Barrel Cant S&W M&P 340

[HCM]

Good advice however this platform is not a high volume shooter for me.

Ammo choice makes a difference.

I qualify quarterly with my current M&P 340 using 135 grain +p Gold Dot JHP. It is tolerable for 50 rounds every three months.

Standard velocity 130 grain FMJ is not bad. Wadcutters are pleasant to shoot.

[J0hnny]

Thanks for the feedback. My auto pistols are from ze Germans and as HCM said (ahem Glock!) "you won't really know it's a problem until you shoot it". Want to avoid that path via S&W if possible.

@J0hnny I've had 3 M&P 340's in the last few years. Two had canted barrels both got sent back and fixed. I did't pay for shipping there or back. When I called I explained that the gun was shooting X number of inches off at 7/10/15 yards and was well off the mark at 25. S&W sent me a shipping label via e-mail and had it back to me in less than two weeks both times. I can't say I was happy about the clocked barrels but they fixed them. Every time I got a gun back from them it was dead on afterwards. Sucks that I realized after the purchase but at least they made it right. I would look for a sample without said issue but if you don't have a choice then buy one knowing you're going to have to send it back. S&W's CS was great every time I had an interaction with them whether it was ordering parts or repair they were prompt and polite. Hope this helps with your decision.

[OlongJohnson]

Isn't this exactly the sort of thing that the 2-piece barrel construction is supposed to prevent?

There is a ton of stuff they should have processes in place to prevent:

https://pistol-forum.com/showthread....l=1#post682746

https://pistol-forum.com/showthread....l=1#post719402

https://pistol-forum.com/showthread....l=1#post719443

I have this weird cognitive dissonance where I like S&W revolvers, but I know a new one is almost certain to be an almost-ready-to-shoot gun kit, and that's without even having all the good measuring tools that a competent revolver smith has.

[Lester Polfus]

Good advice however this platform is not a high volume shooter for me.

Hey man. Why are you buying a J-frame?

If it's to carry, I'd suggest becoming a high volume J-frame shooter.

I had to do quite a bit of both dry fires and live fire with mine before I was able to perform to an acceptable standard.

The plus side is I shot everything else much better because of it.

My next "J-Frame" will probably be an LCR.

[J0hnny]

Been reading a few threads here and what resonated with me was J-frame = carry for when I don't need a gun but still have a gun

My smallest pistol is a P2Ksk and even that is a little large for gym carry

Bored with Glocks & want to learn a new platform. When I say "not high volume" I certainly intend to gain a respectable proficiency however I don't see myself putting cases of ammo through it like I would a G19. Or maybe I am kidding myself?

Thanks to you PF enablers, I already have ammo, VZ grips and a pocket holster en route. Hopefully I can get a pistol without a canted barrel, if that even matters.

Hey man. Why are you buying a J-frame?

If it's to carry, I'd suggest becoming a high volume J-frame shooter.

I had to do quite a bit of both dry fires and live fire with mine before I was able to perform to an acceptable standard.

The plus side is I shot everything else much better because of it.

My next "J-Frame" will probably be an LCR.

[mmc45414]

Been reading a few threads here and what resonated with me was J-frame = carry for when I don't need a gun but still have a gun
Thanks to you PF enablers, I already have ammo, VZ grips and a pocket holster en route. barrel, if that even matters.

I hope I have helped enable...
Lots of good advice here. Another thing IMO that changes the shooting experience is grips, getting something like this for only $12 might be worth it:
https://www.amazon.com/Hogue-Rubber-...ds=hogue+60100
Even if they are not the end game they could be handy for the initial immersion. Put them on and shoot a buttload, and then transition to the slightly more difficult boot grips that fit in a pocket easier. Maybe learn to manage the action before you are trying to master the tiny grip at the same time.
I also think larger grips significantly improve the presentation. Since I have the luxury of having several, I have a 340 with boot grips in case I might want to actually put it in a pocket, but for elastic waist bands I use this one with these Altamont grips:

[1986s4]

There is a ton of stuff they should have processes in place to prevent:

https://pistol-forum.com/showthread....l=1#post682746

https://pistol-forum.com/showthread....l=1#post719402

https://pistol-forum.com/showthread....l=1#post719443

I have this weird cognitive dissonance where I like S&W revolvers, but I know a new one is almost certain to be an almost-ready-to-shoot gun kit, and that's without even having all the good measuring tools that a competent revolver smith has.

I love my classic S&W revolvers, smooth actions, shoot dead on, everything one could want in a revolver. I tried a new M67 a few years back, it shot so far left no amount of adjustment could get it on the X. The shop stood behind it and offered to send it back but I was done with it and told them to keep it. Now it seems my experience isn't at all rare. What a shame for a once proud revolver producer. I only buy classic S&W's now.

[J0hnny]

Great info. I found these threads through search and your experiences educated me on what to look for in the first place.

There is a ton of stuff they should have processes in place to prevent:

https://pistol-forum.com/showthread....l=1#post682746

https://pistol-forum.com/showthread....l=1#post719402

https://pistol-forum.com/showthread....l=1#post719443

I have this weird cognitive dissonance where I like S&W revolvers, but I know a new one is almost certain to be an almost-ready-to-shoot gun kit, and that's without even having all the good measuring tools that a competent revolver smith has.

[Tamara]

There is a ton of stuff they should have processes in place to prevent:

What I meant is that when they went from the pinned barrels to the crush-fit ones back in the Eighties (and oh how the silverbeards bitched!), the incidence of poorly clocked barrels increased.

Like most production changes S&W has done ever since the move from small, round sideplates and round cross-section frames on the No.1 1st Issue to flat-sided frames and big, irregular sideplates on the No.1 2nd Issue, this was done to cheapen and speed manufacturing.

When Smith went to two-piece barrels early this millennium, it was one of the first times they did something that upped the parts count (and presumably also upped manufacturing time and cost by a slight amount) but should eliminate the possibility of improperly clocked barrels since the shroud with the sight on it is not only not threaded on, but features a lug on the frame face that mates up to a corresponding mortise on the shroud.

[OlongJohnson]

When Smith went to two-piece barrels early this millennium, it was one of the first times they did something that upped the parts count (and presumably also upped manufacturing time and cost by a slight amount) but should eliminate the possibility of improperly clocked barrels since the shroud with the sight on it is not only not threaded on, but features a lug on the frame face that mates up to a corresponding mortise on the shroud.

The evidence suggests it's wishful thinking to believe that mechanical design will reliably accomplish the hoped-for result, especially when parts are made of aluminum (even doped with a little Sc). I could write a paragraph about ways it could go wrong, but people who actually work on things with wrenches don't need that.