Sig or H&K and why

Status
Not open for further replies.
The Sigs have great ergonomics and make great guns but I feel they are to heavy for concealed carry.
Hmm. Gotta disagree there. My department issue is the H&K USP-9. Our plainsclothes issue carry is the USPc. However, as one who actually carries concealed daily off-duty, I much prefer the SIG P-228 (or 229) (if I'm not packing a 1911), and certainly do not find this pistol "too heavy for concealed carry."

The H&Ks are extremely durable, reasonably accurate and totally reliable. Truly not as packable in the concealment department, and for most folks' hands, don't feel as good in the hand as the SIGs. And, if you're not the head bean-counter in charge of firearms purchasing for a large agency, or that agency's armorer, I suspect you'd have much better luck in the customer service department going with SIG.
 
HK wins

I'd chose HK P2000 over Sig's 228 or 229. It is more reliable, in my experience, and the grips are adjustable.
 
(have experience with the HK USP, HK P2000, and the Sig 229; all chambered in .40 S&W. Fairly god experience.)
I agree. The HK is a "god" experience.:) Well, at least concerning pistols (just joking, no sacrilege intended). The P2000 has the best fit to my smallish hand of any gun I have ever fired, or even held due to the changeable back strap and smoother grip panels. I like the V3, DA/SA with decocker on back. No safety. The fit and finish are comparable to no other modern combat off the assembly line firearm that I am familiar with. Just my experience. To each his own, or course.
 
What a great decision to have to make. Ons 1blindref said, rent em both, shoot em, and decide which you like better.

In HK I'd go with the P2000 and in Sig I'd go with P226ST or P229ST IF you can still find them.
 
As all have said, Sig & H&K both make great firearms. I have a P229 in .40 S&W, a P2000 w/ the LEM trigger in 9mm, and a USP45c v1 (DA/SA w/ safety/decocker). I have short fingers (wear a cadet medium golf glove) and the Sig was a little too fat for my hand until I had the short trigger put on. The USP is terrific and very soft shooting in .45, but the P2000 just feels great in my hand. The Sig seems a little muzzle heavy, but it doesn't have much muzzle flip for a .40, so maybe there's a method to their madness. My problem is in giving them each the love they deserve....and then there's my Kimber. :eek:
 
Sig. HK is poorly balanced and has a goofy up and down magazine release lever on the trigger guard which even large handed typed cannot reach. It's not close in my mind.
One thing you should notice is that not many people have mentioned the Glock.
Probably because he asked for comparisons of the HK and the Sig. No one mentioned 1911 either and it certainly isn't because Glock and the 1911 aren't two of the most popular pistols amongst professional pistoleros.
 
I'd opt for the H&K. IMO: Better feel/ergonomics, better accuracy, better looking, polymer vs. alloy. I just like 'em better.
 
My regular carry gun is a USPc in .40. Sigs don't fit me well. That said, as others have pointed out, both HK and Sig make dependable, accurate weapons. If possible, try them both out and see what YOU do best with, since what is best for me may not be best for you.

Good luck, and let us know which one you end up with.

Cool wife, by the way!
 
The Sig 228 is to me the perfect gun. I still am amazed at the accuracy of my 228, 226, and 239. I cant think of one bad thing to say about these guns.
 
Both are great companies to buy pistols from. It's funny though, I own more HKs than SIGs, but I prefer to shoot SIGs more. The SIG has a smoother trigger, and stock sights are better than any on the HKs.

That said, I do like HK's lever mag release. It's really a toss up, for pure fun shooting, the SIG edges out the HK slightly. Both are slow to shoot fast with long trigger resets. The SIG has a noticeably better DA pull than the HK.

But really, whether SIG or HK you can't go wrong.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top