Sig 225 Re-release

[skt239]

Sig can never go wrong with the P-series. Now if they would only re-release the P-245...

 

[Walt Sherrill]

Sig can never go wrong with the P-series. Now if they would only re-release the P-245...

Why would they bother, now that they have the P220 Compact?

The 220 Compact is basically the same gun -- slide, extractor, maybe beavertail are different, but size and function are basically the same.

I suspect the P245 > P220 Compact changes are going to be similar to the changes you'll see with the new P225: same basic gun, but slightly different.

 

[weemsf]

I own two P6's. The horrid trigger pull was that 28# spring the Germans put in them. It is easily fixed. Feeding hollowpoints was nearly impossible. The West Germans cut and polished the feed ramp into the locking block so deeply that hollowpoints would hang on the bottom of the barrel ramp. It took me a while, but I found two new P225 locking blocks. After installing them, my P6's are sweet. Both have SRT kits and short triggers in them.

I think the P225 will sell well in this political environment. I do remember, however, a time when they could be bought for a song and a dance, seems I saw some ads for them at $325 or so.

Oh, a cut down P226 barrel will work in these. These is a gunsmith over in Virginia who sells the barrels and does work on the P6.

http://www.totalautomation.us/

 

[wojownik]

I suspect the P245 > P220 Compact changes are going to be similar to the changes you'll see with the new P225: same basic gun, but slightly different.

There will a number of changes to the new p225 - extractor is likely to be different, differences in the trigger guard, frame materials will be different. So, not slightly different, at least IMHO, significant difference. Hopefully they will not stick a rail on it

I think they will find a decent market for the p225 - better balance than the p239, thinner than the p228/229. And I still much prefer the slide serations on the p225 over the p239.

Maybe not a huge market, but the original p225 had done fairly well in its day, and there is still a following for that pistol.

 

[giggitygiggity]

I love SIGs. That company simply produces. They make great guns and they're bold. They don't try and cut corners or pretend like their guns are something they're not. They are solid, accurate pieces of engineering.

 

[Walt Sherrill]

...Maybe not a huge market, but the original p225 had done fairly well in its day, and there is still a following for that pistol.

Two points there: 1) the original gun did pretty well in it's day, but that was, arguably, about 30-40 years ago; and 2) while there's still a following, many of the followers already have modified/improved P6's or bought P225's.

Most gunmakers are now selling a LOT of single-stack 9mms, but most of them are polymer-framed, small/thin and very light guns that are just a hair bigger than pocket carry. Guns&Ammo has a big (650+ round fired for each gun) evaluation of 10 of them in this month's issue, and a couple of them perform impressively! The only gun other metal-framed gun that is close to the new P225 is one of the STAINLESS guns from the Kahr, and the T9 is a good bit heavier. But the lack of other comparable metal-framed single-stack 9s would seem to be a "sign."

The original P6 was a big improvement over the P210 it replaced, in terms of COST -- and marketability; but it seems that it wasn't until SIG introduced a double-stack version of the gun (P226) that things REALLY started to take off for SIG. I'm sure SIG will sell some but suspect that if it's successful it will be a modest success at best. (Small numbers of guns produced, however, doesn't seem to faze SIG... which may be the best news for those who love the 225.)

If it's a BIG SUCCESS I'll be amazed, and will happily admit that all of the P225 lovers were right and I was wrong. (Another successful gun is good news for all of us!)

 

[WVsig]

I love SIGs. That company simply produces. They make great guns and they're bold. They don't try and cut corners or pretend like their guns are something they're not. They are solid, accurate pieces of engineering.

Sometimes if you don't know your past then you don't know your future. IMHO Sig these days does cut corners. They build tons of guns which are as much fashion statements as they are functional pistols. They have had a lot of missteps in the past 10 years.

Do the research and you will see what I mean.

 

[bc1023]

The original P6 was a big improvement over the P210 it replaced, in terms of COST -- and marketability; but it seems that it wasn't until SIG introduced a double-stack version of the gun (P226) that things REALLY started to take off for SIG. I'm sure SIG will sell some but suspect that if it's successful it will be a modest success at best. (Small numbers of guns produced, however, doesn't seem to faze SIG... which may be the best news for those who love the 225.)

If it's a BIG SUCCESS I'll be amazed, and will happily admit that all of the P225 lovers were right and I was wrong. (Another successful gun is good news for all of us!)

It was actually the P220 that was built to replace the P210. The P225 came a few years later. The P220 was the first pistol ever built by Sig Sauer and its intent was to replace the P210 at a much cheaper production cost. The P225/P6 was the compact version of the P220. The P226 was the double stack "version" of the P220. The P228 was the compact version of the P226.

 

[Walt Sherrill]

It was actually the P220 that was built to replace the P210. The P225 came a few years later. The P220 was the first pistol ever built by Sig Sauer and its intent was to replace the P210 at a much cheaper production cost. The P225/P6 was the compact version of the P220. The P226 was the double stack "version" of the P220. The P228 was the compact version of the P226.

And the P229 was a beefed up version of the 228, intended to handle the SIG .357 round. I don't know where the P227 falls in all of this. And then there's the M11A1.

With regard to your main point, above. Your right. My error.

As you note, the P220 (in 9mm) was developed for military use and was designated Pistole 75. The P6 was a more compact version developed almost immediatelyl The p6 is related to the P220, like the P228/P229 are related to the P226 (which, is a double-stack version of the P6/P225!!) Your point, which is correct, was (from Wikipedia, but with my underlining) that:

The SIG P220 was developed for the Swiss Army as a replacement for the SIG P210, which had been developed during World War II; in service it is known as "Pistole 75" (P75). For development of the P220, SIG collaborated with J.P. Sauer & Sohn of Germany, thus, the P220 and all subsequent pistols from SIG are properly known as SIG Sauer pistols.​

I post the following from the same article (with my underlining added) for others reading here:

A new German police standard, in the mid-1970s, prompted SIG-Sauer, Heckler & Koch, and Walther to develop new pistols that met the standard: the Walther P5, the SIG-Sauer P225 (known as the P6) and the Heckler & Koch P7.... Each German state was free to buy whichever pistol it wanted to. Initially, the P220 was submitted; the P225/P6 was created to conform with the mid-1970s West German police requirements for its standard service pistol. The SIG-Sauer P225 was the least expensive (due mainly to the inventive design) and received the majority of the orders. ... The only difference between the P6 and P225—the P225 (which was adopted by US civilian law enforcement) has a lighter trigger pull, whereas the P6's trigger pull is heavier...​

The Swiss apparently military liked the 9mm P220 (P75) but the German police didn't. The P220 (in 9mm) was submitted for police use, but not accepted. I'd argue that the P225/P6 had the same relationship to the P220 that the P228/P229 have to the P226 --and they're all derived from the single-stack P220. The German police ended up with the P6/P225s, some H&K P7s, and some Walther P5s.

I guess the German Police acquisition in the 70s explains all of the surplus P6s, P7s, and some of the Walther P5s floating around over the last 10-15 years. On the other hand, while I have seen some Swiss, Danish, and maybe German Border Guard P49s (all SIG P210 variants), I don't think I've ever seen or heard of a surplus SIG P75 in 9mm. Wonder why?

 

[bc1023]

And the P229 was a beefed up version of the 228, intended to handle the SIG .357 round. I don't know where the P227 falls in all of this. And then there's the M11A1.

With regard to your main point, above. Your right. My error.

As you note, the P220 (in 9mm) was developed for military use and was designated Pistole 75. The P6 was a more compact version developed almost immediatelyl The p6 is related to the P220, like the P228/P229 are related to the P226 (which, is a double-stack version of the P6/P225!!)

Walt, I don't really consider the P229 part of the deal at all. When it was built, Sig totally changed the manufacturing process and it wasn't even built in the same country. The original Sig P Series consisted of the P220, P225, P226, and P228. Once the P229 came along, everything changed for Sig. In my opinion, not for the better.

Not to keep correcting you, but the P229 slide was developed to handle the 40S&W. It came out in 1990, which was long before the 357Sig was even a thought. The Sig P229 was one of the first 40S&W pistols to hit the market, along with the Glock 22 and Smith & Wesson 4006.

Here are the original West German Sig 9mms...

P226, P220, P228, and P225







The P220 was introduced first, followed by the P225, P226, and finally the P228.

 

[gc70]

Below is a partial sequence of the classic P-Series guns from the history page on SIG's website. The introduction dates are from several sources, confirmed by a serial number list on one of the SIG forums. If a model was designed for a specific purpose, that is shown in parentheses.

P210 - 1949 (Swiss Army)
P220 - 1975 (Swiss Army)
P230 - 1976 (Swiss Police)
P225 - 1978 - compact P220 (German Police)
P226 - 1982 (US Army trials)
P228 - 1988 - compact P226
P229 - 1992 - derived from P228 (milled slide & beefed up for .40 S&W - .357 SIG in 1994 - 9mm in 1996)

While the P220 in 9mm (P75) is the primary handgun of the Swiss military, they also use the SP2022 (P03) and some specialized units have acquired Glock 17s or 26s in the last few years.

 

[Walt Sherrill]

Walt, I don't really consider the P229 part of the deal at all. When it was built, Sig totally changed the manufacturing process and it wasn't even built in the same country. The original Sig P Series consisted of the P220, P225, P226, and P228. Once the P229 came along, everything changed for Sig. In my opinion, not for the better.

You have it right -- I just MIS-remembered the details (and substituted .357 for .40). I do remember reading about how the 228 was tried with the hotter round, and doing so required a recoil spring so heavy (to manage slide velocity) that the gun couldn't easily be worked by hand cycling for clearing and loading. That hotter round was apparently the .40 S&W.

While it wasn't developed FOR the .357 SIG, the P229 was the FIRST gun to be used with that round. That was part of my poor memory: getting things out of order or, more likely, simply conflating two unrelated points.

One person responding on the SIGTalk on this same topic some time back, wrote (but the underlining is mine):

The story in Wikipedia doesn't exactly match what I have heard about the development of the P229. My understanding of the history of the P229 was that it was specifically designed for the .40 S&W cartridge. Because they wanted to "get it right" they were one of the last gunmakers to have a .40 model (1992). When the .357Sig was introduced later (1994) SIG simply put a .357 barrel in the .40 P229 to have the first pistol for the .357Sig cartridge. Since Sig helped design the .357Sig cartridge, my speculation is they probably used the P229 as a test bed.

The 9mm P229 was the last caliber to be introduced in the P229, and I've heard was almost an afterthought. SIG figured out they could quickly have a 9mm P229 by simply putting a newly designed stainless slide on the existing P228 frame. Because the 9mm P229 doesn't even use the original P229 (.40/.357) frame, I think Wiki has the sequence wrong in stating the P229 "was originally introduced to supplement and then replace the P228 by adding the .357 SIG and .40 S&W as available chamberings". But maybe that's just my (mis-)interpretation of that quote.​

This confirms your information, again. I should check SIGTALK and the SIG FORUM more often. While Wikipedia is generally quite good, the folks on the SIG forums are better (and, maybe, here, too). I had kind of had the right IDEA but two key points out of order.)

Walt, I don't really consider the P229 part of the deal at all. When it was built, Sig totally changed the manufacturing process and it wasn't even built in the same country. The original Sig P Series consisted of the P220, P225, P226, and P228. Once the P229 came along, everything changed for Sig. In my opinion, not for the better.

I would argue the fact that the newer guns/models are now built differently in a different country is more about technological advances, globalization, economic pressures (including, more recently, almost 10 years of severe global recession), and geo-politics than an abrupt change in technical philosophy or approach to gun design and production. In other words, the changes were inevitable and a normal part of the process.

Of course, it's entirely possible (perhaps LIKELY, as my recent efforts have shown) that I've got this wrong, too -- and it certainly won't be the first time.

.