SIG P210 Target - from my perspective

[Ascot500]

The recent thread "9mm Pure Target Gun" received several replies recommending the SIG P210 Target, and it got me thinking about my own experience.
Some background: I've been shooting for more than 50 years and reloading for almost 50.
I have owned and shot a lot of centerfire autoloaders.
About 20 years ago, I started shooting in some informal 25 yard "Bullseye" shoots.
I did very well in the rimfire match - not so much in the centerfire.
My gun at the time was a well worn, refinished Colt 1911. An older and wiser shooter told me, "You need a better gun, because you are more accurate than the gun". I had never really evaluated the intrinsic accuracy of my handguns so I started to do some bench rest shooting and recording the results. That was when I started using a revolver for the matches.

But I like shooting autoloaders and I began a quest to find an auto loader that could equal the accuracy of a good revolver - without costing more than whatever car I was driving at the time (yes I am a cheep skate).

IIRC, true bullseye guns need to shoot 1" groups at 25 yards from a machine rest (4 MOA) - not too hard for a good rimfire, but difficult to achieve with a gun that has a tilting barrel.
So I set my bogey at 2" 25 yard groups. And I tried a lot quality guns including guns from S&W, Kahr, Ruger, CZ - even an HK PSP; and none of them could consistently hold a 2" group. And then...American Rifleman ran an article about the new P210 Target. And it was the holy grail - sub 1" 25 yard groups and at a price that wasn't much higher than the value the value of my car.

So I bought one and it was great, superb trigger, great grips, nice finish, and when I racked the slide - O what a feeling.
And the testing commenced.
And I was disappointed.
I tried factory ammo, I tried various handloads, I even bit the bullet (no pun intended) and tried SIG factory ammo.
No matter what I fed it, it was an 8-10 MOA gun. It didn't do what I wanted and I didn't keep it.
So now I am back to shooting a revolver.
Your mileage may vary.

Side note: If you are going to talk about how accurate a gun is then specify range, shooting method and group size.
"More accurate than I am" is not useful information.

 

[zeke]

I am well past any capability of decent bullseye target shooting, and have a Sig P210a. The first thing i noticed when renting one at the range was the extremely light indistinct trigger. Still bought one, and found out the trigger pack was literally packed in grease. Cleaned it out, and discovered the trigger is really 2 stage. The first stage cams back the hammer and the second stage is an extremely light break. First attempted to use stage the trigger to the second stage, but it was just too light for me agter a couple of rounds. Now attempting to "pull through" both stages and having better success. Still haven't rested it at 25 yds yet, but am using mildly loaded 147 coated lead bullet. Would much prefer a strict single stage trigger, clean breaking and about 3 lbs.

 

[Jim Watson]

Side note: If you are going to talk about how accurate a gun is then specify range, shooting method and group size.
"More accurate than I am" is not useful information.

Neither is "one ragged hole at 7 yards." Or three shot groups. Or five shots and count the best 4... or 3.
I am not a bullseye pistol shooter, but when somebody starts talking about a very accurate gun, I apply bullseye standards. I wish they still did line counts at major matches to see what is really being shot.

Now here is an accurate pistol, even with the "flyer" if centered up it would be a 100-10X

 

[9mmepiphany]

Side note: If you are going to talk about how accurate a gun is then specify range, shooting method and group size.

You don't need a Ransom Rest, but it does make repeatability easier. The "trick" to shooting small groups is trigger management

I didn't shoot the group but back in 2012 when Bruce Gray was prepping for the Bianchi Cup, he tuned up the action of a SIG 226 X-Five 9mm with a BarSto barrel and shot a 5 shot group that measured 1.1" at 50 yards. He was shooting off a rest on a bench with handloaded 147gr jacketed bullets.

I was very impressed and he was a bit surprised as it was his first attempt. He told me that Mike Dalton had shot a similar sized group...back in the 80s...from standing Freestyle.

To give you a point of reference. Combat accuracy was often defined as 4" at 50 yards from a "rollover prone"...which is very close to shooting off a rest. Most competition guns (Action Pistol) would hold 2" at that range...so they would expect 1" groups at 25 yards

 

[Ascot500]

Thanks for the replies.
Combat accuracy (8 MOA) is the minimum that I was looking for.
I suspect that very few combat autoloaders available today can do that.
The P210 would not consistently do it for me and would often return 10-12 MOA groups.
The new Python; priced in the same range as the P210 could produce 4-6 MOA groups: https://www.americanrifleman.org/content/colt-python-review/
The $900 S&W M&P9 2.0 metal is good for about 12 MOA: https://www.americanrifleman.org/content/review-smith-wesson-m-p9-m2-0-metal/

 

[9mmepiphany]

I suspect that very few combat autoloaders available today can do that.
The P210 would not consistently do it for me and would often return 10-12 MOA groups.

I guess it's possible that the accuracy standards of factory' autoloaders might have fallen a bit, but that pretty bad.

What kind of rest are you shooting off of for such wide groups or are you talking about shooting "Bullseye" style ...standing one-handed?

 

[Ascot500]

If I am testing for the intrinsic accuracy of the gun, I test sitting down at a bench with gun on a padded support.
Sometimes the support is for the bottom of the grip, sometimes it's for the front of the gun - I can't tell which is better.
With a good .22 with ammo it likes, 4 MOA is doable.
With my PCP air pistol I can get close to 3 MOA

 

[halfmoonclip]

If I am testing for the intrinsic accuracy of the gun, I test sitting down at a bench with gun on a padded support.
Sometimes the support is for the bottom of the grip, sometimes it's for the front of the gun - I can't tell which is better.
With a good .22 with ammo it likes, 4 MOA is doable.
With my PCP air pistol I can get close to 3 MOA

It has been my experience that, resting the butt and the dust shield, feels really solid, but strange things happen during recoil. I'm better served with the dust cover rested (on one of those poly rests), and my wrists on a sandbag.
Moon

 

[giggitygiggity]

No matter what I fed it, it was an 8-10 MOA gun.

You stated that your “bogey” is 2” at 25 yards. 8 MOA equals approximately 2” at 25 yards, which meets the bogey that you set, but that was not achieved by other tilt-barrel guns listed in your OP.

I’m confused as to what your expectation was/is. Is it to meet the American Rifleman’s 1” at 25 yards claim? Is it to meet the bogey that you set (2” at 25 yards)? Or is it something else? From your account, I’m left with the understanding that the pistol can meet your bogey, but falls short of the American Rifleman article’s 1” at 25 yards claim.

 

[zaitcev]

So this is what those Briley bushings were for.

BTW, if you recall that LifeSizePotato video, here are the claims that he makes for the top guns:
HK P9S SG III - "under 1" at 25 yards" - merely meets OP's requirement despite utilizing a fixed barrel
Smith PPC9 Target Champion "back when Perfomance Center still did a good job" and Briley bushing - 1.5" at 50yards - the only gun on the list that can exceed OP's requirement
USP Elite - 2" at 50m - meets OP's requirement
SIG X6 - he forgot to mention the hard number
Pardini GT9 - 2" at 50 yards - meets OP's requirement

 

[LTR shooter]

My Sig P226 Elite , while not bullseye accurate , has been the most accurate 9mm pistol I've ever owned. I too wanted an accurate 25/50 yard pistol. Never tried any of my loads from a rest but shooting from a standing position with a two hand hold it does well enough for what it is. Tried a Bar-Sto barrel but it was a surprisingly sloppy fit when I placed the barrel in the slide. The OEM Sig barrel fits in the slide with NO movement. I returned the Bar-Sto.

Biggest detriment to accuracy shooting is the trigger , my old German P220 had a great trigger. This P226 had pretty terrible creep. I ended up sending it to The Sig Armorer late last year and the trigger is much improved. Will probably shoot it a lot more in the spring. Target from last year with Hornady 124 XTP reloads , clean barrel , shot from 25 yards standing with two hand hold.

 

[Ascot500]

So this is what those Briley bushings were for.

BTW, if you recall that LifeSizePotato video, here are the claims that he makes for the top guns:
HK P9S SG III - "under 1" at 25 yards" - merely meets OP's requirement despite utilizing a fixed barrel
Smith PPC9 Target Champion "back when Performance Center still did a good job" and Briley bushing - 1.5" at 50yards - the only gun on the list that can exceed OP's requirement
USP Elite - 2" at 50m - meets OP's requirement
SIG X6 - he forgot to mention the hard number
Pardini GT9 - 2" at 50 yards - meets OP's requirement

It's not really a "requirement", more a goal of getting the most accuracy per dollar.
While my P210 was more accurate than most of the 9mm's I tested, it was not more accurate than my much cheaper Remington R1

The handguns that you list are great guns; let's look at their prices:
HK P9S SG III - Could not find an MSRP
Smith PPC - closest that I could find is a 952-1 for $3150 on GB
USP ELITE - One on GB for $1929
SIG X9 - nice used one for $3699
Pardini GT9 - Only found one used GT45 for $2295

 

[lincen]

When Joe Biden sent out the last Covid checks it was on my 65th birthday. Figured I would let him buy me something nice. I’m probably an average shooter and most handguns that I own cost between $300-$800. Bought the Sig P210 and have been very pleased with it. I’m not a bullseye shooter but it was much easier to be accurate with a quality gun and trigger.