340 vs 442/642

[OlongJohnson]

Interested in a J-frame...

From what I can figure out, these are the key advantages in content that a 340 has over a 442/642:

Blast shield on top strap - This is probably the single biggest deal for me, as without it, the frame is being eaten away. I wouldn't put a high volume of rounds through it, but having a scandium frame without it would bug me. Can anyone say whether the blast shield is the feature that makes it ".357 capable", or is there something structural about the 340 that's different?

Protected ejector rod - Obviously, lots of people carry the 442/642 without bending an ejector rod, but it would make me feel that much better knowing there's insurance here against a possible damage mode that can severely impede function.

Pinned front sight - Can be swapped out if desired without involving somebody who owns a mill. If a change was ever desired, this might cover a big chunk of the price difference. The 340 front sight looks a little nicer to start with, too.

(I also read something about the rear sight channel being shaped better on the 340 - anyone able to confirm this and/or post photos?)

Titanium cylinder - About three ounces lighter, makes it nicer for pocket carry, a little less pleasant to hang onto under recoil. Cleaning requires greater care not to damage the finish.

Capable of 357 Magnum - Probably wouldn't shoot it much (or ever), but having it and not needing it doesn't hurt anything, while not having it and wanting it sucks.

--------------
Anything I've missed?

All three seem to be available without locks often enough that a patient person can get one.

My overall grasp of it is that, in essence, the 340PD has everything it's supposed to have, and costs roughly what any other typical S&W revolver costs. (I've been there done that on costing out manufactured systems, and it's often the case that simply being smaller doesn't make a system significantly less expensive to manufacture.) The 442/642 is decontented to get the price down to the point that it will still function while being able to compete in the market with Rugers, but it's basically the bare minimum. It functions, but it's difficult and expensive to make changes if desired, has an inherently limited service life of the frame, and greater risk of being sidelined due to mechanical damage. Is that completely out to lunch, or am I at least on paper?

[Duelist]

Never heard of a lifetime limit on the +p rated 642 frames, but I don't know everything about them, obviously. If I wear mine out, it has a lifetime warranty. Of course, that could be worth as much as the warrantee on a worn out or damaged 3rd gen by the time I need to use it.

If you like the sights on the 340, and don't mind the lighter and more fragile cylinder, en I'd say it's your huckleberry. If you don't want to spend that money, it's not like the 642/442 weigh all that much, or shoot bunny farts (unless you deliberately load them that way). .38 Special isn't a squirrel gun. .357 out of an airweight or lighter gun isn't happening in MY hand. YMMV.

[HCM]

I've carried a 642 as a bug since the mid 90's when it replaced my all steel 640. I had a problematic 340 M&P which S&W could not get zeroed for windage in 3 trips back to the factory. I've heard of others with the same issue. I'm currently issued a S&W 340 M&P which has been very good however, 50 rounds of +p gold dot every three months is bad enough, I have no desire to shoot .357 magnums out of it. I fired 5 magnums out of my prior personally owned 340 and that was enough.

The M&P 340 has a steel cylinder so there is not much weight savings vs the 442/642 but you get the improved sights without having to baby a Ti cylinder. The Ti cylinder on the regular 340 needs to be pampered so you will likely need another j frame as a practice gun.

There is nothing "decontented" about the 442/642. It's a basic steel and aluminum revolver. The basic j frames came first so the 340 is an upgraded "Cadillac" version of the J frame rather than the other way around. IMHO the biggest upgrade is the improved sights.

The tooling and design costs on the 442/642 are long paid for. No special materials etc. The sights are traditional J frame. Orange nail polish on the front and black sharpie on the rear help as do laser grips.

Another issue to consider with the super light SC/Ti guns is bullet pull under recoil / inertia with magnums and hot 38 loads. A related issue is the super light guns are more likely to have issues with recoil unintentionally activating the internal lock mechanism.

The 340 M&P, 442 and 642 are still produced for LE sales without the lock though you may have to search a bit as they are done in batches. Buds Gunshop gets them regularly. Are you sure they still make no lock versions of the 340 PD ?

[UNK]

Is this the sight pic you wanted?
1031110312

[Hambo]

I'm currently issued a S&W 340 M&P which has been very good however, 50 rounds of +p gold dot every three months is bad enough, I have no desire to shoot .357 magnums out of it. I fired 5 magnums out of my prior personally owned 340 and that was enough.

Like HCM I fired 5 rounds of .357 in a friend's 340 and had all the fun I could stand. The truth is that I'd had enough by three rounds, but I couldn't look unmanly. I'm not an engineer but all the blast shield says to me is, "This caliber in this frame is a bad idea."

On Bud's a 340 CT is almost $300 more than a 642 CT. For that difference you could mill the front sight and add an XS and still have ammo money left over.

[Hauptmann]

I'm currently issued a S&W 340 M&P which has been very good however, 50 rounds of +p gold dot every three months is bad enough, I have no desire to shoot .357 magnums out of it. I fired 5 magnums out of my prior personally owned 340 and that was enough.


Same here. I bought a 340 and sold it because I guess I am just a wuss, but the recoil with even standard pressure .38spl was pretty darn uncomfortable. Once I got into .38spl 135gr+P GDs, it got even worse. .357mags felt like each shot was breaking my hand. Accuracy broke down severely with each shot as the natural tendency to compensate for recoil and the upcoming pain caused extreme trigger jerk and handling issues. Plus, with the short barrel it's like having a flash bank go off in your face(heaven forbid that you shoot without ear pro). After that experience, I went back to an old 1980s model 60 stainless which is a pleasure to shoot, and I can shoot accurately well out to 50yrds. The 642 isn't as bad as the 340, but it still brings out bad performance due to the recoil discomfort.

[UNK]

I just picked up the M&P 340 no lock with the big dot for $670 locally. The Airweight 340 goes locally for $400. My air weight has a set of Crimson trace LG-405 grips 250.00 currently at Optics Planet.

https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?4336-BUG-s-380-ACP-vs-38-Sp "There is no reason to go with .357 mag in a J-frame, as the significantly larger muzzle blast and flash, and harsher recoil of the .357 Magnum does not result in substantially improved terminal performance compared to the more controllable .38 Special bullets when fired from 2” barrels. "

So basically you pay for the weight savings which come at a premium regardless of the endeavor. It is noticeable. You also get a tritium dot up front which is replaceable. And the best part is with the 340 M&P you get a rear sight that matches the Big Dot which you won't get with the add on Big Dot and an Airweight 340.

I haven't priced it but I imagine if you purchased a Big dot and had the front sight milled on a 340 the cost savings would be lost.




.

[Super77]

I bought a no-lock M&P 340 a couple years ago. I carried and shot a standard J-frame enough to realize I wanted better sights so for me the upgrade was worth it. I believe even with steel cylinder the M&P 340 is a little lighter than a 442 and whatever they do to allow it to handle .357 presumably mean its more durable even if you're just shooting .38+P. I also like that if push came to shove I could use .357. Subjectively the 340 seems a little better finished and smoother but that might just be my own bias. For something I carry almost every day and expect to last a lon time I can justify the expense. Hell it cost about same as my iPhone that even Apple only expects to last 2 years.

[KevH]

The 340M&P has higher visibility sights and a stainless cylinder coated in PVD. Realistically that is its only advantage. Having a shrouded ejector rod is a meaningless option on these guns. I have yet to find someone that has ever shot more than a couple cylinders full of 357 Magnum in these guns.

The 442 is cheaper and to be honest the sights are not that bad. My buddy has a 340PD (titanium cylinder) and even with the XS sights I find I like my 442 better, especially if you back up beyond 15 yards.

[abu fitna]

Generally happy with the 340 as a BUG. 357 is overkill and painful, run Gold Dot 38 +p.

Uncrimped range fodder can pull and bind cylinder, but not unique to this gun.

Bought this over the others due to having a no lock option in stock when i needed a new J frame. The sights are worth it, though hard to swap between this and back to standard j without a bit of range time and dry fire to reorient.

Largely though not carrying a j frame these days, as much as the niche has some utility the small bottom feeders are more freqently indicated.

[LSP972]

I bought a no-lock M&P 340 a couple years ago. I carried and shot a standard J-frame enough to realize I wanted better sights so for me the upgrade was worth it. I believe even with steel cylinder the M&P 340 is a little lighter than a 442 and whatever they do to allow it to handle .357 presumably mean its more durable even if you're just shooting .38+P. I also like that if push came to shove I could use .357. Subjectively the 340 seems a little better finished and smoother but that might just be my own bias. For something I carry almost every day and expect to last a lon time I can justify the expense.

I'm with you 110%. The Ti-Scan Js are simply better done than the current plain-vanilla 642s/36s/whatever. Their problem is because they ARE so light weight they are simply painful- very painful- to shoot. That, and the communist lock, of course. I bought this 360PD with the lock in 2002. I have carried it almost every day since then. For the first few years, I shot it a lot too. Several thousand rounds; 15 full-patch .357s, the rest wadcutters or semi-wadcutter bullets; had it fail me once, because I had improperly de-activated the lock; fixed that with The Plug, and haven't looked back.

By whacking off the hammer spur, this piece actually "hides" a bit better in trouser pockets, because the Centennial-copy 340 frame is larger due to its covering the elliptical hammer in the Centennial Js.

The thing is, if you DO have to fire these little hogs for real, the pain/etc. ain't gonna be that bad... you'll be too worried/scared/whatever. Which is why I, and a lot of other folks, practice with an all-steel J frame; the one I use is a first-edition M-640, purchased in the early 90s.

This 360PD hasn't been shot in years... but I guarantee you it will, right now, if it must.

[Lost River]

The tooling and design costs on the 442/642 are long paid for. No special materials etc. The sights are traditional J frame. Orange nail polish on the front and black sharpie on the rear help as do laser grips.




http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b109/IV_Troop/Handguns/CrimsonTraceJframe_zpsba1039f6.jpg (http://s18.photobucket.com/user/IV_Troop/media/Handguns/CrimsonTraceJframe_zpsba1039f6.jpg.html)

I have had my 442 since 2000. Having played with the .357 versions in the past, I have absolutely ZERO desire to ever shoot a full house .357 through an Airweight J Frame ever again. I shoot a fair amount of .44 magnums and consider the recoil of the .357s in J Frames to be far worse.

The single biggest factor in improving performance of the J Frames in my observation/experience is the addition of CT laser grips. The substantial performance increase in accurate shooting is very hard to ignore, as well as having the ability to make hits in less than optimal lighting conditions.

Frankly I consider the CT grips to be pretty much mandatory on J Frames used for personal defense.

[TGS]

I don't see the point of buying a 357 revolver to be a ballistic one. I see the advantage being the longer ejector rod, and thus more reliable ejection. I'm surprised this hasn't been mentioned yet.

With that said, the way I would approach this is based on what you're hoping to get out of the gun:

How much will you train with it? Given that, will the better sights of 340 not make a difference? If your capabilities will negate it to being a belly gun, the better sights are a wasted expense.

Will you be carrying reloads? Is this something you hope to accomplish in a fight, or are you carrying a speed strip for purposes of post-fight topping off? If the latter, then the longer ejector rod of the 340 is a wasted expense...

Do you frequently travel with the gun sans ammo and need to pick up a box of ammo at your destination? If not, the greater ammo selection of the 340 is a wasted expense....

Consider a j-frame class as part of the purchase cost. If you bought a 340 can you still get yourself into a class with DeBethencourt or the likes? If not, buy the 442/642 and go to a snub class, as opposed to buying the 340 and not buying a class...

Are you going to run Crimson Trace grips regardless of whichever gun you buy? If so, the better sights on the 340 are a wasted expense....

[mmc45414]

For that difference you could mill the front sight and add an XS and still have ammo money left over.

I have the Big Dot on my 638:
10320
A friend milled it for me but if I do another one I will probably just file it, it really is a simple objective and to mill it the clamping is not really straight forward. I had to clean it up with a file anyway, and stippled it to cover the marks. The main drawback is that it is glued on, and when it depletes getting it off without busting the vial might be iffy.

[idahojess]

The 340 M&P, 442 and 642 are still produced for LE sales without the lock though you may have to search a bit as they are done in batches. Buds Gunshop gets them regularly. Are you sure they still make no lock versions of the 340 PD ?

You can get the no-lock 340PD still. I've posted this before -- this is who I got mine from.
http://www.gunsinternational.com/guns-for-sale-online/revolvers/smith-wesson-revolvers/smith-and-wesson-s-w-model-340pd-no-lock-m340pd-357-mg-3-day-super-sale-sku-103061.cfm?gun_id=100576692

For me, I got the 340 pd because I thought it would carry easier in a pair of dress slacks pockets, vs. the heavier 340 M&P (which I didn't try), or the 442/642, which I had. It is a carried-a lot, shot-a -little gun, but I usually get 10-rounds or so through it every month or so. I think if you're looking to pocket carry in heavier trousers or belt carry, the 442 is fine, at least to start with. It was an LCP replacement for me.

I think if you get a 340 pd you should get either a steel or aluminum j-frame, too, to practice with.

[OlongJohnson]

You can get the no-lock 340PD still. I've posted this before -- this is who I got mine from.
http://www.gunsinternational.com/guns-for-sale-online/revolvers/smith-wesson-revolvers/smith-and-wesson-s-w-model-340pd-no-lock-m340pd-357-mg-3-day-super-sale-sku-103061.cfm?gun_id=100576692

For me, I got the 340 pd because I thought it would carry easier in a pair of dress slacks pockets, vs. the heavier 340 M&P (which I didn't try), or the 442/642, which I had. It is a carried-a lot, shot-a -little gun, but I usually get 10-rounds or so through it every month or so. I think if you're looking to pocket carry in heavier trousers or belt carry, the 442 is fine, at least to start with. It was an LCP replacement for me.

I think if you get a 340 pd you should get either a steel or aluminum j-frame, too, to practice with.

D&L Hunting is a good dealer. I've gotten a nice deal on a hard-to-find item from them before.

Sounds like it would be a decent plan to pick up a 640, get some trigger time and training, and if it's working for me, get something lighter to carry and keep fresh with the 640.

[11B10]

I'm with you 110%. The Ti-Scan Js are simply better done than the current plain-vanilla 642s/36s/whatever. Their problem is because they ARE so light weight they are simply painful- very painful- to shoot. That, and the communist lock, of course. I bought this 360PD with the lock in 2002. I have carried it almost every day since then. For the first few years, I shot it a lot too. Several thousand rounds; 15 full-patch .357s, the rest wadcutters or semi-wadcutter bullets; had it fail me once, because I had improperly de-activated the lock; fixed that with The Plug, and haven't looked back.

By whacking off the hammer spur, this piece actually "hides" a bit better in trouser pockets, because the Centennial-copy 340 frame is larger due to its covering the elliptical hammer in the Centennial Js.

The thing is, if you DO have to fire these little hogs for real, the pain/etc. ain't gonna be that bad... you'll be too worried/scared/whatever. Which is why I, and a lot of other folks, practice with an all-steel J frame; the one I use is a first-edition M-640, purchased in the early 90s.

This 360PD hasn't been shot in years... but I guarantee you it will, right now, if it must.



LSP - on the one hand, I really appreciate all the info you and everyone else has been providing on this thread. HOWEVER, I thought I'd be able to make an informed decision easily, but it just keeps getting harder. I will only be buying ONE j-frame, ever. I will be using it for MOSTLY bug duty, but I suspect it will also become #1 more as I get older (I'm 68 now) and begin to appreciate it more. A very good buddy, retired LEO, is lobbying - hard - to get me to buy the M & P 340 over the 642. When I stand there in his store and do the dry fire comparisons, the 340 is a clear winner, in MY honest opinion. The sights are waaay better and the trigger feels like a pro job. The 'other' two things are the ability to shoot .357 (which I like) and, damn it - it just LOOKS better. So many guys tell me the triigger on the 642 does get better and the sights can be "enhanced," which is true. May I ask for your opinion?

Thanks - much appreciated!

[Dagga Boy]

LSP - on the one hand, I really appreciate all the info you and everyone else has been providing on this thread. HOWEVER, I thought I'd be able to make an informed decision easily, but it just keeps getting harder. I will only be buying ONE j-frame, ever. I will be using it for MOSTLY bug duty, but I suspect it will also become #1 more as I get older (I'm 68 now) and begin to appreciate it more. A very good buddy, retired LEO, is lobbying - hard - to get me to buy the M & P 340 over the 642. When I stand there in his store and do the dry fire comparisons, the 340 is a clear winner, in MY honest opinion. The sights are waaay better and the trigger feels like a pro job. The 'other' two things are the ability to shoot .357 (which I like) and, damn it - it just LOOKS better. So many guys tell me the triigger on the 642 does get better and the sights can be "enhanced," which is true. May I ask for your opinion?

Thanks - much appreciated!

Not LSP, but I am a total convert to the M&P340 as "The J frame". Wayne and I are both using them extensively for back up and discrete carry. Both have APEX kits and no locks. I am using Mike's boot grips for carry and I have a set of real Spegel wood boot grips if I want it to look good. It is really the state of the art snub in my mind with its sights, materials, construction, etc. Do I like shooting it a lot...no. It is the bottom end of light and I have 640's as trainers if I want to shoot a bunch. I think they are just very "capable" while in the lightest, smallest package I would every use.

[LSP972]

I don't see the point of buying a 357 revolver to be a ballistic one. I see the advantage being the longer ejector rod, and thus more reliable ejection. I'm surprised this hasn't been mentioned yet.

.

It hasn't been mentioned because it doesn't occur until the barrel becomes three inches long. The Ti-Scan/ M&P snubbies still have 1 7/8 inch barrels , even in the .357 caliber versions.

The better sights are NOT a wasted expense to some of us... regardless of whether you use it as a "bellygun" or a Wimbledon competitor.

Other parts of your post are pretty well correct... but why diss the guy's choice? I have almost a dozen J frames; most of which are pre-95 examples, two of which were built in the 60s. I carry the Ti-Scan... because of the less weight.

Something wrong with that, too?

BTW, not trying to beef you here, because I really don't give a shit what anybody else thinks about me or mine. But you were kinda-sorta telling that fellow he was being dumb- at least, it appeared that way to me- and I don't think he was. If that wasn't your intention, then I apologize.

.

[El Cid]

Add me to the list of folks who shot 5 rounds of magnum through mine and felt the bruise forming on my trigger finger (from the guard striking it) after the first shot. Carry ammo was either 135gr Gold Dots or 110gr Corbon DPX.

I used it only as a second gun to my Glock or a primary when lounging around the house in shorts and a t-shirt. I bought my 340 before the no-lock versions were available and that was my only regret. It's now hanging out in the safe though because I discovered my G43 to be basically the same size. The 340 may see use as a jacket pocket gun during winter but for all other pants/shorts pocket duty the G43 does what I need with 9 rounds of 9mm and a light/laser.

To give an idea of size comparison (this is w/o the TLR-6 and +2 mag)
http://i828.photobucket.com/albums/zz209/El_CidAF_ResQ/Mobile%20Uploads/FullSizeRender_zpsbj0guuvd.jpg

[LSP972]

Not LSP, but I am a total convert to the M&P340 as "The J frame". Wayne and I are both using them extensively for back up and discrete carry. Both have APEX kits and no locks. I am using Mike's boot grips for carry and I have a set of real Spegel wood boot grips if I want it to look good. It is really the state of the art snub in my mind with its sights, materials, construction, etc. Do I like shooting it a lot...no. It is the bottom end of light and I have 640's as trainers if I want to shoot a bunch. I think they are just very "capable" while in the lightest, smallest package I would every use.


There ya go, 11B10. DB tells you straight. Sadly, I have ZERO experience with the M&P J frame, so I couldn't have advised you anyway. Sorry...

.

[UNK]

Shot 5 rounds of 357 through mine today because it was the only Gold Dot I could find. That will never happen again. Then shot a box of 158gn standard velocity. That is some sweet stuff. I could shoot it all day.
Can someone clarify something for me. Are the 158 grain hitting aprox same POI/POA as the 130-135 grain P+ rounds?

[Duelist]

10328

What my 642 sights look like with fluorescent orange modeling paint on the front and black sharpie on the rear. 12 years in my pocket, on my ankle, or in a SmartCarry. This is the second or third time I've painted the front sight, fifth or sixth on the rear. Liking the orange better than the glossy red nail polish that was on it last time. Had white on it one time. Non-starter.

I don't feel the need to get something different. It runs, it's as accurate as anything this size I've ever shot, and I trust it. That said, I very rarely shoot it with +p. Stings.

[HCM]

10328

What my 642 sights look like with fluorescent orange modeling paint on the front and black sharpie on the rear. 12 years in my pocket, on my ankle, or in a SmartCarry. This is the second or third time I've painted the front sight, fifth or sixth on the rear. Liking the orange better than the glossy red nail polish that was on it last time. Had white on it one time. Non-starter.

I don't feel the need to get something different. It runs, it's as accurate as anything this size I've ever shot, and I trust it. That said, I very rarely shoot it with +p. Stings.

My 642 sights look just like this ^^^^. Black sharpie rear / Hot Tamale Orange nail polish on the front.

[Dagga Boy]

My girlfriend is nice and keeps a drawer full of front sight paint. With that said, compared to the sights on my 340 M&P, 640 Pro, and 642 Power port, or pre 68 Colt snubs....no comparison. I much prefer the ones with real sights to the painted nubs.

[Eastex]

http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b109/IV_Troop/Handguns/CrimsonTraceJframe_zpsba1039f6.jpg (http://s18.photobucket.com/user/IV_Troop/media/Handguns/CrimsonTraceJframe_zpsba1039f6.jpg.html)

I have had my 442 since 2000. Having played with the .357 versions in the past, I have absolutely ZERO desire to ever shoot a full house .357 through an Airweight J Frame ever again. I shoot a fair amount of .44 magnums and consider the recoil of the .357s in J Frames to be far worse.

The single biggest factor in improving performance of the J Frames in my observation/experience is the addition of CT laser grips. The substantial performance increase in accurate shooting is very hard to ignore, as well as having the ability to make hits in less than optimal lighting conditions.

Frankly I consider the CT grips to be pretty much mandatory on J Frames used for personal defense.

Are those the Crimson Trace LG 405 grips?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Up1911Fan]

Are those the Crimson Trace LG 405 grips?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

They don't look like 405's. I don't see the air pocket cushion on the back.

[Imaposer2]

I believe those are the original, now discontinued, version of the 105s.

[El Cid]

I believe those are the original, now discontinued, version of the 105s.

It's discontinued?? Glad I got mine when I did.

[Lost River]

Are those the Crimson Trace LG 405 grips?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I honestly have NO idea on a model #.

They have been on the gun for years and I have no idea if the old box is around.

They make the gun accurate enough to allow the whacking of jackrabbits at 20-25 ish yards (on a good night), so I figure that is plenty good enough. :cool:

[Imaposer2]

It's discontinued?? Glad I got mine when I did.

That version is. They have a newer version of the 105, like these on my 638...

http://i637.photobucket.com/albums/uu93/ThePosers/My%20revolvers/IMG_4205.jpg (http://s637.photobucket.com/user/ThePosers/media/My%20revolvers/IMG_4205.jpg.html)



Current 105s on the 638 on the left, 405s on the 640 on the right...



http://i637.photobucket.com/albums/uu93/ThePosers/My%20revolvers/1123121206a.jpg (http://s637.photobucket.com/user/ThePosers/media/My%20revolvers/1123121206a.jpg.html)

[11B10]

Not LSP, but I am a total convert to the M&P340 as "The J frame". Wayne and I are both using them extensively for back up and discrete carry. Both have APEX kits and no locks. I am using Mike's boot grips for carry and I have a set of real Spegel wood boot grips if I want it to look good. It is really the state of the art snub in my mind with its sights, materials, construction, etc. Do I like shooting it a lot...no. It is the bottom end of light and I have 640's as trainers if I want to shoot a bunch. I think they are just very "capable" while in the lightest, smallest package I would every use.




This will teach me to turn off my laptop and watch tv! Thanks for the very quick response. I don't now why I decided to doubt my LEO buddy on this one as he has been absolutely perfect in everything he has suggested for me. Doesn't matter if it was a flashlight, knife, or firearms, he has nailed it. I had a gut feeling about this one and will now seek to scrounge up the extra $$$ to make it happen - hopefully sooner rather than later. VERY much appreciated.

[UNK]

https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?22112-J-Frame-POA-POI&p=495488&viewfull=1#post495488

Yes. IME that isn't so.

I have multiple J frames in .38 Special and .357 Magnum, mostly with 1 7/8" barrels, from the scandium alloy lightest weight models to solid steel models.

The steel 1 7/8" barreled guns all seem to be regulated such that POI corresponds to POA for 158gr+P loads, best exemplified with Remington's premium LSWCHP.

NONE of those guns hit to POI with lighter weight rounds, with Gold Dot .38 Special+P 135gr JHP having been tested most consistently among all of them. The lighter Speer rounds consistently hit low.

The scandium alloy guns (340PDs, ostensibly in .357 Magnum) OTOH are very close to having POI = POI with said Gold Dot+P 135gr JHP load, but hit high with 158gr Winchester, Remington and Buffalo Bore +P LSWCHP loads.



[QUOTE=UNK;495335]Can someone clarify something for me. Are the 158 grain hitting aprox same POI/POA as the 130

[JodyH]

Yet another PF thread has cost me money.
Ordered a no-lock 340 with Express sights today.

[Dagga Boy]

Yet another PF thread has cost me money.
Ordered a no-lock 340 with Express sights today.

You will be happy and also find it surprisingly "useful".

[JodyH]

I have a Sc/Ti 360, but hate the dust bunnies that pack in around the hammer.

[LSP972]

I have a Sc/Ti 360, but hate the dust bunnies that pack in around the hammer.

Me too. Which is why I buy canned air by the case at Sam's, and blow that shit out/away every other day. Gee, it takes at least 30 seconds... how can I stand it???;)

.

[JodyH]

Don't you screw up my excuse for buying the 340.

[Dagga Boy]

Don't you screw up my excuse for buying the 340.

Forgive him, he's not just his normal curmudgeon, he has an excuse this time. Obviously, they left the "smart ass" lobe of his brain fully intact.:p

[Duelist]

And here I am thinking that the money this thread might cost me will be for a 640...

[jslaughter]

This is a Great thread! I have a 638 with over 2k through it. I love this gun, but it has a lock (yuck). I'm looking for a 340, 442/642 for better concealment, no lock for pocket carry.

[NickA]

Based on a perusal of recent threads and what people have been buying, looks like the good 'ol J-frame is the current "PF hotness" 😁 All we're missing is a J-frame grip thread, I think.
Anxiously waiting to see if this is awesome or if it creates a singularity that kills us all in da streetz.

Sent from my XT1095 using Tapatalk

[JJN]

For the more budget minded, check out the 360J. Lots of great features if you don't mind the hammer. https://www.slickguns.com/search/apachesolr_search/160360?is_firearms_wikiarms=0

[Hauptmann]

Based on a perusal of recent threads and what people have been buying, looks like the good 'ol J-frame is the current "PF hotness" �� All we're missing is a J-frame grip thread, I think.
Anxiously waiting to see if this is awesome or if it creates a singularity that kills us all in da streetz.

Sent from my XT1095 using Tapatalk

I think J-frames are perfectly fine for civilian personal defense away from home(hopefully won't have to shoot enough to reload) provided that you shoot it well. Personally, I do not shoot hammerless DAO airweights well, and I would rather go with something that I can shoot accurately out to 25yrds. I think it is especially critical that you be able to very accurately shoot the pistol well considering the low capacity, and difficulty in reloading a revolver. So, the smallest I am willing to go is my classic S&W model 60 all stainless .38spl. It has just enough weight to keep the recoil down so that I keep the gun steady even under stress, and it of course has the exposed hammer so that I can go into SA mode. Shooting bowling pins at 35yrds is no problem with this pistol.

[NickA]

I think J-frames are perfectly fine for civilian personal defense away from home(hopefully won't have to shoot enough to reload) provided that you shoot it well. Personally, I do not shoot hammerless DAO airweights well, and I would rather go with something that I can shoot accurately out to 25yrds. I think it is especially critical that you be able to very accurately shoot the pistol well considering the low capacity, and difficulty in reloading a revolver. So, the smallest I am willing to go is my classic S&W model 60 all stainless .38spl. It has just enough weight to keep the recoil down so that I keep the gun steady even under stress, and it of course has the exposed hammer so that I can go into SA mode. Shooting bowling pins at 35yrds is no problem with this pistol.

Totally agree. I've had a 642 for several years but have barely shot it, and almost never carry it because I know how hard it is to shoot well.
That said, all this talk has me planning to break it out and at least do some dry fire.
Being a hard pistol to master (or at least be competent with), working with it should boost skill overall, I'd think.

[Dagga Boy]

I think J-frames are perfectly fine for civilian personal defense away from home(hopefully won't have to shoot enough to reload) provided that you shoot it well. Personally, I do not shoot hammerless DAO airweights well, and I would rather go with something that I can shoot accurately out to 25yrds. I think it is especially critical that you be able to very accurately shoot the pistol well considering the low capacity, and difficulty in reloading a revolver. So, the smallest I am willing to go is my classic S&W model 60 all stainless .38spl. It has just enough weight to keep the recoil down so that I keep the gun steady even under stress, and it of course has the exposed hammer so that I can go into SA mode. Shooting bowling pins at 35yrds is no problem with this pistol.

For the "it is my only gun, single snub carry", the all steel guns make sense. It sort of is the case for things like the 640 PRO. Works really well entangled and if you have to shoot it they are more "real" gun like. For a majority of folks CCW needs balanced with risk, it is not a horrible choice, especially for "non dedicated" users. By the same token, "uber-dedicated" snub devotees who live a snub lifestyle and train with the "one gun" mentality on them, I have seen a few folks do some amazing stuff with them.

[UpDok]

Interested in a J-frame...

From what I can figure out, these are the key advantages in content that a 340 has over a 442/642:

Blast shield on top strap - This is probably the single biggest deal for me, as without it, the frame is being eaten away. I wouldn't put a high volume of rounds through it, but having a scandium frame without it would bug me. Can anyone say whether the blast shield is the feature that makes it ".357 capable", or is there something structural about the 340 that's different?

Protected ejector rod - Obviously, lots of people carry the 442/642 without bending an ejector rod, but it would make me feel that much better knowing there's insurance here against a possible damage mode that can severely impede function.

Pinned front sight - Can be swapped out if desired without involving somebody who owns a mill. If a change was ever desired, this might cover a big chunk of the price difference. The 340 front sight looks a little nicer to start with, too.

(I also read something about the rear sight channel being shaped better on the 340 - anyone able to confirm this and/or post photos?)

Titanium cylinder - About three ounces lighter, makes it nicer for pocket carry, a little less pleasant to hang onto under recoil. Cleaning requires greater care not to damage the finish.

Capable of 357 Magnum - Probably wouldn't shoot it much (or ever), but having it and not needing it doesn't hurt anything, while not having it and wanting it sucks.

--------------
Anything I've missed?

All three seem to be available without locks often enough that a patient person can get one.

My overall grasp of it is that, in essence, the 340PD has everything it's supposed to have, and costs roughly what any other typical S&W revolver costs. (I've been there done that on costing out manufactured systems, and it's often the case that simply being smaller doesn't make a system significantly less expensive to manufacture.) The 442/642 is decontented to get the price down to the point that it will still function while being able to compete in the market with Rugers, but it's basically the bare minimum. It functions, but it's difficult and expensive to make changes if desired, has an inherently limited service life of the frame, and greater risk of being sidelined due to mechanical damage. Is that completely out to lunch, or am I at least on paper?

I don't think it has been mentioned yet in the thread but I think the hammer & trigger pivots were "missed"

It may be a small practical point, but the 340/340PD series has steel hammer and trigger pivots pressed into the scandium/aluminum alloy frame, while the 442/642 series has integral aluminum hammer & trigger pivots that are one piece with the aluminum alloy frame. The 340 is made of higher cost materials and is stronger and lighter weight. the 442/642 is cheaper, heavier, and not as strong.

I own both a 642 and a 340SC. I carry the 340SC more because it is lighter weight.

[OlongJohnson]

That's a huge deal for a mechanical engineer, thanks for posting!

[Willard]

I don't think it has been mentioned yet in the thread but I think the hammer & trigger pivots were "missed"

It may be a small practical point, but the 340/340PD series has steel hammer and trigger pivots pressed into the scandium/aluminum alloy frame, while the 442/642 series has integral aluminum hammer & trigger pivots that are one piece with the aluminum alloy frame. The 340 is made of higher cost materials and is stronger and lighter weight. the 442/642 is cheaper, heavier, and not as strong.

I own both a 642 and a 340SC. I carry the 340SC more because it is lighter weight.

I haven't dug into the guts of my 442, so not arguing the point, but post 29 in this thread states the pins in the 442/642/etc are steel. If you're correct, that could well explain the failure and his initial assumptions regarding same. Would be interesting to know for sure.

https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?17882-S-amp-W-442-hammer-stud-failure/page3

[Imaposer2]

I don't think it has been mentioned yet in the thread but I think the hammer & trigger pivots were "missed"

It may be a small practical point, but the 340/340PD series has steel hammer and trigger pivots pressed into the scandium/aluminum alloy frame, while the 442/642 series has integral aluminum hammer & trigger pivots that are one piece with the aluminum alloy frame. The 340 is made of higher cost materials and is stronger and lighter weight. the 442/642 is cheaper, heavier, and not as strong.

I own both a 642 and a 340SC. I carry the 340SC more because it is lighter weight.

Interesting, although I'm not sure how much difference it makes in practical terms if only using the gun with .38 Special as most will do, as opposed to the .357 it was beefed up to handle ...

Just out of curiosity, would you happen to know the weight difference between the 642 and the 340?

I remember back in the day when S&W first introduced the Scandium .357 revolvers, and they were all the rage in the local market, and commanded the prices to show for it, I handled a few at various gun shows. While, side by side comparisons did show a difference in weight, I couldn't justify the price difference for what amounted to such a small difference. And since I knew I wouldn't be using .357 in a gun that light anyway... Well, I don't have a Scandium S&W. I guess I'm an oddball because in my normal J frame carry methods I really can't tell much difference between my 640 and my 638. Sure, holding one in each hand I can tell a noticeable difference, but I can wear either all day pretty much just as easily and quickly forget they're there. And the 640 is easier to shoot to me. Of course, I don't pocket or ankle carry, and I can see that a few ounces would make a difference in either of those modes. But my J frames are normally either in a Smartcarry or IWB/AIWB and in those locations I can't really feel much difference.

[11B10]

There ya go, 11B10. DB tells you straight. Sadly, I have ZERO experience with the M&P J frame, so I couldn't have advised you anyway. Sorry...

.




LSP972 - sorry I missed this post ^^^^. I want you to know I have been thinking of - and praying for - you much since you made the details of your situation public knowledge. It speaks volumes as to your character that while you most assuredly have much to think about, you are still contributing absolutely great info here and I thank you so much for doing so.

Speaking to that info and after re-reading (many times) nyeti's advice and thoughts on "which j-frame," I visited my favorite FFL this morning and spent a couple hours bs-ing with the guys, but more importantly, getting a real feel for the M & P 340. I have felt this kind of urge so many times before, but this one has to be pre-ordained as the M & P 340 just came down in price AGAIN, now at $592.00. The only reason I'm not at the range right now is because due to my recent retirement, I DO have to exercise some degree of financial restraint, which is something foreign to me. Not to worry, though, as the price and availability are now 'etched in stone.' Soon.

[jslaughter]

I think J-frames are perfectly fine for civilian personal defense away from home(hopefully won't have to shoot enough to reload) provided that you shoot it well. Personally, I do not shoot hammerless DAO airweights well, and I would rather go with something that I can shoot accurately out to 25yrds. I think it is especially critical that you be able to very accurately shoot the pistol well considering the low capacity, and difficulty in reloading a revolver. So, the smallest I am willing to go is my classic S&W model 60 all stainless .38spl. It has just enough weight to keep the recoil down so that I keep the gun steady even under stress, and it of course has the exposed hammer so that I can go into SA mode. Shooting bowling pins at 35yrds is no problem with this pistol.

This is why I like a 638 and Crimson Trace Laser grips. When I retire it will likely be a J-frame as my CCW. You got to be a dedicated shooter and two J-frames won't be a bad idea.

[11B10]

Not LSP, but I am a total convert to the M&P340 as "The J frame". Wayne and I are both using them extensively for back up and discrete carry. Both have APEX kits and no locks. I am using Mike's boot grips for carry and I have a set of real Spegel wood boot grips if I want it to look good. It is really the state of the art snub in my mind with its sights, materials, construction, etc. Do I like shooting it a lot...no. It is the bottom end of light and I have 640's as trainers if I want to shoot a bunch. I think they are just very "capable" while in the lightest, smallest package I would every use.



I want to thank you again for giving me the info I needed to make the right choice. Check my post from earlier today. Everything is there - no sense repeating it all. Oh, OK. - $592.00 for a no-lock M&P 340!

[Jim Bellino]

Doesn't the 442/642 both have the "blast shield" between the forcing cone and top strap........I believe they do...correct me if I am wrong.

[HCM]

Doesn't the 442/642 both have the "blast shield" between the forcing cone and top strap........I believe they do...correct me if I am wrong.

No. The aluminum frame guns do not. They don't need it as they are 38 special. The Ti / Sc guns do.

[Digiroc]

I have both the 360PD AirLite and the 640 Pro. One to carry and one to shoot. 5 rounds of .357 in the AirLite seems to be a popular stopping point. My wrist hurt for three days after firing a cylinder full of .357s in my 360PD. I doubt if I'll ever fire magnums out of it anymore. Adding the CT laser grips with the air channel helps a lot, making +p's tolerable from it.

I did carry the AirLite all day today in an ankle holster and it didn't bother me at all. I'm sure the 640 would have felt like a ball and chain carried there.

Digiroc

10386

[El Cid]

the M & P 340 just came down in price AGAIN, now at $592.00.
Links? I just googled and didn't find that. I could use a no-lock for carry and use the lock version I have for training.

[OlongJohnson]

A very good buddy, retired LEO, is lobbying - hard - to get me to buy the M & P 340 over the 642. When I stand there in his store and do the dry fire comparisons, the 340 is a clear winner, in MY honest opinion.

Doesn't sound like a deal you'll find on the google. :)

[11B10]

Links? I just googled and didn't find that. I could use a no-lock for carry and use the lock version I have for training.

El Cid - send me a pm.

[LSP972]

V
I have both the 360PD AirLite and the 640 Pro. One to carry and one to shoot. 5 rounds of .357 in the AirLite seems to be a popular stopping point. My wrist hurt for three days after firing a cylinder full of .357s in my 360PD. I doubt if I'll ever fire magnums out of it anymore. Adding the CT laser grips with the air channel helps a lot, making +p's tolerable from it.

I did carry the AirLite all day today in an ankle holster and it didn't bother me at all. I'm sure the 640 would have felt like a ball and chain carried there.


Digiroc

10386

That 640 PRO is a nice- looking good piece. Do you know how many ounces it weighs? If it weighs more than my old, decrepit M-640, I may buy one; for a practice critter.

.

[LSP972]

Okay, the S&W web site says 23 ounces- which is a few ounces more than my M-640. That's good... But does it work okay WITHOUT those communist moon clips?

I despise The Lock, of course, but I know how to get rid of that POS; and the revolver will be only be used for real deal stuff during dark days. Guess I'll go look at the Pro 640 thread and make up my mind.

.

[MGW]

I want to thank you again for giving me the info I needed to make the right choice. Check my post from earlier today. Everything is there - no sense repeating it all. Oh, OK. - $592.00 for a no-lock M&P 340!

Is this an everyday price? As in do you know where a second one is at this price?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Digiroc]

Okay, the S&W web site says 23 ounces- which is a few ounces more than my M-640. That's good... But does it work okay WITHOUT those communist moon clips?

I despise The Lock, of course, but I know how to get rid of that POS; and the revolver will be only be used for real deal stuff during dark days. Guess I'll go look at the Pro 640 thread and make up my mind.

.

The 640 Pro does not have the lock. The extra weight is very helpful in reducing recoil. It works fine without the moon clips. The standard tritium sights are very nice in dark conditions.

Digiroc

[LSP972]

The 640 Pro does not have the lock. The extra weight is very helpful in reducing recoil. It works fine without the moon clips. The standard tritium sights are very nice in dark conditions.

Digiroc

Thank you, sir. I believe I'm going to score one when I get home.

.

[Mitch]

I'm really close to picking up a 340 with no lock. My only question, is it really $200 better than a Ruger LCR? For another $60 I can put a big dot front on the LCR, and unless I'm missing something I'm $140 ahead with the Ruger?

[Kram]

Is this an everyday price? As in do you know where a second one is at this price?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That's the S&W LE price. That's the same price my local cop shop sells them for.

[LSP972]

I'm really close to picking up a 340 with no lock. My only question, is it really $200 better than a Ruger LCR? For another $60 I can put a big dot front on the LCR, and unless I'm missing something I'm $140 ahead with the Ruger?

Well, don't take this personally... But if you are worried about the S&W being $200 more than the Ruger... buy a Ruger.

It has been covered here many times before; the J frame is smaller, handier, IOW easier to conceal, than any LCR. You can also double-clutch the LCR trigger a lot easier than you can the S&W action; IOW, short-stroke the trigger which makes you miss that round, period. Some people don't believe that; okay, fine with me.

The LCR is a good piece; lots of folks here like it. But lots of us also think that the S&W J frame is a better choice for concealed-carry piece... And who gives a damn what the price difference is?:D

.

[Dagga Boy]

I'm really close to picking up a 340 with no lock. My only question, is it really $200 better than a Ruger LCR? For another $60 I can put a big dot front on the LCR, and unless I'm missing something I'm $140 ahead with the Ruger?

If you do want to buy an LCR with a big dot all ready on it and great holsters.....let me know.

[APS-PF]

I decided to try another 340M&P (thanks pf) now that I'm a much better j frame shooter than I was the first time around 8yrs ago. Had to go back for a canted front sight, grouped 7" left @25yds. Hopefully they can straighten the shroud. Next time I'm taking a magnifying glass to the gunshow ;).
Otherwise, yeah that front sight is much easier for my eyes to see than the post/notch on my 642 particularly without my glasses. It also helped me to really appreciate the PC action job that came standard on my 642 Talo!

[Isaac]

Bump for consideration of 340 vs 340PD purchase.

Just how delicate is the Ti cylinder? This thread isnt the first I've read about it needing a lot of care. The finish just comes off? With certain solvents or is it from scrubbing?


And while I have your attention, 148 vs 158 WC have the same recoil, the difference is that the 158 is too slow? Is my understanding correct?

Thanks!

[Isaac]

NM on the why or Ti erosion, a search revealed its the solvent that takes off the coating, which then exposes the Ti to wear from the blast.

[OlongJohnson]

Mechanical scraping, such as scrubbing the chambers with a steel brush (read the manual for what is OK to use) will also destroy the coating.

[SteveB]

I think it's reasonable to carry a 340PD and shoot it once in a while to confirm zero and flush out the lint. It's not a training revolver; you need another one for that.

11541

[Isaac]

Agree Steve.

I've had a hammer stud break off a 642 of mine in the past. Could have been my fault though. S&W was great w the CS when it happened, but the comment a page back about the studs being in vs shaped from the actual aluminum frame have me leaning twds the 340s...

[idahojess]

Bump for consideration of 340 vs 340PD purchase.

Just how delicate is the Ti cylinder? This thread isnt the first I've read about it needing a lot of care. The finish just comes off? With certain solvents or is it from scrubbing?




I took the advice from LSP 972 (thread below), and only shoot jacketed bullets through my 340 pd, so no wadcutters. I also use Hoppes Elite to clean it, which S&W recommended. I haven't had any issue with the finish coming off -- granted cleaning only occurs once every few months (but I do shoot it about once per month). Also, I follow Chuck's advice and use nylon brushes.

https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?12282-340-PD

[Isaac]

Thanks Jess, thats a shame to hear WC are no good in it. Gonna read that thread now, thanks for the link!

[mmc45414]

Bought a M&P340 with a lock a year or so ago when my friend wanted to upgrade to the no lock. I had shot it before I bought it with 357 reloads he had optimized for it, and I really didn't think it was that bad. It has spent most of the time in the safe, and I really don't keep much factory ammo on hand, but yesterday I decided to shoot a cylinder full of 125GDHPs through it. Holy Shit Batman, what a boom!

The recoil is indeed nasty but not IMO unmanageable, but the blast is horrific. It was painful. Outdoors. With ear plugs in...

Seems like the Speer 135g "Short Barrel" concoction at just under 1000fps might be just what the doctor ordered, but they seem to be in stock nowhere. This causes me to think they are either awesome and sold out, or lame and not in production. Anybody have any experience with them?

[SAWBONES]

...only shoot jacketed bullets through my 340 pd.... I also use Hoppes Elite to clean it, which S&W recommended. I haven't had any issue with the finish coming off... Also, I follow Chuck's advice and use nylon brushes.

All good advice, though I use M Pro-7, which as far as I can tell, may the very same formulation as Hoppes Elite.

Gentle brushing of the titanium cylinder will get most residue off off the rounds and flutes, though the firing rings left around each cylinder face charging hole are best not scrubbed too hard, since IME they will never disappear except with use of metal brushes, abrasives or Lead-Away. I clean them just enough that there's no build up sufficient to touch the forcing cone and hinder cylinder rotation.

(IOSSO bore cleaning paste does really well in removing firing rings from a stainless steel cylinder face, and might work with the 340PD cylinder, but I'm afraid to try it.)

[Isaac]

Just came from a 50 rounds session with the 642. I've tried CT grips in the past, but always went back to the older style stock boots, think ill try them again before buying a 340/pd, as the sights are more important to me than the weight- bc I carry it AWIB.

[OlongJohnson]

This appears to be a good time to pick up an M&P 340 no lock, using the power of gun.deals and S&W's rebate until the end of the year.

[Willard]

This appears to be a good time to pick up an M&P 340 no lock, using the power of gun.deals and S&W's rebate until the end of the year.

I looked at gun.deals and only saw $900 plus models. Did you find a source I missed? Thnx.

[OlongJohnson]

UPC 022188030723 brings up iammo.com at $649. Shipping is extra, but very reasonable.

Of course, it does mean breaking my rule about putting money down on a new production S&W without inspecting it first, but at least it's a no-lock. Hopefully (jeez, that sounds dumb and unplanned), they pay a little extra attention to "M&P" models. Wish in one hand... we'll see.

[Willard]

UPC 022188030723 brings up iammo.com at $649. Shipping is extra, but very reasonable.

Of course, it does mean breaking my rule about putting money down on a new production S&W without inspecting it first, but at least it's a no-lock. Hopefully (jeez, that sounds dumb and unplanned), they pay a little extra attention to "M&P" models. Wish in one hand... we'll see.

Thank you sir. I have a similar rule, but it is increasingly hard to find decent no lock revolvers, and you can always refuse delivery at the FFL.

[11B10]

This appears to be a good time to pick up an M&P 340 no lock, using the power of gun.deals and S&W's rebate until the end of the year.



Olong, you're reading my mind! I'm trying to put the cash together right now to do just that. Hopefully very soon. Just a tip here: my FFL has #163072 for $646.00. If you're interested, pm me for contact info.

[OlongJohnson]

No locks, thank you.

[blues]

No locks, thank you.

Darn you for bringing this thread back around...(I'm going to do my best to resist so my 642-1 won't think I don't love it anymore.)

[OlongJohnson]

Whittaker just dropped its price to $310 for the 642. That's $260 after the rebate. Insane...

https://shop.whittakerguns.com/product/ss-2953

[EricM]

No-lock 642 for $319 @ Grabagun (https://grabagun.com/s-w-642-1-875-38spl-sts-cent-wo-il.html)

I just bought my first revolver.

Thanks for the heads-up on the rebate!

[OlongJohnson]

Picked up the M&P 340 this afternoon. Front sight pin was driven too far, so it sticks out on the right and the barrel housing is marred on the left. I can at least center the pin. Maybe a dab of flat black will survive cleaning. The crown is non-concentric with the bore and has a burr on one of the lands. Some burrs on the ratchet, but not the worst I've seen. Trigger press is not rough, but not silky. The reset feels like pulling your boot out of the mud: less force than it took to drive it into the mud, but still not a nice clean return, like it kinda wants to stay where it is. Barrel does not appear canted at all (at least not visually detectable by me so far), and the sideplate fit is exceptionally good. Lockup is nice and tight, timing is good. Crane fit is correct. Overall, I'm keeping it. Digging the sights over standard J sights. I expect that touching up the crown and a thorough deburring/cleanup of the action will make it right.

[willie]

Let Smith perform warranty service.

[Duelist]

No-lock 642 for $319 @ Grabagun (https://grabagun.com/s-w-642-1-875-38spl-sts-cent-wo-il.html)

I just bought my first revolver.

Thanks for the heads-up on the rebate!

Good grief! That's $10 less than I paid for my then-new -2 in 2004.

[OlongJohnson]

Let Smith perform warranty service.

Unlike other defects I've seen in S&Ws, nothing makes this one obviously non-functional. It cycles, everything is "OK." I would expect them to send it back to me with no changes other than some handling damage, and tell me it meets specifications. Having the PC do an action tune leads to variable results, according to some who have many samples to evaluate, and I have an almost supernatural knack for finding the "Monday morning/Friday afternoon" quality surprises. I suspect an independent who will take the time to get it right is a better option.

[willie]

Good point.

[OlongJohnson]

[Stuff relevant to the Beretta 1301 thread.]

Yesterday, I dropped off my defective M&P 340 with FedEx to go home and get fixed. I'm getting tired of this stuff, seriously.

So, in spite of the paragraph above, as I inspected the little bugger more carefully, I found a serious dimensional error. Nothing I've seen or heard of before, but totally obvious once you realized what you were looking at. Shipped it back to S&W. Got it back today from FedEx with a new crane fitted, as well as the expected new handling damage. Nothing all the way through the anodizing, thankfully...

Unfortunately, they also took either a file or a grinder to the extractor, so I'll be asking S&W to send me a new one, and having it fitted locally by someone who is familiar with the concepts of "skill" and "care."

[Isaac]

Man, that's disheartening. Feel like I've read a few of those stories from S&W lately.

[OlongJohnson]

It's really reinforcing the statement I've read here (BBI?) that new guns are an expensive, time-consuming PITA.

The paperwork says they "repaired" the extractor. This is the result of their repair. Before they repaired it, it was just a normal, brand new extractor in moderate (on the scale of what I've seen) need of deburring.

If I was to undertake that deburring myself, there would have been ultra-fine stones and a 10x loupe involved.

Just to reiterate, this is the work done by the S&W factory warranty shop.

24447

[Lex Luthier]

It's really reinforcing the statement I've read here (BBI?) that new guns are an expensive, time-consuming PITA.

The paperwork says they "repaired" the extractor. This is the result of their repair. Before they repaired it, it was just a normal, brand new extractor in moderate (on the scale of what I've seen) need of deburring.

If I was to undertake that deburring myself, there would have been ultra-fine stones and a 10x loupe involved.

Just to reiterate, this is the work done by the S&W factory warranty shop.

24447

That is disheartening.
To quote my lutherie mentor, "I would never allow that to leave my shop."

[TC215]

Unreal...I don’t even know what to say to that.

[Holmes375]

Unreal...I don’t even know what to say to that.

Ditto that. Looks like work done by a graduate of WCSOG.

[Duelist]

24452

14 year old 642, for ten years my only carry gun, regular shooter and lots of dry fire. Very minor peening on the corners of the extractor. No weird grinding on it, either. Was perfect as a gun can be when I got it, except for the stupid lock.

[Bushytale]

It's really reinforcing the statement I've read here (BBI?) that new guns are an expensive, time-consuming PITA.

The paperwork says they "repaired" the extractor. This is the result of their repair. Before they repaired it, it was just a normal, brand new extractor in moderate (on the scale of what I've seen) need of deburring.

If I was to undertake that deburring myself, there would have been ultra-fine stones and a 10x loupe involved.

Just to reiterate, this is the work done by the S&W factory warranty shop.

24447

That looks like someone got to close to a bench grinder!

[rjohnson4405]

Or it got drug behind the delivery truck on its way to you. Wow.

[OlongJohnson]

They're sending out a new extractor.

[OlongJohnson]

Smokin' deal if you feel like taking your chances on S&W quality.

S&W M&P340 357 MAG/38 SPL 1.875IN 5 Rd - $609.99 shipped w/code "NDV" ($579.99 after $30 MIR)

https://www.brownells.com/firearms/handguns/revolver/m-p340-handgun-357-magnum-38-special-1-875in-5-163072-prod92355.aspx

[23JAZ]

Adding a set of VZ boot grips to the 442. Do you guys recommend the smooth or the diamond cut ones? The diamond cut looks like they might be too grippy.

[03RN]

Adding a set of VZ boot grips to the 442. Do you guys recommend the smooth or the diamond cut ones? The diamond cut looks like they might be too grippy.

I have the smooth ones and the checkered ones for 2 k frames. The checkered ones are perfect.

I also like the most agressive grips possible.

[MDFA]

I picked this up new and installed the XS Big Dot tritium sight yesterday. For those of you who want to upgrade your front sight it's a tremendous improvement. I did mine by hand with files and some use of a dremel tool. If you take on the project take your time, remember you can always take more metal off, putting it back on is harder...

.29197

[23JAZ]

I picked this up new and installed the XS Big Dot tritium sight yesterday. For those of you who want to upgrade your front sight it's a tremendous improvement. I did mine by hand with files and some use of a dremel tool. If you take on the project take your time, remember you can always take more metal off, putting it back on is harder...

.29197
How is it attached? JB Weld?

[MDFA]

How is it attached? JB Weld?

When you mill or file the existing sight you leave part of the metal which fits into a recess in the new sight. Then JB Weld the sight on. There are detailed instructions on the XS Website.
Hope this helps.

[mmc45414]

I did mine by hand with files and some use of a dremel tool.
This makes feel guilty for my stalled project (am building a deck in the meantime...):
29198

How is it attached? JB Weld?
Yes (I did one prior). Here is a link to the instructions:
https://www.xssights.com/ITEMMEDIA/10045/SW%20J-Frame%20Fixed%20Installation.pdf
They talk about using a mill (I had my buddy help on the last one) but I think files are actually easier (clamping it well enough to carry a chip takes a lotta force).

Just need to finish what I start...

[SAWBONES]

I have the smooth ones and the checkered ones for 2 k frames. The checkered ones are perfect.

I also like the most agressive grips possible.


I have the sharp-checkered VZ J-frame grips, and find them exceedingly easy to hold onto, of course, but I've wondered if the smooth ones are slippery or not. What's your experience? Do they get slick if wet?

[NEPAKevin]

I picked up a 642 to practice with as opposed to using the 342 that I carry. Went to the range yesterday and every speed loader I tried, except for the speed strips, hung up on the grips. Never had that problem with the 342. So when I got the chance I compared the two and the cut out on the 342 grips is way bigger than the 642. Or should I say, what used to be on the 642.

[RevolverRob]

I picked up a 642 to practice with as opposed to using the 342 that I carry. Went to the range yesterday and every speed loader I tried, except for the speed strips, hung up on the grips. Never had that problem with the 342. So when I got the chance I compared the two and the cut out on the 342 grips is way bigger than the 642. Or should I say, what used to be on the 642.

S&W stock grips?

They've had to change them even more, since losing the license to make Spegel-type boot grips and one aspect of that is not having the depth of relief related to the speed loader.

Best rubber grips ever made for J-Frames were the Uncle Mikes Spegels...shame those are all gone. Second would be the S&W made Spegels. I wish Spegel himself would make rubber versions, but he seems intent on simply making wood ones at a pace that is only slightly faster than a glacier.

[OlongJohnson]

Hogue rubber can be sanded. Some people put it in the freezer first, but I found no need for that when trimming up the grip on my GP.

I find a 3/8" belt sander is very useful for such work.

[NEPAKevin]

S&W stock grips?



Yes. I relieved some of the material and while not pretty, the speed loaders work now.

[23JAZ]

Sportsman’s Outdoor Superstore has No Lock 642s for $289.

[newyork]

Out of stock last I checked.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[23JAZ]

Out of stock last I checked.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Damn that was quick. I just got the email 10 minutes before I posted it.

[03RN]

I have the sharp-checkered VZ J-frame grips, and find them exceedingly easy to hold onto, of course, but I've wondered if the smooth ones are slippery or not. What's your experience? Do they get slick if wet?

I don't know. I don't use the slick ones much. They're my wife's on her M15
https://pistol-forum.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=28502&d=1532648308
Vs
29225

[23JAZ]

I don't know. I don't use the slick ones much. They're my wife's on her M15
https://pistol-forum.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=28502&d=1532648308
Vs
29225
I just ordered the tactical diamonds in black cherry. I figure I can always sand them down if I find them to aggressive.

[23JAZ]

Out of stock last I checked.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I just checked. They still have them.
29226

[newyork]

Awesome!!!!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[MDFA]

This makes feel guilty for my stalled project (am building a deck in the meantime...):
29198

Yes (I did one prior). Here is a link to the instructions:
https://www.xssights.com/ITEMMEDIA/10045/SW%20J-Frame%20Fixed%20Installation.pdf
They talk about using a mill (I had my buddy help on the last one) but I think files are actually easier (clamping it well enough to carry a chip takes a lotta force).

Just need to finish what I start...

Break out the files.... you need that Snubby to have in your pocket while you enjoy that new deck....

[mtnbkr]

I just ordered the tactical diamonds in black cherry. I figure I can always sand them down if I find them to aggressive.

FWIW, I have the tactical diamonds on my S&W 629 4" RB and don't find them too aggressive at all.

Chris

[mmc45414]

Break out the files.... you need that Snubby to have in your pocket while you enjoy that new deck....
My procrastination is bolstered by having several J-frames. It's a first world problem... :)

[23JAZ]

FYI there is currently a mint condition 340 on gunbroker with no reserve. Current bid is $480 and the acution ends at 1pm today.

[OlongJohnson]

Pretty good price and free shipping.

https://www.mrgundealer.com/shop/sw-mp340-1875-in-357-blk-sc-no-22352

S&W has a $25 rebate if you qualify.

[blues]

Pretty good price and free shipping.

https://www.mrgundealer.com/shop/sw-mp340-1875-in-357-blk-sc-no-22352

S&W has a $25 rebate if you qualify.

That is a good price.

(But it's still a lot extra to pay, imho, to save 1.1 oz and upgrade the front sight over a 442 / 642.)

[GOTURBACK]

642 No Lock @ Smoky Mountain Guns and Ammo 299.99 free ship

[Tamara]

(But it's still a lot extra to pay, imho, to save 1.1 oz and upgrade the front sight over a 442 / 642.)

This. The 340 is one of those guns that just makes me think "Huh. Dude doesn't shoot a lot."

The 442/642 (or for a heretic like me, the 432) is such a Goldilocks gun. Light enough to carry, heavy enough to get a reasonable amount of practice with, no weird bullet weight/load worries.

[TheNewbie]

642 No Lock @ Smoky Mountain Guns and Ammo 299.99 free ship

Wow that's a sweet deal.

[Totem Polar]

Wow that's a sweet deal.

No kidding; that would be a solid buy for a clean used example.

[OlongJohnson]

This. The 340 is one of those guns that just makes me think "Huh. Dude doesn't shoot a lot."

Pretty sure it was Darryl who first called the M&P 340, with its steel cylinder, better sights and steel pivot pins, the "quintessential J-frame." Or something like that.

[blues]

Pretty sure it was Darryl who first called the M&P 340, with its steel cylinder, better sights and steel pivot pins, the "quintessential J-frame." Or something like that.


Sure, now you'd have us choose between mom and dad. :rolleyes:

(I'm staying with mom. How'd I get older than her anyway? Sounds like an idea for a new gun themed "Back to the Future".)

[Tamara]

Pretty sure it was Darryl who first called the M&P 340, with its steel cylinder, better sights and steel pivot pins, the "quintessential J-frame." Or something like that.

I'm sorry, when I hear "340" without any other referent, I think of Ti/Sc jewelry box revolvers from the early Aughties, not the M&P. I guess I really am getting old.

[OlongJohnson]

Sure, now you'd have us choose between mom and dad. :rolleyes:

I'm going with, "Big Sister is watching you."


I'm sorry, when I hear "340" without any other referent, I think of Ti/Sc jewelry box revolvers from the early Aughties, not the M&P. I guess I really am getting old.

Everyone knows .357s with Ti and Sc should be N frames.

[03RN]

How about a 640 for $380?
https://www.kingsfirearmsonline.com/products/handguns-smith-wesson-163690-528

[Bucky]

642 No Lock @ Smoky Mountain Guns and Ammo 299.99 free ship

That’s a good deal. If we didn’t already have two, but mine have had locks.