To Sigma or not to Sigma...

[CZ52GUY]

A couple of mine in $250 range...

...Makarov's...$150-175 OTD.

Arcus - Aimsurplus has the SA 94's for $219...I bought the DA 98 for $290 OTD.

Good luck!

CZ52'

 

[slh02]

I would spend the extra 30 bucks and get the Steyr M-9 or M-40. Much better gun for very little more money, IMO. The CDNN catalogue that I just recieved today has the M-9 for $278 and the M-40 for $290.

 

[scottsw1]

I once owned a Sigma, but later traded it off for a Springfield XD 40. The Sigma was a great looking pistol, it just wasn't that great to shoot!

 

[000Buck]

Hmmmm...I asked a question like this a few months ago and got mixed reviews like you are here. I asked about a Remington 7400, some people loved them, some people had lots of problems with theirs. I went ahead and bought one, and I had the problems others warned me about.

The Sigma is a "hit or miss" or "luck of the draw" gun, just like the 7400. Unless you have really good luck, you should pass.

 

[makdoddle]

I have always been told "Do not buy a Sigma".

 

[355sigfan]

It`s become all the rage to bash Sigmas even if you`ve never shot one much less owned one.
END

Roomate owns one I have shot it its a jamamatic pos.
Pat

 

[3 gun]

When I started shooting again in 1999, I had a 9mm Sigma. The one I picked up came from CA by way of eBay, new for $279 with shipping. Good pistol, wish I had never sold it. It may be true they are a hit or miss deal on the QA, but the one I had was a big hit and I'm sorry I didn't keep it. It would shoot/feed anything you could load into the mag. 17 rounds of 90-147gr, lead-FMJ-HP, mix and match at will, nothing slowed it down. The only downside with the pistol was it would not group better than 6"@ 25yds with any load. I know I can shoot better than that. It is the only pistol I’ve owned that I knew I could out shoot.

 

[The Mighty Beagle]

I personally wouldn't chance a Sigma, but if you just hafta have one, Davidson's has NEW production Stainless ones for $257 until Jan. 15th. I love CDNN, but what stinkers they are. Those appear to be the old-style Sigmas.

BTW, I'm totally with you on the cheap-guns-are-irresistable bandwagon. Some of my best guns are cheap guns, and I thought the same thing when I saw the Sigmas. I guess I'll just put up with a lot from a gun if it's inexpensive and still works well.

 

[Tropical Z]

It would sure be nice to know if any internal changes have been made to make the trigger lighter since the enhanced models came out.The one i dry fired several years ago must have been the old model and i would hope that S&W had lightened the trigger a bit by now.Its just neat to think that you or i could get a NEW 9mm or 40S&W,S&W for less than $300.00-thats .22lr territory!

 

[Abominable No-Man]

I have had Sigmas in the past. Old-style and enhanced. They were 100% reliable.

So maybe I'm just lucky. Still don't see where all these Sigma horror stories are coming from. If the thing was that bad, I would think that S&W would have withdrawn them from production a long time ago.

Maybe I work for S&W (it's been alluded to in the past). I wish.

Why don't I own them anymore? For the same reason I don't have my Glock 19 or H&K USP anymore either. Don't care for plastic-framed pistols of any kind.

ANM

 

[SouthpawShootr]

I have one in .357. Dealer gave me a good price on it new. I don't shoot it much but it's been 100%. I did have to send it back to the factory b/c the mag catch stopped working. They replaced it and sent back within a week. Worked like a champ since. Try and find a range that rents these out somewhere before you buy and try one out. If you still like it, just make sure you get one of the newer models. You might also look around over at www.smith-wessonforum.com to balance what you here over on this board. The threads I've read over there are pretty much middle of the road (basically, it's ok, but you can do better type comments). You also will find comments on specific problems.