GLOCK vs. Sig Sauer


PDA






Greg8098
November 4, 2006, 10:24 AM
I know both of these have their pros and cons, but I'm looking for the better overall quality of manufacturing. I'm an avid glock fan, but can't get over the feeling I got from actually gripping a Sig. The thing just felt a hell of a lot more natural to me. The only thing I hate is the $800+ price tag :mad: . I really miss my GLOCK 32, but I am considering a Sig 229 in 357 sig. Any suggestions?

If you enjoyed reading about "GLOCK vs. Sig Sauer" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Heavy Metal Hero
November 4, 2006, 10:26 AM
The main reason why I like SIG over Glock is the grip. The 226 just feels natural.

Eightball
November 4, 2006, 01:23 PM
SIG is better manufactured. People also don't posess an irrational hatred of SIGS--ususally, it is something like "they just don't fit my hand". Frankly, if it fits your hand, I'd say to go for it--easier pointing handguns are always a good thing.

Besides, it is very hard to go wrong with a SIG. Unless you don't have the money :o .

Il Duca
November 4, 2006, 01:24 PM
Sig and Glock are like apples and rotten oranges JK :D . There is nothing wrong with Glock but I greatly prefer Sig. The grip angle and controls are more natural to me. I also like the trigger of a Sig over a Glock's. If you don't want to shell out the price of a new Sig you can get one of the factory reworks for a good deal cheaper. My P226 is a retired LE pre-rail gun and I absolutely love it. It will probably be the pistol I keep the longest.

Retro
November 4, 2006, 01:59 PM
Sig Sauer has probably the best double-action trigger pull than any pistol that I have fired... the only thing that came close to Sig trigger pull was the Beretta 92FS trigger... My HK USP .45 has a much stiffer double-action trigger pull than Sig and Beretta.

Glocks are pseudo-single-action... you cannot really compare the two... the only thing a Glock and a Sig have in common is that both lacked frame-mounted safety (actually some newer sigs have them).

Plus you can practice dry-firing with a snap cap in the chamber with a Sig... something you can't do with a Glock without ejecting a snap cap and reloading a new one in.

Go for the sig.

cpaspr
November 4, 2006, 02:14 PM
possibly, find a used Sig that isn't a CPO. Lots of them for sale from private parties. Sigs are hard to break, so the odds of buying a dud on the used market are quite low. That's how I got my P232, and it's never failed to go bang yet.

Ohen Cepel
November 4, 2006, 03:29 PM
SIG, especially if you can find one of the factory re-furb guns. It'll be in a red case rather blue. Great buy for the money and they're usually less than a new Glock if you go that route.

Froggy
November 4, 2006, 03:36 PM
I have a Glock 19 and a Sig P229 in .40 S&W / .357 Sig (interchangable barrels). Both are nice guns. I prefer the Sig. As you've already noted, it just "feels" better.... the grip fits better, I like the "heft" of it, I like its milled stainless steel, I like the trigger's action better than I do that of the Glock. Nothing wrong with Glock's safe-action either, but I have a preference for that DA rebounding hammer of the Sig.

Right now I'm keeping my eyes on the local shops hoping to find a used P232 to replace one or more .380s currently on hand.

massnee
November 4, 2006, 03:52 PM
I own a Glock 27. I have shot several of my fatherís sigs (226, 220, 232). All of the sigs have been jam-o-matics. Particularly the 220. The Glock has performed near flawlessly.

10-Ring
November 4, 2006, 04:02 PM
That's the nice thing about this obsession. If you get bored w/ one, you can get something else. If right now, you have an itch that can only be scratched by a SIG...get the SIG. At some point, you'll be back to your Glocks. There is a place in your collection for both! :D

AK103K
November 4, 2006, 04:09 PM
The problem with SIG's is, once you get one, they rapidly multiply, and all your other loves become old maids, and if they are lucky, and you dont sell them outright, end up living in a cold, neglected life in a dark safe. :)


Froggy,

Dont pass up a P230 if you come across one. You can usually get them a little cheaper than the 232's and they are just as good. My last one cost me $300 at a local shop, and it was in about new condition.

antsi
November 4, 2006, 05:02 PM
----------quote----------
All of the sigs have been jam-o-matics.
-------------------------

This is very bizarre and is not the typical SIG owner experience.

Nickodemus
November 4, 2006, 05:13 PM
I have a sig P229 with the tutone stainless that I got new for $500. I shoot paper targets the best with it, my favorite. I have handled many glocks but choose to buy a styer S-40 instead.

tikka_fan
November 4, 2006, 05:21 PM
If you compare the Glock to the SIGPRO there is no real difference in quality or bang for the buck as both are priced very similar.

The alloy frame SIGs cost quite bit more and give you options that the Glock doesn't have like DA/SA.

It comes down to whether you want a hammer or not.

Having said that I own both (P220, G17) and love them to death.

FPrice
November 4, 2006, 05:33 PM
My favorite pistols right now include both Sigs and Glocks. Each is a good, reliable pistol in their own right but they also have their own strengths. I consider the Sig better as a duty/belt gun with the Glock being better for CCW for me, but each also overlaps the other.

real_name
November 4, 2006, 05:39 PM
The problem with SIG's is, once you get one, they rapidly multiply, and all your other loves become old maids, and if they are lucky, and you dont sell them outright, end up living in a cold, neglected life in a dark safe.

I just read that out to my wife, she joked that I need to sell my P232 as she refuses to live in a metal box.

I'm presently weighing up my options.

RyanM
November 4, 2006, 05:45 PM
I don't care for the DA/SA with decocker only that SIGs have. If they allowed for cocked-and-locked, I'd be all over them.

Other than that, SIGs have better fit and finish, but Glocks have a much more durable finish to the metal, and are also more durable overall (about a 150,000+ round lifespan for a 9mm Glock vs. 60,000 for a 9mm SIG).

Rob96
November 4, 2006, 05:53 PM
It was weird for me. I handled a Sig P228, and it felt incredible. Gut I could not shoot that thing as well as I do my G19. Sold the P228 and bought a second G19.

AK103K
November 4, 2006, 06:02 PM
If they allowed for cocked-and-locked, I'd be all over them.

Get ready to "wrassle" :D

P220R SAO
This 8+1 capacity pistol features a crisp 5-pound SAO trigger that breaks like glass and an ambidextrous thumb safety.


http://sigarms.com/images/catalog/product/220R_blk_SAO-left.jpg

Slvr Surfr
November 4, 2006, 06:24 PM
I never had a sig that shot worth a damn. I always had FTE problems with my P220. After I shot my brothers G21 I ditched the 220 for a G22. I then got rid of my P239 for a G23. I havent looked back since. The glocks have been bullet proof. I havent had a single malfunction with either that wasnt induced by me. The parts for glocks are much cheaper, and more available. Try finding sig mags cheap. Its not easy.

It really is like comparing apples to oranges but If you ask me GO GLOCK.

Soybomb
November 4, 2006, 06:31 PM
They are both high quality firearms with excellent manufacturing. Buy which ever you like best.

OH25shooter
November 4, 2006, 06:34 PM
Not sure those brands should be compared. Doesn't the big difference in price indicate the better manufactured of the two? What is priced the same as a Glock product?

SoCalShooter
November 4, 2006, 06:42 PM
I really prefer the SIG grip also, very ergo in my opinion, but both are great shooters and easy to use.

Ichiro
November 4, 2006, 06:49 PM
It has to be reliable and fit you well. I like them both, but would actually prefer a CZ P-01.

RyanM
November 4, 2006, 11:52 PM
P220R SAO
This 8+1 capacity pistol features a crisp 5-pound SAO trigger that breaks like glass and an ambidextrous thumb safety.

I've seen that, but it doesn't really interest me. 8+1 shots is not enough for a platform of that size and weight, for me. Optimum would be a double stack .40 caliber of about G23 size. .40 caliber has nearly the same on-paper (expanded diameter and penetration) terminal performance as the .45, but with higher capacity, at the expense of snappier recoil and more blast.

If they made a 229SAO, I'd buy it (if I had the money).

f4t9r
November 5, 2006, 12:22 AM
FTE and jams in a Sig is not the norm. Great gun and fantastic customer service. Better choice is the Sig !!!!!

jlh26oo
November 5, 2006, 01:59 AM
I personally prefer consistent triggers, lighter & smaller packages with paradoxically higher capacities, shorter slides with paradoxically longer sight radii and barrels (& w/polygonal > conventional rifling), poly > aluminum, more durable, and less expensive in initial cost, parts and mags; less parts/simple design, less intensive maintenance schedule etc; but then again, I'm of the "lowest common denominator" in handgunners, so ymmv...

Because Sigs really look nice, when new at least (GLOCK is just as ugly used or new). SIgs have nicer sights. And apparently the pins and controls in their frames don't rust anymore. And Sig just has this essence of all around superiority that no one can put a finger on specifically, because it's more a general sense of awesomeness.

Also, remember that because GLOCK is the most common choice of poorly trained cops and first time gun owners, and is most simple in operation and upkeep- that if you buy GLOCK, you are part of the "lowest common denominator" of all handgun users in terms of skill, training, and taste (your palate is not refined enough to appreciate a higher level of sophistication). Either that, or you just bought one because you saw it in a movie. Or because you couldn't afford a Sig. Do you really want to be part of all that? Didn't THINK so! Get a Sig.

PhillyGlocker
November 5, 2006, 03:54 AM
As you can tell by my user name, I'm a Glock fan. I still can't believe the negative reviews they get. I have fired lots of pistols including Sigs. They are excellent pistols as well, but I don't see how they are better than any Glock I've fired. I favor Glocks because of the weight and durability. For self defense I would definitely go with the Glock. If you want to look like a Homeland Security Employee, Get a SIG.

You may finish debating now. :rolleyes:
http://www.teamglock.com/Glock-Buyers-Guide/images-guide/Glock-19.jpg

Slvr Surfr
November 5, 2006, 08:47 AM
jlh26oo,

Your post was by far the most condescending post I have ever seen on THR to date.

QUOTE:
"GLOCK is the most common choice of poorly trained cops and first time gun owners, and is most simple in operation and upkeep- that if you buy GLOCK, you are part of the "lowest common denominator" of all handgun users in terms of skill, training, and taste (your palate is not refined enough to appreciate a higher level of sophistication)."

Its obvious that you have never worked in the Law Enforcement field.
70% of the U.S. LE world uses glocks because they in fact WORK. Yes they are simple, and yes they are easy to up keep. I would call that perfect in a world that so badly needs things to work EVERY time when LIVES depends on it. Hence: "GLOCK PERFECTION". Sigs are great guns. I personally have never cared for them. Iíve owned two and felt like they never shot well. Yet I can pick up a glock and call my shots all day. Speaking of non LE world. Have you bothered to look at anyone in your local shooting competitions? Take a guess what a majority of those "poorly trained souls" use. You guessed it. GLOCK. Your generalization of glock guns and owners is ridiculous and plain ignorant. I hope you donít try to tell me a Rolex is better at keeping time than a Timex just because its more expensive and looks fancier. Just incase don't bother I own both, and know better.

wfparys
November 5, 2006, 09:18 AM
I have been looking at Glocks since they first came out. They simply do not fit me properly. In a small pistol I looked at the Glock and the Kahr. I chose the Kahr. In a full sized / high cap pistol I looked at sig beretta glock hk and smith and wesson. I bought a Sig 226. As far as accuracy goes I think it is very good as does my wife.

jlh26oo
November 5, 2006, 09:34 AM
:evil:

jlh26oo,

Your post was by far the most condescending post I have ever seen on THR to date.

QUOTE:
"GLOCK is the most common choice of poorly trained cops and first time gun owners, and is most simple in operation and upkeep- that if you buy GLOCK, you are part of the "lowest common denominator" of all handgun users in terms of skill, training, and taste (your palate is not refined enough to appreciate a higher level of sophistication)."

Its obvious that you have never worked in the Law Enforcement field.
70% of the U.S. LE world uses glocks because they in fact WORK. Yes they are simple, and yes they are easy to up keep. I would call that perfect in a world that so badly needs things to work EVERY time when LIVES depends on it. Hence: "GLOCK PERFECTION". Sigs are great guns. I personally have never cared for them. Iíve owned two and felt like they never shot well. Yet I can pick up a glock and call my shots all day. Speaking of non LE world. Have you bothered to look at anyone in your local shooting competitions? Take a guess what a majority of those "poorly trained souls" use. You guessed it. GLOCK. Your generalization of glock guns and owners is ridiculous and plain ignorant. I hope you donít try to tell me a Rolex is better at keeping time than a Timex just because its more expensive and looks fancier. Just incase don't bother I own both, and know better.

:uhoh:

Rolex? Nah, FAR too sophisticated for my crude tastes!

Rob96
November 5, 2006, 11:31 AM
Also, remember that because GLOCK is the most common choice of poorly trained cops and first time gun owners, and is most simple in operation and upkeep- that if you buy GLOCK, you are part of the "lowest common denominator" of all handgun users in terms of skill, training, and taste (your palate is not refined enough to appreciate a higher level of sophistication). Either that, or you just bought one because you saw it in a movie. Or because you couldn't afford a Sig. Do you really want to be part of all that? Didn't THINK so! Get a Sig.


Please do share with us your background that entitles you to post such ill-thought out crap.:rolleyes:

Curare
November 5, 2006, 11:43 AM
newer SIGs (about 2000+) = MIM (hammer, sear, trigger).

Edmond
November 5, 2006, 12:40 PM
They both have their advantages and disadvantages. I've owned both, never had a problem with either.

Sig Pro's=what can I say, it's a damn good gun. It's built well and extremely accurate. The out of the box accuracy and smoothness is almost unparalleled. Plus, there's something about the sound you hear when you rack a Sig slide that you don't get with other guns.:D Will pretty much eat up and spit out any ammo you feed it.

Sig Con's=price. They're not inexpensive guns. Depending on your body type, you might have a problem balancing size and capacity. Mags are expensive, $30 for new mags.

Glock Pro's=easy to use, no frills. Plenty of aftermarket support such as sights, barrels, control levers, triggers, etc... They're inexpensive. You can get used Glocks for a $400. They're easy to maintain and easy to work on. Like the Glock, it will eat up any ammo you feed it. High capacity in relation to size. C'mon, who wouldn't want 15+1 in a G19? It's a pretty small gun. Mags are $20 a piece.

Glock Con's=some people don't like the way they look but that's subjective. Some people don't like the grip angle.

I heard one idiot, and I do use that term literally, say that, "Glocks are garbage." But that was coming from an idiot who has never even owned a pistol in his lifetime.:rolleyes:

Of course, you hear about the lack of "safeties" on a Glock. But if you're trained well, you know that your safety shouldn't be a mechanical lever, it should be your brain, which controls your trigger finger.

FPrice
November 5, 2006, 01:07 PM
(GLOCK is just as ugly used or new)

Pretty don't win gunfights.

-terry
November 5, 2006, 02:03 PM
jlh26oo,
I thought you were being funny. I was quite amused, not offended. Only the pot can call another pot black, right?
-terry

zoom6zoom
November 5, 2006, 02:07 PM
70% of the U.S. LE world uses glocks because they in fact WORK.

Actually, many of them use them because that's what they were issued, and they don't have a choice. I'm not putting down the Glock, but let's cover all the angles.

Slvr Surfr
November 5, 2006, 05:46 PM
Its true that some officers are not entitled to their choice of weapons. It is left up to the department. I was more concerned about the way a department goes about choosing a gun manufacturer. The 70% of the market chooses Glocks because of their simplicity, and excellent quality. In my opinion Glock offer departments an exceptional product for a hard to beat price. The gun is not extremely expensive, parts are easy to get, and training armorers is easy. Glocks have their cons as do all gun manufacturers.

My post to jlh26oo was caused by what I thought was a extremely bad generalization. If he was just joking than I apologize. It was the end of a long shift, and the cord of the post just struck me wrong. Normally Id agree that arguing on the internet is futile. :cuss:

I really enjoy this forum becuase its not the typical gun forum !:)

atblis
November 6, 2006, 12:35 AM
Did you guys actually read jlh26oo's message?
:banghead:
I more or less agree with him. What's so special about SIG?

Texshooter
November 6, 2006, 01:13 AM
Well, the burb I live in outside ATL uses the G22 because they got them for free (with trade of old wheelies.)

My neighbor was on the selection board and the politicos told them they would select the free pistol.

It was not what they wanted, but the did become part of the "why do you think 70% of LEOs carry Glock" crowd.

zamboxl
November 6, 2006, 05:32 AM
i really dont understand why anyone would compare a glock to a sig, that's like comparing a cady to a chevy. Nothing wrong with a chevy i like em but i would take a nice cady over a chevy any day. SEcriously people are over hiping glocks just a bit.

jlh26oo
November 6, 2006, 06:28 AM
Congrats to terry and atblis for reading (not skimming) my post; you win the 5% award!

For non-readers: only SIGaphiles; NOT GLOCKaphiles should be offended!

Rob96
November 6, 2006, 06:32 AM
My bad. I was not fully awake.:(

jlh26oo
November 6, 2006, 06:38 AM
Please do share with us your background that entitles you to post such ill-thought out crap.

Rob, please read it again. If it helps, imagine Chris Sarandon's most snooty voice when you read that particular paragraph.

He should be making his trademark "something-in-this-room-stinks" face.


http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/f5/Humperdinck.jpg

jlh26oo
November 6, 2006, 06:39 AM
My bad. I was not fully awake.


LOL and I spent all that time finding a good sarandon pic.

jlh26oo
November 6, 2006, 06:45 AM
and it's not my Sig-Sauer.

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