Defensive Carry banner

Why is the J frame superior to the Shield for pocket carry

19K views 43 replies 36 participants last post by  Huskybiker 
#1 ·
Hi all,

You may have seen some of my other posts regarding my search for a deep conceal pistol. During my research I found a lot people saying guns like the S&W Shield or the Walther PPS are difficult to pocket carry, and many steer people towards a J Frame for pocket carry, however, after seeing the following pictures on some other forums, I don't know why;

See 10th post: Dump my J-frame for a M&P Shield? - AR15.COM

M&P9 Shield vs M&P fs + M&Pc+ J-frame

In the rest of this post, please don't take anything I say to be smart ass or combative, I'm not incredibly well versed in the topic and I'm asking because I doubt I'll be able to put a gun at the shop in my pocket and walk around to compare the two, but I don't want to buy the Shield or similar auto based on these pictures and be missing something that will be obvious after I've bought the gun.

Now looking at those pictures, I cant see what about the shield makes it unbearably large to pocket carry vs the j frame which people say disappears the only part i can see that has a larger profile is the "corner" so to speak near the back of the slide as opposed to the rounded shape of the J Frame. Speaking strictly in terms of size compatibility (NOT reliability or ability to fire from a pocket or any other auto vs revolver point).

Thanks in advance.
Ace
 
See less See more
#2 ·
I can't comment on anything except the j frame as I don't own any small autos. However most of what I've read points to what you've already mentioned in way of the j frame having an easier to conceal shape. I do pocket carry mine as a BUG regularly, and it does ok for that task in a mika pocket holster...however its still pretty obvious there's something going on in my pocket. The average person I run into around town probably doesn't suspect its a gun, but to anyone who carries anything similar it is probably not hard to tell what's going on.

sent via iCarry
 
#4 ·
I believe it has something to do with the J-Frame shape and canted angle in the pocket.

I had a PPS but it looked like you were carrying a VHS tape in your front pocket, just the shape I guess...

Don't let that keep you from getting a PPS though, it was probably the best pistol I have ever owned and the one I have the most regret that I sold. Just not right for pocket carry though.

As for owning both now, the J-frame kicks the snot out of the PPS for pocket carry.
 
#5 ·
Thanks for the replies. I would carry in a pocket holster because the situation where I feel pocket carry would be optimal ( at work) requires me to wear light fabric clothing so printing would be a problem if I just put the gun in my pocket without a holster so in my mind in that case, cant would be the same. I'm a big guy ( both fat and big boned) and I carry a smart phone, keys and wallet in my pocket at work so I'm not sure how different I'd look if i replaced one of those items with a gun.
 
#6 ·
printing would be a problem if I just put the gun in my pocket without a holster
In that situation, printing would be the least of your problems.

If you pocket carry, ALWAYS use a good holster, for your own safety and the safety of others.

In fact, always use a good holster with whatever method of carry you use.
 
#7 ·
I have a PT709 which is similar in size to the shield and I have numerous j frames. I find the rounded nature of the j-frame blends a little easier than the squared lines of a small auto. One exception is I bought a Bersa Thunder CC 380 and it has much more rounded edges and seems to pocket carry very easily.

The other issue is I personally feel more comfortable carrying a Double Action gun in my pocket. The Bersa Thunder CC is a DA/SA with de-cocker and I have no concern carrying it in a pocket. I would never carry any gun without some type of holster that covers the trigger. I also don't carry anything else in that pocket.
 
#9 ·
Regardless of whether it is at work, at home, out running errands, what ever. A pocket holster is a must. Never leave your trigger uncovered. That is just a ND waiting to happen!
 
  • Like
Reactions: BugDude
#10 ·
I think that maybe this conversations could actually be considered an auto vs revolver scenario. The reason I say that, is that practically all of the new generation of polymer pocket/ccw guns are excellent, regardless of manufacturer. The perennial snubby plugs on, largely unchanged, with the exception of the material that they are constructed of. I think both platforms have their advantages and drawbacks. When looking at both of these guns, I would say that different carry situations and circumstances would find me carrying either one... or both?
 
#11 ·
I don't own a Shield, buy I do own a S&W M&P 45C as well as a Ruger LC9. I also own a S&W Airweight in .38 cal. I carry both the LC9 and the Airweight in a pocket holster, and of the two, I think the Airweight is more comfortable. First, it's lighter; not by a lot, but by enough to be noticeable. And second, its shape conceals well, and my hand seems to fall naturally to the grip. I like both guns, and I carry both, but from the standpoint of comfort, the Airweight gets a slight edge.
 
#12 ·
J-frame because...

I'm an old fart who appreciates that the j-frame (S&W 642 or 640) is the easiest to carry and operate out of a pocket holster. There is no drill for a double feed, failure to extract, bad primer, etc. If it doesn't go "bang", pull the trigger again! Also, Crimson Trace lasergrips are a great addition. The psychological impact of someone seeing a red dot on their chest with the explanation to them that the red light will be replaced by their red blood has amazing results on their thought process. Whatever you choose, please practice often with it. Buy some snap caps and sit there in you LR practicing sight alignment and trigger pull.

-=BDD=-
 
#14 ·
A reputable shop should let you put each in your pocket to see how it fits. That is exactly how I decided on my first CCW so many years ago. Just be respectful and don't have anything else in the pocket so you don't scratch up the merchandise.
 
#15 ·
Thanks for all the replies, if u get a j frame it'd be the 442 no lock, but I'm leaning towards a small auto.

Ya it is a auto vs revolver post, I just wanted to keep it limited to a size and shape discussion as operation/ reliability/ trigger has been discussed many times before.
 
#17 ·
I'm going to suggest to you that you reconsider pocket carry at all....... There are some serious limitations on pocket carry. Accessing the firearm while seated is nearly impossible. It excludes that particular pocket from any other use while carrying. It limits you to small caliber autos or pocket revolvers and as you've already seen, printing is a serious concern. Instead of pocket carry I'd recommend strongly that you consider iwb carry in a tuckable holster or use one of the very comfortable "belly band" type holsters. I can carry a Glock26 in my waist band in a tuckable holster and I promise you that you cannot see ANY indication I'm carrying. The Glock is a double stack 9mm. If you went with one of the single stack 9's or 40's in a tuckable iwb holster it would be even easier to conceal. I do own a Smith 642 and Ruger LCR and pocket carry them occasionally, but my preferred method of carry is iwb.
 
#18 ·
I understand there are draw backs to pocket carry, but I work in the veterinary field and its not uncommon for me to have to lay in the floor to restrain a large dog, or for smaller ones to kick off my torso and a gun in that area would make a convenient place for them to kick off of a shift the gun. My shirt has also ridden up, and my pants have come down a little so its not unimaginable that Iwb or belly band carry could be revealed in those situations. I cannot however think of any way the gun could inadvertently come up out of my pocket, and other than that, the gun won't go anywhere my pocket wouldn't.
 
#22 ·
My LCR is lighter in weight than my PM9, and in my experience, much less finicky and much more reliable.

The footprint is larger, yet the rounded shape prints less in my dress pants pockets. I need to use a pocket holster with an anti-print panel to hide the outline of pocket autos - but such is not the case with a revolver, unless you are wearing really tight clothing.
 
#24 ·
I prefer a small auto to a j-frame mainly because I shoot autos better an I get a coupkle extra rounds. That said the Shield is a nice gun but for pocket carry i would go Kahr PM9. The shield is slightly larger than other small autos. Although for waist carry i believe the Sheild is an excellent option.
 
#25 ·
I never found the pocket pistols as reliable and more finicky about the ammo.
The J Frames can get as light as 13 ounces and some are able to use .357 mag if its of interest. I figure that offsets somewhat the 5 rounds vs the 7 in pistols.

I like the option of using a jframe as a BUG as well if I want too. Obviously you can carry a small pistol as a BUG but I have found over the years that I like revolvers for that task due to the near 100% reliability. There is the understated advantage of revolvers as well. No racking, slide releases etc. hand it to someone else and tell them to pull the trigger.

The common thing about both types are not target shooting guns. They can get painful. The Shield is nice even in .40 to shoot and is a pretty accurate little gun as well.



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
 
#26 ·
I have an S&W 642 and a Kahr MK9. The pistols have fallen into the roles where they work best for me- the Jframe goes into the pocket or on the ankle, and the MK9 rides on the belt. I find that I do not like semi autos in my pocket- I think the draw is clunky and they tend to print an image that screams gun in the pants I wear.
 
#27 ·
First off, the Airweight is about 4 oz. lighter to start with. Add 2 0z for the auto's mag and extra rounds, and now you have a firearm that's 6 oz. heavier than the Airweight. The shorter barrel and the grip angle on the revolver make it more comfortable and less noticeable when you look at your pocket. The only small 9mm that I have carried in my pocket half way comfortably is the Ruger LC9. It's lighter than the Shield a little smaller and all corners are "melted" and nicely rounded.
 
#28 ·
I've carried a 642 and Nano in the pocket. Two differences. The cylinder causes a bulge from the 642 whereas the Nano is flat and the square bottom of the Nano grip shows more than the smaller 642 grip. Personally I'm not convinced 99% of the people out there would notice either. For what it's worth I sold the 642 for the Nano and have no complaints.
 
#29 ·
Why is the J frame superior to the Shield for pocket carry

Speaking strictly in terms of size compatibility (NOT reliability or ability to fire from a pocket or any other auto vs revolver point).
Thoughts ...

I'd suggest that compatibility hinges on degree of match with a given person's body shape and clothing choices.

For example, someone wearing dressy, tighter-fitting business attire and of a given body shape (curvature) might well not be able to conceal both equally well. But that same person in looser-fitting "weekend" wear might have no issues at all, between the two choices. And it'll depend on where holstered (ie, pocket carry, vs OWB/IWB).

As well, holster choice can come into the equation. Not all holsters can adequately deal with the cylinder thickness of a typical revolver. Not all holsters can adequately deal with the square-ish, "blocky" shape of the typical compact semi-auto. Much depends on the leather chosen, the curves sewn/shaped into the holster itself, and how well that matches your body shape and clothing choices.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top