M&P 340 (no lock) or 640 Pro

[The West Virginian]

Good morning, all.

I am looking for a small, lightweight revolver for carry and have narrowed it down to the M&P 340 no lock or 640 Pro. I like these as they fit what I am looking for with the ability to fire .357 or .38. Do any of you good folks carry either or both of these revolvers? If so, can you give me an idea if one offers significant advantage(s) over the other?

Thank you so much.
Aaron

 

[Mister X]

I've had a 340 M&P and a regular 640(not the pro model). The 640 was the more practical of the two when shooting .357 and I'd probably recommend it if you really intend on putting any substantial amount of magnum rounds through it. However, I found it a bit too heavy for pocket carry and the 340 M&P is the better overall EDC in my opinion. Both have high end sights that raise costs, but these are close-quarter self-defense guns rather than range guns, so I don't see the advantage for them and I'm just not a fan of night sights. I personally don't see the need for .357 in a j-frame snub and generally recommend the 642/442 as they make great carry guns and are half the price.

 

[SmokinLoon]

*points above* Mister X said it very well.

I do not own either, but I do own a Taurus 605 (2in, .357 w/ exposed hammer, and steel frame), a S&W 642 Performance Center in .38 Special, and a S&W Bodyguard 38 (BG38)

I do believe the weight of the gun will be a bigger factor than you may think. Having a true light weight CCW gun is important. The .357 in a light weight CCW is simply too much and not needed, imo.

I strongly suggest the 340 over the 640. Better yet, if you can find a 442 or 642 I even more strongly recommend one of them. The front sight on the 340 is nice, but is it worth it???

 

[F75gunslinger]

I too own a 642, and I recommend it. That being said, if you're really serious about one of these two models , grab a pocket holster and go find some that you can handle. Put them in the holster and in your pocket, and see which one you like better . Of course make sure the clerk knows what you're doing...but give it a go. Also realize that both guns will be lighter since they're not loaded . I know that my 642 is pretty snappy recoil wise , so I can imagine that a .357 in something a bit lighter will be pretty rough on you . If you plan to do much practice shooting that might be a consideration as well. The M&P340 was listed as 13.3 oz. , where the 640 Pro was listed at 23.2oz I believe. My 642 is 15 oz. for comparison.

 

[mclark202]

I have the m&p340 and love it. Used to have a few 642's but wanted the 357 capability.

I strongly believe the lighter weight will be a true deciding factor when carrying daily. You want the lighter so you will always carry it if you ever NEED to actually use it, you probably won't even remember the recoil or pain or even pulling the trigger.

 

[nyeti]

I own two of each. The Pro makes a great holster gun for a primary carry piece and great trainers for the lightweight guns. I am rarely without a M&P 340 on my person somewhere as a back up to my primary carry gun (HK VP9) or as a primary in house shorts or working out. Depends on what you want to use it for. I found the PRO's just about have to use a hot 158 .38 or 158 . .357 to hit to the sights. My 340's have short barrel Gold Dot in them. They will never see a .357 magnum (one is fitted with a Ti cylinder....at 11 ounces it is not fun to shoot with anything, but easy to carry in gym shorts).

I do feel the sights are worth it on these. You don't get to choose your fight, so I like the capability the sights give my older eyes.

 

[gnystrom]

I too own a 340PD and a 640 Pro. The Pro is beautiful to look at and pleasant to shoot but there is nothing like a Scandium snubbie for carry. Even the two extra ounces on the alloy Smith snubbies are noticeable.
If it is primarily for carry, I would go 340. If you want a solid gun for OWB and occasional range use, go steel frame snubbie. If you want an extremely beautiful snubbie go 640 Pro.

Or, you can do what I did and get all three.

Somebody stop me, Kimber has a six shot snubbie coming out.

 

[two-bit cowboy]

I, too, carry the M&P 340 no lock with Speer 135 grain Gold Dot Short Barrel .38 +P. My 340 replaced a 60LS (same weight and barrel length as the 640 Pro), and what a positive difference.

The only real plus I might see with the 640 Pro would be the action, but I don't mind the heavy pull on my 340. It seems to be getting better and better with more practice.

Cheers,

Bob

 

[tcon]

I've got a M&P340 NIL and my wife chose the 642. The 340 came at a good price and I liked the tritium front sight and the steel cylinder. The option to be able to fire .357 was a plus. If I had it to do over again with regular prices without the discount I got, I would get the black 442 (.38+P, steel cyl). Why? If you get the 340 and fire a regular .357, you'll know why. I don't mind recoil but damn, Daniel!

I love my wife's 642 and she loves it too.

 

[Lobster Picnic]

Both are excellent choices, depending on how you will carry. I say:

Pocket carry = 340.
Belt carry = 640.

 

[mj2008]

I have a M&P 340 so I'm picking that one. great for carry. Ammo wise you can't go wrong with 110 mags or the Speer 135 +P's.

 

[bowzette]

You might want to consider the Ruger LCR in .38+P, 13oz, and .357, 17 oz. as more options to look at. The trigger pull is wonderful. The trigger reset isn't. I get the "hots" for a 442/642 or LCR .357-not to shoot .357 but to reduce recoil with a bit more weight but not the weight of an all steel snubbie.

 

[kaaskop49]

I have a M&P 340 so I'm picking that one. great for carry. Ammo wise you can't go wrong with 110 mags or the Speer 135 +P's.

^^^^What he said. A lot of M&P 340s out there, more than I thought. I have two no-lock models and if I ran across a 3rd, I would have trouble passing it up. I use the CCI Blazer .357 158gr loads for practice: they're pretty much a heavy +P in a mag case anyway. I use the 110gr Mags for carry: the M&P's steel cylinder allows their use, while the Titanium cylinder of the PD version prohibits them. But don't feel undergunned if you carry the Blazers. And for some reason, with identical loads, the M&Ps recoil much less than the PD versions. I know, I've felt it.

Too many home invasions here in the valley, ugly affairs, take my word. The 340s serve as pocket guns in the house, and outside, as well. Don't know why it took me so long to come across these guns. Daddy's got 2 new girlfriends.

Kaaskop49
Shield #5103

P.S. BTW, the M&P costs substantially less than the PD model, some $300 out here. Another incentive to buy 2.

 

[Bill In Texas]

Both are excellent choices, depending on how you will carry. I say:

Pocket carry = 340.
Belt carry = 640.

Having neither, this would get my vote! I do like the 640 Pro. If my wife ever gets her license to carry, I would buy it for her purse gun. I belt carry a 60-15 Pro and pocket carry a 637-2.

 

[31FordA]

I have a 340 (no lock) and an old no dash 640. The 340 was bought as a BUG to the SP-101 I carry as my primary for work. I had been carrying a 442, but wanted the ability to use the same .357 ammo in both guns in a pinch. My usual load for the 340 is the .38 Spl 135gr GDHP (which I use in all my .38 J frames), although I don't find the .357 125gr Golden Saber to be excessive in it either. The 640's are nice too, but I wanted to keep the weight to a minimum for the BUG.

As others have pointed out if you need a lightweight revolver get the 340, and if you don't need the .357 capability get a 442/642. If you plan to shoot a lot of .357 get the 640.

 

[629shooter]

Both are excellent choices, depending on how you will carry. I say:

Pocket carry = 340.
Belt carry = 640.

You hit the nail on the head.

 

[The West Virginian]

Good evening, all.

I cannot thank you enough for the thoughts. While I still like the 340/640, and really want to pick one up, I believe I am going to go with the NIL 442/642, and save a few hundred dollars that will go to the possible purchase of a pre-lock 686 Plus 2 1/2" that I found today.

Thank you all so much again.
Aaron

 

[Jim1392]

As soon as you said lightweight you can rule the 640 Pro out. I have one and and carry it IWB and I can tell you that you feel the 23oz unloaded after a while. I retired my 642 to the safe when I bought the Pro but I'm sure as I get older then I am now it will be back out. The 340 is an excellent choice and if you decide that's the way to go talk to Kaascop49 he has them. I was thinking about one a while back but haven't found one around here that I can touch and feel. But saving the extra bucks and going with the 442/642 is a good choice also.

 

[tcon]

Good evening, all.

I cannot thank you enough for the thoughts. While I still like the 340/640, and really want to pick one up, I believe I am going to go with the NIL 442/642, and save a few hundred dollars that will go to the possible purchase of a pre-lock 686 Plus 2 1/2" that I found today.

Thank you all so much again.
Aaron

Excellent decision. Now it's silver or black. Life is easier when we narrow down to simple choices.

On my black J Frame, I've since replaced the rubber with Hogue Pau Ferro grips model 61351.

 

[cleans up]

Good evening, all.

I cannot thank you enough for the thoughts. While I still like the 340/640, and really want to pick one up, I believe I am going to go with the NIL 442/642, and save a few hundred dollars that will go to the possible purchase of a pre-lock 686 Plus 2 1/2" that I found today.

Thank you all so much again.
Aaron

Sounds like a good decision. Lots and lots of stories of guys who get an ultralight 357 like the 340 and run a cylinder or 2 of 357 before reverting to 38 sp. I'm also not convinced 357 is that great from an <2" barrel. Tons of info and opinions out there, so there you have it. I'm guessing you'll feel just fine about your 4/642 when you get it