Hey guys Im thinking about getting a my first Sig sometime soon. The main purpose of this gun will be CCW. Currently my CBOB feels that role. The Sigs im looking at are, P229 and P220 Carry. I know the 229 is a .40 and the 220 is .45, but what else is different? And do I really need the SRT Trigger? How do this guns carry compared to a 1911? Any pics? Thanks guys.
Which Sig for CCW?
- Thread starter gadegaard
- Start date
- Status
smartshooter.45
Member
If you are used to a 1911 i would suggest a single action only version of the p220. i have a fullsized p220 SAO and love it. totally reliable, accurate, controllable. It puts big holes in things like your DW does.
Autolycus
Member
The P229 can also be a 9mm and a .357 Sig as well as a .40 S&W. I prefer 9mm in Sigs. But the P220 itself can be a great carry gun.
The SRT trigger is not needed but it is an excellent upgrade.
The SRT trigger is not needed but it is an excellent upgrade.
Jed Carter
Member
I currently own 5 SIGs, my CCWs are the P232, P239 and P229. P232 underpowered but conceals well. P239 holster carries great .357 SIG has punch, P229 a little too large but the best compromise of size and capacity .40 S&W. However this has all changed because of the CZ PCR, over all size only slightly larger than the P232 and holds 14+1 of 9mm, slide width very narrow and shoots like it's big brother.
Ala Dan
Member in memoriam
West German Models
Dependent on the occassion, I sometimes carry a full size .45 caliber
P220A, or a 9m/m compact P228; always with extra magazines~!
Dependent on the occassion, I sometimes carry a full size .45 caliber
P220A, or a 9m/m compact P228; always with extra magazines~!
AK103K
member
- Joined
- Dec 27, 2002
- Messages
- 7,610
Shoot the ones you think you might like the best, and go with the one you do.
I have both the guns you mentioned, and both will serve you well. Both are just slightly smaller than a Colt Commander, and they all carry the same. I doubt you'll notice any difference in that respect. I went from Commanders to a standard P220 when I first switched, and never had any problems.
Do you need the SRT? I dont know, do you? I dont think they are necessary, but some seem to think its important. Again, try and shoot both, and see what you think.
Personally, I'd take the P229 (357SIG) over the P220. The main reason being it carries more ammo in the mag and the grip is slightly more comfortable. Other than that, there is really no difference.
I have both the guns you mentioned, and both will serve you well. Both are just slightly smaller than a Colt Commander, and they all carry the same. I doubt you'll notice any difference in that respect. I went from Commanders to a standard P220 when I first switched, and never had any problems.
Do you need the SRT? I dont know, do you? I dont think they are necessary, but some seem to think its important. Again, try and shoot both, and see what you think.
Personally, I'd take the P229 (357SIG) over the P220. The main reason being it carries more ammo in the mag and the grip is slightly more comfortable. Other than that, there is really no difference.
Thnks.
Thanks guys for all that info. I was at a gun store on base yesterday and I held the P220. It felt a little to big for my hand. It was hard for me to reach the mag realease with my thumb, without rolling the gun. I couldnt try the trigger pull do to the tigger lock (do to dumb DOD Base rules). So how does the P239 in .40 compare to the p229? I know there is a round count loss, but does it feel better for people with hobbit hands?
Thanks guys for all that info. I was at a gun store on base yesterday and I held the P220. It felt a little to big for my hand. It was hard for me to reach the mag realease with my thumb, without rolling the gun. I couldnt try the trigger pull do to the tigger lock (do to dumb DOD Base rules). So how does the P239 in .40 compare to the p229? I know there is a round count loss, but does it feel better for people with hobbit hands?
P229, hands down. You get a better capacity, and .40 is no slouch. With the 229 I really suggest .40 or .357 because that pistol was particularly designed for these higher powered rounds as compared to 9mm. The P229 is a little heavier than a P228 for this reason. While I have absolutely no doubts about the 9mm version, I personally think that .40 is a better choice from a design and performance IN THAT PLATFORM standpoint (not trying to start or incite a caliber war, do not interpret it as such). Since so many people bring up weight as a major concern with CCW, why not put a tad more power with the weight?
To me, it seems like the grip size is perfect for a wide range of people. If you want it a little slimmer there are reputable aftermarket grips that might fit the bill. The stock grip feels good in hand and makes it very easy to control the shots at any rate you so choose to let them fly forth out of the barrel.
Aside from grip size, the thickness of the slide is another serious consideration. Be aware that the P229 will have more thickness. It's not a great big amount more, but people get finnicky when it comes to carry guns.
To me, it seems like the grip size is perfect for a wide range of people. If you want it a little slimmer there are reputable aftermarket grips that might fit the bill. The stock grip feels good in hand and makes it very easy to control the shots at any rate you so choose to let them fly forth out of the barrel.
Aside from grip size, the thickness of the slide is another serious consideration. Be aware that the P229 will have more thickness. It's not a great big amount more, but people get finnicky when it comes to carry guns.
gunsnharleys
Member
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2008
- Messages
- 7
I have a 239 and Houges make the grip more comfortable. I am 6'4 and I still feel that my 229 and 239 are bigger than I like to tote around. I tend to have my LCP or J frame Smith most often. I really am interested in the P238........
- Status