Smith and Wesson Factory 9mm Revolvers

[LibertyNeverDies]

I was looking on Smith and Wesson's site and found these
Model 929 (http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/Product4_750001_750051_827553_-1_757896_757751_757751_ProductDisplayErrorView_Y)
Model 986 (http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/Product4_750001_750051_827555_-1_757896_757751_757751_ProductDisplayErrorView_Y)

I'm glad to see that SW is offering 9mm revolvers but I'd much rather see them offered in a J-Frame. I hope this mean future SW 9mm revolvers to come(J-Frames:cool:).

[19852]

I've seen these [not in person]. Just what is S&W's target market with these? I can assume competition but what game?

[86 slo-vo]

I would buy one of these in a Jframe.

Trying to stay away from picking up more calibers.

[LibertyNeverDies]

I think they are marketing to high volume revolver shooters who don't reload. 9mm is much cheaper than 38 is you are buying factory ammo.

[LibertyNeverDies]

I would buy one of these in a Jframe.

Trying to stay away from picking up more calibers.

They would sell a ton a J Frames if they would just make them.

[jr1572]

They would sell a ton a J Frames if they would just make them.

I would be all over one of these.

JR1572

[walkin' trails]

Agreed. A 940 as well as offerings with alloy frames.

Sent from my HTCONE using Tapatalk

[jr1572]

Agreed. A 940 as well as offerings with alloy frames.

Sent from my HTCONE using Tapatalk

I want a 940 that doesn't take moon clips and has an extraction system like a 547.

JR1572

[xpd54]

USPSA just changed the rules for revolver class. These make sense if you want to shoot revolver class in USPSA and maybe ICORE. I shoulda waited a year. I bought a 686SSR last year. Woulda rather had one of these.

[anachronism]

I've had two different 940s. The 357 guns I replaced them with are far superior to the 940s as far as shootability goes. 9mm snubbys have a very sharp recoil, and are especially loud. The 9mm reloads in moon clips bent in my pockets, causing erratic trigger pull. They should have been better, but they just weren't. The 547 cylinders were expensive to make, and at the end, the people who called on S&W to make them simply didn't buy the guns, so they were discontinued.

[G19A3]

Agreed. A 940 as well as offerings with alloy frames.

Agreed, alloy frames. The 940 was too heavy for a pocket pistol. It would need to be worn with a belt. Might as well carry something a little more substantial. In fact, I believe a Glock 19 weighs the same, both loaded.

I would also love a shortened "I-frame" similar to the short-lived Taurus IBUS or something a couple years back, but with reliable S&W engineering.

[G19A3]

I want a 940 that doesn't take moon clips and has an extraction system like a 547.

JR1572

Double down on this. M547 extraction system, no moon clips. (Would prefer the more durable and flatter Speed Strips made expressly for 9mm for reloads.)

Combined with alloy "I-frame".

[G19A3]

I've had two different 940s. The 357 guns I replaced them with are far superior to the 940s as far as shootability goes. 9mm snubbys have a very sharp recoil, and are especially loud. The 9mm reloads in moon clips bent in my pockets, causing erratic trigger pull. They should have been better, but they just weren't. The 547 cylinders were expensive to make, and at the end, the people who called on S&W to make them simply didn't buy the guns, so they were discontinued.

Can you elaborate on this?

What ammo were the "357's" shooting when you compared it directly to the M940? .38 or .357 ammo? What type/weight of 9mm ammo, +P?

Shootability? Recoil? Loudness? (A comparison scale of 1 to 10 of each category would be helpful.)

I always loved the M940 idea, but the excessive weight was a turn off.

Cheap 9mm ammo compatability with my G19's, what's not to love?

[halo2304]

I owned a Taurus M905 for a short time. I can attest to the recoil being obnoxious. Despite the gun being all steel, it was painful to shoot. The fact that it was January didn't help much either. Personally, I'd love to see S&W make a K frame snubby in 9mm. And as much as they suck, I would be okay with it using moon clips.

[walkin' trails]

I bought a brand new 940 in the early 1990s. I thought it would be the ultimate revolver BUG to my 9mm semi duty pistol. This one had the 2 inch heavy barrel (I've since seen some with the lighter weight 38-style barrel). Anyway, the gun handled great, and I was still using the factory wood grips. I tried it with my 115 grain +p+ duty load and it handles them without problems. It was controllable. I've also fires J-frame 357s and the 940 with +p+ was better. My problem with the revolver arose when shooting some 147 grain Hydra Shoks I had acquired. The cylinder bound up and wouldn't open until the gun cooled down. I hadn't shot more than a couple of cylinders that day when it happened. I took the gun back to the shop and they sent it to S&W for me. It came back supposedly fixed, but no explanation of the repair. I swapped it for a 640 immediately. That probably was a mistake. I did not really like the moon clips, but that may have been a matter of lack if experience. Still, I also wished S&W had incorporated the 547 extraction system to make this versitle little gun really versitle. Mine was as accurate as any steel 2 inch J-frame and handled well with proven SD rounds of the day (Fed 115 gr BPLE). Yeah, they should bring it back with an eye toward price and it would sell.

Sent from my HTCONE using Tapatalk

[G19A3]

I bought a brand new 940 in the early 1990s. I thought it would be the ultimate revolver BUG to my 9mm semi duty pistol. This one had the 2 inch heavy barrel (I've since seen some with the lighter weight 38-style barrel). Anyway, the gun handled great, and I was still using the factory wood grips. I tried it with my 115 grain +p+ duty load and it handles them without problems. It was controllable. I've also fires J-frame 357s and the 940 with +p+ was better. My problem with the revolver arose when shooting some 147 grain Hydra Shoks I had acquired. The cylinder bound up and wouldn't open until the gun cooled down. I hadn't shot more than a couple of cylinders that day when it happened. I took the gun back to the shop and they sent it to S&W for me. It came back supposedly fixed, but no explanation of the repair. I swapped it for a 640 immediately. That probably was a mistake. I did not really like the moon clips, but that may have been a matter of lack if experience. Still, I also wished S&W had incorporated the 547 extraction system to make this versitle little gun really versitle. Mine was as accurate as any steel 2 inch J-frame and handled well with proven SD rounds of the day (Fed 115 gr BPLE). Yeah, they should bring it back with an eye toward price and it would sell.

Sent from my HTCONE using Tapatalk

You stated a comparison with J-frame 357's, and 9mm+P+ was better. But was the controllability/recoil comparison of 9mm+P+ with 357 Magnum or 38 Special ammo?

I have heard the 940 had some problems that resulted in model updates. (i.e. 940-1, 940-2, 940-3. etc.)

Still, the excessive weight (23oz unloaded, IIRC) was a no go, considering my intended purpose for a 9mm J-frame.

Now if S&W reintroduced the 940 in an alloy version, if people disliked the recoil in an all steel frame, I don't know what to think in a 10oz or so lighter alloy version.

I know a semiauto has different recoil mechanics, but my 19.5oz-fully loaded with 7 rounds, 16oz-unloaded Kahr PM9 is a creampuff to shoot. Even with Gold Dot 124gr+P's.

[walkin' trails]

My comparison was meant to be 357 vs 9mm, but as I recall, the 9+p+ wasn't what I would call unpleasant. Probably similar or slightly less than a 158 or similar +p in 38 spec. It's been years since I fired one, but the recoil of 125 grain or 145 grain Silvertips in 357 Mag out of a two inch Model 60 made everything else seem mild by comparison. The one thing about the 9 was that it was pushing a lighter bullet regardless of the velocity. I carry a steel framed 640 in 38 now for a BUG, so weight is not a major issue. Having a steel frame 940 at least to train with would be a benefit to some of us while carrying an alloy frame. Just a little less punishing.

Sent from my HTCONE using Tapatalk

[HMM]

I really wish it didn't need moon clips... I'd love an updated version of the 547!

[Vintovka]

This is actually really appealing to me. I bought my first S&W revolver last week and it's ridiculously nice. The single action trigger and the sights are amazing. An 8-shot 9mm with the same trigger and sights would be like a laser!

[anachronism]

Can you elaborate on this?

What ammo were the "357's" shooting when you compared it directly to the M940? .38 or .357 ammo? What type/weight of 9mm ammo, +P?

Shootability? Recoil? Loudness? (A comparison scale of 1 to 10 of each category would be helpful.)

I always loved the M940 idea, but the excessive weight was a turn off.

Cheap 9mm ammo compatability with my G19's, what's not to love?

Sorry, I don't get here as often as I should. My 940s had a very sharp, abrupt recoil as compared to me current 357 J frames. Kind of like a firecracker going off in your hand. I really expected the guns to be more comfortable to shoot, but the recoil was a turn off for me. In comparison, my current guns have a slower recoil pulse, and it's a lot easier to get into a controlled cadence for rapid fire. With 357 mag loads, the recoil is heavy, but I adapted to it quickly. With wooden S&W "Combat" finger groove grips, the 9mm would twist in my hand, which drove me nuts. If you get a 9mm J frame, I'd suggest you consider the longer grips for 357 mag guns. They are 3 finger groove grips, as opposed to the 2 finger style. This might make a real difference, although they will make it's butt bigger. As I said, I had two of them, spaced a couple of years apart, and two was enough. They were a damn sight more comfortable to shoot than a S&W 360 though.