Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

M&P 340 vs Ruger LCR

Discussion in 'Handguns: Revolvers' started by HJHMD, Feb 19, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. HJHMD

    HJHMD Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2011
    Messages:
    10
    Hello everyone, new to the forum. I would appreciate any advice from those who have shot both guns. I have arthritic hands and issues like trigger pull, recoil and ease of cylinder release are important considerations. Thank you in advance for you help.

    Jim
     
  2. fourtycal

    fourtycal Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2011
    Messages:
    5
    Location:
    North Coast (Ohio)
    Remember recoil is proportional to weight and the LCR is lighweight.(Hence the name).
    The LCR feels to me like a cheap toy in my hands. If your considering a Ruger, perhaps a SP-101 would be a better choice. I'm not familiar with the m&p revolver you mentioned. I prefer a 686 2.5 inch 357 mag rounds for carry and 38s for target and "playing around".
     
  3. mgregg85

    mgregg85 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2007
    Messages:
    2,008
    Location:
    Midland, MI
    I can't comment on the 340 but I do have an LCR. The trigger is much lighter than any s&w snub i've tried. The cylinder release is easy to use, just a little pressure and a push on the side of the cylinder.

    How do you handle recoil with the arthritis and all? Obviously the lighter the gun, the more the kick and the LCR kicks hard with +p loads.
     
  4. nonseven

    nonseven Member

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2007
    Messages:
    216
    Location:
    Arkansas
    I've got both guns. I think the advantages go to the Ruger. Better trigger on stock gun, easier cylinder release, and with the Hogue Tamer grips which come on the Rugers (except for the crimson trace) much better to handle the recoil. Heck, the grip alone is just about a reason to get the Ruger - the tamer grips have a thick section of TPR rubber right where the web of your hand goes. You can't as of yet get those grips for the Smiths.

    Yeah it's not conventional looking compared to the S&W, but the LCR is quite functional and the design grows on you.
     
  5. DAdams

    DAdams Member

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2007
    Messages:
    3,081
    Location:
    East Tennessee
  6. rikman

    rikman Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2004
    Messages:
    822
    Location:
    People's Republic of IL
    I have a 340PD...great little hand cannon. Fun to carry, never know it's there, but not so fun to shoot. I've played with the LCR at the shop and I have to say Ruger hit a home run with this little wheel gun!
     
  7. erice303

    erice303 Member

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2010
    Messages:
    19
    I love my 340m&p. Yes the recoil is a bit harsh with 357, but Every time i shoot full bore 357 out of mine i get a giant smile on my face. I rented an lcr before I got the 340, and it does have a slightly better trigger, but I did feel like the stack on the trigger was pretty bad. Out of the box the trigger on the j frames are general horrendous, it did not smooth out until after i dry fired it over 1,000 times( this will also work out you trigger fingers). Either one of them will work well for you, but the 340 is just more fun for me.

    Eric
     
    Last edited: Feb 21, 2011
  8. nonseven

    nonseven Member

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2007
    Messages:
    216
    Location:
    Arkansas
    The reviews I've read on the LCR described the new cam design on the trigger as non-stacking, and would have to agree that I would describe the trigger on my LCR as having no stacking at all.
     
  9. erice303

    erice303 Member

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2010
    Messages:
    19
    I have now have about 300rd through the 340 and I can almost pull the tiger to just before hammer release so I can considerate on the last bit of the trigger pull. When i shot the LCR the trigger was very smooth, but to me it felt like my finger would slam down at the end of the trigger pull. This is just my opinion, and the trigger feel is something that different people feel differently.

    I would say the the LCR is better for getting quick trigger puls, and the 340 is better for slightly more accurate slower shots. YMMV

    Eric
     
  10. thedogbone

    thedogbone Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2010
    Messages:
    6
    340PD was superlight and easy to carry. Naked backstrap beats up your hand pretty well with full power loads.

    Haven't ha a chance to use the LCR 357 yet, but given my past experience with Ruger factory stocks, I expect it will be more pleasant to shoot. Size is equivalent, weight is 4oz heavier (+/-.5 oz)
     
  11. jcs271

    jcs271 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2004
    Messages:
    124
    Ruger LCR hands down over my various pocket smiths!
     
  12. dispatch

    dispatch Member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2006
    Messages:
    344
    Location:
    DFW area
    Ruger LCR-best pocket revolver ever. I love Smiths, but Ruger hit a home run with LCR.
     
  13. grant1265

    grant1265 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2011
    Messages:
    92
    Location:
    Central Virginia
    just make sure that when you shoot the lcr you are not pulling the trigger with the pad or tip of you index finger, otherwise it will jar your finger and after 30 or so rounds it will get very sore, probably the same with the smith, but i've only shot the ruger.
     
  14. gnb

    gnb member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2009
    Messages:
    20
    Location:
    Pittsburgh
    I carried an S&W 342 airlite ti .38 as my ccg for about 10 years with no complaints because it was easy to carry. I got a.38 LCR last year and it is WAY easier to shoot accurately due to its trigger. I like the LCR grip better also and I am not at all worried about reliability or durability.Totally sold on the LCR.
     
  15. mhphoto

    mhphoto Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2010
    Messages:
    72
    Those 340s are brutal to shoot. I had the (dis)pleasure of putting a few rounds through my brother in law's on Saturday. I'm no limp-wristed poltroon when it comes to handgun recoil, but dang.

    As I understand it, the Ruger weighs about 8 ounces more than the 340, so I guess it might kick a little less (though I don't it would be much of a difference). I'd still take the 340 if choosing between the two. Not sure if I trust a polymer .357 (though I might be full of it because I'll trust a polymer 10mm... :) )
     
  16. DAdams

    DAdams Member

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2007
    Messages:
    3,081
    Location:
    East Tennessee
    I suspect that felt recoil between the two should be quite similar as they weigh the same, 13.3 vs 13.5 ounces for the Ruger. The grips are going to be the key to "felt" aspect of the recoil.

    I have found the Crimson Trace 405s much to my liking.

    Although you may find the ability to shoot .357 Magnum from the M&P 340 not to you pleasure, you may also look at it as the ability to get more versatility out of your revolver.
     
  17. JaxJim

    JaxJim Member

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2007
    Messages:
    100
    Location:
    USA
    I already owned a 442 and wanted a bit lighter of a hand cannon for pocket carry in summer. I had got a chance to shoot an LCR and while the trigger was nice, it's, well, ugly (opinion, I know) and a bit heavier than a 340 M&P.

    I smoothed the trigger a bit on my new 340 M&P and while probably not as smooth yet as the LCR, I like the gun overall better. My wife now carries the 442 in her purse and I have the 340 in a pocket. I run 135 Gr Gold Dots in both and am pleased with the setup.

    I like the tritium sight on the 340 M&P too. Nice touch and easy for me to pick up the sight in any light condition.

    I own a lot of both Ruger and S&W so I'm not a S&W homer by any means, just like the 340 M&P for this job better.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page