sigpro 9mm opinions please?

Status
Not open for further replies.
M

megatronrules

Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2003
Messages
960
Location
The sunshine state,Florida
I am looking for insight on these guns from people who own them and to see if they are a good choice for another polymer frame 9mm? (I have 2 glocks in 9mm now) I am also wondering who makes a good Iwb rig or any rig for that matter for these guns? Any insight also on reliability would be great altogh being its a sig I would think its a great gun and do they sit as high in the hand as other sig models i.e. the 220,229 for example? Thanks for any info.
 
I had one and sold it. I did replace it with another Sig, the 2009 was too thick for my hand but was totally reliable. They do not make commercial hi-caps for it so it is large for a 10 round 9mm but I have heard that you can use 40 S&W mags and fit more 9mm in it.

I do not recall how high it sat in the hand but it is definetly higher than the Glocks you have.
 
I own the 2340 with both 40 and 357 barrels. I have also owned or own at one time or another a Colt 1991A1, Taurus PT-99, Steyr M40, and HK USPc 40.

I love the SigPro. It has never had a malfunction of any kind with about 300 rounds through the 357 and 250 rounds through the 40 barrel.

I think as far as Polymer pistols go it is over engineered. It is built like a tank. The rails on the guns are nice and beefy. It does have a high bore axis compared to the glock or steyr but I really don't think it matters. I can get back on target and shoot the Sig just as fast as the Steyr. Mine shoots like a laser. Nice and accuarate.

The DA trigger pull will take some getting used too if you are used the glock trigger. I think the DA trigger is better on the SigPro then the classic sigs. THe SA trigger pull is nice and crisp.

I have a FIST Kydex Paddle holster for mine. Several companied are making holsters for the SigPro.

Things I don't like are the non-standard rails and it could be a litter thinner but so can most glocks.

I love mine and I can reccomend one with out hesitation
 
Dittos.
I have a 2340 in 357SIG, and I'm not trading it off anytime soon.
It has been tight to the point of almost not going into battery for a long time, thousands of rounds, that has been my only complaint.
Feeding probs, never.
Points like a laser, scary accurate, too.
I'm still waiting for the 9mm conversion barrel group purchase from bar-sto, but this may happen soon.
Get the night sights.
I must agree, the proprietary sight rail is a bummer, the only good laser is really expensive, but on the good side looks like a part of the gun once it's installed.
 
I like mine. I haven't carried it on a regular basis. I have other guns that are much more size efficient for this purpose. I suggest you look at the pro undercover at www.comp-tac.com

Mine has been 100% after some initial break-in of less than 200 rounds. I think it is an excellent choice for a polymer frame gun. The interchangeable grips are definitely a plus I wish other polymer framed guns had. If you can get over the fact that it is rather oversized, it could make an excellent defensive pistol.

I might even add a 2340 in the near future, who knows.
 
I had a SIG Pro in 40-S&W, bought it at a great price (Blue Like Special for $440). I bought it and a Glock 23, mostly for my wife to have something that held more than 6 shots that didn't have an active external safety. Shy decided she just liked the 686 more than the SIG or the Glock.

I sold the SIG and kept the Glock. I personally put about 450 rounds through the SIG and it never failed. Not in the first 50 shots or the last 400 shots. Perfect. I just didn't like how high the balance was, some would say a high bore axis. The 1911 is what I'm used to and what I shoot the most of, along with the CZ75 guns. Their bore axis is what feels 'right' to me. The Glock and the FN have a lower bore axis which for me, isn't too hard to get used to. The SIG I just couldn't get used to. Ever time I'd draw the gun, I'd end up looking right at the back of the slides instead of the front sight and I didn't want to unlearn the 1911 to learn the SIG.

For a good price, it's a good gun... nothing 'wrong' with it but if you're completely comfortable with the Glock, you might not like the SIG once you play with it for a while.

SigPro1.jpg
 
It is unattrative, due to the extremely long slide release lever, tapering dust cover/trigger guard (it's Daewoo-rific) and triangle mag release.

It is less accurate than a Sig Classic. I say that because I have read tests that suggest that. I have also asked Sig Pro owners for bench rest groups and no one seems to have bothered to test their gun from the bench. I'd be happy to be proved wrong on this one.

The backstrap is extremely wide in the web area. A very big grip in general for such a recent design. It's as big as the Beretta 92, that was designed in the early '70s.

Not light. One of the benefits of polymer is light weight, and the Pro is as heavy as most alloy framed guns.

On the upside, the gun can be found new for $400, which is cheap for something so reliable. But so is a CZ PCR.

So ends the dissenting opinion.
 
I just got rid of my 2009, not because of anything really wrong with the gun, I just decided any full sized 9mm of mine ought to have full capacity magazines. Like my Beretta and CZ. It was a sweet shooter, though. The double-action was better than the P239 I had by far. Very well built, as others have pointed out. Looks like it would last forever. Everything I found wrong with it had to do with the magazine. I got a 2340 magazine, but it only held 11 or 12 (can't remember), and I didn't like the way the 9mm rounds set up so high in the magazine due to the wider lips. Just didn't trust it. So 10 rounds, no full capacity available here in the USA, and they didn't fit into the magazine well with "precision". Too much back and forth movement for my taste. The little finger exerting pressure on the finger rest part of the magazine made it "shift" too much. But I still believe that for the money, it was a fine, reliable weapon. Great sight picture too, by the way. I already regret getting rid of it.
 
I would not say it is less acurrate then the classic sigs. I think the people that say that are the people who don't own the Pro and own a classic.

From Petes 357sig page review:

"Accuracy

I frankly couldn't believe it. Even with its short sight radius, compared to my Long Slide Glock 35, it shot just as accurately, maybe even better. It was common to share the same ragged hole in the target within 21 feet. Both Ayoob and Walt Rauch have stated that the sig pro is very accurate, equal to or better than the P229."

Also:
"Addendum (SP2340 Versus P229)

1. More efficient, snag free, recessed decocker and slide catch lever design.

2. Beveled, narrower slide.

3. Less blocky, more pleasant streamlined slide and frame shape.

4. Optional grips for various sized hands --- great feature.

5. At least as accurate as my P229's, maybe more so.

6. Less parts.

7. Less maintenance.

8. Less expensive.

9. More durable.

10. Better recoil damping due to polymer frame.

11. 1 piece fire control unit to easily switch between DA/SA and DAO.

12. Integral accessory rails for light attachments, etc.

13. Awesome, tough slide rails --- built to last longer than the Classic SIG models.

14. Excellent over-all pistol balance, as with the P229. "
 
I certainly wouldn't include inaccurate in any description on the sig pro series.
Or fragile.
Or unreliable.
Or with the 357SIG, underpowered.
Yeah, there are smaller guns, but it conceals ok, and personally, if I ever had to draw my piece, I'd want the biggest baddest piece I could carry without my knees buckling drawing attention to the gun. (A .300 win mag gets heavy after a while, and there's just no good way to present quickly when challenged.)
It's really a good compromise.
I've shot the smaller glock 357SIG, and it's a bear for me to shoot.
(Really light, really small, 2 finger grip, etc).
I couldn't shoot that gun under pressure, no way.
The sig pro series is a good all-purpose gun.
I suspect the only reasons it hasn't caught on is the lack of high-caps, was later to market than glocks, and has a proprietary sight rail.
Also (Operator error alert.) it's very easy to eject the mag under stress.
That would normally be a good thing, except that I bump it when carrying occasionally, and have had it eject under my pillow at night. (The H&K USP series has a much, much better mag release.)
 
Like I said before, it would be interesting if a Pro owner actually shot the gun for groups from the bench. Then we would have a reference for its comparable accuracy to other models rather than stuff like:

"Shoots accurately in my hands"

or the even more suspect,

"One ragged hole at 21 feet [7 yards]."


Case in point, my brother's beautifully made Walther P5 has a decent trigger, points well and is easy to shoot. However, its factory test target is a +4" group. The P5 will still clean house at 7 yards-so will a derringer.

A mechanically sloppy gun with a good trigger will often produce better combat groups than a tight gun with a bad trigger. That doesn't make the first "accurate".
 
I may try that soon, and do a Stephen A. Camp style range report.
I have a friend who has one in .40, and mine in 357SIG, we may co-author.
I'll see if I can get him to join me in this.
I have a month vacation soon, and got a few rounds just sitting around.
I'll prolly wait for my bar-sto conversion barrel to arrive, and break it in before that happens.
Maybe June.
 
I never shot my SIG Pro for groups off the bench... just doesn't really strike me as the type of gun that longs to have that done. But I will say that it was probably less accurate, in my hands, than any of my 1911s. And probably less accurate in my hands than my G23 as well.
 
My friend Josh offered to help me co-author a 2340 range report, and we will commence once I have the 9mm conversion barrel from Bar-sto. I hope it shoots well with the conversion barrel in it.
I already replied by accident to the range report thread, so if you want to suggest ammo types, or specific tests, reply here or there, to avoid being redundant.
If anyone has any 357SIG handload recipes using rainier plated bullets, I wouldn't mind an info upload.
 
Hey, that really is great accuracy. I'll happily stand down on that the accuracy issue.

I'm curious how it does in .40. .40 gets a bad rep for accuracy, but does decent in guns designed for it, like the USP. Maybe the Pro is another winner in the accurate .40 search?
 
While I can't speak for my friend Josh, I can say this.
In all the times that we have gone out to the range, I haven't seen his beretta .40 outshoot his 2340.
He is a good shot, and keeps the best of day target.
His best-of-day targets are usually less than 3".
Not rested, no sand bags, not leaning against anything, average day, 25 yards. I forgot to add that he shoots lead reloads most of the time.
The beretta was usually around 4" or so. Not bad, just not as good. He later sold his beretta 96, from what I hear.
While we compared the two sig pros informally (Inevitable.), and the 357SIG won, a formal range report will end any doubt.

He could very well reload 3 boxes of lead reloads for every box of winchester 357SIG that I shoot.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top