I'd take the 337 if the guy takes the trade but I'm really interested in Ruger's LCP. The Keltec design with better execution in a slightly larger package. It looks like a WINNER. My dealer is already working on getting one for me. I"ll bet Ruger is going to sell a MILLION of those little rockets.
Smith 642, Smith 340pd/MP, or PM9 for this summer?
- Thread starter jon_in_wv
- Start date
- Status
DawgFvr
Member
642 in a Mika pocket holster. I like the idea of a small 9mm auto in the pocket...but have tried it...lint, dust, etc., = malfunction after carrying it all week. Naw...give me the revolver that goes bang every time.
florida1098
Member
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2008
- Messages
- 66
If money is no object the 340PD is the ultimate lightweight pocket gun. I recently sold my 642 and purchased a 340PD. I have never shot it, and hopefully never will. After 25 yrs in law enforcment I am reasonably proficient with a snub. If the time comes at 5-7 yards when I have to pull the trigger, I am betting my life I will not miss.
My wife has almost 20 yrs as a cop and I purchased a 340 PD for her also, simply because of the lightweight. She carries it everywhere, and I mean everytime she leaves the house. If the time comes to use it, the adrenaline and stress will make recoil a moot point. She never carried the 642 due to the weight. Here in Florida, shorts and tees are standard dress code, and the 340PD fits the dress code.
On duty we both trust our lives to Glocks, G21 and G23.
My wife has almost 20 yrs as a cop and I purchased a 340 PD for her also, simply because of the lightweight. She carries it everywhere, and I mean everytime she leaves the house. If the time comes to use it, the adrenaline and stress will make recoil a moot point. She never carried the 642 due to the weight. Here in Florida, shorts and tees are standard dress code, and the 340PD fits the dress code.
On duty we both trust our lives to Glocks, G21 and G23.
Ivy Mike
Member
PM9 but only because I prefer autoloaders.
Well thank you for all your input peeps. It was very informative. I have made a deal with a fellow High Roader for a 337. I think it will fit the bill nicely. I also have my dealer hunting for a Ruger LCP. I WILL get one of those too. We'll see which one spends the most time in my pocket. I'll have to do some head to head shooting and post the results.
Attachments
Picked up my 337 today. It looks just like the pic and even came with a really cool soft case. That thing is STUPIDLY light. Holy crap. I wouldn't even want to shoot .357s through a gun that light. IT will make a really cool poicket gun though.
The Annoyed Man
Member
I just bought a 642 Crimson Trace on Saturday for my wife for Valentines day. I actually gave it to her today. Suffice it to say that things went well. 
Dollar An Hour
Member
I own one of each.
The 340 packs the biggest punch, but more than likely you'll end up carrying .38's in it because they are quite a bit more controllable. With stock grips its a nice light pocket gun, but the grips are too small for controlling .357's. If you install Monogrips to make .357's more tolerable, the gun becomes much more controllable, but it's no longer a pocket gun, the grip is too bulky, and it is now a belt gun.
A 442/642 is a little easier on recoil than the 340 with the same grips and shooting the same ammo, but not much difference. Still excellent weight for pocket carry too. No night sight and sweet DLC finish like the 340 though, but you save about $200.
The Kahr carries 7 rounds instead of 5, has better sights than a J-Frame, and 9mm +P has more punch than .38's. It's also much easier to control and fire quick, accurate follow-ups than either of the J's. My Kahr is easier to shoot accurately than my J-Frames, and I don't mind putting 100+ rounds through it, as opposed to the airweights where I'm not interested in putting more than 50 in a typical range session. I have put over 100 .38+P's downrange in my M&P 340 in a single session, but it's more painful than the same number of rounds out of the Kahr.
The 340 packs the biggest punch, but more than likely you'll end up carrying .38's in it because they are quite a bit more controllable. With stock grips its a nice light pocket gun, but the grips are too small for controlling .357's. If you install Monogrips to make .357's more tolerable, the gun becomes much more controllable, but it's no longer a pocket gun, the grip is too bulky, and it is now a belt gun.
A 442/642 is a little easier on recoil than the 340 with the same grips and shooting the same ammo, but not much difference. Still excellent weight for pocket carry too. No night sight and sweet DLC finish like the 340 though, but you save about $200.
The Kahr carries 7 rounds instead of 5, has better sights than a J-Frame, and 9mm +P has more punch than .38's. It's also much easier to control and fire quick, accurate follow-ups than either of the J's. My Kahr is easier to shoot accurately than my J-Frames, and I don't mind putting 100+ rounds through it, as opposed to the airweights where I'm not interested in putting more than 50 in a typical range session. I have put over 100 .38+P's downrange in my M&P 340 in a single session, but it's more painful than the same number of rounds out of the Kahr.
I compared my 337 to my P32 and while it is a bit larger the weight difference is hardly noticeable and I think i got a major leap in OOOOMPH. Especially loaded with Corbon Pow'rballs. I take up a bit more room in the pocket but I REALLY like the hogue grips. I have kinda meaty hands and I doubt I would have been able to get a PM9 out of my pocket very easily. Now I have to do something about the spur on the hammer. I hate to bob it off but it is a carry gun not a show gun.
Well thanks for the opinion but the poll was set for a certain time period because the orig poster (ME) wanted to get a few opinions to make a decision about what gun to get. Your opinion might have been helpful a week ago when I asked for it but I have already made my purchase (post #56). The information is still there. I don't think the opinions of the 122 people who did take the time to vote and/or comment is "lame" nor have any of the other 1300+ people who viewed this thread. If you think it is than post your own poll instead of complaining about mine.
Last edited:
If I am not mistake, the PD has a titanium cylinder and those have been known to seize up with certain ammo. It happened to my 342.
I have both the 642 and the 360SS (the hammer version and stainless cylinder version of the 340M&P). They are both good carry guns but for summer carry, I'd go for the PM9.
I have both the 642 and the 360SS (the hammer version and stainless cylinder version of the 340M&P). They are both good carry guns but for summer carry, I'd go for the PM9.
kanderson586
Member
i traded my pm40 towards the 340ct about three months ago and am pleased. i had problems with the pm trigger reset, it only happenned twice in a few thousand rounds but i value my life. also the new ct405 fits bigger hands WAY better than previously owned cts
abrink
Member
I agree you should go with the 642. I saw someone else say to get the hammerless model. Honestly the hammer isn't that big a deal even if you are pocket carrying. I pocked my 640 with the hammer all the time. When i practice my draw the hammer wasn't caught once. And with the hammer it allows you to go into single action if you need to make a precise shot like maybe someone with a hostage.
I practiced drawing the 337 from my pocket and it was way to easy to get the hammer caught on the lining of my pocket. I will most likely bob the hammer to make that less likely. I think I will leave a little of the spur though so I can cock it if I choose to.
I just bought a PM9 3 days ago and am LOVING it! I used to carry a 637... a little too fat and not nearly accurate enought and a P3AT not really accurate and hard to hold on to. The PM9 is really accurate... i mean REALLY. I can shoot it better than some full size handguns, and I ran 150 rounds through it and my hands didnt hurt like if I was shooting one of the aforementioned firearms.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
