Sig P232: a PPK copycat?

[The Unknown User]

I've asked this before in other threads when the PPK or Sigs came up, but I wanted to give it its own thread.

Do you think the Sig P232 is a Walther PPK copycat? I like the two pistols, but I can't help but wonder.

I have OCD about copycat/knock-off products, and so I'd never buy a Kimber 1911, as I'd want the "original," and so I'd try to get a Colt instead.

I don't know enough about pistols to figure out if they're basically the same pistol with a different name stamped on the slide, so I'm hoping someone that either knows or has experience with both can comment.

They look similar, take the same round, and so on. I really hope the 232 isn't a copycat. I like Sig. But, if they're copying other products I'd really lose faith in them.

 

[Windhover45]

If by "copycat" you mean an exact copy, then the answer is no. True, the double action feature was pioneered by Walther, but I don't consider that to be a "copycat."

I had a Sig P230 (preceding model to 232) once upon a time, and I can enumerate a number of differences betwwen it an PPK from memory.

--take down is different. Walther required you to pull down the trigger guard to start the field strip process. Sig has a take down lever.

--different safety system. PPK has a safety lever on the slide. SIG has hammer drop lever on the frame which lowers the hammer safely. PPK's safety locked the trigger and dropped the hammer at the same time.

--SIG had a pinned breechblock. PPK didn't.

--PPK has thumb mag release. SIG has mag release on the heel of the grip.

--SIG was dead reliable. PPK isn't.

I can go on, but I think the point is made.

 

[Shear_stress]

No, despite looking similar, the Sig is not a copy of the PPK.

On the other hand, there is so much technology shared between gun makers, that the terms "original" and "copy" lose their meanings very quickly. Moreover, guns change much over time. After all, is a modern 1911 built by Colt--with its firing pin safety, MIM parts, variations in caliber/frame and slide material/styling/sights, etc. etc.-- still an "original" 1911, especially when a bone-stock Norinco might be more faithful to Browning's design?

I would concern myself less with subjective terms like "original" and "copycat" and judge each gun on its individual merits. If you want only "originals" in your collection, you're going to spend a lot of money on pin fire revolvers, Borchardts, Mausers, 1902 Colts, etc. Not much new under the sun since the early years of the 20th century. Just my two cents.

 

[The Unknown User]

Thanks guys. So, I should consider the 232 to be a completely different pistol and not just a "PPK knock-off"?

Edit:

You can see the basic similarities, much like how an XD or an M&P looks similar to a Glock in some aspects. The biggest thing that bothers me is that thing next to the ejection port. Is that an aesthetic thing or does it actually do something?

 

[Windhover45]

If you're talking about the extractor/ejector, then yes it really does something, i.e. hurls the empty case clear. They as configured also double as "loaded chamber" indicator. If I remember right, there's also a loaded chamber indicator on the PPK's slide that the SIG lacks.

 

[The Unknown User]

So what do the rest of you think? Copycat or no?

 

[outofbattery]

Other than ammo,there is absolutely nothing that interchanges between the 2 guns.If none of the parts are the same,how can it be a copycat?The general profile is quite similar but if one looks at any number of European pistols designed in the 30's,the same form is very,very common- much like cars,guns,aircraft,toasters etc. of any era.The Makarov,Mauser HSC,HK4,various and sundry CZ and FEG's and many others all share somewhat similar shape and design features while being unique pistols.
As the owner of a Walther and a SIG,the SIG is a far,far better pistol.It might not have the cache of the PPK,but it's functionally superior.Obviously,if you want to fulfil James Bond fantasies only a PPK will do but watch out - you're not going to want one of the American S&W made ones,or an Interarms PPK/S or one of the French Manhurins that was final assembled in Germany and marked as a Walther

 

[surjimmy]

No copycat, each is an outstanding weapon. However in the 380 I would go with the ppk. If you were going to get a 9mm, 40, 45 go with Sig. In the 380 I think Walther makes the best. Now ot put a twist on your post, why go with a 380 when you can get a 40cal or even a 9mm in the same size in a Kahr. Just a thought.

 

[romma]

you're not going to want one of the American S&W made ones

Au' contraire! I have a S&W one, and it is pretty decent!! I like it.

 

[usp9]

Rob87
So what do the rest of you think? Copycat or no?

No.

Other than size, what similarities do you see?

 

[MrAcheson]

Copycat? No, there are many differences. Derivative? Arguably yes.

 

[The Unknown User]

usp9, the only similarities I see are the general shape, caliber, and overall profile. I was just curious. I'm still new to this stuff, so I'm just learning.

What '30's European pistols were you referring to, outofbattery? Could you post a picture or two if you can find one?

I like Acheson's comment. I can see how it could be a derivative.

 

[ravencon]

--SIG was dead reliable. PPK isn't.

For me this is the really important difference.

 

[field70]

Quote:
--SIG was dead reliable. PPK isn't.


My PPK is........

 

[420Stainless]

I don't consider it a copycat. I wanted to buy the SIG until I stumbled onto a great deal on an Interarms PPK/S. My PPK/S is great, so I never found out how good the SIG is.