Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 41

Thread: old 640 or new 640

  1. #31
    Well, we have a box of it here, in good condition. I'll try to get it chrono'ed.

    No doubt about it bouncing off hard cover; I was thinking more of unprotected meat.

    .

  2. #32
    Member Moonshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    earth
    That Super Police load seems to be going about as fast as the S&B WC, and I believe Doctor Roberts indicated that was too slow.

    As for the 640 not being +p rated, I wish it were otherwise, but it's not a deal breaker. I anticipate that i will give the 640 to my wife, to replace her 70's vintage M60. I am a big believer in DAO, and the 640 has the added advantage of an internal hammer - she could shoot through a pocket if needed and there are fewer avenues for lint and dust bunnies to migrate into the action.

    She would be more prone to carry a 642, but less prone to practice with it (even with WCs).

    I would still like to qualify annually with the 640 (just in case I end up with it), but I can limit my use to WCs. After reading, and re-reading the recent posts on this subject, I think WCs are a pretty sound way to go. I just have a lot of SBGDs. If I don't practice and carry them in my J-frames, I'll have to buy another bigger and heavier gun (3" SP101 or K-frane) to shoot them out of.

  3. #33
    With the relative scarcity of the 135gr +P Gold Dot, I would imagine you'll have no trouble selling those cartridges.

    If you have to buy wadcutters, selling the others might be a good idea. The prices for new factory wadcutters are heinous, these days.

    .

  4. #34
    Quote Originally Posted by LSP972 View Post
    Well, we have a box of it here, in good condition. I'll try to get it chrono'ed.

    No doubt about it bouncing off hard cover; I was thinking more of unprotected meat.

    .
    I had some of those 200 grain rounds, which I (unwisely) had in a HD revolver for awhile. They were recommended by a cop who seemed to know what he was doing, but they wouldn't penetrate much of anything. The were very, very, very slow. Had they really travelled at 800 fps the recoil would have been hideous, I suspect.

  5. #35
    Working on getting a chronograph lined up now. Ours (the lab's) be bust, and now is not the time to request a replacement..

    .

  6. #36
    Member Moonshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    earth

    r

    A little late, but I finally picked up that 640 no dash. It has an incredibly smooth stigger. I don't know what the weight is, as I don't have a gage, but it's smooth as butter. Denny really can do some beautiful work. It also came with beautiful Secret Service grips. I'll probably put Hogue monogrips on it as it will become my wife's house gun. The SS grips may make their way to my 642.

    I haven't had an opportunity to shoot it yet. That should come this weekend when I take my 640 and my 642 to the range and use up some of the Federal WC's I managed to pick up. If they shoot to POA at 7 to 10 yards, I may have found my new carry load.

  7. #37
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Wappinger NY
    In the 1980s and 90s NYPD Model 36, 60 and 640 got a steady diet of Remington 158 SWC +P and held up fine. so in think the +P rating is just a lawyer talk. I chronograph my duty ammo listed above at 830 fps from a 1 7/8" barrel.

  8. #38
    Member Moonshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    earth
    While I am not overly concerned with shooting some +p out of my new "old" 640, I do take the manufacturer's recommendations seriously. If they say it's not recommended for +P (and they did say this), I have to figure there is a reason. It may be a stupid reason, it may be a lawyer's CYA reason, it may be based on factors that would not apply to me, but so be it.

    In fact, my moving away from +p out of my sub 2" J-frames is based more on reports of even the better "designer" HP rounds not opening up if cold (and where I live it gets cold a lot, and I carry on my ankle). Hotter +p rounds are also a little less accurate for me when shooting with my non-dominant hand, they are slower with follow up shots, and one primary reason I carry a j-frame at all is to give to my wife or daughter(s) in an emergency. They shoot WCs far better than any +p.

  9. #39
    Glad you got the piece; they are becoming quite difficult to find in good shape (for sale, that is).

    No joy so far on a chronograph, but then I haven't thought about this in a while (i.e., I haven't been actively looking). Thanks for the reminder… I gots ta KNOW…

    .

  10. #40
    Good info FROG 1

    Quote Originally Posted by LSP972 View Post
    Well, do you want to SHOOT it, or CARRY it? Sounds to me like you're looking for something to augment your M-642; something more "shootable". That's wise, and the older 640 you've been looking at is the perfect match.

    OTOH, the AirLite/Ti-Scan (titanium cylinder, Scandium frame) J frames weigh a steady three ounces less than the AirWeights… and if you pocket carry, that matters. Belt or ankle, its a wash and not worth fretting over. But until I began doing it (carrying an AirLite in my pocket) there is NO way you could have convinced me that those three ounces made a difference. It most assuredly does.

    No free lunch, however. As you correctly deduce, the AirLites are distinctly unpleasant to shoot; which presents one with a dilemma.

    Allow me some wandering philosophy here: use it, or ignore it, as you see fit…

    As a long-time trainer of cops, with the added responsibility of assisting in the clean-up after one of them shot something/somebody, I was a hardcore proponent of the "Practice as you do" dictum. IOW, if you carried a flyweight snubby, then by God that's what you should be training with. And that's why I have over 5K of rather unpleasant rounds through my EDC M-360PD AirLite snubby.

    Time and age tends to alter one's perspectives. Two things to consider here: one, as I have aged, my tolerance for discomfort in general and recoil in particular has diminished noticeably. Second (and the more important of the two, IMO), after many thousands of rounds downrange through various "platforms", I feel comfortable and confident picking up (or drawing) a weapon that is very similar, if not exactly identical, to the one I normally shoot.

    My rambling point here is, if you want a practice snubby that is more comfortable to shoot, go for it. You want to shoot bunny farts in it? Go for it. As long as your "shooter" is pretty close in configuration to your EDC example, you'll get plenty of training value. What I'm taking about here, specifically, is the stocks you put on both weapons. Those should be the same- EXACTLY the same.
    One thing I have noticed about folks who were weaned on bottom feeders is their near-total lack of understanding of how much of a difference stocks make on a revolver. No fault of theirs; its something you learn after lots of exposure, and they lack that.

    To get specific, lots of folks carry a flyweight snubby with small, "carry" stocks, yet their shooter has Pachmyar Compacs or similar, hand-filling, recoil-attenuating stocks. Number One on the list of Why That Is Not A Good Idea is this: the more comfortable stocks are NOT going to shoot to the same POI, especially one-handed under duress.

    Anyway, sorry for the novella. Good luck on snagging that old M-640.

    .

User Tag List

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •