chris in va
Member
I wouldn't get a new 220. The older ones have a much better reliability record.
Sig P220 Or S&W 1911
- Thread starter sigbear
- Start date
- Status
boomstik45
Member
What's wrong with the new ones? And which ones qualify as the new ones?
the ones with the stainless slides
evan price
Member
Old P220 = internal extractor, breechblock held into a bent-steel slide with double roll-pin.
New P220 = External extractor, stainless slide machined as one unit (like a P229)
New P220 = External extractor, stainless slide machined as one unit (like a P229)
Autolycus
Member
I like Sigs for carry. I love the DA/SA that Sig makes. 1911's are great as well but I prefer Sig. Though I will be getting myself a nice custom Colt someday.
boomstik45
Member
Ah, so the new ones are just the ones with the external extractors. Okay.
mjrodney
Member
I also own both, and both have been 100% for me.
That being said, the 1911 remains King.
That being said, the 1911 remains King.
Last edited:
Wireman
Member
More P220 Info
Both the P220 and 1911 are generic labels that can refer to a variety of different designs. And, the reliability of those various designs is remarkably different as well.
Here is some additional info on the P220 guns that you won't get from Sig. I have owned several P220's of different vintages and each one is a different animal. I have yet to see the "improved" P220 with external extractor, btw.
The original gun as introduced into the US as the BDA was a great design. I don't know how many years it was until they fooled with the design, but it is probably safe to say that P220's made up until about 1990 were all the same. Part of the equation was that the original P220 magazines were correct for .45 ball ammo - 7-round magazines of tapered feedlip design with a strong spring and dimpled follower. Then came the demands for 8-round variant magazines, which were known to be erratic (sound similar to the 1911 story?), and finally the worst insult: an 8-round stainless magazine with short parallel feedlips, a slick undimpled plastic follower and a weak spring.
The first generation stainless P220 has nothing in common with the original P220 except for the model number. They built the new stainless on one of their competition platforms. Both frame and slide were radically different than the original. But you have to see them both side-by-side, and shoot them both to get an idea of how different these two guns are.
The P220 stainless, 1st generation (with useless accessory rail) featured altered dimensions in the breechface and locking block areas. Fitted with their new and improved 8 round magazines with slippery plastic follower, they were very unreliable compared with the original P220. Sure, they did manage to chamber a round most of the time. But, personally, I'm looking for a little better than "most of the time". If you look carefully at the P220 stainless as it strips a round from the magazine, you see that the bullet tip is aimed at a nearly vertical feed ramp. The round almost always bounces straight back after striking the ramp head on, with attendant bullet setback. It literally bounces its way toward the chamber - you can hear the ka-chunk, bang, ka-chunk noises clearly. Very close in operation to a pinball machine. No thanks! Partial solution: heavy action spring - green 22 pounder! No, they were not installed to protect the frame from hot loads. (The original spring weight was 12-14 pounds.) Yes, 1911 fans, we have been there before too!
Predictably, the stainless guns would jam, fail to eject, have double feeds, toss out live ammo, etc. Therefore, in most people's minds, the problem was a "faulty extractor". Even though that strange extractor had its own problems, the extractor itself was is not to blame for more fundamental design flaws. So, even though we now have another variant with external extractor, the basic magazine/breechface/feedramp design flaws may still be unchanged. I wouldn't get too excited about a new extractor type just yet. But for the purpose of taking a reliability poll, we should first specify which P220 design and which 1911 variant we might be considering. They are not all same.
Both the P220 and 1911 are generic labels that can refer to a variety of different designs. And, the reliability of those various designs is remarkably different as well.
Here is some additional info on the P220 guns that you won't get from Sig. I have owned several P220's of different vintages and each one is a different animal. I have yet to see the "improved" P220 with external extractor, btw.
The original gun as introduced into the US as the BDA was a great design. I don't know how many years it was until they fooled with the design, but it is probably safe to say that P220's made up until about 1990 were all the same. Part of the equation was that the original P220 magazines were correct for .45 ball ammo - 7-round magazines of tapered feedlip design with a strong spring and dimpled follower. Then came the demands for 8-round variant magazines, which were known to be erratic (sound similar to the 1911 story?), and finally the worst insult: an 8-round stainless magazine with short parallel feedlips, a slick undimpled plastic follower and a weak spring.
The first generation stainless P220 has nothing in common with the original P220 except for the model number. They built the new stainless on one of their competition platforms. Both frame and slide were radically different than the original. But you have to see them both side-by-side, and shoot them both to get an idea of how different these two guns are.
The P220 stainless, 1st generation (with useless accessory rail) featured altered dimensions in the breechface and locking block areas. Fitted with their new and improved 8 round magazines with slippery plastic follower, they were very unreliable compared with the original P220. Sure, they did manage to chamber a round most of the time. But, personally, I'm looking for a little better than "most of the time". If you look carefully at the P220 stainless as it strips a round from the magazine, you see that the bullet tip is aimed at a nearly vertical feed ramp. The round almost always bounces straight back after striking the ramp head on, with attendant bullet setback. It literally bounces its way toward the chamber - you can hear the ka-chunk, bang, ka-chunk noises clearly. Very close in operation to a pinball machine. No thanks! Partial solution: heavy action spring - green 22 pounder! No, they were not installed to protect the frame from hot loads. (The original spring weight was 12-14 pounds.) Yes, 1911 fans, we have been there before too!
Predictably, the stainless guns would jam, fail to eject, have double feeds, toss out live ammo, etc. Therefore, in most people's minds, the problem was a "faulty extractor". Even though that strange extractor had its own problems, the extractor itself was is not to blame for more fundamental design flaws. So, even though we now have another variant with external extractor, the basic magazine/breechface/feedramp design flaws may still be unchanged. I wouldn't get too excited about a new extractor type just yet. But for the purpose of taking a reliability poll, we should first specify which P220 design and which 1911 variant we might be considering. They are not all same.
chris in va
Member
Interesting information Wireman, but not sure I understand the 7-8 round mag issue.
I have a 1994 'folded slide' 220 that eats anything I put through it. Came with two 7-rd mags that look stainless to me, marked 'made in Italy' 'P220-1'.
I recently bought an 8rd with the same markings. Both have fed flawlessly. Both are absolutely identical, save for the extension at the bottom.
So if the original mags are identical with the same power spring, what exactly is wrong with it?
I have a 1994 'folded slide' 220 that eats anything I put through it. Came with two 7-rd mags that look stainless to me, marked 'made in Italy' 'P220-1'.
I recently bought an 8rd with the same markings. Both have fed flawlessly. Both are absolutely identical, save for the extension at the bottom.
So if the original mags are identical with the same power spring, what exactly is wrong with it?
the mags marked "made in Italy" aren't the original mags he's talking about.
the original 7 round mags had spines with either dovetailed (my preference) or zipper joints and were made in Germany.
the first 8 round mags were the original lenght german mags with a different, but still metal, follower...these are ones i would avoid.
the current factory 8 round mags have seamless spines and longer bodies. they are made by Mec-gar in Italy. Mec-gar makes all factory mags for Sig pistols.
the other popular 220 mag is the 8 rounder from Act-Mag. looks the same as the factory mag, just less expensive
the original 7 round mags had spines with either dovetailed (my preference) or zipper joints and were made in Germany.
the first 8 round mags were the original lenght german mags with a different, but still metal, follower...these are ones i would avoid.
the current factory 8 round mags have seamless spines and longer bodies. they are made by Mec-gar in Italy. Mec-gar makes all factory mags for Sig pistols.
the other popular 220 mag is the 8 rounder from Act-Mag. looks the same as the factory mag, just less expensive
texas bulldog
Member
whoa, Wireman! 2 posts in a year...slow down there, buddy!
seriously, though, thanks for the informative post. drop by more often...
seriously, though, thanks for the informative post. drop by more often...
I have/like both platforms. I have seen A LOT more 1911's choke than Sigs. Take that back. I have not seen a Sig choke yet. The 1911's that I have seen choke varied from Colt GC to race guns. The competition guns that are super tight have more issues than most. Although I own and still like Sigs I find myself shooting 9mm Glocks and 45 1911's a lot more. My Sigs are close to being safe queens. I have grown to prefer the consistent trigger pull instead of the DA/SA transition. Now if I were to pick one for business work, it would have to be the P220.
The new new ones seem to be fine, with the external extractor. It was the fairly new ones (last couple of years or so) that had issues. Not all or even most, but more than the other Sig models. Now the 220 has the 226 style external extractor which is very reliable.
Wireman
Member
7-round & 8-round
chris in va,
Glad you asked about this subject; most people don't give it a second thought. The short version is that a single stack .45 pistol has room for 7 rounds and the strong spring required to feed them. Squeezing in 8 rounds is possible only if the size of the spring is reduced. Fact is, adding rounds to a magazine requires a stronger spring, all other things being equal. And, all other things are not equal because we have to deal with things like the change in stacking angles, and so on. So, a correctly designed 8-round single stack mag would extend well below the grips, because of the need for a stronger spring. Speculation only, such a magazine does not exist. I am, of course, ignoring the rediculous argument that goes like this:
1) No self-respecting gunfighter would be caught dead (pun) with only 7 rounds in his .45. Seven rounds puts the shooter at great disadvantage, and is practically suicidal.
2) Having 8 rounds, on the other hand, places the shooter in a position of strength, of tactical advantage and firepower superiority. Everyone knows this, so why fight it?
There is some invaluable information on proper magazine function here:
http://forum.m1911.org/forumdisplay.php?f=53
The info applies to any design, not just the 1911. With reference to the P220, the new magazine style is just the last insult to what was originally a reliable and tested design.
Wireman
chris in va,
Glad you asked about this subject; most people don't give it a second thought. The short version is that a single stack .45 pistol has room for 7 rounds and the strong spring required to feed them. Squeezing in 8 rounds is possible only if the size of the spring is reduced. Fact is, adding rounds to a magazine requires a stronger spring, all other things being equal. And, all other things are not equal because we have to deal with things like the change in stacking angles, and so on. So, a correctly designed 8-round single stack mag would extend well below the grips, because of the need for a stronger spring. Speculation only, such a magazine does not exist. I am, of course, ignoring the rediculous argument that goes like this:
1) No self-respecting gunfighter would be caught dead (pun) with only 7 rounds in his .45. Seven rounds puts the shooter at great disadvantage, and is practically suicidal.
2) Having 8 rounds, on the other hand, places the shooter in a position of strength, of tactical advantage and firepower superiority. Everyone knows this, so why fight it?
There is some invaluable information on proper magazine function here:
http://forum.m1911.org/forumdisplay.php?f=53
The info applies to any design, not just the 1911. With reference to the P220, the new magazine style is just the last insult to what was originally a reliable and tested design.
Wireman
PuntoQuatroCinco
Member
Thats interesting info on the mags. I have an older folded slide, spur hammer 220. Came with parked 7rd mags. I did like the dove tailed backstrap. Thats quality! I now have 5 of the new 8rd stainless ones. I use them for carry and steel shooting. Dont much like the wussy plastic follower and floor plate either. I too have also noticed a bit of a Ka-chunk when feeding rounds. I have not suffered any reliability issues in the 2000 rds since I switched to these, but I will definitly compare them to the the old 7 rounders. The mag spring in these 8 rounders has a couple of coils that have a smaller radius thus allowing the spring to collapse onto itself. This combined with the deeper floor plate and longer mag were what allowed them to increase capacity. I thought....
One things for sure. They are too
expensive!!!
One things for sure. They are too
expensive!!!
- Status