Sig vs. Glock vs. Ruger


December 13, 2007, 11:46 PM
What do you guys think is the better gun in terms of accuracy, and reliability but mostly reliabiliy and defensive applications. Sig Sauer P226 9mm, Ruger P89 9mm, and Glock 17 9mm? From what I hear Sig and Glock are both great but I want to know for sure which is better. I liked the feel of both G17 and P226 but I'm asking about Ruger too because I haven't looked at one yet. I will probably be getting a Glock 17 because of cost, but I wanted to know about these others as well. Please just give opinions on these guns as I have looked at nearly everything except the Ruger which like I said is why I asked about it.

If you enjoyed reading about "Sig vs. Glock vs. Ruger" here in archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join today for the full version!
December 14, 2007, 12:22 AM
It depends what your criteria are for one or the other to really be better. I don't have much experience with the Ruger, but I have fired both the Glock and SIG. Both are very reliable. The SIG is probably the more accurate of the two. The SIG also has the better trigger in my opinion, BUT the Glock has the more consistent trigger (IE no DA to SA transition). I recall the SIG also having an excessively long SA trigger reset distance. The Glock less so. If you reload or plan to, the SIG will also have some advantages since you can use lead bullets, and it's probalby better on the brass.

Realistically, you just need to shoot both of them and see which you shoot better. You won't go wrong with either.

Ken Rainey
December 14, 2007, 02:18 AM
The Glock 17 - easy to operate, easy to maintain, ultra reliable. If I had my choice of any brand new pistol and had to pick one that you could take from the box and depend on it to work, it would be the Glock 17 ;)

Blue Brick
December 14, 2007, 02:20 AM
Ruger all the way, before you make a purchase go to the library and read the P-series section in “Ruger and his guns”.

Why the Ruger P-Series is the Best

Calibers: 9mm, 45ACP and 40S&W

Magazine capacities: 9mm 15 or 10 rounds, 45ACP 8 or 7 rounds depending on model and 40S&W 11 or 10 rounds depending on model.

Barrel: 4.5 inches long constructed of Stainless Steel with fully supported chamber

Trigger and hammer: Constructed of Stainless Steel as are many other main parts.

Sights: Square notch rear and Square post front sight with white inserts for rapid target acquisition. Rear is adjustable for windage.

Grips: Molded G.E. Xenoy high-impact material or Hogue non-slip rubber grips.

Slide Construction: 4130 Chrome-Molybdenum alloy Steel or Terhune Anticorro Stainless Steel heat-treated for hardness with ample metal in stressed areas. Has open-top slide design (wide ejection port) that allows easy and rapid clearing of the breach or single loading without magazine.

Frame: Anodized hard coated Aluminum alloy with ergonomic grip design resistant to wear, breakage and standard lubricants. Design with a non-slip surface and oversized recurved trigger guard to accommodate two hand hold comfortably with or without gloves.

Springs: Unbreakable Steel music wire coil springs.

Service life: Expected service life is 20,000 rounds.

Extractor: Simple and reliable design based on the Thompson submachine gun proven design.

Magazine latch: Stainless Steel Ambidextrous magazine latch (except the P-90)

Safety: Ambidextrous Safety that locks firing pin incase of accidental drop. Safety levers also serve as decocking levers.

Disassembly: Only 52 to 56 individual parts depending on model and can be field striped into five basic subassemblies in seconds without tools.

The P-85 barrel’s was plugged with a Steel rod and fired with military high-pressure M882 ammunition and the only damage was bent extractor that separated from the slide as the case was removed from the chamber. One P-85 had its entire right side of the ejection port removed and 2,000 rounds of M882 ammunition were fired with no signs of stress. The pistol was then subjected to 3,000 rounds of M882 ammunition. During both sessions the pistol was not disassembled or cleaned and was not allowed to cool during firing. At 1,000 round intervals the pistol was examined for slide fractures. After 5,000 rounds no damage was observed.

The state Police of Wisconsin adopted the P-85 in 1987. The Israeli Air forces has ordered substantial numbers of the P-85. In addition many foreign governments have adopted the P-85 in Central America, Asia, Europe, and the Middle East as well as numerous domestic law enforcement organizations.

December 14, 2007, 02:58 AM
9mm in this order:


AZ Husker
December 14, 2007, 03:05 AM
If you've never held a Ruger semi...go to the nearest Home Depot and pick up a standard clay brick...same thing! I love their revolvers, but the autos are just chunky!

December 14, 2007, 08:49 AM
To me it’s an easy decision, Sig, Sig or Sig, the question is what can you afford. I’ve owned many Rugers and let me tell you they are tough but it’s like comparing a Cadillac to a Pinto, they will both get you there but in a different way.

Landlocked Pirate
December 14, 2007, 09:11 AM
I don't have any experience with the Sig or Ruger, but I absolutely love my Glock 17.

December 14, 2007, 09:13 AM
between these 3, I'd get the Glock. Sig seems to have quality issues of their newer guns; even the hardcore sig dudes agree on If I'm gonna be paying $800, I better be getting high quality gun dammit!
as for ruger, it's just built cheap and plain ugly, it looks like stuff made in china.

December 14, 2007, 12:25 PM
Built like a tank.
I'm biased though I shoot my P89 better then anything I own or have owned.

December 14, 2007, 12:30 PM
Carry or nightstand: Glock. Dead nuts simple and reliable.
Range gun: Sig. Also reliable, but heavy. A few more levers and buttons and such. Pricier too.
Construction: Ruger. Use it as a sidewalk paver. Maybe a hammer, if you unload it. Ugly enough to make even Kathy Bates look good.

December 14, 2007, 12:33 PM
Well, if you want to be able to hit what you’re aiming at beyond 25’ with perfect reliability in almost any conditions, go with the Sig.

If you foresee a time when you’ll be dragged 15 miles through the mud and then run over by a convoy of tractor-trailers, and still want to shoot at something (<25’ away) go with the Glock.

December 14, 2007, 12:36 PM
Whatever fits your hand best, i.e. points the best.

All else equal, if cost is a factor I would go with the Glock 17. Fits my hand well, the first time using one it was satisfying to get the "one ragged hole" in the target.

The SIG is cool. I really like SIGs, the 9mm fits my hand well (the .357 grips are 1/8" wider which is annoying) but not quite as well as the Glock. I like a metal gun but if a new SIG is really $800 :eek: then I'd be all over the Glock. (Inflation sucks. I bought my .357 several years ago for $500.)

A neighbor put it this way: "Now that your newbie friend has a Glock, in a couple years he can upgrade to a SIG." I know what he means but really I don't think an upgrade is warranted. The Glock will do just fine.

My experience with the Ruger is limited to handling one but it felt clunky.

If when you pick it up and the sights don't naturally align with the target, it's "leverite." As in "leave her right there"

December 14, 2007, 12:37 PM
Sig! After owning glocks for years, I recently picked up a sig... Better feel, Better Fit, better accuracy... simply amazing difference (IMO)


Also... Check out this poll... divide the number of problems with the number of NO problems for each brand/gun... It's interesting.

December 14, 2007, 12:44 PM
Sig hands down. The ONLY reason anyone would pick either of the other two is price.

It's like asking: Ferarri, Honda, or Toyota?

December 14, 2007, 12:47 PM
I am currently struggling with a brand new Ruger KP95, detailed here:

Go with a Sig if you can afford it, you get what you pay for.

I have nothing but praise for my FNP-9 (, it's priced between the Glock and the Ruger, and operates much like a Sig.

December 14, 2007, 12:51 PM
Ask three gun guys this question... :)
The track record of those 3 firearms is solid enough that you can safely trust your life with them, so it comes down to preference.

I happen to prefer the Sig.

December 14, 2007, 12:53 PM
Sig hands down. The ONLY reason anyone would pick either of the other two is price.

It's like asking: Ferarri, Honda, or Toyota?

Totally agree!!! After using Glocks for years, I really had no idea that Sigs could possibly THAT much better... It is amazing.

December 14, 2007, 01:08 PM
Glocks all the way.

I've trained with my GLOCK 35 in Basic-Basic II-Intermediate and Advanced Self-Defense Handgun course. It went bang every time, while others jammed.

You won't be sorry.

December 14, 2007, 01:27 PM
Listed from best to worst. SIG, GLOCK, RUGER.

December 14, 2007, 03:03 PM
The Rugers are big, but they are exceedingly well built, and they are about as reliable as you can get. That being said, all three of the pistols you mentioned could accurately be described as such. Aside from personal preference, the only other distinguishing factor is price, and in that category, the Ruger wins hands down. Past that, I think your just looking at subjective opinion.

December 14, 2007, 08:14 PM
I'm a Glockaholic. I work mine over, but I do that on most any gun. Save for something special, I do all my own Glock work. Saves a bundle, gets done right, and it's always available.

December 14, 2007, 08:21 PM
Those are all good pistols, but I'm partial to the Ruger as far as both accuracy and reliability are concerned...My P89 is by far and away the most accurate handgun I own, and have never failed to feed or fire. I took the extra money I could have spent on the sig and have spent it on practice ammo...At seven yards, a good defensive shooting distance, my p89 will shoot one big ragged hole.

AZ Husker
December 14, 2007, 08:28 PM
We went to Sigs for a short time. I, like most of our department, had a difficult time transitioning between the heavy first pull and the light subsequent shots. I prefer a consistent pull on every shot. Excellent quality though!

December 14, 2007, 09:05 PM
My list: Ruger, Ruger, Ruger. The other's didn't even cross my mind when picking a choice. You said Home Defense, not concealed carry. The arugment of Rugers' "clunkyness" is null because you don't need it to be the slimmest or lightest at home.
You can't beat Ruger's reliability and durability. Accuracy is no worse than the others, the barrels were designed by Bar-Sto afterall.

Nothing wrong with Glock or Sig, I've used both in the past, they were great guns, however I really wish people would quit with the Ruger bashing.

December 14, 2007, 09:24 PM
Go with a Sig if you can afford it, you get what you pay for.

Sigs are no doubt great guns, but if your buying new, they are way over priced(IMHO)

Get what fits you best:) That $300 ruger will serve you just as well as a $750Sig. And with that said, I carry a Glock.:D

December 14, 2007, 10:57 PM
Thanks everyone, just so you know I have shot the Glock and loved it, but the Sig also had a great feel so I think it's between those two. I'm going to look at both again and try to decide, thanks for all your help.

March 1, 2008, 01:22 PM
what is this mainsail if you cant hit something beyond 25' with a glock you are a danger with any pistol no gun aims it self and the accuracy difference between a glock and a sig at 50 yards is less than 2 inches so i think you need training and practice at 25' i can hit accurately with a thrown rock

March 1, 2008, 02:08 PM
what is this mainsail if you cant hit something beyond 25' with a glock you are a danger with any pistol no gun aims it self and the accuracy difference between a glock and a sig at 50 yards is less than 2 inches so i think you need training and practice at 25' i can hit accurately with a thrown rock

I don’t mean to offend you, but I have no idea what that says. It appears to be a bunch of random words all thrown together. If you can translate that into normal English sentences, I may be able to give you the information you ask for, if you are asking something.

March 1, 2008, 02:22 PM
If you can afford a Sig, it is probably the best of the three for accuracy (but differences in accuracy are pretty minimal). Glock has the simplest manual of arms. Ruger probably has the best price. All three are built like tanks and as reliable as the day is long.

March 1, 2008, 02:27 PM
If you've never held a Ruger semi...go to the nearest Home Depot and pick up a standard clay brick...same thing! I love their revolvers, but the autos are just chunky!

Are you holding your Ruger by the SLIDE? Because the grip frame is just slightly fatter than a 1911's, has the same grip angle - the only real change is the way low down join between the trigger guard and the frontstrap.

Great googly moogly, I've held more uncomfortable Glocks, and yet people gripe about the nicely oval, no sharp edges on the grip P89...


March 1, 2008, 03:18 PM
All you guys that say ruger is chunky have you ever shot one??
I't does feel chunky when you hold one but when you shoot it,it feels great.I shoot it great because of the bigger grip you pull the trigger with the tip of your finger not the middle which results in better accuracy.
I was shooting my P95 for about 100 rounds then shot my friends CZP-01 I actully liked my ruger better.My P95 has a smooth trigger.The pull is a little long at first but after a few shots I shot it great.
I also like a gun with a hammer so I didn't buy the Glock or Xd I was looking at.For $346 bucks out the door I love my P95.
My P95 is great for the range,Home defence.I'ts not a good conceled carry gun do to it's larger size.

March 1, 2008, 04:08 PM
I can only compare Glock and SIG, having owned both and carried both as duty pistols. A Glock is probably more forgiving of the owner who forgets to use a good lubricant. The SIG is much more likely to be accurate. If a consistent trigger pull is desired, the DAK trigger option in a SIG will fill that role. FWIW, my current duty pistol is a P229R with the DAK trigger system. It has never malfunctioned. My P220 I used as a duty pistol in the early 1990's was 100% reliable, except for one batch of ammo that had bell-mouthed cases, and would not work in any other weapon, either. My recently purchased pre-owned decocker P229 had a couple of failures to feed, but I had let it get a little dry and quite dirty in shooting 400+ rounds over two days. (I was trying a new-to-me lube, which does not remain as "wet" as the lubes I had been using.) I should have, of course, at least field-stripped it and checked the lube situation before continuing shooting the second day. My two duty Glock G22 pistols were mixed; one was 100% reliable, the other a bit temperamental until I replace the magazine springs with stronger ones.

March 1, 2008, 04:40 PM
All three brands are great. I have had them all.

I would suggest to you to try the new Ruger SR9. I just got one and I love it.
Less expensive, Very accurate. 17 Rounds magazines and a new different approach from Ruger.

Let me know what did you find out.


Gun Slinger
March 1, 2008, 04:48 PM
I have experience with all three 9mm platforms, having owned all three at some point and retaining those that suit me best.

My observations from my professional LE experience with these 9mm service sidearms follows:

The Ruger P95, while quite reliable and comfortable to shoot, is a strong, massively constructed handgun and the price to be paid for those qualities is that it is a rather bulky sidearm that tends to be somewhat inconvenient for the purpose of concealed carry.
The slide itself is relatively trim for a Ruger, but the sights, safety lever and slide release/disassembly lever all seem conspire to contribute to its dimensional girth and make it a little ungainly for concealed carry.
As an open carry service sidearm, it is certainly acceptable since its structural profile is of lesser significance in this mode of carry.
While not a "top of the line" selection, its accuracy and operation were acceptable.
Since the vast majority of my time is spent carrying concealed these days, the P95 saw such infrequent employment in that role that I decided to part with it and recoup the capital that I had in it for use in another pursuit.
It was a fine gun overall, but not optimally "streamlined" for the purpose of concealed carry.
It is the least expensive of the three and if money is an issue, this is the best gun for the money.

The Sig-Sauer P226 (also in 9mm) is a well constructed full-size service handgun. The P226 is also a large service weapon, moreso than the P95 both in its mass and its physical dimensions.
Its trigger in either SA or DA mode was superior to the P95's in every aspect (smoothness and consistency) and was highly conducive to excellent accuracy as well as short "split times" on follow up shots during qualifications and training drills.
The lower frame/grip of the P226 tends to be a bit "broad across the beam" and while it lends itself to increased comfort during firing, the penalty for such an attribute is that it is fairly difficult to conceal properly under lighter clothing. With a little effort and attention to clothing details, it can be concealed, however it demands constant vigilance in that regard. While it still resides in my gun safe as my most favorite service weapon due to sentimental reasons, I wear it rarely these days.
It is also the most expensive of the three guns discussed herein.

The Glock 17 is the lightest and most dimensionally appealing of the three.
At ~25 ounces, it is lighter than the Ruger P95 by two ounces and the P226 by eight ounces, gives me two more rounds than the P95 and one more than the P226 and a grip geometry that fits my hand better than the P95 or the P226. In addition to this, the slide presents a much smoother profile and while not much smaller than the P226, conceals with a lesser degree of required vigilance even in warmer weather where lighter clothing is the "uniform of the day".
I don't particularly care for the polymer sights that Glock provides with the 17 since they seem a bit "fragile" for a serious defensive CCW piece, but it is an issue that is easily remedied with any one of the numerous "after market" sights available for the gun. My choice was to replace them with Heinie Standard Sights since they provide an extra .400"/1.016cm of sight radius over the O.E.M. factory sights due the configuration of the Heinie's rear sight.
On a good day at the range, I can usually shoot 3" groups at 25 meters with the G17 and hit an 8" circular steel plate at 50m on command with my preferred carry load.
As the G17 can still be purchased with a little searching for $550-$600 it is the 'mid-priced' gun of the three and worth every penny.

While I strongly prefer the Glock 17 over the P95 and the P226, any of these guns will do the job. I've carried them and bet my life upon them and would carry any of them again without hesitation.


March 1, 2008, 05:37 PM
awesome review gun slinger

Gun Slinger
March 1, 2008, 05:55 PM
Thanks. :)

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