Sig P239, Makarov comparison pics?


PDA






heathen
May 26, 2011, 08:42 PM
Hi folks, I was wondering if anyone would happen to have a few pics or might be able to take a few quick comparison pics of these two pistols for me. I am particularly interested in the thickness of the two guns. A web search didn't turn up much, so I'm coming to you guys for help. Thanks in advance!

If you enjoyed reading about "Sig P239, Makarov comparison pics?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
WardenWolf
May 27, 2011, 03:38 PM
The Makarov is a little big to conceal. Thickness isn't an issue, but handle length is. Get a Polish P-64. It will fit in Makarov holsters and will perform just the same after respring it with Wolff's weakest hammer spring and strongest recoil spring. Holds 6+1 shots instead of 8+1 but is much smaller and a little thinner. I own both. Great guns and absolutely reliable with all FMJ ammo. Haven't tried hollowpoints in the P-64, though I've heard they usually work fine. The Makarov will digest anything.

harmon rabb
May 27, 2011, 04:10 PM
WardenWolf, I find a Makarov to be pretty easy to conceal IWB.

heathen
May 27, 2011, 05:37 PM
Thanks. The reason I was asking is because I have a Makarov already and I was interested to see how the p239 compares. To me the Makarov is the perfect size for ccw, but I'd prefer to step up to a 9x19 with a better trigger. Anybody have both that could compare?

RX-178
May 27, 2011, 06:03 PM
The dimensions are almost the same, but the P239 is just a bulkier design for the full size cartridge.

It shouldn't be any more difficult to conceal in all practicality, but it will likely be noticeably heavier if that's a concern.

Maia007
May 27, 2011, 10:39 PM
Both are about the same thickness at the slide. Both are about the same length in the butt. Thickness of the butt depends on the grips. The 239 is a bit (maybe 1/2-3/4") longer in the slide (exclusive of safeties/decockers/levers).

The Sig shown has CT laser grips (thicker than stock grips), the EG Mak shown has the Pearce rubber grips....you can get thinner grips.

The second photos shows the Mak laid atop the Sig.

The Sig has a higher bore axis than the Mak. Otherwise they are fairly similar in size.

When carried in the holster, I doubt that you will feel much difference. The Mak trigger isn't too bad, the 239 is a bit better.

Maia007
May 27, 2011, 10:51 PM
Here's another showing the butts.

heathen
May 28, 2011, 04:48 PM
Excellent pics! Thank you very much everyone for you help and insight!

WardenWolf
May 28, 2011, 10:01 PM
I love the Makarov. It's a wonderful pistol. Very accurate, completely reliable, and extremely safe. The hammer-block safety is very good. One thing I really like is that the safety is on in the up position, but off in the down position, much like a 1911's safety. Most autos have that reversed, which is very difficult and awkward to work as it doesn't use strength of your hand. The Makarov is a shooter's gun, though, and will do whatever you want it to do.

heathen
May 30, 2011, 01:14 AM
Yeah I never did understand the backwards safeties. They are so awkward to use. JMB had it right on the 1911 for sure!

If you enjoyed reading about "Sig P239, Makarov comparison pics?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!