Looking for a concealed carry size pistol & I would like to buy a S&W Shield but they are not available as well as alot of the smaller pistols. Have found two Taurus, PT 111 Millennium G2 and a PT 709 Slim. PT111 feels good to handle but is slightly bigger than the PT709. PT709 the grip is small by design but would take some getting use to. Thought I would buy one of them & then buy the Shield when they come available. Does anybody have an opinion on which one of the PT you would buy to use a concealed carry pistol and why or why not. Thanks for any comments.

I used to think that for concealed carry I needed something about like the Shield. I carried the Kahr P-9 for years. Then I tried the S&W M&P 9c. Essentially a wide body version of the Shield, if you will. Carried in a Milt Sparks VM II, it was nearly just as unnoticed in all day carry as my little P-9, so I made the switch permanent, and no longer see any reason whatever for a Shield sized auto pistol for IWB concealed carry. Why give up the extra five or six rounds?

I have owned both pistols, and I can say they're downright decent pistols. I guess it alll depends on what you need out of the two. The 709 is a very slim, compact pistol with a single column magazine. The PT 111 is a compact but a bit chunky pistol with a double column magazine giving you many more shots per mag. If you're looking to drop one in your pants pocket, then it's the 709. If it's always going to ride in a holster, then the PT 111.

I agree with Kevin. I had a slim and really liked it. Sometimes I would just slide it in my back pocket if I was going for a walk down by the creek with the kid. Mine was the .40 version and even with its small size, recoil wasn't bad.

I'm in a similar situation, my main carry gun up here is a full size 1911. Up here I wear a coat year round, no big deal. I'll be moving back to MI shortly where that's not gonna be the best way to go IMO.

Ditto on the M&P compact .40 in an IWB holster. That is what I carry for light weight.

Personally I would not buy a Taurus anything. If you ask the guys behind the gun counters at your LGS which brand of pistol they return to the factory the most, my bet is they would answer Taurus.

Now that I've pissed off all the Taurus owners that's just my opinion and if you own one obviously your opinion is different than mine. I just happen to like mine.... but every one is different.

My thought on concealed carry is that barrel length is an easier dimension to hide than grip length. As you move about the grip length is that part of the pistol most likely to print on the outside. That's why, under that theory, I carry a Glock 27. I know there are some lads who cannot stand not having the pinkie finger resting somewhere and I'm just not one of those lads. Just the 2nd and 3rd fingers are fine for me.

I did notice that most of the CC Kimbers are just the opposite with most of the commonly seen models have the shorter barrels with the full length grip. If I were to buy a Kimber I would be interested in the Compact model, I think, with the 4" barrel and the short grip for the reasons mentioned. However that doesn't seem to be a popular theme as I haven't seen any of those compact Kimbers in the last two years anywhere.

So I guess my opinion is not widely accepted. That's ok ......I still like it.

After having had one, I would not buy a Taurus anything either. Your statements are a bit conflicting though. First you say you wouldn't buy a Taurus and then say "I just happen to like mine."

my experience has shown the quality of KelTec products to be even worse than Taurus.
Kahr, Smith, Springfield..........there are far better choices out there, that will accommodate the same needs.

If you're going to carry a gun, assuredly you're expecting it to save your life. Therefore, you have to carefully consider compromises. Start with what you consider to be the best handgun for saving your life. Work from there to where you want to be.

My opinion is the best is a 1911A1. But when I carry, which is rare, it's a Sig P229 in 40 S&W. While the .40 S&W ain't a .45 ACP, it holds more rounds. Not having to reload is a tactical advantage. And it's slightly smaller than a full-size 1911A1.

I used to carry a Model 60 with 5 158 grain SWC .38 SPL +P rounds and another five in a speed loader. This is a neck & up weapon. Under ideal conditions, it takes too long to reload 5 more .38 SPL rounds. I'd hate to have to reload it in darkness while a bad guy is shooting at me. It ain't a very good weapon with which to save my life. It'll work on feral dogs, but not when bag guys are trying to kill me.

When it comes to saving your life, a general rule is bigger (caliber) is better.

So much depends on your physical build, climate conditions and style of dress regarding selection of a concealed weapon and holster.

The Sig 239 is a good compromise between magazine capacity and size. Overlay a S&W Chief's Special over one and the dimensions are not dissimilar, except that the Sig is slimmer. Same can be said for the now out of print H&K P7.

A single stack 9 is not a bad compromise between concealability, power, comfort and magazine capacity.

Once I get beyond pocket size and go to IWB, I prefer a gun that allows me to get all my fingers on the grip frame. The mini-Glocks don't work for me, but a Glock 30 with the flush fitting 9 round magazine works. The Springfield XDs with the 5 round magazine can accommodate all my fingers as well. I don't know about a Shield because that remains a mythical gun in my part of the world. Of course, you can carry small guns with a finger extension on the magazine and take care of the problem or carry an extended magazine for some guns like the mini-Glocks, Sig P938, Beretta Nano or XDS. One important consideration for belt carry is that being able to establish a firing grip on the gun while holstered. Some tiny gun/holster combinations preclude that. Good luck with the search.

The phrase "I just happen to like mine." was in reference to my opinion not ownership of anything Taurus. I would never own a Taurus firearm and sympathize with those that do own a Taurus shooter.

Add the S&W 3913/3953 to that list as well. No longer in production, but available used at popular prices....

That's pretty much where I fall as well!

If I'm in basic "pocket carry" mode, I'll have the 642 loaded with +P Gold Dots or +P Keiths. The next step is IWB carry and the M&Pc .357sig.

I'll revert back to the 1911 when I can do so and not worry about a policy violation. That's a few years off, though.

George

For me, even the PT 111 has a small grip.
IMO, the Millennium pro series are very good pistols.
However, none of these Taurus pieces qualify as pocket pistols under the current zeitgeist.
If you're not dead-set on 9mm, you may find that PT 145 has a better grip and is otherwise easier to hit with.

I dont think they make the perfect carry gun but Kahr is getting pretty close. I live in Florida and our coat season last about 10 days a year. I'm not complaining about wearing teeshirt and shorts in February, but it sure made it hard to carry my Kimber ultra carry ll. Even when wear dockers and a polo shirt for work. I used one of those belly bands for awhile. Now I know how a horse must feel. So I recently purchased a Kahr p 380. It slided in your back pocket like a wallet and thanks to Hornady critical defense loads a .380 is a better gun. Kahr also makes a 9 & 40 in a very small framed gun. I've always been a fan of the single actions, but i'm not carrying a cocked, lock and hot single in my pocket. If not for the lil bit long pull, Kahr has in my opinion one of the best DAO triggers out there.

I like a .45 but the full sized models I have are too big for good concealed carry on my body frame. I've been carrying smaller more concealable calibers until recently I picked up a Springfield XDs .45. I carry it IWB with a 5-1 clip. Except for a little reassuring pressure behind my hip I hardly know it's there. When I feel the need I carry two extra 7 round clips. Some may like a smaller caliber with more capacity but I'll take a few big holes over more smaller holes any time.

Well the Shield is a single stack M&P compact...
We have had one for several years now and love it.
Bought very slightly used with a Crimson Trace Grip and my wife can shoot it better than most "target" models.

I love to watch her on Sundays out shoot everyone at the range. Her laser dot appears to be glued to the target.

I load it with light reloads for her to practice with and fill it with Critical Dutys for "light" carry.
kinda between pocket and full size.

take a look at the Kahr CW9 CW40. this is my cc pistol, has a slim frame .90" wide single stack mag. i have large hands and i need this compact size over the CM9-CM40. added the hogue handall junior grip, perfect fit for me. highly accurate pistol with a short barrel, smoothest trigger just had to get use to the long travel. worth taking a look at and about $100 cheaper than the the Glock.

get a Kahr or a Ruger, anything but the Tauri or Keltec.

I simply don't fool around with mini-guns; I prefer a bigger gun if the attire of the day allows IWB or a shoulder holster if I'm going to spend a lot of time in a car or sitting.

Favorites & most carried are a 1911 Commander w/bobtail, Beretta 92 full size or Compact (which is not really very compact), Glock 19/23 or maybe a Glock 26/27 with a magazine extension.

For any other needs, it's a S&W J-frame in a front pants pocket or a jacket pocket.........That's as small as I am usually willing to go.

MM

handguns are still evolving. The new Springfield XDS I picked up is almost identical in size to my Smith 442. The S&W is some 8 ounces lighter, but they are physically almost the same.
The decision as to size is becoming more and more difficult. A .38 Special with 5 rounds, or a .45 ACP with 6, in the same size package.

IMO, weight, as well as size is a factor in comfortable pocket carry.

The S&W Airweight J frames (642/442) are about as heavy as I want for moving around much & carrying for any length of time in my front pants pocket.

MM

Do you know if the CW9/40 sights can be replaced?

What�s that they say? A picture is worth a thousand words�or some such thing. That picture really puts it all into perspective doesn�t it?

Now I�m going to have to go find one of those and drop it into my front pocket. If it really works as a pocket gun, and the thing is reliable; I�m in!!

Let us know how you like 22-24 oz in a front pants pocket, especially if you're walking fast.

MM

Look @ xds 3.3

Although the XDS may be a �pocket gun� in a purely theoretical sense because I can fit it in a jeans pocket, it does not meet my definition. I like to be able to get a firing grip on the gun while it is in the pocket in a pocket holster and be able to withdraw it smoothly and snag-free. I can�t do that with my jeans. And, with the trigger the way it is, a snag on the draw could create a real problem with this type of gun in a reflexive grasp situation. The largetst I can go in a semi-auto and still consider it a pocket gun is a Beretta Nano (about 22-1/2 ounces loaded with 6-124 Gold Dots), but I still prefer the Sig P938 (20 ounces loaded) because its overall dimensions are the smallest and there is not blocky hump on the rear of the slide like most striker fired pistols.

Another thing to consider is that overall dimensions are very deceptive. Two inches of a S&W J Frame are overall much smaller and concealable than two inches consisting of a boxy slide, and a dust cover that is big enough to house recoil springs and also is squared with a rail. The grip on the S&W also is much slimmer and rounded than a square grip that can accommodate a magazine with .45 ACP rounds. The cylinder is widest part on the revolver, and that is only a small percentage of the overall gun.

I think the XDS is a great IWB gun for someone who lives in a place where even a CCW holder needs to be very discreet, like a �may issue� state or a purple state. It also would make an awesome backup gun in an ankle holster or cargo pocket of uniform pants. It weighs about 25-1/2 ounces (junky scale) loaded with 5-230 grain Gold Dots.

YMMV

the XDS is thinner than the Smith.