Glock 21 vs SIG-Sauer P-220


PDA






Admiral Thrawn
February 18, 2003, 03:03 AM
I'm interested in everyone's opinion on these two 0.45ACP semiautos.

I've got a Glock 21 myself but have yet to try the P-220, although i've heard alot of good things about it, and so am considering purchasing one.

Pros and cons?

Thanks in advance. :)

If you enjoyed reading about "Glock 21 vs SIG-Sauer P-220" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Braz
February 18, 2003, 03:44 AM
Hiya AT,

I have a 21 as well, but have shot a 220 quite a bit. The Sig is more accurate imo. Ergonomics are close, I'd say trigger feel is the diff between the two. That's a personal choice, shoot a loaner at the local range if you can.

10-Ring
February 18, 2003, 03:43 PM
I've owned both, currently own neither. There are alot of fans in both camps so the best thing to do is actually shoot both before you decide. You will need your own subjective opinion on ergonomics, trigger feel & accuracy.

dairycreek
February 18, 2003, 05:57 PM
Only possible negative is the bulky grip of the G21. If you have large hands then no problem. Both are superlative pistols. Good shooting;)

Stephen Ewing
February 18, 2003, 08:50 PM
Either one will go bang with frightening consistency. I believe it comes down to ergonomics, and for most of us, that suggests Sig.

Steve

blades67
February 18, 2003, 09:20 PM
My experience has been that both are reliable and accurate. I like my P220 better though.:D

amprecon
February 18, 2003, 11:15 PM
I own a Glock 21, never fired a P220, is it the traditional SA/DA set-up? I just like the simplicity and consistency of the Glock. Same trigger pull each time, no safety levers or exposed hammers or decockers, just point & shoot. I like the K.I.S.S. design of the Glock and it's accurate, reliable and tough as beat hell and for a reasonable price.

Kahr carrier
February 19, 2003, 08:14 AM
I also own a Glock 21 reliable as hell ,Sig 220 nothing bad to say Da/Sa good,. Decocker,Ergonomics are good . Reliable and acccurate. Go for it.:)

Edward429451
February 19, 2003, 11:42 AM
I own the G21 and friend owns the 220 so I'm familier with both and have nothing bad to say about either one.

The Sig seems to shoot a little low for either of us, but not low enough to be a problem at combat/defensive ranges.

Choosing between these two is going to be preference, they're both good.

DeltaElite
February 19, 2003, 11:51 AM
For me they are pretty much comparable, I have a new G21C and no longer have the 220.
It came down to weight of the weapon and ammo capacity.
14 rounds in the Glock and 8 in the Sig.
Oh, the comp had some bearing also. ;)

Nero Steptoe
February 19, 2003, 02:35 PM
I've put thousands of rounds through G21's and a few hundred rounds through a friend's 220. I prefer the Glock's lower bore axis; higher mag capacity; simplicity of changing trigger pull, etc., but the 220 is a nice pistol.

Boom Vang
February 25, 2003, 10:14 PM
I've owned two examples of each, shot thousands of rounds through them, carried them for years, and have seen dozens carried and used.

SIG - PROS: more accurate, better grip feel, better pointability and more natural grip angle, more easily concealed.
CONS: heavier felt recoil, 8-rd mags not reliable, not as durable. SIG P220 frames AND slides have self-destructed in as little as 2000 rounds, usually by 6,000 rounds - - catastrophic cracking. SIG beefed-up the frame and slide a few years ago, which only served to put off the cracking for an additional 2,000 rounds or so. Stamped steel parts such as decocking and slide stop levers bend and break. Trigger bar and decocking lever springs break. Roll pins that retain the breechblock in the stamped-steel slide crack frequently. SIG service guarrantees on these problems have varied over the years, from pretty good to awful.

Glock:
PRO: high mag capacity (pre-ban), reliability, decent combat accuracy.
CON: huge size for concealment, too large grip, poor pointing, company is known for weasily customer service at the retail level.

Triggers are a draw, as they are totally different, depends what you like. SIG is VERY heavy DA and a nice 3-4 lb SA. Glock is a decent one-pull SA-like 5-6 lbs.

Poohgyrr
February 25, 2003, 11:18 PM
I have a P220 & like it a lot. That said, if I was going to buy a .45 now, I'd get a G30: it's easier to conceal and I wouldn't have the 10 round mag limit (here in the States- without this law I'd take a much closer look at the G21) nonsense. I tested a friend's G30 last weekend, and put two mags into a nose size group at 25 feet. Recoil, etc is fine; this is what I'd buy. Sigs are nice, but Glocks are so practical that I have to look closely at them.
:D

megatronrules
February 25, 2003, 11:19 PM
I don't feel the "vs." term in a correct one here its likes saying bmw or mercedes? They are both great cars its a matter of personal preferance. That said I've owned both these guns but since sold them. The sig is thinner then the g21 and fits most people's hands better. However the 3rd generation g21 w/finger grovers does fit the hand better then the second gen one because the finger groves reduce the grip circumfrance.

The glock will be cheeper then the sig if thats a concern for you. I'd go with the 3rd gen. glock 21. Either way you can't go wrong they are both great guns. I hope this helps you let us know what you decide to buy?

Psssniper
February 26, 2003, 12:25 AM
I have both. My silly tactical mentality keeps the G-21
(high capacity) on the nightstand and the Sig 220 in the safe.
My hands measure about 8 1/2 x 5 1/4 so the 21 fits me nicely.
The Sig is probably more accurate in moa terms but in center of mass terms the 21 will do just fine. Buy the Sig cause you can never have too many guns.

firestar
February 26, 2003, 01:57 AM
I've owned both but now have niether. My SIG 220 was a German made one and my Glock 21 was the 3rd gen. I think the SIG is a MUCH MUCH better made pistol. You can feel the quality in everything on the SIG.

The SIG will be more accurate 99% of the time also, they are famous for the accuracy. The shape of the grip is better on the SIG but the Glock has a better angle and it points better. The Glock has a much lower bore axis which helps in recoil but my SIG was an extremly soft shooter, even with +P loads. Reliability is about equel.

I miss my SIG but I really don't care that my Glock is gone so that tells you something. BTW, I have med sized hands with short fingers so that is why the Glock didn't fit well. The SIG's DA trigger was just a tad bit long for me also, that is why I got rid of it. I can't even dream of shooting a CZ-75 in DA. I'd have to hook it with my finger nail.:D

If price is the same, I think the SIG is a better value.

billcameron
February 26, 2003, 02:28 AM
If you like to detail strip your pistols and replace parts for preventive maintanence then the glock is the way to go. Glock easy to detail strip, fewer parts, parts cheaper, parts easily obtained from either glockmeister or topglock. Only source of sig parts I know of is sig and if I recall they charge $10 for SandH. Also I have never detailed stripped a sig. I think I could learn, but it looks tough.

Handgun
February 26, 2003, 05:50 AM
It is definitely a matter of personal preference.

I had them both and now have neither. I found the G21 to be more accurate in my hands than the 220.

I never could get the 220 to shoot well for me. I shot my Ruger P97 better than the 220 so I sold the 220.

schild
February 26, 2003, 07:32 AM
The Glock21 is my favorite .45, I don't have a 220, but I do have a P245, 4 Colts, and just sold my HK Mk23.

If you enjoyed reading about "Glock 21 vs SIG-Sauer P-220" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!