Hybrid J frame

[slabside2]

I loved the weight of my 340pd but also loved being able to cock the hammer sometimes. What's the answer? I took the titanium cylindrer and crane off the 340 and installed it on my 438 and to my surprise worked! The cylender gap is between 600 and 700. It locks up super tight with no end shake or movement when it's cocked. Timing is perfect. Now I just have to remember to keep all 357 ammo away from it. It weights in loaded at
10.9 with the 340 grips installed. I put 200 rds of 130 gr FMJ and 25 rds of 125 gr +p golden sabers theu it and shot great. Now what to do with the 340 frame and a steel cylinder. I tried to buy just the titanium cylinder so I didn't have to use the 340 cylinder but NO one has them.
Mike

 

[kaaskop49]

Hi Mike. I read your post with interest as I consider myself a "J-hound." You'll see my moniker on most J-posts.

I don't know what you've gained, but you seemed to have lost a gun. You now have a .357 titanium cylinder on a 438 frame in which you will not shoot Mag loads. You also say you have a 340 frame with a steel .38 cylinder. It seems as though you are puzzled about what to do with the remaining frame/cylinder, you do not refer to it as a gun!

It's an experiment, pure and simple. It worked to a degree. It might be of interest if the legislative picture darkens and guns become 'thin', and I fight constantly to prevent this.

I would return the parts back to their original configurations and have 2 great revolvers. Don't even try to sell 2 hybrids, and 'hybrid' is the polite term.

 

[gtmtnbiker98]

What has been gained compared to what has been lost?

 

[slabside2]

I gain a super light carry gun that I can shoot single action if I want to.
I don't care to shoot 357's of the 340 anyway. I don't think I losted anything. I can always change it back or find another 357 titanium cylinder and have whole gun again. I'm left with the blued stainless steel cylinder from the 438 that I could sell on eBay if I want to. To each his owen. I very pleased it. Thanks for posting.
Mike

 

[hotrod150]

Someone posted recently about putting a titanium cylinder on their airweight (642?). I think they were able to get the cylinder from Numrich or Midway. Can't recall who it was, but you might surf back through the last month or so's posts and check it out.

 

[slabside2]

Someone posted recently about putting a titanium cylinder on their airweight (642?). I think they were able to get the cylinder from Numrich or Midway. Can't recall who it was, but you might surf back through the last month or so's posts and check it out.

Found it thanks.
Mike

 

[kaaskop49]

Mike, please check my post on your 'like' on the 649 thread.

 

[hotrod150]

It was driving me crazy so I had to go back & find that post myself. It's at the bottom of page two of "The wonderful world of j-frames" thread in the 1980 and up revolvers forum. TucsonMTB bought a pair of titanium cylinders from Midway & installed them in a 638-3 and 642-1, apparently with a minimum amount of fitting required. Knocked about 3 ounces off the weight of his 642.

 

[TucsonMTB]

It was driving me crazy so I had to go back & find that post myself. It's at the bottom of page two of "The wonderful world of j-frames" thread in the 1980 and up revolvers forum. TucsonMTB bought a pair of titanium cylinders from Midway & installed them in a 638-3 and 642-1, apparently with a minimum amount of fitting required. Knocked about 3 ounces off the weight of his 642.

Exactly correct, sir. Sorry I didn't see this sooner. Here's a link to the original post: http://smith-wessonforum.com/s-w-re...hem-j-frames-post137434947.html#post137434947

Oh, and they are working really well as you can see from this image.

 

[chipking]

Why not just buy a 360PD then you have exactly what you want plus the big dot tritium front sight. I carried one for a good while before going to a 340. One word of advice on the titanium cylinder watch out for flame cutting and throat erosion. I went through 3 cylinders on my 360 and 340 and one on my 396 before I decided that the titanium cylinders were not one of Smiths better ideas.
Chip King

 

[TucsonMTB]

Why not just buy a 360PD then you have exactly what you want plus the big dot tritium front sight. I carried one for a good while before going to a 340.

Uhm, well . . . I'm retired and not wealthy.

I bought the 642-1 locally for $350. It was slightly used and like new everywhere inside and out. The first of the two Titanium cylinders cost less than $100 on closeout at Midway. They have gone up since.

When I win the lottery, I will consider a 360PD. I am going to win the lottery, right?

One word of advice on the titanium cylinder watch out for flame cutting and throat erosion. I went through 3 cylinders on my 360 and 340 and one on my 396 before I decided that the titanium cylinders were not one of Smiths better ideas.
Chip King

Yep, I kept the original stainless cylinder for moments when I might desperately want to shoot 110 grain +P ammo at a dollar a round. Don't laugh, because it was the only +P available locally, I did just that to understand what +P recoil might be like before buying a case of the Federal +P pictured below.

 

[hotrod150]

I'd carry some of that Nyclad ammo you posted a photo of recently if I was you. Good stuff methinks.

 

[TucsonMTB]

I'd carry some of that Nyclad ammo you posted a photo of recently if I was you. Good stuff methinks.

Roger that . . . Thanks!

 

[hotrod150]

The dash model 442/642's are built on the magnum-length j-frame, but the only production 357 j-frames seem to have been built on the stainless or scandium frames. The aluminum airweight frame is apparently up to 38+P pressures of 22,400 CUP but not the 357's 46,000 CUP.
The hybrid I'd like to see is a 442/642 fitted with a 9mm cylinder. 9mm pressures at 35,700 CUP are just about midway between the 38+P and the 357, so I'm not sure the airweight frame would be up to it or not. According to the SCSW, S&W did produce a prototype model 942 airweight 9mm (see page 274) back about 1999 but only one was made. That's a pity, cut for moon clips it seems like it'd be a big seller.

 

[TucsonMTB]

The dash model 442/642's are built on the magnum-length j-frame, but the only production 357 j-frames seem to have been built on the stainless or scandium frames. The aluminum airweight frame is apparently up to 38+P pressures of 22,400 CUP but not the 357's 46,000 CUP.
The hybrid I'd like to see is a 442/642 fitted with a 9mm cylinder. 9mm pressures at 35,700 CUP are just about midway between the 38+P and the 357, so I'm not sure the airweight frame would be up to it or not. According to the SCSW, S&W did produce a prototype model 942 airweight 9mm (see page 274) back about 1999 but only one was made. That's a pity, cut for moon clips it seems like it'd be a big seller.

Not having fired a 357 magnum J frame, I cannot comment on its usefulness. With 125 grain +P ammo the Airweights we have are pleasant shooters.

I'm not much of a fan of the 9mm Luger cartridge. So, we don't own any. We do have a couple of Kahr PM40's and enjoy shooting the full range of S&W .40 caliber bullet weights in that semi-auto. Admittedly, 135 grain is the mildest and thus most fun. But, the performance of "fotay" 180 JHP is impressive.

I will refrain from suggesting S&W build any revolvers on that cartridge because it works so well in the plastic pistols we already own. Admittedly, at one point I was considering a "74020 - .40 Pit Bull, SS Std" from Charter Arms. I never found one I could buy easily and everyone who commented had unkind things to say about Charter Arms quality.

Then, along came a 638-3 and on its heels a 742-1, all sold locally as private sales and now, I am not the least bit interested in a "fotay" revolver.

In the final analysis, there is something special about a S&W revolver and a 38 Special J frame from S&W really makes me smile.

 

[jimmyrabbit]

I'm committed to a local dealer for a new 340PD, and now that I'm reading here about flame cutting of frames, I'm squirming a little bit. Any remarks? Should I keep my 442 and use it for point shooting at the gun club…carry the 340PD for its lighter weight and just eat it on having to own two pretty similar carry guns? I ask ya.

 

[TucsonMTB]

Excellent question, Mr. JimmyRabbit.

Although I am all too aware that financial circumstances might dictate otherwise, keeping both revolvers seems like a wise choice.

Those are my two, nearly identical, .40 caliber, primary carry pieces. Both have proven to be 100% reliable through hundreds of rounds fired. Not only do they ensure that I will always have one to carry in the unlikely event of a mechanical failure, but the replacement is already in place should it be needed because its brother is sitting in an evidence locker.

Recently, when a nice J-frame became an alternate carry piece for around the house and other low threat circumstances, a very similar, companion revolver quickly followed, ostensibly for my wife. Although she really enjoys shooting it. She seldom carries, so her's does double duty as my ready spare in the event of an unthinkable disaster.

Besides, J-frames are like potato chips. It is difficult to limit yourself to only one.

Admittedly, that is just one man's opinion and you will have to do what makes most sense for you.

 

[hotrod150]

My favorite carry gun these days is a pre-model 37 airweight Chief, but I rarely shoot it-- I shoot one of several steel or stainless Chiefs instead. They're all set up the same with 13# rebound, smooth narrow trigger, bobbed hammer, and uncle mike boots, so I figure that practice with one is applicable to all.

 

[kaaskop49]

The late Stephen A. Camp wrote a great book: The Shooter's Guide to Airweight J-Frames. Written in '09, yet VERY timely, I recommend it to any "J-hound." Still available from his wife, Sandra, at highpowersandhandguns.com. A must-read.

Never experienced flame-cutting on my early 360Sc. After finding a load that would not suffer the 'inertia pull,' I kept firing to an absolute minimum: 5 rounds.