[ARCHIVED THREAD] - DanTSX (Page 1 of 3)
Posted: 7/6/2013 4:31:44 PM EDT
|
I take it that you are the resident Glockinado around here.
I had a 27 many moons ago but the grip was just impossible to hold while shooting. It felt good in the shop but it just not right in the range, so I sold it. I'm just curious to know if you have ever shot a SIG P229 or P226? I bought a P226 Enhanced Elite for home and a P229 for concealed carry. I then shot it straight up with a G19 (nephew's gun) and while I thought the Glock was okay, the SIG was heads and shoulders above the Glock. The Glock had a lot more snap to the recoil than the SIG and just seemed a much smoother shooting gun with much faster follow-up shots. Just wanted to get your thoughts and see if I could convert you over to a SIG owner. |
|
Quoted:
I take it that you are the resident Glockinado around here. I had a 27 many moons ago but the grip was just impossible to hold while shooting. It felt good in the shop but it just not right in the range, so I sold it. I'm just curious to know if you have ever shot a SIG P229 or P226? I bought a P226 Enhanced Elite for home and a P229 for concealed carry. I then shot it straight up with a G19 (nephew's gun) and while I thought the Glock was okay, the SIG was heads and shoulders above the Glock. The Glock had a lot more snap to the recoil than the SIG and just seemed a much smoother shooting gun with much faster follow-up shots. Just wanted to get your thoughts and see if I could convert you over to a SIG owner. 
|
|
Quoted:
I take it that you are the resident Glockinado around here. I had a 27 many moons ago but the grip was just impossible to hold while shooting. It felt good in the shop but it just not right in the range, so I sold it. I'm just curious to know if you have ever shot a SIG P229 or P226? I bought a P226 Enhanced Elite for home and a P229 for concealed carry. I then shot it straight up with a G19 (nephew's gun) and while I thought the Glock was okay, the SIG was heads and shoulders above the Glock. The Glock had a lot more snap to the recoil than the SIG and just seemed a much smoother shooting gun with much faster follow-up shots. Just wanted to get your thoughts and see if I could convert you over to a SIG owner. 
Good luck with that. |
|
Quoted:
I take it that you are the resident Glockinado around here. I had a 27 many moons ago but the grip was just impossible to hold while shooting. It felt good in the shop but it just not right in the range, so I sold it. I'm just curious to know if you have ever shot a SIG P229 or P226? I bought a P226 Enhanced Elite for home and a P229 for concealed carry. I then shot it straight up with a G19 (nephew's gun) and while I thought the Glock was okay, the SIG was heads and shoulders above the Glock. The Glock had a lot more snap to the recoil than the SIG and just seemed a much smoother shooting gun with much faster follow-up shots. Just wanted to get your thoughts and see if I could convert you over to a SIG owner. GL. That's like asking the Great Wall of China to move a foot to the left or right. |
|
I've shot mostly every Sig.
I like old sigs mainly for historical value, as they pushed the envelope in production quality, accuracy and reliability compared vis a vis the competition. I find that modern Sigs do not hold up in terms of practicality compared to how to other products have evolved. They are still nice guns, but for various reasons, they are hampered by sticking to their original formula. In other words, all the night sights, rails, lasers, diamondplate, etc, etc, doesn't translate well. The old P220's, P226's, P229's, and P228's made with folded metal slides were a product of their design requirements and really did the job well. They balance well and have amazing lockup. Their triggers were, for the time, spectacular. But again, they cannot be forced to fit into the modern market. Essentially, they are riding the same heritage and dedication as the 1911, but now it is just run by Kimber and Taurus Marketing and QA depts. Here is what I do not like about Sig Sauer P Series: High Bore Axis Thick and heavy Newer CNC guns are top-heavy Rust easily Bulky DA/SA is dumb Frame Rails wear out breach block on folded slide guns can wear out and crack Grips suck from factory Suck for lefties too many controls bunched in together slide lock is too easy to hit Factory sights usually shoot "low" Sig's downward spiraling quality issues Sig's comical catalog of mall ninja and pimp guns Documented outsourcing to third world for some parts Here is what I like about Sig Sauer P series pistols: Classic P220 P239 is a neat CCW X-series is probably the only "off the shelf" high end competition pistol avaliable anywhere. In 2013, Sig Sauer should stick to what it does best......1911's 
Any of the issues that you identified with comparing to the Glock 19 are not apples to apples, and could be mitigated with additional training and practice. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
I take it that you are the resident Glockinado around here. I had a 27 many moons ago but the grip was just impossible to hold while shooting. It felt good in the shop but it just not right in the range, so I sold it. I'm just curious to know if you have ever shot a SIG P229 or P226? I bought a P226 Enhanced Elite for home and a P229 for concealed carry. I then shot it straight up with a G19 (nephew's gun) and while I thought the Glock was okay, the SIG was heads and shoulders above the Glock. The Glock had a lot more snap to the recoil than the SIG and just seemed a much smoother shooting gun with much faster follow-up shots. Just wanted to get your thoughts and see if I could convert you over to a SIG owner.
Good luck with that. I thought Dan gave in and panic bought an S&W MP and enjoyed it? |
|
Quoted:
I figured.. just curious to see if Dan had any experience with the SIG line. Hey, I gave it the old college try. I suppose there are those who are bound to drive a VW bus (a short one at that) even to this day! :D I am actively looking for an inexpensive German P220. I have some extra $$$ and have been kicking around getting one of those or a new USA made Glock 17. We have a new hi cap magazine ban in CT, so the P220 suddenly became attractive, as the G17 is about as useful as dicks on a BBQ plate now that hi caps are banned. I could show you my search history in gunbroker if you don't believe me. I even have sig forum open in my browser |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I take it that you are the resident Glockinado around here. I had a 27 many moons ago but the grip was just impossible to hold while shooting. It felt good in the shop but it just not right in the range, so I sold it. I'm just curious to know if you have ever shot a SIG P229 or P226? I bought a P226 Enhanced Elite for home and a P229 for concealed carry. I then shot it straight up with a G19 (nephew's gun) and while I thought the Glock was okay, the SIG was heads and shoulders above the Glock. The Glock had a lot more snap to the recoil than the SIG and just seemed a much smoother shooting gun with much faster follow-up shots. Just wanted to get your thoughts and see if I could convert you over to a SIG owner.
Good luck with that. I thought Dan gave in and panic bought an S&W MP and enjoyed it? I'm flip-flopping on it like a senator. One day I want to drive over it, the next I am ready to do more work to it and buy holsters, night sights, lights, etc, for it. |
|
Quoted:
I've shot mostly every Sig. I like old sigs mainly for historical value, as they pushed the envelope in production quality, accuracy and reliability compared vis a vis the competition. I find that modern Sigs do not hold up in terms of practicality compared to how to other products have evolved. They are still nice guns, but for various reasons, they are hampered by sticking to their original formula. In other words, all the night sights, rails, lasers, diamondplate, etc, etc, doesn't translate well. The old P220's, P226's, P229's, and P228's made with folded metal slides were a product of their design requirements and really did the job well. They balance well and have amazing lockup. Their triggers were, for the time, spectacular. But again, they cannot be forced to fit into the modern market. Essentially, they are riding the same heritage and dedication as the 1911, but now it is just run by Kimber and Taurus Marketing and QA depts. Here is what I do not like about Sig Sauer P Series: High Bore Axis Thick and heavy Newer CNC guns are top-heavy Rust easily Bulky DA/SA is dumb Suck for lefties too many controls bunched in together slide lock is too easy to hit Factory sights usually shoot "low" Sig's downward spiraling quality issues Sig's comical catalog of mall ninja and pimp guns Documented outsourcing to third world for some parts Here is what I like about Sig Sauer P series pistols: Classic P220 P239 is a neat CCW X-series is probably the only "off the shelf" high end competition pistol avaliable anywhere. In 2013, Sig Sauer should stick to what it does best......1911's
Any of the issues that you identified with comparing to the Glock 19 are not apples to apples, and could be mitigated with additional training and practice. Nice writeup. So you DO have experience. When shopping I almost bought an older German made SIG but I think I was outbid by the seller who was trying to protect the reserve price. Good deal, good luck with that Glock |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
I figured.. just curious to see if Dan had any experience with the SIG line. Hey, I gave it the old college try. I suppose there are those who are bound to drive a VW bus (a short one at that) even to this day! :D I am actively looking for an inexpensive German P220. I have some extra $$$ and have been kicking around getting one of those or a new USA made Glock 17. We have a new hi cap magazine ban in CT, so the P220 suddenly became attractive, as the G17 is about as useful as dicks on a BBQ plate now that hi caps are banned. I could show you my search history in gunbroker if you don't believe me. I even have sig forum open in my browser I trust you! :D Just beware, you might get the bug |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
I've shot mostly every Sig. I like old sigs mainly for historical value, as they pushed the envelope in production quality, accuracy and reliability compared vis a vis the competition. I find that modern Sigs do not hold up in terms of practicality compared to how to other products have evolved. They are still nice guns, but for various reasons, they are hampered by sticking to their original formula. In other words, all the night sights, rails, lasers, diamondplate, etc, etc, doesn't translate well. The old P220's, P226's, P229's, and P228's made with folded metal slides were a product of their design requirements and really did the job well. They balance well and have amazing lockup. Their triggers were, for the time, spectacular. But again, they cannot be forced to fit into the modern market. Essentially, they are riding the same heritage and dedication as the 1911, but now it is just run by Kimber and Taurus Marketing and QA depts. Here is what I do not like about Sig Sauer P Series: High Bore Axis Thick and heavy Newer CNC guns are top-heavy Rust easily Bulky DA/SA is dumb Suck for lefties too many controls bunched in together slide lock is too easy to hit Factory sights usually shoot "low" Sig's downward spiraling quality issues Sig's comical catalog of mall ninja and pimp guns Documented outsourcing to third world for some parts Here is what I like about Sig Sauer P series pistols: Classic P220 P239 is a neat CCW X-series is probably the only "off the shelf" high end competition pistol avaliable anywhere. In 2013, Sig Sauer should stick to what it does best......1911's
Any of the issues that you identified with comparing to the Glock 19 are not apples to apples, and could be mitigated with additional training and practice. Nice writeup. So you DO have experience. When shopping I almost bought an older German made SIG but I think I was outbid by the seller who was trying to protect the reserve price. Good deal, good luck with that Glock Thank you, You as well. 
|
|
Quoted:
OP. I'm not talking entirely out of my ass... I still have the Colt. 
http://img295.imageshack.us/img295/674/coltandsiglf3.jpg Both very good guns. I don't know I've ever seen that Colt before. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
OP. I'm not talking entirely out of my ass... I still have the Colt.
http://img295.imageshack.us/img295/674/coltandsiglf3.jpg Both very good guns. I don't know I've ever seen that Colt before. You must have. |
|
Quoted:
I've shot mostly every Sig. I like old sigs mainly for historical value, as they pushed the envelope in production quality, accuracy and reliability compared vis a vis the competition. I find that modern Sigs do not hold up in terms of practicality compared to how to other products have evolved. They are still nice guns, but for various reasons, they are hampered by sticking to their original formula. In other words, all the night sights, rails, lasers, diamondplate, etc, etc, doesn't translate well. The old P220's, P226's, P229's, and P228's made with folded metal slides were a product of their design requirements and really did the job well. They balance well and have amazing lockup. Their triggers were, for the time, spectacular. But again, they cannot be forced to fit into the modern market. Essentially, they are riding the same heritage and dedication as the 1911, but now it is just run by Kimber and Taurus Marketing and QA depts. Here is what I do not like about Sig Sauer P Series: High Bore Axis Thick and heavy Newer CNC guns are top-heavy Rust easily Bulky DA/SA is dumb Suck for lefties too many controls bunched in together slide lock is too easy to hit Factory sights usually shoot "low" Sig's downward spiraling quality issues Sig's comical catalog of mall ninja and pimp guns Documented outsourcing to third world for some parts Here is what I like about Sig Sauer P series pistols: Classic P220 P239 is a neat CCW X-series is probably the only "off the shelf" high end competition pistol avaliable anywhere. In 2013, Sig Sauer should stick to what it does best......1911's
Any of the issues that you identified with comparing to the Glock 19 are not apples to apples, and could be mitigated with additional training and practice. Would you care to document this? Because it is untrue and a rumor based on this totally unrelated entity, SIG.ORG; "Sourcing Interests Group". 
http://www.sig.org/ http://wiki.igda.org/Outsourcing_SIG |
|
Quoted:
That reminds me. One of my other bitches about the Sigs is the grips are kinda blecgh. But the new shorter grips have really improved the guns. My favorites were always the rubber finger groove hogues, but they really fuck up CCW options. I'll agree in part. The new E2 grips will give you road rash when carried against the skin. I'm looking to get rid of them currently. Plus the SIGS are not cheap. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
I've shot mostly every Sig. I like old sigs mainly for historical value, as they pushed the envelope in production quality, accuracy and reliability compared vis a vis the competition. I find that modern Sigs do not hold up in terms of practicality compared to how to other products have evolved. They are still nice guns, but for various reasons, they are hampered by sticking to their original formula. In other words, all the night sights, rails, lasers, diamondplate, etc, etc, doesn't translate well. The old P220's, P226's, P229's, and P228's made with folded metal slides were a product of their design requirements and really did the job well. They balance well and have amazing lockup. Their triggers were, for the time, spectacular. But again, they cannot be forced to fit into the modern market. Essentially, they are riding the same heritage and dedication as the 1911, but now it is just run by Kimber and Taurus Marketing and QA depts. Here is what I do not like about Sig Sauer P Series: High Bore Axis Thick and heavy Newer CNC guns are top-heavy Rust easily Bulky DA/SA is dumb Suck for lefties too many controls bunched in together slide lock is too easy to hit Factory sights usually shoot "low" Sig's downward spiraling quality issues Sig's comical catalog of mall ninja and pimp guns Documented outsourcing to third world for some parts Here is what I like about Sig Sauer P series pistols: Classic P220 P239 is a neat CCW X-series is probably the only "off the shelf" high end competition pistol avaliable anywhere. In 2013, Sig Sauer should stick to what it does best......1911's
Any of the issues that you identified with comparing to the Glock 19 are not apples to apples, and could be mitigated with additional training and practice. Would you care to document this? Because it is untrue and a rumor based on this totally unrelated entity, SIG.ORG; "Sourcing Interests Group".
http://www.sig.org/ Gaston Glock told me that at a dinner party. The wine was exquisite. |
|
Quoted:
Please explain how the grip was "impossible to hold while shooting"? Just personal ergonomics. For the same reason that I find it easier to hold onto a slimy bonefish than my Chief's Special ,38. I guess I have great big meaty hands and my pinky finger hanged over the bottom of the grip. I thought I could use it to get some extra squeeze on the grip but it just bounced around. Never could make that small grip fit my hand. I shot the .38 today (original wood grips) and I wasn't sure that it wasn't going to fly out of my hands and hit me in the forehead! :D My own fault for buying a gun that didn't quite fit, thinking I could make it work. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
That reminds me. One of my other bitches about the Sigs is the grips are kinda blecgh. But the new shorter grips have really improved the guns. My favorites were always the rubber finger groove hogues, but they really fuck up CCW options. I'll agree in part. The new E2 grips will give you road rash when carried against the skin. I'm looking to get rid of them currently. Plus the SIGS are not cheap. I think that the CPO's are fairly priced. However, these are generally the basic guns. Maybe rails, night sights, or a few different of the more practical finishes. You don't find CPO "nightmare" editions or threaded barrels, the goofy FDE ones, etc, etc. But then again, those never interested me. I passed up a beautiful used 2-tone nickel 229 in .40S&W with night sights for $430 this past winter because it was a .40S&W. Later that week, the Sandy Hook shooting happened, and the rush was on and in hindsight, I should had bought it. The deals are out there. The deal is that a lot of people think that because a lot of the Sigs sell for $850-$950 new, that they are somehow $750 guns used. Any of the guns in unmolested shape should be around $625 used give or take $50. |
|
Quoted:
I guess I'm curious as to why the OP cares what Dan shoots. Because he seems to be the best known Glockite around here. I guess it's the same reason I roll down my window and give homeless people a dollar or two. Help those who can't or won't help themselves! 
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
That reminds me. One of my other bitches about the Sigs is the grips are kinda blecgh. But the new shorter grips have really improved the guns. My favorites were always the rubber finger groove hogues, but they really fuck up CCW options. I'll agree in part. The new E2 grips will give you road rash when carried against the skin. I'm looking to get rid of them currently. Plus the SIGS are not cheap. I think that the CPO's are fairly priced. However, these are generally the basic guns. Maybe rails, night sights, or a few different of the more practical finishes. You don't find CPO "nightmare" editions or threaded barrels, the goofy FDE ones, etc, etc. But then again, those never interested me. I passed up a beautiful used 2-tone nickel 229 in .40S&W with night sights for $430 this past winter because it was a .40S&W. Later that week, the Sandy Hook shooting happened, and the rush was on and in hindsight, I should had bought it. The deals are out there. The deal is that a lot of people think that because a lot of the Sigs sell for $850-$950 new, that they are somehow $750 guns used. Any of the guns in unmolested shape should be around $625 used give or take $50. Funny, during the Post Sandy Hook nonsense, I had the same thought several times. "Plenty of .40's, plenty of .40 ammo....why again am I not buying a .40?" :D But sanity has returned. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I've shot mostly every Sig. I like old sigs mainly for historical value, as they pushed the envelope in production quality, accuracy and reliability compared vis a vis the competition. I find that modern Sigs do not hold up in terms of practicality compared to how to other products have evolved. They are still nice guns, but for various reasons, they are hampered by sticking to their original formula. In other words, all the night sights, rails, lasers, diamondplate, etc, etc, doesn't translate well. The old P220's, P226's, P229's, and P228's made with folded metal slides were a product of their design requirements and really did the job well. They balance well and have amazing lockup. Their triggers were, for the time, spectacular. But again, they cannot be forced to fit into the modern market. Essentially, they are riding the same heritage and dedication as the 1911, but now it is just run by Kimber and Taurus Marketing and QA depts. Here is what I do not like about Sig Sauer P Series: High Bore Axis Thick and heavy Newer CNC guns are top-heavy Rust easily Bulky DA/SA is dumb Suck for lefties too many controls bunched in together slide lock is too easy to hit Factory sights usually shoot "low" Sig's downward spiraling quality issues Sig's comical catalog of mall ninja and pimp guns Documented outsourcing to third world for some parts Here is what I like about Sig Sauer P series pistols: Classic P220 P239 is a neat CCW X-series is probably the only "off the shelf" high end competition pistol avaliable anywhere. In 2013, Sig Sauer should stick to what it does best......1911's
Any of the issues that you identified with comparing to the Glock 19 are not apples to apples, and could be mitigated with additional training and practice. Would you care to document this? Because it is untrue and a rumor based on this totally unrelated entity, SIG.ORG; "Sourcing Interests Group".
http://www.sig.org/ Gaston Glock told me that at a dinner party. The wine was exquisite. Well; in that case...............
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I take it that you are the resident Glockinado around here. I had a 27 many moons ago but the grip was just impossible to hold while shooting. It felt good in the shop but it just not right in the range, so I sold it. I'm just curious to know if you have ever shot a SIG P229 or P226? I bought a P226 Enhanced Elite for home and a P229 for concealed carry. I then shot it straight up with a G19 (nephew's gun) and while I thought the Glock was okay, the SIG was heads and shoulders above the Glock. The Glock had a lot more snap to the recoil than the SIG and just seemed a much smoother shooting gun with much faster follow-up shots. Just wanted to get your thoughts and see if I could convert you over to a SIG owner.
Good luck with that. I thought Dan gave in and panic bought an S&W MP and enjoyed it? I'm flip-flopping on it like a senator. One day I want to drive over it, the next I am ready to do more work to it and buy holsters, night sights, lights, etc, for it. It's going to take time for a guy as well indoctrinated as you to get past the denial phase. 
|
| I'll freely admit that the Sig shoots "smoother" than the Glock. But I feel that "smoothness" is about as important thinking about the "ride" of an ejection seat in terms of the "ride" of a caddillac down the interstate. "Smoothness" is nice, but only really applies to a narrow range of utility in the concealed carry equation. The gun will ride in my pants next to my bunghole 99.9% of it's life. If it ever comes out in an actual defense scenario, smoothness, how it feels in my hand, or anything else like that is of very little concern to me. I will be working that gun, not the other way around. I am looking for the feedback that the pistol gives me, and the Glock gives me feedback in droves between the trigger reset and the way that the grip handles. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Please explain how the grip was "impossible to hold while shooting"? Just personal ergonomics. For the same reason that I find it easier to hold onto a slimy bonefish than my Chief's Special ,38. I guess I have great big meaty hands and my pinky finger hanged over the bottom of the grip. I thought I could use it to get some extra squeeze on the grip but it just bounced around. Never could make that small grip fit my hand. I shot the .38 today (original wood grips) and I wasn't sure that it wasn't going to fly out of my hands and hit me in the forehead! :D My own fault for buying a gun that didn't quite fit, thinking I could make it work. Thats what mag extensions are for |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
That reminds me. One of my other bitches about the Sigs is the grips are kinda blecgh. But the new shorter grips have really improved the guns. My favorites were always the rubber finger groove hogues, but they really fuck up CCW options. I'll agree in part. The new E2 grips will give you road rash when carried against the skin. I'm looking to get rid of them currently. Plus the SIGS are not cheap. I think that the CPO's are fairly priced. However, these are generally the basic guns. Maybe rails, night sights, or a few different of the more practical finishes. You don't find CPO "nightmare" editions or threaded barrels, the goofy FDE ones, etc, etc. But then again, those never interested me. I passed up a beautiful used 2-tone nickel 229 in .40S&W with night sights for $430 this past winter because it was a .40S&W. Later that week, the Sandy Hook shooting happened, and the rush was on and in hindsight, I should had bought it. The deals are out there. The deal is that a lot of people think that because a lot of the Sigs sell for $850-$950 new, that they are somehow $750 guns used. Any of the guns in unmolested shape should be around $625 used give or take $50. Funny, during the Post Sandy Hook nonsense, I had the same thought several times. "Plenty of .40's, plenty of .40 ammo....why again am I not buying a .40?" :D But sanity has returned. I had to pass up an almost new Glock 22 with night sights for $300 that a local afrcommer was willing to sell me because I had to fill the oil tank that week. 
Sucks, but life goes on, and gets better. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I take it that you are the resident Glockinado around here. I had a 27 many moons ago but the grip was just impossible to hold while shooting. It felt good in the shop but it just not right in the range, so I sold it. I'm just curious to know if you have ever shot a SIG P229 or P226? I bought a P226 Enhanced Elite for home and a P229 for concealed carry. I then shot it straight up with a G19 (nephew's gun) and while I thought the Glock was okay, the SIG was heads and shoulders above the Glock. The Glock had a lot more snap to the recoil than the SIG and just seemed a much smoother shooting gun with much faster follow-up shots. Just wanted to get your thoughts and see if I could convert you over to a SIG owner.
Good luck with that. I thought Dan gave in and panic bought an S&W MP and enjoyed it? I'm flip-flopping on it like a senator. One day I want to drive over it, the next I am ready to do more work to it and buy holsters, night sights, lights, etc, for it. It's going to take time for a guy as well indoctrinated as you to get past the denial phase. I'll freely admit that I think that the M&P 40 is a better gun for a cop's holster than a G22. For 9mm and any CCW use, I think Glock still has it. I use minimalist holsters like the Raven Vanguard II a lot. Fucking sucks having those picatinny rails digging into your ball sack. Glock's simple notch rail is better. .45ACP is up in the air. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
I guess I'm curious as to why the OP cares what Dan shoots. Because people like him and don't want to see him shooting plastic crap and possibly losing a hand. That's why. I don't really worry about KB's. They make good jokes, but it's really not an issue. |
|
Quoted:
Comeon on, the Glock trigger beats the pants off the M&P six ways to sunday. I have Apex trigger. Brings it on par, if not better in some regards than Glock. The overtravel is GONE. That makes a huge difference right there. It's debatable. The Glock is a much simpler trigger to achieve the same effect, so I guess I favor the Glock. The S&W trigger is complex for no good reason. |
|
Quoted:
I'll freely admit that I think that the M&P 40 is a better gun for a cop's holster than a G22. For 9mm and any CCW use, I think Glock still has it. .45ACP is up in the air. Care to explain the caliber logic? Also, I think the G19 is larger than what most CCW-ers carry. At this point, I'd say the M&P Shield is the best semi-auto CCW gun on the market for most people. If Glock would produce a similar single stack gun at a similar price, it might be a good competitor. |
|
Quoted:
I'll freely admit that the Sig shoots "smoother" than the Glock. But I feel that "smoothness" is about as important thinking about the "ride" of an ejection seat in terms of the "ride" of a caddillac down the interstate. "Smoothness" is nice, but only really applies to a narrow range of utility in the concealed carry equation. The gun will ride in my pants next to my bunghole 99.9% of it's life. If it ever comes out in an actual defense scenario, smoothness, how it feels in my hand, or anything else like that is of very little concern to me. I will be working that gun, not the other way around. I am looking for the feedback that the pistol gives me, and the Glock gives me feedback in droves between the trigger reset and the way that the grip handles. True. I could tell a decent amount of different in follow up shot target acquisition. But given the numbers of the FSA and the coming nonsense, it might be the difference between life and death. Most likely though it just helps me be a better shot. I'm sure with enough practice I could get the Glock down. Always fun to BS some gun hate on a rainy Friday night. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Please explain how the grip was "impossible to hold while shooting"? Just personal ergonomics. For the same reason that I find it easier to hold onto a slimy bonefish than my Chief's Special ,38. I guess I have great big meaty hands and my pinky finger hanged over the bottom of the grip. I thought I could use it to get some extra squeeze on the grip but it just bounced around. Never could make that small grip fit my hand. I shot the .38 today (original wood grips) and I wasn't sure that it wasn't going to fly out of my hands and hit me in the forehead! :D My own fault for buying a gun that didn't quite fit, thinking I could make it work. Thats what mag extensions are for True but then that defeats some of the advantages of having the G27. But now I have a P229 so it mighta worked. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
I'll freely admit that the Sig shoots "smoother" than the Glock. But I feel that "smoothness" is about as important thinking about the "ride" of an ejection seat in terms of the "ride" of a caddillac down the interstate. "Smoothness" is nice, but only really applies to a narrow range of utility in the concealed carry equation. The gun will ride in my pants next to my bunghole 99.9% of it's life. If it ever comes out in an actual defense scenario, smoothness, how it feels in my hand, or anything else like that is of very little concern to me. I will be working that gun, not the other way around. I am looking for the feedback that the pistol gives me, and the Glock gives me feedback in droves between the trigger reset and the way that the grip handles. True. I could tell a decent amount of different in follow up shot target acquisition. But given the numbers of the FSA and the coming nonsense, it might be the difference between life and death. Most likely though it just helps me be a better shot. I'm sure with enough practice I could get the Glock down. Always fun to BS some gun hate on a rainy Friday night. Rather than asking Dan why he doesn't shoot Sigs, perhaps we should be asking you why you don't shoot CZs... 
|