M&p 340

Status
Not open for further replies.
Long time looker, first time poster here... Been checking out this thread and had to get a M&P 340 so I could retire out my 442 that has been carried every day for many years. Placed the order today through Buds. My CT grips will come off the 442 and on the 340. Looking forward to getting it.

Will S&W do a action job on it? My 442 was a little hard for the wife to shoot accurately due to the heavy trigger. If not S&W, then recommendations are welcome.

Cheers!
 
340 vs 360

I keep wavering back and forth. I've never been a fan of not having an option of a single action shot should I want to make one. Plus the 340 is a little funny looking to me ;)

I get the idea of not wanting the hammer to snag during a draw, but how often does that really happen? I've never had that happen with my 1911. How often does it happen if you draw with your thumb over the hammer? Of course, once at the wrong time is once too many. And I suppose if you have the time and presence of mind to be cocking the hammer, you could probably be using the same amount of time to stage a double action trigger pull.
 
I suspect that many of us carry-ers of j-frames reached their decision for a DAO revolver simply because they were primarily interested in a front pocket carry. I know I did--and I certainly didn't want to even think about the possibility of an hindrance to my draw.

Overall then, I limited my issues for consideration. The circumstances under which I would even need to worry about single action shooting are really limited now by the conventional wisdom of self-defense shooting. That is, by shooting at distances beyond, say, ten yards (distances at which a SA trigger would be advantageous), shooters see a possible liability--i.e., they could have avoided the confrontation. With training, I've been able to shoot a 340 DAO as accurately as I did my semiauto carry guns.

So, I started my current carry usage with a DAO revolver. Nonetheless, I had the same curiosity you did--so I bought a 360 and carried it for six months. At the end of that time, I found I preferred the DAO 340. And, incidentally, although I can stage a j-frame trigger--and I have a 640 with 20,000 rounds on it that has a trigger to die for--I simply practice with full-stroke shooting. In my thinking, I have no need to stage a trigger in a good shoot.

The reason for this preference for me is simply the issues of growing older. I want less and less extraneous issues to consider--issues such as keeping a hammer covered--if and when I need to draw. YMMV.

Jim H.
 
Last edited:
So I guess the answer there is to practice enough with the 340 to become proficient with the DAO trigger, and remember that we have other guns to use as 'range toys'. This guy is all business.
 
Yes, practice is the answer, along with hand conditioning if you need it. Practice can cost a lot of money, I guess--but I reload. Interspersed in posts in this thread (and in the 442 thread) are comments from some of us about "replica reloads" for popular carry ammo--the Speer GDSB 135-gr loads, or the Rem 38S12 / "FBI 800" LSWC-HP rounds. The cost of those rounds (about 12-13 cents, with case amortization) makes more practice affordable.

For me, the basic practice paradigm is Old Fuff's "quad five"--five shots, five inch group, five yards, five seconds. It's a good place to start, I think.

Jim H.
 
Welcome

Thanks for joining the fray avball and Morpheus.

I have three j frames two DAO I prefer the double action, action.
When I get the urge to SA I take my 686 to the range. After a few rounds I put it away. Not as much challenge as continuing the mastery of the J frame DAO snubs which are much more challenging and rewarding. The DAO grows on you due to it's operator simplicity and clean lines. Great pocket tool in the front pocket Mika round cut Holster.

Not surprising then that all my semi autos are DAO.

Indeed the Old Fuff fives drill is a good exercise and I use my grip developer nightly and when driving.

JFH good to see you around!
 
Last edited:
I pick up the 340 tomorrow. Leaning toward the Corbons but the Buffalo Bore stuff looks good as well.

With the rebate, the purchase was a no brainer with the OTD price of $608 at Buds (the police webpage). My 442 was a faithful companion but the 340 makes sense; .357 option, lighter weight, and better sight did it for me.

FYI... I carried the 442 in a Pocket-Roo and liked it so I will have the 340 ride there as well http://www.tuffproducts.com/product.php?productid=16252&cat=268&page=1

Hopefully will put some lead down range after picking her up.
 
I've been using Critical Defense. Most of us rule out .357 for daily carry, but you are dead on about the other features such as sights. Congrats!
 
be real Leary of using any after market springs for a CCW
don't get me wrong... Wilson makes quality products and if you understand what changes springs bring and are willing to spend the $$$ on self defensive ammo to verify reliability... then go for it.

here's a detailed tear down of a S&W revolver I did on Oklahoma Shooters Forum (OSA) that will help if you decide to proceed.

my first thread that made sticky status..
http://www.okshooters.com/forums/showthread.php?t=98175
 
I love the buffalo bore stuff..

Also...about these little J-Frames not being range toys....am I the only one that enjoys running 50-100 +p rounds through one of these lovelies in a single range session?
 
Just picked up the M&P 340. Didn't get to shoot it :(
I probably won't do the spring kit. The trigger pull is slightly better than my 442 which had a bunch of dry fires.

Fit and finish is great! Pulled the CT grips off the 442 and put them on the 340.

Looking at the envelope the expended case is in, indicates a date of 9-7-10 so she is not too old.

Hopefully make it to the range tomorrow.
 
The range session went very well. I am extremely happy with the way it shot. Groups were better than expected. The .357 shot better than the crappy .38's that I had. Maybe I was just used to shooting the 442 as recoil was no biggie. My buddy who has little range time with a revolver did not care for it. I have a lot of time behind a wheel gun and like them better than a semi-auto. That XS front sight is sweet.
 
Morpheus

That XS front sight is sweet
Click to expand...

Isn't it.

Glad your first range session went well. As you say, being experienced with lightweight snubs ie. X42 the 340 doesn't deliver any big surprises...
 
All this recent posting activity makes me itch to shoot! Things have been crazy with work and kids - I confess I haven't hit the range in months. Please no lectures, I know how important practice is... However, the simplicity of a 340 with CT gives me comfort I could still use the thing in a stressful situation...

Safe shooting to all (including me soon!),
FT
 
Last edited:
I'm stuck between the 442 and the M&P340...

Are the differences:

442 aluminum frame vs the M&P340 with a Sc/Ti
Front ramp vs. tritium Big Dot
.38+p rated vs. .357 rated
$384 vs. $607

Either gun would exclusively shoot .38+p. Is the 442 going to break on me or can I save the $223 with confidence?
 
Welcome to THR, dbjd.

The 442 will not break on you. They have excellent track records, and SW stands behind them without fail.

If you are going to shoot .38 spl exclusively, 442 is just as good, imo.

My good friend DA may say otherwise.
 
What Nematocyst says is correct. For serviceability, the 442 will shoot the rounds just as well as the M&P 340. (FWIW, I've owned both, and carried and shot them both.)

If you adjust the pricing by including the aftermarket installation of a tritium front sight (and thereby making them similar in features), the cost difference is probably about $150.00. The devil is in the details, IMO--that is, the two firearms really have their own marketing niches.

There is no denying the Scandium frame has superior strength--and, arguably, longevity. In their carry guns, S&W has generally marketed this product into the 357-upgrade niche, thus tying this strength to the 357 Magnum cartridge. It also is of benefit for 38 Special-only shooting, I think. Similary, the DMC finish on the scandium frame is vastly superior to the clearcoat process on the aluminum / Airweight-spec guns. Finally, the QC on the scandium-framed guns appears to be noticeably higher. Fit and finish is simply better done.

If those factors matter to you, then the additional cost of the M&P 340 may not be a factor to you. I never worried about the (potential) reliability of my 442 when I was carrying it. I prefer owning the M&P 340, and the gun now has 2500 rounds or so through it.

Jim H.
 
Jim's essay is eloquent, and I'll easily defer to his knowledge on this issue.

He's making an excellent point, too, about quality. Admittedly, if I was swimming in money, with $ to burn, I'd go with the MP 340 (or some other similar high end SW revolver airweight in .38 spl +p; I have little desire or need for .357 mag in an airweight).

But I'm not swimming in $, so the x42 works fine for me. I don't shoot that often, and my 642 has operated smoothly and flawlessly.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

T
  • Locked
What exactly is "M&P" with regard to revolvers?
Replies
2
Views
512
TexasShooter59
T
D
  • Locked
340 vs. 340PD
Replies
10
Views
3K
DAdams
DAdams
A
  • Locked
M&p 340
Replies
8
Views
949
DAdams
DAdams
DAdams
  • Locked
M&P 340/360
Replies
0
Views
628
DAdams
DAdams
G
  • Locked
Front Sight: XS Standard Dot vs. XS Big Dot
Replies
7
Views
5K
gb6491
G
Back
Top