220 vs P 90


PDA






Ghostrider_23
October 29, 2006, 10:24 AM
Ok, let's compare what some say is the best 45 acp out of the box. Which would you choose the Sig P22o or the Ruger P90:confused: I have read many threads that people say that the Ruger is just as accurate and reliable as the Sig but cost less. Think about it before you go with the most expensive one or cheaper one:banghead: Which one would you really pick??????????????

If you enjoyed reading about "220 vs P 90" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
prolanman
October 29, 2006, 10:30 AM
I have owned and still do own Sigs. Never had one bit of trouble with any of them. Very reliable guns with the exception of the Mosquito which is a real piece of junk.

STAGE 2
October 29, 2006, 11:16 AM
Ruger is a good gun, but nowhere in the class of the sig.

GeneS
October 29, 2006, 11:19 AM
+1, what STAGE 2 said.

strambo
October 29, 2006, 12:03 PM
I can believe the Ruger is as reliable. Price no factor...the Sig is the better gun in every other aspect. If money is a big deal even considering the lower cost of a used CPO Sig...I could maybe see getting the Ruger.

cslinger
October 29, 2006, 12:42 PM
I have a SIG P220ST and a Ruger P97.

The SIG is the better gun by far. Now that is not to say the P97 is a bad gun, quite the opposite. The P97 is a great gun, reliable, accurate, great trigger (really) it just isn't in the same league as the SIG. It rattles, it has machine marks, take down is a bit funky, and every once in a while she throws brass straight back.

Skywarp
October 29, 2006, 12:53 PM
The Ruger decocker scares me.... it's almost as loud as an actual gunshot.

rbernie
October 29, 2006, 12:58 PM
The P97 is a great gun, reliable, accurate, great trigger (really) it just isn't in the same league as the SIG. That's a fact. Once you take down, shoot, and live with both - the difference becomes glaringly obvious.

The Ruger is perfectly servicable, but the Sig is simply a finer piece of machinery.

10-Ring
October 29, 2006, 01:12 PM
I've shot both, owned a P220. Two very popular firearms...popular enough that you'd probably be able to rent & shoot both. Do so and get the one that works best in your hands :D

gudel
October 29, 2006, 01:41 PM
I bought P220ST, didn't work out of the box.
If I have to choose between 220 or 90, I'd take my USP45. :D Sig is overpriced & overrated compared to HK. I like my HK better.

Rob96
October 29, 2006, 05:07 PM
I am the only dissenting vote.:neener:

The Ruger P90 does everything the P220 does, including accuracy, but is way more durable.

Skywarp
October 29, 2006, 06:34 PM
Except the scary decocker. I would never decock one on a live round unlike my Sigs.

LeonCarr
October 29, 2006, 07:45 PM
I like the Ruger P90 over the Sig P220. I have owned both of them and in side by side range tests both were very accurate (8 shot groups under two inches at 25 yards with just about everything, factory and handloads), and the Ruger is about 300 bucks cheaper than the Sig brand new.

The Ruger is a larger handgun than the Sig, but not 300 dollars larger :).

Just my .02,
LeonCarr

BevrFevr
October 29, 2006, 08:01 PM
I really don't like either choice that much. I find SIGs are overpriced for what you get. I would be willing to spend more on a Ruger if it were made a little better.

Rugers I don't care what model of rifle, auto, or wheelgun you are talking about... I look at them all the same... moderate quality budget firearms. The don't make one firearm that I can't think of something better fro only a few dollars more.

The opposite is true for Sigs, I can always name something as good for less.

just me though I'm sure.

-bevr

SigfanUSAF
October 29, 2006, 08:13 PM
Well, they don't call me Rugerfan:neener: P220 IMHO is the finest .45 DA on the planet. I am still looking for a reason NOT to like the 220.

jlh26oo
October 29, 2006, 10:51 PM
The Ruger P90 does everything the P220 does, including accuracy, but is way more durable.
The Ruger is a larger handgun than the Sig, but not 300 dollars larger
I find SIGs are overpriced for what you get. I would be willing to spend more on a Ruger if it were made a little better.

+1

Fit & finish, aesthetics, cc-ability: advantage Sig
Durability, toughness: advantage Ruger
Accuracy, reliability: wash

hexidismal
October 29, 2006, 11:01 PM
I have to wonder why compare the Sig 220 vs. the P90 at all. The P90 isn't Ruger's flagship .45. While it's still not really in the same league as the the sig, the Ruger you should really be using for a comparison if you're going to do it is the P345.

Euclidean
October 30, 2006, 12:04 AM
Thing is...

Bottom line, the Sig 220 probably is the better gun in at least one way that matters to most people.

However...

To compare the two is just a bit inane. Of course the Sig is at least marginally better according to most people, it's much more expensive.

I like my XDs much better than the Ruger P series, but the XD is a slightly better and more expensive gun, of course it's at least marginally better. But as far as function goes, if you'll adapt to it, the Ruger P series will realistically do everything the XD will. You could pretty much make that comparison to anything though, such as the Sig.

The fact that the Sig costs an arm and a leg is the reason something like the Ruger exists. That doesn't mean the Ruger is bad or vastly inferior, just that it's not really comparable.

Then again, I sold off my Sig and I still have a Ruger. So it's not necessarily a question of which one is better, it's which one is more appropriate for you and your intended purpose.

Autolycus
October 30, 2006, 12:19 AM
I like the Sig better than Ruger.

To be honest I would look at an HK USP before either. Or if you are patient the HK45 will be here sooner than you think.

2ndamd
October 30, 2006, 12:40 PM
Save the money. Get the Ruger and then buy a bunch of ammo, Belt and Holster.
My dad bought mine when the Ruger P90 out shot his $2500 Ed Brown.

The P90 is the best there is as far performance goes and does not break the bank. If they were not so big and ugly they would be both perfect for performance and asthetics. But, when it comes to function, reliability, durability, longevity, and accuracy the P90 is the winner.....again and again.

(sigh) Now someone will flame me for this opinion. No response needed. The truth is in the performance......not the looks.

EdLaver
October 30, 2006, 12:56 PM
Kind of cut and dry, the P90 is a good gun though. It is less expensive and accurate. But I still voted 220 purely because its a proven gun. But both are accurate and reliable.

Ala Dan
October 30, 2006, 03:05 PM
that is what I chose, way back in 1988~!:cool: :D

GunNut
October 30, 2006, 03:58 PM
No brainer for me. Sig P220 is one of the nicest and classiest .45ACP's out there.

Steve

cbsbyte
October 30, 2006, 04:09 PM
I can't really compare the two since I never seen P90. I have held the Sig P220 and it is a very refined weapon. Well made, good trigger, and is know to be very accurate. It is a light weapon compared to a 1911 etc so it will probably have more felt recoil than a 1911.

DogBonz
October 30, 2006, 04:17 PM
My dad bought mine when the Ruger P90 out shot his $2500 Ed Brown:scrutiny:

I know what was wrong... it was a loose nut behind the trigger...

Get the Sig. I have bought “inexpensive” guns before. Some of them were good shooters, while some of them were just cheap. With the Sig, you know that you are getting a good firearm. With the Ruger, who knows? Spend the money now, and you will have a pistol that you can enjoy for many years. Worst case scenario, The Sig will have a much better resale value should you have to sell it.

This may sound ridiculous to some people, but the Ruger feels crappy to me. Those big ugly controls make me want to vomit. The Sig is a well made tool that I would trust my life on, and I do, I own a 229. The 220 has a great reputation, and has since it was introduced.

High Planes Drifter
October 30, 2006, 04:27 PM
I chose Sig 220. Most Ruger I have seen have had issues with hollow points. My P95 had it, my older brother had a P89 years back that had it, and a close friend has a P345 that has it. I'm not trying to start a big flame war here, Im just stating my experience and observation. I have yet to find a round that my Sig wont digest.

the pistolero
October 30, 2006, 06:37 PM
I love my P90 and trust it with my life, but the Sig is definitely on my wish list. Had I not caught the 1911 bug earlier this year, I'd have one sitting in my safe now. I agree with the poster that said comparing the Sig and the Ruger is a bit inane, though...like comparing a Ford and a Jaguar....

skers69
October 30, 2006, 08:27 PM
I have a P226 in 9mm and P90 in 45. Both are great guns. One costs much more and is polished up. The other is rough and tough and will save you a few bucks. I would get the sig now if you can and get a Ruger when you can.

2ndamd
October 31, 2006, 12:41 PM
I know what was wrong... it was a loose nut behind the trigger...


Now, now, Please refrain from refering to me or my family as "loose nuts." While humorous it could offend.:uhoh:

I think it is funny that the gun snobs feel the need to put down a better product that cost less than theirs did. It makes them feel justified in spending the extra money.

I knew the flames would start.....sigh. It is hard to beleive that a $400 Ruger could out shoot a $800 SIG or $2500 Ed Brown. Whether it is hard to beleive or not, does not make it less true. The truth is the Ruger P90 may be the best DA .45 auto there is (when price is considered).

I am not flaming your choice in weapons. I am merely sharing my experience with the aforementioned brands.

You guys are funny:D

Rob96
October 31, 2006, 01:07 PM
I knew the flames would start.....sigh. It is hard to beleive that a $400 Ruger could out shoot a $800 SIG or $2500 Ed Brown. Whether it is hard to beleive or not, does not make it less true. The truth is the Ruger P90 may be the best DA .45 auto there is (when price is considered).


If this would have hit the markets at a higher price, many would be stating it is the finest DA/SA 45acp. But because of the lower price tag, it must be junk. Truth be told, the gun is as/more accurate than the Sig P220 and if put head to head, I would say more reliable and durable than the Sig. :neener:
I have yet to hear of Ruger frames cracking or the rails splitting or anything.

kevin387
October 31, 2006, 08:29 PM
Sig is by far best out of the box. I like Rugers but they aint no Sig.

Mayo
November 1, 2006, 09:54 PM
P220 and it's not even close. the poll results should answer all of your questions.:)

varoadking
November 2, 2006, 08:46 PM
It is hard to beleive that a $400 Ruger could out shoot a $800 SIG or $2500 Ed Brown.

The Ruger makes a dandy door stop too...

SouthpawShootr
November 2, 2006, 10:02 PM
Kind of comparing apples to oranges. Both are quality handguns. The 220 is more finely crafted, better in terms of trigger and, most likely accuracy. The Ruger, at (usually) several hundred dollars less is a good gun for the money. Heavy duty (both in capability and actual weight). Of course, I go for the Sig. But if I tried the Ruger and found that I could live with the nuances of the gun and I didn't have the budget for the Sig, I'd would turn the Ruger down.

usp_fan
November 2, 2006, 11:58 PM
I've shot both, the ruger works, I now own the SIG. It's really no comparison.

--usp_fan

eastwood44mag
November 3, 2006, 04:50 PM
220 to shoot, 90 to carry.

If you enjoyed reading about "220 vs P 90" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!