Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
1/25/2018 7:38:29 AM
Posted: 8/11/2001 6:56:01 AM EST
which is better as a duty weapon, I shoot good with both, both fit my hand well, i am not worried about the price. i am mostly intrested about cons not the pros. has anyone ha any problems with either of these weapons sig226 40cal or Glock
Link Posted: 8/11/2001 7:42:25 AM EST
A while back I had two sigs(226) cracked both frames, switched to glock 22 [:)]
Link Posted: 8/11/2001 8:17:45 AM EST
I've carried .45 Glocks and SIG .45s and a .40 P229. Reliability: Both are extremely reliable, but I'll give an edge on the SIG; I've fired about 4,000 rounds without a single malfunction. My Glocks have an occasional failure to feed. Accuracy: I usually shoot a little better with my compact Glock than the SIG on qualification courses; I'll give this one to the Glock. Finish: The Glock's finish is dang near indestructible. The older finish on SIGs is rust prone and shows wear pretty quickly; edge to the Glock. The P229 finish is better than the old K-Coat; no rust but still shows a lot of wear. Other factors: -The P229 is less taxing to hold for long periods of time than a Glock .45-I don't know how this compares to a .40 and is just a personal observation. -The P229s with fixed rear sights tend to drift, especially if you are clumsy, like me, and bang your holster on a door every now and then. Overall, I'd give the edge to the Glock, especially considering that it gives you more rounds and is generally cheaper. But the SIG isn't a bad weapon. I was issued the SIG and mandated to carry it. I hated it at first because I had to stop carrying my Glock (though I still carry one as a back-up). The SIG grew on me though, and I really like it now. Shoot both and carry the one that you like the most. You will be well armed with either one.
Link Posted: 8/11/2001 8:21:40 AM EST
Several people on this list have complained about G22s cracking or exploding as well. Also, the Sig P226 was never intended to fire the very high pressure .40 round, let alone +P ammo. The Sig of course is heavier and more accurate, while the Glock of course is more durable (although some would say both are equally durable). Since the Glock is so light, recoil will be a problem with +P loads. However, the Sig should not use hot +P loads from what a factory rep has told me too. Also, a Glock will weigh less on your duty belt (I assume you are a cop), while the Sig will strain you a little more. Another complaint about the Glock is the DA pull, whereas the Sig has a "safer" first round trigger DA pull of 10 lbs vs. 6-8 lbs. Then, after you fire, you have a sweet 4 lb pull for more accurate rapid fire. The Glock carries more rounds too, 15 vs. the Sig's ?12-13? rounds. If you want my opinion, you may want to opt for a Sig P229, because that gun from the onset was designed to handle the .357 Sig and .40 rounds (but again, +P over a long period of time will wear the gun down faster). With the P229, you can put Trijicons on top, and then buy an extra barrel to switch between the .40 and .357 Sig round. The .357 Sig round packs a greater punch with the proper load, but .40 is more widely available and alledgely has more desirable penetration over all (ie Remington Golden Sabre 165 grain rounds). The magazines are interchangable or rather can use both rounds too, carries 12 rounds. The P229 is also a little smaller and will weigh less than the P226. The Glock 23 would also be a good gun to look at as well to save weight, and can use +P ammo more than the P229. themao [chainsawkill]
Link Posted: 8/11/2001 8:33:28 AM EST
At my local range, back in '93, they have both a 9mm Sig P226 and a Glock 17 as range rental guns. The Sig eventually broke a roll pin behind the ejection port. It took my friend 2 months to get another roll pin from Sig. Eventually that roll pin broke too, and he had a gunsmith put in solid roll pin. Later the slide broke behind the ejection port. This Sig had the old style stamp steel slide, I believe the newer Sig P226s has same the blackened stainless slide as in the P229 with a solid pin holding the breach block in place. The Glock 17 had no major problems, it went aproximately 250,000 rounds when the slide broke and was replaced. In 1996 it had 500,000 rounds thru it.
Link Posted: 8/11/2001 9:40:02 AM EST
thanks for the info.
Link Posted: 8/11/2001 9:43:52 AM EST
May I suggest a HK USP .45[:D]
Link Posted: 8/11/2001 10:30:38 AM EST
Link Posted: 8/11/2001 10:44:04 AM EST
If you plan on carrying it on duty, the Glock has a much better finish. The tennifer finish will outlast the Sig's finish. I am from south Florida and most polcie officer's I work with either switch to Glock or have their Sig's refinished in a more durable finish. Keep in mind though that this will void your sig's warranty.
Link Posted: 8/11/2001 12:50:49 PM EST
Note: I'm not bashing. I own several of both Glocks and Sigs. Both are good weapons. For a duty weapon, the Glock without a doubt. Why? Magazine interchangeability with the Glock 27. While the guys on the Dept. with Sigs are carrying a 5-shot J-frame for backup, I've got my 27 with fully compatible G22 magazines holding a total of 56 Hydra-shocks ready to go. Ask yourself-"what would I do if my primary went down after the very first shot of a fight?" Even if you had a backup in the same caliber as your Sig the mags won't interchange. No big deal? Read Massad Ayoob's "Ayoob Files: The Book" and you'll understand why I place so much value on having the most effective backup weapon available. I've carried a G22/G27 combo on duty for three years. Light weight, 100% reliable (3,000+ rounds in the 22 & 1,000+ in the 27), & excellent corrosion resistance. I like my other handguns, but for duty use I wouldn't want anything but my Glocks.
Link Posted: 8/11/2001 1:26:21 PM EST
.40 S&W ammunition does not have a true +P designation, a few companies fictiously labeled their .40 loads '+P' or '+P+'. My idea is to consider a G23, then you have the option of two hi-cap mag choices (13rd. G23 mags or 15rd. G22 mags).
Link Posted: 8/11/2001 2:29:32 PM EST
[Last Edit: 8/11/2001 2:25:58 PM EST by Jeeper21]
I prefer a gun from a manufacturer that supports my 2nd amendment rights, and the NRA (they donated 1million). Beretta is that manufacturer. Glock & Sig don't give a flying f*ck about the NRA or America's 2nd amendment. Especially Sig, leaders in "Smart Gun" research, which when perfected, will be required on ALL your handguns someday. You want to support a company like that? Glock supports strict gun laws in America, during the S&W deal, Glock stopped shipping new weapons to gun shops for a few weeks. They where contemplating joining the S&W deal... but didn't. Not because they support us, but because they realized it would be a death blow to their company. As it was for S&W. Beretta openly refused the contract when it was offered. I know this isn't in the spirit of the original topic, but I had to rant anyway [:D] If I had to choose the lesser of 2 evils, much like our presidential elections. I'd get the Glock. However, if you're so inclined to go against the grain, get a Beretta. I've been more than ecstatic with mine. Never jams, super accurate, and it looks awesome. Mags are also cheap, and best of all, they support my rights to own a gun. [%(]
Link Posted: 8/11/2001 2:49:19 PM EST
The 226 in .40 has a solid stainless steel slide, just like the 229, which eliminates the need for the pinned-in breech block of the older 226's. They are much stronger than the older 9mm slides, and should last through many thousands of rounds of .40. The black teflon on my 226-.40 slide has lasted through much duty holster use without noticeable wear. Very accurate, hasn't jammed yet. Great gun. That being said, I REALLY like the Glock 35 in .40 I recently bought. Balances well, and the 3.5 lb trigger makes it a joy to shoot. The extra barrel length makes for great accuracy, and noticeably higher velocity (some .40 loads approach 10mm velocity through the 35's 5.3 inch barrel). It's almost exactly the same length as the government model 1911 I usually carry, so the size doesn't bother me. If you are looking for a uniform duty gun, I would SERIOUSLY consider the Glock 35. If your department won't allow the 3.5 lb trigger, you can easily switch it out with a standard 5.5 connector. Bottom line, either one would be a great choice for duty. The Glocks have an edge for concealed carry because they are somewhat thinner, but for uniform duty guns either is an excellent choice. Beretta's Elite series in .40 would be worth looking at, as well. If you get an Elite II, I would swap the Novak sights that come with it for a set of Trijicons, which you should seriously consider for any duty weapon.
Link Posted: 8/11/2001 7:26:37 PM EST
Link Posted: 8/11/2001 9:15:30 PM EST
[Last Edit: 8/11/2001 9:12:50 PM EST by Marksman14]
If I had to take a Glock or a SIG, I would take a GLOCK, I dont need to go through my reasoning, read above. However, I have to support the EERETTA suggestion. I have a 92FS, and I SWEAR by it. I would never trade it for any handgun, except maybe a MK23. Its a plain 92FS, and it is SOLID, has a VERY durable finish on it, and it is smooth as butter. If I had to get a carry gun in .40S&W, I would eihter get a 96 w/brig slide, a 96 ELITE II, or a 96 Border Marshall. I have shot about every beretta model, and they ALL functioned flawlessly, and had reportedly had more than 25,000 rounds through them all. Their customer service is wonderful, and other than HK guns, I trust no other gun company more than beretta. Beretta and HK are currently at a tie for my personal list of best pistol makers. That said, go for a 96, or a USP .40 also, if you look at the USP, it has the best of both SIG and GLOCK, and none of the negatives. Light weight(G), exposed hammer(S), accuracy(S), reliability/durablility(G), and is one bad ass looking gun. The beretta however, is just solid, smooth and reliable, and durable. Stick with Beretta or HK If you must go sig or glock, get a glock
Link Posted: 8/12/2001 3:38:57 AM EST
Glocks. Only. They are the predominant weapon carried on our team, we've had NO problems with them what so ever. Our firearms instructor is a Glock purest and has been conducting a continual test on his for the last two years. Five thousand rounds, no cleaning, no problems. Except when he uses USA magazines. I have about the same through mine, with no problems. Even though it is retired now and is my wife's pistol. Second reason. With the Glock you get a consistant trigger pull every time. You do not have to worry about a long double action pull then changing to a single action pull after your first round goes down range. If I went to another department, where I could not carry my Kimber or any single action, then I would not hesitate in carrying a Glock. You will not go wrong with a Glock.
Link Posted: 8/12/2001 5:06:12 AM EST
Originally Posted By greentimber: Why? Magazine interchangeability with the Glock 27. While the guys on the Dept. with Sigs are carrying a 5-shot J-frame for backup, I've got my 27 with fully compatible G22 magazines holding a total of 56 Hydra-shocks ready to go. Ask yourself-"what would I do if my primary went down after the very first shot of a fight?" Even if you had a backup in the same caliber as your Sig the mags won't interchange.
View Quote
I have a Sig P228 and love it so much I bought it instead of a Glock. But the above statement it probable the best advice I have ever heard for purchasing a duty weapons system. Can't disagree with logic like that!! sgtar15
Top Top