A 9 mm j-frame

9mm jframe

Ok my 2 cents. I like the duty round in a back up weapon. I know that S&W made the 547 and a 940. I do know a couple of shops do conversions to j frame guns. As for a 380 j frame , not worth it. The 327 magnum has way more stopping power and could be a 6 shot. I still hope for a 686 40 s&w.











:
 
I'd put money on the table in seconds for an 8-shot 9mm with moonclips , like the 627 models from the Performance Center.
Fantastic guns , and 9mm ammo is available in abundance + cheap.
Lucky me , I already have 5 inch .45 Model 625.
 
Ok my 2 cents. I like the duty round in a back up weapon. I know that S&W made the 547 and a 940. I do know a couple of shops do conversions to j frame guns. As for a 380 j frame , not worth it. The 327 magnum has way more stopping power and could be a 6 shot. I still hope for a 686 40 s&w.
That's been done, find yourself a 646.
 
For those of you who carry 940's or other moon clip guns for concealed carry, how do you carry a spare clip (or clips) without it bending in your pocket, etc?
Thanks,
Scott
 
I've carried them in pockets and never had a problem with one bending.
 
642 in 9mm

Steve,
S&W did make the 940 which is very similar to the 640. Put the two side by side and it is difficult to tell them apart. The 940 chambers five rounds, so a seven round cylinder would be considerably larger and result in a larger frame.

S&W did make a lightweight 942 for Wiley Clapp and Mr. Clapp said the recoil was very snappy. Several members of this forum put 940 cylinders in 642 frames with good results. You can do a search and you will find some interesting reading.

A place named pinnacle does a conversion for the 642 to 9mm.
 
A 9mm snubnose would be popular with combat troops, I'm sure. It could be carried inside their trousers, in a groin holster.

Unless it was issued, they wouldn't be allowed to carry it, and if caught doing so could be punished (and most likely would).

Hate to say it, but the Army is never going back to the revolver, except perhaps for Delta Force or Special Forces, for a lot of reasons. Soldiers may buy such a thing but most will be reluctant to as carrying it starts breaking into the law of land warfare business, which the Army prosecutes their own more than the enemy for. By regulation and law, soldiers cannot carry non-issue, civilian designed and manufactured weapons with rare exceptions. As an example, if a soldier purchased a Beretta 92, even if it looked like issue, if he or she were caught with it, they could be punished, and severely.

As far as what insurgents do to soldiers after capture, it's not based on fair treatment or normal kind of procedures that we might know and they know all about searching in unusual places just like soldiers are trained to do; usually if the soldier lives very long, he or she would be lucky just to use it on himself more than the enemy and might even prefer to do so; normally soldiers are captured after being wounded, incapacited or unconcious following IED strikes or ambushes. Insurgents don't care anything about casualties among themselves and want live captives for propaganda and revenge and know well how to search and restrain them. If rifles and machine guns have failed to that point, handguns are useless and the insurgents have little or no fear of them. It may make the soldier feel a little better to have such a weapon, but not if he or she is being prosecuted by their commander for carrying it. It's not that easy for soldiers to even own firearms of their own in garrison, especially if they live in barracks; the commander can even deny ownership in environments like that, sadly. The other issue is that there are so few soldiers now (and there will be less in the future) that sales would barely be affected enough for there to be a need.

Now if all of us civilians would create a need as there are millions of us, that would do the trick. Sadly, the military has little effect these days on anything as soon paying light bills and keeping fuel in armored vehicles will be a struggle for those organizations. Glad I retired when I did, but it hurts me to see what's being done to our military...but I digress.

In the meantime, I say bring back the 2 or 3" 940 (I can't help it, I've got to put in a plug for the 547!) or the 3" 547 for those of us that can have them!!!:D
 
It's not that easy for soldiers to even own firearms of their own in garrison, especially if they live in barracks; the commander can even deny ownership in environments like that, sadly.


and that is why I will never live on post..... I do like the idea of a 9mm J-Frame and will buy one in a heart beat if one ever crosses my path.
 
and that is why I will never live on post..... I do like the idea of a 9mm J-Frame and will buy one in a heart beat if one ever crosses my path.

I concur with both those statements, unfortunately sometimes living off post just wasn't always an option for me.

Just wish S&W would make a 940 with the same extraction system as the 547.
 
I concur with both those statements, unfortunately sometimes living off post just wasn't always an option for me.

Just wish S&W would make a 940 with the same extraction system as the 547.

oh I understand that there may not be a choice at times, I will just avoid it as long as I can. :D
 
I posted this in another thread, but thought some might be interested in it here as well. I reference the 547 a lot, but I'd also like to see the 940 return just as much, I mean maybe anything in a 9mm revolver and here's some reasons why:

I keep trying to champion the cause of the return of the 547 (or even the 940) in the hopes that maybe someday S&W will....at least think about it.


Awhile back, I got to thinking about some comments I've seen on other threads about 9mm in revolvers, so I thought I'd put a little comparison together that is generic, and based on what I own, not necassarily what's out there for a more specific bullet type or availability comparison. I am a bit limited on ammunition availability, so I have added here a brief snapshot (literally) of .38/.357/9mm comparison. I own a L-Frame (619), so had to use seven round speedloaders, which will influence the width, but not length shown in the photos. I've included simple ballistics that, for instance, would be applicable here in Germany for hunting. However, here they use Joule and not energy per foot pounds, so I entered what we good Americans are used to. FYI, in order for a handgun to be used for hunting purposes, it must be able to produce 300 joule at the muzzle, which is about 220 foot pounds. Note: you cannot hunt with handguns in Germany, they can only be used for "finishing shots" (dispatching wounded animals). I had to used something as a comparison, so chose these ballistic figures, obviously one could get a lot more detailed, particularly handloaders. I'm also going to post this on a few other threads for reference, just for interest sake.

Like they say, a picture is worth a thousand words. Note the "power to size ration" between .38 special +P and the Federal 9x19 124 grain. A speed loader with 9x19 (in any flavor), is very easily carried, even in a pocket as the dimension is nearly equal all the way around. To me, this sells 9x19 as a revolver caliber in a lot of ways. For those that say you can get +P+ .38s to match 9x19 performance, what you can't replicate is the ammunition availability and compact size. The only problem with this is that 547 HKS speedloaders are not that easy to find; I was able to get about seven of them on ebay a few years ago.

357vs_edited-1jpg.jpg


And of course, I would be remiss if I didn't post a photo of my 547, which I own but cannot take possession of for a few weeks until the nightmarish paperwork clears (it's quite the process over here). Get them while you can!!!

58650_1.jpg
 
M2MikeGolf,
Keep beating that drum and hope S&W is listening.
Bring back the 940 in 2" & 3" barrels and the 547 in 3" & 4" barrels. The 547 extractor in the 940 would be terrific.
 
M2MikeGolf,
Keep beating that drum and hope S&W is listening.
Bring back the 940 in 2" & 3" barrels and the 547 in 3" & 4" barrels. The 547 extractor in the 940 would be terrific.

I just can't give up on it, will just have to be happy to have two 4" 547s in the meantime. I closed the deal on the one here in Germany last week, just waiting on the paperwork. Pretty happy about it, it's NIB just like my Texas 547.

I know I keep reposting that cartridge comparison, but it's just too dramatic to keep to myself (or so I think). On another thread awhile back, I kept seeing posts from people saying they saw no purpose in 9mm in a revolver, so this is my comeback. The difference is pretty serious between .38 spl and 9mm and you even get a power increase. I laugh often at the 9x19 detractors, it is proven and effective as long as the shooter fufills their part of the shooting responsibility. Even if S&W never puts a 9mm revolver back into production, I'm just happy there's still something out there!

Besides a 3" RB 547, a 3" 940 (just like Sebago Son!)is on my "gotta find" list when I return to the US.
 
They don't need to bring the old 940 back - IMO, at 22oz, it's way too heavy for it's intended purpose. What they need to do is to make a new scandium frame version, the weight savings would be substantial and make the gun so much more pleasant and convenient to carry. My 9mm 360J with CT LG-105 laser grips weighs exactly 16oz loaded with 115gr JHP. It is a breeze to carry and a great shooter. In fact, I shot an IDPA BUG match with it a couple of weeks ago and using UMC 115gr FMJ I won the match with a total time almost 25% faster than the #2 shooter.
 
Back
Top