Sig P220ST/Glock 21SF: Opinions from LE, please

[Beachcomber]

If your P220 has no issues and you can shoot it well as you say you can... then my opinion would be to carry your P220 and add two extra mags to your duty belt to compensate for what the Glock carries.

Stay Safe,
-Rick

 

[Marcus L.]

As you get into the job and you experience all the demands of it, don't be surprised if you start to drift to a smaller sized pistol and a smaller cartridge. I started my career with a P226 9mm, then a couple of years later I started using the P220. After a few years on the job and as likely scenario training played out I realized that I needed better capacity, and that a slighly smaller pistol was a better police pistol. Magazine exchanges can be difficult if you are pinned, wounded, or just scared sh*tless and your heartrate has jumped to 200bpm because you just made a traffic stop on a car load of......eh...immigrates and one pulls an assault rifle on you. You also lose targets of opportunity when you are out of the fight due to reloads. Off duty carry and undercover carry don't work too well with the P226/P220. So, I moved to the P229 in .40S&W and have been very satisfied since. It is the perfect middle ground.......middle ground pistol size, middle ground cartridge, and middle ground capacity. I recommend you give one a try.

P.S.: The P220 does not have a very good track record in LE agencies that put a lot of ammo down range. Most P220s last about 10k-20k rounds before they break something major like the frame. It's slide mass is almost identical to the 9mm P226 meaning that it takes a beating, especially with +P ammo. The 9mm P226 will give you anywhere from 50k-100k rounds of reliable service, and the P229 in .40S&W will do very similar. The lower the durability of the firearm, the more chance it has of breaking parts and putting you out of the fight when you need it most.

 

[10-Ring]

I prefer the Glock. I like the lower weight, higher mag capacity, greater ambidexterity(?) and IMHO greater durability

 

[RX-178]

I say stick with the P220.

That hardware matches your software. That's the most important of all.

If you're worried about capacity, Sig does make 10 round magazines for the 220, although they aren't flush with the grip.

 

[Baneblade]

When I went through the LE Firearms instructor school they challenged us with a simple question. Has any LE Officer ever lost a firefight because they ran out of ammo? They lost because they missed, had a malfunction, never had the opportunity to return fire, etc. None of us had a credible story where an officer lost because of capacity or failure to reload.

8+1 in a gun you are comfortable with should be just fine.

 

[boomstik45]

Heard that before. And there is much truth in it. But running out of ammunition is not possible, people do miss (for various reasons) their intended target, and more than enough bullets beats not enough bullets.

Some people act like there is nothing that can prevent them from taking out a target with 8 rounds of .45. I can think of several things: certain kinds of barriers, operator errors (unless of course, both you and your 1911 are absolutely infallible, along with that one-shot stop super bullet you are using...don't worry, we believe you), getting shot or otherwise injured during the engagement, the introduction of extra targets that weren't there before, etc.

Having said that, more bullets doesn't guarantee a winning situation. Just more opportunities. And no, I'm not saying drop that 1911 and run out to get that 17+1 9mm. If you're carrying that 8 rd 1911....just carry a another mag or two...or more. Same with anything else....you can never have too many bullets. Too many is just enough. Just enough....is never enough. Ya never know.

 

[Marcus L.]

Heard that before. And there is much truth in it. But running out of ammunition is not possible, people do miss (for various reasons) their intended target, and more than enough bullets beats not enough bullets.

Some people act like there is nothing that can prevent them from taking out a target with 8 rounds of .45. I can think of several things: certain kinds of barriers, operator errors (unless of course, both you and your 1911 are absolutely infallible, along with that one-shot stop super bullet you are using...don't worry, we believe you), getting shot or otherwise injured during the engagement, the introduction of extra targets that weren't there before, etc.

Having said that, more bullets doesn't guarantee a winning situation. Just more opportunities. And no, I'm not saying drop that 1911 and run out to get that 17+1 9mm. If you're carrying that 8 rd 1911....just carry a another mag or two...or more. Same with anything else....you can never have too many bullets. Too many is just enough. Just enough....is never enough. Ya never know.

Very well put, Boomstik45 and on the mark. Most LE shootings occur at less than 7 yards and are over in only a couple of shots. However, there are a good number of shooting incidents that do not go that smoothly. When the badguy has cover, and you have cover, you can bet that you will go through a good portion of the ammunition on your belt. Holding your fire for perfect shots doesn't win the battle either. You should be bouncing rounds off the pavement to take out the perp's legs, or punching through barriers sparingly to get your foe to start bleeding. You win shootouts how ever you can, and more ammunition gives you more combat options. Let the guy bleed out and disengage if possible.

 

[C-grunt]

I think the Glock is the better duty weapon, but I wouldnt trade the 220ST for one. The extra capacity will be a big advantage in a gunfight. I know one officer who has ended a gunfight with one round. I know several who took a lot more shots than that. Remember that as a LEO, your common getting mugged scenarios no longer really apply. Shooting a perp who is in a vehicle is actually pretty common. Also remember that you wont always be able to have a long gun when the fight begins. My partner and I came very close to having a firefight with a guy hiding behind a truck with a 12 gauge. Luckily the guy somehow managed to jam the gun up solid when he pumped the slide. During that incident, we had no warning or time to retrieve any long gun that we might have had with us.

Another big point going for the Glock is that they are tough as nails. You are going to be rolling around on the ground with suspects, jumping concrete walls and be subject to foul weather. The polymer doesnt care and the finish on a Glock is outstanding.

I love my duty G22 because of its durability. Its not the prettiest thing out there, or the most accurate. But when a gunfights calling, Id take no other pistol.

IMPORTANT....Almost forgot. If you do get a Glock, buy metal sights for it. We were trained to use the rear sight, hooked onto our duty belt, as a means to cycle the slide if our other hand was decommissioned in a fight. Well one of our officers did that, actually used the side of a table, and he snapped off the rear sight. He finished the fight using only his front sight but surely wasnt as accurate as before.

 

[JT in VA]

My agency went Glock (22s and 23s) from SW 686s about 8 years ago. I am a big fan of the law enforcement applications for Glocks. They are reliable, accurate, powerful, have high capacities, and weaker shooters (which I know you are not) can often do quite well with them after training.

With all that said, I have a Sig 220 and certainly would not feel the least bit apprehensive about using it as a duty weapon - especially if you are already confident in your ability to ring it out.

Good luck.

 

[JT in VA]

QUOTE:

"When I went through the LE Firearms instructor school they challenged us with a simple question. Has any LE Officer ever lost a firefight because they ran out of ammo? They lost because they missed, had a malfunction, never had the opportunity to return fire, etc. None of us had a credible story where an officer lost because of capacity or failure to reload."

Only example I can think of may be the Miami FBI shootout - I know some ammo shortages were a problem but also had a lot to do with SW revolvers vs. a Mini-14 and 12 guage.

 

[RX-178]

Even in the Miami shootout, the fight was ultimately ended with 6 shots from an injured (unable to reload) agent's revolver.

The critical factor in the FBI shootout was that the FBI agents were taken completely by surprise when their suspect maneuvered past their cover. They had failed to anticipate, and failed to notice their target's advance.

Would it have turned out different with higher capacity weapons? The only way I can see that happening is if the Agents used suppressing fire. Law Enforcement is generally (some things have changed since then, and some lawmen just played by different rules from the get-go) not trained to use suppressive fire in a shootout, because from a legal standpoint, they are responsible for every single bullet that is fired.

That means even if the FBI agents had Glock 17s, and emptied multiple 33rd magazines towards the suspects during the shootout, they would have to account for each and every round, and for the damage that each and every round did. Would it have saved their lives? Probably. But even if they had those weapons, my bet is that suppressing fire would have been something that they would have been deliberately instructed NOT to do.

If they had used the hypothetical Glock 17s, it's likely that they would have used them in the exact same manner that they used their revolvers. They would still have been taken by surprise when their suspect came right up to them, and a wounded agent still would have ended the fight by emptying his weapon. There just probably would have been a lot more bullets fired by that wounded agent, which could have ended in some kind of litigation (I can just see the lawyer asking 'Why was it necessary to fire 30 rounds of ammunition at the deceased as he was laying motionless inside his vehicle!').

 

[JT in VA]

RX-178 is right. I was just stating that this was one example where capacity was an issue. The FBI found several major problems with their agents in that gunfight - stopping power (38s and 9s) - difficulty reloading under stress (thus the reference to capacity), lack of body armor (only 2 agents were wearing same), lack of long guns, and poor planning/tactics.

Certianly taking more ammo into a badly planned situation is not the answer. Also, this gunfight was an anomolie, most gunfights happen fast and close and don't involve as many participants. I think today it would be a field office swat team or HRT armed with AR-15s, MP5s, and 1911s, that would follow and arrest such suspects. Still, a lot of LE research shows a low % of hits during a gunfight so having high capacity mags could be a plus. Still, though, nothing really wrong with either weapon option presented in the original post.

 

[full metal]

We carry the HK P2000, if I had a choice I would carry my 1911, but a sig or a glock would be better than the HK. I can make a 5 inch group at 15 yards with the HK, but with 1911 I can do a 1 inch group at the same distance. Go with the Sig, if you are better with it, and it works for you.

 

[Baneblade]

You are right on the Miami shootout. They did run out of ammo. However, they knew they were going into a fight with trained men with high capacity rifles and failed to bring enough gun. I think the LE community has learned more from than incident and the Hollywood shootout than just about anything else.

Unfortunately for us, it took a shootout with a suspect hiding in his house with hunting rifles before we got rifles. Glock 22's and 870's with 00 buck are pretty much useless at that point.

Anyhow, LE still "won" both of those firefights. The badguys died, even though the good guys took some serious hits. Those are two very extreme situations, which, when they happen again, I hope we are better prepared for.

Revolvers really are not part of the equation anymore, especially in Arizona. I believe the Tombstone Marshall's Office is the only agency in the State that authorizes revolvers as a primary weapon. Everyone else only has them as a backup.

 

[C-grunt]

^^ Im trying to get proficient with my SP101, so I can carry it as backup.

 

[Dobe]

If it's between a Sig and a Glock, I'll take the Sig. Well made, better ergonomics, extremely accurate, and good triggers.

 

[Gun Slinger]

Based on its merits, the Glock 21.

Rugged design, fewer parts, inexpensive and readily available parts for repair, plenty accurate and higher capacity, too.

While the Sig is also a nice pistol, I think that Glock is better suited for the Patrol environment and if it gets scuffed and marked up (and it will) it ain't like you just screwed up your pretty Sig.

 

[boomstik45]

Ammunition capacity shouldn't be confused with the use or lack of use of proper tactics.

Where did the issue of suppressive fire come from, anyway? I'll say this though: do you want to go home or not? Some hard choices come our way in a firefight. As an LEO, I say this: survive and protect as best as you can.

Know your target, know what is behind it to your best ability. Assess the situation if possible and make the best decision you can. If not possible, make the best decision you can, do what it takes to get you, your colleagues, and innocents home safe that night. Yes, you will get the monday morning quarterback treatment. Even sometimes by those whose butts you just saved (ungrateful bastards). However....tried by twelve or carried by six are often your choices. Choose as you will.

And no, mag capacity is NOT the determing factor. But I maintain: more than enough bullets is better than just enough bullets.