M&P 360 and hot 357?

Joined
Dec 12, 2010
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
I am considering an M&P 340 for carry and had a some questions:

I have shot primarily semiautomatics recently. I am usually accurate with revolvers with the exception of the few times I've shot snubbies. The 357 and 44mag in K and N frame don't give me a problem and I've even run a few rounds through a 500 mag with an 8in barrel. The one experience with a 340PD was more humbling, one cylinder of 357 produced mediocre results. If I got the 340 38 special would be the primary ammo with just enough 357 to be comfortably proficient. My first question is how difficult to master a light J-frame with heavy loads?

Which brings up question #2:

From what I've gathered, even the full 357 loads from the 1.87in barrel would be lucky to match the ballistics of a +P 9mm. I have had good luck with Double Tap ammo in my autoloaders and DT makes some really stout 357s. Would these be just too much for the M&P 340? I would also like opinions as to whether 357s in general are really pushing the envelope for this pistol.

Thanks
 
Register to hide this ad
As far as mastering the lightweight J frame, that depends on you. You'll just have to go out and shoot it enough to feel confident with it.

One of the recent gun mags (I think it was American Handgunner) had an article on how these are expert guns. I shoot mine worse than any other gun I have. The size, weight, and trigger pull definetly make a difference when comparing it to a larger frame revolver. But if I spent enough time behind it, I could tighten my groups and stage the trigger correctly.

I regulate mine to back-up duty. I would much rather carry a comparable size semi-auto as a primary.

There's been several threads on ammo in the ammo section. If you can handle the recoil of .357 mag and shoot it accurately (when compared to .38 spl.) I don't see where you would be at a loss going with the mag round. There's also some compromises with this. Buffalo Bore makes a hot .38 spl load, while Federal seems to make a weaker .357 mag load. I would lean towards the hot .38, as the shorter cases would be easier to eject with the shorter rod.

Next question.
If your not going to use .357 mag, is the $300+ more you'll spend on the 340 M&P worth it for the big dot FS and 1 1/2 oz. lighter than the 442/642?
 
Last edited:
I've posted this before and think it's a great read:

From Gary Roberts:

BUG's: .380 ACP vs. .38 Sp
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If you are an LE officer, carry a BUG!!!

Many small, easily concealed semi-automatic pistols which are recommended for law enforcement backup or concealed carry use fire .380 ACP or smaller bullets. While these small caliber handgun bullets can produce fatal wounds,they are less likely to produce the rapid incapacitation necessary in law enforcement or self-defense situations.

Handguns chambered in .380 ACP are small, compact, and generally easy to carry. Unfortunately, testing has shown that they offer inadequate performance for self-defense and for law enforcement use whether on duty as a back-up weapon or for off duty carry. The terminal performance of .380 ACP JHP's is often erratic, with inadequate penetration and inconsistent expansion being common problems, while .380 ACP FMJ's offer adequate penetration, but no expansion. All of the .380 ACP JHP loads we have tested, including CorBon, Hornady, Federal, Remington, Speer, and Winchester exhibited inconsistent, unacceptable terminal performance for law enforcement back-up and off duty self-defense use due to inadequate penetration or inadequate expansion. Stick with FMJ for .380 ACP or better yet, don't use it at all. The use of .380 ACP and smaller caliber weapons is really not acceptable for law enforcement use and most savvy agencies prohibit them.

While both the .380 ACP and .38 sp can obviously be lethal; the .38 sp is more likely to incapacitate an attacker when used in a BUG role.

BUG--Infrequently used, but when needed, it must be 100% reliable because of the extreme emergency situation the user is dealing with. Generally secreted in pockets, ankle holsters, body armor holsters, etc... Often covered in lint, grime, and gunk. By their very nature, usually applied to the opponent in an up close and personal encounter, many times involving contact shots. A small .38 sp revolver is more reliable in these situations than a small .380 ACP pistol, especially with contact shots or if fired from a pocket.
--------------------------------------------------

There have been many reports in the scientific literature, by Dr. Fackler and others, recommending the 158 gr +P LSWCHP as offering adequate performance. Please put this in context for the time that these papers were written in the late 1980's and early 1990's--no denim testing was being performed at that time, no robust expanding JHP's, like the Barnes XPB, Federal Tactical & HST, Speer Gold Dot, or Win Ranger Talon existed. In the proper historical perspective, the 158 gr +P LSWCHP fired out 3-4" barrel revolvers was one of the best rounds available--and it is still a viable choice, as long as you understand its characteristics.

While oversimplified, bare gelatin gives information about best case performance, while 4 layer denim provides data on worst case performance--in reality, the actual performance may be somewhere in between. The four layer denim test is NOT designed to simulate any type of clothing--it is simply an engineering test to assess the ability of a projectile to resist plugging and robustly expand. FWIW, one of the senior engineers at a very respected handgun ammunition manufacturer recently commented that bullets that do well in 4 layer denim testing have invariably worked well in actual officer involved shooting incidents.

With few exceptions, the vast majority of .38 Sp JHP's fail to expand when fired from 2" barrels in the 4 layer denim test. Many of the lighter JHP's demonstrate overexpansion and insufficient penetration in bare gel testing. Also, the harsher recoil of the +P loads in lightweight J-frames tends to minimize practice efforts and decrease accuracy for many officers. The 158 gr +P LSWCHP offers adequate penetration, however in a 2" revolver the 158gr +P LSWCHP does not reliably expand. If it fails to expand, it will produce less wound trauma than a WC. Target wadcutters offer good penetration, cut tissue efficiently, and have relatively mild recoil. With wadcutters harder alloys and sharper leading edges are the way to go. Wadcutters perform exactly the same in both bare and 4 layer denim covered gel when fired from a 2" J-frame.

When faced with too little penetration, as is common with lightweight .38 Sp JHP loads or too much penetration like with the wadcutters, then go with penetration. Agencies around here have used the Winchester 148 gr standard pressure lead target wadcutter (X38SMRP), as well as the Federal (GM38A) version--both work. A sharper edged wadcutter would even be better... Dr. Fackler has written in Fackler ML: "The Full Wadcutter--An Extremely Effective Bullet Design", Wound Ballistics Review. 4(2):6-7, Fall 1999)
Quote:
"As a surgeon by profession, I am impressed by bullets with a cutting action (eg. Winchester Talon and Remington Golden Saber). Cutting is many times more efficient at disrupting tissue than the crushing mechanism by which ordinary bullets produce the hole through which they penetrate. The secret to the increased efficiency of the full wadcutter bullet is the cutting action of its sharp circumferential leading edge. Actually, cutting is simply very localized crush; by decreasing the area over which a given force is spread, we can greatly increase the magnitude to the amount of force delivered per unit are--which is a fancy way of saying that sharp knives cut a lot better than dull ones. As a result, the calculation of forces on tissue during penetration underestimate the true effectiveness of the wadcutter bullet relative to other shapes."

Currently, the Speer Gold Dot 135 gr +P JHP and Barnes 110 gr XPB all copper JHP (for ex. in the Corbon DPX loading) offer the most reliable expansion we have seen from a .38 sp 2" BUG; the Winchester 130 gr bonded +P JHP (RA38B) and Hornady 110 gr standard pressure and +P Critical Defense loads also offer good performance out of 2" barrel revolvers.

Any of the Airweight J-frames are fine for BUG use. The steel J-frames are a bit too heavy for comfortable all day wear on the ankle, body armor, or in a pocket. My current J-frames are 342's and previously in my career I have used the 37, 38, 649, and 642. I like the 342 w/Lasergrips very much. Shooting is not too bad with standard pressure wadcutters and the 110 gr DPX, but not so comfortable with the Speer 135 gr JHP +P Gold Dots. Before the advent of the 110 gr Corbon DPX load, I used to carry standard pressure wadcutters in my J-frames with Gold Dot 135 gr +P JHP's in speed strips for re-loads, as the flat front wadcutters were hard to reload with under stress. There is no reason to go with .357 mag in a J-frame, as the significantly larger muzzle blast and flash, and harsher recoil of the .357 Magnum does not result in substantially improved terminal performance compared to the more controllable .38 Special bullets when fired from 2" barrels.

For years, J-frames were considered "arm's reach" weapons, that is until CTC Lasergrips were added. With the mild recoil of target wadcutters, officers are actually practicing with their BUG's; when combined with Lasergrips, qualification scores with J-frames have dramatically increased. Now 5 shots rapid-fire in a 6" circle at 25 yds is not uncommon--kind of mind blowing watching officers who could not hit the target at 25 yds with a J-frame suddenly qualify with all shots in the black…

2" J-frames are great BUG's and marginally acceptable low threat carry guns because they are lightweight, reliable, and offer acceptable terminal performance at close range--downsides are difficulty in shooting well at longer ranges because of sight design and sight radius limitations, along with reduced capacity coupled with slower reloading. Nonetheless, with the addition of CTC Laser Grips and an enclosed or shrouded hammer, the 2" J-frame models without key locks (I personally will NEVER own firearm with an integral lock) may be the best BUG's and most reliable pocket handguns available.

Another great BUG option if it can be comfortably carried, is a compact 3-3.5" barrel 9 mm pistol like the G26, Kahr PM9, Sig P239, or S&W 3913, as these offer superior terminal performance compared to either .380 ACP or .38 Sp handguns. A G26 is particularly nice when using a G19 or 17 as a primary weapon due to the ability to use the same magazines.

As always, don't get too wrapped in the nuances of ammunition terminal performance. Spend your time and money on developing a warrior mindset, training, practice, and more training.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Last edited by DocGKR; 10-09-2010 at 09:12 PM
 
@Dump1567: What are you thoughts on the Speer Short Barrel 135gr .357MAG load. It was designed specifically for the 2" barrel snubbies. It's advertised as having less muzzle flash, reduced recoil, and the ability to expand consistently out of a 2" barrel.
 
IMO a 357 Magnum in combination with an extreme lightweight such as the 340 PD is a pretty poor choice for defense. As you've seen the recoil is beyond "stout", it's punishing. I also suspect that you weren't shooting in rapid fire. had you attempted that you probably would have put your followup shots well off target, perhaps enough to get you escorted from the range you were shooting at.

The old standby recomentation for these revolvers is to practice with the 38 and carry the 357. I have a real issue with this advice. Every 357 Magnum I've ever shot had a dramatically different POI when compared to the 38 spl.. So, practicing with the 38 means you'll be relying on a gun that won't shoot where you expect it to. When you are defending yourself from an assailent, missing is VERY VERY BAD.

Given a choice between one single 357 Magnum and 5 well placed 38's, I'll take 5 well placed 38's. As you can see from that link to the report on the ballistics of the 38 spl., even a mild target load such as the 147 grain full wadcutter can offer pretty good performance. With the recent high performance bullets available today, the stopping power of the 38 offers enough performance that I just don't see any need for the 357 Magnum.

Once you take the 357 Magnum off the list, then you have the option of going to the less expensive 640, which then means that you have that difference in cost to apply towards the purchase of ammunition for practice and defense. To me, this is all Win Win. You get a caliber that you can actually achieve proficiency with and have the option of timely followup shots that will actually hit your target.
 
@Dump1567: What are you thoughts on the Speer Short Barrel 135gr .357MAG load. It was designed specifically for the 2" barrel snubbies. It's advertised as having less muzzle flash, reduced recoil, and the ability to expand consistently out of a 2" barrel.

I can't comment, as I have no experience with this round or have read any info. on it.

My two .38 carry choices are the Corbon DPX 110 gr. and Speer GD 135 gr.. One of the advantages of the DPX is the pointed bullet. This should help with reloading.

Again, your just going to have to go out and experiment with recoil vs. accuracy vs. follow-up shots to find what works best for you.

Also, my needs with this gun may be different than yours. Mine is used as a back-up to my primary and I won't feel comfortable engaging targets at the same distance with a 2" Airweight as I would my primary.
 
I own an M&P 360 and while it is a fine weapon I cannot shoot it as well as my model 638 chambered for .38 +P. As to .357, I did fire several rounds from the M&P 360 at the range and agree with others. Save your money and buy a J chambered for .38 +P and practice, practice, practice.
 
I have a 360, a 442 and a 340 - had I known then what I know now, I would not have bought the 360 as I carry +p gold dots. A 357 in a 360 is tough, just no fun to shoot, and if I can't practice with a gun I don't carry it for protection.
 
I have a 360, a 442 and a 340 - had I known then what I know now, I would not have bought the 360 as I carry +p gold dots. A 357 in a 360 is tough, just no fun to shoot, and if I can't practice with a gun I don't carry it for protection.

Have you shot the Speer Short Barrel 135gr .357MAG load out of your 360?
 
For me, it's all about light weight in a pocket.
I am not a cop and do not HAVE TO engage bad guys or arrest them. If trouble comes my way, it will most likely be at 8 feet or closer. At that range, a good 38+P in a reliable J frame, with no exposed hammer to catch on anything will work.
I went from a nickel 49 to a 640 (38) to a nickel 442 and ended up with a 340 PD. I don't shoot 357's in it. It's loaded with Buffalo Bore 125 grain 38 +P's. The 49 & 442 with BB Standard Pressure 158's and the 640 with BB 158 +P's. If I couldn't get the BB's, all would be loaded with Corbon DPX +P's. I also figured that besides the weight, if the gun is built to handle 357's, it must be strong enough for ANY 38. But since follow up shots are most important, and because the Scandium guns don't seem to like all lead bullets, I settled on the 125 JHP from BB.
My life is real life, not the movies. I feel confidant that with 5 shots, I can defend myself against 2 bad guys, with a little luck and good shot placement. Three or more armed, I'm going to die regardless of how many bullets I have, whether 9mm, 45 or 357. Bruce Lee wins in the movies because he takes on 2 and 200 watch. If the whole bunch joined in, I'm sorry to say, the almighty Bruce would be lost at the bottom of the pile. I'm not trying to be a smartass, just realistic.
P.S. If I could only keep one of the 4, it would be the 640 (38). Yes, I would sacrifice the extra weight for the stainless finish and it was built when quality control meant something. It came from the factory with all edges smooth and a nice double action trigger pull. I LOVE the gun.
 
1 have a M&P340. I've shot the Gold Dot short barrel 38 and 357 mags.
I've also tested both going through cloth and water jugs with the bullet being stopped in wet newspaper. The 357 gold dot penetrated a couple of inches more and opened up a little nicer than the 38.

I've also tested the double tap 125 gr. 38 and 357 mag. Neither one opened up even close to what the gold dots did but were very accurate.

My choice for carry is the Speer Gold Dot short barrel in 357 Mag. I really don't think I will notice if my hand hurts after a life or death shooting and follow up shots are just as fast for me.

As far as learning to shoot the J frame......dry fire everyday.
 
Back
Top