Firearm & Gun Forum - FireArmsTalk.com

Firearm & Gun Forum - FireArmsTalk.com (http://www.firearmstalk.com/forums/)
-   Revolver Handguns (http://www.firearmstalk.com/forums/f16/)
-   -   s & w 640 pro series 2" .357 (http://www.firearmstalk.com/forums/f16/s-w-640-pro-series-2-357-a-77551/)

hawkguy 12-02-2012 08:51 PM

s & w 640 pro series 2" .357
 
1 Attachment(s)
hey all.

i have done some research, talked to a few guys at gun shops, held a snubby 640 (not pro series), all in all, i think this is the direction i want to go.

i'm attracted to the nice steel and improved sights. i know it is probably overpriced, but for once i wanted to invest in a slightly higher quality gun.

i wanted a compact pistol with some power because i don't have one. i have considered a concealed carry on and off. if i decide to get a concealed license, then this would be the gun i would use.

any opinions on this gun? any owners with praise or complaints? other models to consider?

all input appreciated.

magnumman 12-02-2012 08:57 PM

Smith and Wesson makes the best wheel guns on the market IMO. If you are comfortable with that round in that small of a gun, then I don't think you can go wrong.

hawkguy 12-02-2012 09:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by magnumman (Post 1036064)
Smith and Wesson makes the best wheel guns on the market IMO. If you are comfortable with that round in that small of a gun, then I don't think you can go wrong.

thanks for the input. i'd probably shoot 38's out of it 80% of the time. but its nice to have the option for the higher power round as well.

i would go with the cheaper aluminum frames, but i had a friend who told me they are very "snappy" even with 38's.....and i want my recoil sensitive wife to feel comfy shooting this gun.

magnumman 12-02-2012 09:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hawkguy

thanks for the input. i'd probably shoot 38's out of it 80% of the time. but its nice to have the option for the higher power round as well.

i would go with the cheaper aluminum frames, but i had a friend who told me they are very "snappy" even with 38's.....and i want my recoil sensitive wife to feel comfy shooting this gun.

I have an aluminum 442. It is a little snappy but it isn't horrible. My wife shoots it sometimes with no problems.

Clem 12-03-2012 11:32 PM

1 Attachment(s)
I have a 640 and a 340. The 340 is for carry much, shoot little. The 640 is the range gun. Both were off quite a bit in windage. I had dovetailed front sights fitted on both so I could sight them in to my satisfaction. If the 640 Pro had been available, I would have jumped on it.

willfully armed 12-03-2012 11:41 PM

I've sold my 442 and M60. Should've never sold the 60, but I turned a $250 profit. My next will be a 340pd.

J frames aren't range guns, they serve purpose as a concealable handgun. And have done a fantastic job for decades.

hawkguy 12-05-2012 12:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clem (Post 1037576)
I have a 640 and a 340. The 340 is for carry much, shoot little. The 640 is the range gun. Both were off quite a bit in windage. I had dovetailed front sights fitted on both so I could sight them in to my satisfaction. If the 640 Pro had been available, I would have jumped on it.

how do you like your 640? any complaints? can you get decent accuracy at say 10 yards?

was fitting the new sights expensive?

thanks

hawkguy 12-05-2012 12:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by willfully armed (Post 1037586)
I've sold my 442 and M60. Should've never sold the 60, but I turned a $250 profit. My next will be a 340pd.

J frames aren't range guns, they serve purpose as a concealable handgun. And have done a fantastic job for decades.

i see your point, but i'm hoping with the better sights, it could be used to punch paper at the range now and then? you have to train with your carry gun, right? :)

Clem 12-06-2012 02:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hawkguy (Post 1039220)
how do you like your 640? any complaints? can you get decent accuracy at say 10 yards?

was fitting the new sights expensive?

thanks

I have no issues with the 640. I smoothed up the internals and the trigger is now very good. The accuracy is actually very good, it just required windage adjustment so I spent some bucks on the front sight. I don't remember what it cost, but it wasn't cheap.

I basically consider the little guns in .357 to be .38s with extra margins of strength.

I also like the 340. It will make a better carry gun, if I can ever get a CCW, but I am not convinced of the durability of aluminum frame guns. I have several, but I don't shoot any of them too much. I have nearly identical stainless guns that I shoot regularly. While the accuracy with less than full power loads is very good, with loads approaching full power the recoil is severe enough that the gun is moving before the bullet leaves the barrel and accuracy suffers, at least for me. The Pachmayr Decelerator grips help me. They are much bigger than the factory grips.

hawkguy 12-06-2012 09:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clem (Post 1040773)
I have no issues with the 640. I smoothed up the internals and the trigger is now very good. The accuracy is actually very good, it just required windage adjustment so I spent some bucks on the front sight. I don't remember what it cost, but it wasn't cheap.

I basically consider the little guns in .357 to be .38s with extra margins of strength.

I also like the 340. It will make a better carry gun, if I can ever get a CCW, but I am not convinced of the durability of aluminum frame guns. I have several, but I don't shoot any of them too much. I have nearly identical stainless guns that I shoot regularly. While the accuracy with less than full power loads is very good, with loads approaching full power the recoil is severe enough that the gun is moving before the bullet leaves the barrel and accuracy suffers, at least for me. The Pachmayr Decelerator grips help me. They are much bigger than the factory grips.

thanks for your feedback. do hammers give you any trouble with carry?


All times are GMT. The time now is 09:25 AM.

Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.