[Bren]

Originally Posted by GlennS

Here in North Alabama Sig pistols aren't looked on very highly. They are top of the line guns, easy to work on, easy to fire. The only drawback I have is the shape of the grips, hard to get a really high hold with the thumbs high like on a 1911. I have the P220, P225, P226, P228 and P229. For the 40 S&W's I have 357 Sig barrels. I consider the Sigs to be the best guns I have. Why have they not caught on any better then they have?

IMO, they are fairly expensive guns that aren't the best for anything. They have the DA/SA triggers that make them slower and require 2 different trigger techniques to shoot the first 2 shots well, they position the borer axis higher above the hand than just about anything but a Hi-Point.

Why pay more for a Sig, when all the guns that are fast, accurate and reliable enough to regularly win national competitions cost less (M&P, Glock, XD, CZ, etc.)?

[AtlantaR6]

Originally Posted by countrygun

How many Sigs have a "thumb safety"? Besides the little colt pony clones of course.

Ambi safety is what I meant

[Rick O'Shay]

Pricey, for sure, but they're also a bit bulkier than their competition.
I have a 220 in .45ACP, and it goes to the range frequently. But I have no other use for it. Not a carry weapon, and I prefer the M&P pistols for home protection.
I enjoy shooting the 220 as much as any of my .45's though.

[MIWildcat]

Originally Posted by Bren

IMO, they are fairly expensive guns that aren't the best for anything. They have the DA/SA triggers that make them slower and require 2 different trigger techniques to shoot the first 2 shots well, they position the borer axis higher above the hand than just about anything but a Hi-Point.

Why pay more for a Sig, when all the guns that are fast, accurate and reliable enough to regularly win national competitions cost less (M&P, Glock, XD, CZ, etc.)?

Yes because the ability to win "national competitions" is the most important factor in choosing a gun.

[silversport]

and it has been done with a SiG...(Ernest Langdon P220)

Bill

[silversport]

Originally Posted by AtlantaR6

Ambi safety is what I meant

which SiGs are you talking about???

Bill

[Bren]

Originally Posted by MIWildcat

Yes because the ability to win "national competitions" is the most important factor in choosing a gun.

I take it you've never shot in competition.

You win national competitions by having a gun with good accuracy that you can shoot faster than everybody else, while still hitting the target and which is reliable enough to never fail during a match that involves hundreds of rounds.

If you think that isn't a good way to choose/test your gun for self-defense, you're doing it wrong.

[MIWildcat]

Originally Posted by Bren

I take it you've never shot in competition.

You win national competitions by having a gun with good accuracy that you can shoot faster than everybody else, while still hitting the target and which is reliable enough to never fail during a match that involves hundreds of rounds.

If you think that isn't a good way to choose/test your gun for self-defense, you're doing it wrong.

And what kind of competition are we speaking of? Race guns, your serious fast ones, are often highly modified from stock. To boot, there is also a nice bias towards 1911's as well because they are so easily modified. SIG does make some nice SAO race guns as well.

Now, back to the SIG. They've been duty pistols and are used by special forces because they can shoot continuously without fail.

Neither my Glock or my SIG have ever failed in any way. No FTE, FTF, etc. between a stock Glock trigger and a stock SIG trigger, SIG wins hands down.

[AtlantaR6]

Originally Posted by silversport

which SiGs are you talking about???

Bill

938 and 238 are the ones I fancy.

[TheJ]

1) I think Sigs are perfectly fine pistols.
2) The OPs question practically begs a subjective answer.
3) Sigs likely aren't as popular as many striker fired pistols because striker fired pistols are generally easier to shoot well and/or learn to shoot with. That doesn't make non sig folks or new shooters "lazy" it makes them practical. There is a difference. If you shoot a bad guy with a Glock 19 versus a Sig P229 there is not a heck of a lot of difference as far as the bad guy is concerned.

Characteristics of good striker fired pistols like Glock that make them appealing:
* Many local LE use them (right or wrong people tend to want what they see local LE use)
* Lower bore axis. Practically speaking hammer fired pistols will always have a higher bore axis than striker fired pistols. That's just physics. The lower bore axis is going to mean less muzzle flip and easier recoil management. That means more comfort, less flinching, more likely to be accurate for new shooters. More accuracy and comfort to shoot means more fun and more likely to not be discouraged. It also tends to mean lower times in competition.
* Consistent trigger pull on striker fired pistols mean they are easier to learn to shoot well especially in timed competition. Many new folks start out in something like IDPA with there fancy new DA/SA Sig, they suck and want to improve. So they look around see lots of folks better then them with striker fired pistols and realize life would be easier if they don't first have to overcome the inconsistent trigger (and the higher bore axis) and decide to give Glock a try.
* Price is an obvious reason as well. Others have discussed this already.
* Competitors like HK take market share. In similar price points.
* The grips are a little big for some folks. Length of pull being long in DA combined with the large grips (even the "E" models) mean for folks with small hands Sigs tend to be tougher to be as fast as with many striker fired pistols while maintaining good consistent trigger control.

Yes pretty much any/all of the differences between the Sig and Striker fired pistols can be overcome with enough training (more for some than others) but I'm sure many folks simply make the decision to pay less for a firearm that is basically just as reliable and that is actually easier to shoot well (and learn to shoot well) for practical reasons.

All that said, I'm a fan of Sigs.

[MIWildcat]

Originally Posted by TheJ

1) I think Sigs are perfectly fine pistols.
2) The OPs question practically begs a subjective answer.
3) Sigs likely aren't as popular as many striker fired pistols because striker fired pistols are generally easier to shoot well and/or learn to shoot with. That doesn't make non sig folks or new shooters "lazy" it makes them practical. There is a difference. If you shoot a bad guy with a Glock 19 versus a Sig P229 there is not a heck of a lot of difference as far as the bad guy is concerned.

Characteristics of good striker fired pistols like Glock that make them appealing:
* Many local LE use them (right or wrong people tend to want what they see local LE use)
* Lower bore axis. Practically speaking hammer fired pistols will always have a higher bore axis than striker fired pistols. That's just physics. The lower bore axis is going to mean less muzzle flip and easier recoil management. That means more comfort, less flinching, more likely to be accurate for new shooters. More accuracy and comfort to shoot means more fun and more likely to not be discouraged. It also tends to mean lower times in competition.
* Consistent trigger pull on striker fired pistols mean they are easier to learn to shoot well especially in timed competition. Many new folks start out in something like IDPA with there fancy new DA/SA Sig, they suck and want to improve. So they look around see lots of folks better then them with striker fired pistols and realize life would be easier if they don't first have to overcome the inconsistent trigger (and the higher bore axis) and decide to give Glock a try.
* Price is an obvious reason as well. Others have discussed this already.
* Competitors like HK take market share. In similar price points.
* The grips are a little big for some folks. Length of pull being long in DA combined with the large grips (even the "E" models) mean for folks with small hands Sigs tend to be tougher to be as fast as with many striker fired pistols while maintaining good consistent trigger control.

Yes pretty much any/all of the differences between the Sig and Striker fired pistols can be overcome with enough training (more for some than others) but I'm sure many folks simply make the decision to pay less for a firearm that is basically just as reliable and that is actually easier to shoot well (and learn to shoot well) for practical reasons.

All that said, I'm a fan of Sigs.

I certain this is all subjective in comparison and we are on a Glock forum, so it should skew Glock.

Glocks are a lower price point than most SIG's (except the 2022's, which are within range), which makes them a bit more accessible to new shooters. Striker vs. Hammer is always up for debate and preference plays in here.

When I compare the G17/G19 to the P226/P229, the SIG's tend to have less muzzle flip due to the extra weight they carry, especially when I compare new shooters with both of these types of guns. I think that puts the high bore axis debate out the window. High bore has almost no net affect on the ability to shoot the SIG compared to the Glock.

Besides the striker vs. hammer, I think the biggest issue is the triggers and the pulls. Standard triggers on Glocks are usually god awful, as they are with many of the HK's. Once you get over DA by training DA, it isn't that big of a difference to learn to shoot it every effectively.

However, many shooters don't put many rounds down the range in a year and if they choose to not train, I'd suggest something other than a DA/SA. Go DAO or SAO and live with it. However, if I have to choose a go to war gun, it's the SIG. Very accurate, dependable, and proven.

Lastly, I'll just put this one out here...while I love both my SIG and Glock, I think the Walther PPQ is a better gun than the Glock, hands down. The trigger is perfect and it has taken the polymer game to another level.

[JuneyBooney]

Originally Posted by 9mm +p+

Ummmm, they are despite the fact that most are just in total lust over glocks. Serious folks run HK's and SIG's, don't get me wrong I've had glocks and never had an issue one but I prefer HK's and SIG's over glocks. Price probably has something to do with it as well, SIG's are not cheap, most people feel $600 on a gun that always works is smarter than $900 on a gun that always works. I prefer the feel of SIG and HK for that matter, I also like the quality of both of them over and above any glock that I've had or shot.

I think you are right on the money. It is cost of the firearm. You don't see lots of 1911 Colts, Baer etc because of cost but you see lots of off brand 1911s. Then Glocks are cheap and that is the reason of their popularity. Cops don't have Glocks because they are superior...theu have them because of cost. I have three Sigs and find them to be reliable and very accurate like the Hks I have too. You figure about 500 for a Glock vs eight to nine hundred for a HK or Sig.

[silversport]

Originally Posted by AtlantaR6

938 and 238 are the ones I fancy.

got it...you fancy them but don't like the thumb safeties...have you tried any of the original type P Series pistols???...you might like them...

Bill

[AtlantaR6]

Originally Posted by silversport

got it...you fancy them but don't like the thumb safeties...have you tried any of the original type P Series pistols???...you might like them...

Bill

I haven't, to be honest after seeing those I assumed all sig pistols had them. Just checked out the web Page, looks like I chose the only 2 that DO have them!

:embarrassed

[dpadams6]

Originally Posted by MIWildcat

I certain this is all subjective in comparison and we are on a Glock forum, so it should skew Glock.

Glocks are a lower price point than most SIG's (except the 2022's, which are within range), which makes them a bit more accessible to new shooters. Striker vs. Hammer is always up for debate and preference plays in here.

When I compare the G17/G19 to the P226/P229, the SIG's tend to have less muzzle flip due to the extra weight they carry, especially when I compare new shooters with both of these types of guns. I think that puts the high bore axis debate out the window. High bore has almost no net affect on the ability to shoot the SIG compared to the Glock.

Besides the striker vs. hammer, I think the biggest issue is the triggers and the pulls. Standard triggers on Glocks are usually god awful, as they are with many of the HK's. Once you get over DA by training DA, it isn't that big of a difference to learn to shoot it every effectively.

However, many shooters don't put many rounds down the range in a year and if they choose to not train, I'd suggest something other than a DA/SA. Go DAO or SAO and live with it. However, if I have to choose a go to war gun, it's the SIG. Very accurate, dependable, and proven.

Lastly, I'll just put this one out here...while I love both my SIG and Glock, I think the Walther PPQ is a better gun than the Glock, hands down. The trigger is perfect and it has taken the polymer game to another level.

Yep. Many always talk about the "low bore axis" making the striker fired guns softer to shoot.
I have compared the glock 31 to a 226/229 357sig. The difference, to me, is very obvious that the sigs are softer shooters due to the extra weight.

[MIWildcat]

Agree on the softer shooting. Also, I'd point out the E2 grips are better for those with smaller hands.

[silversport]

Originally Posted by AtlantaR6

I haven't, to be honest after seeing those I assumed all sig pistols had them. Just checked out the web Page, looks like I chose the only 2 that DO have them!

:embarrassed

...don't feel embarrassed...but you may be trying some new pistols now...

Bill

[Bren]

Originally Posted by MIWildcat

And what kind of competition are we speaking of? Race guns, your serious fast ones, are often highly modified from stock. To boot, there is also a nice bias towards 1911's as well because they are so easily modified. SIG does make some nice SAO race guns as well.

Like I said, you don't do it, or else you wouldn't have to ask. While "race guns" get a lot of pictures in gun magazines, they are a tiny minority in actual competition. I know abou and have built race guns, but most people who compete are shooting ordinary carry guns in IDPA, USPSA production or single stack, GSSF, etc. Where people come out and shoot ordinary guns from the gun shop, guns with a DA/SA trigger, including Sig,. Beretta and H&K, can't keep up.

[Glock_Convert]

Love mine. Excellent gun. But not worth the extra $$$ to me. Hence my handle in this forum . There are many other super reliable guns out there for less $.... like Glocks. A friend of mine in the army swears by sings though. Says the Berrettas don't hold up in the desert, so he would finagle a SIG as his sidearm.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk 2

[LawScholar]

In my neck of the woods they're very popular. One of the most popular.

In general, I can only think of expense as a legitimate reason they're not more prevalent. They're quality firearms.

[pgg00]

Trigger pull sucks (at least on my 226 and 239) and the price.

[TheJ]

Originally Posted by Bren

Like I said, you don't do it, or else you wouldn't have to ask. While "race guns" get a lot of pictures in gun magazines, they are a tiny minority in actual competition. I know abou and have built race guns, but most people who compete are shooting ordinary carry guns in IDPA, USPSA production or single stack, GSSF, etc. Where people come out and shoot ordinary guns from the gun shop, guns with a DA/SA trigger, including Sig,. Beretta and H&K, can't keep up.

Bingo

[ca survivor]

Originally Posted by AtlantaR6

Ambi safety is what I meant

going in my mind with all the Sig models I can remember one with an ambi safety except the new P938 or a 1911

[ozy]

As mentioed by several, they are pricey, but absolutely excellent in every aspect, imho.and ido love my gen 4 glocks. but the sig are simply on a different palteau.
Again , in my expereince.

[bunk22]

Old thread but different strokes for different folks. We have a competitive shooter at my squadron, a Hornet pilot who uses only Sig, a Sig 226 to be exact and from what I hear, is one hell of a shooter. A few others compete, all use Glock. I love my Sigs and Glocks but if I had to compete, it would be a Glock but that's just me. They are a bit expensive as well and only the Sig 2022 and 250 are within range of your standard Glock.