beefed-up Sig P229 frames?

[seed]

I am a new poster, however I have been reading postings here as well as elsewhere for a long time. However, I have never been able to find out the answer to my question which is: at any time over the course of the last 10+ years, has Sig actually done anything to beef up the strength of the alloy P229 frames? I have seen it mentioned, but I have never been able to find anything which specifically stated whether or not they did. Once, I was in a gun store and was allowed to field strip a recently manufactured 229. I could have sworn that the frame was heavier than the one on mine at home, which I purchased in 1994. But I did not rush back to check mine, with the recent memory still fresh in my head of how the one in the store felt. And obviously, I have never actually made a side by side comparison. Does anyone have the answer to my question?

Thanks,

seed.

 

[Rinspeed]

I've been a big fan of Sigs for a long time and currently own a 239, 229 and 220. As far as I know the design of the 229 frame has never changed. The 226 and 220 frames were redesigned at some point in the 90's to help deal with the trend of shooting +P ammo. The 229 was developed from the 228 for the .40 S&W. Unlike a lot of companies at the time that just rebarreled and put a stronger recoil spring in their 9mm pistols Sig took their time to make sure it was right.

Rinspeed

 

[seed]

Thanks for helping me out. But I'm curious as to why they would beef up the 226 frame and not the 228 (and therefore the 229 frame). Was the 228 frame already strong enough?

A couple more questions, if you don't mind...How long have you had your 229? And how many rounds do you think you have put through it? I only ask, because I am pretty sure that you have put more through yours than I have through mine (sad, since I got mine so long ago...but I think I have spent too much time and money on other toys and not enough on any one). Does that galling thing on the under-side of the front portion of the frame rail subside, or does it keep getting worse? That portion of my 229 frame is showing obvious wear there. I'm not worried about it, just curious especially since my 239 does not show any signs of this sort of friction evidence. Thanks again.

seed

 

[Grump]

Yeah, if we could get some pix, dates and serial number/model ranges like GlockMeister has for Glocks, we would all be informed, educated, and approaching Nirvana!

Or at least a happy state of greater enlightenment.

 

[Ala Dan]

Greeting's All-

I wasn't aware the SIG's P229 frame required any form of
beefing up ? Very early on, SIG had a little bit of a
problem with the aluminum frames of its P226 cracking
but that has long since been corrected! I owned one of
the first aluminum framed .40 caliber P229's to arrive in
this area; and although I didn't like the caliber, I NEVER
had a frame problem.

Best Wishes,
Ala Dan, N.R.A. Life Member

 

[seed]

Yeah...I'm probably making something out of nothing, but I was just curious about what I had heard and thought I noticed. In the end, it doesn't matter anyway, because I heard that Sig is very helpful in replacing frames that do crack. But I swear, that Sig frame in the store just seemed heavier... Oh well. I should just let it drop. Thanks for helping me out.

seed

 

[Rinspeed]

The 228 was not redesiged most likely because it wasn't necessary. From what I understand it didn't take much material in the right spots to strengthen the 226 and 220. I'm not sure about the 226 but the old style american 220 was changed over in 94 or 95. The new 220 starting at serial number 219166 had three changes. The frame was stronger, the trigger group was totally changed because the 220 was the only one out of the three that couldn't be converted to DAO and lasty the recoil spring weight was increased to 20#. These new ones had a more rounded hammer and the recoil spring was painted green. One week point of the new trigger group was the hammer return spring was a little week. Mine broke at around 600 rounds and it wouldn't fire in dbl action but it would if I cocked the hammer. As far as I know this issue has been taken care of. Sig fixed mine and had it back to me within a week. This is the only malfuntion/ breakage I have seen in the four Sigs I have owned with thousands of rounds fired. I wouldn't worry a bit about the frame cracking. If it does happen some day just get it fixed. I bought my 229 used so I'm not sure how many rounds are through it but it is very accurate and 100% reliable with both the .40 and .357 barrels. The slight galling at the end of the frame is quite normal and will taper off after 600 or 700 rounds. Anything else? By the way I think this is the longest post I have made. Take care.

Rinspeed

 

[seed]

Rinspeed, that was exactly the kind of information I was looking for. You wouldn't happen to know if they increased the recoil-spring strength of the 229? It always seemed a little on the soft side to me. Still, I used it rather than replace it. The 239 I got a few years later uses a flat coil spring. Man, I just realized it's been so long since I shot it...And I really like it. I better go rectify that situation soon. But anyway, thanks again.

seed.

Oh...by the way, how is the finish holding up? Any signs of corrosion? If you carry it (which I can't in Kali), I am really interested in the answer to this as well.