP rounds with ease -- I haven't yet found a round they won't fire and cycle.

The Ruger LC9 has a long trigger -- one that ~really~ moots its manual safety in my opinion. I think the Ruger to look at is the LC9s, the LC9's striker-fired cousin. A pistol with a trigger as long as the Ruger's should not come with a TS in my opinion. If you like the LC9, look also at the Kel-tec PF-9 -- it's an extremely small 9mm with a long-but-smooth trigger and no TS. It's no range toy -- it's a snappy 9mm that's very concealable.

The Springfield firearms are very nice. When I bought my Shield, the XD-S was selling for about $100 more, and the major differentiating factor to me was the fiber optic front sight. I don't know if the XD-S still has that or not, and I also don't know what the price difference is.

Look also at the Walther PPS or its newer sibling, the CCP.

 

[mannys9130]

You will never find a CCW gun with a better trigger than the LC9s. I love mine. Small, but fits perfectly in the hand. Light, but recoil is perfectly fine and doesn't discourage shooting. Thin. Excellent trigger, and I mean it feels like a competition trigger compared to a mushy Glock trigger.

My Ruger conceals wonderfully in my Alien Gear cloak tuck 3.0 at the 4 o'clock.

 

[Al]

Originally Posted By: GMFan

S&W M&P Shield - All around a nice package. This gun has grown on me a lot from what I've seen.

One thing I don't like about the Shield is the trigger. It flat out sucks in my humble opinion. Other than that I really like the gun. I am getting pretty used to the trigger. The firearm has a very good record from any number of sources of being drop dead reliable. Its the simplest gun take down I have ever seen. But don't let that stop you. I got to the point I could totally disassemble my 1911's (yes totally) and reassemble them in 15/20 minutes.

Quote:
Ruger LC9] - Nice gun. I do like the sleeker package in a hammer fired gun but I'm not too keen on the little key needed to break the gun down. I see that as an inconvenience - you never know if you will lose the key or you get stranded somewhere and the key is at home and you can't break it down. Does anyone see this as I do or am I over-reacting about this?

You are over-reacting. That is no issue

I would still consider the Glock 43...yes it has no safety, capacity is 6+1, its over priced.....But, its a Glock. The trigger pull isw sweet. You may regret not buying the Glock.....I did


I Ultimately bought a Glock for reasons that Hokified bouht his full size M&P. But other than that I wanted to own a Glock once in my life.

I am 69 years old and probably will never buy another gun. I got rid of a number of guns and now am down to 2 full size 1911's, the Shield, Glock 19, Ruger LCP, Smith Sigma .380, and My smith 440 .38.

 

[LoneRanger]

For a full size, consider Walther PPQ M2. Guns and Ammo magazine handgun of the year 2015.

 

[ZeeOSix]

Originally Posted By: GMFan
hokiefyd, interesting point about the safety vs no-safety M&P Shield. I can see your point. I felt the same way when I bought my shotgun way back when and my lever rifle...having a safety is like training wheels and makes you feel a little safer but once you get familiar with your weapon it's something you don't find necessary.


If you make it part of your training to move the safety to the fire position during the draw of the gun, then it's really not impeding anything. I can flick the safety to the fire position during the draw, and it's ready to go before the muzzle is level and ready to fire.

 

[wtd]

I recently bought a Glock G43 to compliment my G19. It conceals very well and it is very soft shooting for it's size. It pretty much has taken over as my CC gun although I still like my G19 for that role. Good luck in your search.

Wayne

 

[GMFan]

It's interesting that some people in this thread think the Ruger LC9 trigger is the best and others dislike it. This goes to show it's down to personal preference. I wonder if the gun shop will let me test the triggers... I know some places don't even want to take the trigger guard off when showing you a gun.

I think I've come to the conclusion that pocket carry (unless it's cargo pants) even a sub compact 9mm is almost wishful thinking. I think you need to step down to a .380 such as a Ruger LCP for true pocket carry. The reviews are mixed among people that the LC9 and Shield are actually pocket worthy. Again, I've never concealed carried before so I am not sure if a IWB holster at 4'oclock will be comfortable or not for me. However at the same time I think if I got a true pocket gun it wouldn't be as fun to shoot. If I'm going to carry the gun on me I want to shoot it a lot and I want it to still be enjoyable to shoot.

In any event, not sure I will get to a gun shop this week and next week I'm on the road for work. I may have to digest everything I've learned over the next couple of weeks. Thanks again to everyone. I'm really glad I decided to post on this forum...lot's of knowledge and intelligent folks here.

I'll be sure to let everyone know what I get when the time comes!

 

[Al]

Originally Posted By: GMFan
It's interesting that some people in this thread think the Ruger LC9 trigger is the best and others dislike it.
I think I've come to the conclusion that pocket carry (unless it's cargo pants) even a sub compact 9mm is almost wishful thinking. I think you need to step down to a .380 such as a Ruger LCP for true pocket carry.


Probably experience comes into play.

To me a trigger needs to have a predictable travel and actuation. In theory a predictable actuation is not what you want. A "surprise" actuation is desired. Perhaps as my experience improves I will change my mind. So it is preference probably based on experience.

But Glock is ideal for me...

 

[bubbatime]

Originally Posted By: GMFan
It's interesting that some people in this thread think the Ruger LC9 trigger is the best and others dislike it.


Well it's important to note the distinction that there are two different Ruger LC9 pistols. The standard LC9 has a long heavy trigger pull and a hammer. The LC9s is a striker fired version of the pistol with a markedly improved trigger.

 

[Triple_Se7en]

Now there's an upgrade to the Ruger LC9s called the LC9s Pro.

 

[Hokiefyd]

Originally Posted By: GMFan
It's interesting that some people in this thread think the Ruger LC9 trigger is the best and others dislike it. This goes to show it's down to personal preference. I wonder if the gun shop will let me test the triggers... I know some places don't even want to take the trigger guard off when showing you a gun.


I've never fired an original LC9, but I do have a gun with its type of trigger, a Kel-tec P-32. It's a long, but smooth, 5.5 pound trigger. They say it's double action only (DAO), but I'm not sure I completely agree with that, as the hammer has to be pre-cocked by the slide first. But, the trigger does cock the hammer the rest of the way, so it's double action from that standpoint. Once you fire it, though, there's no second strike capability -- if the round does not go off, and the slide does not cycle, the trigger is limp.

I really like Kel-tec guns, though. They're inexpensive, super light, and effective for how they're intended to be used. My P-32 weighs 6.6 oz empty. 10 ounces fully loaded with 7+1 of 32 auto. 32 auto's not the stoutest round in the world, but I carry the gun everywhere. It's truly a pocket pistol. It rides in a Blackhawk or DeSantis pocket holster to hide the printing and looks like a slim wallet in my front pocket.

I don't own any pair of pants, jeans, slacks, shorts, etc, that would fit a Shield/LC9/43. Those guns are too big for my pockets; I carry the Shield IWB in a PJ Holster or OWB in a Blade Tech Eclipse. Mostly OWB under a sport coat or similar.

 

[billt460]

Another problem that I don't see being addressed here, is a lot of people like myself that have very large hands, can't hold these tiny, little pistols very well, if at all. For me, a Glock 21 has a grip that's "just right". We gravitate to larger framed handguns for that reason. All of my smaller framed guns have had grip replacements done in order to provide a larger, more hand filling grip.

Even all of my AR-15's have had their stock plastic grips changed out to the more hand filling Ergo Deluxe Tactical Grip. Because of that all of these little pocket guns are all but useless. I recently purchased a Bond Arms Stainless Steel Derringer in .45 Colt / 3" .410, because I loved the quality of it's construction. I can barely shoot it because the thing is just too small to hold on to. For people like me a larger, more hand filling gun is the only option for accurate shooting. Small guns are like small shoes. They just don't fit.

 

[05LGTLtd]

Originally Posted By: billt460
Another problem that I don't see being addressed here, is a lot of people like myself that have very large hands, can't hold these tiny, little pistols very well, if at all. For me, a Glock 21 has a grip that's "just right". We gravitate to larger framed handguns for that reason. All of my smaller framed guns have had grip replacements done in order to provide a larger, more hand filling grip.

Even all of my AR-15's have had their stock plastic grips changed out to the more hand filling Ergo Deluxe Tactical Grip. Because of that all of these little pocket guns are all but useless. I recently purchased a Bond Arms Stainless Steel Derringer in .45 Colt / 3" .410, because I loved the quality of it's construction. I can barely shoot it because the thing is just too small to hold on to. For people like me a larger, more hand filling gun is the only option for accurate shooting. Small guns are like small shoes. They just don't fit.


This is the reason I have a pachmyer grip on my model 37 that's almost the double the size of the boot grip it came with. I literally could not hold on to the airweight with the boot grips and +P loads. Would have to to reset my grip every shot.

Also the reason my kahr is 40 cal compact with a slip on grip enhancement.

I've fired a ruger LCP a few times and they are just too small for me as well. OTOH, I like my NAA black widow for pocket carry/BUG very much.

 

[hatt]

I have some pretty big hands. A S&W 642 with factory boot grip works pretty well. I would agree that big hands and tiny autos could be a problem since your grip has an effect on the gun's reliability. Obviously, everything is a tradeoff. You have to balance being able to easily carry it vs shootability.