I have a Colt 1991A but want another .45 cal handgun. Got it down to these three in this order.  Glock 21, H&K, SIG P220. Would like input on these 3 choices. Price is no question just the best over all handgun.   Thanks

I have a sig 220, it shoots very nice. i would like to get a glock 21 ,next.
i already hve 2 1911s

I have fired all three.  All three are fine weapons.  I MUCH prefer the SIG, due to the way it feels in my hand, the great SA trigger pull, and its manual of arms.  Glocks are OK, but not for me.  I don't like the trigger.  HKs are OK, but I HATE the safety/decocker arrangement, as I've trained all my adult life with 1911s in the high thumb position pressing down on the thumb safety, which decocks the HK, which could wind up killing me.

SIG P220 or 245 all the way.  245 is great for CCW.

SIG 220 will outshoot the other two IMO.
It is a tackdriving pistol.  You should fire all three before deciding.

I like the feel & recoil of the new SIG220 ST  ...it is one of the most accurate firearms I have ever shot.  Its not really appropriate for CCW though.

The Glock would be lighter but make sure you like the trigger on it.

H&K: not really my cup of tea.  Nice gun, accurate, but not for me.  Plus its BIG.

If you like the 1911 grip then get the Sig .{ I did } The glock is like grabbing a 2x4 and the H&K isn't much better .

I've had all three.  Which do I still own?

The HK.  

SIG - feels nice in the hand, exudes quality, is pretty damn accurate.  Rusts if you look at it with wet eyes.  Reliable, though I don't care for the 1911-type extractor.  

Glock - Very reliable, surprisingly accurate considering the trigger...and nearly rustproof.  Parts abound.  Pretty damn big in the hand.  

HK - Accurate in the extreme. I can (no shit) bounce a B27 at 200 yards with mine at least 5 shots of ten offhand. Can be carried cocked-n-locked (if you're prone to ride the safety, you can get a variant that doesn't have a decock.)  Very corrosion resistant, and the trigger is good out of the box, and someone like Teddy Jacobsen can make it wonderful.  It's the only .45 I know of that's so strong, it's factory approved for .45 Super with no modifications.  Seems to me you're going to run a lot of standard ACP through it before you start to have a problem.  

The HK just makes me a little happier.  

Quoted: HKs are OK, but I HATE the safety/decocker arrangement, as I've trained all my adult life with 1911s in the high thumb position pressing down on the thumb safety, which decocks the HK, which could wind up killing me.

Actually, it would just make your first shot DA.  I like that it gives you a choice of first shot DA or 'cocked and locked'.  I personally carry hammer down, round in chamber, first shot DA on the HK, Sig P220, and Ruger P90.  

In order, for the 3 you mentioned,
1. Sig P220
2. HK USP
3. Glock

Simply my preferences.  I think the Sig is just a tiny bit better than the HK and I won't have Glock.  Not going to get into a pissing match with the Glockaholics, just a Glock is not for me.

All good choices, but opinions don't matter all that much. Which feels best to you? Which do you shoot the best?

My personal choice would be a revolver in 45acp.

I have all three...as well as a .45 acp revolver...as well as several more 1911's, etc...yeah, I REALLY like the .45s.

I usually carry one or another of the more compact 1911 style pistols simply because I handle and shoot them better than anything else and they are reliable enough for me to trust. The MOST important attribute of a handgun for serious use is RELIABILITY...it must go "Bang" first time, every time or it is worse than useless.

Of these three guns, the reliability winner, hands down, is the H&K. Glock is second, Sig is last. The single column mags are simply not as reliable in feeding as the double column mags. H&K and Glock finish is very good...Sig blue sucks. H&K is made to serious, military specs, Glock and Sig are not.

Little things...the Sig ejector is simply an extension of the slide catch and cannot be tuned or replaced separately. The grip screws screw directly into the frame...no bushings. If you strip one...fun city. The extractor is pretty fragile...I have seen several break, but mostly because idiots were dropping a round into the chamber of a slide-locked gun, then letting the slide slam home...a definite no-no. Actually, these guns should not work as well as they do, but Sig controlls their quality very well.

Having said that, the Sig is smaller and lighter and extremely accurate. You can get the "two-tone" with nickle slide which will pretty well stop any rust problems, and the guns are reliable enough to trust once you find a load they like. (Both of mine prefer 230 gr. JHP's)


"Best" is subjective, but all three are good guns and you won't go wrong with any of them.

Have also had all three. Still have a P220 and a USP 45.
Since you already have a 1911, the H&K will keep all the controls familiar. My H&K and P220 are both tack drivers.
P220 is great as well.
The Glock is also fine, but personally would be my last choice of the three. Just didnt care for the way it recoiled. Not a bad recoil, just kinda felt funny to me. Hard to describe.

Lots of great points...it may be a hard decision but you should shoot all three & see which you prefer.

As a side note, the SIG 220 Steel (220ST) is available in an all steel version...frame & slide.
Heavy but won't rust..recoil is mild compared to the aluminum frame.

Ah shucks, just get all three & rotate carrying them.

I owned a Glock 30 & Sig P-220 & then bought my H&K USP Compact in 45acp. The H&K was by & far away the most accurate of the three. This was regardless of ammo used. None have ever jammed nor did they have any other problems.

I found accuracy to be in this order: H&K, Glock & then Sig. Actually the Glock was a big jump ahead of the Sig also.

All are good pistols, but I will rate them in this order:

1. Sig
2. H&K
3. Glock

All are pretty reliable, but when it comes to function, feel and accuracy, I think the Sig is the overall winner (although the H&K is a close second).

I like the HK the best.  The Glock would be great, but the grip is just too damn big.  The Sig, well I would rather take my Buckmark into combat than a Sig.  

Quoted: H&K is made to serious, military specs, Glock and Sig are not.

That's funny.  If the Sig is not made to military specs, why do several militaries around the world use it?

I have a H&K .45, a SIG 229, and a Glock 17. I like the H&K the best and the 229 second, in a distant third would be the Glock.
The Glock for me is the least accurate.

Quoted: I like the HK the best.  The Glock would be great, but the grip is just too damn big.  The Sig, well I would rather take my Buckmark into combat than a Sig.

Can you elaborate a bit more as to why? I have dealt with many Sigs and I have yet to find a more reliable or accurate out of the box pistol. I can understand someone not liking a Sig for some personal reason or taste, but trying to say that they are somehow a bad gun is just ridiculous.

G21 of course.

I have been a huge Sig fan for most of my life. I had an older (early-mid 90's) P220 that was just fabulous. Had to let go of it. Just got another new P220 last week. Had it at the range yesterday and it was horrible. Recoil seemed to be much more than my older one and the biggest problem, it was all over the paper at 7 yards. No consistent grouping at all. The new Springfield Mil-Spec Micro Compact that I bought it the store, took back to the range, took out of the box, loaded and fired, was making one ragged hole with no cleaning, prep or anything. I am very dissappointed in my new P220 and it will most likely be hitting the road soon as I cant keep a gun that wont shoot well, whether it be me or the gun. Just something to consider in your search. As much as I love Sigs, I fear their quality in the past couple of years might be declining somewhat.

HKs are OK, but I HATE the safety/decocker arrangement, as I've trained all my adult life with 1911s in the high thumb position pressing down on the thumb safety, which decocks the HK, which could wind up killing me.

Repear after me.  v a r i a n t  n i n e.

For $25.00 in parts and about three minutes you can turn your USP or USP Compact into the equivalent of a %100 reliable 1911 with a pinned grip safety.

The USP is an extremely versatile and accurate design, and they always bang when you hit the go button.

For those of you who dont have size-extra hands, the compact version is often a good fit.

All the weapons mentioned are good in the right hands, but don't discount the USP because of your (correct by the way) high thumb preference-it can work with you.

LarryG;

That the P220 is not built to serious military specs is not "funny"...it is fact.

The fact that several military establishments around the world may use them...although, other than Japan, I cannot recall any right now... changes nothing, especially since NO military in the world knows a tenth as much about fighting with handguns as the U.S. military has forgotten. Most places use pistols as a badge of rank, or to execute prisoners. Even the Germans don't know squat about shooting handguns...building them? yes. Shooting? Nein.

The P226 passed the U.S. military trials without problem, and the P228 is simply a reduced-size 226. THEY work much better than the older designs. No army anywhere uses the P220 in .45 caliber, and the 9mm 220 was never tested for the U.S. as it did not hold enough ammo.

The P220 is a decent handgun, but, believe me, "mil-spec" it ain't.

Quoted: HKs are OK, but I HATE the safety/decocker arrangement, as I've trained all my adult life with 1911s in the high thumb position pressing down on the thumb safety, which decocks the HK, which could wind up killing me. Repear after me.  v a r i a n t  n i n e. For $25.00 in parts and about three minutes you can turn your USP or USP Compact into the equivalent of a %100 reliable 1911 with a pinned grip safety. The USP is an extremely versatile and accurate design, and they always bang when you hit the go button. For those of you who dont have size-extra hands, the compact version is often a good fit. All the weapons mentioned are good in the right hands, but don't discount the USP because of your (correct by the way) high thumb preference-it can work with you.

I have been shooting 1911's most of my life too. Have always shot with my thumb under the safety. For some reason my rounds always hit in the ring with the X in it. Am I doing something wrong?

I'm in the market for a .45 also..since I gave my brother, my 92fs for his birthday. Time to move up...I'm about 90% sure on the HK. Now, can I get hi-cap mags for the compact? And what is the highest capacity for the full size?

I'm afraid to ask my local dealer...if you know what I mean. All this BATF talk about mags has gotten me spooked.

Is the stainless/older HK's "better" than standard black models? Or is this preferential?

I found a used full-size...great condition, for $600. Looks like it just came out of the box and never carried. the bore is flawless...I've got to get it or a nib compact. I like the sig 9mm's...they "feel" and look very nice but they're not in the mix.

So..compact or full-size? Is it too cumbersome for CCW if it's full-size?

Thanks in advnace,
NAKED

Quoted: LarryG; That the P220 is not built to serious military specs is not "funny"...it is fact. The fact that several military establishments around the world may use them...although, other than Japan, I cannot recall any right now... changes nothing, especially since NO military in the world knows a tenth as much about fighting with handguns as the U.S. military has forgotten. Most places use pistols as a badge of rank, or to execute prisoners. Even the Germans don't know squat about shooting handguns...building them? yes. Shooting? Nein. The P226 passed the U.S. military trials without problem, and the P228 is simply a reduced-size 226. THEY work much better than the older designs. No army anywhere uses the P220 in .45 caliber, and the 9mm 220 was never tested for the U.S. as it did not hold enough ammo. The P220 is a decent handgun, but, believe me, "mil-spec" it ain't.

Still wondering. You threw out a few generalities but no information. How about some specifics for those of us who might be considering a P-220? What is it about the 220 that you find weak? Other than caliber, I can't find much difference between the specs on the SiG 226, 228 & 220.

The P220 is not necessarily "weak", but its' design leaves much to be desired for a serious, fighting handgun.

When handguns are placed in service with large numbers of semi-skilled personnel, by either police or military establishments, there are several issues that become more important than they might otherwise be if all sidearms were used only by highly trained and motivated men and women.

Among these, the most important is reliability. Given that "reliability" is influenced by the basic design of the weapon, the design of its' magazines, the ammunition being used and the shooter, the pistol/magazine combination is only part of the equation. Still, it is obviously a critical part.

The Sig P220...specifically the P220 in caliber .45 acp...has several shortcomings which, while they certainly do not make the pistol unuseable for duty, do influence the reliability of these guns in both police and civilian service. Among them are the following:

The high "bore line" combined with light weight and the heavier recoil of the .45 cartridge is more difficult for many shooters to handle. No recoil operated handgun can function properly without being "backed up" by the shooter. "Locking the wrist" is much more critical with the P220/.45 than with, say, the 9mm's, simply because the rotational torque of the gun is greater. While this can be said of other .45 pistols, the Sig is, in my experience, one of the worst offenders.

The magazines will often split at the seam and, even when in good shape, tend to "nose dive" the first and second rounds, occasionally failing to feed. They are, in addition, difficult to unload although that is a minor criticism. Typically, single column mags tend to feed less reliably than double column mags.

The extractors break on a dismally regular basis. This is only aggravated when shooters who should know better lock the slide back on an empty gun, drop a single round into the chamber and let the slide slam forward.

The ejector is not a separate, replaceable part but rather an extension of the slide catch. As such it is not held as securely in place when the weapon operates, even though it is "captured" by the slide. (This is one of those corners that manufacturers cut in order to save money, and something that the military tests for the 9mm handgun required Sig to change in order to be considered.) The ejector  cannot be replaced separately from the slide catch as a result.

The frame rails are uninterrupted. This makes for better accuracy but less reliability in dirt sand or mud. When dry, the 220's are no more or less prone to problems than other guns, however, they seem to show up at the range dryer than many others. Maybe because of the straight rails, or maybe the guys who carry them just don't maintain them as well.

The plastic stocks tend to be too fragile. I have seen at least five sets crack and two of these were pretty badly broken. With the design having a hammer spring that is protected only by the stocks, this is not good. None of the guns above had been abused as in being thrown to the pavement...just banged into cruiser doors, etc. This may be a moot point if Sig is only selling the gun now with the rubber stocks.

More critical is the fact that there are no stock screw bushings. The stock screws screw directly into threaded holes in the frame. Forget to put the washer on the screw and it can go too far into the frame, locking the mag in place...or not allowing another mag to be inserted. Strip the threads and you will have to have the frame rethreaded.

With some 350+ sworn Deputies, my agency had probably 50-60 carrying the P220 in .45acp and I worked with many more officers from other agencies on our ranges for over 20 years. These are all things I have personally observed with these guns...not something that I heard about.

Let me also say that I like the P220 enough to have voluntarily trusted my life to one for many years, and one of mine saved my ass on Christmas eve, 1997. There are NO perfect guns, but the superb ergonomics and quality control of the Sig pistols should not blind us to the faults of this gun. Would I carry one again? Yes. Do I think the H&K is a better gun? Again. yes, but I wish it were not quite so big.

Hawkeye:

Whatever works for you, keep doing it.  This is not a dig on how to hold a pistol.  The first few times I fired a 1911 (MANY moons ago), my big-assed thumb kept hitting the safety on recoil, resulting in a malf.  The safety detent wasn't up to spec, but my instructor showed me to do high thumb, and I've never had that problem again.  

I have always purchased the Gunsite thumb safety for my 1911s since it was introduced, and find that it gives the best of both worlds:  It keeps the bloody safety down, and allows me to keep my thumb from brushing the slide, which could also result in a malf.

Pistols, and how they are employed, are extremely personal.  YOUR preference, and no one else's, is the only one that matters.

If you are getting consistent X's, I wouldn't change a God-damned thing.

Quoted: Hawkeye: Whatever works for you, keep doing it.  This is not a dig on how to hold a pistol.  The first few times I fired a 1911 (MANY moons ago), my big-assed thumb kept hitting the safety on recoil, resulting in a malf.  The safety detent wasn't up to spec, but my instructor showed me to do high thumb, and I've never had that problem again.   I have always purchased the Gunsite thumb safety for my 1911s since it was introduced, and find that it gives the best of both worlds:  It keeps the bloody safety down, and allows me to keep my thumb from brushing the slide, which could also result in a malf. Pistols, and how they are employed, are extremely personal.  YOUR preference, and no one else's, is the only one that matters. If you are getting consistent X's, I wouldn't change a God-damned thing.

No Prob. I was just being a bit sarcastic.

I agree, what ever works for one personally is what you should do.

Glock 21 fer sure !!! I wouldn't mind having the other two though ....

Quoted: The P220 is not necessarily "weak", but its' design leaves much to be desired for a serious, fighting handgun. When handguns are placed in service with large numbers of semi-skilled personnel, by either police or military establishments, there are several issues that become more important than they might otherwise be if all sidearms were used only by highly trained and motivated men and women. Among these, the most important is reliability. Given that "reliability" is influenced by the basic design of the weapon, the design of its' magazines, the ammunition being used and the shooter, the pistol/magazine combination is only part of the equation. Still, it is obviously a critical part. The Sig P220...specifically the P220 in caliber .45 acp...has several shortcomings which, while they certainly do not make the pistol unuseable for duty, do influence the reliability of these guns in both police and civilian service. Among them are the following: The high "bore line" combined with light weight and the heavier recoil of the .45 cartridge is more difficult for many shooters to handle. No recoil operated handgun can function properly without being "backed up" by the shooter. "Locking the wrist" is much more critical with the P220/.45 than with, say, the 9mm's, simply because the rotational torque of the gun is greater. While this can be said of other .45 pistols, the Sig is, in my experience, one of the worst offenders. The magazines will often split at the seam and, even when in good shape, tend to "nose dive" the first and second rounds, occasionally failing to feed. They are, in addition, difficult to unload although that is a minor criticism. Typically, single column mags tend to feed less reliably than double column mags. The extractors break on a dismally regular basis. This is only aggravated when shooters who should know better lock the slide back on an empty gun, drop a single round into the chamber and let the slide slam forward. The ejector is not a separate, replaceable part but rather an extension of the slide catch. As such it is not held as securely in place when the weapon operates, even though it is "captured" by the slide. (This is one of those corners that manufacturers cut in order to save money, and something that the military tests for the 9mm handgun required Sig to change in order to be considered.) The ejector  cannot be replaced separately from the slide catch as a result. The frame rails are uninterrupted. This makes for better accuracy but less reliability in dirt sand or mud. When dry, the 220's are no more or less prone to problems than other guns, however, they seem to show up at the range dryer than many others. Maybe because of the straight rails, or maybe the guys who carry them just don't maintain them as well. The plastic stocks tend to be too fragile. I have seen at least five sets crack and two of these were pretty badly broken. With the design having a hammer spring that is protected only by the stocks, this is not good. None of the guns above had been abused as in being thrown to the pavement...just banged into cruiser doors, etc. This may be a moot point if Sig is only selling the gun now with the rubber stocks. More critical is the fact that there are no stock screw bushings. The stock screws screw directly into threaded holes in the frame. Forget to put the washer on the screw and it can go too far into the frame, locking the mag in place...or not allowing another mag to be inserted. Strip the threads and you will have to have the frame rethreaded. With some 350+ sworn Deputies, my agency had probably 50-60 carrying the P220 in .45acp and I worked with many more officers from other agencies on our ranges for over 20 years. These are all things I have personally observed with these guns...not something that I heard about. Let me also say that I like the P220 enough to have voluntarily trusted my life to one for many years, and one of mine saved my ass on Christmas eve, 1997. There are NO perfect guns, but the superb ergonomics and quality control of the Sig pistols should not blind us to the faults of this gun. Would I carry one again? Yes. Do I think the H&K is a better gun? Again. yes, but I wish it were not quite so big.

Great info..

Now, what changes did they make to the P226 9mm that makes it better for combat(Navy SEALS)???

Debating b/n a P226 and 92FS for my first pistol.

About the only difference between the 226 and the 220 is caliber and that the 226 is double stack.

The 226 is a great handgun but then I still think the 220 is, despite some folks opinion, the best of bread of the ones mentioned so far.

Just a general statement, any double stack .45ACP is not going to fit nicely in a small-small/medium hand.  I have medium size hands, and the Glock double stack (21 and 30)is a hand full for me.  Now, the 36 is SWEET.  Would be happy to pack any of the 3 brands you suggested.

Art in KY

I have exactly no experience with the new, machined slide 226's, so I cannot say much about them. I do have experience with the 229's, which were the first pistols built this way by Sig. I prefer the machined slide to the stamped metal-pressing with pinned breechblock of the older guns, and the new extractor to the old. Certainly, the stainless steel slides will be much more corrosion resistant. My understanding is that Texas DPS is happy with theirs in .357Sig.

The original P226 has / had a separate ejector, which can easily be replaced if necessary and grip screw bushings as all autopistols should have. The early guns had magazine catch springs that were a little weak, but later ones are stronger. Other than that, Sig 230 is correct that there is not a lot of difference. So far as I know, all 228's are made with the older technology. Occasionally, the roll pins will work their way out a little under recoil, but they can be tapped back in with a non-marring tool of some sort, or...if serious...you can use a roll pin punch. I have never seen this cause a function problem.

Generally, 9mm pistols tend to be more reliable than .40 or .45 guns for several reasons, not the least of which is the fact that the 9mm case is slightly tapered while the others are straight-walled. Also because of the lighter recoil which produces less "torque".

My personal...ONLY my personal...opinion after years of work with, literally, thousands of guns and shooters, is that the two most reliable handguns on the planet "out of the box" are the Sig P226 and the Beretta 92 series in 9mm Para. When a guy showed up with one of these guns, it was always pretty much "load gun...pull trigger as long as ammo lasts". Boring, really.

You cannot do better that either of them, and should pick the one that feels and shoots best to/for you.

All three pistols are the great, see what one fits your hand the best and go with it.

Prior to about 1975 the only real fighting handguns were the Browning HP and the Colt 1911. Sure there were others like the P38 and the S&W 39 but neither were as good as the Colt and the browning.

Consequently, these two guns were able to build quite a reputation for themselves with no real competition. That all changed in about 1975 with the introduction of the SIG 220, the gun that made the Browning and Colt obsolete.

Prior to the SIGs introduction the Colt wasn't even available with decent sights. Many people that handled them in training and complained about inaccuracy and heavy recoil.

The SIG 220 and its 9mm brother the 226 did every thing the Browning and Colt could do and did it better. The SIGs were more accurate and reliable right out of the box with factory mags and needed no work. Additionally, the SIG was draw and fire capable with no external safeties to be missed or forgotten.

The SIG 220 never had the luxury that the Colt and Browning had in the semi auto market place and was almost immediately in competition with many other great guns from HK, Glock, Beretta, S&W, and Ruger just to name a few. It was in light of these fine pistols that the 1911 could no longer cut it. Consequently, everyone and their brother seems to be making semi custom or custom 1911s (including Colt) to meet this higher standard.

In my experience the SIG 220 is the finest box stock 45 sold. In ten years it has never jammed not once. The SIG was also more accurate than my 70s series Colts. However its hard to go wrong with the Glock or the HK (which also has the ability to be carried cocked and locked if you absolutely feel the need to add an extra step to the draw and fire process).

I have a 2nd generation Glock 21 with Trijicon sights.  It is a fabulous handgun, but I just don't find the grip comfortable, and therefore I don't enjoy shooting it.  I'd say my hands are small, maybe medium (approximately 7.5 inches from the tip of my middle finger to my wrist).  I am currently selling the G21 and I plan to replace it with another full size .45 pistol.  I am considering a full size HK USP 45 to replace it.  Although the HK grip is still big, I think it will fit me better than the G21 does.  Just found out a friend of mine has a USP 45 so I can go try it out before I buy.  I am also giving consideration to possibly getting a Loaded Springfield Mil-spec Operator.  Since I only plan to target shoot with the .45, I don't mind if it is single action only (I normally prefer double action pistols).  Fact is, I want too many handguns but I don't have enough money!  Now I am researching the USP 45 and the Loaded Operator, but I can only afford one of them!