M&P340 or 340PD for same price which prefer?

[wingslevel]

Hello,
I have the chance to purchase either an M&P340 or 340PD for the same price both NIB.
Which would you opt for and why?
Thanks in advance

 

[Technosavant]

Personally, I'd go for the M&P340. The main reason is the stainless steel cylinder over the titanium cylinder of the 340PD. While it is a couple ounces heavier, to me that's a good thing- the 340 (be it M&P or PD) is really light anyway and the extra weight would make it that much less uncomfortable to shoot. Also, there's fewer worries about cleaning a steel cylinder, the Ti ones require special care (no harsh chemicals).

I'm sure others will chime in with other thoughts, but that's just my $0.02, and it's worth what you paid for it.

 

[1 old 0311]

I carry more than I shoot, so I got a 340pd

 

[1/7GRUNT]

Personally I would go for the 340MP for the improved sights. What is the weight difference, like an ounce and a half? I dont think i would even notice.

 

[Sir Aardvark]

I carry mine all day, so I'd have to say the 340PD - why carry the extra weight.

Not to be to critical here, but I don't think that the sights on a snub-nose J-frame are going to make too much of a difference, really.

My preference would be an XS 24/7 Big Dot front sight! - at least you can see it in the dark.

 

[Matt-J2]

The M&Ps have XS 24-7 standard dot tritium sights. At night, I bet they're pretty much the same(so far as I can tell the tritium part is the same size).

With a touch more weight(I like to shoot defensive pieces as much as I can) and a night sight, I'd pick the M&P. So long as they're both at the lower M&P price, anyway.

 

[wingslevel]

Thanks for the replies, and yes the 340PD is priced at the M&P price. It will be used for always with me handgun, so shot little carried a lot (will leave the shooting to the 686 and 60).
The plus for the PD is 1.3 less ounces if that will be significant in a pocket.
The plus for the M&P is easier maintance of cylinder (though again won't be shooting it much) and no 120g minium (though will be keeping it loaded with .38 +P but want the .357 capacity so not having to swap rounds out of the 60's speedloader that carries Rem GS 125 .357)
Those are as I see it so far but appreciate all the thoughts and ideas

 

[Sir Aardvark]

The one thing that made the biggest impact on the shootability of my 340PD was the addition of Crimson Trace 405 lasergrips - these are the ones with the little "Air Pocket" on the backstrap.

Although I am not a huge fan of lasergrips, I've gotta say, the extra recoil protection provided by these grips is amazing! they are well worth the money.

 

[loplop]

I really like my M&P 340. I chose it over the 340PD because of the front sight; for me, this was not an insubstantial difference in shootability and accuracy. I was OK with my 442, and much better than OK with my M&P340. I *really* like the sight setup. It's no target king, but I can put shots in the zone much more quickly and accurately enough with that XS sight. A great combo!

 

[wingslevel]

How does the slight difference in weight (though about 10%) make in real world use. Will primarily carry in pocket holster in jeans/casual pants. The dead weight of my 60 isn't too much of a problem, its the movement of the entire pocket as you walk. So am sure the 340MP solves a great deal of that, but is the 340PD noticeably better day in day out. Enough to warrant the extra care of cylinder and 120g .357 min?

 

[loplop]

That's a very good questioin, wingslevel. I don't know for certain, as I have never pocket carried the 340PD. What I can say, with great certainty, is the M&P340 carries much better than the Airweight 442 I previously owned. The weight difference, in that case, made a substantial difference in the pocket.

How that translates to the Titanium-cylinder version, I don't know, but it's another data point to consider

 

[jfh]

I carry an M&P340 daily, in my pocket. At the time I bought I compared the two extensively--and decided I liked the smaller XS dot on the M&P 340, and I was leery of the titanium cylinder on the 340PD.

Occasionally, I carry my S&W 442--which weighs about 1.5 oz more, IIRC. After 5 minutes, the only way I can tell the difference is if I stop and think about it.

With that in mind--and given the fact that the plusses and minuses of the two models have been well laid out in preceding posts particularly the cylinder restrictions / issues , I'd opt for the M&P 340.

Jim H.

 

[stanley_white]

Better sights always improve the shooter's ability to shoot.

I own / side with the M&P 340 crowd.

IMHO folks who think "it's a snub nose for contact distance shots and I won't use the sights anyway" are taking a risk on two fronts.

1. You're assuming you won't have time / space / inclination to use the sights under self-defense conditions.

2. Testifying in court to "Well no I didn't even use the sights" following said self-defense incident would be bad.

 

[Evyl Robot]

M&P, all the way. It is still painful with 158-gr .357's, but I would want that extra 1.3-oz at any rate. Plus as others have said, the superior sight and the easier care of the SS cylinder vs. Ti. If you are concerned about carry weight, I severely doubt that the heavier M&P at 13.3-oz is going to bother you. Either will be doubled in weight when you load them!

I was actually thinking about getting an M&P340 for myself. I recently had the opportunity to shoot one. I decided that it is cheaper to get a hammer and hit my hand five times. Neat gun for carry though.

--Michael

 

[wingslevel]

not really that concerned with the ammunition restriction as I tend to use heavier .357s in my 60/686 and would probably opt for .38+P in the 340.
but if less then 120G .357s are used is it just the cosmetic damage to the front of the cylinder or actual damage to occur?

the finish durability is a concern, is it mainly from use/abuse and harsh cleaners or just holster wear rubbing the finish off? and if merely cosmetic no problem but if lessens durability thats a concern.
know i can add the MP front sight to the PD later if wanted much easier then the PD cylinder for a weight savings on the MP.