I own/carry both pistols and have put hundreds, if not thousands of rounds through both at the range. The more I use them, the more I'm convinced that the EZ version should have been marketed as an upgrade/improvement instead of a more 'accessible' version of the pistol.Size: (For size reference, I'm a 6'3" male, slim build) While the EZ is slightly larger than the standard Shield, the size difference is negligible if you use a proper holster and attire (I use Vedder Light Tuck hoslters). Not once has the size of the EZ been any more of an issue than with the standard Shield. However, the larger grips mean that the EZ just fits better in the hand. Because of this, handling and control are both a marked improvement for the EZ in my experience. In addition, there were times when I was shooting the standard Shield, and I felt it was necessary to re-adjust my grip between shots because my pinky finger on my right hand kept on sliding off the grip. Never had this issue with the EZ grip. If you have smaller hands, I'm sure it's not an issue, but for someone like me with large hands, EZ is the better choice.Internal Hammer: Call me old fashioned, but the internal hammer of the EZ just feels better than striker. The trigger feels much smoother and you get that crisp break when the hammer is released. In addition, and perhaps this is just a matter of personal preference, but I enjoy feeling the internal action with every shot; kind of like how with manual transmission vehicles you get to feel the gears and the levers and how they interact with the engine with every shift.Grip safety: If you carry without safeties of any kind, this obviously doesn't apply, but if you do opt in for a safety, the grip safety seems like a better choice for both training and ease-of-use purposes. Disengaging the grip safety is just so effortless; all you have to do is make sure you have a proper grip on your pistol, and you should be practicing your grip anyway, so it's just one less step in the learning process. I've heard the counterargument that if you can't get a proper grip in a defensive situation it might prevent you from using the gun, but can't the same argument be applied to thumb safeties? Besides (and please correct me if I'm wrong), it seems to me that if you don't have proper grip on your gun, you shouldn't be using the weapon anyway.. just seems like a safety issue at that point, at least in theory.Easy-to-rack Slide: I genuinely don't see a downside to this one. I honestly wish more firearms manufacturers would experiment more with the easy-to-rack slides. Not that I have an issue with using the slide on any other gun, but why would I want one that requires more effort, when I can have one that requires less effort. I honestly haven't noticed a difference in recoil or any other trade-off, for that matter, so if there is a downside to this, please let me know.In conclusion, I'm surprised the EZ doesn't get more love on this sub. I know it's done relatively well on the market, largely to the success of the the standard Shield (which is a fantastic gun, don't get me wrong), but I would go a step further and argue that Shield 9 EZ is superior to the standard Shield 9 in just about every way and should have been marketed as such, especially if the price point is relatively the same.Would love to hear others' experience with these pistols. Counter-arguments and debates are welcome. via /r/CCW https://ift.tt/3r7LRRL
No comments:
Post a Comment