do any of you have one of these? which you do prefer & why? I have narrowed down my choices to a sig p220, glock 23, hk usp 45, or a 1911 style gun.
Whats your opinion?
Thanks again.

I prefer the USP because it fits my hand.  It has restrike capability.  It has a very nice recoil system.  It hasn't EVER failed me.  Thus, I have 2 compacts in 9 and 40, and 2 full sizes in 40 and 45.  None have EVER had a malfunction that wasn't ammo related.  The only one that did was the 45...Wolf ammo and tight chambers don't mix.

ok, I am leaning towards the usp45. Does anyone have the UTL for it? or is it just a waste of money? I will have to take a better look at them later. Thanks for the advice guys.

Big Guy --

These pistols are so very different you need to find a range which rents them and try them all.  I'm sure you meant Glock 21, not 23 though.

If magazine capacity is a factor, the Glock 21 or ParaOrdnance P14-45 (or P14-LDA) should be looked at seriously.  The P220 only holds 7 rounds like the M1911, although extra capacity mags are available for them.  The USP 45 is 9 or at most 10.

What use you planning for these?  

A new pistol I'm shooting at present that I like more and more as I shoot it is the Taurus PT145, which is very compact and holds 10+1.  Hasn't got the up front smoothness of the first 3, but it's half the price and has fed everything I've tried.

-- Chuck

Quoted: The USP 45 is 9 or at most 10.

It's 10, unless you can find some "legal" hicaps 12 rounders.

I'm sure you meant Glock 21, not 23 though.

no, I meant glock 23. I will go give them a try later, when I have a bit of time. This is going to be an "all round" pistol with no one specific purpose. I will take a look at the glock 21 though. What it has come down to is a choice between hk and glock in .40s&w or .45
thanks again.

If you're gonna get a Glock in .45, the G30 can't be beat... if you really want to go extreme on saving weight, take a look at the G36. Although I've owned a Glock .45, I'm still very devoted to the1911. A Kimber Custom is the ultimate in my opinion (if you're looking to spend that much)... I also had a ParaOrd 12.45LDA that was a wonderful gun.

---Chris

I used to shoot IPSC and Speed Metal so I've always loved 1911's, BUT......
my Glock 21 is the best pistol I think I have ever shot. I have an HK usp in .45 and it is crap, as is most HK. ( my 2c) Glocks, though are like Belgian Malinois, either you love 'em or you hate 'em. Me, I've got both.

Quoted: I have an HK usp in .45 and it is crap, as is most HK.

Well hell, if it's crap, you'd want to sell it cheap, right?

yeehaw! here we go again! now, besides my beloved s&w mod. 41 .22, old, very old, aaannnddd besides the fact that this is probably one of the finest shooting pistols in the world, next to my hi-standard military .22, that is,(1956)(old) which is without doubt the very finest shooting pistol mechanism in the universe, then i would have to say that ALL the rest of these pistols y'all are discoursing about are jest fine. having been frustrated trying to decide what to get in the larger calibers (usually after reading all the posts in this forum), i embarked upon a very focused pistol buying and shooting type of spree, and almost ended up divorced! ahem, where was i, oh yes, what year is this? 2001 allready?!! i could have sworn my alzheimer's was in regression. i have been reading this same stuff for 40 years now, and folks have never been able to come to a consensus yet about what is the best defensive pistol. and never will, it is just too much fun to discuss the merits of the various designs and calibers.   that said, let me state unequivocally, that aside from the previously mentioned brilliant mechanisms that i endeavor to  exercise often,  glock rules. all the rest suck. get used to it.
willy

Quoted: I have an HK usp in .45 and it is crap, as is most HK. ( my 2c)

Since I'm looking to purchase a HK USP Tactical, I'd love to hear why you think it's crap.  So far your the first person who had anything negative to say about the USP.

God Bless Texas

this may be a dumb question, But why buy the USP tactical unless you need the threaded barrel for a suppressor

I have two USP's, a .40 and a .40C.  Obviously, the .40C is on my CCW, the fullsize is for pins and targets.  Both of these guns rock!  Glocks are good, sigs are better, but HK is the way to go.

besides, glocks are so damn UGLY

Quoted: this may be a dumb question, But why buy the USP tactical unless you need the threaded barrel for a suppressor

Substitute "need" with want and you have your answer.

God Bless Texas

Substitute "need" with want and you have your answer.

I like the way you think. After you get the USP tactical you will need the matching suppressor.

Sig 226 any day.. I tried a HK USP 9 hated it. nasty feeling grip. the sig felt like it was built for me. fit perfect. shot good with it the night I bought it.. next day, I went to the transfer FFL dealer to pick it up(bought in georgia, had to get it to SC) and shoot it again. didnt shoot as well. ahwell guess I'll just have to shoot it more.. i can live with that. ;)

As stated above, try to rent or borrow what you are considering, then decide.  I won't tell you which is the best, but will say that you can do a lot worse than any of the fine pistols you mentioned.  Besides, best is relative to YOUR individual needs.  I've have had or currently own all of the above so Ill just offer some general impressions:

Sig P220 - nice feel, liked the weight because it felt solid, did not like mag capacity, stock sights decent, despite things I've heard never seen a rusty Sig (although I don't proclaim to have seen it all)

Glock 23 - excellent all-around pistol, as far as reliability, accuracy, durability, concealability, and capacity; trigger has a different feel but once you get used to it, it feels normal; love the "safe-action" system; simplistic; good weight even though polymer; replacing stock sights necessary for me;  hi-caps are expensive but worth it to have at least a few; castrated 10-rounders still hold more capacity than most 1911 style pistols

HK USP - solid pistol but big; trigger less favorable after I got use to the Glock; mag situation same as Glock; definitely harder to conceal unles your are of a large frame

1911 - an all-around classic and very sexy; tunable to the nth degree if you like to tinker, though minimal customizing can result in a fine weapon; if capacity is an issue, options for hi-cap mags/frames are Para-Ord, Kimber polymers, Wilson Combat's polymer (though the Wilson is only 10 rds, and not truly hi-cap).  Then there are other more exotic creatures like Caspian, STI, etc.  Trigger is in general the most crisp of the four pistols you mentioned, for obvious reasons.  

These days, I tend to gravitate towards Glocks and 1911s - Glocks because it fits me the best in all that it offers; 1911s because, like I said, they are just sexy, and yet still make a damn fine weapon.  However, I would not hesitate to own any of the ones you mentioned if funds were unlimited - I have just prioritized my wish list.  

It comes down to what characteristics you value most, what you already have in your arsenal, and the primary purpose of the weapon of choice.  

Quoted: Quoted: The Glock is an HK wannabe. German overengineering RULES. Go ahead, FLAME ME! My statement stands. Juggernaut I agree 110%! Tyler

I'll third that emotion...

Let's not forget that the USP .45 is rated for +P+ and .45 Super.

HK

Let's not forget that the USP .45 is rated for +P+ and .45 Super

Do you have to do modifications to use .45 super?

Nope.  I shoot it all the time in my HK.  It is only suggested that the recoil spring be changed after 3000 rounds of the stuff.

Sure you've narrowed it down... you're going to end up getting them all and you know it! Which one are you going to get first is the real question.

All of them rock. Anybody who has anything bad to say about any one of these guns is speaking from personal preference, not mechanical quality. (And they're probably full of **** anyway.)

The Sig & 1911 are heavy, but solid. Some people like metal, some plastic. I like both. I like a light concealed weapon, but a heavy one at the range. The 1911 is a pure classic, are you a historical buff who wants to shoot the same gun the 60 year old guy next to you is shooting or do you want hi-tech goodies.

Glock and HK are similar in weight, different in feel. (I'm talking the reg. USP) The tactical is a bit bigger. No fun to carry, but hellafun at the range. I don't have a surpressor so I went from the tactical for a reg USP. Chicks find the tactical (and esp. the Mark IV) huge!
Glock is cool. I like feeling from Glock that when I know it's cocked, I know it will fire. My other guns are sometimes riding on safe, sometimes riding on fire. In a quick SHTF scenario it could be? Yeah, it only takes a second to flip the switch with your thumb...
The HK may have arguably the best out of box accuracy. I've shot soup cans at 100yds. with my USP out of the box. (Can hardly SEE the things!)

Hey, at least you've narrowed it down to .45 cal! Congratulations!

Quoted: I have an HK usp in .45 and it is crap, as is most HK.

How about explaining your statement ?? "CRAP" ?? and if you think it's CRAP, why not let someone with better taste take it off your hands ?

and yes, I do have an opinion

HK usp it is, then a kimber will be next. I wish I had more money, then I could get them all.
Thanks once again.

BTW, if you like the stainless USP, then you better go ahead and get it.  They are not being produced anymore in the full size.  They cost a little more, but if you like them, you'd better get one now.