[LJWebster1]

I love these little J frames, and plan on getting one. I have a question, though. Why is the 340 so much more expensive than the 642? Is it just because the 340 can shoot .357 too?

[Bob79]

Yes. The 642 is an "Airweight" that has an alumunium alloy frame, stainless steel cylinder, and stainless steel barrel.

The 340 is an "Airlite" that has an aluminum alloy frame with a little bit of scandium mixed in to make it stronger, titanium cylinder, and the barrel has a stainless steel insert.

So the cost is increased because the materials are more expensive in the 340, which makes the gun stronger and lighter than the 642. The difference comes from the cylinder and barrel mostly. And these materials (in the 340) allow you to shoot .357 magnum.

Unless you really have your heart set on .357 or just love recoil I would really recommend against using .357 mag in a gun that light, and that small. If you just want the lighter weight you can always just use the 340 to shoot .38's and there are some pretty good +P loads in .38

[rikman]

I have the 340PD and it is very nice for carry. But haven't put .357's through it. I carry .38 +p's.

Rich

[chuck pullen]

Of the two, the 642 is much more shootable. Few people regularly shoot 357 out of an Airweight or Airlite. Get the 642. Much more usable and much better value.

[ribbonstone]

One way to look at it is this:
Which is easier to hide, a cell phone sized block of oak or block of balsa wood? Past a certain point, an couple of ounces isn't going to make a drastic differnce.

[LJWebster1]

Yeah, I hear you. I doubt I would ever shoot .357 out of this little gun, so the 642 is just fine. 3 more ounces is not going to matter. However, I just love that black! I am really trying to convince myself that black is not worth $300! I assume the two shoot .38 special identically, right?

[SAWBONES]

"Of the two, the 642 is much more shootable."

Well, that's one opinion.

I have a 642 and two 340PDs, and find them all equally "shootable" (whatever that means).

I've put hundreds of premium .357 Magnum 125gr+P JHPs (basically all the major brands) through my 340PDs, and found those loads to less accurate and precise in these little guns than several of the premium .38 Special loads. Mine seem to like the (now-defunct) Federal Nyclad 158gr+P LSWCHP and the new Gold Dot 135gr+P JHP "snubby" load in particular.

The couple ounce difference in weight between the 340PD and the 642 makes A LOT of difference in daily pocket carry of these little pistols, believe it or not.
The difference in the feeling of firing them with the same .38 Special loads is minimal, however, IME, and I really can't feel any difference.
OTOH, firing the 340PD with full power .357 Magnum isn't particularly fun!

[ribbonstone]

May not be a lot of fun...may even hurt a little bit...but just how many people do you have to shoot in a given afternoon?

[Bob79]

You can get the model 442.

Its the same as the 642, but the aluminum alloy is a very dark blue/black, and the cylinder/barrel are blued carbon steel.

Costs a little more than the 642, maybe 25-50$ more, but if you really like the black, and have the money, go for it.

[gazpacho]

I bought my 340PD with the intention of carrying stout 38+P. My thinking is that a 357 rated revolver will hold up better and longer than a 38+P rated revolver, while shooting 38+P ammo.

[medic_guns]

I carry the 342ti. It weighs 11 oz. That's light. It's a little snappy when you shoot it. Ran some of that Speer 135 through it the other day. REALLY snappy. It isnt too bad, though. Handle sticks out too much when I smartcarry. Put one of those PM9s in my smartcarry the other day; wow. Grip is like one inch shorter. No bulge at all. Man, I'm tempted to get something like that. But I still like the fact that the revolver is pretty much fool proof. Going to try some 158 grain in it soon to see if it groups a little better. Go with the 342. It's uber-light.

Ric