I have narrowed down my choices for a off duty gun to the 239 in 9mm and the 228. I have been to gun shops to see each of them, but cannot find a shop that has both in stock for me to compare side by side. On the 239 - does the 10 round magazines stick out a lot from the magazine well? I know that I will be getting 5 more rounds capacity from the 228 and that pulls me closer to the 228. But then I think that the 239 is smaller and likely easier to carry. I plan on carrying either in the 4 O'clock position in an IWB most of the time. And, no I can't afford both. Any help is much appreciated. Thanks
Help me decide - Sig P239 or P228
- Thread starter Frank1991
- Start date
- Status
Ala Dan
Member in memoriam
Frank My Friend-
I sell both, the SIG P228 and P239. To me, the P239 is somewhat of a
compromise. Sure its a tad more compact, but you are giving up on one
of SIG's all time classic's in the P228; not to mention the firepower!
It took me a long time to locate and acquire a LNIB West German SIG-
SAUER P228 with standard capacity magazines (Oct. '98), but once I
did, I have never looked back. BTW, you will still find the P228 in use
by several federal, state, and local agency's. If the choice were mine
to make (which I've already done), I would choose the P228 time and
time again.
I sell both, the SIG P228 and P239. To me, the P239 is somewhat of a
compromise. Sure its a tad more compact, but you are giving up on one
of SIG's all time classic's in the P228; not to mention the firepower!
It took me a long time to locate and acquire a LNIB West German SIG-
SAUER P228 with standard capacity magazines (Oct. '98), but once I
did, I have never looked back. BTW, you will still find the P228 in use
by several federal, state, and local agency's. If the choice were mine
to make (which I've already done), I would choose the P228 time and
time again.
KLR
Member
I will admit to having it in for the Sig 239- I see no purpose for it. More to follow on that topic.
I LOVE my 228. It is, without a doubt, my favorite handgun in my collection. Easily concealed, decent capacity, and slightly lighter than the 229. I also love my single stack Sig 225 even though it is too large for the number of rounds it holds.
With regard to the 239 it is too big for it's intended purpose. Compare the weight, height, width, etc. to say, a Glock 19. The 239 loses in every characteristic. I also hate the "swoopy" triggerguard.
A super compact, 9mm sig does exist. It is called a Kahr K-9.
Go with the 228- it is a fantastic pistol.
I LOVE my 228. It is, without a doubt, my favorite handgun in my collection. Easily concealed, decent capacity, and slightly lighter than the 229. I also love my single stack Sig 225 even though it is too large for the number of rounds it holds.
With regard to the 239 it is too big for it's intended purpose. Compare the weight, height, width, etc. to say, a Glock 19. The 239 loses in every characteristic. I also hate the "swoopy" triggerguard.
A super compact, 9mm sig does exist. It is called a Kahr K-9.
Go with the 228- it is a fantastic pistol.
critter
Member
I have and carry a 229 (same size as the 228 you are considering). I would highly recommend you get the 228. You do get more on board ammo and the 228 will not be a chore to carry. It is not too long; it is not too thick; it is not too heavy. It, like the other SIG's, an exceptionally accurate and completely reliable firearm. Plenty of low cost standard cap (un-neutered) mags available for it too. Get one-you'll never look back.
Ala Dan
Member in memoriam
Greeting's Again Frank-
I'll second what others have said in comparison, I see NO use in the SIG
P239's existence; as the P228 is only slightly larger, and conceals just as
easily. FWIW, I don't care for the P239 in any caliber!
I'll second what others have said in comparison, I see NO use in the SIG
P239's existence; as the P228 is only slightly larger, and conceals just as
easily. FWIW, I don't care for the P239 in any caliber!
faustulus
Member
I'll just basically echo what everyone else said. As far as single stack sigs, I tend to think the 225 is a better choice than the 239. It is a little bigger, but feels worlds better.
Between the two you mentioned I don't think it is even a race. The 228 is very easy to carry IWB (I use Bladetech for Kydex IWB and Josh Bulman's AWIB for leather). It is a fairly light gun and the ergonomical gain from the 239 is incredible.
Between the two you mentioned I don't think it is even a race. The 228 is very easy to carry IWB (I use Bladetech for Kydex IWB and Josh Bulman's AWIB for leather). It is a fairly light gun and the ergonomical gain from the 239 is incredible.
Redlg155
Member
I carried a 239 for a while for concealed carry use.
It was ok..but not really great. I just didn't really care for the long trigger guard area. It made shooting with support hand finger braced against the trigger guard area a bit awkward.
You also mention off duty. The chances of you needing the extra capacity that double stack models offer are much greater since we non leo folks don't have a sworn duty to stop the commission of a felony.
Good Shooting
Red
It was ok..but not really great. I just didn't really care for the long trigger guard area. It made shooting with support hand finger braced against the trigger guard area a bit awkward.
You also mention off duty. The chances of you needing the extra capacity that double stack models offer are much greater since we non leo folks don't have a sworn duty to stop the commission of a felony.
Good Shooting
Red
KLR
Member
Anybody find it odd to go this many posts with no one coming to the 239s defense? 
Not sure if it has any significance. Just pointing it out.
Not sure if it has any significance. Just pointing it out.
cslinger
Member
I will come to the defense of the poor little P239. I personally think it is a marvelous carry gun and as for concealment it just about disappears. I personally find it much easier to conceal then a P228/229.
Mine shoots extremely well has a great trigger and is super easy to conceal.
Course I am a SIG guy and there are very few SIGs I do not like.
Chris
Mine shoots extremely well has a great trigger and is super easy to conceal.
Course I am a SIG guy and there are very few SIGs I do not like.
Chris
KLR
Member
cslinger- you had to go and ruin it! FINE! Be that way. 
Back to the issue, though: as a sig fan, which one would you go with?
Back to the issue, though: as a sig fan, which one would you go with?
cslinger
Member
I currently own the following SIGs.
P220
P226
P245
P229
P239
P225
If concealed carry is my main use than I am going P239, P245, P225 and P220 in that succession with the P239 basically disappearing. I personally find double stacks harder to conceal.
Now I am not a LEO so if the SHTF my job is to run away and in my job I don't generally make enemies on a daily basis so smaller capacity isn't that big of a deal to me. Heck I carry a 5 shot revolver most of the time.
If I were a LEO or something to that effect I might seriously consider a double stack P228/P229 since they do conceal very well and offer more capacity should all hell break loose and it would be my duty to run towards it.
The P239 is completely rounded, has a bobbed hammer and simpley doesn't have anything to hang up on clothing which also is a plus for concealed carry IMHO.
My P239 is in .40 and I think this combo shines as far as concealability, shootability and power to weight etc. I don't particularly like the P239 in 9mm and would prefer a P225 in this case.
It is also probably pertinent to say that I have reasonably small hands and therefore the small size of the P239 and P245 grip doesn't really bother me at all. Single stack pistols as rule fit me better.
P220
P226
P245
P229
P239
P225
If concealed carry is my main use than I am going P239, P245, P225 and P220 in that succession with the P239 basically disappearing. I personally find double stacks harder to conceal.
Now I am not a LEO so if the SHTF my job is to run away and in my job I don't generally make enemies on a daily basis so smaller capacity isn't that big of a deal to me. Heck I carry a 5 shot revolver most of the time.
If I were a LEO or something to that effect I might seriously consider a double stack P228/P229 since they do conceal very well and offer more capacity should all hell break loose and it would be my duty to run towards it.
The P239 is completely rounded, has a bobbed hammer and simpley doesn't have anything to hang up on clothing which also is a plus for concealed carry IMHO.
My P239 is in .40 and I think this combo shines as far as concealability, shootability and power to weight etc. I don't particularly like the P239 in 9mm and would prefer a P225 in this case.
It is also probably pertinent to say that I have reasonably small hands and therefore the small size of the P239 and P245 grip doesn't really bother me at all. Single stack pistols as rule fit me better.
Walt Sherrill
Member
The P-239 (9mm) was one of my first SIGs. It was also one of the first I sold.
Great gun in every respect but one: the small grip, even with oversize grips, had a way of shifting in my hand. This might NOT be a problem for you, but it was for me.
(Its not THAT much smaller than the 228, and the higher capacity of the 228 is worth consideration.)
If you've got to go slimmer than the 228, then I recommend the kahr P9; smaller even than the 239, great trigger, and it will use the full-size 8 round mags.
Great gun in every respect but one: the small grip, even with oversize grips, had a way of shifting in my hand. This might NOT be a problem for you, but it was for me.
(Its not THAT much smaller than the 228, and the higher capacity of the 228 is worth consideration.)
If you've got to go slimmer than the 228, then I recommend the kahr P9; smaller even than the 239, great trigger, and it will use the full-size 8 round mags.
KLR
Member
At the risk of sounding like a broken record: Sig needs to come out with something in the size envelope of the Glock 27, P-2000SK, Walther P-99 Subcompact, etc. One of the coolest things about the guns above is the ability to accept magazines from their bigger brothers.
cslinger- a lot of the gunwriters referred to the 239 as having an unusually good "concealability" factor in spite of the size. Still don't like the swoopy triggerguard but cannot argue with what works for you.
Well, I suppose I could argue but it would be a waste of time. Kind of like telling someone they are wrong for preferring chocolate ice cream over vanilla.
Mmmmmmmmm, ice cream.
cslinger- a lot of the gunwriters referred to the 239 as having an unusually good "concealability" factor in spite of the size. Still don't like the swoopy triggerguard but cannot argue with what works for you.
Well, I suppose I could argue but it would be a waste of time. Kind of like telling someone they are wrong for preferring chocolate ice cream over vanilla.
Mmmmmmmmm, ice cream.
TexasRifleman
Moderator Emeritus
Oh, just waiting for the experts to finish first....
I carry a 239 in .357 Sig as my primary CCW, and have for the last 5 + years.
I see no compromise whatsoever, it's one of the most accurate guns I own, and won't likely be carrying anything else, ever. In over 2500 rounds I have not had a single FTF, FTE, or malfunction of ANY kind. The gun is exactly like I took it out of the box years ago, no work needed at all. I can't say the same about my other Sigs....
I carry a 1911 when I can manage to conceal the monster, but the 239 is just the right size. It's funny everyone goes on and on about the firepower and how many rounds this or that holds in the magazine. That is not the #1 consideration of a concealed carry weapon.
The 239 is the perfect size for CCW in my opinion. Not too small that your hands won't fit around it, but not so large as to be difficult to conceal. It is very thin and fits well in close to the body, especially in a well built holster.
Extra magazines are small enough to toss into a pocket if you feel you might need to take on a gang somewhere.
You need to find someplace that will let you try one or rent one. You need to feel your choices in your hand and on the firing line, then you can decide what works for you.
cslinger
Member
Not possible SIG builds attractive firearms with class.
Actually most of us SIG-O-PHILEs would love to see a 9x19mm P232 or something similar.Absolutely since all of these guns are spectacular firearms and when talking about concealability everybody is different in what makes a gun hard for them to conceal, how do they carry, what are they comfortable with etc.
For me a decision like P228 vs. P239 is kind of like gee do I want to take the Porsche out today or the Ferrari. It's all good.
Decisions, decisions, decisions........
KLR
Member
cslinger:
You wrote: "Not possible SIG builds attractive firearms with class. Actually most of us SIG-O-PHILEs would love to see a 9x19mm P232 or something similar".
While I agree that the sub-compact Glocks are high on the utility, low on the beauty scale, and that the Walther subcompact is (ahem!) tolerable, I think the P-2000 SK is a work of art. I love mine, especially now that I was able to fashion some flat baseplates for it. I await the original H&K ones.
Some of the factors that I take into consideration (that lead me to my conclusions:
In general (since I carry plainclothes for work) I go for the lightest gun possible. You start piling spare mags, cuffs, badge, 16" ASP onto a dress belt (even a dress gun belt) and everything starts heading south. I read something about there being a Sig P-250 in the works which is kind of like a compact SigPro with a useful rail. A subcompact SigPro with picatinny rails would be most welcome as an off-duty/backup weapon.
Secondly, as an LE instructor I believe that when one is carrying for self defense, it should be the same trigger pull and action every time. If you carry a G-23 on duty, you should carry your G-23 or a 27, but not something like a 1911. Heck, if an officer/agent carried the the 229 DAK on duty, but carried the 239 DAO off duty, in a critical situation he or she could short-stroke the trigger on the 239, expecting the DAK's short trigger reset. This has happened (in training) to me. I had been shooting my P-2000SK with the DAK trigger extensively for a few weeks. I went to use a FATS machine equipped with a DAO handgun. I consistently short-stroked the trigger until I started reminding myself to let the trigger go all the way forward.
You wrote: "Not possible SIG builds attractive firearms with class.
Actually most of us SIG-O-PHILEs would love to see a 9x19mm P232 or something similar".While I agree that the sub-compact Glocks are high on the utility, low on the beauty scale, and that the Walther subcompact is (ahem!) tolerable, I think the P-2000 SK is a work of art. I love mine, especially now that I was able to fashion some flat baseplates for it. I await the original H&K ones.
Some of the factors that I take into consideration (that lead me to my conclusions:
In general (since I carry plainclothes for work) I go for the lightest gun possible. You start piling spare mags, cuffs, badge, 16" ASP onto a dress belt (even a dress gun belt) and everything starts heading south. I read something about there being a Sig P-250 in the works which is kind of like a compact SigPro with a useful rail. A subcompact SigPro with picatinny rails would be most welcome as an off-duty/backup weapon.
Secondly, as an LE instructor I believe that when one is carrying for self defense, it should be the same trigger pull and action every time. If you carry a G-23 on duty, you should carry your G-23 or a 27, but not something like a 1911. Heck, if an officer/agent carried the the 229 DAK on duty, but carried the 239 DAO off duty, in a critical situation he or she could short-stroke the trigger on the 239, expecting the DAK's short trigger reset. This has happened (in training) to me. I had been shooting my P-2000SK with the DAK trigger extensively for a few weeks. I went to use a FATS machine equipped with a DAO handgun. I consistently short-stroked the trigger until I started reminding myself to let the trigger go all the way forward.
Siggyboy
Member
IMO, the 228 or the 225 (single stack) offer much more overall than the 239. I'd go with a 228 unless you feel it is too thick. If you think it is too thick, try a 225; you won't be disappointed. The 239 has nothing on those two models.
cslinger
Member
Just for the record I love the HK P2000 in all of it's forms. I just have a hard time paying that much for a plastic gun. Yeah yeah German engineering, HK name, import taxes etc. but it is still hard to swallow that much of a cost hit when in effect a Glock 26/27 etc. is really just as good a gun.
I only josh when it comes to Glocks. They are great guns just not my thing.
Sig Arms is supposed to have a smaller SIGPRO on the horizon with a DAK trigger, bobbed hammer etc. So my guess is their marketing department can see the trends as well as we can.
I only josh when it comes to Glocks. They are great guns just not my thing.
Sig Arms is supposed to have a smaller SIGPRO on the horizon with a DAK trigger, bobbed hammer etc. So my guess is their marketing department can see the trends as well as we can.
KLR
Member
cslinger-
I went through the same considerations (high dollars for polymer) before buying the SK. I figured that for the cost of an SK I wasn't too far below the cost of both a Glock 23 and a 27.
Ultimately I decided that I liked the SK better. I carry a G-19 for work- I just don't like the trigger all that much. It happens to be a great tool for work, no love there, though.
I went through the same considerations (high dollars for polymer) before buying the SK. I figured that for the cost of an SK I wasn't too far below the cost of both a Glock 23 and a 27.
Ultimately I decided that I liked the SK better. I carry a G-19 for work- I just don't like the trigger all that much. It happens to be a great tool for work, no love there, though.
Frank,
If I had the money, I would do it but I just bought the 229 myself. I debated whether to go with the 239 in .40 or 229 in .40. There isn't much difference between the 229 and 228 in terms of outer dimensions.
I went with the 229 for extra capacity. I'm not in LE but I didn't want to get caught without enough ammunition and the guy I mostly work with isn't armed.
If I had the money, I would do it but I just bought the 229 myself.
I debated whether to go with the 239 in .40 or 229 in .40. There isn't much difference between the 229 and 228 in terms of outer dimensions.I went with the 229 for extra capacity. I'm not in LE but I didn't want to get caught without enough ammunition and the guy I mostly work with isn't armed.
- Status
