This is probably simple but please help me out. What are the differences between the P228 and P229? All I've been able to find is the 229 offers more than one caliber.

The P228 is the older of the two and was designed around the 9MM round; the newer P229 was originally built to handle the .40 S&W round.

The P228 has a stamped slide with a welded on frontpiece and a pinned in (and removable) breechblock.  Depending on its finish (and how well it’s taken care of), the slide can be somewhat rust-prone.  The slide has full-length serrations.  The breechblock is pinned in the slide with two roll pins – one inside the other – which also capture the firing pin.   It has an internal extractor

The P229 has a heavier, milled, stainless (though sometimes blackened) slide.  The slide has only half-length serrations.  The equivalent pin to the roll pins in the P228 is solid.  It has an external extractor.

AFAIK, the P228 is not available with a rail.

The P228 is slightly lighter and less chunky than the P229.  Thus, for a 9MM I much prefer the P228.  It just handles a bit better IMHO.

Thanks 199. I rechecked the Sig web site and you're right about the weight. The 228 is listed as being 2 oz. lighter and I now see what you're saying about the serations on the slide. I had missed both of those before.

From your description it sounds like the 229 may be built better, well at least heavier, guess that doesn't necessarily mean better, but I haven't heard/read of people complaining that they have problems with thier 228's breaking down.

The P229 is beefed up in the slide and frame (?) to handle the .40S&W round.  So yes, it is built "better" for the .40, but not necessarily for the 9mm.  If you are wanting a 9mm, I'd say go with the 228, if you want .40 or .357SIG you'll have to go with the 229.

Quoted: The P229 is beefed up in the slide and frame (?) to handle the .40S&W round.  So yes, it is built "better" for the .40, but not necessarily for the 9mm.  If you are wanting a 9mm, I'd say go with the 228, if you want .40 or .357SIG you'll have to go with the 229.

Actualy the frame is the same. The only difference I found in the frame is the triggers. The 228 has a stamped trigger and the 229 is solid.

Frame is the same...gotcha, I wasnt 100% sure.

Did you really mean to say triggers?  Because I am nearly 100% sure the slide is milled on the 229 and stamped on the 228.

Don't kid yourself with the 228.  If you want a 9mm handgun the P228 will serve you just as well as the P229.  The P228 is also known as the M11 used by the military, it can stand up to the toughest use.  It is a well built firearm a solid preformer and not to mention my favortie SIG pistol.

Agree with everyone here... 9mm, the 228 is the way to go. Its not so much as the 2oz weight difference as the overall balance. If your looking for a .40 or .357 or need a rail, well your choice is limited to the 229,.

Quoted: Frame is the same...gotcha, I wasnt 100% sure. Did you really mean to say triggers?  Because I am nearly 100% sure the slide is milled on the 229 and stamped on the 228.

Yes I ment triggers. As I was talking about the only difference I have found "in the frame" . The trigger is not the frame. However it resides there.  I thought the fact that the 228 slide was stamped and the 229 was milled was clear.

I had owned a 228 for years. Before I found it was a stamped slide. I was shocked to say the least. Talk about German workman ship!

I still prefer the ability of the 229 to handle the 40 & 357.sig. Nothing wrong with 9mm. I just feel more capable of ending a wider range of threats.

Quoted: Yes I ment triggers. As I was talking about the only difference I have found "in the frame" . The trigger is not the frame. However it resides there.  I thought the fact that the 228 slide was stamped and the 229 was milled was clear.

I see...yes the slide is a given, but you never know what other people know, thats all.

Thanks for the clarification.