Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 3/28/2006 2:05:47 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/28/2006 2:06:28 PM EDT by Fglocker_Plz]
I know it's personal perference so lets hear it from your own personal opinion. Which one would you choose? H&K USP Fullsize .40S&W or SIG P229 .40S&W?

I'm such a noob, I don't even know how to make a poll here.
Link Posted: 3/28/2006 2:09:16 PM EDT
I've owned a USP 9mm and currently own a P229 in .40 S&W.

P229 wins hands down.
Link Posted: 3/28/2006 2:09:40 PM EDT
USP .40= designed around the .40 cartridge. DA/SA with decocker AND safety- can be carried cocked and locked.

Sig 229= beefed up 9mm platform. DA/SA with decocker only.

Other than that, its personal preference. Both companies make good firearms. I prefer HK.
Link Posted: 3/28/2006 3:11:50 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/28/2006 3:12:59 PM EDT by alphatengo]
I love my HK. The fact boils down to above statement of carrying cocked and locked. One smooth movement from holster-select fire-on target. A buddy has a sig and he likes it, however it's not his carry weapon.
Link Posted: 3/28/2006 3:32:55 PM EDT
USP over sig every day. Twice on tuesday.
Link Posted: 3/28/2006 3:41:24 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/28/2006 3:41:58 PM EDT by DigDug]
Have the USP's changed in design in the last 10 years since I owned one? Big clumsy pistol with poor ergonomics and an ultrahigh bore height? That's what I'm familiar with. When I bought my USP, it only came in 9mm.
Link Posted: 3/28/2006 3:59:35 PM EDT

Originally Posted By DigDug:
Have the USP's changed in design in the last 10 years since I owned one? Big clumsy pistol with poor ergonomics and an ultrahigh bore height? That's what I'm familiar with. When I bought my USP, it only came in 9mm.



The USP was designed for a .40 and the Ergonomics are great for my taste. The grip angle and grip size are much better than my glocks but not as good as my 1911s. They are both great handguns but the HK is much better IMO. The high bore height is a non issue for me because IMO it does not affect how the gun shoots.
Link Posted: 3/28/2006 4:03:16 PM EDT

Originally Posted By BSheppard:

Originally Posted By DigDug:
Have the USP's changed in design in the last 10 years since I owned one? Big clumsy pistol with poor ergonomics and an ultrahigh bore height? That's what I'm familiar with. When I bought my USP, it only came in 9mm.



The USP was designed for a .40 and the Ergonomics are great for my taste. The grip angle and grip size are much better than my glocks but not as good as my 1911s. They are both great handguns but the HK is much better IMO. The high bore height is a non issue for me because IMO it does not affect how the gun shoots.



So have you ever shot a SIG?
Link Posted: 3/28/2006 4:05:05 PM EDT
I like the sig better. The triggers are nicer and it's simple in that it's DA/SA. Just point and shoot. The USP's controls of the decocker/safety is not neccessary. You can carry the USP in DAO, SA w/ safety on, or DA/SA w/ safety on. Idealy, you pick one of those options and stick with it. But as you know, Murphy will always screw with it at the worst moment. One other thing to note is that if you hold the USP decoking leaver down (like how some people shoot their 1911's) whle you press the trigger, the gun will not fire.

If you like apples eat apples, if you like oranges, eat oranges.
Link Posted: 3/28/2006 4:07:37 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Dragonfly228:
I like the sig better. The triggers are nicer and it's simple in that it's DA/SA. Just point and shoot. The USP's controls of the decocker/safety is not neccessary. You can carry the USP in DAO, SA w/ safety on, or DA/SA w/ safety on. Idealy, you pick one of those options and stick with it. But as you know, Murphy will always screw with it at the worst moment. One other thing to note is that if you hold the USP decoking leaver down (like how some people shoot their 1911's) whle you press the trigger, the gun will not fire.

If you like apples eat apples, if you like oranges, eat oranges.



So get a V9, or a V something else that suits your needs.

Thats the beauty of the USP. Options.

Link Posted: 3/28/2006 4:15:03 PM EDT

Originally Posted By DigDug:

Originally Posted By BSheppard:

Originally Posted By DigDug:
Have the USP's changed in design in the last 10 years since I owned one? Big clumsy pistol with poor ergonomics and an ultrahigh bore height? That's what I'm familiar with. When I bought my USP, it only came in 9mm.



The USP was designed for a .40 and the Ergonomics are great for my taste. The grip angle and grip size are much better than my glocks but not as good as my 1911s. They are both great handguns but the HK is much better IMO. The high bore height is a non issue for me because IMO it does not affect how the gun shoots.



So have you ever shot a SIG?



I know this wasn't directed toward me, but I'll respond anyway since I agree with him. And to answer your question, yes, I own a 226. I feel the USP platform is superior in every way, for ME. Also, the 9mm may have been released first, but it was designed around a .40. That may be a possibility. To be honest, I am not sure.

High bore axis? Are you kidding? Thats what Sig is all about. I wouldn't be suprised if Sig's is higher than HK's. HK's to me do not recoil harsh at all. Their recoil reduction system works quite well. Muzzle flip is VERY controllable, nor are they big and clumsy. My 5'1" ex girlfriend had no trouble handling my USP .40 at all.

The USP was designed as a combat handgun. I could care less if it feels like a tit in my hand. Its made to function wet or dry, in any conditions. And it does. Its also made to place rounds where you want them to go, and it does...better than any other production handgun out there. It can be carried cocked and locked. Which may not mean much to you, but to me, it means everything. I just lucked out in that one of the only handguns out there that allows this happens to be one of the best ever designed.

And the reason that the USP hasn't changed in 10 years is quite simple. It hasn't had to.
Link Posted: 3/28/2006 4:19:09 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/28/2006 4:20:46 PM EDT by Marksman14]

Originally Posted By Dragonfly228:
I like the sig better. The triggers are nicer and it's simple in that it's DA/SA. Just point and shoot. The USP's controls of the decocker/safety is not neccessary. You can carry the USP in DAO, SA w/ safety on, or DA/SA w/ safety on. Idealy, you pick one of those options and stick with it. But as you know, Murphy will always screw with it at the worst moment. One other thing to note is that if you hold the USP decoking leaver down (like how some people shoot their 1911's) whle you press the trigger, the gun will not fire.

If you like apples eat apples, if you like oranges, eat oranges.



I guess some of us are competent enough to have a pistol that gives you a variety of options, however I agree- stick with one system.
I picked one style, and all of mine are V1. I use mine all the same way, cocked and locked.

I ride the safety. I have NEVER accidentally decocked the handgun. It may not be necessary, but what other firearm gives you the flexibility of the USP? And I will answer, none. If you don't like one method of carry, choose another. If you don't like it, choose another after that. When you figure out what you like, stick with it, and don't worry.

If its that big of a concern, Get any one of the V1-9 controls, and only allow it to do what you want.
Link Posted: 3/28/2006 4:24:12 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Marksman14:

Originally Posted By DigDug:

Originally Posted By BSheppard:

Originally Posted By DigDug:
Have the USP's changed in design in the last 10 years since I owned one? Big clumsy pistol with poor ergonomics and an ultrahigh bore height? That's what I'm familiar with. When I bought my USP, it only came in 9mm.



The USP was designed for a .40 and the Ergonomics are great for my taste. The grip angle and grip size are much better than my glocks but not as good as my 1911s. They are both great handguns but the HK is much better IMO. The high bore height is a non issue for me because IMO it does not affect how the gun shoots.



So have you ever shot a SIG?



I know this wasn't directed toward me, but I'll respond anyway since I agree with him. And to answer your question, yes, I own a 226. I feel the USP platform is superior in every way, for ME. Also, the 9mm may have been released first, but it was designed around a .40. That may be a possibility. To be honest, I am not sure.

High bore axis? Are you kidding? Thats what Sig is all about. I wouldn't be suprised if Sig's is higher than HK's. HK's to me do not recoil harsh at all. Their recoil reduction system works quite well. Muzzle flip is VERY controllable, nor are they big and clumsy. My 5'1" ex girlfriend had no trouble handling my USP .40 at all.

The USP was designed as a combat handgun. I could care less if it feels like a tit in my hand. Its made to function wet or dry, in any conditions. And it does. Its also made to place rounds where you want them to go, and it does...better than any other production handgun out there. It can be carried cocked and locked. Which may not mean much to you, but to me, it means everything. I just lucked out in that one of the only handguns out there that allows this happens to be one of the best ever designed.

And the reason that the USP hasn't changed in 10 years is quite simple. It hasn't had to.



Thank you for that advertisement. You would think someone challenged your manhood or something.
Link Posted: 3/28/2006 4:25:23 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/28/2006 4:27:23 PM EDT by Marksman14]

Originally Posted By DigDug:

Originally Posted By Marksman14:

Originally Posted By DigDug:

Originally Posted By BSheppard:

Originally Posted By DigDug:
Have the USP's changed in design in the last 10 years since I owned one? Big clumsy pistol with poor ergonomics and an ultrahigh bore height? That's what I'm familiar with. When I bought my USP, it only came in 9mm.



The USP was designed for a .40 and the Ergonomics are great for my taste. The grip angle and grip size are much better than my glocks but not as good as my 1911s. They are both great handguns but the HK is much better IMO. The high bore height is a non issue for me because IMO it does not affect how the gun shoots.



So have you ever shot a SIG?



I know this wasn't directed toward me, but I'll respond anyway since I agree with him. And to answer your question, yes, I own a 226. I feel the USP platform is superior in every way, for ME. Also, the 9mm may have been released first, but it was designed around a .40. That may be a possibility. To be honest, I am not sure.

High bore axis? Are you kidding? Thats what Sig is all about. I wouldn't be suprised if Sig's is higher than HK's. HK's to me do not recoil harsh at all. Their recoil reduction system works quite well. Muzzle flip is VERY controllable, nor are they big and clumsy. My 5'1" ex girlfriend had no trouble handling my USP .40 at all.

The USP was designed as a combat handgun. I could care less if it feels like a tit in my hand. Its made to function wet or dry, in any conditions. And it does. Its also made to place rounds where you want them to go, and it does...better than any other production handgun out there. It can be carried cocked and locked. Which may not mean much to you, but to me, it means everything. I just lucked out in that one of the only handguns out there that allows this happens to be one of the best ever designed.

And the reason that the USP hasn't changed in 10 years is quite simple. It hasn't had to.



Thank you for that advertisement. You would think someone challenged your manhood or something.



No, I'm just explaining my opinions, instead of criticizing a platform without backing it up. You asked, I answered. I guess I'll keep my logic to myself next time.
Link Posted: 3/28/2006 4:26:02 PM EDT
One thing about H&K owners, they sure know how to be arrogant and condescending...
Link Posted: 3/28/2006 4:28:28 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/28/2006 4:29:27 PM EDT by DigDug]

Originally Posted By Marksman14:

Originally Posted By DigDug:

Originally Posted By Marksman14:

Originally Posted By DigDug:

Originally Posted By BSheppard:

Originally Posted By DigDug:
Have the USP's changed in design in the last 10 years since I owned one? Big clumsy pistol with poor ergonomics and an ultrahigh bore height? That's what I'm familiar with. When I bought my USP, it only came in 9mm.



The USP was designed for a .40 and the Ergonomics are great for my taste. The grip angle and grip size are much better than my glocks but not as good as my 1911s. They are both great handguns but the HK is much better IMO. The high bore height is a non issue for me because IMO it does not affect how the gun shoots.



So have you ever shot a SIG?



I know this wasn't directed toward me, but I'll respond anyway since I agree with him. And to answer your question, yes, I own a 226. I feel the USP platform is superior in every way, for ME. Also, the 9mm may have been released first, but it was designed around a .40. That may be a possibility. To be honest, I am not sure.

High bore axis? Are you kidding? Thats what Sig is all about. I wouldn't be suprised if Sig's is higher than HK's. HK's to me do not recoil harsh at all. Their recoil reduction system works quite well. Muzzle flip is VERY controllable, nor are they big and clumsy. My 5'1" ex girlfriend had no trouble handling my USP .40 at all.

The USP was designed as a combat handgun. I could care less if it feels like a tit in my hand. Its made to function wet or dry, in any conditions. And it does. Its also made to place rounds where you want them to go, and it does...better than any other production handgun out there. It can be carried cocked and locked. Which may not mean much to you, but to me, it means everything. I just lucked out in that one of the only handguns out there that allows this happens to be one of the best ever designed.

And the reason that the USP hasn't changed in 10 years is quite simple. It hasn't had to.



Thank you for that advertisement. You would think someone challenged your manhood or something.



No, I'm just explaining my opinions, instead of criticizing a platform without backing it up. You asked, I answered. Whats the big deal? Did I answer too complete for you?



Opinions are what you presented. Nothing more.

I've owned both systems and would not choose an H&K. You will have to live with that.

What is it with Colt and H&K owners. Sheeessss.

Nice edit by the way...
Link Posted: 3/28/2006 4:33:12 PM EDT

Originally Posted By DigDug:
One thing about H&K owners, they sure know how to be arrogant and condescending...



No, we just know what we like. And we know why we like it. And we know why other platforms just don't do it for us.

I took the time to explain myself and my opinion. I even said the Sig was a fine firearm, hell I own one. There are just a few things I prefer that other platforms to date do not offer. I didn't go into why I prefed HK until someone asked. I did that, and now you're complaining.

Link Posted: 3/28/2006 4:42:21 PM EDT
I have a Sig 229 .40 I love it. 100% reliable even when shot dry w/o any lube. It also is on my hip everyday. I would choose it over the HK.
Link Posted: 3/28/2006 4:42:34 PM EDT

Originally Posted By DigDug:

Originally Posted By Marksman14:

Originally Posted By DigDug:

Originally Posted By Marksman14:

Originally Posted By DigDug:

Originally Posted By BSheppard:

Originally Posted By DigDug:
Have the USP's changed in design in the last 10 years since I owned one? Big clumsy pistol with poor ergonomics and an ultrahigh bore height? That's what I'm familiar with. When I bought my USP, it only came in 9mm.



The USP was designed for a .40 and the Ergonomics are great for my taste. The grip angle and grip size are much better than my glocks but not as good as my 1911s. They are both great handguns but the HK is much better IMO. The high bore height is a non issue for me because IMO it does not affect how the gun shoots.



So have you ever shot a SIG?



I know this wasn't directed toward me, but I'll respond anyway since I agree with him. And to answer your question, yes, I own a 226. I feel the USP platform is superior in every way, for ME. Also, the 9mm may have been released first, but it was designed around a .40. That may be a possibility. To be honest, I am not sure.

High bore axis? Are you kidding? Thats what Sig is all about. I wouldn't be suprised if Sig's is higher than HK's. HK's to me do not recoil harsh at all. Their recoil reduction system works quite well. Muzzle flip is VERY controllable, nor are they big and clumsy. My 5'1" ex girlfriend had no trouble handling my USP .40 at all.

The USP was designed as a combat handgun. I could care less if it feels like a tit in my hand. Its made to function wet or dry, in any conditions. And it does. Its also made to place rounds where you want them to go, and it does...better than any other production handgun out there. It can be carried cocked and locked. Which may not mean much to you, but to me, it means everything. I just lucked out in that one of the only handguns out there that allows this happens to be one of the best ever designed.

And the reason that the USP hasn't changed in 10 years is quite simple. It hasn't had to.



Thank you for that advertisement. You would think someone challenged your manhood or something.



No, I'm just explaining my opinions, instead of criticizing a platform without backing it up. You asked, I answered. Whats the big deal? Did I answer too complete for you?



Opinions are what you presented. Nothing more.

I've owned both systems and would not choose an H&K. You will have to live with that.

What is it with Colt and H&K owners. Sheeessss.

Nice edit by the way...



No problem, I realized it sounded assholish, so I removed it.

I could care less what you prefer. I can live with you choosing a rock and a stick of gum if thats your thing. And if I asked why, and you explained, I certainly wouldn't call you arrogant or condescending. I would simply understand that what works for you may not work for me. Like I said, I specifically made it a point to explain that this was my opinion. The originator of this post may not have thought out the different pros and cons to each system, so I made sure I pointed out the pros of the system I prefer. Feel free to point out the pros of the system you prefer! Chances are I'd agree with you 100%.

I shared my opinion because you asked. I also made sure I pointed out exactly where my opinion started.

Biggest reason is cocked and locked, as I stated earlier. If that is not important to you, than you're lucky- there are plenty other great options for you. Sig is one! Great firearms, no doubt. However, for me...it does not do what I want it to do.

Oh, and btw, I'm a Bushmaster guy, not a Colt guy ;-)

Either way, you chose a fine platform.
Link Posted: 3/28/2006 4:49:06 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/28/2006 4:49:47 PM EDT by Marksman14]
Either way...I apologize if I came across as an ass. Just sharing my opinion is all. Choosing between Sig and Hk is like choosing between BMW and Mercedes. Both fine cars, its all about what has the options you're looking for!
Link Posted: 3/28/2006 4:56:44 PM EDT

Originally Posted By DigDug:

Originally Posted By Marksman14:

Originally Posted By DigDug:

Originally Posted By Marksman14:

Originally Posted By DigDug:

Originally Posted By BSheppard:

Originally Posted By DigDug:
Have the USP's changed in design in the last 10 years since I owned one? Big clumsy pistol with poor ergonomics and an ultrahigh bore height? That's what I'm familiar with. When I bought my USP, it only came in 9mm.



The USP was designed for a .40 and the Ergonomics are great for my taste. The grip angle and grip size are much better than my glocks but not as good as my 1911s. They are both great handguns but the HK is much better IMO. The high bore height is a non issue for me because IMO it does not affect how the gun shoots.



So have you ever shot a SIG?



I know this wasn't directed toward me, but I'll respond anyway since I agree with him. And to answer your question, yes, I own a 226. I feel the USP platform is superior in every way, for ME. Also, the 9mm may have been released first, but it was designed around a .40. That may be a possibility. To be honest, I am not sure.

High bore axis? Are you kidding? Thats what Sig is all about. I wouldn't be suprised if Sig's is higher than HK's. HK's to me do not recoil harsh at all. Their recoil reduction system works quite well. Muzzle flip is VERY controllable, nor are they big and clumsy. My 5'1" ex girlfriend had no trouble handling my USP .40 at all.

The USP was designed as a combat handgun. I could care less if it feels like a tit in my hand. Its made to function wet or dry, in any conditions. And it does. Its also made to place rounds where you want them to go, and it does...better than any other production handgun out there. It can be carried cocked and locked. Which may not mean much to you, but to me, it means everything. I just lucked out in that one of the only handguns out there that allows this happens to be one of the best ever designed.

And the reason that the USP hasn't changed in 10 years is quite simple.
It hasn't had to.



Thank you for that advertisement. You would think someone challenged your manhood or something.



No, I'm just explaining my opinions, instead of criticizing a platform without backing it up. You asked, I answered. Whats the big deal? Did I answer too complete for you?



Opinions are what you presented. Nothing more.

I've owned both systems and would not choose an H&K. You will have to live with that.

What is it with Colt and H&K owners. Sheeessss.

Nice edit by the way...



1. When I bought my USP, it only came in 9mm
Either your mistaken or you have no idea what you are talking about. The USP was originally released in .40 S&W, and was late downsized to take the 9mm Luger round. SIG had to take a 9mm and "up" it to fit the .40 S&W. Ask me if I want a gun made for a certain caliber compared to a gun modified to take a caliber and I will take the gun made for the certain caliber any day.

2.
And the reason that the USP hasn't changed in 10 years is quite simple.

-Sorry Scott, but your wrong. USP changed to polygonal rifling in the 90's.

3. Opinions are what you presented. Nothing more.
-DigDug it certainly appeared that Marksman presented some reason to BACK up his opinions. You are the one who has only present opinions, and in some cases blatently WRONG facts.

So with that out of the way my opinion is that the HK is a better weapon, and I have fired a P226, and the P239. The HK is the hands down better weapon and here are REASONS why not just opinions.

-USP has much, much better finish, a HE finish.
-The ability to have the hammer in three different positions, with or without the safety on/off in each hammer position. And you have have up to nine other different variants.
-A patented recoil reduction system that drastically reduces wear and tear.
-Much more agressive checkering for a much better fit
-Enlarged trigger guard for use with gloves
-Actually has an external safety, you can not use it if you do not see fit
-Pyramid shaped three dot sights to gently guide yours eyes into alignment
-Cold Hammer Forged barrels with polygonal rifling for increased velocity and accuracy, not to mention longer barrel life.
-Comes stock with a rail, SIGs rail cost extra, and for the extra you could buy an adapter for the USP and have some money saved for the light. Or just buy a light that fits the HK rails.
-Lifetime Warrenty
-Lighter gun due to the use of polymer
SIG P229 with unloaded magazine (32.4 oz)
HK USP Fullsize with unloaded magazine (26.4 oz)

From the looks of things SIG just got its ass handed to it.

Link Posted: 3/28/2006 5:08:21 PM EDT
Haha, well yeah, got me there. Rifling changed.
Link Posted: 3/28/2006 5:09:43 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Burkey:

From the looks of things SIG just got its ass handed to it.


Ok sure

Marksman14 really hit the nail on the head. It is very much like choosing between the BMW or Mercedes

BTW the cocked and locked feature on the USP is way, way over rated. I have posted this countless times, I do not understand why some many people whine about a double action trigger pull for the first shot.
Link Posted: 3/28/2006 5:28:12 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/28/2006 5:42:54 PM EDT by DigDug]

Originally Posted By Burkey:

Originally Posted By DigDug:

Originally Posted By Marksman14:

Originally Posted By DigDug:

Originally Posted By Marksman14:

Originally Posted By DigDug:

Originally Posted By BSheppard:

Originally Posted By DigDug:
Have the USP's changed in design in the last 10 years since I owned one? Big clumsy pistol with poor ergonomics and an ultrahigh bore height? That's what I'm familiar with. When I bought my USP, it only came in 9mm.



The USP was designed for a .40 and the Ergonomics are great for my taste. The grip angle and grip size are much better than my glocks but not as good as my 1911s. They are both great handguns but the HK is much better IMO. The high bore height is a non issue for me because IMO it does not affect how the gun shoots.



So have you ever shot a SIG?



I know this wasn't directed toward me, but I'll respond anyway since I agree with him. And to answer your question, yes, I own a 226. I feel the USP platform is superior in every way, for ME. Also, the 9mm may have been released first, but it was designed around a .40. That may be a possibility. To be honest, I am not sure.

High bore axis? Are you kidding? Thats what Sig is all about. I wouldn't be suprised if Sig's is higher than HK's. HK's to me do not recoil harsh at all. Their recoil reduction system works quite well. Muzzle flip is VERY controllable, nor are they big and clumsy. My 5'1" ex girlfriend had no trouble handling my USP .40 at all.

The USP was designed as a combat handgun. I could care less if it feels like a tit in my hand. Its made to function wet or dry, in any conditions. And it does. Its also made to place rounds where you want them to go, and it does...better than any other production handgun out there. It can be carried cocked and locked. Which may not mean much to you, but to me, it means everything. I just lucked out in that one of the only handguns out there that allows this happens to be one of the best ever designed.

And the reason that the USP hasn't changed in 10 years is quite simple.
It hasn't had to.



Thank you for that advertisement. You would think someone challenged your manhood or something.



No, I'm just explaining my opinions, instead of criticizing a platform without backing it up. You asked, I answered. Whats the big deal? Did I answer too complete for you?



Opinions are what you presented. Nothing more.

I've owned both systems and would not choose an H&K. You will have to live with that.

What is it with Colt and H&K owners. Sheeessss.

Nice edit by the way...



1. When I bought my USP, it only came in 9mm
Either your mistaken or you have no idea what you are talking about. The USP was originally released in .40 S&W, and was late downsized to take the 9mm Luger round. SIG had to take a 9mm and "up" it to fit the .40 S&W. Ask me if I want a gun made for a certain caliber compared to a gun modified to take a caliber and I will take the gun made for the certain caliber any day.

2.
And the reason that the USP hasn't changed in 10 years is quite simple.

-Sorry Scott, but your wrong. USP changed to polygonal rifling in the 90's.

3. Opinions are what you presented. Nothing more.
-DigDug it certainly appeared that Marksman presented some reason to BACK up his opinions. You are the one who has only present opinions, and in some cases blatently WRONG facts.

So with that out of the way my opinion is that the HK is a better weapon, and I have fired a P226, and the P239. The HK is the hands down better weapon and here are REASONS why not just opinions.

-USP has much, much better finish, a HE finish.
-The ability to have the hammer in three different positions, with or without the safety on/off in each hammer position. And you have have up to nine other different variants.
-A patented recoil reduction system that drastically reduces wear and tear.
-Much more agressive checkering for a much better fit
-Enlarged trigger guard for use with gloves
-Actually has an external safety, you can not use it if you do not see fit
-Pyramid shaped three dot sights to gently guide yours eyes into alignment
-Cold Hammer Forged barrels with polygonal rifling for increased velocity and accuracy, not to mention longer barrel life.
-Comes stock with a rail, SIGs rail cost extra, and for the extra you could buy an adapter for the USP and have some money saved for the light. Or just buy a light that fits the HK rails.
-Lifetime Warrenty
-Lighter gun due to the use of polymer
SIG P229 with unloaded magazine (32.4 oz)
HK USP Fullsize with unloaded magazine (26.4 oz)

From the looks of things SIG just got its ass handed to it.




Thanks for cutting and pasting from H&Ks web site. That was so helpful. If people want marketing fluff, they can go to the website on their own here:

www.hecklerkoch-usa.com/index.jsp?loc=101&SITEID=A&PartNumber=704501

Here's a complete feature list of the USP:

Features:
• Corrosion proof fiber reinforced polymer frame
• Polygonal bore for increased velocity, easier cleaning and longer life
• Can be converted to any of nine trigger firing modes
• HK recoil reduction system
• Corrosion resistant "Hostile Environment" Nitro Carburized finish
• Oversize trigger guard for use with gloves
• One piece machined steel slide
• Universal mounting grooves for installing accessories
• Ambidextrous magazine release lever
• Extended slide release
• Patented Lock-Out safety device
• Limited Lifetime warranty


Now on to the P229 (Actually P229R)

Compared to the P229, the USP is huge. The USP is lighter. If you want even lighter, get a Glock.
The P229R is the standard config now. It comes with an industry standard rail. No adapter needed!
You can get 9mm, .40 S&W, and .357 SIG. SIG has its own caliber. So does Glock! What does HK have?
P229R has Stainless steel construction.
DAK is available. Arguably one of the best trigger systems ever invented.
Link Posted: 3/28/2006 6:50:13 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/28/2006 6:54:41 PM EDT by Eupfhoria]
From someone who has both a SIG and HK (USP40c and P220R), I'd say get the 229, with both a .357SIG and .40S&W barrel.

SIG's fit MY hand a little bit better than the USP, but I do really like the controls of the USP. And has been said you get more flexibility with the HK.

You really can't go wrong with either...


Get both

eta: The HE finish on HK pistols is a little better than SIG's Nitron finish, and I actually think they should weigh about the same. My USP Compact is just barely lighter than the 220R. Cant comment on a 229 though.
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 11:36:34 AM EDT

Originally Posted By DigDug:
Thanks for cutting and pasting from H&Ks web site. That was so helpful. If people want marketing fluff, they can go to the website on their own here:

www.hecklerkoch-usa.com/index.jsp?loc=101&SITEID=A&PartNumber=704501

Here's a complete feature list of the USP:

Features:
• Corrosion proof fiber reinforced polymer frame
• Polygonal bore for increased velocity, easier cleaning and longer life
• Can be converted to any of nine trigger firing modes
• HK recoil reduction system
• Corrosion resistant "Hostile Environment" Nitro Carburized finish
• Oversize trigger guard for use with gloves
• One piece machined steel slide
• Universal mounting grooves for installing accessories
• Ambidextrous magazine release lever
• Extended slide release
• Patented Lock-Out safety device
• Limited Lifetime warranty


Now on to the P229 (Actually P229R)

Compared to the P229, the USP is huge. The USP is lighter. If you want even lighter, get a Glock.
The P229R is the standard config now. It comes with an industry standard rail. No adapter needed!
You can get 9mm, .40 S&W, and .357 SIG. SIG has its own caliber. So does Glock! What does HK have?
P229R has Stainless steel construction.
DAK is available. Arguably one of the best trigger systems ever invented.



Originally Posted By DigDug:
Thanks for cutting and pasting from H&Ks web site. That was so helpful. If people want marketing fluff, they can go to the website on their own here:

First off I didn't just copy and past and its obvious from my wording that that wasn't what happened.
Secondly, "marketing fluff"?
Those are facts and features that the SIG does not have. Yes thats right the HK has more features than SIG. No read that again DigDug and see if it can be "dug" into your head. HK USP pistols have more features than a SIG.
How is that marketing fluff? How can having an ambi safety be fluff? You have said nothing, nothing and nothing to prove your point that SIG is a better gun. How about some features that SIG has that the USP doesn't have?

So, SIG has DAK, and HK has LEM. HK USPc are availible in .357 SIG.

How about telling everyone here why the SIG is a better pistol? We all are awaiting with open ears and will be glad to listen.
Because truthfully, drinking great tasting HK Kool Aid starts getting boring.


I will agree that SIG is a great company. They make some excellent pistols, and many of them are carried by professionals. But honestly if you want to have a pistol made by the worlds top arms maker, then your going to have to go to HK. HK supplies tons, and tons of countires with weaponry. There HK G3 and G36 are a favorite of European armies. HK pistols can be seen in the German miltary, and hundreds of law enforcement agencies across the world. Not to mention the ever popular HK MP5 which has become the staple weapon of any SWAT team on the planet Earth.

Now if SIG can do stuff like that, then you can bet your ass that I would back their product .
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 12:09:39 PM EDT
I'd vote for the Sig 229. I've tried to like HK's for a very long time, however every time I pick one up its never felt right in my hand and the triggers have always been too long for me to shoot comfortably or accurately. I'm sensing thats just based upon my hands in terms of their size and how they're built, but that alone has kept me from owning any of the USP series.

The 229 fits very well in my hand, the triggers have always been good (the older the Sig the better the trigger though), I am accurate with them and I've never had one choke. Also there are a glut of used police trades out there on the market which means I can feed my Sig addiction without completely breaking the bank.

My 229 is in 9mm and its a very pleasant shooter, however the ones in .40 are very nice as well because of they heavier slide the 229's have.

In either case both HK and SIG make very fine pistols and you can't go wrong with either. I'd get out and shoot the two to see which you like more and let us know which one you get.

Cheers!
Lithgow303

Link Posted: 3/29/2006 12:27:12 PM EDT
I've had both in .40, I prefer the SIG229R and it's the .40 i still have.
Thats not to say I don't like the HKs, although now I only own USPs in .45
I like my Glocks too.
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 10:11:00 PM EDT
Get the USP. You don't need to Store In Grease.
Link Posted: 3/30/2006 5:40:48 PM EDT
Burkey,

People are speaking about their preferences for which firearm they like better. They can get Feature lists from web sites. The original poster is looking for opinions from people who have used both. I have owned both and have posted my opinion. How a firearm feels and shoots is more than "Features".

Are you even old enough to own a firearm? Seriously.
Link Posted: 3/30/2006 7:46:51 PM EDT
I own a P229 in .40 and I like it quite a bit, its been reliable and a very robust pistol. However the USP's that I've shot were sweet and its one thing that is definitely on my "to get" list.
Link Posted: 3/30/2006 11:11:27 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Marksman14:
USP .40= designed around the .40 cartridge. DA/SA with decocker AND safety- can be carried cocked and locked.

Sig 229= beefed up 9mm platform. DA/SA with decocker only.

Other than that, its personal preference. Both companies make good firearms. I prefer HK.



Acctually the 229 was one of if not the 1st hand gun built for the 40. SIG help in the develipment of the 40 and the 229 was born. Later it was chambered in the 9mm.
Link Posted: 3/31/2006 11:26:39 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/31/2006 11:27:37 AM EDT by Burkey]

Originally Posted By DigDug:
Burkey,

People are speaking about their preferences for which firearm they like better. They can get Feature lists from web sites. The original poster is looking for opinions from people who have used both. I have owned both and have posted my opinion. How a firearm feels and shoots is more than "Features".

Are you even old enough to own a firearm? Seriously.



Since both are such great pistols and if both feel the same to (This guy who asked the question), and both work 100% what can you tell the guy?

DigDug all you have been doing is saying: "I like SIG, I don't need any reasons".
I have been saying: "I really like HK; here are my reasons:".

Which do you think would be more helpful to someone?
And if you cannot answer that question then I have to ask you; "Do you feel lucky?,............ Well do ya punk?"
LOL!
Link Posted: 3/31/2006 7:48:14 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/31/2006 7:51:24 PM EDT by DigDug]

Originally Posted By Burkey:

Originally Posted By DigDug:
Burkey,

People are speaking about their preferences for which firearm they like better. They can get Feature lists from web sites. The original poster is looking for opinions from people who have used both. I have owned both and have posted my opinion. How a firearm feels and shoots is more than "Features".

Are you even old enough to own a firearm? Seriously.



Since both are such great pistols and if both feel the same to (This guy who asked the question), and both work 100% what can you tell the guy?

DigDug all you have been doing is saying: "I like SIG, I don't need any reasons".
I have been saying: "I really like HK; here are my reasons:".

Which do you think would be more helpful to someone?
And if you cannot answer that question then I have to ask you; "Do you feel lucky?,............ Well do ya punk?"
LOL!



The majority of people posting in this thread seem to prefer the P229 over the H&K, so it sure looks like I am not in the minority. The H&K USP is indeed a fine firearm. I know. I used to own one. I liked it a lot and will probably look closely at H&K when their new .45 comes out. Do you own any firearms? Have you ever fired a SIG of any kind? Have you ever fired an H&K USP before? From a shooters perspective, did you feel the SIG you shot was in any way inferior to the H&K you shot? Which one had more recoil? Which was more accurate for you? Which firearm allowed for faster followup shots? Which would you feel would be more concealable? Which one had the better fit and finish of the two? How many rounds did you fire through each firearm? Any failure to feed issues? What kind of ammo were you shooting? Do you have your concealed carry permit? If so, what type of firearm do you carry? If not, why not?

Did you get an A on your posterboard presentation?
Top Top