642 PC vs M&P 340

[Apyung]

Hello All,
New to the forum but not to S&W. Through the years I’ve owned a first gen Shield 40, and gone through 3 442s and 2 M&P 340s. The last was a 442 Performance Center (11516) from Christmas. It caused me nothing but issues, FTF 3 times while I shot it during qualifications and ended up having to send it to S&W due to the FTF issue and noticing the locking bolt pin was missing while cleaning it after quals. Still had issues after receiving it back with S&W installing the pin and saying nothing found causing the FTF.

I’m ready to give another J frame a try for conceal carry and a backup at work. I’ve narrowed it down to either a 642 Performance Center (10186) or going back to a M&P 340 (103072).

I’m sure there’s been countless of comparisons between a 442/642 and the M&P 340 on here, as there a numerous on YouTube and the web. However, I have not found a companions of a Performance Center 442/642 and a M&P 340. I know the decisions I ultimately mine, however I would like some input.

What I like about the M&P 340 over the standard 442 was the sight picture and weight. With this said I do recall having to angle my wrist downward when I shot, if not I shot high. I did like the trigger on the Performance Center 442. But didn’t like the standard blade sight. I will be practicing with 38 and carry 38+p (department issued). 99% likelihood of not shooting any 357 load through the M&P340.

Not having handled or seen a 642 PC in person, is the 642 series easier to pick up the front blade compared to the 442 series? Also does the 642 PC model #10186 have the internal lock? I have seen pictures of it with and without the lock. I called the shop where I would buy it from and they could not give me a solid yes or no. Every description I read does not say if it does or doesn’t have the lock. And lastly it says the cylinder is cut for mood clips. When not using moon clips do the rounds move around? I haven’t used noon clips.

Would the 642 PC be better for my needs? Is the add $150 for M&P340 justified just for a front sight and weight savings? Does Performance Center offer the performance tune action package for the M&P340, I remember the tigger being heavy.

Sorry for the long winded post but I appreciate any input/insight.

 

[malph]

You've gone through a lot of J frames. You pretty much know the deal with them by now.

They all have relatively heavy triggers. The sight radius is short. The sights may or may not be regulated to point of aim for the load you want to carry. Hard to shoot well.

Still the best thing going for a highly reliable backup piece.

You get out of a J frame what you put into it. Practice, practice, practice and the trigger will seem fine. Sights will seem adequate. You'll be able to hit what you aim at at reasonable distances.

Ok. All that being said, I'd get the M&P340. The front sight is pinned. You can change it if necessary. It will be more durable, which is a consideration if you are going to practice with it.
The finish should be more durable. It should be highly corrosion resistant which could be a consideration.

You can always have someone who knows what they are doing smooth out the action. It may not need it though. Most come decent enough from the factory.

But in the end, you are going to have to put the time in to get good with it.

The problem was probably not with all your previous J frames. You have to do your part, and with a lightweight J frame, there is no "easy button".

 

[ContinentalOp]

The 642 PC has the same sights as the 642. The sights are silver, so visibility would depend on what kind of target you're aiming at and the lighting where you're shooting. My experience is that they're more likely to wash out, especially with overhead lighting, so I paint my sights.

Can't help with no-lock availability of the PC.

I'm not a fan of moonclips. My understanding is the 642 PC doesn't require moonclips, but I can't say how reliable firing one without the clips would be.

The only reason I'd get the 340 M&P would be for the sights. They are replaceable, so you may be able to find a different sight, but I don't know what alternatives are available.

Personally, if I were in your position, I'd just get a 642-1 (or a 442-1, if so inclined), paint the sights for improved visibility, and, if necessary, have a gunsmith smooth the trigger action while retaining the factory springs for reliability. I think this is probably the most cost-effective approach, unless you just absolutely have to have a tritium front sight.

Just my opinion.

 

[B_Still]

I'm fairly new to revolvers, spent a few months each with a Model 65 and an LCR. But I've never heard of a "FTF" malfunction in the context of revolvers. I assume that just means that the cylinder gets stuck and doesn't rotate the next round into place?

Sent from my LM-G710 using Tapatalk

 

[ContinentalOp]

OP probably meant "Fail to Fire." That's why I've always hated the "FTF" acronym. It could mean either "Fail to Fire" or "Fail to Feed."

 

[malph]

OP probably meant "Fail to Fire." That's why I've always hated the "FTF" acronym. It could mean either "Fail to Fire" or "Fail to Feed."

So how does that happen with a J frame? It's almost always due to someone mucking with the gun. Changing out springs typically.

I know I'm being a little harsh with the OP but it seems like he is looking for a hardware solution to a software problem. He's gone through a lot of revolvers.

Don't change springs. Put the money into ammo and practice. You will be better off.

 

[Apyung]

Thanks for all the responses. Sorry for the acronym. It was he failed to fire, the cylinder would move and the trigger wouldn’t pull. It was witness by the range instructor who was administering my qualification. It happened once more once I got it back, I decided I didn’t want to mess with it and sold it. It also had a real stiff cylinder release button. I had reserved feelings on it when I first got it. It was ordered online and my fault for not taking a close inspection before doing the paperwork. Once I got home and did a full inspection and what I thought may have been the oil S&W put on ended up looking like residue from being shot. I actually brought it to my LGS to look over and the consensus showing it off was it had been used. I called the online dealer and they swore it was new but had been sitting on their shelf. Called S&W, they looked up the serial number and said there were no prior warrant claims on it and it was manufactured 11/2015. Top it off the shop swore it was from Davidson’s so it would be a free replacement if any issues, after a 30 conversation with Davidson reps running the serial number then running the model number they swore it was not a model J frame they distributed.

I had one issue with my second M&P 340 which is the cylinder release came off as I took off my IWB holster. Heard something fall and looked down saw the screw and release button.

The reason for going through so many J frames is it was my primary (only) conceal carry pieces and I would want to switch to a semi auto so I sell the J frame but then missed the weight and concealability so would I go back to a J frame.

I was concerned being silver it would wash out in light background and did think of paining the ramp. I don’t want to spend more money then necessary which is why I’m looking at the Performance Center and the M&P since they are “top of the line” for J frames outside of the M&P PD models, which I’ve read about issues with the cylinders.

 

[kaaskop49]

There are 2 PC 642 models. 10186 does NOT have the IL. 170348 DOES have the IL. Why 2 PC models? Prolly so J-hounds like me will buy both guns.

Kaaskop49
Shield #5103

 

[Linejudgemick]

I have a PC 10186 version 642, but I don't have any experience with the other S&W revolvers mentioned. (You are a great deal more experienced with J-frames than I am.) I can say I've never had any issues with it of any kind, but I don't have a gazillion rounds thru it either. I find it shoots to point of aim and it is very smooth and easy to shoot. It does NOT have the internal lock. I prefer speed strips for reloads due to their slim profile in my off-hand pocket. I do use a moon clip for the first load because they enhance case removal. The silver colored front sight and silver colored groove can blend together so I painted the front. I'm very pleased with mine, but it's only an example of one. Good luck and I hope you are happy with whatever you choose.

 

[mikerjf]

Shooting 38's in a 357, there can be a buildup of residue in the chambers ahead of the case. On firing, it is possible for the case to back up and then get 'stuck' there against the recoil shield, binding up the cylinder.

I even had this happen in a 38 Special-only gun from shooting lots of full wadcutters. Then loaded LSWC and had binding issues. Cleaned the cylinder carefully, shot only 158 LSWC's from then on, and no more issues.

Maybe this is your FTF problem?

 

[Apyung]

Shooting 38's in a 357, there can be a buildup of residue in the chambers ahead of the case. On firing, it is possible for the case to back up and then get 'stuck' there against the recoil shield, binding up the cylinder.

I even had this happen in a 38 Special-only gun from shooting lots of full wadcutters. Then loaded LSWC and had binding issues. Cleaned the cylinder carefully, shot only 158 LSWC's from then on, and no more issues.

Maybe this is your FTF problem?

Thanks for this insight. I’ve heard of this but didn’t fully understand. Would like effect long term use on the M&P 340?

 

[Apyung]

I have a PC 10186 version 642, but I don't have any experience with the other S&W revolvers mentioned. (You are a great deal more experienced with J-frames than I am.) I can say I've never had any issues with it of any kind, but I don't have a gazillion rounds thru it either. I find it shoots to point of aim and it is very smooth and easy to shoot. It does NOT have the internal lock. I prefer speed strips for reloads due to their slim profile in my off-hand pocket. I do use a moon clip for the first load because they enhance case removal. The silver colored front sight and silver colored groove can blend together so I painted the front. I'm very pleased with mine, but it's only an example of one. Good luck and I hope you are happy with whatever you choose.

This is good information and what I was hoping for. Thank you!

 

[Apyung]

Looking at the cost, it’s more effective for the 642 PC. I would actually save $250+ on the gun itself and another $150 if I wanted to send the M&P 340 to Performance Center for the tuned action. Wish I could just pick up both.

 

[mikerjf]

Thanks for this insight. I’ve heard of this but didn’t fully understand. Would like effect long term use on the M&P 340?

Depends on how much you are going to shoot, and what. Jacketed ammo would do this less, IMO. Careful cleaning/deleading fixes it.

What I learned to do: when I load the gun, before I close the cylinder, I push the ejector rod in bit and make all 5 cartridges rise up, and then let them drop back. Just to see that they move freely in and out. If they stick in at all, or won’t fall fully back in on their own, that’s when this problem can appear during actual firing.

 

[Apyung]

Thanks for the valuable info and insight.