Hi All,

I am pretty new to revolvers. I fell in love with the Model 360PD when I first held one (and fired one), so I bought a new one from my LGS.

I've decided to make this my summer EDC, so I want to practice with this gun as much as I am able.

.357 Magnum and .38 Special ammo was scarce, so I bought what I could find: Federal American Eagle 158 gr JSP, as well as some Buffalo Bore (125 gr JHP and 125 gr lead-free).

Well, I went to the range, fired a bunch of the Federal and the BB JHP. On my second range visit, I brought a glove, as my trigger finger was getting cut by the trigger guard - the recoil on this thing is real. I also added CT LG-405 grips, which has a stiff rubber back strap which helps a lot with the recoil.

On my second range trip, and after firing 10 rounds of the BB 125 gr lead free, I noticed this on the front of the cylinder (see attached image).

I contacted S&W and they promptly sent me an RMA number. Six weeks later, I have a new titanium cylinder installed and no questions asked - nice customer service from S&W.

Yesterday, I returned to the range with some .38 Special (Federal Punch +P, Buffalo Bore +P 'heavy', Fiocci wad-cutters), as well as Hornady .357 Magnum Critical Defense. By the way, the Buffalo Bore .38 Special +P 'heavy' felt like a .357 round, recoil and muzzle blast-wise.

The Hornady .357 was 'relatively' low recoil, compared with the other .357 rounds, but one round threw out some debris from the cylinder gap and left a small cut on my forehead. A gentle reminder of why we wear eye pro.

After the range visit, I examined my cylinder face and found a single, very small 'nick'. Similar to what's in the attached photo, but much smaller in comparison. Maybe from that Hornady round? Who knows...?

I have cleaned this gun with kid gloves - Hoppe's #9 solvent (only for the bore) and #9 oil with cotton swabs and patches - no brushes on the cylinder.

Now, I am wondering if I should even be firing this on the range and keep it only for carry. I noticed at my LGS that the new M&P 340 has a stainless steel cylinder; I am guessing that S&W has had to replace a lot of damaged titanium cylinders and they've had enough of that.

So, it seems like my choices are:

1) get a M&P 340 and practice without fear of damaging the gun, then carry the 360PD (another $800?),

2) practice and carry the 360PD with .38 Special +P (which I am guessing is easier on the cylinder,

3) go back to .40 or 9mm semi-autos.

EDIT:

4) Stick with heavier ammo, like the Federal 158 gr JSP, which might be better for the cylinder flame cutting problem?

Attached Images

IMG_0300.jpg (31.4 KB, 624 views)

The first .380 that S&W came out with -- imaginatively called the SW380 -- was designed to be fired for a finite number of rounds -- some say 2500 -- at which point it needed to be sent in for a rebuild. Hardly ideal for any gun, and part of the reason the model flopped (the larger part being it just stunk overall). From the day the titanium-cylindered guns came out I have felt they fall in to the same category. Not that they are inherently lousy guns, but that they are built to a standard that puts light weight ahead of durability. If you know that, and if the lightest weight is your main priority, they're great; if you also want to shoot them a lot, though, you may be disappointed.

Titanium is heck-for-strong when it comes to tensile strength, but it erodes horribly. Yeah, they put a protective coating on it; it doesn't last forever, and a traditional cleaning will take it off right now. In my opinion their freakishly light weight is their only advantage, and they are a carry-a-lot-and-shoot-rarely proposition. If I want a revolver both to carry and to shoot the bejeebers out of, it will be all steel.

__________________
Pisgah

Titanium cylinders are cheap. They can be replaced if they erode more than you wish. I shoot 147gr 9mm in my three converted .357Mag j-frame titanium cylinders. So far, no erosion, knock wood.

Even though it has a new cylinder (or because of it) you might want to check and see how much barrel-cylinder gap it has & what the endshake is.

.

I'd practice with low power ammo that has the same POI as the SD ammo you'll be carrying & use the higher power SD ammo to a lesser degree if you have concerns.

Your wallet & wrist will like it too.

.

__________________
Waiting for the break of day

Well, cylinder erosion is a "thing." At least they still produce that cylinder, unlike the 386PD.

I have a 340PD and a M&P340. Because I have dealt with cylinder erosion before, my 340PD only has about 100 rounds through it. It serves as a "backup," and I shoot the M&P340. It's gotta have around 1000 rounds of 125 gr. Magnum loads through it.

The M&P340 is one that I rarely leave without, and in my opinion, has the best sight picture of any J-frame.

If I buy another "spare," it will be a M&P340 (no lock.)

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

Go back to 9 or 40 in a semiauto.

__________________
To cannon, all men are equal

Bad luck. There is a bunch of stuff on the erosion thing on here if you dig hard enough. If you want to shoot .357's, I would only shoot 158 grain bullets thru it. Never clean the cylinder face with anything but nylon brushes and never use any cleaner with ammonia or such. I just use Hoppe's Elite.

I replaced the stainless steel cylinder on my 642-1 with a titanium cylinder. Seems like it was a couple years ago. I've probably put a 200 or 300 rounds through it. No signs of erosion. I clean with Hoppes #9 and a nylon brush. Might be my mild loads. I use 4.5 gr Unique, and 158gr coated bullets.

I shoot snub noses every range trip, since either that or my BG380 is my EDC. But I practice with the 640 Pro or Taurus .22 snubbie and generally save the 642 for carry. It's no fun to shoot, so I mostly shoot it enough to know it will work if needed.

Good luck with your problem. In my case, if mine starts to erode, I'll just switch back to the original cylinder, and live with the 2.2 ounce weight gain.

What about a 4th option: Get a proper ALL STEEL revolver and leave the "airweight" stuff to the NASA scientists?

a couple ounces isn't going to make you or break you.

What I see on the fuzzy image of the cylinder face appears to be some lead splash. Not that big a deal. If there's actual damage, I can't see it.

However, first of all, once you get past a minimum power level of .380-and that's a rather low floor- the single most important factor in your ability to stop an aggressor is shot placement. And, your ability to accurately and rapidly place shots is affected by recoil. Yeah, I know, everyone on this site is above average.......NOT.

So, as a start, I'd abandon the attempts to get absolute maximum ballistics out of your ammunition. S&W makes a featherweight .357 because there's a market for it. It doesn't mean it's an ideal choice for everyone/anyone. A quality HP/JHP that works in a .38 Spl +P loading should do you quite well.

Any mechanical device experiences wear, requires regular maintenance and has a life expectancy. That device where performance and light weight-like race cars-are emphasized and used hard requires more maintenance and has a shorter life expectancy. If you want longer life, you lift your foot/use lower pressure ammunition. Or, as someone suggested above, get an all steel firearm although the life won't be as long as it could be if you used less powerful ammunition.

For what it's worth, I shoot and carry my 340 PD with nothing but 158 grain 38 Special ammo.

__________________
Pass it on.
Mark

I have owned a 340pd for over a decade and it has thousands of rounds of both 38sp and .357 mag (all 125gr.) with zero damage.
That revolver might be the best pocket snubbie ever made.

The whole Ti cylinder erosion issue is a weird one for sure. Some people fry the cylinder in no time with 125gr or lighter .357's and others seem to have no issue shooting thousands of rounds thru them. I had a cylinder erode on a 386pd and it took me 2 years to find a replacement cylinder. I think it's a combo of "wrong" ammo usage and cleaning procedures. Either way S&W should put a warning label on these guns for proper cleaning (not buried in the manual like now) and develop a stronger coating for the cylinder face. I think if you use just .38+p you will be good to go with some occasional 158gr .357's if you fell the need for some extra power.

It was not lead splash... it was physical erosion. S&W agreed and replaced the cylinder.

Yes, I've concluded that the answer is to use .38 Spl +P and call it a day.

If you've watched the LuckyGunner videos (Feed Your Revolver), they conclude that there is a limited selection of 'quality' .38 Spl ammo, with respect to penetration and expansion, fired from a short barrel; notably Winchester Ranger T and Remington Golden Saber. Good luck finding any of that ammo. I don't really know how seriously to take those findings, but the tests seem objective and thorough.

I have concluded the same, after a lot of reading on this forum and other places.

For me, as I mentioned in the post, I am being extremely careful with cleaning.

Thanks, everyone for your helpful replies. I really appreciate the community on this forum.

I did consider moving back to my Sig P365SAS, but in the summer I am frequently walking around in track pants or basketball shorts. I use a Boraii pocket holster that makes it look like a phone or wallet in my pocket (see attached image). The 360PD is just way too easy to pocket carry.

I've decided to:

1) Restrict my practice & carry ammo to .38 Spl +P and continue a very careful approach to cleaning. Maybe occasionally shooting the .357 158 gr Federal JSP, which I think will be safer for the 360PD.

2) Instead of getting another snubby, I am going to purchase a S&W Model 19 - I have stockpiled a bunch of .357 ammo and I want to have fun with it, without worrying about damaging the gun.

Attached Images

IMG_0326.jpg (85.1 KB, 80 views)

The other aspect of this... these scandium alloy frames are known for developing frame cracks under the barrel due it being so thin, there's been many a post about that on the forum:

My S&W 357PD has "The Crack" (Update 5-12-21, post 46)

I myself would not feed this gun a steady diet of +P for practice, especially the Buffalo Bore stuff.

I have a 432PD, once I've printed it once with the SD ammo I plan to use, that's it... I don't subject it to a constant use. I just don't trust it, this was my first and last alloy frame.

__________________
Conrad
SWCA #1830 SWHF #222

It's really sad, but this is literally all I ever hear about S&W's Scandium Frame, Titanium Cylinder revolvers anymore. I used to be really interested in both the 329 and 327, but they just don't seem to be very durable at all, and I've since lost all interest in owning either.

__________________
Shooting Comfort is bilateral.

I really wanted one of those little hand cannons. I was a little concerned about the cylinder. By accident I found a 360 J. It pretty well has the same frame but a SS cylinder. It also has a red ramp sight.
I’m real careful cleaning this pistol. I only use hoppes and Ed’s red.

I’m surprised by the number of folks that have wear problems with the Titanium cylinder guns. I have a model 342 (CFC70XX) that I bought in about 2001 (pre-lock), and I early on shot the hell out of it (not so much lately as I close in on 80 years of age) without any problems. As I noted in a previous post, about 2-3 years ago I noticed that the yoke had a circumferential crack in the barrel portion (part that goes into the center of the cylinder) but S&W quickly fixed that (2 week turnaround) with a new yoke. The new replacement yoke is made of stainless steel rather than aluminum, but the Titanium cylinder has never exhibited any unusual wear or pitting: it looks like new.
I understand the remarks about the steel cylinder only having a small (about 2 oz) weight penalty, but in the middle of summer in either Las Vegas or Reno when the temps are well over 100 degrees, I want the lightest weight I can get for either pocket carry (with a MIKA bolster) or ankle carry.
By the way, I only clean the revolver with CLP and I can get it cleaned easily.

Instead of a 340 you could get a 360 M&P. Sell your PD, deal with the extra ounce and a half or so for .357 rated steel cylinder and not worry about what kind of ammo you feed it.

The recently manufactured .357 M360J (not to be confused with the S/C alloy frame, black cylinder, .38 Spcl. 360J -thanks S&W- that they had a special run off about 12-15 yrs ago) with it's brite polished S/S cylinder can be scrubbed to your heart's content.

They're tuff as they come.

I have one & it's about 15 oz.

.

__________________
Waiting for the break of day

I wish I could tell you that your 19 will be trouble and worry free but this is an earlier example of a gun made as small and light as the technology of the time would allow and they are somewhat known for cracked forcing cones at the 6-o-clock position. It seems to mostly be a problem with lightweight bullets but of course there are endless threads about how much of a problem is it really so I'll just mention that it's a thing that some people experience and if you want a .357 that you really don't have to worry about you want to find an older model 27. Those things are built like tanks and will just plain survive. I gather those fancy new (anything invented after I was like 10) L-frame guns are very sturdy as well. You could also go brand-trator and buy an MR-73.
I've had one model 19 that I dearly loved die as a result of a bulged barrel and subsequent cracked frame from the replacement not being installed properly, but that wasn't the fault of the gun or .357 ammo but rather a inattentive shooter and bad reload followed by a inexperienced 'smith. As a result I don't tend to lend out guns I really like and go a little easy on my 19s.

Not really true of the current production Model 19 and 66. S&W has redesigned them, eliminating the thin spot on the barrel extension, also moving the front cylinder lock from the extractor rod to the crane. It is a vastly better lock system and is likely to be a far more durable 357 Magnum revolver.

__________________
VCDL, GOA, NRA

As a fan of the 38 Special and 357 Mag, I have followed threads and opinions of the loadings, I am no expert, just a fan. My opinion, stick with the heavier bullets, I prefer and get great accuracy from 158gr bullets in my revolvers. I reload, so I listen to comments and opinions from those who are more knowledgeable than I. Lighter bullets with most powders will cause the issues you mention. I will use nothing lighter than 125gr bullet in a 38spec standard loading, not with +P. 158gr bullet only for 357mag and +P if and when I load +P. I rarely do +P loadings since I personally do not see the advantage in a 38 spec. If I want more power, I step up to a 357 revolver. My revolver of choice to carry is my PC 386PD. No issues at all with the revolver. I will post pics when I get a chance.

You could always get a 360FDE and not worry about the titanium issue. The small difference in weight won't really be noticeable. However those saying to switch to an all steel gun and calling the difference only a "few" onces...right. One is a brick in a pocket and the other disappears. No comparison.

Attached Images

20190403_123718.jpg (79.1 KB, 29 views)

Why would you carry a gun that spits out hot lead at your face? At least you have eye pro at the range ...

I'm just sayin'.

Hi
I am new here. I am interested in either 340PD or 360PD. I already have Model 66. I only want to shoot 38special, max is +P. will I have problem with cylinder wearing out?


Is there an option to get the regular steel cylinder with Scandium frame? Is steel cylinder better? I have no problem shooting my Model 66. It's just too heavy.

Why not try a new coating on the titanium cylinder, like hard chrome. I would think hard chrome would prevent the issue you're seeing.

Sent from my moto g stylus 5G using Tapatalk

If you're fine with DAO, the M&P 340 (SKU: 103072) has a scandium frame and steel cylinder. Going rate is about $850. Weight comes in-between the scandium frame/titanium cylinder 340/360PD and the aluminum frame/steel cylinder Airweights at 13.8 oz.

The steel cylinder being "better" is a matter of priorities. You might want the lightest revolver possible, in which case titanium is better. You might want slightly more weight to absorb a little more recoil, in which case steel is theoretically better.

Steel will also be more resistant to harsher cleaning methods. If you plan to shoot a lot of uncoated soft lead ammo, that's a plus.

Solvents strip the protective coating. When cleaning, make sure no solvent makes contact with the cylinder. A titanium cylinder with damaged coating will erode quickly across the front of the cylinder around the forcing cone when firing.

I've had a 340SC (what they used to be called) for 20 years. Originally got it as a hiking gun, with the first two chambers with snakeshot, the last 3 with GTFOM bear discouragers.
Current choice for those are Fiocchi 140 FMJTC, 1100'sec in a snub, and utterly no fun to shoot. Mostly, the 340 sees full charge wadcutters, not a bad choice for any snub.
Never have been fussy cleaning it, and wasn't even aware of the admonitions.
Also have a 986, which will doubtless see more shooting. We'll see how it holds up.
Moon

What is really the problem with the titanium cylinder? Is it too weak to take the higher power rounds, or erode fast without protective coating. I am still trying to learn more to decide.


I have no intention to fire 357Mag, just 38+P if that. But if titanium erodes without protective coating, that's bad. Then seems the M&P is a much better choice.


That brings to another question. Is the M&P 340 safe and can last firing 357Mag rounds?


Thanks

There was a short run of the .357Mag 360J in 2016-2017. It had a Sc frame but Ss cylinder.

.



.
.



.

__________________
Waiting for the break of day