Quantcast
M&p 340 - Page 2 - THR
THR  

Go Back   THR > Tools and Technologies > Handguns: Revolvers

Welcome to THR
You are currently viewing our site as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions, articles and access our other FREE features. By joining our free community you will have, access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!


If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please visit the help section.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old June 13, 2007, 11:03 AM   #26
jfh
Member
 
 
Join Date: August 28, 2003
Location: Maple Plain, MN
Posts: 4,769
Glad someone is getting some "action" around here. What does an action job on a 340 consist of? Who is doing it and what does it cost? What spring weights are being used on th AJ?

Meprolight front sight? How does that differ from the standart Tritium sight?
1. Although I am an experienced novice 1911 'smith, I have not done anything with revolvers. From what I have read in forums and manuals, though, there is not a lot to be done to a j-frame action. You can 'drop in' a spring kit--and I have read in forums of owners being highly satisfied with that.

My 'smith probably just polished the action and may have clipped a spring--something like that. I got the 640 back from him last Saturday--it has a very smooth pull, with a distinct 'notch' at the takeup. I've found it very easy to adapt to staging the trigger. The pull weight is 10-lbs in standard DA pulling--but it's very smooth.

Cost was 70.00; no issues there. Someone else (don't have the link) is promoting himself as a j-frame guru, and his charges start at $180.00--and may well be worth it, for all I know. The point is, my 'smith is experienced with j-frames (now carries a 642 in his hip pocket at his shop--which is remote / out in the country). However, he's mostly a rifle builder who will do general gunsmithing.

2. I misspoke about the brand of front site--it's the standard 'small dot-white circle' one--is that an XS brand?

FWIW, I paid about 234.00, shipping included for the CT-logo 405--that was from Ultimate Outdoors. Over the weekend, I paid $205.00, shipping included, for the CT-Logo 305 for the 640. That was from Impact Guns.

I'M LOOKING FOR A NIGHT-DOT FRONT SIGHT FOR THE 640-- can't seem to find one. Does anyone know of one for that standard pinned & slot design mount?

RELOADING: If some of you posters here also do reloading, you'll find I have a topic going in that forum about handloads for the 2" barrels. Basically, I am developing practice ammo for 2" barrels, primarily using .38 Special / +P loadings. However, I have also found reload data for .357 magnum that provides lower-pressure loads, but stronger than .38+P.

If any one has reload data that's appropriate for these 2" barrel guns, feel free to add to the link:

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=278146

It looks to me right now like there may be real promise for PD loads, or practice loads, under the Speer GDSBJHT 135-gr. bullet--but loads development is just getting under way, with no real organized data yet.

Personally, I have no desire to shoot full-power .357 loads in either of these guns--I'm a placement-kind-of-guy, not a max-power one. I'll practice a lot with the 640, and shoot the 340 as needed to keep the skills developed for actual carry use. There might be full-house SB loads in the speedloader, however.

Jim H.
jfh is offline  
Old June 13, 2007, 11:33 AM   #27
DAdams
Member
 
 
Join Date: February 28, 2007
Location: East Tennessee
Posts: 3,076
Coach

Quote:
I ordered Buffalo Bore Standard Pressure
Non +P in 38 Special (158 grain).
They say 900 FPS out of a 2 inch and no leading.
I haven't had a chance to try them out yet.
Might load those as first 2 after I try them out.
Anxious to hear how these work out for you. I bought two boxes and haven't had a chance to range them out either. I bought the soft nose.

fiver-
That's is not a bad price for the S&W CT grips after the fact. I think I paid 239 for mine OTD on one of the on-line stores.
__________________
Quote:
After a bad opening, there is hope for the middle game. After a bad middle game there is hope for the end game. But once you are in the endgame, the moment of truth has arrived - Edmar Mednis
DAdams is offline  
Old June 13, 2007, 11:51 AM   #28
PaladinX13
Member
 
 
Join Date: December 29, 2002
Posts: 747
I'm using the 20D (150gr very hard cast, full wad-cutter), I absolutely adore this load. After a little practice, I've become very accurate with it. I suspect you'll enjoy the 20C which seems pretty similar.

I've had a PD and don't need a M&P and yet I feel the pull for one!
PaladinX13 is offline  
Old June 14, 2007, 10:39 PM   #29
Brassman
Member
 
 
Join Date: March 21, 2006
Location: Gastonia, NC
Posts: 278
We'll probably lose the battle at trying to get Nematocyst over to the dark side with these comments, but I have to say them anyway.

Went to the range again today and shot the M&P 340. Began with 5 rounds of my 148gr BBWC with no problem. Then proceeded to my light .357 158gr LSWC. Shot 5 rounds with some discomfort at the base of my right thumb. Next went with my heavy .357 158gr JHP that I use Alliant 2400 on. Shot 3 rounds and on the 2nd round nearly took out my right thumb with the recoil. The 3rd round had jumped crimp and locked the cylinder down. Removed the round which had jumped crimp and didn't fire the 5th round because of thumb and web of palm pain.

Concensus: will not shoot any more rounds charged with 2400 for a while, and when I do, they will have an extra heavy crimp applied to see if they still jump. For now, the Remington FBI load in .38sp +P will be the maximum power carry load for this weapon. I think the history of this round proves it is a more than sufficient stopper anyway.

All of this testing was done with the factory grip. Later, when my thumb heals a little, I will take my wife's monogrip off her 642 and try this sequence again to see if things are different.

Don't think I don't still love this piece. It's 2 oz. lighter than the 642 and is more than controllable and comfortable with the FBI load (my usual carry). The monogrip will probably do its normally sufficient job of controlling recoil and making second shots easier. It also costs only about $15 to install a new one.

PS Have I got a good woman, or what? She went with me to the range today on our 27th anniversary and shot better than I did left handed. Maybe that's why we've been together for so long. She's a good 'un!
Brassman is offline  
Old June 15, 2007, 01:15 AM   #30
Nematocyst
Member
 
 
Join Date: August 5, 2005
Location: Downeast Maine
Posts: 11,648
Quote:
We'll probably lose the battle at trying to get Nematocyst over to the dark side ...
Who, me?

Just taking in all the data here.

Sure am glad I'm gonna have a model 65 soon for .357s.

__________________
______________

Blades, Levers, Sticks & Wheels
Nematocyst is offline  
Old June 16, 2007, 02:22 AM   #31
wardog
Member
 
 
Join Date: September 9, 2003
Location: Colorado
Posts: 673
Is the CT grip more comfortable for shooting than the boot grip?

Looks like it might be since there appears to be some rubber on the back.

I'm wondering why no one seems to be making a grip for the J frames like what comes on a Ruger Super Redhawk Alaskan. Nice cushiony portion at the top of the grip in the back.
__________________
"What is that?" "Looks like an assault rifle hon', .308 caliber, semi automatic, with a [whack] folding stock."

Wardog
wardog is offline  
Old June 16, 2007, 03:47 AM   #32
fiVe
Member
 
 
Join Date: January 7, 2003
Location: West Florida Panhandle
Posts: 1,264
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brassman
You probably know from the 642 Club that I have an M&P 340 laid away. I hope fiVe doesn't throw me out of the club for joining here.
Dude, once you join the 642 Club, you are a member for life (so concerning your being here---hey! it's cool...)

Quote:
Originally Posted by DAdams
As long as we all have our 642's I'm sure fiVe will be ok.
True. Actually, I just want to perpetuate/propagate revolvers. (I'm somewhat partial to snubbies, and the 642 is my favorite.......just so you know.)
__________________
When you heed the call to battle, let your witness be as steel.
═══════════════════════
The 642 Club part 1 The 642 Club part 2
fiVe is offline  
Old June 16, 2007, 03:58 AM   #33
Nematocyst
Member
 
 
Join Date: August 5, 2005
Location: Downeast Maine
Posts: 11,648
Rumors are spreading that
fiVe is a closet 340 guy ...




Understatement of the year:

"I'm somewhat partial to snubbies."

__________________
______________

Blades, Levers, Sticks & Wheels
Nematocyst is offline  
Old June 16, 2007, 09:06 AM   #34
DAdams
Member
 
 
Join Date: February 28, 2007
Location: East Tennessee
Posts: 3,076
Snub Fever

I certainly like my 642 since I am somewhat proficient with it and it is still my primary carry.. for now. Drat if I could just get to the range to try out the 340.
Perhaps not, maybe I will turn it into a NIB safe queen. Then again.

Having read another thread on the evolution of man and handguns I read somewhere that the elusive Model 65 K Frame in 3 inch is the nads.
Maybe Arguy made that statement. I will have to investigate and keep my antennae tuned at the pawn shops now. I wondered what my next wheeler was going to be. Nema may be on to something.

This hobby/lifestyle is like, well addictive.

Speaking of levers (I am easily diverted) I need to take some pics of my recent inheretence items and postem up. Marlin, 3 Winnies and a sweet .410.
__________________
Quote:
After a bad opening, there is hope for the middle game. After a bad middle game there is hope for the end game. But once you are in the endgame, the moment of truth has arrived - Edmar Mednis
DAdams is offline  
Old June 16, 2007, 08:43 PM   #35
JMFred
Member
 
 
Join Date: December 25, 2002
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 25
I've got a 3" 65 already but I sure do want a 340! I'd like to set up my 642 with a Barami Hip Grip and a Tyler T and convince my wife to carry it. Then I can put my 405's on the 340
JMFred is offline  
Old June 16, 2007, 09:41 PM   #36
fastbolt
Member
 
 
Join Date: December 26, 2002
Location: Within the lightning
Posts: 2,477
I suppose I can visit here every once in a while, considering I picked up a M&P 340 Centennial a couple months ago ...

I took my new M&P340 Centennial out to the range back in April and ran a little over a hundred rounds through it.

More than half of the rounds fired were various .38 Special loads ... (probably closer to 3/4's of the rounds fired) ... including standard pressure 110gr Winchester STHP and Federal Low Recoil 110gr; Speer 125gr & 135gr +P; and El Dorado Starfire 125gr +P (found a couple boxes in my ammo locker I'd forgotten I had) ... and I ran several cylinder loads of some Remington 125gr Golden Sabre and Federal Low Recoil 130gr .357 Magnum through it, as well.

The Magnum loads I tried seemed as though they were less brutal than the Remington 125gr Magnum rounds I've previously fired through a few other Scandium Magnum J-frames equipped with titanium cylinders. It probably wasn't just my impression, either, as I had another instructor try it, too. He hadn't enjoyed shooting the last Airlite Magnum J-frame he'd tried, which I'd loaded with Rem 125gr SJHP Magnum rounds, and he described this one, loaded with one of the other Magnum loads, as easier to shoot.

I did notice some bullet-pull with the Remington Golden Sabre Magnum loads, though, with the 5th round exhibiting bullet movement from the case mouth, apparently caused by the recoil from the 4 fired rounds. It was the same with a few cylinderful's. Guess I won't be using that load in this particular lightweight Scandium gun. The Federal Magnum load didn't seem to exhibit any bullet movement, and I may pick up some more.

I decided to buy this new model mostly because I looked at it as sort of an 'improved' version of my 642-1 (in my mind) and my original thinking was to just use .38 Spl +P ammunition. However, since the felt recoil of the Magnum ammunition wasn't as bad as I remember from the last few experiences of shooting one or another of the Airlite Magnum J-frames I might change my mind and actually carry Magnum loads from time to time.

In the meantime I'll probably continue to load it with a .38 Spl +P load.

I'm going to try some Winchester 145gr STHP Magnum next, as that used to be one of my favorite standard service loads when I carried an issued .357 Magnum revolver. I felt it offered me some improved controllability over the 125gr Magnum loads in the full-size guns, and I liked the bullet design and weight.

The XS dot front sight is much smaller than my early Ashley Big Dot, so I'm guessing this is the standard size front sight. It seems to fit the gun well, size-wise. Once I remembered to cover the intended POI with the XS dot (like I have to do with my Big Dot sight on my CS45) my POA/POI at 10 yards was fine. It was bit low until I did so.

All things considered, this seems to be an interesting example of the J-frame line. I like the steel cylinder and the XS tritium sight.

There are a couple of minor details I wish they could've done better at the factory when assembling my particular example, but that's the way it seems to be nowadays, and not just with a single manufacturer, either.

For example, what I thought was a weirdly colored patch of something on the frame, around the front screw head, easily wiped off with a dampened patch. However, when it was gone it revealed a smooth & shiny narrow crescent cut in the frame surrounding the screw head. Probably resulted from someone experiencing a moment's inattention at the factory during assembly, during which the screwdriver tip cut into the black finished frame ... after which a felt-tip marker somehow came by to visit, covering the shiny 'oops'. Oh well ...

My purchase of the M&P340 makes the second J-frame I picked up since I first visited the 642 thread. If I'm not careful I may end up going back to spending more money on guns than I do on cigars and adult beverages.

Something I found interesting about the 642 thread, though, is that back in my first posting I made a comment to the effect that if S&W ever made a Scandium alloy J-frame with a stainless steel cylinder (instead of titanium) that I'd buy one.

Guess I did.

I weighed my M&P340 on an electronic scale and received a consistent reading of 13 3/8 oz. (empty). I can feel (by hand) the difference in weight when comparing it to my 642-1 and 37-2 Airweights.

Nice J-frame.
__________________
Retired LE - firearms instructor & armorer
fastbolt is offline  
Old June 16, 2007, 09:58 PM   #37
Nematocyst
Member
 
 
Join Date: August 5, 2005
Location: Downeast Maine
Posts: 11,648
Fastbolt, that's a great review. Thx.

Very interesting observations on rnds.

I'd like to hear from you and other 340 owners about how the quality of materials and workmanship and feel of the 340 stacks up v. the 642. Are they comparable, or does the 340 have an edge?

I realize that's kind of an apples and oranges question (or maybe red delicious v jonathans) given the caliber capability differences, but I think a comparison is still possible.
__________________
______________

Blades, Levers, Sticks & Wheels
Nematocyst is offline  
Old June 16, 2007, 11:20 PM   #38
Brassman
Member
 
 
Join Date: March 21, 2006
Location: Gastonia, NC
Posts: 278
My thumb seems to be healing quickly from the bruise inflicted by the recoil of my heavy .357's on Thurs. The next time we go to the range I'm going to see if factory .357 jump crimp like my hand rolled ones did.

I may also experiment with mixing a cylinder between Remington FBI loads and heavy .357. If factory JHP .357's jump crimp after 3 or 4 rounds, one could carry with two .357's loaded up front and load the rest of the cylinder with the FBI. You could fire the first 2 rounds with no crimp jump and have the best .38 +P rounds in reserve.

The reason I bought the M&P 340 was to replace the 642 that my wife is now carrying, but if I could carry at least 2 rounds of .357 that would be a nice thought.
Brassman is offline  
Old June 17, 2007, 12:40 AM   #39
Nematocyst
Member
 
 
Join Date: August 5, 2005
Location: Downeast Maine
Posts: 11,648
Quote:
...one could carry with two .357's loaded up front and load the rest of the cylinder with the FBI. You could fire the first 2 rounds with no crimp jump and have the best .38 +P rounds in reserve.
Ah, watching the evolution of loading strategies for ultralight snubs.

Da'um, life is good.
__________________
______________

Blades, Levers, Sticks & Wheels
Nematocyst is offline  
Old June 17, 2007, 11:55 AM   #40
jfh
Member
 
 
Join Date: August 28, 2003
Location: Maple Plain, MN
Posts: 4,769
and to be the contrarian--

Quote:
...one could carry with two .357's loaded up front and load the rest of the cylinder with the FBI. You could fire the first 2 rounds with no crimp jump and have the best .38 +P rounds in reserve.
How about the .38 Special / .38+P as the first three loads, so you can get off the followup shot without suffering that bruised thumb and the concomitant distractions....

Jim H.

Last edited by jfh; June 20, 2007 at 08:43 AM. Reason: saw discrepancy in qty; fixed text
jfh is offline  
Old June 17, 2007, 01:37 PM   #41
DAdams
Member
 
 
Join Date: February 28, 2007
Location: East Tennessee
Posts: 3,076
Fastbolt

Great review of the 340.

I may have to revisit those Federal 130 low recoils. Aren't those the ones where you need a PhD and a sledge to open the box?
Maybe I won't.

Quote:
The Magnum loads I tried seemed as though they were less brutal than the Remington 125gr Magnum rounds I've previously fired through a few other Scandium Magnum J-frames equipped with titanium cylinders. It probably wasn't just my impression, either, as I had another instructor try it, too. He hadn't enjoyed shooting the last Airlite Magnum J-frame he'd tried, which I'd loaded with Rem 125gr SJHP Magnum rounds, and he described this one, loaded with one of the other Magnum loads, as easier to shoot.
I'll bet that is just what S&W had in mind when they developed this beauty.

Civilization is "a hundred layers of ten thousand decisions, only a few of them even interesting". Procurring a 340 falls into the interesting category.
__________________
Quote:
After a bad opening, there is hope for the middle game. After a bad middle game there is hope for the end game. But once you are in the endgame, the moment of truth has arrived - Edmar Mednis

Last edited by DAdams; June 18, 2007 at 08:40 AM.
DAdams is offline  
Old June 17, 2007, 02:28 PM   #42
fastbolt
Member
 
 
Join Date: December 26, 2002
Location: Within the lightning
Posts: 2,477
Quote:
Aren't those the ones where you need a PHD and a sledge to open the box?
Pretty much.

The 'low recoil' is only by comparison to a couple of other loads I've tried. The report is sharp and the pistol wants to torque in your hand and whip upward. Achieving fast AND accurate groups on a target takes some determination, especially when shooting 1-handed. That's what training's for, though, right?

The bottom edge of my trigger finger generally takes a bit of a beating after a couple of boxes of rounds of +P loads, and the Magnum loads seem to quicken the process.

I'm going to try a few cylinder loads of some Winchester 145gr STHP next time out.

In the meantime I'm fine with continuing to carry .38 Spl loads.

Nice to have the option of the Magnum loads, though.
__________________
Retired LE - firearms instructor & armorer
fastbolt is offline  
Old June 19, 2007, 11:06 AM   #43
rich642z
Member
 
 
Join Date: January 20, 2007
Posts: 296
Smile M&P 340 Club

DADAMS,One Question om the M&P340,How is that steel under the top strap holding up?????? I am thinking of getting one also,but, being disabled,its going to take me awhile to get the money up to pay for that since I am only on Social Security Disability checks. Thanks,Rich@642z
rich642z is offline  
Old June 20, 2007, 05:24 AM   #44
kashton
Member
 
 
Join Date: June 10, 2007
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 323
How did you get such good prices on the M&P 340 regular and CT?

At my local dealer, the regular is $683 + tax
kashton is offline  
Old June 20, 2007, 06:25 PM   #45
travl4me1
Member
 
 
Join Date: May 16, 2007
Location: Music City USA
Posts: 16
re:s&w 340

Could someone post a good picture of the gun turned the other way? Every photo I can find of this firearm (anywhere) shows the gun pointed to the right. Much like the first photo in the thread but have the barrel pointed to the left instead of right?

I wish I had my camera here to take a photo if mine. For those that have 100+ rounds out of their 340 has your cylinder started to come in contact with your frame? It's happening as I open it up and it falls out - the rear edge of the cylinder is rubbing the frame. It's noticeably silver, rather than black where this rubbing is happening. Maybe its normal (maybe it was always there) but I just noticed mine this past weekend.

On the opposite side of my gun are two gold dots (frame pin - I dunno) under the cylinder. Just beside those is where I am looking.
travl4me1 is offline  
Old June 20, 2007, 07:56 PM   #46
travl4me1
Member
 
 
Join Date: May 16, 2007
Location: Music City USA
Posts: 16
Not sure how to post pics , so let me try. It looks like glare but actually is scratched black. My other 2 s&w revolvers are stainless and not noticed.

Again, maybe it has been there all along, but would appreciate somone confirming they see the same wear on theirs.



Attached Images
File Type: jpg DSCF0081.jpg (167.4 KB, 465 views)
File Type: jpg DSCF0080.jpg (230.4 KB, 490 views)
travl4me1 is offline  
Old June 20, 2007, 08:34 PM   #47
jfh
Member
 
 
Join Date: August 28, 2003
Location: Maple Plain, MN
Posts: 4,769
my 340 is still at the 'smith's, but I know that

I have exactly the same rub mark.

I noticed it at the store, before I bought it--didn't really bother me. I did examine it more closely after the first shots--limited to five, BTW, because I was test-firing the 640 first, and ran out of time--and I did (and still do) think it isn't black, but a bright rub mark.

Although my cylinder and crane movements are within spec, it is caused by contact with the cylinder when you open it. In the nominal 70-plus shots total I put through the 340 before I brought it to the smith, the freeplay did not get any worse, nor did the mark.

And yes, the two pins are 'gold' on mine.

On a slightly different topic--my Hip Pock-its arrived today--that's the multifunction tool holster I read about in the 642 club thread. I forget who posted the link there--but here it is now:

http://www.niteize.com/productdetail...product_id=100

At any rate--yes, I'm impressed--it's a good quality unit, and complete with four different attachment methods (included HD belt, two sets belt loops (large and duty-belt size), and an IWB flap). It will hold either the 340 or the 640 nicely, with enough padding to prevent any printing, and there is plenty of room for a camera, spare batts, pens, tools, etc., etc.

It's a bit geeky--but that's all right. To me, it doesn't shout 'gun' to savvy sheeples.

Jim H.
jfh is offline  
Old June 20, 2007, 10:23 PM   #48
DAdams
Member
 
 
Join Date: February 28, 2007
Location: East Tennessee
Posts: 3,076
Quote:
On a slightly different topic--my Hip Pock-its arrived today--that's the multifunction tool holster I read about in the 642 club thread. I forget who posted the link there--but here it is now
That would be me.

Quote:
It's a bit geeky--but that's all right. To me, it doesn't shout 'gun' to savvy sheeples.
Perfect description Jim H. Anyone looking at it would think camera, large flask or "what the hell is that".


Closed Position a bit blurry, let's clear this up.




Shown with S&W 686 CS-1 3 inch.



Still plenty of room for other goodies, small GPS, cell phone, a couple of speedloaders, energy bars etc.

This would swallow a 642/442/340 with lots of room to spare.


Here is a smaller vesion. This one has a "rain shield' that completely covers. Quite fast on the out take. Not as attractive as the large version but faster access to the snubs or small autos. Flip, grab.

With the Kahr PM9



With the ubiquitous 642-2



In the covered position


Prints a bit with the 642 grip to someone aware...."yeah, that's right leave me alone."

Travl4me1, here you go.





Rich642-
Look closely at the two photos above.
On the frame of the 340 front top there is a piece of metal seperate from and inserted in the frame.
I took this to be a "flame shield" or sacrificial piece which could be replaced once nearly worn from flame cutting.
Anyone else have a theory on this piece?

Kashal
Check with these guys. This is where I got mine.
http://www.randyshuntingcenter.com/
They had the best price two months ago, better than Bud's by $5. and they included shipping, Bud's wanted to add that.
Randys advertizes on GunsAmerica and has a high rating. They were a pleasure to do business with and performed flawlessly.
Sent to my transfer agent on time as promised and out the door I went,..but not before picking up some Speer Gold Dot 135s and a set of Hogue Monogrips.
__________________
Quote:
After a bad opening, there is hope for the middle game. After a bad middle game there is hope for the end game. But once you are in the endgame, the moment of truth has arrived - Edmar Mednis

Last edited by DAdams; June 20, 2007 at 10:54 PM.
DAdams is offline  
Old June 20, 2007, 10:55 PM   #49
jfh
Member
 
 
Join Date: August 28, 2003
Location: Maple Plain, MN
Posts: 4,769
DAdams, thanks for bringing in the pictures

relevant to the current segue.

Now, on the 340:

1. The steel insert on the top front cylinder opening is a shield, alright. It should stop torching, but I still wonder about long term effects there.

2. On my 340, there is a sharp spot on / by the crane hinge, toward the rear of the hinge; since the gun is not here right now, I cannot confirm this location exactly, but I believe it is on the frame and not on the crane. It's a sharp little sprong, all the world like a piece of flashing that was missed in cleanup. Does anyone else have this?

3. When I get mine back (Saturday), I think I will use a black permanent marker to cover the back rub mark and see just how much rubbing occurs. For sure, there is no touching if the cylinder is shoved forward prior to opening. Has anyone else played around with this?

Jim H.
jfh is offline  
Old June 21, 2007, 07:39 AM   #50
tarheel
Member
 
 
Join Date: April 9, 2004
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 111
New M&P 340 owner

What are your thoughts on having a trigger job, not for a "light" trigger just to smooth the action and still keep a "self defense" pull? This will be a CCW in a pocket holster most of the time; but still in some type of holster the rest of the time. I asked this question in another thread and it was suggested that I move it here! Thanks DAdams!
tarheel is offline  
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:46 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
vBulletin Optimisation by vB Optimise.
This site, its contents, Shooting Reviews, and its contents are Copyright (c) 2010-2013 Firearms Forum, Inc.
IMPORTANT DISCLAIMER
Although The High Road has attempted to provide accurate information on the forum, The High Road assumes no responsibility for the accuracy of the information. All information is provided "as is" with all faults without warranty of any kind, either express or implied. Neither The High Road nor any of its directors, members, managers, employees, agents, vendors, or suppliers will be liable for any direct, indirect, general, bodily injury, compensatory, special, punitive, consequential, or incidental damages including, without limitation, lost profits or revenues, costs of replacement goods, loss or damage to data arising out of the use or inability to use this forum or any services associated with this forum, or damages from the use of or reliance on the information present on this forum, even if you have been advised of the possibility of such damages.