Glock 17 or Sig 226 for truck and woods carry?

[Richard.Howe]

Some might view this as a tired old debate, but I'm having a difficult time finding direct 1:1 comparisons between these two fine sidearms.

Please, no "neither -- you should get an HK" or "Glocks suck, Sigs rule" or "9mm will get you killed" brainiac responses. I already own three other Sigs and a Glock G34, so I'm used to both platforms and like each in the role for which they were intended.

This is going to be a truck gun to be carried with a paddle-type kydex holster. I will carry this in the woods and occasionally as a CCW when the weather chills way down, and my 220 isn't handy. I see this gun going elk hunting with me and getting a fair share of snow and water in it. Both will be outfitted with night sights and (probably) stoked with 115 gr +P GD's at about 1300 fps.

If your choices were limited to 226 (Blackwater) or G17 in this application, which would you choose and why?

Rich

 

[osteodoc08]

I voted for the G17. Only because I'd hate to see the Sig get too messed up. If I were to pick which one I'd rather have for a range gun or one that got carried but not just thrown around, I'd pick the Sig.

 

[TexAg]

G17

Since you have a 220, its hard not to say to go for another SIG, familiarity of controls and what not. But, since you asked what I would pick, I will say the G17. Its fits my hand better, I like the reliablity of it, the tough finish, the lightwieght polymer frame, great capacity, and very available high-capacity mags and super-high capacity mags (33 rounders for fun!). Since its a truck and outdoors gun the finish will hold up very nicely on the Glock and you won't worry at all about it rusting. You can carry a 17 rounder with a + 2 extension on it and have 20 rounds on tap and with the polygonal rifling you'll get great velocity out of it. But hey, this is just what I would chose, I understand why you're having a hard time with the choice though!

 

[Steve C]

The Glock is definitely more weather and scratch resistant and they're about a $100 cheaper, I'd go with the Glock.

 

[hirundo82]

Yeah, another vote for the Glock. I like both systems, and both should be just as reliable, but the Glock is the one I wouldn't mind getting beaten up, which would be my primary concern in the woods.

 

[Old Dog]

I am amused that some would advocate a particular pistol based solely on its finish durability or its price.

For me, it would come down to which platform I felt more comfortable with for defending my life or the lives of others ... Since I do not base the value of my life (or especially the lives of my family) on whether my pistol may get scratched or was less expensive than another ... I'd go with the SIG, hands-down.

The SIG P-226 possesses (for most users) superb ergonomics; it's one of the best-feeling pistols in the hand. Legendary for out-of-the box accuracy (in my experience, far superior accuracy from the SIG over any Glock). A long TDA trigger for threat-management (should you have to hold someone at gunpoint) and a very good SA trigger pull for follow-up shots. Reliability on a par with Glock, yet without the crappy "safe-action" trigger ...

If I had to pick a gun just to rattle around in the back of my truck or trunk of my car ... yeah, I'd choose a Glock. After a few years, it'd still look like a Glock. But to pick a pistol I might actually have to shoot ... I'd go with the SIG and accept any wear and tear on its finish as badges of honor.

Yeah, so far ... some of the answers confirm my beliefs about why people buy Glocks.

 

[HSMITH]

I would, and do, pick the Glocks for the use you outline. I shoot Sigs as well as I do Glocks and like both, but I prefer the Glock. It is lighter, vastly more corrosion resistant, simple and durable.

OD, I disagree about the accuracy. Glocks are capable of fine accuracy, it is the shooters of the Glocks that often times can't demonstrate it.

 

[Richard.Howe]

Dog, I'm with you. Either of these guns are going to get beat up being used as a truck/woods pistol. At the end of the day, I don't really care IF that's the original reason it was purchased.

 

[larry starling]

Buy the Sig I for one hate plastic guns. Not to bash Glocks there excellent firearms, But for me I have allways thought Sigs felt better and were more accuarate to me....

 

[Glockman17366]

I also vote for the Glock although I'd probably go for the 19 rather then the 17 (I own both, BTW).

One caveat: if you're planning to carry this gun in the woods, I strongly suggest you get a paddle holster (or something) if you buy the Glock. I rarely carry any handgun sans holster (only if it goes in a coat pocket).
Glocks are tough, reliable and, if you got to toss a gun under the truck seat...the Glock is the one to do that to it. But not a good gun to carry sans holster!

 

[tc300mag1]

I vote for glock .. I have plenty of guns and dont feel bad at all when the glock gets bumped around in woods or what not

 

[mordechaianiliewicz]

Glocks and Sigs are both fine. But unless a Sig really resonates with you to your very soul, I'd go with Glock, everytime.

 

[Jubei]

I would choose the Glock. I own both, and it would hurt my soul more to bounce the SIG around than it would the Glock.

Jubei

 

[Marshall]

Ok, I won't say Glock sucks or Sig rules. Get a .375 Mag revolver for what you described the need to be. You'll be better off.

 

[cookekdjr]

I voted Glock 17, but either is an excellent choice.
-David

 

[Richard.Howe]

Thanks Marshall. I would agree save one point -- when I leave the truck headed into the woods, the 226/G17 would have about three times the capacity of my SP101 and SW686 collection. Believe me, I'd like to use something I already own, but the capacity issue tips the scales for me.

 

[denfoote]

I think the Glock has the edge in the "left outside" and not rusting catagory!!

 

[Lobotomy Boy]

I voted Glock because I like Glock triggers and don't like Sig triggers, but that information is useless to you because you may like the Sig and hate the Glock. Both are terrific guns, two of the best autoloaders ever built, but with very different triggers. Shoot as many rounds as possible through both guns, then see which one works the best for you. Buy that gun and you will be happy with your choice for the rest of your life, because both guns will probably outlive you.

 

[gunfan]

It seems to me...

that the Glock is a more "utilitarian" pistol. It was, from the outset, designed as a service pistol. I, personally, don't care for the Sig's "stamped slide" attribute. IMHO, it makes NO logical sense, whatsoever! Hence my dislike for the entire Sig line of autoloading pistols.

JMHO. Because "You Asked For It!" (Title of a 1960's television show.)

Scott

 

[porterdog]

IME the SIG finish isn't as rough-and-tumble ready as the Glock. My carry is a 228; I thoroughly enjoy it, but you need to stay on top of maintenance to keep the surface rust away.

Less so with the Austrian units.

 

[albanian]

It is such a toss up that I can't even decide. I have owned both SIGs and Glocks and they both have there pros and cons.

The Glock would be a little lighter and more rust resistant. The SIG would probably be a little more accurate and safer. There is no safer trigger system than the SIG DA/SA decocker set-up. You can get Hogue grips for the SIG which would make it more secure than the slick Glock in the wet. The Glock is cheaper and has a very tough finish.

It is a hard choice.

 

[Marshall]

Richard, I understand. However, seeing as how we're not talking about going to work or to the mall, couldn't you throw 12-18 rounds in your pocket? Or, wear a gun/ammo belt or fanny pack or put three to four speed strips in your pocket? I just think that for the woods a revolver is the way to go, especialy the magnum calibers and ammo capacity isn't really much of an issue seeing as how there are so many ways to easily have enough with you.

I'm in the woods quite a bit and much prefer to have my 357 or 44 mags with me over my semi-auto's. Something about a revolver and woods just seem to go together too. They just feel right.

 

[MS .45]

I was at my local range Saturday and a guy came in with a Glock17 that looked like it had been in the bottom of a lake for for a month(rust and so forth). It was a sad sight. I didn't get the details of how it ended up like that. He had the gunsmith function check it for him and it worked! It will cost the guy $85 for a new finish but his gun will be fine. That told me a lot about Glock durability.

 

[OH25shooter]

Oops, I voted for the better quality gun, Sig. Should have read the responses. Then I would have voted, Glock. Who cares if it gets beat up and scratched.

 

[Elwood P. Dowd]

I like Sigs a lot better than Glocks. I like the trigger, the grip and the looks. That being said, I can still shoot a Glock accurately and if you can too I'd recommend a Glock as a beater. If handguns were fetishes, the Glock would be masochism.