Weight of 640 and 340 w/.357

[BigRich315]

I'm looking to upgrade my pocket gun, and after a little more time with mom's 60LS (yes, you read that right, MOM's) I decided a J-frame is the way to go.

My first choice was the 640 to eliminate the hammer and have a better grip, but then I began thinking about weight: its just too heavy. That made me look at the M&P 340 (it will make a nice set with my 40c), but then I began to think about weight again: is it too LIGHT?

I will be using .357, which I have shot many times with the 60LS, and it was a handful with it! Not so much the power itself, but I had to keep re-gripping. The rubber/synthetic grips will help (mom's still has the rosewood), but how much?

The question: how much difference does the weight really create between the 640 and 340 with .357 loads?

 

[Hikertrash98]

My M&P 340 weighs 16oz exactly loaded with stock Hogue grips.

 

[robotoid]

I have 4 J frames; a 640, 640-1, 637-1, and a 340SC. The 340SC is the lightest of the lot, but the most unpleasant to shoot (mines a .38spl too, not a magnum) and hardest to shoot accurately at anything beyond say 7 yards. The 637-1 was my carry gun for about 8 years before I acquired the 340SC. I think the 637-1 weighs about the same as the 340M&P. The 637-1 is fairly easy for me to shoot. It's amazing what a difference a few ounces makes in carryiblity and shootability. If tommorrow S&W came out with a NO IL 340M&P, I'd have one and it would be my main carry. I did pocket carry the 640 a few weeks ago, and its weight is very noticeable over the 340 or 637-1.

 

[robotoid]

Here's some more info. Not mine, but an old post by an unknown author I found informative enough to save.

Today I used an accurate electronic scale to weigh my J-frames and some accessories. Guns were weighed more than once, to verify the numbers. Regardless of what grips came from the factory, ALL OF THE GUNS WERE WEARING HOGUE BANTAM RUBBER GRIPS (like the 340 has from the factory) when they were weighed. Guns were empty. All weights rounded to the nearest 1/10 ounce. Results:

317 2", pre-lock: 10.1 oz
340PD: 11.3 oz
340SS or M&P340: 13.3 oz
640 no dash: 20.7 oz
640-3: 21.6 oz

If you replace the Hogue rubber Bantam grips with something heavier, here is the increase:
Uncle Mike's rubber boot grip: add .7 oz
Uncle Mike's rubber long grip from current 340-3: add 1.3 oz

Ammo:
five rds Winchester 110 JHP: 2.2 oz
five rds Speer 135 +P Gold Dot: 2.4 oz
five rds Winchester 158 LHP: 2.6 oz
Hopefully, everyone carries ten or fifteen rds total.

Bianchi Speed Strip: .2 0z
Safariland speed loader: .4 oz
HKS speed loader: .6 oz

Uncle Mike's #3 pocket holster: .8 oz
Safariland #25 pocket holster: 1.8 oz
I previously sold my Kramer pocket holster but it was much heavier.

It's interesting that the 340PD is .7 oz lighter than S&W claims, while the 340SS/M&P340 are exactly what they claim.

Also, the weight difference between the two versions of the 640 is less than an ounce, I would have predicted it to be greater.

Hope this helps someone...

 

[BigRich315]

You hit it close with "The 340SC is the lightest of the lot, but the most unpleasant to shoot... and hardest to shoot accurately at anything beyond say 7 yards.". Thats what I'm really going for, the shooting properties of the gun.

And it's about what I figured, but there's "unpleasant" and then there's "too hard to handle". Shooting the 60/640 gets to be a bit unpleasant with .357 (probably a little better with rubber grips instead of the wood, though), so how bad is a gun that weights almost 10oz less?

I guess I just need to get the gun, try it out, and it I feel uncomfortable with .357 I can use .38+P.

 

[flop-shank]

Rich, I carry a full power 5" 629 as a primary when possible, and fire full power .44 magnum ammo in it. I think I'm a reasonable recoil tolerant person. That said I own a 360 PD with wooden Altamont boot grips. The last time I fired that gun with full power 125 gr. Remington SJHPs, my right hand was screwed up for a month and a half. That was after firing five rounds. Like fat women and spandex, some things just don't work. The good news is that you don't have to shoot +Ps either. Speer makes their excellent short barrel .357 load utilizing their 135 gr. Gold Dot bullet. It's essentially a ballistic .38+P+ packed in a .357 case. The whole cartridge seems to be designed around scandium snubs, and in testing I did in Perma-Gel expansion is more reliable than Speer SB .38+P. Unlike other cartridges, bullet pull is a non issue with the SB loads. Recoil is still stout, but doable, unlike full power 125 grainers. I hope this helps.

 

[Hikertrash98]

You hit it close with "The 340SC is the lightest of the lot, but the most unpleasant to shoot... and hardest to shoot accurately at anything beyond say 7 yards.". Thats what I'm really going for, the shooting properties of the gun.

And it's about what I figured, but there's "unpleasant" and then there's "too hard to handle". Shooting the 60/640 gets to be a bit unpleasant with .357 (probably a little better with rubber grips instead of the wood, though), so how bad is a gun that weights almost 10oz less?

I guess I just need to get the gun, try it out, and it I feel uncomfortable with .357 I can use .38+P.

If you don't plan to pocket carry, the Hogue Monogrip makes shooting 125g & 135g .357 quite manageable and is not painful in any way. It allows a full grip and covers the backstrap which is what cuts my hand during extended range sessions with even .38 +P.

 

[BigRich315]

Flop-shank, one of my favorite shooters is a Blackhawk .44mag, so I'm also no stranger to recoil. That's a 3lb gun though... Gold Dots, I like Gold Dots. I'm a "heavy bullet theorist" but I'll have to give those a try.

Hikertrash98, I'll definitely be looking into alternate grips so I'll check those out also.

 

[flop-shank]

Flop-shank, one of my favorite shooters is a Blackhawk .44mag, so I'm also no stranger to recoil. That's a 3lb gun though... Gold Dots, I like Gold Dots. I'm a "heavy bullet theorist" but I'll have to give those a try.

While I'm not a heavy bullet guy by any means, trust me the SB .357s won't lack penetration (which is as much a product of velocity and expanded diameter as it is weight). IIRC I got about 13" penetration from my snubby.

 

[dirtygrunt95]

I have an M&P 340 and only shoot a cylinder of mags every few months through it, my big paws can't take much more than that. The rest of the time I practice with wad cutters and some 38 +P+ that I have and it's just fine. I carry magnums in it because I won't notice the recoil if I have to really use it. Just my 2 cents.

 

[Smitty500Mag]

I just weighed my 340PD on some accurate electronic scales and it weighed 11.60 ounces empty with Crimson Trace Laser Grips and 14.10 ounces loaded with 125 Gr. jacketed .357 Mag hollow points.

Smitty

 

[BigRich315]

I have an M&P 340 and only shoot a cylinder of mags every few months through it, my big paws can't take much more than that. The rest of the time I practice with wad cutters and some 38 +P+ that I have and it's just fine. I carry magnums in it because I won't notice the recoil if I have to really use it. Just my 2 cents.

That's also my thought, though I'll carry .357 and feed a few through it at the range, it's main diet will be .38. Hmmm, I guess I ask more out of curiosity than practicallity.

 

[Papa]

You hit it close with "The 340SC is the lightest of the lot, but the most unpleasant to shoot... and hardest to shoot accurately at anything beyond say 7 yards.". Thats what I'm really going for, the shooting properties of the gun.

And it's about what I figured, but there's "unpleasant" and then there's "too hard to handle". Shooting the 60/640 gets to be a bit unpleasant with .357 (probably a little better with rubber grips instead of the wood, though), so how bad is a gun that weights almost 10oz less?

I guess I just need to get the gun, try it out, and it I feel uncomfortable with .357 I can use .38+P.

Shot my 340 pd with 38 +p for the first time this weekend. After 15 rounds it had drawn blood twice.

 

[BigRich315]

While I'm not a heavy bullet guy by any means, trust me the SB .357s won't lack penetration (which is as much a product of velocity and expanded diameter as it is weight). IIRC I got about 13" penetration from my snubby.

I just read the findings in your Perma Gel thread, they'll be the first load I try.

I also found the .380 testing very useful. I'm still waiting on backordered Hornady Critical Defense's to arrive so I can see how they run in my P3AT, but your info makes them sound promising. I'll also try Speer, Fiocchi, and Rem GS (if I manage to find any of ANYTHING, I'm forced to FMJ currently after mistakingly thinking I put aside some carry rounds at my last range trip). I use Speer GD in my M&P40c, so why not in my .380 and .357?

Great info, keep up the good work, I'm sure many in addition to me appreciate it.

 

[flop-shank]

You're most welcome, Rich, and thanks for your kind words.

My hunch regarding the Speer .380 Gold Dots is that they will feed reliably in more guns than ammo utilizing Hornady bullets because of the rounded FMJ-like ogive of the Gold Dot bullet. I also think it's probably a more reliable expander than XTP or FTX. IIRC the Gold Dot that had issues was the one that hit bare gel while the one that hit heavy cloth expanded well.

Between FTX and Fiocchi Extrema, I like the Fiocchi. Ballistic performance seems about equal, but the Extrema is much less expensive and comes in a nickeled case.