M&p 340
- Thread starter DAdams
- Start date
- Status
OP
OP
DAdams
Member
mavracer
Welcome to The Club. That's an excellent price. Do they have any more in stock?
The demand seemingly exceeds the supply these days.
Don't forget to post pics, let us know which holster you get and we really like range reports.
I think you will really like it.
Don't forget to get the free range bag from S&W once you have your receipt.
Welcome to The Club. That's an excellent price. Do they have any more in stock?
The demand seemingly exceeds the supply these days.
Don't forget to post pics, let us know which holster you get and we really like range reports.
I think you will really like it.
Don't forget to get the free range bag from S&W once you have your receipt.
AStone
Member
Yeah.
I know myself well enough to know that
I'm prob'ly gonna buy one of these eventually ...
I mean, it eats the same rnds
as the 65 & 1894C,
not to mention the .38 spl
for the 642.
I'd put a set of
full Hogue monogrips on it,
but that's just me ...
I know myself well enough to know that
I'm prob'ly gonna buy one of these eventually ...
I mean, it eats the same rnds
as the 65 & 1894C,
not to mention the .38 spl
for the 642.
I'd put a set of
full Hogue monogrips on it,
but that's just me ...
OP
OP
DAdams
Member
Nem
Nem-
Thanks for stopping by. M&P 340 with Hogue Monogrips yep. Not the one you posted in the pic. That doesn't have the stainless cylinder. Despite the fact it's a tad lighter. Also doesn't have nite sights. That's the little devil that jumps crimp with the light .357s. The M&P doesn't have "the fine print" on the barrel.
Almost the same but not the same. Also about a $100 less for the M&P.
Nem-
Thanks for stopping by. M&P 340 with Hogue Monogrips yep. Not the one you posted in the pic. That doesn't have the stainless cylinder. Despite the fact it's a tad lighter. Also doesn't have nite sights. That's the little devil that jumps crimp with the light .357s. The M&P doesn't have "the fine print" on the barrel.
Almost the same but not the same. Also about a $100 less for the M&P.
Tifosi
Member
Mine started as a 340PD but I kept on having to return it to S&W because the titanium cylinder would chip on the front side, three times I returned it and they would new cylinder on it, to the range and it would chip again. This was shooting 158Gr FMJ. The last time I had them put the cylinder on from the M&P black stainless and no problems nor due I notice the 1 oz. increase in weight. Put CT 405 on it almost two years ago, they are great.
AStone
Member
Thanks for that clarification, DA.
I wasn't paying close enough attention on the SW web site.
Not sure I fully understood the differences. Now I get it.
Here's the specs page for the M&P.
Nem
I wasn't paying close enough attention on the SW web site.
Not sure I fully understood the differences. Now I get it.
Here's the specs page for the M&P.
Nem
AStone
Member
Man, just comparing those two images - the one on SW site and DA's with full Hogues -
I like the way this revolver looks an order of magnitude (power of 10) better with those full Hogues.
Very similar to the proportions of my 642 with the same grips.
No doubt: not as concealable, but significantly more controllable,
and just better looking due to those more symmetric proportions.
And that black finish ... oh, la ...
IMO, of course.
YMMV.
Dang, I'm getting interested in one of these.
Probably a better match for my 65 than my 642
since I could shoot .38 and .357 with both and the 1894C ...
Uh, oh ...
I like the way this revolver looks an order of magnitude (power of 10) better with those full Hogues.
Very similar to the proportions of my 642 with the same grips.
No doubt: not as concealable, but significantly more controllable,
and just better looking due to those more symmetric proportions.
And that black finish ... oh, la ...
IMO, of course.
YMMV.
Dang, I'm getting interested in one of these.
Probably a better match for my 65 than my 642
since I could shoot .38 and .357 with both and the 1894C ...
Uh, oh ...
I've had a 340SC for a few years now that sits comfortably in either a Kramer pocket holster or ankle holster. I've been thinking of having some trigger work done, but I am not sure it's possible or even adviseable. Been thinking of having the trigger pull reduced to something closer to what my duty weapon is (Sig 229). I skimmed this thread and found some mention of the subject (hopefully I didn't miss anything), but was hoping for more information. Anybody do anything like this? Opinions either way?
Lightsped
Member
Ok, without going through and reading the whole thread, can someone tell me what the difference(s) is between a 340PD, Scandium 340, and a MP340? Also, what are some good places to get a MP340 and what kind of price is to be expected? I am interested in the regular MP340, not the CT version.
Thanks
Thanks
The 340PD has the scandium frame and the Titanium cylinder and weighs in at a little over 11oz. The 340MP has a scandium frame a steel cylinder and weighs in at a little over 13 oz. You can fire no less than a 120 gr bullets in the 340pd; it says so right on the barrel. Both 340s have scandium frames so I guess a 340sc is probably just a pd or an mp.
OP
OP
DAdams
Member
Tejano
hit most of the major points. In my mind the big difference is:
Tritium night sights with the big dot in the ramp. I find this a better sight acquisition system day or night compared to the blade or light pipe.
Stainless steel cylinder, with no grain limitation on the .357 load.
The M&P 340 is 1.3 oz heavier than the PD which provides a bit more mass to absorb recoil yet 1.7 ounces lighter than a X42 (15 oz) which is nice for pocket carry. No funky Atomic Energy Commission Logo on the starboard side. In fact the PD looks like a billboard on the right side.
340PD MSRP $988
M&P 340 845
$$143 less for what I consider a superior revolver. That $ delta will hold up in the real world too.
http://www.knightshooting.com/
These guys have two in stock I just called them. No CTs.
I think they had $799 on them. They will do a transfer to an out of state FFL.
hit most of the major points. In my mind the big difference is:
Tritium night sights with the big dot in the ramp. I find this a better sight acquisition system day or night compared to the blade or light pipe.
Stainless steel cylinder, with no grain limitation on the .357 load.
The M&P 340 is 1.3 oz heavier than the PD which provides a bit more mass to absorb recoil yet 1.7 ounces lighter than a X42 (15 oz) which is nice for pocket carry. No funky Atomic Energy Commission Logo on the starboard side. In fact the PD looks like a billboard on the right side.
340PD MSRP $988
M&P 340 845
$$143 less for what I consider a superior revolver. That $ delta will hold up in the real world too.
http://www.knightshooting.com/
These guys have two in stock I just called them. No CTs.
I think they had $799 on them. They will do a transfer to an out of state FFL.
Tifosi
Member
Thanks, Tifosi. I think the 340 looks better all black. May I ask approximately how many rds you have fired?
On another note, 640 cylinders are plentiful and easy to get as opposed to an M&P cylinder. Does anyone know how difficult it would be for me to fit a new SS cylinder into my 340? Or would this be something better left for a gunsmith?
On another note, 640 cylinders are plentiful and easy to get as opposed to an M&P cylinder. Does anyone know how difficult it would be for me to fit a new SS cylinder into my 340? Or would this be something better left for a gunsmith?
Tifosi
Member
Tejano,
I fired approx. 700 rounds through it, 300 with the titanium cylinders (3 of them) and 400 since. Mine was a warranty issue so it cost me nothing and the SS cylinder was their suggestion. S&W was prompt each time it took a week from when I sent it till I had it back.
I fired approx. 700 rounds through it, 300 with the titanium cylinders (3 of them) and 400 since. Mine was a warranty issue so it cost me nothing and the SS cylinder was their suggestion. S&W was prompt each time it took a week from when I sent it till I had it back.
Some Advice, Please
Thanks for all the great info on this gun. I am about to buy one and I have a question. The salesman at my gunshop said that it is not a good idea to buy a .357mag and then shoot tons of .38 ammo through it. He said that it is hard on the gun. He said, of course, that you can do it... But if you think that .357 ammo will be too much recoil for you, then don't buy the .357, and instead buy the .38 model. I like the idea of being able to use both, but don't want to damage the gun. Any feedback will be helpful. Thanks.
Thanks for all the great info on this gun. I am about to buy one and I have a question. The salesman at my gunshop said that it is not a good idea to buy a .357mag and then shoot tons of .38 ammo through it. He said that it is hard on the gun. He said, of course, that you can do it... But if you think that .357 ammo will be too much recoil for you, then don't buy the .357, and instead buy the .38 model. I like the idea of being able to use both, but don't want to damage the gun. Any feedback will be helpful. Thanks.
the only problem you'll have is if you shoot a lot of 38s through it there will be a fouling ring in the chambers.it could pose a problem if it would get bad enough that the .357 were hard to seat all the way in the chambers,it may even cause a pressure spike.the good news is if you keep it clean its not ever a problem.I get around it by reloading. I use light loads in .357 cases.
OP
OP
DAdams
Member
Perhaps tons is the operative word. I have never heard such a proposition put forth, but hey I'm relatively new to the sport.
Guess I could get S&W to replace the cylinder 5000 rounds from now.
I would like to get a definition of "tons"?
Perhaps I will post this over on the S&W site and see what comes of it.
Brassman
Member
Shooting a couple of thousand rounds of .38 through a .357 will cause the powder ring and cause the .357 round to not go into the chambers as easily as they should, but I have never heard of .38 rounds damaging cylinders beyond that! A little Hoppes, or your chosen solvent, and some brushing should return the cylinders to their original state, though. I have put many thousands of .38 rounds through all of my .357's (I have 3 of them) and all I've ever had to do is clean them up to return them to normal operational condition.
OP
OP
DAdams
Member
Brassman
Where do these people come up with this stuff. Now if he would have just caveated the rest of the story. We wouldn't be wasting bandwidth on this hooey.
Another Urban Legend debunked....thanks Brassman.
Where do these people come up with this stuff. Now if he would have just caveated the rest of the story.
We wouldn't be wasting bandwidth on this hooey.
jfh
Member.
some chrono results:
I finally got a chrono running to test the Speer 38+P 'replica loads' reloading project I've been working on. While most of that testing so far has been with a 640, I finally put five of the Speer factory 38+P-135gr loads under the chronograph with my M&P 340.
Results for four rounds: (I missing setting the chrono for the first shot.)
Average of 911 fps, with an ES of 8.7 and SD of 3.8
Since Speer specs this at about 860 from a nominal 2" barrel, I'm more than satisfied. Accuracy was excellent: using the CT-405 sights from a benchrest, I had a group about 3/8"w x 1/2" tall at 15 yards. I have NOT checked POA with the 'regular' sights simply because my eyes fail to help me get good groups with them.
of the Speer reload recipes in 38+P for this bullet, the one that "feels best" is AA#5--and that averaged 851 out of the 640. Of those Speer recipes, it looks like Power Pistol is the one most like to hit factory velocities--and that is also the one that feels "least like" the factory round in perceived recoil. It has a much sharper impulse to the recoil.
Jim H.
I finally got a chrono running to test the Speer 38+P 'replica loads' reloading project I've been working on. While most of that testing so far has been with a 640, I finally put five of the Speer factory 38+P-135gr loads under the chronograph with my M&P 340.
Results for four rounds: (I missing setting the chrono for the first shot.)
Average of 911 fps, with an ES of 8.7 and SD of 3.8
Since Speer specs this at about 860 from a nominal 2" barrel, I'm more than satisfied. Accuracy was excellent: using the CT-405 sights from a benchrest, I had a group about 3/8"w x 1/2" tall at 15 yards. I have NOT checked POA with the 'regular' sights simply because my eyes fail to help me get good groups with them.
of the Speer reload recipes in 38+P for this bullet, the one that "feels best" is AA#5--and that averaged 851 out of the 640. Of those Speer recipes, it looks like Power Pistol is the one most like to hit factory velocities--and that is also the one that feels "least like" the factory round in perceived recoil. It has a much sharper impulse to the recoil.
Jim H.
Last edited:
OP
OP
DAdams
Member
jfh
Those are excellent results. I would be thrilled with that velocity and accuracy with a reload. Is that considered a "low flash" powder like the Buffalo Bore. Maybe that promotional aspect is just hype. Do you think you know what they use for their load? How do your results stack up against BB?
Thanks for the information.
Those are excellent results. I would be thrilled with that velocity and accuracy with a reload. Is that considered a "low flash" powder like the Buffalo Bore. Maybe that promotional aspect is just hype. Do you think you know what they use for their load? How do your results stack up against BB?
Thanks for the information.
jfh
Member.
Just to be clear, DAdams, the stats in bold are from the factory load. The one reload that I am most enamored with, using AA#5 powder, averaged 851 fps in the 640--which is close enough to the 860 fps Speer would like to see with this bullet for effective expansion. Speer says that the Power Pistol recipe will duplicate the factory velocities--we shall see.
While these first tests are hardly conclusive, it does appear that the 340 might be 20 or 30 fps faster than the 640. The factory round averaged 880+ from the 640, but with a great ES and SD.
The reloads--mostly shot out of the 640, typically show the same kind of grouping the factory rounds do, albeit at different POAs. The load that hasn't been tested on the chrono yet that I am most curious about is the V.N350 load--that one is similar to the 340 results, and also to the same POA.
These short-barreled j-frames are capable of excellent accuracy if the shooter is up to it.
Various rounds were chrono'd just prior to dusk--and the only powder producing much flash was Power Pistol. However, I am not up on those issues yet, really.
The bottom line is, with the reloads I can spend 23 cents a shot if I use the Speer GDSB135JHP bullet, and about 11 cents a shot if I use a 140-gr. LTC bullet. That's a good savings that can be put to more practice.
Jim H.
While these first tests are hardly conclusive, it does appear that the 340 might be 20 or 30 fps faster than the 640. The factory round averaged 880+ from the 640, but with a great ES and SD.
The reloads--mostly shot out of the 640, typically show the same kind of grouping the factory rounds do, albeit at different POAs. The load that hasn't been tested on the chrono yet that I am most curious about is the V.N350 load--that one is similar to the 340 results, and also to the same POA.
These short-barreled j-frames are capable of excellent accuracy if the shooter is up to it.
Various rounds were chrono'd just prior to dusk--and the only powder producing much flash was Power Pistol. However, I am not up on those issues yet, really.
The bottom line is, with the reloads I can spend 23 cents a shot if I use the Speer GDSB135JHP bullet, and about 11 cents a shot if I use a 140-gr. LTC bullet. That's a good savings that can be put to more practice.
Jim H.
- Status
