i just recently purchased a sig 226 dak in .40. i had originally ordered a 220 DAK and changed my mind and went with the .40. i own other 1911s in .45 and a 9, but i dont own a .40, nor have i shot one very much. my question is did i make a good choice? for those of you who have shot the 226 dak in .40, what do you think of it? hows the roil compared with the 220? is it reliable? also how are the prices on .40 ammo at walmart compared with the .45 auto? thanks
New Sig 226 DAK questions???
- Thread starter evan1293
- Start date
- Status
Haven't shot the DAK but the DA/SA P226 was the only .40 that ever impressed me with its accuracy. It should be extremely reliable. Only problems I've ever had with Sigs are when they get bone dry or with PMC 
ammo.
I prefer 9mm or .357 Sig but I'd say you made an excellent choice.
ammo. I prefer 9mm or .357 Sig but I'd say you made an excellent choice.
I'll agree with MK11.
I have a P226 stainless in .40 that is great (DA/SA). It's one of the very few .40s that has been really accurate for me. I like DA/SA and I've never shot a DAK, but your pistol should be great.
Just be sure you give it time.
I don't shop a Walmart, but CCI Blazer 180s (aluminum) have been very accurate and run about $12-$13 a box.
I have a P226 stainless in .40 that is great (DA/SA). It's one of the very few .40s that has been really accurate for me. I like DA/SA and I've never shot a DAK, but your pistol should be great.
Just be sure you give it time.
I don't shop a Walmart, but CCI Blazer 180s (aluminum) have been very accurate and run about $12-$13 a box.
thanks for the responses. does the sig 226 have any kind of break in period or is it pretty much good to go out of the box. also, ive heard that these are very accurate out of the box, would you guys happen to know just how accurate? (@25 yrds) additionally, hows the recoil compared with the 220 sig? (i havent yet shot my new 226.) thanks again!
I've found some minor annoying things (like the slide not staying back) within the first 50 rounds, then it runs like a top. Also, that only happened with my W. German Sigs, not the newer ones.
No specific figures at 25 yards. Offhand or from a rest?
Compared to the aluminum 220, it's snappier but less "hoppy." Compared to the P220ST, recoil is more noticeable in the .40.
No specific figures at 25 yards. Offhand or from a rest?
Compared to the aluminum 220, it's snappier but less "hoppy." Compared to the P220ST, recoil is more noticeable in the .40.
chaim
Member
.40 ammo seems to be priced about halfway between 9mm and .45ACP in most places.
I used to hate the round but I've really grown to appreciate it and for defensive arms it just might be my favorite caliber. You get relatively affordable practice ammo, 9mm sized platforms, more flexibility in ammo selection than 9mm, more rounds than .45, similar performance to .45 (whether you use gelatin tests, "one shot stops", or FPE as your guide) and it works better out of a short barrel than .45. I think all major calibers do have a place (I don't believe in caliber wars)- 9mm is affordable, is a low recoiling round, the guns hold a lot of rounds, it can be put in small guns, and in good premium ammo it is quite capable; .45ACP is very powerful (for a handgun round), gives more flexibility in ammo selection over 9mm and is relatively low recoiling; .40S&W is the best of both worlds (other than recoil it has the advantages of both rounds, though it is a bit more expensive than 9mm).
The one big disadvantage of .40S&W is that it is the worst of both in recoil. 9mm has a short and sharp recoil impulse due to the high velocity but since it is a small and light round the recoil isn't very heavy. The .45 has a heavy recoil impulse but it is a slow round so the recoil is delivered to your hand much more slowly and so it feels more like a push than a shock. The .40 is a relatively large and heavy bullet so it has the heavy recoil of the .45, but it is also a high velocity handgun round so it has the short (all the recoil hits you at once) and sharp recoil of the 9mm. That does put a lot of people off. Still, in a full-sized and well designed package like the 226 I doubt you'll find it unplesant.
I used to hate the round but I've really grown to appreciate it and for defensive arms it just might be my favorite caliber. You get relatively affordable practice ammo, 9mm sized platforms, more flexibility in ammo selection than 9mm, more rounds than .45, similar performance to .45 (whether you use gelatin tests, "one shot stops", or FPE as your guide) and it works better out of a short barrel than .45. I think all major calibers do have a place (I don't believe in caliber wars)- 9mm is affordable, is a low recoiling round, the guns hold a lot of rounds, it can be put in small guns, and in good premium ammo it is quite capable; .45ACP is very powerful (for a handgun round), gives more flexibility in ammo selection over 9mm and is relatively low recoiling; .40S&W is the best of both worlds (other than recoil it has the advantages of both rounds, though it is a bit more expensive than 9mm).
The one big disadvantage of .40S&W is that it is the worst of both in recoil. 9mm has a short and sharp recoil impulse due to the high velocity but since it is a small and light round the recoil isn't very heavy. The .45 has a heavy recoil impulse but it is a slow round so the recoil is delivered to your hand much more slowly and so it feels more like a push than a shock. The .40 is a relatively large and heavy bullet so it has the heavy recoil of the .45, but it is also a high velocity handgun round so it has the short (all the recoil hits you at once) and sharp recoil of the 9mm. That does put a lot of people off. Still, in a full-sized and well designed package like the 226 I doubt you'll find it unplesant.
- Status