Wanting a Airweight .357 J Frame

[FLA2760]

I am wanting an AirLite scandium or titanium J frame .357. What Smith models do I need to avoid due to problems? I have heard that some lock up with bullets that are too light and some have forcing cone issues. I am thinking of a a 340PD or something similar. Thanks for your replies

 

[jfh]

The M&P 340 is the one you want.

Start reading the M&P340 link--you'll get the information you need.

Here:

Jim H.

 

[TimM]

It hurts my hand just thinking about it!

 

[roscoe]

Yeah - you can have it!

 

[Vonderek]

Plenty of used ones on gun store shelves...nearly new with less than a full cylinder fired through.

 

[ArchAngelCD]

FLA2760,
The 12 oz. J frame Magnum is a Aitlite whereas the 15 oz. .38 Special +P is the Airweight. I'm not being a wise guy so please don't take it that way.

I have found that firing full house .357 Magnum rounds in a 12 oz. revolver is just too much for me and I'm not recoil sensitive at all. Not only is painful after a few rounds it's very hard to fire an accurate follow up shot because the recoil is violent. If you want a S&W Magnum J frame I would suggest either a M640 or M649. At the very lease try and find a range that will rent you a Airlite and try it out before you buy one.

If you still want one then I would agree with "jfh", the M&P 340 is what you are looking for.

 

[jfh]

Lightweight revolvers aren't for everyone, that's for sure. I selected the M&P 340 while somewhat of a greenhorn about them--I thought I would want the 38 / 357 flexibility, and I preferred the sight picture of the M&P over the PD I also handled at the same time. Like you, Steve, I definitely knew I wanted a Scandium frame. I'm convinced the strength of scandium is what S&W claims--roughly equivalent to a good steel frame.

I also bought a 640 so I could practice a lot.

I started out with FC 110-gr std.-pressure 38 Spls in the M&P 340--and I could only shoot 5 shots (one cylinder) without wanting to rest my hand. After a few thousand 38+P 'replica loads' of the Speer GDSB 135-gr. PD round, which were mostly shot in the 640, my hand became acclimated and conditioned. Now I can shoot (and reload) the replica load for at least two cylindersful in the 340 and be ready to shoot more.

I've also shot the Speer 357-Mag GDSB135-gr round--and that's my next goal for more powerful performance. The 135-gr 38+P round runs about 860 to 900 from a 2"; the 135-gr 357 round does about 970 to 1000. The Buffalo Bore 38+P(+) 158-gr. LSWC-HP does an honest 1000+ FPS out of my M&P340 (I chrono'd it), and that one is at my "ragged edge" of controllability.

I have NEVER shot the 357 125-gr. loads in the 340, and I don't intend to--as said above, the 357 lightweights regularly show up "used" with much less than a box of (357) rounds run through them--a friend just picked one up that way, c/w the CT laser grip, for just over 600.00.

To maintain that level of proficiency, I try to shoot a minimum of 200 rounds a month, and between range visits I do use a hand / finger exerciser.

Were S&W to make a 38+P - rated scandium j-frame, that's what I would buy today, knowing what I know now. But they don't, because they know that then they could not get the extra premium a 357 commands in a lightweight.

Jim H.

 

[FW]

Can anyone honestly tell the difference in recoil between an M&P 340 and a 340pd?

Can anyone honestly tell the difference in firing 38 special loads in a 642 compared to a M&P 340 or 340pd firing the same 38 special loads? (assuming identical grips are used since the 642 factory grip is different).

The simple answer is not really. However, when carrying these, a few ounces DOES make difference sometimes and that is why they are made so light, for carrying, not shooting pleasure.

None of them are easy too shoot for the inexperienced.

 

[jfh]

I dunno about the difference between the M&P and PD versions (13.3 vs 12 oz.), but I bought a used 442 (15 oz.) later last summer--some carry wear, and yes, likely less than one box of cartridges run through it--and the recoil difference shooting the "replica" load referenced above was noticable.

I was so surprised I repeated the comparison--and I could still tell the difference. OTOH, it was only something that was mentionable, and not of significance. And, I did notice the weight difference in my front-pocket carry.

Jim H.

 

[ArchAngelCD]

Can anyone honestly tell the difference in recoil between an M&P 340 and a 340pd?

FW,
I wasn't recommending the M&P because of the extra once of weight or recoil, I was recommending it because of the Stainless Steel Cylinder, the Tritium Night Sights and the fact that it's $120 less than the 340PD. IMO it's the best of the 5 revolver in the M340 line.

 

[FW]

The night sight on the M&P 340 is certainly something that would be nice to have. I have to wonder why it isn't offered on the 340pd, probably would make it even more expensive than it is. Though if money is not a problem, it could be added to the 340pd. I also have to wonder if the M&P 340 could cost a little less without the tritium sight.

The only real functional difference between the two is the cylinder. The only advantage the 340pd offers is being 1.3 oz lighter. I can say there is a definite perceivable difference in the carry weight of a 340pd vs. a 642 (3 oz difference), but the 1.3 oz difference between the 340pd and M&P 340 would be more negligible. The titainium cylinder is more difficult to clean and possibly subject to erosion from hot loads with fast powder (reason for the light bullet warning). In reality this is not a concern for most people since a lot of hot 357 would have to be fired and even then, it would probably only be a cosmetic defect at first. Some will mention the ss cylinder is stronger, which is true, but the titanium cylinder is not weak. If one is concerned about ultimate durablility and longevity, get a steel framed J frame such as a 640. Of course then the weight gets doubled, but with gun designed mainly for carry, it is a reasonable compromise to sacrifice a little strength (if it even matters).

The M&P 340 was not the first "scandium" (it is actually aluminum alloy) frame revolver with a stainless steel cylinder. There were a limited number of 340ss revolvers produced which were identical to the 340pd, except for a stainless steel cylinder that had a shiny finish instead of the dull black finish on the M&P 340.

What is best to go with is subjective. Sometimes comments about differences are actually amusing. When the M&P 340 was released, I remember reading a message board where there were people bashing the 340pd while having great praise for the M&P 340 (though most had not likely actually seen one yet). One guy even said the M&P was such an improvement because the titanium cylinder of the 340pd was ,"obsolete" in his words.

When having to decide between and airweight (642, 442, etc.) and an airlite (340, 340pd, M&P 340), there are significant differences to consider such as weight, cost, and ability to handle 357 or not. When faced with a decision between a 340pd and M&P 340, differences are more academic.

 

[340PD]

I would get either the 340PD or the 340MP

I went for the 340PD because of the lighter weight. The sights are a non issue with a set of Crimson Trace laser grips. They are on all my snubbies. For me they improve my ability to hit accurately no matter what ammo I have in the gun. I also bought a 640 to practice with. I love the 340 for carry. I clean it with Shooters choice. I have had no finish problems. Just remember to cover the Crimson Trace dot with tape when you clean your firearm. I have fired full house 357 loads with no problem. I carry it with 38 gold dot ammo. This is one great carry gun.

 

[Wild Deuce]

I own a 340PD and a 442. The 340PD cracked while firing full power magnum loads (Winchester White Box ammo). I sent it back to S&W and they replaced the entire gun. They said it was a manufacturing defect (over-torqued barrel at the factory). I've lost my confidence in these light alloy frames to shoot full power loads. I load both guns now with Speer Gold Dot Short-Barrel .38 Special +P (135 Grain). The 442 is a .38 Special +P anyway. The 340PD serves quite well in the back up role for me. My wife carries the 442 and it shares primary duties with her EMP.

These images are not of my gun but they are identical both in location and appearance to the crack that occured in my 340PD J-Frame.

Pic 1
Pic 2

 

[Doug S]

I bought a S&W 340 MP yesterday. It has no limitation on bullet weight. Supposedly the finish is more durable than some of the other models. I took it to the range for the first time today, and liked it. The recoil is not pleasant, but I honestly didn't find it anymore unpleasant than the two 642' that I've owned. The trigger was nice IMO, better than my particular 642', and the sights are better than than those of any snub revolver that I've shot. I can actually hit what I'm aiming at with the 340 MP. If you don't mind the recoil associated with the light weight, this would be a good model for you. Very nice in a pocket.

 

[DawgFvr]

For me...the muzzle flip and recoil is horrendous...definitely not conducive to follow up shots. Recommend you attempt Old Fluff's 5-5-5 test. Try and fire five rounds in five seconds at five yards and keep the impacting rounds within 5 inches of POA.

"having a hand gun and thinking you are armed is like having a piano and thinking you are a musician" - Col Cooper

 

[GunNut]

Just watch for a good deal on a used 340PD. I picked up a carried a bunch, fired very little 340PD in the factory box for $500 shipped early last year.

Love the gun, only like shooting it.