PDA

View Full Version : would you trade a SIG220 for Glock


STEVE M
February 27, 2005, 07:40 AM
If you had been carrying a SIG220 and were now allowed to carry a Glock

(if you buy it) would you make the switch? My co. is in the process of

allowing Glocks (any except the compact models). So what do you guys

think?

Sarge
February 27, 2005, 08:08 AM
No way.

http://www.thesixgunjournal.com/p220.htm

WillBrayjr
February 27, 2005, 08:17 AM
Heck no! Although Glock has the the largest chunk of LE sales now, more and more departments are adopting Sigs! Soon enough Sig will be the leading manufacturer of sidearms for LE!

I've only seen a Sig jam twice that was because the P230 had around 30,000rds through it and needed a new recoil spring, after that the P230 was as good as new. I've seen Glocks jam several times, including a 17C that I owned. I've only had problems with 9mm Glocks, never with the larger caliber Glocks!

BigSlick
February 27, 2005, 08:30 AM
Depends upon your environment.

If you work in anything near the conditions of the JSSAP (mid-80's) torture tests, then a Glock may be an alternative.

Otherwise, not in a bzillion light years - and I like Glocks.

BigSlick

HighVelocity
February 27, 2005, 08:33 AM
I like Glocks but I would not trade my Sig 220 for one. :eek:

yy4u
February 27, 2005, 08:45 AM
Trading in a Sig 220 for a Glock would be like trading a brand new Ferrari for a Camaro.

RWK
February 27, 2005, 09:03 AM
N E V E R ! !

Springer45
February 27, 2005, 09:23 AM
For a Glock and $500, maybe.

I have and like Glocks too. They're just not a Sig.

STEVE M
February 27, 2005, 09:38 AM
Sounds good to me, I have a lot invested in my SIG's. Sometimes you just

get that 'want a new gun feeling' and need to be talked out of it. Thanks,

guys!

Boats
February 27, 2005, 10:15 AM
Good job, I wouldn't trade a 220 for two Glocks.

Ozzieman
February 27, 2005, 11:16 AM
I would still take a Sig over a glock any day.

Eric Larsen
February 27, 2005, 11:23 AM
Hell, Hell, Hell, Hell, Hell..............NO NO NO NO NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Shoot well.............

Jungle Work
February 27, 2005, 11:43 AM
Depends on how much money the person with the Glock wanted to chip in.

Jungle Work

Hard Ball
February 27, 2005, 11:56 AM
No! No! No! The P220 is by far the superior pistol.

Ala Dan
February 27, 2005, 12:19 PM
NO WAY

keens
February 27, 2005, 02:16 PM
Absolutly not...

OH_FFL
February 27, 2005, 06:09 PM
Keep The Sig and buy the Glock. Then you can decide for yourself. I wouldn't trade my P220 ST for anything. :)

U.F.O.
February 27, 2005, 06:11 PM
It's hard to improve on a Sig P-220. I've got a pair of nice 1911's that have been gathering dust since I brought the Sig home.

U.F.O.

Bullrock
February 27, 2005, 07:05 PM
If I owned a Sig. there is no way I would trade it for a Glock

blades67
February 27, 2005, 09:42 PM
I wouldn't trade my SIG P220 for a Glock. I'd trade my Walther P99 for a Glock 31 in a heartbeat!

TheEgg
February 28, 2005, 03:21 PM
I don't mind Glocks, but in this case I think you would be trading down.

TacticalReload
February 28, 2005, 03:49 PM
If you mean that you would get a Glock and start carrying it, but not necessary SELL the SIG, then I would say... depends. If someone put a P220 and a G21 in front of me and said, "Take one"... well, I would pick up the SIG 99 out of 100 times.

However, you gain in capacity, which could be a bonus for a duty weapon.

Bytor94
February 28, 2005, 04:00 PM
Nein, nyet, uh-uh! :)

Logs
February 28, 2005, 06:13 PM
I own the Glock 21 and Sig 220. My Sig is Very Accurate, and is slimmer to carry and to hold. Glocks are nice, mine has Night sights which I really don't have a need for. I think it comes down to what gun fits a person the best and what you can shoot more accurately. Most shoot outs only last for a few rounds anyway. Now you probably carry 24 rounds of .45(3 mags) with a Glock you are looking at 42 rounds on your belt. Do you really need the extra weight.
You also have to consider the Saftey on the Sig, nice to have the decocker. :)

OBIWAN
February 28, 2005, 09:05 PM
Which model of Glock????

I would likely do it

You might be further ahead to upgrade to a DAK

ryucasta
February 28, 2005, 09:13 PM
Since I own both SIG's and Glock's I would say that it depends on what you are looking for in the firearm. Glocks tend to average 2 more rounds in the magazine for the same sized package. I.E. G19 15 rounds SIG228 13 rounds.

Some folk's prefer the DA/SA trigger of the SIG while other prefer the single trigger weight of the Glock. In a nutshell try (rent or borrow) them both out side by side at your local range and see which one you prefer since after all you probably didnt buy you last car without having first given it a test drive.

MoW
February 28, 2005, 09:23 PM
Yes, I would make that trade-----------------------------if you had a gun to my head and I had no choice!!!!!!!!!!!! :barf:

Bob41081
February 28, 2005, 09:25 PM
I have to agree with Logs and Ryucasta. I have a Sig 226 and Glock 23 and 26. I have grown to prefer the Glock trigger to that of the Sig. I don't like the change from DA to SA of the Sig.

Bob

w4klr
February 28, 2005, 09:39 PM
I think I'm the only sicko here that would trade the Sig for a Glock...

WildWhenWet
February 28, 2005, 09:43 PM
Absolutely NOT. There are few .45s on the market that compare in reliability and accuracy with the 220.

Arizona Fusilier
February 28, 2005, 09:45 PM
I also own both Sigs and Glocks.

Even if I was LEO (I'm not), I'd have to be getting into a firefight with multiple suspects on a regular basis before I would trade a P220 for a Glock. The additional firepower should be acknowledged, but it's the only advantage I see.

Well, maybe double/single trigger action transition too.

Still, SIG is the superior weapon for most purposes.

FirstFreedom
March 1, 2005, 01:48 PM
Umm, no, I wouldn't. But if you hate crunchentickers or feel the need for 5 more rounds (13 vs. 8), and didn't mind Glock's deficiencies, then I could see it.

Any .45
March 1, 2005, 01:58 PM
Hell F#^k No.......

k_dawg
March 1, 2005, 02:12 PM
no

NO

and

HELL NO!

TBT
March 1, 2005, 02:14 PM
No way no how ... not in a million years.

firedog68
March 1, 2005, 02:39 PM
NO WAY. I love glocks but not trade.


ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ


SUPPORT OUR TROOPS
GOD BLESS THE US

Tantrix
March 1, 2005, 02:49 PM
Well if we're talking value, the SIG is worth more than the Glock in dollars. Now if we're talking functionality, to me the SIG is worth no more than the Glock there. People like to assume since SIG's cost more they are the better gun. Glock has proven time and time again that their firearms can be every bit as accurate and reliable compared to others costing hundreds of dollars more. You are going to get 2 different replies in this thread. The inexperienced shooters will of course say hell no, Glock is inferior, blah blah. Those that know better, however, are going to tell you the truth. It depends on the use of the gun.

I personally carry a Glock 30, and I wouldn't carry a P220 over it. The P220 holds less rounds, is heavier, and is bigger. All 3 of those are worse than the Glock for carry. Simply put, the P220 is reliable and accurate. It's a hell of a handgun. But the Glock 30 beat most of all other .45's on the market when it came to carry. It's dead-on accurate, lightweight, small, holds 10+1 of your favorite .45ACP, and mine has been 100% reliable. To me, those traits make up the perfect self-defense weapon.

WillBrayjr
March 1, 2005, 03:43 PM
Actually German made guns are a bit better. I've shot both Sigs and Glocks, never had any malfunctions with Sigs like I've had with a couple 9mm Glocks. I know alot of officers that are issued Glocks that wen't out and personally bought Sigs because the Glocks wouldn't work for them.

WDE-G19
March 1, 2005, 05:11 PM
Both the Sig and the Glock are wonderful weapons, in the end it is the end user's preferences and biases that will shape their decision more than anything.

If you've been shooting traditional DA w/ Decocker since the day you were born and love it, you will probably love the Sig design.

For me, I don't like DA as much as DAO striker-fired designs like the Glock, and I don't shoot the Sig as well as the Glock, and I did try. I owned a P229 .40 several years ago, and even sent it off to Robar to get it Roguard'd and NP3'd after I found out that the slide catch, mag release, and mags would rust. After I spent all that money, try as I might, I found that I could not shoot the gun as well as I could a Glock. I loved that Sig, and wish I still owned it just to marvel at it's two-tone beauty, fondle it, and feel that buttery action one more time, but I don't regret trading it for a G23 that I immediately shot better. That's just me, though.

I think it's notable that both HK and Sig are now offering DAO systems with lighter and shorter triggers (LEM module and DAK, respectively). A strong argument could be made that this is in response to the Glock design, which definitely has some advantages.

In terms of reliability, I have shot over 10k rounds through Glocks, and never had any malfunctions of any kind with anything other than cheap reloads. My Sig never malfunctioned in 2k+ rounds. The Glock is easier to maintain-- period. It just doesn't get any easier than the Glock.

There are good arguments to pick either. As for me, if I decided again to step up to a more expensive gun, it would be an HK P7M13 or perhaps a Kimber, nothing else.

liliysdad
March 1, 2005, 05:36 PM
Interestingly enough, I can lend some very relevant advice. I have the latitude to carry whatever duty gun I choose. The entire department carries Glocks of one persuasion or another. I carry a Sig P220.

I prefer the trigger to the Glock. I despise polymer frames, and Glocks trigger and grip anglemake me nauseus (sp). However, do not take this to mean I feel Glocks are bad guns. I prefer single stack magazines to double stack magazines, and I dislike any magazine that is made of plastic.

They are not, they are wonderfully reliable, and suitably accurate weapons. If I were required to carry one I would, and not bitch a whole lot, but I wouldnt buy one. It is simply a matter of personal preference. By the way, I am experienced enough to know that name means nothing. However, sometimes you really do get what you pay for, and the quality of the Sig exemplifies this.

abelew
March 1, 2005, 05:42 PM
Yep, I would buy one, and carry one if I was allowed. Glocks are great carry guns, and I do not wish to start the Glock V. Whatever gun, or the Polymer V. steel/aluminum/etc. arguement. They have a tough coating, a high capacity magazine, are reliable, relativly inexpensive, and low maintanence. Plus, I could beat the crap out of it, carrying it everywhere, and not feel bad when the finish or the gun got beat up a little bit.

WDE-G19
March 1, 2005, 06:15 PM
Quote-- "Trading in a Sig 220 for a Glock would be like trading a brand new Ferrari for a Camaro."

I don't know about this analogy. Dave Sevigny and many other competitive shooters seem to be able to "drive the Camaro" pretty quickly and accurately.

glock19er
March 1, 2005, 06:26 PM
i had about all the sigs in the past and glocks at one time or another.to me the sig (store in grease) had parts that could rust,many more moving parts than a glock and seemed more like a delicate handgun compared to a glock.sig was more accurate and a good trigger pull but i found out the glock was a easier gun to use and learn than the sig when it came to carrying which to this day i still carry a glock 19 with 5000 rounds without a hiccup and have a glock 17 with over 12000 rounds with no hiccups either.the darn things even shoot wolf ammo when my sig 226 wouldnt digest it.also the glock 19 seems to hide better than my sig 226 did.both are great guns but i stick with what has worked for me all of those years owning handguns a glock!!!