[wickedbeernut]

Shield Arms S10 10-round Magazine (left) and S15 gen3 15-round Magazine (right)

Shield Arms Grip-Chopped G43X with S10 10-round Magazine

Shield Arms Grip-Chopped G43X with S15 gen3 15-round Magazine​

Here's the video from which I took the still pictures,

Shield Arms S10 Magazine​

​

Here's a YouTube video discussing the Shield Arms S15 gen3 15-round magazine (new manufacturer), S10 10-round magazine, and G43X grip-chop service ...

Shield Arms SHOT SHOW 2023!
New S10 Magazine, Soft Goods, Sling, and Integrally-Folding Lowers!
The Armorer’s Fix

 

[wickedbeernut]

A rep from SA said in a posted video that it was shorter than a G43. I’d like to see a comparison in pics.

You can compare the pictures of the Shield Arms grip-chopped G43X with the S10 and S15 magazine. A G43X is approximately 0.75" taller (including the magazine) than a G43. If the S15 magazine sticks out of the grip-chopped G43X frame by more than 0.75", I would think that corresponds to the difference in height as compared to a G43 frame. Of course, this is just a crude approximation.

 

[wickedbeernut]

This right here is a key point. I've been following the Shield Arms drama from the get go and it really seems to be about how well the gun and magazine work together. I've had luck, others have not. I would hate to chop my grip and then find out it doesn't work well with the Shied Mags.

If someone is going to pursue the "S10 magazine will work in a grip-chopped G43X if a S15 magazine worked in the same G43X (prior to the time the grip was chopped)" theory, they should use the new gen3 S15 magazines. Shield Arms is using a new manufacturer and has made "a couple of tweaks" to the S15 magazine. Shield Arms is saying the S10 magazine is the result of "modular tooling" which would imply the S10 magazine and gen3 S15 magazine have a lot in common. Time will tell whether the gen3 S15 magazine works any better (or worse) than the gen2 S15 magazine.

 

[wickedbeernut]

Having to use Shield Arms mags would make it a no go for me.

You could always use an OEM Glock 10-round G43X/G48 magazine, but then what's the point of chopping the G43X/G48 frame.

We'll eventually have a PSA Dagger™ Micro 15-round G43X/G48 hybrid polymer/steel magazine (which works with the OEM polymer magazine release), but again, what's the point of chopping the frame.

Eventually someone will manufacture a grip-chopped G43X/G48 frame. My money is on PSA. Obviously, PSA could cut down their Dagger™ Micro magazine to 10 - 13 rounds. Of course, at this point, there's no reason to think the Dagger™ Micro magazine will be any more reliable than a Shield Arms magazine. Only time (and thousands of rounds) will tell ... assuming the Dagger™ Micro magazine ever sees the light of day.

 

[wickedbeernut]

I just don’t get it. Just buy a 43 or if you’re concerned about 10 round capacity…buy a cr920. The CR is a great little pistol.

An OEM Glock G43 magazine is six rounds. The Shield Arms Z9 magazine (pictured below) is nine rounds. However, the Z9 magazine isn't a flush fit with the G43. The S10 magazine is flush fit with 10 rounds in a grip-chopped G43X/G48 frame that is shorter than a G43 frame. Someone else suggested shortening an OEM Glock G43X/G48 10-round magazine. That doesn't get you anywhere in terms of capacity.

I see the Shield Arms grip-chopped G43X/G48 frame and S10 magazine as nothing more than a proof of concept. I suspect Shield Arms will regret not maintaining the G43 magazine height when (not if) a grip-chopped G43X/G48 frame becomes commercially available. I would expect a commercially-available grip-chopped G43X/G48 frame to preserve the G43 height and the proposed S10 magazine isn't going to fit.

Shield Arms Z9 (G43) Magazine​

 

[wickedbeernut]

What we be awesome is the PSA 15 round polymer hybrid flush mag for the 43x/48. That’s innovative for sure.

The Dagger™ Micro magazine shown at SHOT Show last week is lookin' a little "rough". Let's hope it's still in the prototype phase ...

I bet we will get a 10 round flush hybrid mag from psa for a micro dagger 43 frame as well.

As I mentioned before, I would expect it to be a grip-chopped Dagger™ Micro (G43X) frame like we're discussing here rather than a G43 frame. I'm not convinced the community is enamored with the ultra-slim G43 frame. And I'll go out on a limb and suggest it's impossible to get a 10-round flush-fit magazine in a G43 frame. Shield Arms pulled off nine rounds. However, that required a rather sizeable magazine extension (not flush-fit).

As I said ...

Eventually someone will manufacture a grip-chopped G43X/G48 frame. My money is on PSA. Obviously, PSA could cut down their Dagger™ Micro magazine to 10 - 13 rounds. Of course, at this point, there's no reason to think the Dagger™ Micro magazine will be any more reliable than a Shield Arms magazine. Only time (and thousands of rounds) will tell ... assuming the Dagger™ Micro magazine ever sees the light of day.

 

[wickedbeernut]

1. "I love the concept of what Shield Arms did there. Hey Glock, get your act together and make a reliable OEM version already!"

The "problem" is Glock will never push the limits in terms of magazine capacity. They're committed to the their steel-lined polymer magazine design. Even with an OEM Glock subcompact-height G43X, you're still stuck with an aftermarket magazine in order to achieve 10 - 13 rounds (flush-fit). Until we find an aftermarket G43X/G48 15-round magazine with OEM Glock reliability and durability, we're stuck.

 

[wickedbeernut]

For some reason, I've ignored my typical preference for name brand and OEM when it comes to PSA and I have been following the Dagger offerings to some degree. (Although, even that is likely only due to the unending efforts of @wickedbeernut who had so faithfully chronicled every update and development in his thread here on GT. A thread the mods seem to have rudely eliminated instead of just moving it to a more appropriate forum. That was an unnecessary loss of a great resource).

And for the record, my Palmetto State Armory Dagger™ thread was created almost two years ago (May 19, 2021) in the Firearms Forums > General Firearms Forum after having consulted with GlockTalk admins. On December 30, 2022, a GlockTalk admin moved my thread under the Palmetto State Armory Vendor Member Section. Two weeks later another GlockTalk admin deleted my thread falsely claiming that I had posted it under the Palmetto State Armory Vendor Member Section. The thread had been viewed over one quarter million times. Thousands of hours of my time gone.

 

[wickedbeernut]

Yes I agree, I was following that thread. Even though I have no interest in a dagger. I do appreciate someone sharing valuable experiences and knowledge on firearms. It’s a shame because the dagger seems popular. I hope he kept those post separate on his computer and can repost it somewhere else.

I'm slowly porting some of the content from an Internet archive (Wayback Machine),

Palmetto State Armory Dagger™​

However, I'll never be able to recover all of the content. I had chronicled the entire history of the Dagger™ (The Good, the Bad and the Ugly) from the time it first shipped the week of May 10, 2021. It was ultimately the Bad and the Ugly that resulted in the thread being deleted.

 

[wickedbeernut]

You’re not allowed to be honest with your experience? I remember reading some of your trials. What a disappointment. The whole point of a forum like this is for us to share/discuss and sometimes debate with other like minded people. Someone looking to a dagger would have benefitted from your knowledge.

I don't want to derail this thread any more than I already have. We both agree it was a major loss for GlockTalk and the Dagger™ community as a whole. The GlockTalk Dagger™ thread was referenced from all over the Internet including Reddit, ARFCOM, Dagger™ Facebook groups (owned and/or moderated by PSA), ... R.I.P.

 

[wickedbeernut]

Did you receive any kind of apology?

I’m really baffled that a thread that added so much value to this forum and drove traffic to this site was deleted.

I'm confident the GlockTalk admins can still restore the thread. I've told them that I'll make whatever modifications to the thread they feel necessary. No luck. I've been told the thread "stays down".

The GlockTalk admins identified two issues ...

First, the GlockTalk admins claimed the thread gives the impression that I represent PSA. The first paragraph of the thread stated (and has always stated),

The author of this thread is not affiliated with Palmetto State Armory or any other company under the JJE Capital Holdings, LLC umbrella. The opinions expressed within the content are solely the author's and do not reflect the opinions and beliefs of Palmetto State Armory.​

I'm not sure how I could've made it more clear that I don't represent PSA. A GlockTalk admin just needs to tell me what modifications to make in this regard and I'll gladly make them.

Second, the GlockTalk admins claimed that I was driving traffic off-site. On the contrary, I was driving traffic to GlockTalk. I created "aliases" in order to forward community members to specific posts within the thread from across the Internet. For example, the alias,

"http://wickedstone.com/Dagger/DaggerHolsters"​

forwarded community members to,

"https://www.glocktalk.com/threads/palmetto-state-armory-dagger™.1896913/post-30438833"​

The alias was simply more human-readable and compact as compared to the cryptic post URL. The end result was exactly the same regardless of whether a community member clicked on the alias or the post URL.

I offered to delete all of the aliases and replace them with the corresponding post URL. No luck. I was told the thread "stays down".

I spent thousands of hours developing this content with the sole purpose of helping GlockTalk members and the broader Dagger community. A GlockTalk member recently referred to the thread as the "Dagger bible". I don't profit from the content in any way, shape, or form. The content was technical in nature, factual, and accurate. I would think this is the type of content GlockTalk wants. I'm equally baffled.