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

Discussion in 'Handguns: Revolvers' started by DAdams, Jun 12, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Marvin KNox

    Marvin KNox Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2008
    Messages:
    244
    I must agee that about half the "adjustments" would have, made the "macho" point just as well, been just as humorous and not "jumped the shark" as it were.

    But seriously folks - I'm getting a couple of belts- one brown and another black. I wanted a couple of good gunbelts that wont break the bank. I'm a little in between weight cycles right now and wanted to wait until I stabilized before buying a really good dress belt that will be very supportive of holsters.

    I realize that the 340 doesn't present as much weight as some carry pieces. But still I want a good supoortive belt.

    I've pretty much settled on the Looper belts as a good place to start. They are pretty fair looking and yet have a kydex insert for support. You can't really beat the price. What do you think?

    http://looperlawenforcement.com/looper-reinforced-holster-belt.html
     
  2. Dan-O

    Dan-O Member

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2007
    Messages:
    781
    Location:
    Kansas City
    Just got picked up my M&P 340 today. Gonna take it to the range tomorrow. Go Jayhawks!!!!

    100_2623.gif

    100_2622.gif

    100_2620.gif

    100_2619.gif

    100_2618.gif
     
  3. Marvin KNox

    Marvin KNox Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2008
    Messages:
    244
    Beautiful 340 Dan. But then, aren’t they all? They just kind of look like an American pocket pistol aught to look - don't you think?

    Are those grips the standard grips that come on most 340s?

    MARV
     
  4. Dan-O

    Dan-O Member

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2007
    Messages:
    781
    Location:
    Kansas City
    Marv,

    Yes, these are the stock grips, unless you get the one with the Crimson Trace Laser Grips. I may eventually go with the Laser Grips, but I prefer the ones that are a bit longer and considered the extended grip handles.
     
  5. baxtereyes

    baxtereyes Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2008
    Messages:
    12
    Effectiveness of Crimson Trace grips on 340

    I am considering getting CT grips for my 340 M&P. Any comments on the effectiveness and concealability or lack thereof of a laser site on a "J" frame revolver?

    You comments would be appreciated.

    Ric
     
  6. jfh

    jfh Member

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2003
    Messages:
    4,868
    Location:
    Maple Plain, MN
    baxtereyes: See this thread.

    And, as a general tip--take the time to at least scan the pages in this thread--there's lots of info on grips, reloading, etc., etc.

    The M&P 340 is my daily carry gun--IMO, the LG-405 CT grip on that revolver is the best of the three because it includes a recoil pocket on the backstrap and because of its length. Unless you have oversized pants pockets, the 305 grip (on the 640) is too long. The 105 grip would be suitable for people with smaller hands, but it does sacrifice any attempt at cushioning.

    Jim H.
     
  7. yakkingallover

    yakkingallover Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2008
    Messages:
    184
    Location:
    Jacksonville,Fl
    Quick question,I just bought an M&P 340 today should arrive Tuesday,I plan to practice with true self defense carry rounds but if I want to let a friend try it out does anyone run WWB .38 or .357 through these guns just to kep cost reasonable???
     
  8. Marvin KNox

    Marvin KNox Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2008
    Messages:
    244
    Tritium and laser sight picture

    I’ve got several questions concerning sighting in that I want some help on. I’m going to put them into a series of several posts to keep them manageable and make the posts shorter.

    First off – concerning sight picture - where do you like to put the big white tritium dot in comparison to the notch and top of the notch? Do you put the top of the ball even with the top of the notch? Do you like to put the white ball down in the bottom of the notch?

    Second – concerning the laser that I have on my gun – do you like to sight it in exactly the same as the tritium sight for continuity? Do you like to sight it in an inch or so lower than the tritium to keep them from running together when using one or the other?

    The laser is much easier to do fine sight in work with than the big white dot – so I’d like to get these questions answered before going on to some other questions concerning sighting in. But even without the laser I need to find out what is the best way to use the sights.

    MARV
     
  9. Marvin KNox

    Marvin KNox Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2008
    Messages:
    244
    Sight in ranges?

    My questions concerning sighting in follow here. I’d be particularly interested in zeroing in on the Speer 135 gr. Short barrels since those are the ones most seem to use. But any input would be helpful to all of us fairly new to the gun.

    At what distance do you guys like to sight in? I’m thinking 7 yards????? If I did that – where would that put the bullet at, say, 3 yards etc.? Where is the bullet farther out at, say 12 yards ?

    If my choice of yards is off – can we get some feedback on people’s opinions about that? If you use other ammo, like 158 soft leads, how do you do things and how do you find that the trajectory goes?

    Anything along these lines of questioning and answering will aid those new to the gun and save a great deal of ammo – I’m thinking.

    MARV
     
  10. Marvin KNox

    Marvin KNox Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2008
    Messages:
    244
    .357 trajectory?

    Since the gun is capable of .357 magnums, I thought I’d put out a question that may be helpful someday even to those who don’t intend to carry .357’s right now.

    Some of us want to sight in with 38+p’s to save our hands as well as save some money. But we want to carry 357’s for everyday carry. If we do that, where can we expect the .357’s to hit in relationship to the +p’s that we sighted in with? If we sighted in at, say, 7 yards – would the .357’s be an inch or so higher than the sight in rounds? Is it going to be close enough in real life situations to not make a lot of difference to consider?

    Would it only make a considerable difference beyond the shorter yardages?

    Some of us may just make the last couple of rounds .357’s to enable us to get back on target easier for those 1st critical shots. Should we just forget any difference in trajectory?

    I, for one, don't find the .357's objectionable to shoot. But I might if I had to fire several boxes to get sighted in. I do find the price objectionable for a whole lot of shooting though.

    Any thoughts along these lines? etc.

    Some of you guys who are familiar with the thoughts along these lines that are held by the very large and extensive 642 thread may have some input that you gleaned over there that would help us 340 guys.

    Thanks for input on any of these questions.

    MARV
     
  11. jfh

    jfh Member

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2003
    Messages:
    4,868
    Location:
    Maple Plain, MN
    some answers for you guys:

    yakkingallover:

    1. for self-defense rounds, I suggest you try the Gold Dot 135-gr. 38+P Short Barrel load first. If that's too strong until you get your hand conditioned, try the FC 38 (NOT +P) 110-gr. PD load.

    2. For practice, at first, or for friends to try this gun, I would recommend the typical 38 Special 148-gr. DEWC round--the "softball load."

    Unless you are a very experienced shooter with a well-conditioned hand, do not shoot 357 gr. high-velocity loads.


    MarvinKnox:

    from #533--re tritium sight. I would determine what sight picture puts your preferred carry ammo under the dot. For example, if you've elected to carry the GDSB 135-gr. 38+P load, shoot the round the way you normally do--then, adjust your sight picture if you need to. FWIW, I use the front sight for a flash-sight-picture only.

    for the CT laser grip: I tweak the laser settings to that my carry ammo is dot-on at 15 yards, regardless of how I shoot with the front sight. There is no need for "continuity"--whichever sight you use has to maximize your defensive response.

    As for the best way to use the sights: Use either one--front or laser--to develop proficiency at a quad five. Do NOT worry about "aiming," get the 5-shot group to be in a five-inch diameter. Once you can get the group in five inches in five seconds, then 'concentrate harder' (again, using either sight) to get the group smaller.

    If you find ingrained marksmanship habits are forcing you to take longer to develop a sight picture, get some personal instruction to help you break these habits. With a 340, you're developing personal defense handgun skills. Any shot further than ten to fifteen yards is probably irrelevant. In fact, state law may almost demand that "fight or flight" decision if the conflict distance is greater than fifteen to twenty-five yards.

    from 534--I found the Speer 38+P 135-gr. was nominally "spot on" at 10-15 yards. S&W 38 Special front sights have typically been regulated to shoot to POA with standard 158-gr. load (appr. 755 fps) at 25 yards; I think that is true of the 2" j-frames as well. Regardless of the factory defaults, Speer tweaks the powder recipe to provide that--and it can vary from ammo lot to lot, I have found, but not really more than an inch.

    External ballistics are not going to play any sort of meaningful differences at ranges under 25 yards--see the "details" pages here for more information about, for example, the GDSB 38+P 135-gr and the GDSB 357 Magnum 135-gr. rounds.

    Generally speaking, higher-velocity rounds will print lower, and heavier-weight rounds will print higher--but strictly speaking, velocity POI is a relative relationship for two rounds with the same bullet weight, and any correlation between POI for different bullet weights is determined by real-world tests by individuals.

    so, from 535--If your hand conditioning is sufficient to keep the same control with the GDSB 357 135-gr. round as the 38+P 135-gr. round, the 357 shot should be lower. In the real world, I have found that the "muscle memory" I have impacts that actual experience. If I'm "used to" shooting the 38+P round, the 357 round prints higher if it's the next few shots, even though it runs about 100 fps faster.

    So yes, I would forget the ballistic differences for the time being. And, I would not worry about more esoteric variations on ammo selection and longer-distance defensive scenarios.

    Jim H.
     
    Last edited: Apr 13, 2008
  12. FranklyTodd

    FranklyTodd Member

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2007
    Messages:
    516
    Please let us know how that works out for you. It's kind of an unusual stance, I'd love to hear more why you think this is a smart choice...

    Yes, you can shoot WWB 38 through the gun, it works just fine. I haven't used WWB 357s, but I'm willing to bet they work fine, too.
     
  13. FranklyTodd

    FranklyTodd Member

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2007
    Messages:
    516
    M&P v. Ruger LCP + Sighting Thoughts

    I ordered an LCP, really kind of just for kicks, but thinking that in SOME situations it would be easier to carry than the M&P.

    It came in yesterday, and it doesn't carry better at all. If you lay them next to each other (sorry, no pics), the LCP looks much smaller, and it's obviously way thinner. However, at least in yesterday's jeans in a dirt cheap Uncle Mike pocket holster, it printed with very defined edges that screamed "gun." It was noticably lighter, but so what, it's not like the M&P is heavy.

    A j-frame is all bumpy and rounded, and while it doesn't disappear, at least to me it's WAY less obvious it's a gun.

    Anyway, I'm not complaining, I just wanted to reassure you guys that the M&P is absolutely the way to go for pocket carry!

    SIGHTING
    To Marvin and jfh: I'm speechless with respect to the detailed questions, and the detailed responses. In my opinion, Marvin is WAY overthinking things, and jfh is a saint for patiently responding. The "dot" only fits the groove one way left and right, as for up and down, try it out and make adjustments.

    As for the laser, I adjust it to the fixed sight point of aim at as far away as possible. If you make the laser "dead on" at close range, the trajectories of the laser and the bullet will make an X because the laser is to the right of the bore axis, and you will therefore shoot way right at farther distances. As for left & right, my ideal would be for the POI to be approx. 1/2" left of the laser dot, so the trajectories are parallel, and the 1/2" error will be consistent at any distance.

    In practice, aligning the laser to the sights at long distances results in very tight groups up to 10 yards. I'm perfectly happy with that. Trying to refine it closer is a waste of time, IMHO. If you need to shoot the nuts off a mosquito, get a longer barrelled gun!

    In another practice many would disapprove of, I take the CT grips off for every cleaning (as recommended in the CT manual). So far they've been dead on when re-installed. I check them in literally 5 seconds by again lining the red dot up with the iron sights as far away as possible (probably 60 feet if I'm in my basement).
     
  14. DAdams

    DAdams Member

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2007
    Messages:
    3,081
    Location:
    East Tennessee
    minutia

    Thanks jfh for your input.

    Although analysis paralysis can happen, if it weren't for the minutia, what would there be to discuss? Thoughtful questions are the life blood of THR. :scrutiny:

    Frankly Todd.

    Nice to know
    I haven't had that same experience with my Seecamp .380 in a Desantis Nemesis. That said I usually carry the 340 unless I am really looking for something discrete then it is the Seecamp.
     
  15. Marvin KNox

    Marvin KNox Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2008
    Messages:
    244
    Speechless Todd

    Frankly Todd,

    While I also appreciate the detailed opinions of jfh - I wont offer an opinion on his sainthood status. I will say that his is exactly the kind of input I had hoped for when I posted.

    Thanks a lot, jfh, for the link to the “short barrel” performance from Smith and Wesson. My son and his friend who have chosen 45’s, 40’s, as opposed to my choice of 38’s and 357’s, will find the comparisons interesting as well.

    Actually, contrary to “over thinking” the problem, what I am trying to do is to “under think” the problem. There are many variables that I could go through on my own over the next few months. I’d rather not have to.

    There are, for example, many different ways to accomplish a sight picture with pistols. For purely target work the most common is the 6 o’clock hold, putting the entire bull’s-eye above the front sight. Many, if not most, self-defense oriented instructors recommend putting the front sight “post” in the center of the bull’s eye rather than in the 6 o'clock position. They feel that that is more oriented toward instinctive aiming concerning the center of mass on a human target.

    We, on the other hand, have a large white “dot” for our front sight rather than a square post. I have heard instructors recommend putting that dot in the bottom of the groove and putting that “center mass” area of the target above it - which puts center mass right in between the top of the rear sight.

    Jfh has offered an opinion that the center dot is better used to “cover” the area of desired hits. If this is the majority opinion of seasoned shooters here in the forum, I will probably use that method. It makes a lot of sense especially with quick “point and shoot” type situations as opposed to taking time to get a complete sight picture and “squeeze” off the rounds as I have done in the past.

    As I see from your post – there are also differing opinions as to the positioning of the laser point in relationship to the metal sights. That is as I suspected. Your point about crossing the trajectory with the laser path at longer distances than the very short distance that I may have chosen to sight in at is particularly welcome.

    I’m trying to get as much input as I can before building lifelong “muscle” and “sight” memory into my methods. I’ve done some target work in the past, particularly with rifles. But contemplating the shooting of bad guys under stress is rather new to me.

    My questions concerning ammo performance are for the same reasons the questions concerning sight pictures. Crimson Trace, for instance, says to use 50’ to sight in the red dot and forget about trajectory for the most part. That may or may not be oriented more toward handguns with flatter trajectories than can be expected from our lowered velocity .38 rounds. I’m admitedly not enough of an expert to understand how these things work.

    I’m just trying to save a little ammo and create the best all around method for training on a gun that I may well trust my life to in the future (unlike the several target pistols I have owned in the past).

    I continue to welcome any other input I can receive. I’ll bet I’m not alone in my needs.

    MARV
     
  16. FranklyTodd

    FranklyTodd Member

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2007
    Messages:
    516
    I apologize

    Fair enough, and I'm sorry if I sounded like a wet blanket - I admit I'm the furthest thing from an expert - I've never target shot so much as a bb gun - all my training (weapons or not) has been for ugly SD - no sport fighting or shooting for me. :barf:

    I fully admit I don't understand the wide variety of "sight pictures" available to choose from on a snub-nosed revolver without adjustable sights (or any fixed-sight handgun). With no adjustment, it's going to hit where it's going to hit - your sight picture needs to adjust to the gun, doesn't it? You don't get to "pick" which picture you like, do you? :confused:

    In my simple mind, if I put the dot at the bottom of the target, that's where I'll hit... :) For SD shooting with the 340, I find the rear notch totally useless. I "target shoot" slow and easy for a few shots, then try to replicate that by instinct without seeing the rear notch. I put the dot where I want to hit and pull the trigger. If it ain't working out, I go back to slow and easy.

    If you guys get jazzed over that detailed a discussion on ballistic drop, how bullet weight affects POI, etc., I genuinely support you guys. For me, I have to candidly admit I didn't get all the way through jfh's post. :uhoh: Before I zoned, I agreed with everything he said. ;)

    I have to confess I don't care much about guns as a hobby or sport, or ballistics at all, beyond the basics of what's "effective" and what's "pathetic." I'm a pure SD guy, and there are probably 1,000 things I think take precedence over the minutia of the last several posts, in terms of contributing to one's safety. Again, I'm not trying to be a jerk, I just wanted to throw out a different perspective. :scrutiny:

    I promise to stay out of it - I swear I wouldn't have responded at all if I hadn't already been posting how much better the M&P340 is compared to an LCP! :D:D:D

    As DAdams correctly pointed out, your discussion is precisely what THR is for. I've been trying to stay away from the time-suck that is THR, but still subscribe to this thread...
     
  17. Marvin KNox

    Marvin KNox Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2008
    Messages:
    244
    340 goes to church

    I carried the 340 in several church services today in a Defender belly-band.

    I’ve tried it in the appendix position before because I felt that I wanted to keep it up front to keep an eye on things – being new to this. I didn’t like the way it poked me when I sat down for a long time and had to cross and uncross my legs several times as is my habit. It also tended to ride up higher over time with all the sitting and standing.

    Today I put it at the 3 o’clock position with my belt over the handle and above the level of the cylinder. The belt kept it from riding up even though I put the band on a little loose for comfort. The belt held the handle in tight and it was very concealed under the suit jacket.

    All considered, it was a good day of carry. I quickly got comfortable with it even though I’m pretty new to concealed carry.
     
  18. jfh

    jfh Member

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2003
    Messages:
    4,868
    Location:
    Maple Plain, MN
    well, the last few posts have given us

    a chance to elaborate a bit of the kind of subjects that make up a Cumulative Record for the M&P 340. (As a minor digression--I like the information in this thread, so much more than the 642 thread, simply because even the social interchanges are focussed on the firearm and its use rather than on the club metaphor that drives the 642 thread.) FWIW, I am no saint--basically, not even a believer any more. What I am, however, is a shooting enthusiast somewhat obsessively-compulsively driven by the accumulation of skills and knowledge that head towards a specific goal. I'm also a (former) HS English Teacher, and stuck with the perspective of imparting that knowledge to others--whether or not they want to hear it.

    Like Marvin, I come from a marksmanship background--at least as a child, when my father and cousin started to teach me target shooting when I was five. That was my orientation when I started shooting handguns--but I soon got interested in IPSC-type club competition with 1911s--and then, with the light-bulb awareness of shooting skills for my personal / family defense. So, at any rate, the Virginia Tech incident was a stunning moment for me, and I resolved to again get a carry permit, and to never allow myself to be an unwilling victim.

    Enough background: you can gather the value of the above as you wish, but I'm certain all of us--no matter what background or current interest--recognize the value in learning to use the M&P 340 well.

    As for the more immediate topics in this thread:

    MarvinKnox: The mindset for combat shooting, and the civilian carry-er's subset of personal defense is really unlike marksmanship shooting. I suggest you get a book from Jeff Cooper and start reading it. He is arguably the father of modern pistolcraft, and literate as well. I would also suggest reading Masad (sp?) Ayoob's books, particularly In the Gravest Extreme. He has moved 'legal knowledge'' into the civilian's realm over the last twenty years or so, and provides us both with appropriate insight into the criminal system and the observations of a shooting enthusiast.

    As for specific training formats, I will have to rely on other posters to offer specific literature or programs. I built my own last year, focussed around simply gaining the most fundamental acclimation to a lightweight j-frame. I went on the supposition that I needed to practice a lot--a whole lot--and that rekindled my interest in reloading.

    I'll close this post by noting that the mentalistic approach to marksmanship shooting you and I both learned has to be counter-conditioned away. I approached that counter-conditioning by choosing a PD factory round and then setting a goal I found here to reach--the quad five (thank you, Old Fuff). The training technique I used to do that is simply an ed-psy principle for "successive approximations" and I apply it to both mind and body considerations.

    I spent a chunk of the afternoon shooting my 442 and sighting it in, based on what Frankly Todd pointed out. I also shot my M60-3" and sighted that in. Both now hit to POA at 15 yards--the limit I can work at on an indoor range because of aging eyes. I shot about 225 rounds--150 from the 442, and 75 from the M60--in both 38 Spl+P and 357 Magnum 'light loads--rounds that, in both cases replicate the Speer 38+P 135-gr. factory round. Then, I compared those sight-ins to two versions of the "FBI loads." FWIW, those rounds cost me about 10-11 cents each.

    In the past 10 months, I've now shot about 12000 rounds or so from four different j-frames--about 10,000 from the 640, 1000 from the 340, perhaps 500 each from the M60 and 442. Quad fives are easy to do now--and repeat indefinitely.

    If you're interested in the "Replica Reloads" idea and the related training emphasizing "successive approximations", we've discussed it recently (and other times) over in the Reloeading Forum in this thread.

    Jim H.
     
  19. DAdams

    DAdams Member

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2007
    Messages:
    3,081
    Location:
    East Tennessee
    Frankly

    FranklyTodd....

    We appreciate all perspective and yours is always respected. Viva La Difference!

    I wish I had the time to devote to the art, craft and science of ballistics, loading and shooting. For now I am in the camp of CC for PD.

    Amen to that.

    One of these days....I bought the loader and can't wait to live in an area that has a climate where perepetual summer does not exist (fishing and boating consumes my time, as does turning the wheel of commerce) and where winters will allow some basement recreating loading replicas.

    Thanks to all who (keep and) maintain this as a high quality and informative thread.

    :D Not that that's a bad thing. I have wasted better time on worse.
     
  20. Marvin KNox

    Marvin KNox Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2008
    Messages:
    244
    practice ammo

    Jim,

    Thanks again for your interest.

    You said, “If you're interested in the "Replica Reloads" idea and the related training emphasizing "successive approximations", we've discussed it recently (and other times) over in the Reloading Forum in this thread.”

    I am interested in reloading. But reloading will have to wait a while. I just got 1000 rds. Of American Eagle 130gr. FMJ ammo. That’d probably last you for a week-end. But for me - I’ll probably be shooting it for a while now. They wont be “replica” loads for the Speer short-barrels.
    http://www.federalcartridge.com/ballistics/Ammo_Search.aspx?act=choose&firearm=2&s1=1
    But they’ll have to do for practice for a while.

    I found it interesting that, based on the ballistics and trajectory material from Speer, these practice rounds seem to have about the same rise and fall as my carry rounds over the ranges I’ll be shooting. I’m sure the recoil will be different – but the point of aim should be about the same and that’s what matters most for practice.

    MARV
     
  21. Marvin KNox

    Marvin KNox Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2008
    Messages:
    244
    A trajectory promlem

    Jim – or anyone interested,
    I realize that, for SD, I’ll practice in a different manner than I would be for “target” practice. But I still need to set the gun and laser up properly and that means sighting in.

    Here’s a bit of a brainteaser concerning trajectory. I’m sure I can come up with the answers down at the range – but picking you guy’s brains is cheaper.

    The ballistics charts from Speer show my bullet ending up about an inch low at point blank when sighting in dead on at 25 yards. No big deal – obviously within the range of SD shooting in an emergency. (25 yards seems a bit far for the purposes of the gun and I do believe that a closer sight in would be more appropriate and would cut down the differences even more than the 1” shown on their charts.)

    The Crimson Trace people recommend (and factory install) the laser to be at point of impact at 50 feet. They acknowledge that that will put the laser point about an inch low and slightly to the right of center bore at point blank range because of the location of the laser on the grip.

    My way of thinking tells me that the laser point may be an inch low of “center bore” at point blank range – but it would be approximately dead on the path of the bullet itself. In other words, my bullet impact should end up around the same point as the laser dot whether at point blank or at 50 feet – assuming about a 25 yard factory sight in for the gun and a 50 foot sight in for the laser by me and Crimson Trace.

    Correct? I hate to be an over thinker, but it would be nice to know before spending a great deal of ammo to find out – especially considering the variability of my marksmanship with a 2” barreled gun thrown into the mix. (Besides, I like to think about such things.)

    I'll be finding out at the range anyway whether we get the answer here or not.

    Thanks!
    MARV
     
  22. colt1903

    colt1903 Member

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2007
    Messages:
    184
    Location:
    Minneapolis Area
    I have recently been shooting Speer's Short Barrel .357 Magnum 135 grain Gold Dot Hollow Point with good results. It is milder than most .357's which helps with accuracy.
    054-Copy.gif
     
  23. Dan-O

    Dan-O Member

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2007
    Messages:
    781
    Location:
    Kansas City
    colt1903,

    it seems we have twin guns. I just put the clipdraw on the gun the other day. Sure makes toting it on walks pretty sweet.

    100_2653.gif

    100_2656.gif
     
  24. AStone

    AStone Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2005
    Messages:
    24,176
    Location:
    Far N, E coast
    Please pass the potato chips.

    Thanks. <crunchy sounds>

    Now, what's all this pontification about M&P340? :scrutiny:
     
  25. DAdams

    DAdams Member

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2007
    Messages:
    3,081
    Location:
    East Tennessee
    Shhh

    We are just getting to the good part.

    Marv-

    Without a bench and rest that could lock down the 340 with CT I don't know how you will ever know the answer to your question with any certainty. Repeatability will be difficult at best offhand. When I am using a CT at 25 feet the laser is moving around so much that at any given round release I might be off and inch or two from POA, yet still within COM zone. Have you purchased a bore sight laser? That would probably be the best means of resolving your question comparing the CT with the bore laser.

    Colt-
    Nice shooting. Wish I could find enough SGDSB .357 to burn at the range.
    Have you tried any BB for comparison?

    Buffalo Bore Tactical Short Barrel, Low Flash, Reduced Recoil 357 Magnum

    Item No. 19E/20 158gr. Speer Uni-core, (Gold Dot) hollow cavity, bullet @ 1,100fps from a 2.5 inch barrel. It is designed to mushroom, yet hold together and penetrate deeply—roughly 13 to 15 inches in human tissue.

    "Typical full power 357 magnum loads offer several tactical problems for use in self defense and duty applications, especially when used in the shorter/lighter revolvers that are typical of concealed, defensive and duty carry. First, the muzzle flash can be blinding, especially from short barrels. Second, felt recoil can be a life-threatening drawback if fast follow-up shots are required. Third, the level of report can be deafening and cause permanent hearing loss, especially if fired indoors."

    "All three Buffalo Bore Tactical Short Barrel loads address the above problems and make the 357 magnum ideal for concealed, defensive and duty carry in smaller revolvers"

    "For those who wish to carry a 357 magnum revolver for potential “conflict resolution”, these new Buffalo Bore loads put an end to the “tactical” draw backs associated with our regular 357 magnum ammo. These loads are great for use in longer barreled firearms too".

    "We could have reduced the recoil, flash and blast even more by “watering down” these loads further than we did, but then you wouldn’t have a real 357 magnum in your hands. So we looked for and found a balance between very powerful, fight stopping ammo that recoils and flashes much less than ours and some other makers, full power 357 loads. If we were to “water down” this “Tactical Short Barrel” 357 ammo any more, we would simply not manufacture it and suggest that you use our 38 SPL+P ammunition."



    In a recent test of the Standard BB (non +P).
    http://www.brassfetcher.com/Buffalo Bore 158gr (non +P) SWC-HC.html
    Penetration for five rounds from a 642 were all at 14.5 inches.
    Extrapolate to plus P in a 340, then think about .357. I'm beginning to understand where the word "overkill" may have originated. Particularly when you look at some of Brassfetchers tests with "standard" .357 loads from a 2.5 inch barrel. Leaves the gel (over 16 inches) and penetrates 4 inches of backstop.

    jfh have you emulated any of this while loading?
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page