S&W M&P 340 CT Revolver - Thoughts?

This is a discussion on S&W M&P 340 CT Revolver - Thoughts? within the Defensive Carry Guns forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; Originally Posted by austinguy23 Man, that's slick! Thanks for the pics. By the way, I noticed on a gun shop's website that the owner stated ...

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 17 of 17

Thread: S&W M&P 340 CT Revolver - Thoughts?

  1. #16
    Member Array samtechlan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    102
    Quote Originally Posted by austinguy23 View Post
    Man, that's slick! Thanks for the pics.

    By the way, I noticed on a gun shop's website that the owner stated "Unsafe - do not shoot" on all of his M&P Airweight guns. I thought it was odd since they were all listed as new, so I e-mailed him to ask about it. He responded "These guns were made with alloy cylinders and the unsafe to fire warning comes from Smith & Wesson itself."

    This blows me away. Did your S&W come with such a disclaimer/warning? I can't believe a gun manufacturer would sell a gun they consider unsafe or list as unsafe.


    http://www.collectorsfirearms.com/ad...%26p+airweight
    Those guns are from the 1950's and they are indeed unsafe to shoot with ANY ammo as per Smith. Smith realized in short order that aluminum cylinders were not safe on a revolver in .38 special and went back to steel cylinders. That is the way Airweights have been made to the present date. The surviving guns with the aluminum cylinders are indeed very valuable as collector's items since they are so rare, but they have no value at all as working guns.

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #17
    Member Array Spiff_P239's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    SE Michigan
    Posts
    178
    Quote Originally Posted by austinguy23 View Post
    Man, that's slick! Thanks for the pics.

    By the way, I noticed on a gun shop's website that the owner stated "Unsafe - do not shoot" on all of his M&P Airweight guns. I thought it was odd since they were all listed as new, so I e-mailed him to ask about it. He responded "These guns were made with alloy cylinders and the unsafe to fire warning comes from Smith & Wesson itself."

    This blows me away. Did your S&W come with such a disclaimer/warning? I can't believe a gun manufacturer would sell a gun they consider unsafe or list as unsafe.


    http://www.collectorsfirearms.com/ad...%26p+airweight
    As samtechlan pointed out, Smith & Wesson no longer uses aluminum for the revolver cylinders (unless it's on the 317 which is a .22LR J-frame). The cylinder on my M&P is stainless steel, while other .38/.357 J-frames may use titanium, stainless steel, or carbon steel depending on the model.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. Thoughts on revolver hammer types
    By danlct in forum Defensive Carry Guns
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: July 15th, 2010, 11:17 PM
  2. Thoughts on the G27.
    By wormy in forum Defensive Carry Guns
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: March 25th, 2010, 11:32 PM
  3. SA thoughts?
    By Carry4MyFam in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: January 9th, 2010, 07:09 PM
  4. Could use some others' thoughts here...
    By artz in forum Defensive Carry Guns
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: January 10th, 2008, 02:23 PM
  5. Thoughts on the PPK
    By Hobbes in forum Defensive Carry Guns
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: September 30th, 2006, 10:19 PM

Search tags for this page

m&p 340 ct

,

m&p 340 ct review

,

m&p 340 ct revolver

,
m&p340 ct
,
model m&p 340 ct review
,

model m&p340 ct

,

s&w m&p 340 ct

,
s&w m&p 340 ct review
,

smith and wesson m&p 340 ct

,
smith and wesson m&p 340 ct review
,

smith and wesson model m&p 340 ct revolver

,
smith and wesson model m&p 340 ct revolver review
Click on a term to search for related topics.