J frame 357 versus 38+p

Status
Not open for further replies.
A friend of mine has a 340 PD and does not like shooting .357 in it so he only shoots 38+P. He is retired special forces and has fired thousands upon thousands of rounds through various hand guns during his 28 years of service. If he doesn't like it I know I won't.
 
ApacheCoTodd said:
Here's one aspect of my 340 ownership.

I have ZERO desire to abuse myself with .357 in it anymore..... EVER!

And, here's another aspect of my 340 ownership.

I have ZERO concerns with shooting ANY properly weighted .38s (over 120gr. only!) regardless of how many *P*s are attached to the moniker or where they may fall; before or after.

Todd.
Click to expand...

Careful... The Buffalo Bore .38 Special +P Outdoorsman is pretty stout. 158 gr @ 1250 fps in a 6". I wouldn't suggest it as being good for an old aluminum frame that's for sure.
 
94045 said:
Careful... The Buffalo Bore .38 Special +P Outdoorsman is pretty stout. 158 gr @ 1250 fps in a 6". I wouldn't suggest it as being good for an old aluminum frame that's for sure.
Click to expand...
Good point. Can't just think because it's a *.38* that it's mild anymore.

Todd.
 
Since it might be dark and you won't have ear protection, I would stick to 38 +P. The marginal power advantage of the 357 doesn't make up for the inability to see and/or hear after the first shot.
 
ApacheCoTodd said:
Good point. Can't just think because it's a *.38* that it's mild anymore.

Todd.
Click to expand...
94045 said:
Careful... The Buffalo Bore .38 Special +P Outdoorsman is pretty stout. 158 gr @ 1250 fps in a 6". I wouldn't suggest it as being good for an old aluminum frame that's for sure.
Click to expand...

It's is only doing 1027 from a 642. Buffalo Bore even says in the product description it's fine in light weight 11-12 oz revolvers and has test data from a 642. Won't hurt a +P rated aluminum frame at all. Might hurt your hand some but not the frame.
 
My carry pistols are a S&W M2.0 Compact 4" in .40 S&W and a .45 Shield and the Shield has 230 gr + P in it.

That is to give some context to the following.

The M442 gets standard pressure 148 gr Wadcutters.

In a small lightweight 38 Revolver I think it's still hard to beat the M442 wadcutter combo when it comes to affordability, compactness , weight, recoil and effectiveness. The added advantage is your carry ammo is your practice ammo.

A flat front bullet with a full diameter meplat and 16" of penetration that is shootable, controllable and shoots to point of aim is not easily dismissed.

That said my steel revolvers get the Fed Micro HST 135 gr +P.
It's very light light recoil for +P and in my opinion mostly caused by the reduced case capacity. It loads like a wadcutter and acts like one even if it fails to expand.
 
mcb said:
It's is only doing 1027 from a 642. Buffalo Bore even says in the product description it's fine in light weight 11-12 oz revolvers and has test data from a 642. Won't hurt a +P rated aluminum frame at all. Might hurt your hand some but not the frame.
Click to expand...

I was referring to none +P or limited rating (when I said old).

1027 fps out of a 642 is about 3/4 of the way from mainstream .38+P to .357 Mag offerings. 125 gr +P clocks 850 fps and .357 Mag clock 1250 out of a J-Frame. It's been awhile since I checked 158 gr but if memory serves it is about 100 fps less.
 
Just my personnel preferences...

I have a 3" 357 Magnum Model 60 j-frame. I shoot my moderate 357 Magnum loads in it (158 gran SWC, 900-950 fps from a 4" 357 Magnum revolver) and they are reasonably comfortable to shoot. But the Model 60 is all steel, not a light weight frame.

I have a couple Airweight J-frames chambered in 38 Special. I really do not care to shoot +P ammunition in them. Standard 38 Special is more my speed with these light weight revolvers.

So, I would not shoot full power 357 Magnum rounds in a light weight revolver. It would be just too uncomfortable.

On the other hand, the old, true 38 Special J-frames are a bit more compact than the later J-frames with a frame window large enough to handle a 357 Magnum cylinder. Maybe I'm splitting hairs, but if I'm going to shoot 38 Special ammunition, why not get the most compact version.

Finally, I also have a Model 317 (22 RF). The weight is obscenely light. No way I would want to shoot even 38 Special in an Air Lite frame J-frame.
 
WisBorn said:
I'm thinking about buying a M&P 340 but having a hard time with the cost compared to 442.

Is the more powerful round worth the price? I would carry the 357 in areas with bears and cats and 38s as my primary carry.

Looking for some help!
Click to expand...
How do you intend on carrying it? If you ever intend to pocket carry it go to the 642. The extra length (about ,75 inch) of the 357 magnum makes it problematic
 
[email protected] said:
How do you intend on carrying it? If you ever intend to pocket carry it go to the 642. The extra length (about ,75 inch) of the 357 magnum makes it problematic
Click to expand...
That's true.
In my preferred Wranglers, my 340 rotates up just enough to present a small portion of an already tiny grip over the top of the pocket.

I should think a proper .38 frame might eliminate that or at least significantly diminish it.

As I stated above, I carry, almost exclusively, .38s in it anyhow.

Todd.
 
ApacheCoTodd said:
Interesting. I'd have thought they would have a *.38 only* OAL length cylinder in their line-up. I guess it doesn't make sense from a manufacturing point of view.

Todd
Click to expand...
Same for the 9mm revolvers, just put 9mm chambers in a 357 mag length cylinder. Image how short a cylinder they could use with 9mm if they chose to size the frame and cylinder to the cartridge.
 
mcb said:
Same for the 9mm revolvers, just put 9mm chambers in a 357 mag length cylinder. Image how short a cylinder they could use with 9mm if they chose to size the frame and cylinder to the cartridge.
Click to expand...
True, same with those .45 cap recovers favored by some.

The cost might be significant to run separately but damn, those would be cool pistols in minimum-to-the-cartridge lengthen cylinders - with clip depth added, of course.

Todd.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mcb
gotboostvr said:
I used to really enjoy shooting full power 500mag from a 3" X-frame. Or 50AE from a steel Desert Eagle. Even 44mag from a 4" M29 with Magna grips. My buddies 460 is really fun too.

But, I want absolutely nothing to do with a 357mag alloy J-frame. They're downright painful.
Click to expand...
That mirror's my experience fairly well.

The smallest gun I'd want to shoot 357s from is a Ruger SP101, or a Kimber K6s.

That being said, I'd buy a small 357 for the durability of the gun.

If 38 power levels is all I'm worried about I usually carry a Sig P938. With 124 gr HST +p ammo, I get 1100 fps from that short little 3" barrel.
 
I HAD a M&P 340, I'm not allergic to recoil shoot 454 and 480 Ruger with no issues and have good hand strength and recoil control regularly have splits under .2 with full house 10mm. I shot 5 rounds of 145gr Silvertips and couldn't keep from having to readjust my grip between shots. I carried it with 125 golden saber 357s which are midrangeish.
I now have a LCR 38 that I carry most of the time and a SP101 357 for the woods.
 
mavracer said:
I HAD a M&P 340, I'm not allergic to recoil shoot 454 and 480 Ruger with no issues and have good hand strength and recoil control regularly have splits under .2 with full house 10mm. I shot 5 rounds of 145gr Silvertips and couldn't keep from having to readjust my grip between shots. I carried it with 125 golden saber 357s which are midrangeish.
I now have a LCR 38 that I carry most of the time and a SP101 357 for the woods.
Click to expand...

That was kind of my experience. A .454 is not a gun for 200 round range sessions but a 340 with full-strength .357 Mag is less pleasant. And recoil aside it's just way more "violent" for want of a better term.

With a .454 you think "that's stout" with the 340 - .357 it's more like "Oh no! I had a barrel obstruction!".
 
Howdy.

0. Rent/borrow a .357mag alloy SW snubby and shoot some full power .357mag loads without padded shooting gloves. You'll then know if you want more of that.

1. Neither snubby is a bad option. Even if you shoot the .357mag-capable scandium snuby only with .38spl, the .357mag scandi variant is a bit less mass.

2. That said, my first alloy snubby was in .357mag: Taurus total Titanium deal. Spent lots of time looking for a .357mag cartridge that would shoot POI=POA. And spent some time looking for ammo that was not as painful to shoot.

3. My SECOND alloy snubby was in .38spl +P. With the .38spl ammo blends from Underwood and Buff Bore, I had all the power & penetration I felt I needed in a snubby, even for woods carry. Matter of fact, my woods carry load is standard pressure .38spl 150gr hard cast full wadcutter. Penetrates like crazy, no +P needed. My usual anti-personnel load is Underwood/BB .38spl+P 158gr LSWCHP. If my wife is shooting, her AP load is 148gr target HBWC.

4. Best accessory after a holster is a Crimson Trace laser grip appropriate to your uses. I prefer the hard plastic boot grip flavor. Beats a tritium dot sight for low light.

Good luck.
 
fxvr5 said:
S&W's website shows the 642 and M&P340 have the same overall length of 6.3".
340: https://www.smith-wesson.com/firearms/mp-340
642: https://www.smith-wesson.com/firearms/model-642
Click to expand...

Before S&W began making the J-frame guns capable of firing 357 Magnum, the frames were shorter since the 38 Special cartridge is shorter. Afterwards, S&W stretched the frame to fit 357 Magnum ammunition and all J-frames are made that way regardless of cartridge thjey are chambered in.

On the left is a Model 642 built around 1998 after S&W started building 357 Magnum J-frame guns. The gun on the right is a Model 60 built around 1984. The plastic strips show the Model 60's cylinder is shorter than the Model 642 even though they are both chambered for 38 Special.

index.php
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

CopperFouling
  • Locked
Smith & Wesson M&P 340
Replies
8
Views
510
fastbolt
fastbolt
K
  • Locked
Do I have a round butt or square butt?
Replies
21
Views
7K
KevininPa
KevininPa
E
  • Locked
velocity of .38+p from a 2" .38 vs from a 2" .357
Replies
13
Views
972
Quantrill
Q
L
  • Locked
Best defensive .357 magnum ammo for a J-frame AND an N-frame
Replies
16
Views
3K
wnycollector
W
S
  • Locked
Can I please have some S&W J frame help?
Replies
17
Views
2K
BossHogg
B
Back
Top