Sig for a Glock
- Thread starter hollowpointt
- Start date
- Status
silverlance
Member
huh?
um... don't quite get this comment.
Robert Hairless said:
um... don't quite get this comment.
Warren
Member
Loved (not in a Brokeback sort of way) my G26 sold it to help pay for my SIG P220, love that as well.
The grips on the full size GLOCKS are just not to my liking. Though I might buy one and have it sent off for a reduction.
Eventually I'd like to have a representive of all the major mfrs in my collection so I would, sell one to get another if the one I was to sell was duplicating something I already owned.
The grips on the full size GLOCKS are just not to my liking. Though I might buy one and have it sent off for a reduction.
Eventually I'd like to have a representive of all the major mfrs in my collection so I would, sell one to get another if the one I was to sell was duplicating something I already owned.
Curare said:
The majority of the matches (local) that I have shot it went more like this...
Nineteen eleven's choking left and right.
Glock was on top.
I was almost always the only SIG shooter.
Sometimes I just went to listen to the nineteen eleven guys brag about their two thousand dollar race guns and five hundred dollar holsters... only to witness their prized investment choke atleast once while running the stages.
Funny stuff. Wish I had a camera.
Rule number one, take everything on the internet with a grain of salt.
All guns jam. Glocks are no more reliable than Sigs. If your personal favorite hasn't jammed yet, then you haven't shot it enough. The question is, which one do you like better, not a bunch of strangers on the internet.
Between the two, I would take the Sig. I'm not a big fan of DA/SA, but I actually like the DAK trigger better than I like the Glock trigger, and it is easier for ME to shoot. That is just my opinion, which is worth about nothing, same as most of the people on the internet.
All guns jam. Glocks are no more reliable than Sigs. If your personal favorite hasn't jammed yet, then you haven't shot it enough. The question is, which one do you like better, not a bunch of strangers on the internet.
Between the two, I would take the Sig. I'm not a big fan of DA/SA, but I actually like the DAK trigger better than I like the Glock trigger, and it is easier for ME to shoot. That is just my opinion, which is worth about nothing, same as most of the people on the internet.
Devonai
Member
Yeah, but if you can shoot it just as well, why not give yourself that "little" improvement? At the very least it's .043 wider.
The Glock 22 holds a permanent place in my pistol collection for good reason. As far as I can tell the only thing you get with the Sig is a three round reduction in magazine capacity. If it fits your hand that much better or you prefer a traditional DA trigger, though, it might be worth it.
Vex
Member
Curare said:
There is more improvement going from 9mm to .40, than if you went from .40 to .45acp.
hollowpointt
Member
Sig/Glock
Went to the gun shop and handled the Sigpro once again, and decided it just was not for me. The traditional Sigs I am finding out have gotten to the price range that I cant justify spending that much with other options available. Glock, XD, Smith, and Walther. Reconditioned Sigs are running from $575 up and reconditioned Glocks are $375 and up. I am going to stick with the Glock.
Went to the gun shop and handled the Sigpro once again, and decided it just was not for me. The traditional Sigs I am finding out have gotten to the price range that I cant justify spending that much with other options available. Glock, XD, Smith, and Walther. Reconditioned Sigs are running from $575 up and reconditioned Glocks are $375 and up. I am going to stick with the Glock.
Vex
Member
There's a place here in Columbus (Vance's Shooter Supply) that has police trade in Sig P229 9mm for $399. Some of them have obvious wear, but two of them have very little wear. If you wanted one of them sold and shipped to you, I would be willing to go there, check them out, pick the best one, and you could call, purchase it, and have it shipped to a FFL near you. Send me a private message if you're interested.
Warren
Member
Vex said:
Why is that?
Vex
Member
Check out this link to a muzzle energy calculator:
http://www.on-targetrange.com/energ.../www.on-targetrange.com/energy.shtml#efficacy
For this explanation we are going to use the the preset buttons for remington ammunition, but the same info is basically the same for whatever ammo you use. You can see a section there labeled "Efficacy." Click on it and learn what it is, because it makes alot of sense.
Going from 9mm Reming Gold Saber 124 Grain +P to a 40S&W 165 grain Remington Gold Saber, we gain 23 points of Efficacy. However, going from the same 40S&W to a Remington Gold Saber 230 grain 45acp we only gain 1 point of efficacy. See how the 40S&W has 485 foot pounds of energy, while the 45acp only has 391? The potential for energy is greater on a 40S&W, but the 45 delivers the energy to a target more efficiently. Bigger is better. But how much better? Well, consider that there are only 2 differences between 40S&W and 45acp in this scenario: the 45acp has 1 more point of efficacy, but a lower magazine capacity. Add on top of this that 45acp almost requires atleast a 4.5 inch barrel whereas the 40S&W can operate out of a 3.9 inch barrel. This is why I choose 40S&W.
http://www.on-targetrange.com/energ.../www.on-targetrange.com/energy.shtml#efficacy
For this explanation we are going to use the the preset buttons for remington ammunition, but the same info is basically the same for whatever ammo you use. You can see a section there labeled "Efficacy." Click on it and learn what it is, because it makes alot of sense.
Going from 9mm Reming Gold Saber 124 Grain +P to a 40S&W 165 grain Remington Gold Saber, we gain 23 points of Efficacy. However, going from the same 40S&W to a Remington Gold Saber 230 grain 45acp we only gain 1 point of efficacy. See how the 40S&W has 485 foot pounds of energy, while the 45acp only has 391? The potential for energy is greater on a 40S&W, but the 45 delivers the energy to a target more efficiently. Bigger is better. But how much better? Well, consider that there are only 2 differences between 40S&W and 45acp in this scenario: the 45acp has 1 more point of efficacy, but a lower magazine capacity. Add on top of this that 45acp almost requires atleast a 4.5 inch barrel whereas the 40S&W can operate out of a 3.9 inch barrel. This is why I choose 40S&W.
ftierson
Member.
VPJack said:
I like bricks...
And they look good too...
Forrest
gc70
Member
"Mine is better than yours."
"No, mine is better than yours."
As amazing as it sounds, both Glocks and Sig Pros are great guns. My son owns both types and we shoot them nearly every weekend. Accuracy, reliability, etc. - there is no significant difference. However, the NIB price he paid for his Sig Pro was less than the NIB price he paid for his Glock.
"No, mine is better than yours."
As amazing as it sounds, both Glocks and Sig Pros are great guns. My son owns both types and we shoot them nearly every weekend. Accuracy, reliability, etc. - there is no significant difference. However, the NIB price he paid for his Sig Pro was less than the NIB price he paid for his Glock.
If this is the case, then I'm sorry to say that he got ripped off. Check out www.gtdist.com. They have Glocks for $400 new. Sigs are $550-600 generally speaking.gc70 said:
- Status