What happened to the S&W 640?

[jakerson9]

So - I got a wonderful S&W 640 centennial. To me, it seems to be pretty much a perfect little 38 Special. It was made on March 8th, 1991. I contacted S&W and they said that "based on its age, they don't recommend firing +P ammo," but they didn't address the change from 38sp +P+ to 38sp - or if they made MY 640 Centennial revolver somehow weaker.

This 640 is slightly heavier than my circa 2011 S&W 442. (which is 38sp +p) I like that. It has a much smoother trigger in spite of all the work I've done with snap caps on that little model 442, which is pretty nice on its own.

HOWEVER - there is internet lore about a 640 centennial made in 1990 - 1991 that is marked as being rated +p+. My serial number is CEN02**, so less than 300 were made before mine. Now the 640 is a 357. My question is... what the heck happened to the 640?

Did lawyers in 1991 decide to stop marking the 640 as +P+? Or did they start weakening things to save money? I would think that with the steel, it is stronger than my 442 - and again, my 442 is rated +P. So - what happened to the 640?

I don't have any interest in burning through thousands of rounds of +p. I feel like this revolver will be around long after I'm gone. I know that the ones marked +P+ are worth more money, maybe, in the right circumstances. That doesn't mean so much to me. this is a great little revolver. But how come they didn't mark it +p or +P+?\

Or could it be marked somewhere and maybe I missed that? Does anyone have a photo of where theirs is marked?

Kindly enlighten me, oh wise forum people...

 

[snubbiefan]

If you poke around long enough, you will find some literature that states anything as recent as 1958 and newer should be okay for +P. I believe that is the year they started stamping the model number on the frame under the yoke. The last thing I remember reading stated if the model number is stamped under the yoke, it can handle +P. As a rule I would not shoot that much. The 640 is the same gun as the 9MM 940. The 940 has a bullish barrel. I would say the 640 is every bit as strong as the 940 that can handle 357-Maguum pressures. Just has a bull-barrel.

AND....you likely talked to a rep. that didn't know any better.

 

[jakerson9]

Thanks...

I see this ... and I recognize those grips... I wish the force wasn't so strong with the lawyers... I'm sure that S&W knows...

*sigh* Love to find one with the 3" barrel too.

 

[semperfi71]

What follows is my opinion (worth nothing). It is based on my ownership of the same revolver, circumspection, and some reading.

From about 1930/40ish forward S&W stated all of their K-Frame (M&P) model .38 Specials were sound with the .38-44 load. Sometime before or just after WWII Colt stated the same for their Police Positive Special (which is also a Detective Special and Diamondback).

The .38-44 load was/is a 158 lead SWC at 1150 fps (probably out of a 5 or 6 inch barrel)

Modern (since their inception) +P loads in .38 Special do not approach the .38-44, and some folks say they do not even approach older .38 Special factory loads.

Elmer Keith stated he fired an early Chief's Special with "high velocity" (not +P because I think it wasn't out then) loads and he might have been talking .38-44. He said they did not "seem" to affect the revolver. He "believed" the 5 shot J-Frame actually was better than a K-Frame because the chambers were offset from the locking lugs.

I load my J-Frame .38 Specials for "social use" with 158 grain lead semi-wadcutters to about 850 fps. I suspect that is plenty of power for such a weapon. But...I shoot them with wad-cutters at wadcutter velocities for practice.

I would suspect that a J-Frame, STEEL FRAME .38 Special S&W could probably handle a once a year cylinder of 1,000 fps 158 grain lead bullets okay.

I think S&W dropped the .38 Special M640 because they were making the same revolver in .357 Magnum. I am hearing not too many people are liking to shoot it in .357 Magnum. So now they have a heavier all-steel .38 Special revolver, when the original version was better...again my opinion.

Also, some folks here have opined that a standard wadcutter makes a pretty goo self defense load in a snub .38 Special because the bullet cuts cleans holes and cause more internal bleeding and the blunt bullet has better "shock" than a round-nose.

You have a great carry revolver.

I do not CCW mine, although initially I wanted to, because 1) I don't want to lose it if I have to use it and 2) I have a Chief's Special in used exterior finish that was given to me. I bobbed the hammer and its an excellent CCW.

 

[murphydog]

The ones stamped "Tested(?) for +P+" have this on the bottom frame in the cylinder window. I think the ones so marked are in the early (CEN) prefix series, so I don't have a good explanation why yours isn't. Limited use of factory +P will not blow up your gun in any case, and you'll probably go broke feeding it before you can shoot it loose.

 

[PALADIN85020]

I have this 640, which I purchased new in 1993. In my records, I've noted that this one is rated for +P, although it is not so marked. Like yours, the trigger pull on mine is exceptionally smooth, quite the best of any of my J-frame revolvers. It can be "staged" for a final crisp letoff quite easily with practice, although it's a technique I seldom use. Because it is a bit heavier, it will handle the FBI lead hollow-point +P load without the bullets pulling out from recoil. This has proved to be a problem with the lighter guns such as the 442s. The Herrett "Shooting Star" grips were custom made to my hand pattern back in the 1960s, (originally fitted to a Model 60) and make it very comfortable to shoot, even with heavy loads.

The 640 is a fine piece, and a nice blend of adequate power, heft, ammo versatility and concealability. It's one of my favorites.

John

 

[semperfi71]

PALADIN85020 sez, [QUOTELike yours, the trigger pull on mine is exceptionally smooth, quite the best of any of my J-frame revolvers.

The 640 is a fine piece, and a nice blend of adequate power, heft, ammo versatility and concealability. It's one of my favorites.[/QUOTE]

Ditto for me and mine. It was my first stainless S & W and I had read no end of stories about how the S & W stainless revolvers just "could not" be made as smooth as the carbon steel version because stainless "just would not" polish as well either.

They were wrong and now, if I had to carry any revolver anywhere it would be stainless first choice.

 

[shouldazagged]

My 640 has been my carry gun for years and will go to my son when I croak.

Mine is one of the 1990-built CEN series laser-etched "Tested For +P+". I tried to inquire from S&W how many of these were made. They didn't want to discuss it. All I got was a standard CYA statement that they don't recommend using +P+. Which since they etched the gun doesn't make a hell of a lot of sense.

I've read in various places that the +P+-rated guns were a response to LEO's who wanted a "hotter .38" but not the politically incorrect (at that time) .357 Magnum. More recently someone posted here that he had heard the +P+ 640's were special-ordered as backup guns for FBI agents, but I'm not sure that sounds plausible.

Anyway, enjoy your 640 and don't worry at all about it handling +P. I've always practiced with standard-pressure loads and a few cylinders of +P and carried the +P exclusively. Splendid little gun which I trust implicitly.

 

[BJoe]

Like mine so much I bought a 940 to keep it company

 

[shawn mccarver]

So - I got a wonderful S&W 640 centennial. To me, it seems to be pretty much a perfect little 38 Special. It was made on March 8th, 1991. I contacted S&W and they said that "based on its age, they don't recommend firing +P ammo," but they didn't address the change from 38sp +P+ to 38sp - or if they made MY 640 Centennial revolver somehow weaker.

This 640 is slightly heavier than my circa 2011 S&W 442. (which is 38sp +p) I like that. It has a much smoother trigger in spite of all the work I've done with snap caps on that little model 442, which is pretty nice on its own.

HOWEVER - there is internet lore about a 640 centennial made in 1990 - 1991 that is marked as being rated +p+. My serial number is CEN02**, so less than 300 were made before mine. Now the 640 is a 357. My question is... what the heck happened to the 640?

Did lawyers in 1991 decide to stop marking the 640 as +P+? Or did they start weakening things to save money? I would think that with the steel, it is stronger than my 442 - and again, my 442 is rated +P. So - what happened to the 640?

I don't have any interest in burning through thousands of rounds of +p. I feel like this revolver will be around long after I'm gone. I know that the ones marked +P+ are worth more money, maybe, in the right circumstances. That doesn't mean so much to me. this is a great little revolver. But how come they didn't mark it +p or +P+?\

Or could it be marked somewhere and maybe I missed that? Does anyone have a photo of where theirs is marked?

Kindly enlighten me, oh wise forum people...

Your 640 is fine with limited use of +P+ or +P. Remember, however, that this version of the stainless J frame is no longer made, as the stainless J frames are now built on the so-called E frame, which is a little longer for Magnum rounds. The fact that they do not make this frame size any longer in their stainless revolvers might make repairs more problematic if something disastrous were to happen. The more likely reason for the strange response you got from customer service is that the CS person simply does not know or he is reciting the official company policy. Remember, "Tested for +P+" does not mean "certified for continuous use with +P+."

The J frame cylinder is stronger than you may think because the locking notches are between the charge holes in the thickest part of the cylinder, rather than right over the thinnest part of the cylinder wall as in an S&W cylinder with an even number of rounds. The geometry of the S&W action is what makes the 5- and 7-shot cylinders so strong - the locking notches are offset and not in the thinnest part of the cylinder wall directly over the charge holes.

The discussion is probably irrelevant anyway, as I doubt you will find any 38 Special +P+ ammo out there. The last new stuff was the Treasury load, which was a 110 grain JHP at +P+ pressure/velocity. The ballistic equivalent is now sold in the Winchester White Box line but in Magnum length cases - look for .357 Magnum white box with the 110 grain JHP. It is the same velocity and bullet weight as the old Treasury Load, which the Feds, not including FBI, used in their S&Ws for years, so they could fire Magnums in their 38 Special revolvers and avoid political backlash from idiot legislators and media types.

Enjoy your revolver. It should be laser etched "Tested for +P+" on the bottom flat of the frame window. Open the cylinder and look in there. You cannot see it from the outside. If it is not there, I have no idea why as I think all of the CEN serial number revolvers had the laser etching.

 

[remat457]

I wish the force wasn't so strong with the lawyers... I'm sure that S&W knows...

This. IMO they are the most lawyer-iffic of the firearms companies. If they see that ad they will have their lawyers tell you to take it down. I am not kidding.

 

[Arik]

If you poke around long enough, you will find some literature that states anything as recent as 1958 and newer should be okay for +P. I believe that is the year they started stamping the model number on the frame under the yoke. The last thing I remember reading stated if the model number is stamped under the yoke, it can handle +P. As a rule I would not shoot that much. The 640 is the same gun as the 9MM 940. The 940 has a bullish barrel. I would say the 640 is every bit as strong as the 940 that can handle 357-Maguum pressures. Just has a bull-barrel.

AND....you likely talked to a rep. that didn't know any better.

Everything ive read states that S&Ws with model #s are gtg with +p in a defense situation. Meaning dont make a habit of shooting +p but once in a while, to test a load and for carry they are ok

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

 

[kaaskop49]

shawn mccarver: I recently (pre-panic) purchased 2 boxes of Winchester Ranger +P+ .38 Spl 'Law Enforcement Ammunition' with 110 gr. JHPs as were the old "Treasury loads.' I undersand this ammo is now out-of-print. FYI

 

[mtelkhntr]

More recently someone posted here that he had heard the +P+ 640's were special-ordered as backup guns for FBI agents, but I'm not sure that sounds plausible.

My 640 S/N CEN11XX is marked "TESTED FOR +P+" and it came off the wholesalers shelf so as far as them being special ordered, I too doubt that.

 

[BJoe]

Like mine so much I bought a 940 to keep it company

I did EXACTLY the same thing, 3 weeks apart.

 

[BlueLineNYPD]

This is my 640 Centennial. I bought it new in 1991.
Although S&W states that they don't recommend shooting +P ammo in any gun made before 1998 the NYPD trained and supplied us with +P ammo.