Differences between sig an glock?


PDA






Mossy Bloke
April 4, 2003, 05:45 PM
I'm looking at getting a 357. Can someone tell me the differences between a p229 and say, a midsize glock in 357?

I know this is probably comparing apples to oranges, but just indulge me. Personal opinions are welcome.

If you enjoyed reading about "Differences between sig an glock?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Handy
April 4, 2003, 05:56 PM
Glock .357/Sig .357:

Plastic frame/aluminum frame
Light "Safe action trigger"/DA/SA trigger
Striker/hammer
Built in grips/replaceable grips
1 frame lever/2 frame levers
Really tough finish/decent finish
Really expensive mags/almost as expensive mags
Slim/not so slim
A basic 9mm pistol with .357 barrel as an afterthought/a gun built around .40/.357 ammo family.

Personal opinion: .357 Sig is an expensive and difficult to load specialty cartridge. Consider a 9mm for price and capacity or a .45 for oomph.

Of the two pistol types, they both do well, but I feel the DA/SA trigger of the Sig offers safer carry and more options.

Dave T
April 4, 2003, 05:58 PM
SIG has two distinct trigger pulls and sets rather high in the hand (increased felt recoil). It is also expensive.
Glock has one spongy trigger pull and sets lower in the hand (less felt recoil). Some say the polymer (plastic) frame flexes and soaks up some recoil. Glock is cheeper than the SIG by a couple hundred bucks.
I prefer and recommend to my students a consistant trigger pull so I would go with the Glock of these two (I carry 1911s) but this is so subjective it boils down to individual preference.

CWL
April 4, 2003, 06:25 PM
Personal opinions?

Sigs are like a well-tuned German sportscar.

Glocks are like a well-tuned pickup truck.

They both get you to your destination. You probably won't care about dinging-up the pickup.

treeprof
April 4, 2003, 07:00 PM
Those guys have covered it well. I have both SIGs and glock in 357 SIG, and enjoy shooting both makes. Both the ergonomics and operation are different, as explained above. Grip-bore angle is quite different as well, and you may prefer one over the other as it relates to your natural point of aim. SIG's have the edge in overall feel and accuracy IMO, but I more often have the Glock with me - the pick-up truck analogy at work.

10-Ring
April 4, 2003, 07:37 PM
In this case, I'd go w/ the SIG.

arizona
April 4, 2003, 09:18 PM
I have had both in 9mm and recommend the Sig. IMHO the Sig feels better in the hand, not as thick. Also, is safer and more accurate.

The Glock has a tougher finish.

HadEmAll
April 4, 2003, 11:51 PM
Everything's been pretty well covered except one thing. The SIG is almost guaranteed to be somewhat more accurate than the Glock when fired single-action, but I'll go out on a limb and state that for 99% of shooters, the Glock will be more accurate (hit closer to where you actually intend to hit) than the SIG for the first shot out of each pistol, IF the SIG is fired double-action. That first shot is important to me, so I'd go for the Glock if you're going to carry it for SD. Basically, in my opinion, the SIG is the better range gun, the Glock the better carry gun. Both are great.

C. H. Luke
April 6, 2003, 01:26 PM
Not a .357S fan as reload. Have had a G32 and have a SIG P229
{with both .40 & .357S bbl's.}. 229 shoots with typical SIG "Softness", the Glock did not.......

Other than that the SIG reeks of pure Class!

cratz2
April 6, 2003, 01:55 PM
I'm not a fan of the round and not a big fan of either Glocks or SIGs but between the two, I'd probably go for the Glock. The SIGs don't seem to have more recoil per se, but tend to be flippier in the hand, esp when comapring the smaller guns.

It's a shame more companies don't offer the 38 Super and 9x23 in more factory guns. 9x23 offers 357 SIG performance in a smaller diameter case allowing more rounds in a given magazine length and a infinitely stronger case and easier to load/reload package as well.

firestar
April 6, 2003, 02:01 PM
If you get the SIG, you can buy SIG .40 cal replacment bbls really cheap right now and be able to shoot either cal. I would not buy a .357 sig because I don't like to pay $1 per shot but that is just me. I would also suggest a 9mm, there are some pretty hot loads for the 9mm out there that will give you some real speed and energy.

The SIG and the Glock are strong guns that you will probably never wear out but the SIG will be much more accurate and there is more pride of ownership in owning the best production pistol on the market. The Glock is fine if you want a plastic framed Ruger with no hammer for three time the price.:rolleyes:

TechBrute
April 6, 2003, 02:11 PM
Oooh, oooh... Get the Sig!! It costs 50% more so you can brag to your friends about how much you spent. Oh yeah, while you're in the mood to spend money, buy lots of ammo to practice with, because the DA/SA trigger pull on the Sig takes WAAAAY more training to learn to shoot well under stress. Also, with the extra $200, you get all the neat, but useless, buttons, levers, switches and other such gizmos on the Sig.

Recap: No one can knock the quality of a SIG, but the DA/SA trigger pull was deveoped due to lawyers and insurance companies. It is NEVER preferred to a consistent trigger pull among shooters.

Oh yeah, just get a .40S&W, regardless of the gun.:D

Don Gwinn
April 6, 2003, 02:35 PM
Never say never. . . . some people like DA. I don't really prefer it, but I've learned to shoot a P220 pretty well and don't consider it a major problem. I shoot my 220 better than my G30, but then the 30 has that shorter grip.

People will tell you that you need a lot of training to "overcome the obstacle" of DA. I would say that the corollary is that you need a lot of training to be so good that DA is a major hindrance to your shooting ability.

Quintin Likely
April 6, 2003, 06:24 PM
firestar said...

The Glock is fine if you want a plastic framed Ruger with no hammer for three time the price

Now, there's no need to be rude...

I've got both, a Glock and a Sig although neither of mine are in 357 SIG...my P239 could be, if I bought the 357 barrel and magazines though. The Sig feels like its put together more solidly than my Glock is, but they're both fine shooters regardless of caliber.

My advice? Get your hands on Glock 31/32/33 and a Sig, shoot both, buy whatever suits you best. It is, afterall, gonna be *your* cannon.

T.Stahl
April 6, 2003, 08:13 PM
Several, independent sources told me that Sigs can rust.
vs.
I've never heard that Glocks rust.

faustulus
April 6, 2003, 10:46 PM
Both are excellent guns it comes down to which feels better in your hands. Both have their pluses, what it comes down to for me is the grip angle. The glock grip is different from 99 percent of the guns on the market, if you don't have any other pistols I don't think this would be a problem, for me it renders the gun useless. You cannot go wrong with either.

Handy
April 6, 2003, 10:59 PM
Techbrute,

DA triggers were developed for handguns in the 19th century. They have proved to be the preferred carry method for the majority of shooters for the last 100 years. The largest majority of police and military, East and West, prefer DA triggers above all else for people that actually use firearms.


So, which "shooters" are you talking about? Those that teach classes, compete in competitions, or write for magazines?

The lawyers came into the game a little late to influence much of anything.


Also, saying that a Sig is a bad value compared to a Glock is ludicrous. Sigs have barely changed price in 15 years. Glocks have doubled.

Mr. Purple
April 6, 2003, 10:59 PM
SIGs rust, the 220, 226 and 228 with the stamped slides (45 and 9mm).

SIGs in 40 (226, and all caliber 229, and 239s) have stainless slides and are less likely to rust.

Glocks all have tenifer finish and don't rust.

Having handled copies of both brands, I find both to be outstanding and purchase a matter of personal preference.

dan_s
April 7, 2003, 01:18 PM
Forget the comments you may read about the 357 Sig being difficult to load. It is not...

Waste of Money
April 7, 2003, 02:03 PM
If you're concerned about the price of 357SIG ammo, worry no more. The cost has been dropping for the past year or two and now equals 40S&W costs for practice fodder ammo.

Check outGeorgia Arms (http://georgia-arms.com) and look for "Canned Heat". They're excellent quality reloads and priced lower than anyone. I tried many calibers and have had no failures.

Some folks carry the Sheer Power Plus which are new brass stuffed with Gold Dot bullets and plenty hot.

blades67
April 7, 2003, 09:47 PM
The way they feel in your hand, what they're made from, how much they cost and how they light the fire. Other than that, there's not much difference.:D

Quintin Likely
April 7, 2003, 10:02 PM
Admitedly, I haven't owned my Sig very long, but I've gotta ask:

Under what conditions exactly does a Sig rust?

Lack of maintenance? Leaving it in the bathtub? Does your gun cabinet get rained in to or something? Do gremlins break in your house and ride Sigs around in the toilet like a canoe? Do you hang it up in the closet in a leather holster after toting it around on a hot and humid day?

And if you really wanted to be picky, the slide release on a Glock could rust. ;)

vanfunk
April 7, 2003, 10:31 PM
Inconsistent trigger pull on a SIG? Hmm, My SIG's have a consistent 10 lb. double action for the first pull, then a consistent 4 lb. single action for each successive squeeze.

I have both SIG's and Glocks, don't have much of a problem figuring out what's in my hand when I'm firing it, or hitting what I'm shooting at (assuming it's under 25 yards away :evil: )

They're both great gun designs:cool:

vanfunk

If you enjoyed reading about "Differences between sig an glock?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!