Sig P229/239 question for owners of both


PDA






Olrocker
July 1, 2004, 06:50 PM
I'm thinking about getting a P239 to fill the size slot in my arsenal between a Kahr PM9 and a P229/.40. Do you guys who own both 229/239 find the 239 to be enough smaller than the 229 to warrant having both? I'm a recent Sig devotee and have a sneaking suspicion they're like potato chips...

If you enjoyed reading about "Sig P229/239 question for owners of both" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Devonai
July 1, 2004, 08:12 PM
I have owned both, and IMHO the 239 is much easier to carry around all day. However, I would recommend the 9mm variety, as I found the .40 to have too much muzzle flip.

XLMiguel
July 1, 2004, 08:22 PM
You're right about the potato chip analogy.

To answer your question, IMO, the 239 is enough smaller to make it a worthwhile addition to your armory. I have a 225, 228, 226, and 239 (all 9mm), and find it to be a bit more concealable than the 22x's, but not by a whole lot. It is a sweet shooter, with all the raditional SIG attributes. I added night sights and Hogue walnut grips, it's among my favorites. HTH.

Olrocker
July 1, 2004, 10:25 PM
Thanks guys. I'm probably not going to be able to help myself. Two-tone, 9mm...here I come!

grendelbane
July 1, 2004, 10:30 PM
I have had a P239, a P226, a P245, and most recently, a P229.

The P239 is the best combination of concealability, power, controllability, and accuracy of any SIG pistol I have ever shot. (I have shot P220s as well, but never owned one.

Smaller than all of the above, and nearly as accurate as any of them, and more controllable than the P245.

Mine is in 357 SIG, I have both 357 SIG and .40 barrels for my P229. I will probably break down and get a .40 barrel for the P239, but it also needs its own dedicated magazines.

I have a friend with a 9mm P239. I don't think that you can go wrong with a P239 in any caliber.:D

JNewell
July 1, 2004, 10:32 PM
Yes, it is smaller than the P229 by a greater margin than you'd guess looking at the numbers. I know that doesn't make a lot of sense...but it looks like I'm not the only one who feels that way.

JoeRapture
July 2, 2004, 05:58 AM
I'm a recent Sig devotee and have a sneaking suspicion they're like potato chips...

It's academic. Once you become a Sigaholic, it's not which Sig....it's when.

Surrender. Resistance is futile.

Jiml3
July 2, 2004, 01:25 PM
I have the Sig P229 in 40mm and the Sig P239 in 9mm. I also have the Kahr
PM9. The P229 is great for winter carry when it is easier to conceal and
chambered in 40 S&W, it has a greater capacity to penetrate winter clothing.
For hot summer and easy concealment, my preference is the Kahr PM9. For more temperate times the Sig P239 is better, but I prefer my CZ 75 PCR compact 9.
They weigh about the same but the CZ is slimmer and carries 10 plus 1, versus
6 plus 1 for the Sig.

rappa
July 2, 2004, 04:43 PM
I used to have a 229 .40 and 239 9mm. The 239 was definitely smaller and easier to carry. Carrying the 229 wasn't out of the question, I carried it sometimes. I carried IWB. The 239 was always first choice. Of course, the difference for me was obvious (.40 double stack vs. 9mm single stack). I don't know how the 239 .40 feels as CCW.

Yes, they're like potato chips. Although, since I've never won the lottery or received an inheritence, in order to get a 220, I had to trade my 229. Which I haven't regretted at all!:D

I sold my 239 as well. But made up for that by getting a 225!:D

If you enjoyed reading about "Sig P229/239 question for owners of both" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!