Thoughts on trading a 442 and Glock 26 for 340PD

[quinn]

The 340PD is my EDC gun, and has been for years. Shooting full bore 357's is not a fun experience. I carry 38+p in the first 3 cylinder fo quicker recovery, then a pair of 357s in the last two holes. Nice to have the capability. But, I promise, I don't use 357s for casual plinking.

 

[alexrex20]

My 386 loaded with .357 weighs less than a loaded G43. And .357 > 9mm [emoji14]

And pocket carries just as easily.

Point is, screw the 340PD and get a 386PD.

Ok not really. You will still have a 442 to train with, even if you trade one for a 340PD. It's a no brainer. Practice with the 442 or the 340 with .38s, finished off with a few cylinders of defense .357 to remind you what it's like. If you ever need to use it, you won't be able to tell the difference between the 340 or the 442. But the bad guy sure will.

3oz lighter doesn't sound like much on paper, but it's noticeable in practice. It's a 25% reduction.

Sent from my LGLS991 using Tapatalk

 

[BAM-BAM]

Had 2 Glock 26s back in the 90s(?)a couple of years apart;........ rounded the trigger guard to get rid of the hook and added the "pinky"rest base plate............not a bad 10 shot 9mm.

In the end just liked the 3913 7+1) with the flat baseplate or the PC 6906 with modded ""pinky"rest at 12+1.......... better............

 

[Stopsign32v]

Many of the glib opinions on this thread need to be nuanced. "The Glock 26 is a pointless platform much like the 357 mag snub nose." Really?

In my opinion, yes really. There is nothing and I do mean nothing a 26 can do that a 19 or 43 cannot. Both the 19 and 43 can do everything better than the 26. 26 might have been a good idea in 2004.

To say the .357 is a pointless platform may be arguable for some shooters in an air weight J frame, but others can do very well with them. And, I had no problems with my father's stainless steel J frame .357. In any case, that is hardly the situation in an N or L Frame Stainless Steel or even Scandium like the N frame 8 Shot snub (2.625" barrel) weighing 37 ounces, or a 586 L-Comp L Frame, or a 686+ L Frame. All three of those .357 snubs can easily deal with hot .357 self-defense loads and conceal extremely well with shortened grips as pictured. I own two and used to own the third. And the 327 N frame scandium as well as the L frame night guard snub can handle self defense loads without pain too.

All of this argument is good, and you have great points. However you are missing one big point...2" barrels and 357 magnum do not work. You are wasting too much unburnt powder and having to deal with permanent hearing damage and a concussion that rivals a flash bang. MUCH better options out there. There has been test after test pointing out that 357 out of a short barrel doesn't have near the velocity and stopping power the 357 is known for. For the small amount of performance it gives, 38 special is a better option.

I own a Glock 27, but I'll take up the misleading statement about the 26. The Glock 26's standard unchambered capacity is 10 rounds, the Glock 43 standard capacity is 6. If you're going to compare a standard Glock 26 to a 43 with an extended base plate and then proclaim they're capacity is "practically the same" that is ridiculous, one is MODIFIED. You can make the SAME MODIFICATION to the 26 add a 9mm +3 base plate (Pearce Grips) to a Glock 26. Making capacity either 6 (Glock 43) to 10 (Glock 26) without the accessory base plate or 8 to 13 with. HARDLY similar capacity. A 40% and 45% percent capacity difference respectively. Moreover, the 43 is a much more difficult shoot for large hands than a 26.

So you can add the extended baseplate to the 26 and have a pistol with 19 grip and a short barrel. Still, there is nothing you can do to make the 26 slimmer, and that is where the 43 shines. It is an absolute DREAM to carry and I often times find myself grabbing it due to convenience. So still, the 26 loses terribly there IMO. Best option I ever found for the 26 was a GAP baseplate, that made shooting much easier. 43 is definitely harder to shoot but is very manageable. I carry Underwood +P+ in mine. Snappy but not even as bad as my buddies 27.

"The 26 is too heavy for ankle wear." Don't assume we wear the 26 on our ankles, although it is not too heavy for ankle wear. When I use a back up, I have a Glock 27 or a 586 L-Comp strapped to my ballistic vest with a dedicated vest holster. And, if you're primary weapon is a full size Glock 9mm like a Glock 34, then the 34's magazines are consumable by your back-up 26, not the case with the 43, just like in .40 where my Glock 27 can consume my Glock 35's magazines.

It is too heavy for ankle wear, flat out. No one is going to comfortably strap a fully loaded 26 to their ankle and call it a good day. That rivals people saying a Glock 17 is easily concealable IWB. Sure it CAN be done, but then again a man CAN turn into a woman.

And I'm strictly talking about CCW as this is what the thread was about. I have no advice on what would be a good gun for you to use in your tactical vest. You got me there.

 

[dwever]

All of this argument is good, and you have great points. However you are missing one big point...2" barrels and 357 magnum do not work. You are wasting too much unburnt powder and having to deal with permanent hearing damage and a concussion that rivals a flash bang. MUCH better options out there. There has been test after test pointing out that 357 out of a short barrel doesn't have near the velocity and stopping power the 357 is known for. For the small amount of performance it gives, 38 special is a better option.

No. Multiple companies make short-barrel ammo for the .357 and .38+P that burn very fast and manage blast very well (report and flash), I happen to use Speer Gold Dot Short Barrel in both .357 Magnum and the .38 +P.

I also like the Buffalo Bore - Barnes Short Barrel .357 Magnum, 125 Grain at 1235 fps from a 2.5 inch barrel and 1,190 FPS from a 2", with greatly reduced blast in both report and flash.

At 1,225 FPS as reported by Midway USA's web site (Buffalo Bore Ammo 357 Mag Short Barrel 125 Grain Barnes TAC-XP Hollow), that is 416 ft. lbs. of muzzle energy with controlled flash and report out of a .357 Magnum Snub. Want to stay over 400 ft. lbs. of energy in your snub but use a heavier bullet? Also, Buffalo Bore 357 Magnum Short Barrel 140 Grain Barnes TAC-XP Hollow Point Low Flash Lead-Free.

There are over 267 burn rates represented by gunpowder (Powder Burn Rate Comparison Chart @ www.reloadersnest.com), charts are readily available. Buffalo Bore uses some of the fastest.

So it would seem that using modern gun powder and a TAC-XP hollow point or similar, the .357 snub can give excellent velocity and stopping power necessary for self defense, and a snub nose .357 Magnum is perfectly appropriate for defensive carry. And, the statements, given properly selected .357 above about massive "flash-bang" comparable concussion, flash, and inadequate velocity and stopping power is technically, baloney.

Notice that NOT ONE 9mm load listed below in a Glock 43 makes the velocity or energy of either Buffalo Bore .357 Magnum Short Barrel load. Doesn't even come close. But the Glock 43 is your choice for, "velocity and stopping power" because according to you regarding the .357 Magnum snub, "2 inch barrels and .357 Magnums don't work." in spite of 1,190 FPS from a 2" 125 Grain Short Barrel load 395 ft. lbs. of energy?

Finally I didn't just give statements like, "test after test." Those are real numbers that are verifiable unless you think Buffalo Bore or others are lying, and I even linked the burn chart above from Reloaders Nest.

Here are some final numbers:

Ft. lbs. of energy in 9mm for 3.4" BARREL (read Glock 43 whose barrel is actually 3.39"). Problem is, some of that hot stuff down there is going to be a beastly handful for a a Glock 43 that loaded is 22 ounces and tiny. But all those numbers fall well short of the .357 Short Barrel Buffalo Bore in a 2.5" snub. Good luck.

1. Federal Hydrashok 124gr
a. 1120 - 80 = 1040 FPS
b. Energy 297.75 ft/lb

2. Federal HST 124gr
a. 1150 – 80 = 1070 FPS
b. Energy 315.18 ft/lb

3. Federal HST 124gr +P
a. 1200 – 80 = 1120 FPS
b. 345.42 ft/lbs

4. Hornady XTP 124gr
a. 1110 – 80 = 1030 FPS
b. Energy is then 292.05 ft/lb

5. Hornady TAP CQ 124gr
a. 1110 – 80 = 1030 FPS
b. Energy is then 292.05 ft/lb

6. Hornady TAP FPD
a. 1110 – 80 = 1030 FPS
b. Energy is then 292.05 ft/lb

7. Remington HD Home Defense 124gr
a. 1125 – 80 = 1045 FPS
b. 300.62 ft/lb

 

[Stopsign32v]

No. Multiple companies make short-barrel ammo for the .357 and .38+P, I happen to use Speer Gold Dot Short Barrel in both .357 Magnum and the .38 +P.

I also like the Buffalo Bore - Barnes Short Barrel .357 Magnum, 125 Grain at 1235 fps from a 2.5 inch barrel and 1,190 FPS from a 2", with greatly reduced blast in both report and flash.

At 1,225 FPS that is 416 ft. lbs. of muzzle energy with controlled flash and report out of a .357 Magnum Snub. Want to stay over 400 ft. lbs. of energy in your snub but use a heavier bullet? Also, Buffalo Bore 357 Magnum Short Barrel 140 Grain Barnes TAC-XP Hollow Point Low Flash Lead-Free.

And Underwood has a .38 special 125gr that clocks in at 1200fps and 400ft lbs of energy.

Again, I LOVE the .357 magnum round. In fact it is one of my favorite along with a real .357 Sig load. However out of a 2" barrel it is a bad choice and your argument of a dumbed down version people make specifically for a short barrel proves my point.

Sorry, I wish a 357mag out of a snub nose would make sense. I would own it rather than a S&W 360j.

 

[regalsc]

I went through this about 4 years ago. I found a 340pd no lock nib. I sold my Sig p238 that just sat around & paid the difference for the 340pd. It had a somewhat stiff action but nothing like the stiff recoil when shooting cor-bon 357 magnums out of it. All the time I had a 337ti that was unfired with a great da pull which I now carry. I found a 66-4 3" unfired that I sold the 340pd to partially pay for it & don't miss it. Lots of people love them it just wasn't for me. I suggest try getting a 340pd no lock in case you decide to sell it to some they bring a little more $.

 

[dwever]

And Underwood has a .38 special 125gr that clocks in at 1200fps and 400ft lbs of energy.

Again, I LOVE the .357 magnum round. In fact it is one of my favorite along with a real .357 Sig load. However out of a 2" barrel it is a bad choice and your argument of a dumbed down version people make specifically for a short barrel proves my point.

Sorry, I wish a 357mag out of a snub nose would make sense. I would own it rather than a S&W 360j.

The Underwood round is not clocked coming out of a snub barrel.

HOW ABOUT SOME DATA to make your points rather than the diversionary word smithing and sweeping generalizations that stand on no facts?

And how is a short barrel load making barely shy of 400 ft. lbs. of energy out of a 2" barrel dumbed down? Is that or is that not adequate energy for a self defense load? I think we both know the answer to that.

 

[gen3guy]

My first thought is that I wouldn't expect that 340 to do anything for me that the G26 or the 442 wouldn't do.

 

[Amp]

The answer for me was yes. Actually got the M&P340.
Bought mine to replace a 640 that I feel is heavy after carrying it for over 25 years. And I use 38+p in it.
The answer for you may be different.

 

[Stopsign32v]

At 1,225 FPS as reported by Midway USA's web site (Buffalo Bore Ammo 357 Mag Short Barrel 125 Grain Barnes TAC-XP Hollow), that is 416 ft. lbs. of muzzle energy with controlled flash and report out of a .357 Magnum Snub. Want to stay over 400 ft. lbs. of energy in your snub but use a heavier bullet? Also, Buffalo Bore 357 Magnum Short Barrel 140 Grain Barnes TAC-XP Hollow Point Low Flash Lead-Free.


Notice that NOT ONE 9mm load listed below in a Glock 43 makes the velocity or energy of either Buffalo Bore .357 Magnum Short Barrel load. Doesn't even come close. But the Glock 43 is your choice for, "velocity and stopping power" because according to you regarding the .357 Magnum snub, "2 inch barrels and .357 Magnums don't work." in spite of 1,190 FPS from a 2" 125 Grain Short Barrel load with how many ft. lbs. of energy?

Underwood reports their 38spc as the same velocity. Even slightly lower isn't bad. And the 9mm +P+ is at 1300fps and 465ft lbs. Not sure what size barrel they use, probably 4". But it is the most powerful 9mm round I could find. Still you have 5 rounds of your 357 magnum and I have almost double that and mine is much easier to shoot. So not sure what your argument is.

 

[Stopsign32v]

HOW ABOUT SOME DATA to make your points rather than the diversionary word smithing and sweeping generalizations that stand on no facts?

I'll leave this here and step away from this conversation. You seem rather bothered by it... Sorry for getting off topic OPer.

[ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tXFoaszcciM[/ame]

 

[CQB60]

I wouldn't make that trade. 442 has similar attributes and the G26 is renown..

 

[haywood]

I would carry the Two 442s and put the Glock away. Oh wait, I already did that. 357 Mag Snubs sound like fun but this old boy had enough fun when arthritics took over. 38+P is good enough for me these days. Try it before you by it. A box of full house 357 through something like a LCR or a J-Frame, hurts.

 

[shouldazagged]

Go to your dictionary. Look up "masochism'. You will find a picture of a guy shooting .357 Magnum ammo in a twelve-ounce, two-inch J-frame revolver. In a dark room, in some editions.

A pair of 442's and a G26 sound pretty good to me.

 

[sac-gunslinger]

What would you hope to gain from the 340? Magnum loads in short barrel revolvers offer very little additional on your target (but lots of additional energy on the web of your hand).

My EDC is a 642 loaded with standard pressure 38 Special loads. And I have carried standard pressure lods since the 70's, way back when I was young and macho (or so I thought). With standard pressure loads I can maintain good groups in rapid fire and not hurt my hands. And the energy applied to the target in the right place is far more effective that just a little more energy whizzing by the target you missed due to flinch.

IMHO, the 442's you have offer all you need in performance at a reasonable price, not worth trading them away. (If you have a 340 then more power to you, load it with 38's). Plus they are great to carry, all the corners and protrusions are rounded and snag free.

 

[629shooter]

Now that I have two 442 Pro models, decided I may trade one off to finance a 340PD. But owing to the price, I will need to include a Glock 26 I rarely carry in the trade. So, is the 340PD worth trading two firearms for? My thought is, I may actually carry the 340 and will still have a 442 Pro. Yeah, I know, 9mm ammo is cheap cheap!

I wouldn't trade both of them. If you want to "upgrade" your J-frame I would save up some cash and trade the 442. Odds are you won't use it anymore, if you own both.

Unless, you're a J hound like some of us.

Make sure you take a look at the M&P340, before you buy a 340PD.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk

 

[Muss Muggins]

I haven't ever traded two perfectly fine handguns for one. I've yet to see a trade like that even close to even for the two gun fella. Trade the 442 and pay some boot, and keep the 26. As for the ballistics argument earlier, ignore it. Put two in the ten ring with wadcutters and you'll be fine.

 

[gnystrom]

I didn't read all the responses so please excuse me if I am redundant. I have carried a 340PD since they were introduced. I carry it with Speer 135gr. Gold Dots. Plenty of firepower to deal with the distances that gun was intended. I am recoil insensitive so 357 mags don't really bother me. It is the follow up shot I think about.

Your 442's are an once or two heavier and exactly the same size so I would not trade due to the fact you are really not gaining much, besides the Glock 26 is a heck of a carry gun in these times when one may need more ammo to get out of an ugly situation.

If the urge is still eating at you, keep looking. These scandium revolvers do turn up from time to time at low prices just because the owner can't deal with recoil.

 

[kaaskop49]

I wouldn't trade both of them. If you want to "upgrade" your J-frame I would save up some cash and trade the 442. Odds are you won't use it anymore, if you own both.

Unless, you're a J hound like some of us.

Make sure you take a look at the M&P340, before you buy a 340PD.

^^^^what he said x 1000. Incredible how much vision some folks have!

Kaaskop49
Shield #5103
J-hound extraordinaire