Sig owners: P239 vs P229 question


PDA






Jordan85
September 10, 2008, 02:48 AM
Quick question for you Sig owners:

I have read from a lot of different reviews that people recommend the P239 over the P229 for concealed carry, due to the fact that it is smaller and easier to conceal.

From looking only at the dimensions of the two guns and looking at them side x side, the two guns look very similar in size. Yes, the p229 is slightly longer, taller, and wider, but it does not seem all that significant to me. However, I have read that even though the size differences are slight, the P239 is a much more comfortable and concealable gun to carry. I do not wear tight clothes, and so it seems to me that I would be able to conceal the p229 just as easily as the p239. So it seems to me like (in my case) it comes down to a comfort issue. Is there something I am missing? Why would the slight difference in size cause such a large difference in comfort and concealability if my usual attire is jeans and a loose fitting t-shirt? I am 6'1" 160lbs and would be carrying iwb at the 5:00 position....

If you enjoyed reading about "Sig owners: P239 vs P229 question" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Trebor
September 10, 2008, 03:12 AM
With a carry gun size and weight make more of a difference then you would think. Just a small reduction in the physical "envelope" of the gun can make a huge difference in how comfortable it is to carry.

Since the 239 is slightly smaller in all three dimensions (height, length, and width) and is lighter, that is pretty significant.

Now, I'm not saying that you *can't* carry a full size gun like the 229. Lot's of people do, after all.

But, I will say that if you try both guns, with an equally good belt and holster set up for each, you will find that the 239 is more comfortable or "less noticeable" after a day of "all day" carry.

Whether the 229 is "comfortable enough" or you really need to go to the smaller 239 to be comfortable enough is really up to you.

You will notice a difference though, it's just up to you to decide if it's enough of a difference to go with the smaller gun.

M203Sniper
September 10, 2008, 04:00 AM
It worked in Blazing saddles.

http://i259.photobucket.com/albums/hh284/CTone03/Guns in movies/Ronin/Sig239twotone.jpg

No really I'm here to help. For the sake of the "internet" let's convert this first to Glock;

Glock 36 is smaller then a model 30 = carry gun same caliber. Glock 21 is a duty size gun.

Second to Colt model 1911 (& copies) ; A CCO (officer frame+cmdr slide) is smaller than a LW commander = carry gun. Gov't model is a duty size gun.

Now back to Sig; A P239 is smaller than a P229 = P226 a duty gun.

The carry option here is _________.

:neener:

Muddflap
September 10, 2008, 06:07 AM
Trebor is correct. Just reading about the size difference, does not work. If you could hold both guns, you would understand. The 229 is a double stack, the 239 is single stack. That makes a lot of difference when you carry.
I have both, and carry the 229 mostly in the winter when the larger grip is easier to conceal. The 239 is my summer gun.

AK103K
September 10, 2008, 06:53 AM
They really arent all that different...

http://im1.shutterfly.com/media/47b7d700b3127ccec27f5c97988b00000010O00CYuWbdo5bsQe3nwk/cC/f%3D0/ps%3D50/r%3D0/rx%3D480/ry%3D320/
http://im1.shutterfly.com/media/47b7d700b3127ccec27f0ac319c400000010O00CYuWbdo5bsQe3nwk/cC/f%3D0/ps%3D50/r%3D0/rx%3D480/ry%3D320/
http://im1.shutterfly.com/media/47b7d700b3127ccec27f8d1659ca00000010O00CYuWbdo5bsQe3nwk/cC/f%3D0/ps%3D50/r%3D0/rx%3D480/ry%3D320/

The P229 is a little heavier, especially when loaded. As was mentioned, you really need to get them in your hand, along with some of the other models to know whats best for you. SIG's dont vary dramatically in size until you get to the P230/232's. Models basically the same size, like the P226 and P229 can feel very different in your hands.

ZeSpectre
September 10, 2008, 07:32 AM
When it comes to concealed carry a slight difference in the thickness and/or length of the grip can make an enormous difference in how concealable a gun is.

As others have said, looking at the specs doesn't always give you a good feel for the difference, sometimes you simply have to handle it yourself and see what you think.

Also when carrying the weight difference between 12 rounds in a double stack mag and 7 rounds in a single stack mag can feel huge as well (the double stack .40 can sometimes feel like you are hauling around a brick).

I carry a 229 and have never had the drive to buy/use a 239 but I think it's just a long ingrained habit for me at this point.

Jordan85
September 10, 2008, 07:59 AM
I have held both of them. The problem is that I can't take them home for the day and carry them on me....

My concern is if the p229 is going to be especially more uncomfortable to carry iwb than the p239. Like I said, most of my clothes are baggier than tighter, so it seems like I should be able to conceal either one w/out any printing. I'm just wondering what would make the p239 so much more comfortable to carry when its dimensions are so close to the p229.

I would understand if I said I usually wore a fitted dress shirt and didn't have much extra material hanging over the gun to conceal it. But like I said, I am casual most of the time. Does the fact that most people reading this would consider my clothes too big not aid in concealing the gun? In fact, for all intents and purposes, I would assume I can carry in the summer the way some of our better dressed thr members can only carry in the winter and still maintain concealed due to my attire.

If this is the case, is the P229 that much more uncomfortable to carry that one would choose the p239 even in the winter when they have the option to carry the the larger p229? In other words, is everybody saying the p239 is much easier to conceal? Or that the p239 is much more comfortable to carry?

pogo2
September 10, 2008, 11:14 AM
I have both of these guns, and the P239 in 9mm is about 27.5 ounces empty, while the P229 is over 32 ounces empty. So there is a 5 ounce weight difference. The P239 is also noticeably thinner than the P229 in the slide and grip, making it much easier to conceal.

Although I have carried the P229, I find the P239 more easily concealed.

http://i116.photobucket.com/albums/o25/pogo2/SigP229holster04.jpg

http://i116.photobucket.com/albums/o25/pogo2/SigP239Holster21.jpg

shadowalker
September 10, 2008, 11:47 AM
I carry and conceal a Sig P229 OWB over 70 hours a week and have no problems concealing with an untucked polo shirt. Good belt + good holster are the key to concealment.

I value the higher capacity of a double stack magazine more than a small improvement in concealability.

If you don't specifically know you have to carry IWB I'd consider an OWB holster, Galco's Concealable holster is a great mass produced one. They are far more comfortable and still offer great concealability.

I have an IWB holster but the only time I use it is for running. While carring OWB is more comfortable I haven't found IWB to be uncomfortable with the P229, it just doesn't offer any benefit to me most the time.

You'll probably find you'll wind up with more than one holster, and more than one gun. I prefer to carry service / full size handguns most the time but have smaller ones for times increased concealment is necessary.

TexasRifleman
September 10, 2008, 12:19 PM
I carry a 239 more than anything else. I've been carrying it for over 10 years now. The 239 to me seems much thinner than the 229.

I don't worry as much about length as thickness. I find a full size 1911 very easy to conceal simply because it's thin.

Gordon Fink
September 10, 2008, 02:04 PM
Split the difference and carry a P225. :D

~G. Fink

LA GUN
September 10, 2008, 02:14 PM
I also own both and would say the 239 is a much more comfortable companion.

One of the things I personally notice that does not get as much attention around carry is the LOADED weight of whatever weapon one is considering.I own some wonderful doublestack guns that quickly become bricks with 13 to 15 rounds on board.

I have a .357 239 and I love it. Having said that nobody is more surprised than I that most of my time is now spent with the redheaded stepchild of the glock line a G36. I have one with a clip draw and Heine straight 8 sites and it's so easy to take along that I actually do.

Rinspeed
September 10, 2008, 03:04 PM
I carry a 239 more than anything else. I've been carrying it for over 10 years now. The 239 to me seems much thinner than the 229.



I own both and the 239 seems much thinner to me as well.

DougDubya
September 10, 2008, 03:29 PM
The 239 is slim and fits the hand well, but the extra bit of width makes the P229 feel "rounder" and sit better in my hand.

Also, the 229 is more compact than the 226.

Think of this in Colt terms:
P239 = Officer's ACP - smallest and easiest to handle, but not quite as good a fit in the hand.
P229 = Commander - mid size, balance of concealment and handling.
P226 = Government Model - full size, fits hand nicely, but can be just a tad big for some people to CC.

Trebor
September 10, 2008, 04:00 PM
My concern is if the p229 is going to be especially more uncomfortable to carry iwb than the p239.

Since the 239 is thinner and less bulky overall then the 229 you will notice it less when carried IWB. I can't tell how much more *comfortable* it will be then the 229 since comfort is a subjective term. I'll just say it will be lighter, less likey to poke you somewhere, and generally less noticable.

I'm just wondering what would make the p239 so much more comfortable to carry when its dimensions are so close to the p229.

The weight. You are forgetting to factor in the lighter weight of the 239. The gun is lighter and holds less ammo. Those extra rounds in the double stack 229 do add extra weight.

Weight makes a difference in comfort as well. After a full day a heavier gun will tend to be more noticeable, or even more fatiguing to carry, then a lighter gun.

. But like I said, I am casual most of the time. Does the fact that most people reading this would consider my clothes too big not aid in concealing the gun?

You are confusing "concealability" with "comfort." You might be able to *conceal* either gun equally well under your baggy clothes, but that doesn't mean they will be equally *comfortable*.

In other words, is everybody saying the p239 is much easier to conceal? Or that the p239 is much more comfortable to carry?

Both.

The 239 is easier to conceal as it is slighter smaller in all critical dimensions. That may not make much of a difference if you wear loose clothes.

The 239 is more comfortable, especially when worn in a IWB holster, because it is thinner, generally a little smaller, and lighter. Size and weight do matter.

Now, just because the 229 is going to be "more noticeable" (to you) or "less comfortable" doesn't mean that you can't carry it. It depends how much less comfortable it is.

Let me give you an example: I used to carry a Makarov in an IWB set up. The Mak is smaller, lighter, and thinner then the Sig 239. I found the Mak would conceal very well and was very comfortable. I'd almost forget it was there.

I no longer carry the Mak. I usually carry a S&W M 65, but I sometimes carry a Sig 239.

The 239 is a little thicker, bigger all around, and heavier then the Mak. Although I notice the 239 more on my belt, and it's not as comfortable by the end of the day, I still consider it "comfortable enough" to carry. I thought the extra power over the 9x18 rounds was worth a little less comfort.

I've also tried carrying a CZ 75 in the excellent Milt Sparks Versa Max II. No matter how I tried, the gun was just too big and heavy to be comfortable to carry all day. It was noticeable all day and after just a couple hours I was dying to take the gun off. Even though the CZ holds more rounds and is easier to shoot, it wasn't worth the extra discomfort to wear it all day. If I stuck with the CZ, I'd wind up going unarmed more often.

As an instructor, the most common problem I see in shooters new to carry is that they don't get a good belt and holster. That makes a huge difference.

After that, I do see a lot of students who buy a full size gun, like the 229, carry it for awhile, and then decide it's too much hassle and switch to a smaller gun. YMMV.

KBintheSLC
September 10, 2008, 05:02 PM
You will notice a significant difference, especially IWB, with the 239... it is mostly the thickness that matters to me, and that is there the 239 shines. However, I know guys that carry bigger guns than the 229, so I think it is up to you and how much gun you can tolerate in your drawers.

I went with the 239, and have been happy with the decision. I would love a 229 or 226 also, but the wife will kill me if I come home with another gun right now.

Jordan85
September 10, 2008, 06:58 PM
Ahhh decisions decisions. I just wish there was a way to wear both around for a day so I could see the difference. I like the added capacity of the p229 and larger grip, but I have smaller hands, so I do not have a problem handling the smaller p239.

And having the added capacity is not a good option if it is going to be a pain to carry and cause me to want to leave my weapon at home.

I'm beginning to think the p239 with 10-round extended mag as a backup is an attractive compromise, since it is unlikely the difference in life or death will be decided by the extra 5 rounds I can carry in the p229 and I can handle both guns equally well.

don95sml
September 10, 2008, 07:22 PM
Jordan85 said:
I'm beginning to think the p239 with 10-round extended mag as a backup is an attractive compromise, since it is unlikely the difference in life or death will be decided by the extra 5 rounds I can carry in the p229 and I can handle both guns equally well.
It sounds as if you've reached a decision, and I believe it's the right one.

gc70
September 10, 2008, 07:45 PM
Why would the slight difference in size cause such a large difference in comfort and concealability if my usual attire is jeans and a loose fitting t-shirt? I am 6'1" 160lbs and would be carrying iwb at the 5:00 position....

Jordan85, I am about your size. I have two guns I consider very concealable - a Sig 239 and a full size 1911. For my body shape and the holsters I own, thinner guns conceal better. For comfort, the weight difference between the 239 and 1911 makes the 239 the clear winner.

Even though the 229 is only 25% (0.3") wider and 3 ounces (unloaded) heavier than the 239, the 229 breaks my personal barries both for size/width (concealability) and weight (comfort). However, your results may be entirely different.

AK103K
September 10, 2008, 08:31 PM
I think your all over analyzing the whole thing here. Your worrying "nothing" to death. :)

I own most all the P series SIG's, and have carried all of them wearing the exact same clothes, for the same length of time over a typical day, and have never noticed a difference carrying any of them. (the P230's excepted) I started out with P220's for daily carry, and then went to a P226, and then a P229, which I now carry daily. While I dont usually carry my P239 alone (I do carry it as a third gun at times), I've carried it in the same manner more than enough times to know what it feels like compared to the others.

I carry IWB wearing my normal pants size. I use either a Blade Tech or Milt Sparks VMII holsters (for all guns) with a Wilderness Instructors belt. I always carry two, and sometimes three pistols, depending on need and time of year, and have never had an issue carrying three, let alone worry about the small differences between two similar models.

I often see in posts across the different forums, people complaining about this gun being to big, compared to that gun, when the differences are really nothing. Seems many cant seem to carry anything but a P32 or a Seecamp comfortably, and anything even slightly larger is massive and impossible to hide.

My thoughts on all this is simple, its all about what you want and are willing to do, to carry what you have to to feel comfortable. Its not that you cant do it, its just that you wont. Size of the gun is insignificant. You can easily carry a full size handgun in pretty minimal clothing IF you want to, and theres no way your can convince me otherwise, because I've been doing it daily, with multiple guns, for 30 some odd years now.

If you like the P239 because you like it, carry it. If you like the P229 because you like it, or because you shoot it better, or it carries more ammo, then carry it. Personally, I'd make the gun I shoot the best with my priority, and not the size, shape, or weight of the gun.

Moccw
September 10, 2008, 08:57 PM
239 all the way, i love mine and it shoots great its a .40 sw

evan price
September 11, 2008, 02:48 AM
I carry a P239 IWB and OWB daily- it's almost invisible when covered with an untucked shirt. I don't have a P229, but the P228 felt close, but heavier enough that I found reasons not to carry it. If I am going to go for a bigger gun I would just carry my P220, which is my usual winter carry.

Right now I carry the P239 in summer, the P220 in winter, and keep a P225 in the glove box for emergency backup.

If you enjoyed reading about "Sig owners: P239 vs P229 question" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!