Sig 229 Carry model vs Standard 229

[Plan2Live]

I ran across a Sig 229 "Carry" model at what I would judge to be a good price. I wasn't previously aware that this model existed. The Carry model has a shortened slide and shortened barrel bringing its overall length to 6.7" which is right at the max length I would consider for outside the waistband concealed carry. It maintains the full length grip which is more important to me. I'm not a fan of the mindset of reducing grip size on the so called compacts and subcompacts. I'm finding very little on the internet about this model. Does anyone have one? How does it shoot compared to the full sized 229?

It's time to arm my 21 year old son and he wants my Sig 239 which is my primary carry gun. So I have been looking around for a replacement and was considering the 225-A1 until I spotted this 229 Carry. I'd love to hear from owners who have them. No, I'm not considering a Glock 19 and neither is my son so save your keystrokes.

 

[HisStigness]

I am wondering the same things as you. I figured for the price I would take a chance on it, and ordered the SAS model with the SRT. The only thing I can confirm about it is that a SIG customer service rep told me that standard 229 slides and 22 conversion kit will fit it.

 

[Plan2Live]

The only thing about it I see as a negative is it is only offered in .40 caliber and .357 Sig. I would have preferred 9mm although I do have and do sometimes carry a Springfield XDm 3.8 Compact so I am set up for .40 as well as 9mm. The XDm was my first carry pistol and my only complaint with it is the grip is about 1/4" too short. Yes I have the 16 round extended magazine but if you aren't really careful when slamming the extended mag home you pinch the palm of your shooting hand severely. The 229 Carry solves that problem and gives me a DA/SA trigger which I prefer for carry. The Sig 224 with its shortened grip doesn't suit my preferences and looks awkward.

I looked on Sig's website and they aren't showing the 229 Carry as an available/pictured item at the moment. I'm wondering if this was a short production run?

I'm still mulling over the 225-A1. The only thing the 229 offers over the 225-A1 is extra capacity. I'm not convinced I will ever face a threat where I truly need the extra capacity so the 229 only fills the "just in case" category not the "this is the minimum I will carry" category.

 

[HisStigness]

If I had the choice I would have gone for the 9mm as well. I really think the p226/p229 pistols are best suited to the 9mm chambering. They were designed around that caliber, and in my experience, function absolutely flawlessly. It seems as though they were merely adapted to the 40 S&W and 357 SIG as they were introduced. I am not anti 40 (obviously, since I ordered the gun), but 9mm is my preferred caliber.

I know this gun is a "carry" model, but in my collection it probably won't get any holster time. I have a P226, but wanted to get a P229 because it seems to be only as big as it needs to be, and is less of a boat anchor than my P226. I have a Springfield XDs for summertime carry and a CZ 75 D PCR (DA/SA) for the rest of the year. I looked long and hard at the XDm 3.8, but couldn't justify it, since the grip is only 1/4 inch shorter than my CZ, and the grip is what I have the hardest time concealing anyway. I also looked at the P224, but it seemed way too top heavy, and I didn't care for the grip.

It seems like the P229 carry was a short run experiment, and the public didn't want it (or maybe didn't know it existed). It was introduced in 2015 and there must not have been much demand if retailers are already selling them for $400 under msrp.

As far as the P225-A1 is concerned, what does it offer in concealabilty in exchange for what it loses in capacity by being a single stack? The specs seem to be broadly similar to the P229, but it only holds 8 rounds of 9mm. I suppose the P229 will be a little heavier loaded than the P225. IMO, if all things are equal, I'd take the extra capacity any day.

 

[Plan2Live]

As far as the P225-A1 is concerned, what does it offer in concealabilty in exchange for what it loses in capacity by being a single stack? The specs seem to be broadly similar to the P229, but it only holds 8 rounds of 9mm. I suppose the P229 will be a little heavier loaded than the P225. IMO, if all things are equal, I'd take the extra capacity any day.

I currently carry a P239 so 8+1 capacity isn't an issue for me. I'm not overly concerned with bumps and bulges, no one is looking for them anyway, the general public's faces are down looking at their phones. I doubt I will ever be in a position where I have to take on an ISIS team or 27 Ronin so 8+1 and one spare mag should be sufficient for anything I encounter but if a similar package happens to come with 4 extra rounds onboard I guess that wouldn't be a bad thing. Specs don't always tell the entire story. While the 229 and the 225-A1 spec sheets place them only about .25" apart in thickness, the 225 just feels slimmer overall. The 225-A1 feels quite a bit slimmer in the grip area than the standard 229. I have to assume the 229 Carry grip feels the same as the standard model. I can get the 229 Carry for a few hundred less than the 225 so I might give it a try and see how it goes. I doubt the 229 Carry will drop any further in price so I can always resell it if I don't like it or use it as a demo gun in class when going over the different action types instead of unloading my primary carry gun.

The bigger issue is I would really prefer 9mm over .40 caliber. The 225-A1 gives me that option without buying the X-caliber conversion kit for the 229 Carry.

 

[HisStigness]

It is interesting how two guns that seem to be the same dimensionally, can feel completely different while carrying. I'm going to pick the gun up from my FFL on Friday and I will report back on how it shoots and feels.

 

[Plan2Live]

Which one are you picking up?

I went into Sportsman's Warehouse last weekend and fondled the 229 and the 225-A1 side by side. The 229 grip feels just a tad too large for my hands. I feel like when I get a master grip I am reaching too far to get my finger comfortably on the trigger. The Carry model I spotted on the Internet has the Short Reach Trigger but I don't want to take a chance buying off the internet without handling it in person first. Looks like I will be going with the 225-A1 in the near future.

Interesting you mention the XDm 3.8 Compact. I think that gun would be a Glock 19 killer if the grip was just a tad longer. As-is the grip is just a smidge too short. I have several thousand rounds through mine to base that opinion on. Two more rounds in the magazine with the grip extended to match would be perfect. That should have been included on the Mod 2.

 

[HisStigness]

I ordered the P229 carry SAS version in 40. It's supposed to have rounded corners for less snagging (I guess?) and the SRT. The short reset trigger is a must, in my opinion, and I install them in all my SIGs as soon as I get them. I don't know why they're not standard on all SIG Sauer pistols, unless there's some obvious drawback that I'm missing. I didn't see anything about the short reach trigger on the website I ordered from. When you mentioned it I went back and looked at the picture, and I'll be darned if it doesn't have a short reach trigger as well. Maybe I'll really like the short reach trigger and end up putting them on all my SIGs too.

Which style grips were on the P229 that you tried? I know some people didn't love the old two piece grips, because of the reach issue you described and overall circumference as well. The new(er) one piece E2 grips are supposed to address those issues. Again, I don't know why SIG doesn't put them on all their guns. If they're convinced that the E2 grip is the way to go, why do half their guns I see come with the older ones? It seems like they'll always offer a P226 with no rail, the normal trigger, and the two piece grips just to keep traditionalists happy because it's just like the ones they used to ship over from Germany, even though it's made in New Hampshire from milled instead of stamped steel. If I could give SIG one piece of advice it would be to simplify their product line. Sorry for the rant.

I think if Glock did one thing right, it was figuring out what the size categories for pistols should be: fullsize/duty(17), compact(19), subcompact(26), and pocket(43). The XD(m) 3.8 is a great gun, but why call it a compact if you can't get all your fingers on it? And if you can't get all your fingers on it, why not make the grip even shorter yet, (4.25" instead of 4.75") and have it compete directly with the glock 26?

This will be good; since you're getting the P225-A1 and I'm getting the P229 carry we can both report back to each other on our experiences with them (since we're the only ones participating in this thread anyway).

 

[Plan2Live]

The 229 I handled this weekend had the E2 grips. I'm in the middle of a job change and physical relocation so it will be few months before I buy the 225 but I will post a report when I do. Please open a new thread on your 229 Carry after you wring it out. Pics too!

As for the Sig line, some folks just gotta have bling. What I absolutely don't get is a beavertail on a 229 or a 226. I don't see the purpose. On a 1911 or a Browning High Power I understand but not a traditional Sig DA/SA.

I'll have to disagree on one point, the G19 is just a tad to long overall. I carry outside the waistband and 6.75 overall length is the longest length I want to try and conceal.

Yeah we should have gone PM.

 

[chaim]

If I had the choice I would have gone for the 9mm as well. I really think the p226/p229 pistols are best suited to the 9mm chambering. They were designed around that caliber,

The 226 and the original 228 were designed around the 9mm. The 229 was a new (at the time), stronger/beefier design that was originally designed around the .40S&W and then made for 9mm as well.

 

[9mmepiphany]

The short reset trigger is a must, in my opinion, and I install them in all my SIGs as soon as I get them. I don't know why they're not standard on all SIG Sauer pistols, unless there's some obvious drawback that I'm missing.

The firing pin safety block doesn't reengage during reset when the SRT parts are installed.

The later (current) ones are much better than the early ones...which could "double" if the spring pressures were set too low.

Most folks don't really take advantage of what the SRT offers in followup shots due to their level of training, so it is more of a "feel good" item.

Again, I don't know why SIG doesn't put them on all their guns. If they're convinced that the E2 grip is the way to go, why do half their guns I see come with the older ones?

I think you've answered your own question...they aren't convinced.

The E Squared grips feel better to smaller hands, but the trade off is that it forces your hand lower on the frame due to the recurve...so it changes the geometry of your trigger finger interface

 

[9mmepiphany]

The 229 was a new (at the time), stronger/beefier design that was originally designed around the .40S&W and then made for 9mm as well.

The above is correct. The 229 wasn't designed around the 9mm.

Also note that the 229 in 9mm isn't the same gun as the 229 in .40/357SIG. They didn't share the same frame or slide. There are many who would argue that the 9mm 229 should have been called the 228-A1