Which is the better DUTY or Combat handgun

[gunsNgearguy]

glock. id take a 21 with some 27 round extended mags. i love the 1911 and it feels great in my hand but after the experience i had with a $1200 kimber, i'll stick with my tupperware guns. my Kimber had constant FTRB's. I had to change the recoil spring, buy a bunch of wilson combat mags and use specific ammo to make it run right. I know 1911's can be ultra reliable but EVERY glock ive ever bought has been 100% right out of the box.

 

[el Godfather]

The new Sig Sauer P226 TacOps. If you handled that gun, it blows all else on the list for the purpose stated. Comes with SRT and hiViz night sights with 4 20 shot magazine capacity. No to forget the new slimer Sig Sauer grip and rail. On top of all the Sig Sauer reliability. What's else would you want in a combat ready gun.

 

[Telekinesis]

grayhambone: It may cost more than $50 to make, but it sure doesn't cost anywhere near 1000% of the raw good's cost or they would be out of business. Like I said, Glock built their business and managed to get a following that was willing to pay for them. I'm not willing, and will probably never own a Glock.

Ranger, at the risk of taking this thread even further off topic, there are MANY more costs associated with bringing a product to market beyond just the materials. The company still has to pay for its R&D expense, wages, land, factory/equipment, but more importantly in this industry, licensing (both US and international), importation requirements/working with the fed gov etc. You're paying them for their knowledge of how to make a gun that fires every time the trigger is pulled (and yes, that goes for more companies than just Glock). It has nothing to do with getting a following to pay an exorbitant amount of money for a product, it is about covering every other cost associated with a business.

My choice for a combat handgun is currently a Glock 17, but I have been really tempted to change over to a Sig 226 (nothing fancy, just your average no rail 226). The only thing that's keeping me from doing it (apart from cost obviously) is that I don't want to have to decock the pistol before switching back to a long arm. But I will say that the fact that I can throw my glock into a pile of rocks and not feel any remorse for the finish is a big plus. I would absolutely hate myself for doing that to a Sig, even though I know it can take the abuse.

 

[Inebriated]

FOR ME... the Glock. I really love my Sigs... my favorite handguns overall, but as a .45 ACP guy, I just can't pass up 14 rounds in a Glock 21 vs. the 9 rounds in the Sig P220. And unloaded, the Sig is what, 30 ounces, and the Glock is 27 ounces? Not much difference there.

And honestly, they'll both work flawlessly, both fit my hand well, and are tough as nails. Capacity is my biggest factor.

 

[DannySeesUSMC]

From the tabs I've kept on things, what I've seen and experienced, first hand reports, etc. I will say HK first and then Walther, picked Walther for the poll since HK was not available.

These are the most consistent in reliability and durability the past 15 years and current - least amount of worry that 10 pistols purchased is 10 that will go a couple thousand rounds without issue and keep on ticking without regard for batches with problems, shifts in QA/QC, new MIM parts provider, etc.

Honorable mention going to Glock 17 and 19, SIG classic P series (225, 226, 228, and 229) and well-maintained Beretta M9/92 series.

I think most on the list are very good and if you test your specific, individual pistol from the list, and it is 100%, then it's perfect and enjoy it.

 

[Ranger30-06]

i own, uh, 5 makarovs. all i use is cheap commercial (russian) stuff. never a jam with any of them, doesn't matter how much i mix and match magazines.

I'm not saying that Makarovs are big jammers, but in correction to what I said earlier, the big problem is usually with the cheap 10 round magazines for the hi-cap Maks, not the ammo. My bad!

 

[Lee D]

Glock
Sig
CZ
Beretta
HK
S&W

that would be my list....
i like some of the new offerings, but i wouldnt wanna trust my life to a new design that hasnt proven to withstand 10s of thousands of rounds downrange

 

[Tennessee Ned]

I've got several firearms to choose from but when the SHTF ( e.g. dog barks at wind in the middle of the night ) I always reach for the Sig.

 

[Fiv3r]

I like my Glock. I don't want to, but I do. It's utterly reliable if incredibly ugly. I don't feel they are overpriced by any stretch. When I buy a gun, I'm not just buying the material. I'm buying peace of mind. There could be $20 worth of material in a G21, and I would still pay my $500+ for it. For better or worse, the boring and unsexy Glock is a pretty well documented track record of out of the box reliability.

Conversely, there aren't many 1911's in that price point that can offer the same level of performance, gorgeous and iconic though they may be.

For a SHTF combat side arm, I'll grab my Glock every time. I adore the more classic pistols, but I have never had an issue with a Glock. Reliable, tough, affordable, higher capacity. That's all I'd be looking for.

 

[Winkman822]

For duty/combat, I'd give the nod to the Sig P226 DAK or P229 DAK. I find Sigs to be incredibly easy to operate (at least for a righty), I've found all that I've operated to be quite reliable, and as far as accuracy goes, it's really splitting hairs for most on the list with the exception perhaps of a really good 1911 (i.e. Wilson Combat, Volkmann Precision, Ed Brown, Nighthawk Custom, or Les Baer).

 

[allaroundhunter]

The Sig Pro 2022 and P226/229 are not even in the same class.... I will take a P226/229 any day, but I cannot say the same for the 2022

 

[el Godfather]

i guess not much voice for the 226 Tacops.....strange..

 

[nyrifleman]

CZ75

 

[thefamcnaj]

I voted Glock.
They run and run no matter what. They run: dirty, dry, if theyve been neglected, the'll feed any ammo and they are light weight.
I would grab my 30, 19 and 23. All of the major calibers are covered. It shtf, no matter what ammo I could gather up(if mine were all shot up) I know my glocks would eat it just fine.

 

[rbernie]

To me, 'duty' and 'combat' actually imply very different requirements, especially if history's view on combat is taken into account.

 

[el Godfather]

When you mention glock Sig HK or CZ, reliability is pretty much top notch. Then you have to chose various feature set them apart. USP and Sig226Tacops arE just cut above. Just handle them and you wil realize what I am talking about.

 

[el Godfather]

Put HK and CZ on this list. No need to make run off polls.

 

[MikeRussell]

If I must pick a handgun that will eat what I feed it, be reliable and accurate, and must bet my life on it in a combat situation, then I'm picking up my CZ75 SP01. It's easy to control, will handle a wide variety of ammo, shoots well, is well balanced, and holds 19+1.

 

[guyfromohio]

Any on that list would do.... 1911 probably being last on my list because of capacity and reliability.

 

[MikeRussell]

Any on that list would do.... 1911 probably being last on my list because of capacity and reliability.

For me, placing a 1911 below the SP01 was strictly based on capacity. I've not had any reliability issues with 1911s in good repair...old military issue abused 1911s are another issue.

 

[mgmorden]

To top this all off, Glocks are absurdly overpriced. You people do realize that your paying $500 for 10oz of steel and 12oz of injected plastic. Using today's prices, that's only about $50 in materials. Do production costs really cost 10x what materials cost? Nooooo. Glock is, unfortunately, a company that has been built by a sucker customer base.

Though I own one, I'm not much of a Glock fanboy (I think there are better values out there and personally prefer my M&P to my Glock). I have to say the following though:

As with all things, market value is set by what people are willing to pay. Doesn't matter if it's $5 worth of materials in there or $150 - if people are willing to pay a certain amount for it then that's what its worth.

By the same token though, if its that simple to throw those materials together, then plenty of other companies should be able to build an equally reliable pistol and undercut them. I actually do think that has happened (a ton of companies make good polymer striker fired pistols these days), but you're still not seeing them get much under $300. Either they're all in cahoots, or there's other expenses keeping them from going much lower on costs.

 

[marksman13]

Coming from a 1911 convert I say Glock all the way. I owned a Kimber TLE and a Springfield Operator. I bought a Glock 21 OD and pretty soon the Operator got sold. The Kimber followed a few weeks later. I picked up a Kimber again today and it just dwelt wrong. It felt skinny and heavy.

 

[bikerdoc]

CZ 75 or 85 or the 45 cal model.

Just my .02

 

[holdencm9]

Poll should say "Beretta 92FS or M9 with Factory Mags" Then it may get more votes

 

[vaherder]

Walther P99AS

Have put thousands of rounds through Sig 226s and 229s and various HKs to i
nclude MK 21s and MK23s. Tac Ops is a nice gun but not any better then a run of the mill 226. Sigs are okay

Glocks are the Fiats of the gun industry cheap and mass market. Most if not all govt contracts are low bid. I would never trust my life to a Glock.

FNX nice gun. We have a few FNSs coming in so we can play with them in April.

I prefer a Walther P99AS in 9mm. Best ergos and reliable. I take the P99 over anything HK and Sig currently have on the market.

Forget 1911s. Didnt like them in OCS and dont like them any better now.

PPQ and PPS are also great guns and superior to any Glock out there.

My top three Walther P99AS, HKP30 and Sig P226. I won all three P30 and P226 rarely leave the save.