I have an early 640 that came with the slim rosewood grips (like the ladysmith at the time) and chambered for 38 spec. and inside the frame it's marked "Tested for +P+".

My daughter has expressed in interest in a small revolver/pistol and I thought I'd pass this one on and replace it with a new one. I know that within a couple of years they started to chamber them in 357 and that seems to be all I can find which isn't a problem.

But, any idea if there were a lot of 640's sold prior to the 357 chambering?

1989 to 1996 all were .38 spl. That's not a very long production run.

The "+P+" guns are a bit of a collectors item as S&W didn't make many of them. They dropped the "+P+" after the first year or so and then made quite a few 640's in .38 Special. I had one and, like a doof, sold it. Have been looking for a good one since.

__________________
Centennial Every Day

FYI...
A quick search (S&W 640) on GB shows four (4) .38 caliber Model 640's listed.

Another search (Smith Wesson 640) on GB shows one(1) .38 caliber Model 640 listed.

I have done business with one of the sellers under the (S&W 640) search.

Feel free to send a PM if you'd like further info.

Ther's also one listed in the sale ads here.

Regards,
tp

As Photoman44 indicated, the "Tested for +P+" ones are considered a bit of a collector's item and bring premium over the others.

That said, a run-of-the-mill M640 in .38spl isn't too hard to find. You should be able to find one on Gunbroker.com for between $350 to $450 if you watch the auctions for about a month.

This is just my opinion, but it appears to me that the price on these has decreased over the past several months. I think it is just due to the fact that it is summer and people are looking for lighter guns to carry with lighter clothing.

My point being that if you are looking for a good deal on one, your best bet would be to look now instead of waiting until say the fall.

Well, a bit of pleasant news! Mine is "Tested for +P+" marked, and I had no idea it was a collector's item -- just a danged nice carry gun!

__________________
Pisgah

The 640 is one of my favorite J frames. I bought my 640 no dash new in January 1991 and it also sported smooth service style grips. Mine was not marked for +P+ ammo. I called S&W about it at the time, and if memory serves, they said that they quit that marking because there were no standard upper pressure limit on +P+ loads. It became a moot point because the 640-1 was chambered for 357 Magnum. They are neat little guns.

Does this mean that WE can consider a 640 no-dash as safe for +P? I got a terrific deal on one and have been carrying it nearly a year.

Larry

It's just semantics but the word "Tested" as in Tested for +P+ intriques me. I've been tested for a lot stuff I didn't have (Thank goodness) so in the realm of S&W does "Tested", mean "Approved"? Man, if I'd have been approved for some of the stuff I've been tested for, life would have been a whole lot different!

I love my 640 38 special. I bought it after my wife got spooked one night and got my model 19 out of the safe, cocked it, then was too scared to lower the hammer. (I was out of town.) I put some CT laser grips on it and now it is her "bump in the night gun". I don't have to worry about her walking around the house with a cocked gun.(She knows better, she just got really spooked and was not thinking.)




later

Just curious, do all of the 640s marked +P+ (under the cylinder) have a serial number beginning with CEN, for centennial? Mine does.

Great gun; my EDC.

No, both of mine have the CEN prefix an are not marked +P+.

This is a topic of much discussion on the forum.

If you find an instruction manual from the mid to late 90's, you will find a chart that indicates that the no dash 640 is rated for limited +P use.

The no dash 640 was produced at the same time as the 60-7. So it is reasonable to assume that both received the same heat treatment process.

Forum member Saxon Pig has written an excellent article on the use of +P ammo in S&W .38spl chambered guns.

Mine has the CEN pre-fix and is marked "Tested for +P+" but it is an early 4 digit S/n CEN11XX

Not sure how many or how long they were made, but there was also a 3” heavy barrel version of the 640 in .38 Special. I have one of each and prefer the 3” for a nightstand use and the 2” for concealed carry

This 3” has a 1991 serial number (BFZ prefix)



This 2” is a 1994 serial number (BRH prefix)



Here they both are in their working clothes.




Good luck in your search . . . the 640 is a fine gun.

Russ

IMHO , the idea that in recent years ( 1980's to date ) S&W would Heat treat steel J frames differently depending on model variation strikes me
as extremely ODD.

This would require keeping track of what was what for no economic gain.

I personally choose to treat ALL S&W steel j frame .38s as capable of
handling factory +P ammo in moderation.

I have a 640 no dash with smooth grips as well. When I get home I will have to see if it is stamped +P+. Great revolver and mine is a keeper.

I have it on good authority that the "tested for +P+" was an error on the part of someone who really did not know what they were doing (saying?). All the S&W engineers knew what +P+ meant-which was really nothing as there was NO +P+ standard to test for. I suspect that the original intent was to mark them for "+P". not for "+P+".
Everyone should know that using +P+ ammo is at their own risk. The only .38 Special round I am aware of that was marketed by a major manufacturer as +P+ was the so called "Treasury load" a 110gr HP .38 Special loaded really hot for use by Treasury Agents (read Secret Service) in 2" barrel guns(back when real cops carried real guns). This was also the time frame when S&W tried an aluminum cylinder for the Secret Secret and it did not work out (wonder if they tried a +P+ load?).
Some folks say that the old 60s-70s era Super Vel round was way past +P pressures (making it +P+), they also used a lightweight bullet going very fast from shorter barrels.
I still have some of them and some day I am going to run them for speed(out of a very stout gun).

Since we're guessing... I'll put my two cents worth in...

The "Tested for +P+" guns came out when many different agencies (fed and state) were using the "+P+" loads as something better than the old standby LHP+P that supposedly didn't work well in the FBI Miami shootout. The agencies were told to use the "+P+" loads in .357 magnum guns. Seeing that Smith & Wesson didn't have a .357 magnum J frame, they came up with the "Tested for +P+" Centennial for the ammo.

That's my story and I'm stickin' to sit.

p.s. I've shot a ton of the Federal 147gr +P+ in my .38 Special K frames with no ill effects whatsoever. My opinion is, they are not that hot of a load but VERY accurate.

__________________
Centennial Every Day

this is a very interesting thread for a variety of reasons. i was under the impression that lee jurras stated super vels did not exceed industry standards for the .38. it would be very interesting to see how a super vel, 158gr +p LHP and .357 125 grain golden saber do out of a 2" or 2 1/8" snubbie. in my very limited penetration testing the 158gr +p LHP from one of the big three did not impress me.

Very interesting thread indeed. I was under the impression that the +P+ 38's were a politically correct way of possessing near 357 power without the 'magnum' stigma.
My 640, #CEN11xx is stoked with 147gr +P+; I just hope it holds together for the 5 shots that I may need it for.

My opinion:

I suspect that during production the +P+ markings were probably used on the revolver to relate that the cylinders were tested to greater than .38 special standards (.357 magnum) and since the 640 cylinders were only cut to .38 special length (at the time) it's possible the "+P+" was designated as the next most powerful .38 special rating. If the revolver was marked as being rated at ".357 Magnum" many owners might try to stuff .357's into the .38 special chamber and then complain when they didn't fit? (Shortly thereafter a .357 magnum 640 was released.)

I bought one of the very first 640-1s in 1997, it had a slightly beefed up frame, a longer cylinder, and a heavier and slightly longer barrel, and came with boot-grips.....and chambered in 357 Magnum. At the time I thought it was the worst kicking handgun I'd ever fired. Of course, this was prior to the advent of the Scandium/Ti monstrosities, and the 500 S&W Magnum! One has to wonder what might be coming down the road.....

My 640 is a cen 16## marked for +p+

I went and looked at the manual that came with my 640 to see what they listed for "approved" cartridges and it doesn't show the 640 at all. The book is dated May of '89 and it's surprising what it shows for the other "38 special" revolvers.

My first Centennial was a 1-7/8" Model 640 marked +P+. I purchased it from a forum member several years ago and I still use it for pocket carry on a regular basis.

I later purchased a 640-1 that I had sent back to S&W Performance Center and had them install an XS Big Dot front sight, dehorn the sharp edges and crown the barrel. S&W done a real nice job on reworking the 640-1 to my likings. I don't carry this one as often as I like, but when I wear a suit jacket it rides comfortably on my hip in a belt holster.

I can't say that I like firing full house .357's from the 640-1, but it can be done. If I were to use 357's in the 640-1 I would probably use a lighter factory load to be able to control the 640-1 better during a quick double tap.

In closing, if I had to chose between the .38 special 640 and the .357 Magnum 640-1... I think I would choose the .38 special 640 as it just feels right.

The 640 +P+ guns are pretty neat...I'm trying to get one now. How much do you guys think is fair for one in excellent condition w/o box, papers, or original grips?

If I may comment? Why go right ahead. Thank you Smith nut people, which I belong to. I have a no dash 640. Big deal. It is just a 38 spl 1 7/8" with those oh so stupid boot grips on it. I hate those grips. I don't have a pic but who cares they are all the same. Anyone got grips, as in wood?

__________________
My brother is my Hero

The next time you're in Walmart you might do like I did and buy the next size larger underwear. You'll feel a lot better.

The first loadings for .38 would easily equal what we call +P today. The advent of LW .38 special revolvers in the '50's caused some downloading of the standard. I had a +P+ marked 640. I have read S&W quit marking them as such because there was no standard for +P+. At any rate, my current 640 is a matte .38 that even though not so marked is a ex police pistol. These are fine back pocket pistols.

__________________
SOS USA

I got one too....CEN 3xxx Tested for +P+.....I also had a chance to get
two others....both of them were CEN...Tested for +P+....They came from
a local guy that had traded them in. He also had Three 37-2 DAO that he
let go....So I pick up one of the 37-2 instead for a back-up to the one that I carry daily.

don't forget the rare Performance center models in 38 as well!
Mine below...

i have shot a fair amount of +P+ through a 1987 vintage 60 with no ill effects. However, it liked Rem +P 125's better so that is what I always carried in it until I got a 640 357 mag around 96 or 97. I put 147 +P+ in it. The mags flash too much. Still my go to CCW gun after all these years. Before I put a XS big dot on the front, I could do credible shooting at 100 yds with 125 Federals. Sight ruined it for precise distance shooting, not that it matters. Sight stills glows 10+ years on. 640 of any mod is a hard gun to beat for totin'. Recently came on a 360 at a deal but it is truly brutal with 357's and stock grips. Not so bad with treasury +P+. Wadcutters were fine.

IMHO 640 is the best CCW revolver ever!!! I will look no further.

I have a 640 with Tested for +P+ on it with a serial number of CEN01XX. Must be a real early one. I use that for a bedroom gun along with a 12 gauge. The one I carry is a 642 without the lock which is a lot lighter. Both are great guns!

From limited memory I think Elmer Keith fired the Chief's Special with factory .38-44 loads (158 grain bullet at about 1100 to 1150 fps in a longer barrel) and he claimed it did not harm the gun. I think he opined that the bolt cuts in the cylinder being offset from the chambers made the steel sutiable enough for such loads.

But understand it was his opinion after probably not firing a lot of rounds.

I shoot 158 grain lead bullets in a J-Frame (not alloy though) at velocities up to around 800/850 fps and am not concerned. I use faster burning powders for reduced recoil and I only shoot them for occasional familization and self-defense. The rest of the time I shoot 148 wadcutter loads. They will generally shoot to the same point of aim as 158 grain loads.

I have no experience with lighter bullets and or jacketed bullets and would not use them anyway. I prefer the belief of "penetration" over "expansion" in snub-nosed revovlers.

I don't carry concealed but my M640 is not a "marked for +P" revolver but it is what I consider the best self-defense "hideout" for me. All one has to do is pull and shoot. No safeties and no damage to the finish from carrying in "whatever" as it bumps and grinds against "anything".

__________________
Have guns...will shoot'em.

I've got this 640 en route now. I probably let myself pay more than I wanted to for the CEN-prefix (though it still went for under $500) but I find the history interesting.







Probably not a safe queen, but appears to be doing okay for being a quarter of a century old I love the Centennial design and seem to keep going back to the original 640 - this'll be my 2nd CEN-prefix gun. Perhaps I'll hold onto this one longer than the last one