Walther PPS or SIG P245. Which one as my new CC piece?

Which one?

  • Walther PPS

    Votes: 34 61.8%
  • SIG P245

    Votes: 21 38.2%

  • Total voters
    55
Status
Not open for further replies.

bryanZ06

Member
Joined
Jan 7, 2007
Messages
184
Location
Georgia
Which would you choose and why? I'm equally comfortable and proficient with both striker fired and traditional DA/SA pistols. If I get the Walther I'll opt for the 9mm version. I like the size of the PPS, but I have several SIG pistols now (both West German and US versions) and like the track record of those. Should I get the smaller easier to conceal PPS, or should I go with the gun that has the proven track record?

I'm equally comfortable with carrying a 9mm or a .45, so let's not even factor that into the discussion.
 
Walther PPS

I bought my Walther PPS 9mm back in January of this year and I couldn't be happier with it. It has had zero failures or issues in 1,000+ rounds, has amazing accuracy, is quite comfortable to shoot and the fit and finish is very impressive.

It is so easy to carry that my Kel-Tec P3AT doesn't see much use any longer.
 
A friend of mine has purchased both. The 245 is an awesome weapon, has a great round, and the name of one of the best handgun companies around behind it. The PPS is a DREAM to carry. He bought the .40 pps and it's so nice and slim compared the the 245 (despite it being relatively compact). I'd have to go with the pps, despite my preference for the .45 (seeing as I carry my .38 over my .45 most of the time due to it's size).
 
PPS

About 10 months ago my wife and I got our CCH permits.

We looked at many pistols for her to carry and finally decided on the Walther.

It's been a great pistol. Very accurate and very reliable.

Easy to conceal too. :)
 
I'm a Sig fan, have a P228 and a P220 Carry.
I also have two PPS's one in .40 and one in 9mm.
For CCW I'd go PPS for sure. Been very pleased with mine.

As a side note I also have a P99 in .40, as far as I'm concerned Walther is right up there in the same league with Sig for quality.
Not to mention Sig really, really, pissed me off awhile back on a promotion they greatly mishandled. Thats what started my interest in Walthers.
 
PPS all the way take it with me where ever i go i got the .40 and love how it shoots not one hiccup slide it in the waistband and it just dissapears like magic super walther magic!
 
Been carrying my 9mm PPS for about a year now. I have had zero malfunctions with it, and I still really love shooting it. It conceals so well that even people who know I carry, don't know if I am or not.
 
SIG. Two friends had the PPS and had problems. But, for the size, the Glock 19, S&W M&P 45 Compact or XD 45 Compact have higher capacities.
 
+1 for Walther

I am very happy with my Walther PPS. It is a great gun to carry IWB and extremely shootable considering its compact size. If you go with the Walther be sure to check out the walther pps forums, some great information there.

Also make sure to read a specific thread on that forum about breaking in your pps. They gave me several great pointers that have made my PPS reliable. MY first 100 rounds were shot prior to reading the thread and I experienced 11 failures. My next 500 rounds were shot following advice in the forum and were failure free!
 
Significant differences

The two guns being considered, the Walther PPS and the Sig P245, seem quite different to me. They are similar in both being compact guns for concealed carry, but the Walther is a polymer 9mm with striker and DAO trigger, while the Sig is a metal .45 with hammer and DA/SA trigger. The Walther is much lighter and more compact, although the Sig is smaller than most other Sig models.

The Sig has been on the market for quite a few years and has a solid reputation for reliability, while the Walther is still fairly new by comparison.

Since the poster is considering both, he must be able to conceal both adequately. So I think the determining factor would be which gun does he want in his hand in an emergency? Personally I would probably go with the P245 because I like the .45 caliber for defensive use a little better than 9mm, and both guns have about the same capacity of 7 or 8 shots.

Sig_P245_02a.jpg
 
245 or 239 might get the nod on this just simply based on availability. I have an FFL and none of my distributors have a PPS in 9mm in stock right now.

pogo2-What do you carry your 245 in? I'm 6'3", 200 lbs and was thinking about carrying in a MTAC.
 
Actually I use a Colt Defender

BryanZ06: You asked what I carry my P245 in. The photo is somebody else's P245 - I don't have one. But I do carry a small .45, a Colt Defender, and use a Kramer belt scabbard in horsehide, which positions the gun high on the belt and very tight to the body. If I buy a P245 I'll probably get a Kramer belt scabbard to fit it. Here is my Defender in the holster:

ColtDefender42.jpg
 
Of the two guns I would choose the PPS

I have had my PPS for ~18 months. The gun is very accurate, unbelievably thin, and I have had zero problems through the first 1000 rounds. However, for concealed carry I usually choose my Kahr PM9, just as accurate, fits my front pocket better, and weighs less.
 
I have the PPS (and previously had the P245)… the Walther PPS makes a great all around CCW gun.

I agree with WRGAdog, the Kahr PM9 is outstanding for carry also… the PPS is (for me) on the border line of being too large for pocket carry – the PM9 makes a great pocket holster carry handgun.
 
PM9

Don't own the others under discussion but I do like the PM 9 for a compact 9mm SA carry.
I tried the PPS and ergonomically It did not work for me. For pocket carry it wouldn't conceal well enough either. Lived in FL at the time and wore shorts 11 months out of the year.

PPSPM9KTPF9.jpg

PPS/PM9/KelTec PF9

DSC02416.jpg

Check the weights. It is a huge factor for pocket carry.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top