Beretta PX4 or S&W Shield (9mm) for CCW??

[kiddchaos]

I had no issues training with the Beretta PX4 Storm (and its safety and DS/SA), other than getting thru my own human mistakes.
It's simple to field strip.

As for CCW I'd get the Nano 9mm, but that's my opinion.

 

[jdmack79]

Compared to most other guns with a similar capacity, the Beretta is far wider. A Ruger, Glock, or S&W all feel smaller than a Beretta.

 

[indykid]

Tedious? Turn a lever 1/4, pull it out and the slide comes off?

And I guess all of your tours in the Mideast qualify you to expound on what is, or is not, a good fighting weapon ?

FYI, the 92 series has the rotating lever. The PX4 Storm has a tab on each side similar to a Glock that you have to pull down to release the slide. If you don't have the strongest finger tips, pulling down on the tabs isn't the easiest thing in the world. The biggest problem I have with a Glock is the disassembly method, the PX4 is not much better.

 

[24Carat]

Aren't you cute.
Since you can't see by looking at the PX4 what design flaws it shares with its predecessors, I'll copy a short description that sums up the same mistakes Beretta has blindly clung to for the past 30 years.
"The Px4 uses the same short-recoil, rotating barrel action as the Beretta 8000 models and uses the same trigger and safety system as the M9/92fs series,"
Gee, same action, safety, and trigger as the previous designs. It's soooo different that it borrows major components from previous guns made by Beretta!!!! So essentially they packaged up the crappy DA/SA trigger and the terrible slide safety and slapped it onto a frame that hopefully feels better in your hand. Totally dissimilar to previous designs.
Right.
Now those of us who actually know how to operate a firearm might see the major disadvantages a slide safety/de-cocker offers when clearing any sort of malfunction or how having a trigger that isn't a consistent pull could complicate matters in training. Both can be gotten around via that much more training (as I once did), OR you can train smart and not hard and just buy a pistol that discards those disadvantages so you don't have to deal with them at all.
It was my 92fs that saved my life 7 years ago, and I haven't forgotten that. I did however grow up enough not to invest my ego into my gun choice and put my Beretta away in favor of designs more suitable to the task. I'd rather spend the extra training time increasing my skills. I still get it out every now and then to play with it/ demo why the major design flaw makes your life harder, but why waste my time with it more than that? And why would anyone in their right mind buy a gun with a slide safety and DA/SA trigger if they only want one gun and could get a gun that makes their life easier?
If you like your PX4 fine, but stop pretending it is somehow streamlined for fighting in comparison to other firearms.

Oh and once again you're simply trying to slime your opposition rather than offer concrete reasons as to why the PX4 is the superior or equal fighting design.
Bravo.

The lower and decocker are practically identical to the 92fs I think. Obviously the rotating barrel is a big difference, but not much else has changed to my knowledge besides the frame and slide shape. That is part of what makes the PX4 a reliable design right out of the gate.

I agree that the PX4 is kinda thick, and the decocker on the frame is not the best design. For CC I'd go with the Shield over the PX4SC (the M&P9C with safety is what I actually use). In the end it matters which gun gives you the most confidence in making the shot. I have big hands, so I require a double stack grip in order to obtain accuracy. I use my PX4 as a nightstand gun, a role I think it is well suited for.

The Sub Compact isn't of a rotating barrel design. It tilts. This is no longer a comparison or competition between different platforms anymore. It's an exercise in righteous indignation when preconceived strongly held notions are challenged. If you are not able to feel confident carrying a PX4 as a primary EDC, it's OK. Several hundreds of thousands of folks are but hey, you're right and they are a mouth breathing ignorant sort that haven't risen to your enlightened holier than thou status in society.

 

[jagee]

So after going to GM and holding the M&P9C (they didn't have a Shield in at the time) I don't know that I would want anything smaller. The 9c felt really good in my hand. Also, I didn't even hold the PX4 because after seeing it in person I changed my mind and would much rather go with one of the M&P's.

Now my question is go with the Shield or the 9C? I like the price of the shield, but haven't held it, but I like the feel of the 9c.

Decisions, decisions...

 

[Tyler-The-Piker]

IBTL

 

[rcp2]

+1 for 9c. I think the shield doesn't really have a purpose. Is the savings in thickness really worth the loss in total rounds

 

[k1500]

I'd recommend going to a gun store and holding both of them in your hand. The PX4 is a very thick pistol with a double stack magazine. The shield is a single stack and much thinner (better designed for conceal carry). It really does come down to personal preference and how well you feel you could conceal either one.

 

[gregkl]

So after going to GM and holding the M&P9C (they didn't have a Shield in at the time) I don't know that I would want anything smaller. The 9c felt really good in my hand. Also, I didn't even hold the PX4 because after seeing it in person I changed my mind and would much rather go with one of the M&P's.

Now my question is go with the Shield or the 9C? I like the price of the shield, but haven't held it, but I like the feel of the 9c.

Decisions, decisions...

I am in the same decision making process, though not as close as you are. The Shield fit me okay. I liked it with the 8-round mag. Not as much with the 7-rounder. I don't like any pistol that has my pinkie finger hanging in the air.

But for CC I would just use the 8-rounder anyway. As far as the 9c, I would carry my FS at that point.

I'll probably never make a decision.

 

[JAW]

I am defiantly in favor of the smith and Wesson, my opinion. I have previously owned the 40c and liked it a lot, but now have moved on to a glock 27. I have a nano that I recently picked up, but not really much fun to shoot, my opinion. I would assume that would be very similar to the feel of the shield, although a very good gun it's not the most fun to shoot. It really all depends if you want to shoot it a lot or just have something that is most comfortable to carry. For carry comfort the shield or shooting the crap out of it I would stick with the 9c.

 

[jagee]

I've decided on the Shield. Found one in stock as US Defense Solutions and was able to handle it and the 9c, I liked the feeling of the 9c better but for the price and CC the Shield is my pick since I can't have both. Already have a holster ordered and now just need to go pick up the gun.

 

[OccasionalSh00ter]

The Shield is my choice too. Now I just have to replenish my gun fund and find a deal on one.

 

[jwh20]

My vote is the PX4. I currently have a PX4 Compact in .40 S&W and I like it a lot. It's probably not the best choice for a CCW due to its size but for an OC or nightstand handgun, it's a great choice. Mine functions flawlessly and the gun has enough mass that it really soaks up the recoil from the .40 round. In 9mm my guess is that it will be even softer.

 

[sbond]

Beretta PX4 Storm sub in either 9 or 40