Getting a CDNN automatic - Glock or SIG

[goon]

I am looking into getting another gun soon, probably an automatic from CDNN. I am thinking hard on .40 as the caliber because it would be a little better than 9mm when I go into the woods. I know, a .357 would be better - no argument here. 44 magnum would be better yet. Still though, I think a .40 will work OK for what I need. I don't want to hunt with it, just a little peace of mind. Anyhow, it will be either a SIG of some variation or a Glock 22.
Questions...
For durability which is most likely to stand up better?
From the standpoint that they are used/rebuilt guns, which is likely to be in better shape mechanically from the start?
I know that some people have had issues with the .40 Glocks blowing up. The research that I have done points toward user errors such as reloading the .40 incorrectly and using lead bullets in the Glock. Do SIG .40's also suffer from this these issues?
Anything else I need to think about?
Thank you.

 

[atblis]

Glock V. Sig

Actually the're both excellent guns. Neither are particularly problematic. Both are rather durable. It is entirely personal preference.

Personally
Glocks have that funny grip angle that strains my wrist (Don't like Glocks).
Sigs have a rather short trigger reach that bugs the crap out of me (Don't like Sigs). They both have rather mediocre triggers (Though there's hope for the SIG). The Glock has a uniquely bad trigger.

Shoot both before you buy.

9mm v 40SW
I don't know what you plan on having to defend youself from. 40SW isn't that much "better" than 9mm. If you're talking about real bears, neither will do you much good. Dogs, People, etc. 9mm is fine.

 

[goon]

May have a point on the .40 vs 9mm...
I am not really talking real bears, PA black bears would be the biggest threat I would ever face and I have never had one of them act aggressively toward me.
It happens but it is not really all that common.
I would like to have something that would give me a reasonable chance of stopping one.
Maybe I will go with the High Power (again) and call it a day.

 

[Edmond]

For me, the full steel of the Sig is better against the snappy recoil of the .40 than the plastic lower of the Glock is. I can feel a lot of snap with the .40 in the Glock but the Sig is quite manageable.

Both Sigs and Glocks are superbly made guns, can't go wrong with either of them. That being said, they're different animals and personal preference has a lot to do with it. Or you can do what I did and get one of each.

 

[Black Majik]

Quick correction of Edmond's reply, the SIG is not full steel. They have alloy frames.

Of the two, I'd definitely go for the SIG. The SIG's are my favorite non 1911 platform. The trigger pull is very smooth IMO, and the single action is absolutely a dream. The DA is a little long, but it is very smooth. Of course, the biggest reason I prefer SIGs is becase of the grip angle is better suited for me. I tried the Glock, couldn't like the trigger and couldn't get used to the awkward grip angle. But those Glocks are damn reliable.

But, why listen to all of us. Best thing to do is stop by the range and try them both out. Of the two though, I prefer the full size SIG P226.

 

[goon]

I don't have any ranges in my area where I can try them out or I would definitely take your advice on that. Where I live a range is basically just an area where someone cleared out some trees, put in a dirt backstop, and stuck a gate at the road.
I have shot Glocks before and I own a P-225 now so I am familiar with both brands at least. Just trying to get some other insight before I make a decision.
The FN Hi-powers that CDNN has are tempting as well. I would have to decide between .40 and 9mm if I do that though, which opens up a whole different debate.
Thanks for the help.