Sig P228 and Sig P229

Status
Not open for further replies.

valor1

Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2004
Messages
416
I believe the P229 replaced the P228. Is there any difference between the two models? Which is better in terms of overall durability, reliability and accuracy? Any inputs? Thanks
 
As noted the p228 is stamped slide, while the p229 is milled. As such the two pistols have a slightly different balance to them. Also the p229 is available in 9mm, .40 and .357 Sig.
 
Wasn't the P229 originally designed for .40SW and used the extra weight for recoil control (.357Sig came later)? It was also a USA-specific design.
 
Yep - the heavier milled slide was intended to accomodate the .357/.40 caliber. Which makes it a bit overbuilt for 9mm, which is a good thing, IMHO. Well designed, tough pistol.
 
Is it correct to assume that since the P229 is originally designed for the .40, it is way overbuilt for the 9mm? Consequently, it is more durable than the P228 which takes only the 9mm?
 
are you asking if it's more durable because of the stainless construction or more durable because the slide is heavier?

the slide of the 9mm 229 is actually lighter than the slide of the .40 or 357 versions
 
durable in terms of tenacity or strength. let's say if a slide is weaker, it will digest only 10,000 rounds. If it's stronger, it will take 20,000 rounds.
 
it's hard to say as the 9mm doesn't use the same slide as the .40

i understand that the stainless slide is harder on the alloy frame than the fold slide was
 
As to durability.........

Whether the slide is stamped steel, cast or milled may not really matter except for cosmetics.

The slide will probaby be the least likely part to fail on an semi automatic pistol. I think after many thousands of rounds you may need to replace springs, extractors and other small parts. That is expected on any well used piece of machinery.

Both the 228 & 229 would be considered "durable" handguns. The 228 is also US military issue as the M11.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top