M&P 340 to a 340PD

[oldguyshoot]

After six years of conceal carry, my trusty M&P 340 went to the great used gun warehouse in the sky. Like an old tool in the toolbox, well worn and well used, it will be missed.

Decided to go lighter this time with the 340PD. Just a few oz less makes a huge difference for me in the pocket. I was always aware the M&P was in my pocket, but I simply cannot notice the PD at all - must be a point for me at which this happens, and it's right between these two models. I've owned a PD before, and yes it is a little more brutal with 357s than the M&P, but they are similar shades of pain. Only thing I will miss from the M&P is the big dot night sight. But I figure if I carry it even 10% more since it's so light then there's the payoff. My previous PD was the external hammer version so glad to finally get the hammerless like the M&P it's replacing.

Regarding the expense: I toyed (pun intended) around with the idea of getting a 380 again (owned several Keltecs and a Ruger LCP before). Considered another Keltec 380 for about 60 seconds before getting sucked into looking at the Sig Equinox. But I thought, dang what do I really want in my hand if God forbid I ever need to use it? A 380 or a 357? I put down the Sig 380 and decided to never go backward on conceal carry caliber.

(Post edited because I can't keep my model numbers straight!)

 

[pesty3782]

Had one sold it like an idiot....You know you can punch out the front sight pin and put an XS sight back in.

I want another one so bad!!!

Tony P.

 

[Jeep4]

Nice!!! I had a M&P 360, and loved that thing, but like an idiot I sold it, and have missed it ever since. I even tried getting ahold of the guy I sold it to, to buy it back, but he just laughs at me. I finally found a M&P 340ct today so I brought it home, but I really prefer the hammer for so reason. I would like to try the PD version though.

 

[oldguyshoot]

Edited my original post. Can't keep the S&W model numbers straight. My trade-in gun was the hammerless M&P 340 not the 360. But yeah, I've owned a PD with the hammer and it makes shooting 357s way easier. Regarding the night sights, I can add them but the PD frame doesn't have that nice U-notch in the rear to match.

My new 340 PD has the simple blade front sight. I noticed this one is in the S&W archive page and the 340 PD with the hi-vis is still offered. Mine had been sitting new at the dealer for months so guess it was the last of them with the simple sight. Ended up paying retail for it. Painful, but it's the premium for getting to take one home right away. Haven't seen a new PD in stock at a LGS in years.

 

[TucsonMTB]

My new 340 PD . . . Ended up paying retail for it. Painful, but it's the premium for getting to take one home right away. Haven't seen a new PD in stock at a LGS in years.

Congratulations!

That is a great revolver and well worth the premium for instant gratification, in my opinion.

Nicely done, sir!

 

[Realgunner]

Who needs sights? Put Crimson Trace grips on it.

 

[joonbis]

I put xs standard dot on mine. Mine had fiber optic which has a longer channel so there is a little open channel behind the sight, but doesn't bother me. I have been told that the ones with the ramp front sight has a shorter channel which doesn't leave a gap.

 

[oldguyshoot]

I put xs standard dot on mine. Mine had fiber optic which has a longer channel so there is a little open channel behind the sight, but doesn't bother me. I have been told that the ones with the ramp front sight has a shorter channel which doesn't leave a gap.

So I'm guessing the standard dot makes a better sight picture with the PD's smaller rear sight notch. Good idea.

 

[vinny77]

IMO, the ultimate carry piece. EDC is in a nemisis pocket holster.

vinny
RVN 67-68

 

[oldguyshoot]

IMO, the ultimate carry piece. EDC is in a nemisis pocket holster.

vinny
RVN 67-68

Agreed. One of the best handgun self-defense calibers in one of the smallest, lightest, and most reliable package. I use a basic Uncle Mikes with the plastic belt clip removed. The steep angle of the holster fits deeper in my cargo shorts pocket than a flat-bottomed one, and the material is thin yet grips the pocket and stays put.

 

[Offshell]

Do you notice much of a difference in the way it carries compared to your old M&P? I was always fooling around trying to find light guns like the LCP or Kahr P380 that I liked. A month or two ago I found an M&P340 and ordered it and have been in love ever since. I added some CT grips and it seems perfect. It's taken a bit to get over trying to keep it pristine. It isn't really the cost as much as how easy it would be to replace. I know if I ever scratch a glock up enough to want to replace it, I could get one within a few days. It's a little harder to find these 340's.

 

[oldguyshoot]

Do you notice much of a difference in the way it carries compared to your old M&P? I was always fooling around trying to find light guns like the LCP or Kahr P380 that I liked. A month or two ago I found an M&P340 and ordered it and have been in love ever since. I added some CT grips and it seems perfect. It's taken a bit to get over trying to keep it pristine. It isn't really the cost as much as how easy it would be to replace. I know if I ever scratch a glock up enough to want to replace it, I could get one within a few days. It's a little harder to find these 340's.

I would say that I did notice the 340 PD carries better than the 340 M&P, but I should qualify that with "for me" since I'm tall, thin, and have lower back issues. My back doesn't hurt all the time, but if my pants have too much added weight in the pockets I really notice it. For one, too much weight starts pulling my pants down, so I feel silly always having to pull them up even with a belt. The M&P 340 is still better than an Airweight, but by the time I added the longer CT grips and 357 bullets, I'm betting the weight was about the same. (And you know these guns are light when you can tell the difference between carrying five 357 bullets and five 38 bullets.)

I will say the M&P 340 is the better-shooting choice if you don't mind the extra weight. The big dot night sights are the ****, and the heavier cylinder makes 357s more controllable. But for me the weight difference makes the 340 PD the better carry choice. It's worth noting that even if you don't mind the added weight of the M&P in the pocket, you WILL notice it in a light jacket pocket. Regardless of how big a boy you are, a saggy, weighted down jacket pocket is annoying and potentially a sign to a wary eye that you're carrying.

I used the longer CT grips on my M&P and they make it much easier to shoot; however, I eventually grew weary of the loss of concealment when carrying. So I think either gun is perfect with the shorter CT grips - the best compromise for shooting AND carry. Eventually will get them for my 340 PD.

When I have to carry IWB (winter with jeans that don't have deep pockets) I've gone to the XDs 45. A while back I owned an XDs (pre-recall), and it was a giant, smelly ****. Light strikes and failure to return to battery were its calling card. But a few weeks ago I bought another one (bi-tone), and it's been flawless.

So overall I feel good with the carry choices I've made. 357 and 45 - not much to not like.

 

[Mike Grasso]

First year (2000) 342PD, been carrying it since then.

 

[civil1977]

First year (2000) 342PD, been carrying it since then.

That's a rare one and a heck of a good choice for carry. The PD version of the 342 was only made for one year before the lock was added.

 

[cs45pilot]

My hats' off to you OLDGUYSHOOT.
First time I've ever seen "well worn and well used" and S&W 340 in the same sentence. I once had a 340PD and it felt like I got hit in the hand by a hockey puck every time I pulled the trigger (357's). Both are GREAT guns though for their intended purpose.

 

[whitsue]

Love the M&P 340, but love it best with semi hot .38's