H&K vs. Sig

[Jason_G]

As a first gun, I think a USP in variant 1 would be ideal. It would teach you how to operate both a DA and a SA handgun, as it really fulfills both roles with the manual safety, plus gives you the option to choose which method of carry is best for you should you choose to buy any other handguns in the future. A DA/SA Sig will not have that capability. As far as quality, they are both top tier handguns and my two favorite manufacturers. You won't go wrong with either gun, they are both top notch.

Jason

 

[Autolycus]

You all realize that this thread is very old, don't you?

 

[Jason_G]

You all realize that this thread is very old, don't you?

No I didn't, but the OP might not be the only one with the same questions though. I'm sure someone will dig it up again later on

Jason

 

[pablo45]

The sig will be a little more easier to shoot becase of its weight. The p2000 will be my vote and fits my hand great.

 

[Munodi]

"Quote:
"You all realize that this thread is very old, don't you?"

"No I didn't, but the OP might not be the only one with the same questions though. I'm sure someone will dig it up again later on"

Jason

----------------

Yes, Jason--and here I am. Thanks for saying this.

 

[Jason_G]

Yes, Jason--and here I am. Thanks for saying this.

LOL, NP.

Jason

 

[jbm]

I'd take the HK

I've carried HKs in 9mm, .40, .45 in full size and compact. I have shot Sigs, but not carried them.

I generally find the HKs very comfortable to carry using a High Noon "Down Under" with straps. It is an IWB holster. I've used the same holster with the 9, .40 and .45 (not the same model, the very same holster).

The USP .40 compact appears to be a bit smaller than the P229R but I can't find the exact dimensions. As a comparison, the Glock 23 is 6.85" long, 5.00" high and 1.18" wide. The HK is 6.81" long, 5.00" high and only 1.14" wide -- pretty much the same if you ask me. [The Glock does carry a couple more rounds though.]

For some reason the HK has a reputation for being big and bulky. I've not found that to be true.

 

[Jason_G]

Another point to mention, the H&K's can be run drier than the SiGs without wearing the internals as much. Not a real big deal since most people that spend that much on a gun (hopefully) are going to be keeping it clean and lubed anyway.

Jason

 

[-gunut-]

I would take the HK any day.

 

[shadowalker]

I'd carry a Sig P229 while I prefer the Sig I'd also carry an H&K but am not a fan of DAK at all.

The H&K compact is smaller than the P229 and has a shorter barrel. I'm looking at picking up a H&K USP but probably wont get the compact, P229 is borderline too small for me already.

The full size H&K USP is a little longer than the P229 but is a little thinner and shorter.

P229 size:

Length: 7.10
Height: 5.40
Width: 1.50
Barrel: 3.9

H&K Compact (9mm and 40 S&W)

Length: 6.81
Height: 5.00
Width: 1.14
Barrel: 3.58

H&K USP (9mm and 40 S&W)

Length: 7.61
Height: 5.35
Width: 1.36
Barrel: 4.25 (.67 extra barrel over the compact)

 

[Serpico]

The LEM P2000 is a very interesting gun....but you should shoot it first as the trigger takes some getting used to....For sheer fun I enjoy my 1911, HP and P7 the most...the P7 being my carry....

 

[Autolycus]

Well I prefer my HK P2000 with LEM trigger in .40 S&W as a carry gun. If I could carry I would use that gun with complete confidence. I also have an HK P2000sk with an LEM trigger in .40 S&W as an alternate or backup gun.

Its an excellent gun and I like it more than the Sigs I have fondled simply for the ergonomics and the fact that it is a lighter gun overall.