|
|
07-28-2008, 02:25 PM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
340MP or 340PD for same price
Hello,
I just got a new 340MP and now a family member has found a shop with a new 340MP and 340PD for the same price.
I have read the choices for night sight and SS cylinder for the MP and lighter weight for the PD but typically with the cost difference as a main point.
If the cost was the same which would you pick?
Thanks
|
07-28-2008, 02:25 PM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Hello,
I just got a new 340MP and now a family member has found a shop with a new 340MP and 340PD for the same price.
I have read the choices for night sight and SS cylinder for the MP and lighter weight for the PD but typically with the cost difference as a main point.
If the cost was the same which would you pick?
Thanks
|
07-28-2008, 02:52 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: SC by the Sea
Posts: 299
Likes: 0
Liked 50 Times in 21 Posts
|
|
My choice would be the PD and add a set of Crimson Trace laser grips. John
|
The Following 2 Users Like Post:
|
|
07-28-2008, 03:56 PM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times in 1 Post
|
|
I chose the M&P340
No restriction on ammo due to the stainless cylinder, Xs night sight is nicer than Red Ramp even though you'll never use them in a confrontation.
The PVD coating on the 340 cylinder is tougher than the coating on the Ti cylinder in the 340PD.
You can clean it without worrying about teh coating on the Ti cylinder flaking off.
|
The Following 3 Users Like Post:
|
|
07-28-2008, 04:31 PM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Florida
Posts: 729
Likes: 0
Liked 42 Times in 23 Posts
|
|
The 340PD, of course. The name of this game is weight, and the PD is lighter. The ammo restriction is a non-issue, as you're not likely to shoot 357's with very light bullets. My 340PD and 360PD both wear XS standard dot tritium sights. They're easy to install.
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
07-29-2008, 04:18 AM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: May 2003
Location: TN
Posts: 140
Likes: 4
Liked 49 Times in 31 Posts
|
|
My interest in a J frame is for pocket carry, so weight is paramount to me.
My "heater" is a 340PD.
__________________
<><
|
07-30-2008, 07:16 PM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: DFW, TX
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
|
|
I would take the 340PD...lighter weight for CCW, ammo restrictions not that big a deal, and easy to clean.
I have owned and carried a 340PD for 2 years, and would buy it again without reservation.
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
07-30-2008, 07:39 PM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
buy them both. then if you decide you don't like the pd you can probably sell it without a loss due to the fact you picked it up for the price of a m&p. i have the m&p, but sometimes i wish i would have gone for the lighter pd. if you plan on pocket carry i would go with the pd. if your going to wear on the hip, then either is a good choice. i really do like the sights on the m&p, and it handles 357 pretty well. i don't carry 357 in it that often. i would be def if i ever fired it without hearing protection. off topic, but it would be sweet if s&w could figure out a way to finish the titanium cylinder with a coating that would hold up, chamber it for +p only, and put it on the m&p frame. then we would have a configuration that people really want, 342pd. i actually considered buying a titanium cylinder for my m&p, but the cost, plus fitting, was too much. also, the sights on the m&p do help if you do have to take aim. i am so pleased with my ability on the m&p that i sold all my other small carry pistols.
|
07-30-2008, 08:35 PM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
I agree on the ammo restriction not being that large of a consideration for me. Will be carrying 38+P anyway and the 60 or 686 it would backup will have 125g .357 in the speedloaders as well if needed, not 110g.
on the cylinder finish wearing off, is that due mainly to harsh cleaners or just the heat of firing or even holster rub?
|
07-30-2008, 08:53 PM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Liked 7 Times in 1 Post
|
|
I like the 340 M&P. Why? It is only 1 oz heavier, no ammo restriction, prefer night sight to hi viz, easier to keep cylinder clean.
|
07-31-2008, 08:26 AM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: May 2003
Location: TN
Posts: 140
Likes: 4
Liked 49 Times in 31 Posts
|
|
I don't get the "ammo restriction" talk.
Maybe because I only shoot .38s in my 340PD, and there's plenty of room left in the cylinder, so I don't have to worry about it?
The S&W website lists the M&P as being 1.3 oz. heavier than the PD, but a few who have tossed them on the scales have found them to a tad heavier than that.
And since my 340PD is a carry gun, I don't sweat a few burn marks on the cylinder.
Night sights? Well, the previous owner of my gun had added a front Trijicon, so I think my 340PD is just about right.
If I had been the original owner, I wouldn't have added the night sight.
-If it's too dark to see the sights, will I be able to safely and clearly see the target?
-Many who have been in real shootings, and who have done force-on-force training say you won't use the sights when split seconds count.
But, as I said, my gun has a night sight, and I'm keeping it.
Either one is the pinnacle of concealable firearms design, so you should be happy no matter which one you get.
Since the PD lists for about $200 more, maybe it's a better buy?
__________________
<><
|
07-31-2008, 07:15 PM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: North East Coast of the S
Posts: 197
Likes: 0
Liked 9 Times in 5 Posts
|
|
I used to have a 340PD and I now have an 340M&P, I prefer the M&P. I like the night sight and the weight of the M&P is between the PD and an airweight. I pocket carry and don't notice the difference in the weight until I shoot it, although I DIDN'T shoot magnums out of either.
|
06-29-2009, 01:43 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Maine
Posts: 854
Likes: 88
Liked 116 Times in 57 Posts
|
|
ammo restriction with titanium cylinder????
Quote:
Originally Posted by wingslevel
...snip...on the cylinder finish wearing off, is that due mainly to harsh cleaners or just the heat of firing or even holster rub?
|
and
"I don't get the "ammo restriction" talk.
Maybe because I only shoot .38s in my 340PD, and there's plenty of room left in the cylinder, so I don't have to worry about it?"
I was hoping to see an answer to these questions, but did not....
Anyone????
__________________
Ed
|
07-01-2009, 07:32 AM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: AZ
Posts: 47
Likes: 0
Liked 4 Times in 2 Posts
|
|
I bought the mp for the big dot sight and I shoot .357 in it. I don't notice the weight difference between mine and my coworker's pd except when shooting it. If you only plan on shooting .38 +P, perhaps look for the titanium .38 no lock that S&W put out a few years ago. You could probably get a good deal on one.
|
07-08-2009, 12:44 AM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Beaverton OR USA
Posts: 153
Likes: 0
Liked 24 Times in 20 Posts
|
|
The 340PD. There is no better gun for carry. I have the tritium front sight and the CT laser grips. It is accurate, and pwerful. Also, it is easy to carry in a front pocket holster.
__________________
Fuego
|
07-08-2009, 03:52 AM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Left Coast
Posts: 3,952
Likes: 0
Liked 30 Times in 24 Posts
|
|
For the same dough?
What Fuego said, the P/D.
Were I limited to it as an "only" carry gun? The M&P.
So what I'm saying is, if it's to be your one and only get the M&P.
If it's to be your alternate, back up, or warm weather clothing carry option go the P/D.
|
07-08-2009, 03:59 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Copperhead Bluffs, Tennes
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Liked 4 Times in 3 Posts
|
|
After carrying mine for last few years, the 340PD is the cat’s meow as far as I’m concerned. I removed the rubber grips and installed the S&W Silver and Black wood grips and it slips in and out of my pocket with the greatest of ease.
But the M&P version looks like a nice 5-shot too.
|
07-08-2009, 06:31 PM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Washington
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
M&P my .02
|
07-09-2017, 01:46 PM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: United States
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
|
|
I have to ask this question
No offense, but why would anyone spend a thousand dollars on a revolver made especially to fire 357 magnum rounds, and only use it for 38+p's. I carried a 38 for 20 years, and there is nothing wrong with +p's, but you can buy a J frame that shoots +p ammo for less than half the price, and the weight is about the same on many alloy and Scandium, Titanium etc guns made over the years.
The idea of this gun was to enable one to carry a lightweight 357 magnum pistol. it's like buying a ferrari and diving it at 50 mph. By the way I am in the market for one if anyone wants to sell a nice used one. Or trade for a semi auto 9 or 45.
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
07-09-2017, 04:54 PM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 1
Likes: 3
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
I have them both ... and added the Crimson Laser grips to them both ... but prefer to carry the M&P 340 loaded with 38 special +P rounds. I just couldn't get used to that gray cylinder of the 340 PD. Looked like a cap-gun I had as a kid ... and as stated in an earlier post, the finish M&P 340 cylinder is much less fussy when it comes to solvents used in cleaning. YMMV ... but I will take the very small difference in weight for a more robust cylinder finish.
|
07-09-2017, 07:23 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Maine
Posts: 854
Likes: 88
Liked 116 Times in 57 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by gym
No offense, but why would anyone spend a thousand dollars on a revolver made especially to fire 357 magnum rounds, and only use it for 38+p's. I carried a 38 for 20 years, and there is nothing wrong with +p's, but you can buy a J frame that shoots +p ammo for less than half the price, and the weight is about the same on many alloy and Scandium, Titanium etc guns made over the years.
The idea of this gun was to enable one to carry a lightweight 357 magnum pistol. it's like buying a ferrari and diving it at 50 mph. By the way I am in the market for one if anyone wants to sell a nice used one. Or trade for a semi auto 9 or 45.
|
Because I can? and because I want to? I don't shoot .357s; for heavy metal I have my 45s.
__________________
Ed
|
07-09-2017, 08:26 PM
|
US Veteran
|
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 7,827
Likes: 4,251
Liked 15,247 Times in 4,178 Posts
|
|
I've had the 340M&P for years and just picked up the 340PD. Today my PD passed the litmus carry test, pocket carry in dress slacks. My M&P was too heavy for this. The PD weighs about the same as a sub compact .380, packs more punch and is more reliable (IMHO anyway).
__________________
Old Cop
LEO (Ret.)
|
The Following User Likes This Post:
|
|
07-09-2017, 08:51 PM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 322
Likes: 144
Liked 474 Times in 196 Posts
|
|
340MPD the middle option...
I first traded a pistol for a MP340 pocket carried it for a while..then was really itching to buy a 340PD, but decided to find a middle ground. I purchased a titanium cylinder and fitted it to the MP340, thus making what I've coined a 340MPD. I carried it for a while, then bought a 340PD, just had to have another one I guess. I loosely hold to the "one is none, two is one" theory. I'll also add that both of the revolvers needed to have their front sights adjusted to hit point of aim. I feel like these two cover my needs shooting 357 GoldDots. They both are pretty accurate with 135-158gr loads but I carry the 135gr GDHP short barrel .357 rounds.
Last edited by handejector; 07-09-2017 at 10:23 PM.
|
07-10-2017, 05:55 AM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 2,612
Likes: 3,067
Liked 3,444 Times in 1,366 Posts
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ed333
and
"I don't get the "ammo restriction" talk.
Maybe because I only shoot .38s in my 340PD, and there's plenty of room left in the cylinder, so I don't have to worry about it?"
I was hoping to see an answer to these questions, but did not....
Anyone????
|
The finish will hold up fine, you just have to be careful what you clean it with.
The ammo restriction is due to flame erosion on the cylinder face, with light bullets in .357
I have a 340PD, it is the Cadillac of pocket revolvers. IMHO.
I have the cushy crimson Trace grips on it, and magnums are no problem for me.
|
07-11-2017, 07:36 PM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: HOUSTON, TEXAS
Posts: 10,209
Likes: 7,187
Liked 14,403 Times in 5,426 Posts
|
|
I was looking at the 340PD today. The size and weight were impressive.
|
07-13-2017, 04:52 PM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 128
Likes: 11
Liked 72 Times in 31 Posts
|
|
340 M&P on the ankle for years. Used to be the only one to be carried off duty, but now I'm leaning to a semi just for the extra ammo.
|
07-13-2017, 05:00 PM
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 50
Likes: 1
Liked 6 Times in 5 Posts
|
|
Were you referring to the ammo restriction that is stamped on the barrel stating that 357 Magnum loads are to be no lighter than 120 grains. Being that 115 grain loads will accelerate the wear to the titanium cylinder that Smith and Wesson has no liability if the loads are used and damage will certainly occur after only a few rounds are fired. Regards.
|
|
Tags
|
340, 340pd, 360pd, 686, airweight, ccw, crimson, j frame, lock, rrwo, titanium, trijicon, tritium |
Posting Rules
|
|
|
|
|