sigma 9ve or 40ve

[contender]

for those of you who have shot both.........which do you prefer?

is the recoil/snap of the 40 in the sigma worth the xtra punch over the 9 and control/recovery in such a light gun?

i've shot metal frame 40's but wondering about the plastics.

one last qestion, does the sigma 40 "bulge" brass? I have seen marks on brass shot thru a glock that make me wonder about reloading the 40.

 

[ATXzombie]

i think its a horrible pistol both of em
save a little more and buy a glock or an xd
im in austin and i have a glock 19 for sale, if interrested let me know

 

[General Tso]

9mm. Cheaper to shoot, less recoil, more capacity, and 147gr. 9mm+P is just as good as 40 for self defense.

 

[CajunBass]

I haven't shot both, but that's because I've never wanted a 40 anything. I do like my SW9VE.

 

[Full Metal Jacket]

i assume since you're purchasing a sigma you're primary goal is to spend the least amount of money possible. for that reason i would say take the 9mm.

 

[DNS]

Nine mil Blazer is running $10 locally at Academy which makes for some cheap practice.

Mike

 

[basicblur]

is the recoil/snap of the 40 in the sigma worth the xtra punch over the 9 and control/recovery in such a light gun?

I'd say no?
I just retired a 9mm SW9E as my bed gun for 12+ years, and have owned a couple of SW40VE's. I've tended to move down in caliber over the years as SD ammo has improved, the 9mm is cheaper to shoot, and I not long ago swapped my carry gun from an XDSC40 to an XDSC9 partially due to muzzle flip of the 40.

I can handle the recoil of a 40 no problem, but I think double-taps etc are easier/faster with the 9mm.

'Course, when I shop I do weigh round count vs. caliber, which is what led me the XDSC40. When I bought, the 9mm held only 1 more round than the 40, but after they changed the 9mm mags to hold 3 or 4 more rounds than the 40, that and the reduced muzzle flip is what led me to the XDSC9.

I agree with conventional wisdom on the 40 snap vs 45 push-I'd rather shoot a 45 than a 40.
'Course, with a 9...well, sooner or later somebody's gonna put an eye out!

 

[plateshooter]

I own one of each. If I could choose only one, it would be the 9mm because of the cheaper ammo. For $250.00 after the rebate, I bought the 40 just to have a 40. I really don't notice the recoil difference if I am focusing my attention on the front sight.

 

[Olympus]

I have the 40ve and I can definitely tell a different in the muzzle flip for the 40ve. I'm not super impressed with mine. It was a gift, so that's why I keep it. Had it bought it for myself, I almost certainly would have traded it for something elese.

 

[Onward Allusion]

Get both. They're inexpensive enough. I've seen them go for $200 used and $250 new (with rebate). If you learn to shoot with the trigger, you'll be deadly with almost anything else. Recoil is mild with both. Heck, my wife's EDC is a 40.

contender
sigma 9ve or 40ve
for those of you who have shot both.........which do you prefer?

is the recoil/snap of the 40 in the sigma worth the xtra punch over the 9 and control/recovery in such a light gun?

i've shot metal frame 40's but wondering about the plastics.

one last qestion, does the sigma 40 "bulge" brass? I have seen marks on brass shot thru a glock that make me wonder about reloading the 40.

 

[Arkansas Paul]

I have the 40VE. I've never shot a 9VE so I can't give you a comparison in the recoil department.
However, I do handload and I haven't had a single problem with any brass that I've shot through it. Doesn't bulge any more than any other I've seen.

 

[ET]

I have owned the 40ve for 2 years now. I sent it into S&W for a striker problem and had them work on the trigger at the same time. It came back feeling like a different gun. I really like this gun a lot. I own Glocks, Taurus, & other semi's that cost a lot more, but I can tell you that the Sigma is a good reliable gun. Most people that tell you they are junk have never owned one of the newer ones, much less fired one of them. When these guns first came out they had problems and got a reputation as being junk. They are immensely improved now. I shoot the Sigma as well as any gun I own & it doesn't have any ftf's at all. I vote for the 40ve.

 

[writerinmo]

My EDC is the SW40VE, never had a problem with the brass bulging, this was more a Glock problem as the base of the cartridge was unsupported a bit more, but my understanding is that the problem was addressed. I really enjoy the .40, shoot a lot of Federal Champion and Blazer brass in it, and carry Winchester PDX1 in it as the SD round.

The only problem I have had with it, it shot low at 25 feet. Not the "cover the bullseye with the front sight post" low, but about 3 inches low at that range. Then the front sight disappeared... hell, I dunno where it went, it just wasn't there a few mornings ago when I did my "preflight checks'' in the morning before stowing it in the holster. S&W of course wanted me to send it in... I didn't want the stock sight back on it though, and they weren't going to cough up anything better so I took care of both problems at once.

Bought a Hi Viz fiber optic front sight for a Glock... just a tad bit of filing with one of my needle files and it fit right in, and the slightly shorter height pulled my POA right to where I wanted it. Not night sights, but a darn sight (no pun intended) better than the original.

I will say that mine performs best with 180gr. Hated 155 with a passion.

 

[basicblur]

When these guns first came out they had problems and got a reputation as being junk.

They weren't nearly as bad as folks made 'em out to be. A lot of their junk status came from the but it's a Glock ripoff crowd.

When I bought my first polymer a looooong time ago, I handled the Sigma and a Glock, came home & did my research, and ended up picking the Sigma over the Glock!

As some who have been paying attention may have noticed, perfection over the years has proven to be...well, not so much!
All it took was a little research many moons ago to discover some of the warts.

 

[scbackpacker]

I haven't shot the 9mm but I do own a 40VE. When I bought the pistol I had read about it being a junk gun but for $230.00 new it was a cheap way for me to get into a 40 cal. handgun. My daughter and I went to the shooting range that day so I could teach her how to safely operate a firearm. We took my S&W 422 and the S&W 40VE. I bought 300 rnds of ammo when I bought the 40 and we took 250 rnds with us. I fired several mags to get a feel for the pistol and to see where the rnds hit the target. We put the gun to a test to see if it was dependable. She and I shot while the other loaded mags. No stopping except to change mags until the 200 rnds were gone. As soon as the sights hit the target we fired. It was tiring the trigger is the down fall of the Sigma but the one that I own has always fired with no problems. Try to shoot both and go with the one you like.

 

[Fat Boy]

I handled a 9mm Sig at Gander Mtn. earlier today- I still can't get over the long, long trigger pull

 

[basicblur]

I handled a 9mm Sig at Gander Mtn. earlier today- I still can't get over the long, long trigger pull

All it takes is a little practice (and dry-fire practice is easy/cheap).

Folks need to remember this is a SD, not target gun. Sure, firing a couple hundred rounds in a session may get tiring, but in a SD situation, that short/light trigger that doesn't tire you out with a quick couple hundred rounds might be too short/light in a SD situation, which is what the gun was designed for.

It's all about the right tool for the job-folks just need to figure out what the job is!?

 

[fxstchewy]

40VE, i have owned one for about 4 years now and have about 800-900 rds thru it without issue, it is not my favorite gun but i do like it, the trigger is not that big of an issue if you have ever used a revolver.

 

[ol' scratch]

I owned a 40. I hated the pistol. It had a horrible trigger pull too. I don't really think the 9 would be better for ME personally, but it is cheaper to shoot and easier to find ammo for. I never noticed any bulging with my 40.

 

[cog099]

Sigma's not as bad as others let on

I have had 6 over the years in both 9mm and .40 In fact my second gun(my 1st "real" auto) was a Sigma Value edition with the ugly gray frame. In all of those I have never had a single problem with them. I learned pistols with a S&W model 19, so the trigger pull was not that difficult to master.

The knocks on the pistol are almost always about the trigger. It's tough, but not impossible, and it does get better over time. If you are looking for a pistol to impress your buds with and shoot 2" groups at 15 yards(yes it can be done with practice,lots), then the Sigma is not the right gun for you. If you want a defensive pistol, plenty accurate at SD ranges, and does not have a trigger that would make a newbie nervous about picking up, then either Sigma would fit the bill.

For caliber, either is cheap enough to shoot. Premium SD ammo seems to be more plentiful for the .40 and is the same price as 9mm. If $3 box more for FMJ is a deciding factor then go with the 9mm. Also, if you have another person who is new to firearms, I would go with 9mm, as it be easier to learn to shoot with. Recoil of the .40 is snappy and in a new psitol shooter can lead to flinching and anticipation. I don't know where most folks shop but if you shop at WalMart or Academy, the .40 ammo is always more plentiful. During the ammo shortage, .40 was by far the easiest caliber to find.

I have some very expensive pistols, but I just can't pass up a good deal, so I always seem to end up with a Sigma. In fact I have sold two to good friends who needed a reliable handgun for home defense on the cheap. Do not pay over $275 for a used one in new condition. They are $300 new, so don't get taken. The only problem with the Sigma are guys trying to sell used ones for the price of new ones, then getting their knickers in a knot when you offer $250!

 

[HspncElvis]

Cog099, I agree with you. My SW9VE is great! 10lb trigger pull yes. I have no problem with that. I'm happy with my 9mm. I highly recommend it!