[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Sig -vs- Glock (Page 1 of 2)
Posted: 8/5/2007 7:20:47 AM EDT
| Sig -vs - Glock..Both great handguns but if you could only carry one- which one would you carry & why? |
|
GLOCK: Cheap, Reliable, Hi-Cap, Durable, Lightweight Construction. SIG: Expensive, higher calibers not as high capacity w/mags, a bit heavier, more acccurate. Now, if the question was: G19 or Sig P226 (And I wasn't paying for it)? I'd choose P226. But for now, I'm undecided. |
| Sig.....Have heard too many stories of Glocks going off out of battery, kaboom with new factory ammo, cops shooting themselves in the leg holstering their weapon. I have a P229, and I practice long trigger pull first shot/short trigger pull second and have no problem with 1" groups at 21'. |
+1 |
|
Hmmmmm........ Sig is a little higher end pistol, with slightly better accuracy and trigger, and has decocker, but has slightly less capacity. Glock is lighter weight, no external hammer to catch on anything, and the AK-47 of handguns in terms of ruggedness and reliability, and slightly higher capacity. In most scenarios, I would rather carry the Glock, but if I were a beat cop, I would carry the full size Sig .40 or .45 over a Glock. I really like the decocker feater for such a job. You asked which handgun would we choose, between the two, but I really think the caliber and application matter in making such a choice. (i.e. duty gun, CCW, back country bear gun, etc.) |
 Yeah, that stuff happens all the time. My choice is Glock (at least on the days I think there is a reduced chance of it blowing my leg off)  .
|
|
I just don't like Glocks as much as I do other pistols. My father's P220 fits in my hands really plush and is accurate as all hell. I vote for Sig. De cocker, exposed hammer, double action make it an ideal carry pistol in my opinion. I'd carry a Glock if we could open carry though. |
|
Glock- less expensive, plenty accurate, light weight, higher capacity, durable, rustproof, about as reliable as one can get, quirky ergo's, consistent trigger pull with a lightning fast reset. Dish best served in 9mm, without question. Sig- more expensive, less capacity, slightly more mechanically accurate, horrific finish wears/rusts, especially if you sweat on it, comfortable in the hand, horrible control locations, VERY high bore axis, finicky when run dry, HORRIBLE single action pull. Its long, its mushy, and the reset sucks. Unless you spend 1600 on the X5 or whatever it is, your trigger is going to suck. I don't really see how theres any competition between the two when it comes to a weapon to carry daily. Glock all day every day. Now, with that said, if the choice was between .40 cal models, I'd take a 229, as it was built for that cartridge. MOST the "horror" stories you hear about OOB's and KB's are with the .40 cal Glocks. If you think Sigs are KB proof, you're living in a dream world. Between 9mm, no contest, nod to the Glock. Cops shooting themselves when reholstering is just lousy/little training, and NO fault of the weapon. |
| I carry a Sig P220. It's a wonderful pistol with exceptional accuracy. It fits my hand very well, and the trigger is very good for a double-action. I've never been particularly smitten by Glocks, though I wouldn't hesitate to recommend them (and sometimes do). They're good weapons--they just don't quite do it for me, personally. |
Send me sample an I'll let you know.  I have both, Of I was carring all day it would be the glock 19 ir sig 229. I have shot both in quals and either one works for me but I would go with the sig for the double strike capeblity if the round does not go bang the first time. |
|
To make a long story short I was training at a respected firearms school and the instructors told us we would ALL have malfunctions throught the week because of the ammo we had to use(low pressure indoor frange). We were not allowed to clean our guns eather to see how long they would run. Every Glock, Springfield, 1911, Kahr ect jameed up many times. The only Sig in the class was my 229 NEVER had one malfunction. The instructor said it was one of the only times a pistol made it through with no problems. This at least in my opinion cemented the idea that the SIG platform is one of the most reliable to be had.......it smoked ever Glock in the class and I'm not saying that to piss of the Glock guys it is just how it happened. |
| I have had 2 Sigs and both were crap. My little .22 is getting better but the 226 was a jam-o-matic that had shoe polish for finish and needed lots of oil to run. Sig said it was the ammo or the lube or the way I shot it but it is one of over 20 hanguns I own and even my rugers are better guns. I have never had problems out of a gun like I have with my Sigs. Maybe a 1911 that out of the box needed this or that but never one I could not fix. I have several glocks and they all have been great. My G19, G17 and G21 are in my top 5 handguns I own. |
Great information if you're going to be stuck using shitting low power frangible ammo. Me thinks your sig may be due for a new recoil spring. |
+1000 My Glocks, even when freshly cleaned and lubed, do not like low powered ammo at all (like the 200 rounds of UMC 9mm that sounded like a cap gun going through my G34 some years back). The 9mm's are designed for the NATO pressure round. So, because they won't run with some 900ft/s 115grn underpowered shit ammo then they are a problem???? |
YEP Have you had problems with UMC? Ive shot a shit ton (around 2000rds) of UMC through my G17 and G19 with out any problems |
I think it was a faulty lot, it "sounded" like weak .38 special rounds through a 6" revolver. I switched to WWB that same day and there was one hell of a difference in noise, recoil, and....reliability. I have fired over 10,000 rounds of WWB through that same G34 since that day without a single failure. Maybe I should try the UMC again though because it may have been a bad lot, but don't know if I can bring myself to do it. Back to the point though: The moral to the story (whether UMC sucks balls or not is for another discussion) is that Glocks do not like weak loads, at all. |
Damn sounds like some weak stuff. I run my 1911 exclusively off UMC 230grn and have never had any ammo problems and ive put the 2000 rounds through my g17 with out a hitch. Have you ever run CCI blazer (115 grn) through the G34? PJK |
How can that be about the finish on the sig? The seals use them in some of the harshest environments. Do they put a different finish on for them? |
|
I've been carrying Sigs for over 20 years now. The 226 was my first and still one of my favorite handguns. But the Glock 19 is just as good or better than the Sig 226 and much lighter. I've had a Glock 21 since 1995 and a Sig 220 since 1996. The Sig 220 is more accurate and reliable than the Glock 21, shooting all types of ammo. But it doesn't matter whether you have a Glock 19 or a Sig 220. Mine are better than yours just because I own them.  Use what you feel the best with and don't worry about what someone else thinks. 
|
Nope, new recoil spring just before the class. It eats anything, +p+ or low power frang. I know there are Sigs out there that are junk! Just like Glock, HK, Springfield, or XXX brand. When you take a properly running Sig nothing can beat it in the reliability dept. |
6 of one and a half dozen of the other. I have both and for some reason I find myself carrying the Glock 19 or 23 more than the P-229 or P-228. Maybe I'm just afraid to scuff the Sigs. If you like the Sigs, a little practice will take care of the first shot double action problem some seem to have with the Sigs. |