Difference in sigs


PDA






Giterboosted
June 25, 2012, 03:04 AM
All I'm wondering is what's the difference in all the different similar sig numbers? I have a p6 which is a p225, but it's in a 226 holster. So my question is what's the difference besides caliber?

If you enjoyed reading about "Difference in sigs" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Shuler13
June 25, 2012, 03:17 AM
Spend some time on the sig website. Dimensions are the first key. 229 is a short 226 (I think). 2022 has the same length as a 229 but made of polymer and some other design points. But start there and just click away.

sigarms228
June 25, 2012, 03:41 AM
That's a tall order. The link below may help also.

Some of the most common ones and ALL hammer fired and ALL metal frame other then SP2022:

P220 - Full sized single stack .45 combat pistol. The original German P220 was carbon steel folded slide was but since late 90s the milled satinless steel slide P220 has been available and most prevalent.

P225 - Compact single stack carbon steel folded slide 9MM only

P226 - Full size double stack pistol. The original German carbon steel folded slide was 9MM only but since late 90s the milled satinless steel slide P226 comes in 9MM/.40/.357 SIG. Interestingly SIG did not change the model designation like it did with the P228/P229

P228 - Compact double stack version of the carbon steel folded slide P226.

P229 - Compact double stack version of the milled stainless steel slide P226.

P239 - Compact single stack milled stainless steel slide - 9MM/.40/357 SIG.

SP2022 - Poly frame double stack in 9MM/.40/.357 SIG. Kind of in between compact and full size by SIG standards.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SIG_Sauer

Giterboosted
June 25, 2012, 11:24 AM
Thanks guys

12guagecody
June 25, 2012, 02:30 PM
the reason the number changed from 228 to 229 is because they are not the same gun really at all, the 9mm 228 could take p226 magazines, the 9mm p229 does not

rellascout
June 25, 2012, 02:53 PM
the reason the number changed from 228 to 229 is because they are not the same gun really at all

This is true. Even the 9mm is dimensionally different. They also have a very different feel in the hand due to the difference in the weight of the slide. The P229 seems top heavy to me.

340PD
June 25, 2012, 03:12 PM
Pick any one of them and get one of the most accurate and reliable handguns in the world.
My 226 with the folded carbon steel slide. Maybe the best "car gun" in the world.
http://i163.photobucket.com/albums/t320/gnystrom_photos/SigP226.jpg

12131
June 25, 2012, 04:47 PM
Pick any one of them and get one of the most accurate and reliable handguns in the world.
My 226 with the folded carbon steel slide. Maybe the best "car gun" in the world.
Yeah, but that doesn't answer the OP's question now, does it?:p

sigarms228
June 25, 2012, 06:03 PM
Yet you can put the P228 slide on the P229 9MM legacy frame and it works just fine - SIG even does it. I am thinking that the different look of the P229 slide may have been a factor for the rename along with the fact that initially SIG did not come out with the P229 in 9MM wanting to introduce the P229 as pistol designed for .40.

sigarms228
June 25, 2012, 06:28 PM
the reason the number changed from 228 to 229 is because they are not the same gun really at all, the 9mm 228 could take p226 magazines, the 9mm p229 does not

Better not tell all those legacy SIG P229 9MM pistol owners that are using their P229 9MM magazines in them without issue.

Mecgar even make an X-Grip Adapter to fill in the gap when doing such.

X-Grip - Sig P228/P229 Converts SIG P226 15/17 round magazines to use in SIG P228 or P229 pistols.


SKU: XGP226

rellascout
June 25, 2012, 06:51 PM
Yet you can put the P228 slide on the P229 9MM legacy frame and it works just fine - SIG even does it. I am thinking that the different look of the P229 slide may have been a factor for the rename along with the fact that initially SIG did not come out with the P229 in 9MM wanting to introduce the P229 as pistol designed for .40.

Get your calipers out and check the frame dimensions.... Rails might work for FrankenSigs but they are not the same pistol. It was not the different look of the P229 slide it was the fact it was milled stainless vs stamped carbon steel and that the P229 was intended for the 40 S&W market and .357 market. The 9mm was an afterthought which was further developed for economy of scale. By the time the P229 was developed the tooling for the P228 slides was nearing end of life. That is why there are no more carbon slide Sigs. They added 9mm to the P229 because it made manufacturing sense.

Also if you know your Sig history the P229 was a Exeter gun. It was one of the first guns to come out of the New Hampshire plant in 1992. It was designed and created for the US LEO market which was embracing the 40 S&W round at the time. It was a US LEO version of a P228 in a caliber US LEO was buying heavily at the time.

wgsigs
June 25, 2012, 07:58 PM
If memory serves me correctly (which it has been known to fail recently as I get older ;) ) the original 9mm P229s were P228 frames with a milled stainless slide on them. It has only been within the last year or two that SIG went to a common frame for all three calibers, utilizing the .40/.357 frame which has the slightly wider mag well. That is why the new P229-1 mags have a 15 rnd capacity rather than the 13 of the older mags. The older mags and P226 ones will fit the new guns though with some slight play, but the new mags will not fit the older 9mm P229 nor the P228.

My guess as to why the new P229 name was used is because it was a newly designed gun specifically to shoot .40 S&W.

sigarms228
June 25, 2012, 09:56 PM
It was not the different look of the P229 slide it was the fact it was milled stainless vs stamped carbon steel and that the P229 was intended for the 40 S&W market and .357 market.

Exactly - along with the fact that initially SIG did not come out with the P229 in 9MM wanting to introduce the P229 as pistol designed for .40. - just like the the P226 with the heavier milled stainless steel slide which also gave it capability for .40/.357 SIG and external extractor.

Also if you know your Sig history the P229 was a Exeter gun

YEP - just like the P226 with the milled stainless steel slide is an Exeter pistol. Just came out a few years later.

rellascout
June 25, 2012, 11:09 PM
just like the the P226 with the heavier milled stainless steel slide which also gave it capability for .40/.357 SIG and external extractor.

YEP - just like the P226 with the milled stainless steel slide is an Exeter pistol. Just came out a few years later.

For someone whose handle is sigarms228 you seem a bit off on your Sig history. The P229 was introduced as a completely different caliber from anything else ever offered in that caliber from Sig.

On the P226 you are wrong on the facts. The 40 S&W & .357 Sig version of the P226 with a milled stainless steel slide was brought into production because they changed the slide on the 9mm to a milled stainless steel slide IIRC in 1996. It only made sense to once again incorporate the 40 S&W and .357 Sig into the mix. It was a redesign of the 9mm that created the other calibers thus no change in name. You are trying to present it as if it were the other way around. The P226 was originally designed as a 9mm for the the XM9 Service Pistol Trials in 1984. Which was before Sigarms even was in existence. Remember the SACO & Interarms import marked P226s? 12 years is not a few years later IHMO.

Not the same with the P229. The Sig P228 remained the same when they introduced the P229 in 40 S&W. They only stopped making the P228 when the tooling was at end of life. The P229 in 9mm was created because of the economy of scale and the end of life of the P228 tooling. Sighting frankenSigs built off of leftover parts does not help your position. Sig has placed P228 slides on P229 frames because they found unused parts and there are IHMO fools who will pay for that configuration thinking they bought a P228 but that does not mean they bought a P228. :cool:

sigarms228
June 25, 2012, 11:24 PM
The P229 was introduced as a completely different caliber from anything else ever offered in that caliber from Sig

SIG did not come out with the P229 in 9MM wanting to introduce the P229 as pistol designed for .40.

Thank you for continuing to make my point. :cool:

rellascout
June 25, 2012, 11:29 PM
P220 - Full sized single stack .45 combat pistol. The original German P220 was carbon steel folded .slide was but since late 90s the milled satinless steel slide P220 has been available and most prevalent.

This info is also incorrect. The Sig P220 was originally a 9mm single stack handgun. It was designed to replace the Sig P210. IIRC this was around 1975-1976.

The gun was originally imported into the US as the Browning BDA in 9mm. Later came super .38 and 45 ACP.

The US loves us some 45 ACP so here that one stuck. Most people like you think the of the P220 as a 45 ACP pistol because that is its most common caliber but it was not the original caliber for the pistol.

P225 - Compact single stack carbon steel folded slide 9MM only


The P225 is really a mini P220....

rellascout
June 25, 2012, 11:30 PM
Thank you for continuing to make my point.

If you don't know your past then you don't know your future....:banghead:

Your statement here Interestingly SIG did not change the model designation like it did with the P228/P229
Makes no sense.... You clearly do not know your Sig history.

sigarms228
June 25, 2012, 11:45 PM
Makes no sense.... You clearly do not know your Sig history

You have NO clue as to what I know or not and you are taking this conversation toward the personal insult level.

At this point it is best to say we will have to agree to disagree.

NOTHING you say will change my mind and I believe the reverse to be true also.

Let the readers decide for themselves.

rellascout
June 26, 2012, 10:49 AM
These things are not a matter of opinion so agreeing to disagree would not make sense. You are right I do not know the full extend of your Sig knowledge. I can only go with what I see posted here some of which is incorrect.

Look at this chart.

http://sigforum.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/430601935/m/7320040262

P220 - Full sized single stack .45 combat pistol. The original German P220 was carbon steel folded slide was but since late 90s the milled satinless steel slide P220 has been available and most prevalent.

Notice that all the oldest Browning BDA/P220s are 9mm. The 45 ACP does not show up until 1977 and does not become the standard for the pistol until about 1985-86.

The P225 precedes the P226 which as I stated was developed for the XM9 Service Pistol Trials in 1984. It was in production prior to 1984 IIRC some are dates as early as 1981/82. The P225 was developed around 1978. It is a compact version of the P220. The P226 borrows from the P220/P225 in terms of design.

P229 - Compact double stack version of the milled stainless steel slide P226.


This again is not true. The P229 was introduced in 1990 at the SHOT show with a milled stainless steel slide. I believe they were in full production buy 1991-92. It was the first Sig in the 40 S&W cartridge. The milled stainless steel P226s did not come out until 1996. So how can the P229 be a compact double stack version of the milled stainless steel slide P226. if its introduction predates the milled P226s of any kind?

Now it would be safe to say that the P226 is a double stacked version of the P220/P225 design and that the P229 was developed from the P226 for the S&W caliber but that is not what you said. Is it? The P229 had a different name because it was a new pistol built around a new cartridge. It was not really a modified P228 which was also developed from the P226. A buddy of mine knew one of the Sig designers that worked on it and saw prototypes of the chopped P226s, carbon steel slides. Which I had seen those... Also the fact that the P228/M11 was used by various active govt agencies and US Military contracts might have also influenced Sig in their decision but this part is speculation on my part.

Simply admit you are wrong on some of your facts instead of trying to paint this as a difference in opinion.

Giterboosted
June 26, 2012, 07:09 PM
Man what a conversation I started, but it's ok Cus of all this wonderful information!!

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