Sig vs. Glock vs. Ruger
- Thread starter Soldier0117
- Start date
- Status
Soldier0117
Member
Thanks everyone, just so you know I have shot the Glock and loved it, but the Sig also had a great feel so I think it's between those two. I'm going to look at both again and try to decide, thanks for all your help.
what is this mainsail if you cant hit something beyond 25' with a glock you are a danger with any pistol no gun aims it self and the accuracy difference between a glock and a sig at 50 yards is less than 2 inches so i think you need training and practice at 25' i can hit accurately with a thrown rock
Mainsail
Member
jgo296 said:
I don’t mean to offend you, but I have no idea what that says. It appears to be a bunch of random words all thrown together. If you can translate that into normal English sentences, I may be able to give you the information you ask for, if you are asking something.
gc70
Member
If you can afford a Sig, it is probably the best of the three for accuracy (but differences in accuracy are pretty minimal). Glock has the simplest manual of arms. Ruger probably has the best price. All three are built like tanks and as reliable as the day is long.
DougDubya
Member
Are you holding your Ruger by the SLIDE? Because the grip frame is just slightly fatter than a 1911's, has the same grip angle - the only real change is the way low down join between the trigger guard and the frontstrap.
Great googly moogly, I've held more uncomfortable Glocks, and yet people gripe about the nicely oval, no sharp edges on the grip P89...
Yeesh.
All you guys that say ruger is chunky have you ever shot one??
I't does feel chunky when you hold one but when you shoot it,it feels great.I shoot it great because of the bigger grip you pull the trigger with the tip of your finger not the middle which results in better accuracy.
I was shooting my P95 for about 100 rounds then shot my friends CZP-01 I actully liked my ruger better.My P95 has a smooth trigger.The pull is a little long at first but after a few shots I shot it great.
I also like a gun with a hammer so I didn't buy the Glock or Xd I was looking at.For $346 bucks out the door I love my P95.
My P95 is great for the range,Home defence.I'ts not a good conceled carry gun do to it's larger size.
I't does feel chunky when you hold one but when you shoot it,it feels great.I shoot it great because of the bigger grip you pull the trigger with the tip of your finger not the middle which results in better accuracy.
I was shooting my P95 for about 100 rounds then shot my friends CZP-01 I actully liked my ruger better.My P95 has a smooth trigger.The pull is a little long at first but after a few shots I shot it great.
I also like a gun with a hammer so I didn't buy the Glock or Xd I was looking at.For $346 bucks out the door I love my P95.
My P95 is great for the range,Home defence.I'ts not a good conceled carry gun do to it's larger size.
I can only compare Glock and SIG, having owned both and carried both as duty pistols. A Glock is probably more forgiving of the owner who forgets to use a good lubricant. The SIG is much more likely to be accurate. If a consistent trigger pull is desired, the DAK trigger option in a SIG will fill that role. FWIW, my current duty pistol is a P229R with the DAK trigger system. It has never malfunctioned. My P220 I used as a duty pistol in the early 1990's was 100% reliable, except for one batch of ammo that had bell-mouthed cases, and would not work in any other weapon, either. My recently purchased pre-owned decocker P229 had a couple of failures to feed, but I had let it get a little dry and quite dirty in shooting 400+ rounds over two days. (I was trying a new-to-me lube, which does not remain as "wet" as the lubes I had been using.) I should have, of course, at least field-stripped it and checked the lube situation before continuing shooting the second day. My two duty Glock G22 pistols were mixed; one was 100% reliable, the other a bit temperamental until I replace the magazine springs with stronger ones.
All three brands are great. I have had them all.
I would suggest to you to try the new Ruger SR9. I just got one and I love it.
Less expensive, Very accurate. 17 Rounds magazines and a new different approach from Ruger.
Let me know what did you find out.
jorferpe
I would suggest to you to try the new Ruger SR9. I just got one and I love it.
Less expensive, Very accurate. 17 Rounds magazines and a new different approach from Ruger.
Let me know what did you find out.
jorferpe
Gun Slinger
member
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2007
- Messages
- 777
I have experience with all three 9mm platforms, having owned all three at some point and retaining those that suit me best.
My observations from my professional LE experience with these 9mm service sidearms follows:
The Ruger P95, while quite reliable and comfortable to shoot, is a strong, massively constructed handgun and the price to be paid for those qualities is that it is a rather bulky sidearm that tends to be somewhat inconvenient for the purpose of concealed carry.
The slide itself is relatively trim for a Ruger, but the sights, safety lever and slide release/disassembly lever all seem conspire to contribute to its dimensional girth and make it a little ungainly for concealed carry.
As an open carry service sidearm, it is certainly acceptable since its structural profile is of lesser significance in this mode of carry.
While not a "top of the line" selection, its accuracy and operation were acceptable.
Since the vast majority of my time is spent carrying concealed these days, the P95 saw such infrequent employment in that role that I decided to part with it and recoup the capital that I had in it for use in another pursuit.
It was a fine gun overall, but not optimally "streamlined" for the purpose of concealed carry.
It is the least expensive of the three and if money is an issue, this is the best gun for the money.
The Sig-Sauer P226 (also in 9mm) is a well constructed full-size service handgun. The P226 is also a large service weapon, moreso than the P95 both in its mass and its physical dimensions.
Its trigger in either SA or DA mode was superior to the P95's in every aspect (smoothness and consistency) and was highly conducive to excellent accuracy as well as short "split times" on follow up shots during qualifications and training drills.
The lower frame/grip of the P226 tends to be a bit "broad across the beam" and while it lends itself to increased comfort during firing, the penalty for such an attribute is that it is fairly difficult to conceal properly under lighter clothing. With a little effort and attention to clothing details, it can be concealed, however it demands constant vigilance in that regard. While it still resides in my gun safe as my most favorite service weapon due to sentimental reasons, I wear it rarely these days.
It is also the most expensive of the three guns discussed herein.
The Glock 17 is the lightest and most dimensionally appealing of the three.
At ~25 ounces, it is lighter than the Ruger P95 by two ounces and the P226 by eight ounces, gives me two more rounds than the P95 and one more than the P226 and a grip geometry that fits my hand better than the P95 or the P226. In addition to this, the slide presents a much smoother profile and while not much smaller than the P226, conceals with a lesser degree of required vigilance even in warmer weather where lighter clothing is the "uniform of the day".
I don't particularly care for the polymer sights that Glock provides with the 17 since they seem a bit "fragile" for a serious defensive CCW piece, but it is an issue that is easily remedied with any one of the numerous "after market" sights available for the gun. My choice was to replace them with Heinie Standard Sights since they provide an extra .400"/1.016cm of sight radius over the O.E.M. factory sights due the configuration of the Heinie's rear sight.
On a good day at the range, I can usually shoot 3" groups at 25 meters with the G17 and hit an 8" circular steel plate at 50m on command with my preferred carry load.
As the G17 can still be purchased with a little searching for $550-$600 it is the 'mid-priced' gun of the three and worth every penny.
While I strongly prefer the Glock 17 over the P95 and the P226, any of these guns will do the job. I've carried them and bet my life upon them and would carry any of them again without hesitation.
GS
My observations from my professional LE experience with these 9mm service sidearms follows:
The Ruger P95, while quite reliable and comfortable to shoot, is a strong, massively constructed handgun and the price to be paid for those qualities is that it is a rather bulky sidearm that tends to be somewhat inconvenient for the purpose of concealed carry.
The slide itself is relatively trim for a Ruger, but the sights, safety lever and slide release/disassembly lever all seem conspire to contribute to its dimensional girth and make it a little ungainly for concealed carry.
As an open carry service sidearm, it is certainly acceptable since its structural profile is of lesser significance in this mode of carry.
While not a "top of the line" selection, its accuracy and operation were acceptable.
Since the vast majority of my time is spent carrying concealed these days, the P95 saw such infrequent employment in that role that I decided to part with it and recoup the capital that I had in it for use in another pursuit.
It was a fine gun overall, but not optimally "streamlined" for the purpose of concealed carry.
It is the least expensive of the three and if money is an issue, this is the best gun for the money.
The Sig-Sauer P226 (also in 9mm) is a well constructed full-size service handgun. The P226 is also a large service weapon, moreso than the P95 both in its mass and its physical dimensions.
Its trigger in either SA or DA mode was superior to the P95's in every aspect (smoothness and consistency) and was highly conducive to excellent accuracy as well as short "split times" on follow up shots during qualifications and training drills.
The lower frame/grip of the P226 tends to be a bit "broad across the beam" and while it lends itself to increased comfort during firing, the penalty for such an attribute is that it is fairly difficult to conceal properly under lighter clothing. With a little effort and attention to clothing details, it can be concealed, however it demands constant vigilance in that regard. While it still resides in my gun safe as my most favorite service weapon due to sentimental reasons, I wear it rarely these days.
It is also the most expensive of the three guns discussed herein.
The Glock 17 is the lightest and most dimensionally appealing of the three.
At ~25 ounces, it is lighter than the Ruger P95 by two ounces and the P226 by eight ounces, gives me two more rounds than the P95 and one more than the P226 and a grip geometry that fits my hand better than the P95 or the P226. In addition to this, the slide presents a much smoother profile and while not much smaller than the P226, conceals with a lesser degree of required vigilance even in warmer weather where lighter clothing is the "uniform of the day".
I don't particularly care for the polymer sights that Glock provides with the 17 since they seem a bit "fragile" for a serious defensive CCW piece, but it is an issue that is easily remedied with any one of the numerous "after market" sights available for the gun. My choice was to replace them with Heinie Standard Sights since they provide an extra .400"/1.016cm of sight radius over the O.E.M. factory sights due the configuration of the Heinie's rear sight.
On a good day at the range, I can usually shoot 3" groups at 25 meters with the G17 and hit an 8" circular steel plate at 50m on command with my preferred carry load.
As the G17 can still be purchased with a little searching for $550-$600 it is the 'mid-priced' gun of the three and worth every penny.
While I strongly prefer the Glock 17 over the P95 and the P226, any of these guns will do the job. I've carried them and bet my life upon them and would carry any of them again without hesitation.
GS
Gun Slinger
member
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2007
- Messages
- 777
Thanks. 
- Status
