S&W Scandium Revolvers


January 6, 2003, 11:14 AM
The S&W Scandium revolvers have been out for some time now. How are they holding up? Have there been any reports of them coming apart with 357 Mag ammo? I am considering buying a S&W 340. Thanks for your help.

If you enjoyed reading about "S&W Scandium Revolvers" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
January 6, 2003, 01:24 PM
So far my S&W Ti and Aluminum/Scandium guns (242, 342 & 386) are holding up well. Although none of them have a high enough round count to provide any meaningful data. On the other hand, my one and only Taurus revolver, a .357 Ti Tracker had several initial operational problems (action binding, etc.) and a structural failure (center pin sheared flush with the ejector star) within the first 300 rounds.


January 7, 2003, 06:41 PM
And, so far, so good. Recoil is stiff although far from unmanageable. I like it a lot. I quit buying Taurus products because I had so many problems like Rangegod. My advice is to stay away from Taurus. Good shooting:)

Kentucky Rifle
January 7, 2003, 07:46 PM
Scandium is a little higher up on the periodic table than titanium. I believe I also read it's only found in Siberia. Rare stuff. $7000.00 per pound! Just (I think!) 2 or 3 percent added to aluminum alloy really strengthen's it up. Thus, the very light (and painful for me) to shoot .357's. But the scandium alloy should really be strong stuff!


January 8, 2003, 01:33 AM
Had a 342ti. Got a crack on the piece that connects the cylinder to the frame (the yoke?), but was fixed by S&W free of charge. Traded it on a 340. Haven't put much ammo through it (less than 200 rounds, only about 10 of which were 357), but haven't had any problems. My favorite carry gun.

January 8, 2003, 02:53 AM
branrot...how many rounds did you put through that 342? The aluminum frame guns like the 342 I've always felt you don't put alot of hot loads through, although I don't really know if that would break the crane. Did S&W offer an opinion as to what caused the break? The scandium frame gun would be substantially stronger than the plain aluminum for sure. Scandium is used in mig fighter jets(and some really high end racing mountain bike frames that cost a bunch)......tom

Ala Dan
January 8, 2003, 06:50 AM
I've been considering either a S&W model 360PD,
or a 386PD myself. Haven't exactly made my mind
up just yet; but a decision should be forthcoming

Best Wishes,
Ala Dan, N.R.A. Life Member

January 8, 2003, 09:58 AM
Kentucky , unfortunately advertizing hype has people confused. You're right scandium is a rare earth and expensive metal. The amount in the aluminum as I understand is less than 1%. But it's still an ALUMINUM alloy not scandium. At least now some people have heard of scandium. Metallurgy marches on.!

January 8, 2003, 10:07 AM
I just picked up a 340PD to replace the Kahr P9 I'm transferring to my wife. I'm greatly looking forward to some range time this weekend.

Kentucky Rifle
January 8, 2003, 10:20 AM
You're right. I should have said aluminum alloy. Isn't it amazing what less than 1% of added Scandium can do?
Pretty neat that it makes an aluminum alloy tough enough to fire .357's. Somebody also told me that the Russians use scandium in spacecraft. I wonder just how much higher the melting temp is when scandium is used in the alloy. Mig 25's are a +Mach 3 aircraft, and THAT would get the skin pretty hot!


kent e
October 30, 2009, 09:16 PM
Here's a blast from the past! So... anyone still have these guns? How are they holding up long-term?

October 30, 2009, 09:34 PM
I believe the verdict was that you hands will fall off before you break the frame.

The stainless steel drums (M&P 340)are better than the coated ti drums (340PD).

Yes "scandium" is a very strong aluminum alloy first used by the Ruskies in fighter jets.

Got some real nice scandium tent poles. Tough stuff.

October 30, 2009, 10:24 PM

in which way better?

October 31, 2009, 05:37 PM
armsmaster270: I haven't closely followed the PD cylinder issues, as I have a M&P 340 with the steel cylinder. Apparently the standard cylinders on the PD can have the chambers' coating easily scratched, leading to hard extraction and possible cylinder expansion and cylinder failure.

IOW, the M&P 340 cylinder is "better" because it is less prone to damage, albeit two ounces heavier.

I have read of owners who have had at least two cylinders replaced and then having S&W offer to install the steel cylinder (thereby making it like the M&P 340--i.e., 2 oz. heavier.)

It was an issue at least two years ago (when I researched the 340s, and selected the M&P version), and I think it can continue--but somebody else who has followed the topic closely will have to comment on that.

Jim H.

October 31, 2009, 06:07 PM
Thank You

November 2, 2009, 02:29 PM
I have the .44 mag (329PD, I think they call it). It is the first handgun I have that actually hurts to shoot (by the 5th round), even with the Hogue rubber grips. Having said that, it's a great gun. I carry it as a hunting or hiking sidearm and it is so light you forget it's there, unlike my Model 29, which means you will actually have it if you need it. I figure I won't notice recoil if I am using it in earnest. I have noticed that w/o a strong crimp, bullets will begin to unseat from recoil. Don't know whether this happens with the smaller calibers.

November 2, 2009, 10:53 PM
It does in the 340PD

November 3, 2009, 07:34 AM
The S & W with scandium, are lightweight and are excellent. :) The 357 Mag. for the scandium revolver is "too nervous". Is not suitable for use for sporting competitions. I 50-100000 shots in one year is too much for a weapon in "aluminum", but "scandium". :( :(

If you enjoyed reading about "S&W Scandium Revolvers" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!