A 12 round sc version is inevitable. The top end is done and their are already mags in production for the 1.0. It’s literally just shortening the grip and a new texture on the pinkie shelf of the magazines.

I think they should just modify the shield, make it a tad thcker and omit the mag sleeve and voila- a subcompact, thin, 12-13 round gun to compete wiht the 365.

I shot a 365 at the range yesterday side by side with my Shield and the mag on P365 was only about 1.5 mm more wide.

Wilhelm Bubits ( gun designer of Steyr,Glock, Caracal fame), made a novel magazine design in the subcompact Caracal (don’t think every made it to market), anyway the spring was wound centrally so that when it was compressed it was basicallly a spiral which allowed for a higher capacity in a smaller design. That gun was about 6.7 x 4.5” 23.5 mm wide (that’s less than an inch thick). Oh and it held 13 rounds. That was about 5 years before the SIG P365.

Sorry didn’t mean to get sidetracked.

I will take anything S&W makes lately!

JL, it’s your fault I bought these things!

Dave

Let's face it. When it comes to the 2.0, I'm an enabler.

Checked at the LGS Saturday, and the 3.6 is the same price as the compact. And the distributor had 32 in stock.

Very tempting.

quote:

Originally posted by esdunbar:
I thought about it but never did. I still might though.

I usually just carry my 4”. When I want something smaller I grab my shield .45 (which is somehow the best grouping gun I shoot...go figure).

Sorry for the quick digression, but I'll second that on the Shield .45, es. Ayoob tested one that group 2" at 25 yards with HST. It's a gem.

quote:

might be more favorable to those who desire to appendix carry

Winner!

Exactly why I prefer a 26 to a 19, and the difference in length is minor . . . until you have it stuffed down the front of yer drawers.

quote:

Originally posted by bionic218:

quote:

might be more favorable to those who desire to appendix carry

Winner!

Exactly why I prefer a 26 to a 19, and the difference in length is minor . . . until you have it stuffed down the front of yer drawers.

Here's the real meat and potatoes. If the gun handles just as well as the 4.0, the extra .4 barrel length serves no other purpose than a choice. The whole "longer sight radius" advantage is bunk out to 50 yards. The whole loss of velocity thing isn't going to matter much out to 50 yards. The performance just has to be close.

While everyone is saying they don't see the need for the 3.6, if it performs the same, with a 4.25 offering, the 4.0 offering might be the one that there is no need for.

My world is splits, draws, and transitions.

quote:

Originally posted by jljones:

...While everyone is saying they don't see the need for the 3.6, if it performs the same, with a 4.25 offering, the 4.0 offering might be the one that there is no need for.

My world is splits, draws, and transitions.

I love my 2.0 4", so it really pisses me off when you confuse us with the facts!

Originally posted by jljones:

Here's the real meat and potatoes. If the gun handles just as well as the 4.0, the extra .4 barrel length serves no other purpose than a choice. The whole "longer sight radius" advantage is bunk out to 50 yards. The whole loss of velocity thing isn't going to matter much out to 50 yards. The performance just has to be close. :Quote"



Mrgunsngear did some quick velocity testing of the 3.6 vs 4" compact. starts about the 2 min 18 sec mark.

My daughter has chosen this to be her 21st birthday present from her mother and I.

I really like my M&P 2.0 Compact 4". I don't see much need for the 3.6" barrel. It feels like an answer in search of a problem. Worth noting is that I feel similarly about the 4.25" full-sized M&P 2.0 now that the 4" Compact exists. I see benefit to a G17 over a G19 some days, but 1/4 inch isn't worth it to be. I'll buy the 5" CORE 2.0 once it gets released.

I have a 4" version I carry as a back up and off duty gun. We just switched to the M&P 2.0

I got one a couple weeks back and it's becoming my favorite striker pistol of all time. The balance is perfect and the 3.6" bbl is the bees knees when carrying AIWB. My G26 may go up for sale as it is now obsolete.

I just picked mine up a couple weeks ago and finally shot it this week. It’s an awesome gun. Strikingly well balanced; it’s hard to describe without holding it.

Definitely worth buying.

So a little less than 20'/s. How much does it have to be to matter?

I handled one recently. I thought it was a neat little package.

quote:

Originally posted by Nick:
Originally posted by jljones:

Here's the real meat and potatoes. If the gun handles just as well as the 4.0, the extra .4 barrel length serves no other purpose than a choice. The whole "longer sight radius" advantage is bunk out to 50 yards. The whole loss of velocity thing isn't going to matter much out to 50 yards. The performance just has to be close. :Quote"



Mrgunsngear did some quick velocity testing of the 3.6 vs 4" compact. starts about the 2 min 18 sec mark.

I consider the original compact, equipped with an Apex trigger and Trijicon NS’ to be a formidable
CC package, always shot it well. Warming up to the 2.0 3.6

quote:

Originally posted by BBMW:
So a little less than 20'/s. How much does it have to be to matter?

I handled one recently. I thought it was a neat little package.

Yeah, I can see now that its going to wind up costing me money.......

(I have no answer to your other question)

quote:

While everyone is saying they don't see the need for the 3.6, if it performs the same, with a 4.25 offering, the 4.0 offering might be the one that there is no need for.

All comes down to perspective, I do believe. If someone is SO taken with the 4" they COULD say that it's the OTHER TWO that are the superfluous ones.

So of o don't have any of the 2.0s, which one should I start with for concealed carry purposes?

quote:

Originally posted by ruger357:
So of o don't have any of the 2.0s, which one should I start with for concealed carry purposes?

If you’re only going to get ONE, I would say the 4-inch compact, just like I would say you should get a Glock 19 if you’re gonna have just one Glock. It’s the perfect do-everything size. This is especially true when you talk about possibly adding a weaponlight. The 3.6 easily accommodates the TLR7 and APLc lights. Not so much full size lights like the TLR1 or X300. The 4” will readily accept all four of those lights.

But I do really love the 3.6. I don’t think you can go wrong with any of the 2.0s, unless you get one in .40S&W

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Revolution37,

quote:

Originally posted by

But I do really love the 3.6. I don’t think you can go wrong with any of the 2.0s, unless you get one in .40S&W

Hahahahaha

True