Sig P226R vs Glock 22

[tacstar]

I am interested in purchasing a .40 cal pistol. I am interested in a Sig Sauer P226R. One of the more common .40 cal pistols in the market is the Glock 22. The Glock 22 has been adopted by several LE agencies.

I have read that the Sig Sauer is a far superior weapon however it has been deemed cost prohibitive some departments & they have opted to go with Glock.

What are the advantages of a DA/SA pistol over a striker fire pistol if any?

I have read that the DAK trigger has a less than favorable reset.

What justifies Sig Sauer's price point? Is it based on its frame not being polymer or are there additional variables?

[jmr40]

I've never had a Sig in 40, but have had a couple of 9mm Sig 226's. I've owned several 40's in the past made by Glock, Smith, and XD. I'd just as soon have 9mm as 40.

And between Sig 226 and Glock I'd buy the Glock even if it cost more. Or for that matter any modern striker fired pistol. I'm not just a Glock fanboy. I'd rather have a Smith M&P or Sig 320 than a Sig 226 if I thought I might actually have to use one in a life or death situation. I still own a 226, but it is a safe queen.

What are the advantages of a DA/SA pistol over a striker fire pistol if any?

The perceived advantage is that the long, heavy trigger pull for the 1st shot is safer. In reality the long, heavy trigger pull makes it harder to hit the target. And the followup shots are much lighter making them a little harder to master. It can be done, but just adds unnecessary complexity to a stressful situation.

Striker fired pistols aren't just cheaper, but have proven to be more reliable and rugged too. Having the same trigger pull for every shot means more rounds on target and the lighter weight doesn't hurt either.

[jr24]

Both are good guns and will be a reliable .40 platform. The Sig is probably a better made firearm in terms of technique and the metal frame but I wouldn't say it is a far superior weapon by any metric.

The DA/SA system does get you a really nice SA trigger but at the cost of a long DA trigger that can take longer to master while the Glock gives a consistent trigger pull (that I personally prefer). The DAK is a consistent pull but long, unpleasant, and with a bad reset, IMO. I am not a fan.

I personally prefer the Glock because I like the trigger better as well as the ability to get a much higher grip on the gun and better recoil control. Though I do very much enjoy the sig hammer p series a lot so either gun is an excellent option.

Worth noting is both can be had for good prices used as police trade ins.

[stephen426]

Originally Posted by jmr40

The perceived advantage is that the long, heavy trigger pull for the 1st shot is safer. In reality the long, heavy trigger pull makes it harder to hit the target. And the followup shots are much lighter making them a little harder to master. It can be done, but just adds unnecessary complexity to a stressful situation.

This is exactly what brought me over to the "Dark Side". I had a Sig P228 that I shot very well (single action). Double action is long and heavy, making the first shot hard to hit with accurately AND quickly. You won't always have time to cock the hammer back or make a long smooth trigger pull. Interesting thing is long DA pulls are actually easier if you pulls all the way through instead of pulling slowly.

The Glock is also lighter and the tenifer finish is very corrosion resistant. There are plenty of after-market products that make the trigger much better on the Glock.

[jr24]

Originally Posted by stephen426

This is exactly what brought me over to the "Dark Side". I had a Sig P228 that I shot very well (single action). Double action is long and heavy, making the first shot hard to hit with accurately AND quickly. You won't always have time to cock the hammer back or make a long smooth trigger pull. Interesting thing is long DA pulls are actually easier if you pulls all the way through instead of pulling slowly.

The Glock is also lighter and the tenifer finish is very corrosion resistant. There are plenty of after-market products that make the trigger much better on the Glock.

I have recently, again, dedicated significant range time and ammo trying to master the DA pull on my very nice Sig P229 SRT. Many dot torture drills (and many others) and I'm making progress but the cold, hard truth is I am just so much better with any of my Glocks or 1911s.

[craddleshooter]

The 226 was not designed for the DAK trigger. It was designes to have a double/single trigger. Otherwisw the DAK trigger is going to be longer and heavier. The issue is not is the Sig less accurate, but that you shoot the glock more accuratley. The Glock probably just fits you better than the Sig. tell you what. Mail me the sig and I will throw it in the ocean for you. I promise.

[tallball]

The DAK trigger is an abomination.

All of my Glocks shoot great.

I just bought a barrel and magazine for my Glock 22, and now it is also a 9mm pistol.

[DFM914]

The P226 is superior when compared to the Glock. The SIG wins hands down!

[pblanc]

For me, the decision would be easy. The SIG wins without a second thought. Although I slightly prefer the P229 to the P226.

For you, the decision should come down to whether you want a striker-fired pistol, or a DA/SA hammer-fired pistol.

Disadvantages of the traditional double action (DA/SA) pistol are:

They are often more expensive than striker-fired pistols.

If you want a very compact pistol, the selection of DA/SA pistols is quite limited compared to striker-fired pistols.

If you plan to use them for self-defense, you need to master both the double action trigger pull, and the DA to SA transition. If you are only going to be shooting at the range, you can shoot in SA mode exclusively if you wish to.

The exposed hammer can increase the tendency for the pistol to snag.

The advantages to traditional double action, hammer-fired pistols:

The single action trigger of quality DA/SA pistols is considerably better than the action of the stock striker-fired pistols I have shot.

The long, deliberate DA trigger pull reduces the likelihood of an accidental or premature discharge in a tense situation.

A lot of people are more comfortable with a round kept chambered in a DA/SA pistol than in a striker-fired pistol without an external, manual safety.

The hammer of a hammer-fired DA/SA pistol can be ridden with the thumb while holstering reducing the chance of an accidental discharge occurring due to a foreign body in or entering the holster.

DA/SA pistols have second-strike capability. Most striker-fired pistols do not.

Many people become quite passionate about their choice of a striker-fired versus DA/SA hammer-fired pistol for self-defense. Both actions are time-honored and work. the choice is yours.

[disseminator]

The 40 caliber Glock pistol is where the 40 S&W cartridge got all it's bad reputation from. The guns are known to have less case head support and can also suffer frame cracks where lights are attached. That doesn't sound like "Perfection" to me.

I own a few 226's, including a Nitron model in 40 S&W. It's a beast and has never given me a single issue in thousands of rounds. These are out there on the used market and good deals can be found if your patient.

The DA/SA trigger system is the best IMO but like any other operating system, you will need to train into it, simple as that.

Any pistol will be easier to shoot well if it fits your hands correctly. A strong grip is essential to a smooth trigger press IMO whatever type of action you are shooting.

Get the one you like the best and TRAIN.

[lamarw]

There are a lot of great deals available as police trade-ins both with the Sig P226 and the Glock over the last couple of years. I would look there for a great deal. Here is one possible source: https://www.recoilgunworks.com/polic...uns-c-132.html

I would think in terms of choosing between a Sig P226 or a Sig P229. I bought both two years ago for well under four hundred dollars each. Then I bought a .357 Sig barrel for each. This way you can quickly change the barrels and have a handgun in each caliber. The .40 & .357 use the same magazines.

If you like, you can send your Sig police trade-in to Sig Sauer and for about hundred and fifty bucks and get a complete tune up with all new springs, night sights and a check-up.

Why Not over an expensive new pistol?

[Areoflyer09]

I looked at a Sig P229 & 226 when I was looking for my 40SW. They just don’t fit my hand as well as I would like.

I ended up with a CZ P-09. Fulll size, DA/SA but a polymer frame. It did need a bit of love in polishing and a new hammer spring from CGW to bring the trigger to where I wanted it.

I started shooting centerfire with a PPQ and loved it right up until I got my first quality DA/SA and then the first revolver came. I don’t feel the DA/SA is as hard to adjust to as some claim. Now both PPQs are gone and I don’t have much intention to purchase another striker. Turns out, they just weren’t for me.

[dgludwig]

What are the advantages of a DA/SA pistol over a striker fire pistol if any?

I don't think either system is intrinsically "better"; rather a matter of personal preference and/or training experience. Personally, I much prefer da/sa, with the caveat that most of my training in le was with a da/sa pistol.

[hogwiley]

You can find pros and cons for both guns.

I don't find Sigs DA trigger to be difficult to master if you practice with it. Get some snap caps and dry fire the thing until you got it down, then test yourself at the range. I like the DA trigger because I can safely keep a round in the chamber. With glocks you need to exercise more caution when grabbing/drawing the gun and when reholstering it. I've kept a round in the chamber in my nightstand gun when its a p226. I've been hesitant to do that with glock. Wide awake and not under stress its a non issue. At 3 am waking from a deep sleep, in the dark, and under stress, it could be.

The big drawback with Sig, and the reason I went with a glock 22 over a .40 p226 is magazine capacity. 3 rounds is a substantial difference. The good thing for the Sig is that I find reloading easier than in every other gun Ive used. I guess its the mag release button and its placement, the grip angle, along with having metal magazines versus polymer that make the Sig so easy to reload. I still prefer the Glocks extra 3 rounds. If you live in Cali or Mass its a non issue though.

[dgludwig]

With glocks you need to exercise more caution when grabbing/drawing the gun and when reholstering it.

I agree. I would never say that a Glock is less safe. But I would argue that they're less forgiving of people who are less safe.

[craddleshooter]

I've have 2 sigs now with a combined 1600 rounds or so between them and always heard a bang when expected. I've shot countless of others rounds through other sigs I've owned prior and friends guns and also never had a malfunction. And I don't mean just the high end sigs 229 and 226 elite models I mean one of mine is the p250 polymer framed 800 rounds just as reliable as my 26 or 17. I'm not saying they are all perfect but mine have been, there are glocks that fail as well on occasion. One thing to remember is any mechanical thing can fail doesn't matter how much u pay for it nothing is fool proof

[Red Devil]

Originally Posted by disseminator

The 40 caliber Glock pistol is where the 40 S&W cartridge got all it's bad reputation from. The guns are known to have less case head support and can also suffer frame cracks where lights are attached. That doesn't sound like "Perfection" to me.

I own a few 226's, including a Nitron model in 40 S&W. It's a beast and has never given me a single issue in thousands of rounds. These are out there on the used market and good deals can be found if your patient.

The DA/SA trigger system is the best IMO but like any other operating system, you will need to train into it, simple as that.

Any pistol will be easier to shoot well if it fits your hands correctly. A strong grip is essential to a smooth trigger press IMO whatever type of action you are shooting.

Get the one you like the best and TRAIN.

As a GLOCK .40 shooter for decades, your information is somewhat antiquated.

The Gen4 platform specifically addressed the resultant growing pains of shoe-horning a .40 into their 9mm pistols.

Add to that the improved triggers, and they are out-of-the-box outstanding carry pistols at a reasonable price.

The .40 Caliber GLOCK G23Gen4, loaded with 180 gr. HST/GD/Ranger-T hollowpoints, is probably the finest carry pistol on the market, and will even out-run a .45 ACP for round performance.

Nothing against Sig. I have a P938 and like it a lot.

But my Go-to-War/WROL pistol is the .40/180 gr./G23.4.




Red

[hogwiley]

I have to agree that the glock 23 is THE perfect carry gun. Pwerful round, good capacity, 4 inch barrel in a small size with a height thats under 5 inches. Its the perfect package and i find the recoil in gen 4 to be very manageable, owing in part to the grip angle and low bore axis. Its not a fun gun to shoot for long sessions to be sure, but i can still put rounds on target fast with it. For most women or older folks with arthritis its probably better to go with the 19, but for everybody else id recommend a 23. The .40 seems to be getting a bad rap these days, but hold a 40 and 9 hollowpoint next to each other and ask yourself which one youd rather get shot with. The answer is obvious and why i prefer .40

[TunnelRat]

For most women or older folks with arthritis its probably better to go with the 19, but for everybody else id recommend a 23. The .40 seems to be getting a bad rap these days, but hold a 40 and 9 hollowpoint next to each other and ask yourself which one youd rather get shot with. The answer is obvious and why i prefer .40

I must be an old woman with arthritis, because I'd recommend the 19 over the 23 every day of the week and twice on Sundays.

[disseminator]

As a GLOCK .40 shooter for decades, your information is somewhat antiquated.

The Gen4 platform specifically addressed the resultant growing pains of shoe-horning a .40 into their 9mm pistols.

Add to that the improved triggers, and they are out-of-the-box outstanding carry pistols at a reasonable price.

The .40 Caliber GLOCK G23Gen4, loaded with 180 gr. HST/GD/Ranger-T hollowpoints, is probably the finest carry pistol on the market, and will even out-run a .45 ACP for round performance.

I am sure that is true, but it doesn't make what I said untrue. Especially if you are talking used/police trade-in models....

The earlier Glock 40 S&W's had a few well known issues that I feel tainted the reputation of the round unfairly. My gen 4 Glock 20 hasn't had any problems.....

[hogwiley]

Originally Posted by disseminator

I am sure that is true, but it doesn't make what I said untrue. Especially if you are talking used/police trade-in models....

The earlier Glock 40 S&W's had a few well known issues that I feel tainted the reputation of the round unfairly. My gen 4 Glock 20 hasn't had any problems.....

I don't see how they tainted the round. The glock 22 is sort of what put the .40 on the map.

At the end of the day the main knock against the .40 has always been recoil. I don't find it that much worse than 9mm +p, but there are some vocal recoil sensitive people who scare off others.

The FBI going back to the 9mm probably did the most to hurt the .40s reputation. The problem is that the FBI has a lot of different considerations in choosing the round. One of them is that a large number of their agents are female, and ill be honest with you, upper body strength helps in managing recoil. It just does, especially forearm strength.

If you have toothpick arms and small hands, a lightweight .40 is going to be more difficult to control than someone with good upper body strength and larger hands and forearms.

The FBI is also very specific about the exact 9mm ammo to be used in order to bring it close to the performance of the .40. If you aren't using that exact 147 gr Speer G2 round, you may experience the same issues that gave the 9mm a bad reputation in the past. I also think a lot of their selection has to do with how that round performs shooting into vehicles, and through glass and other barriers. Things that aren't as important if you are a civilian using the round for self defense.

[disseminator]

I don't see how they tainted the round. The glock 22 is sort of what put the .40 on the map.

Ever heard of: Kaboom!!!!

Glock invented that with their 40 caliber guns and bad case head support. I am not a Glock hater, but that is pretty well established history right there.

[TunnelRat]

I am not a Glock hater, but that is pretty well established history right ther

Right but it's an issue that has pretty much been addressed.

[disseminator]

Right but it's an issue that has pretty much been addressed.

Agreed, unless one buys an older used gun. Then it's something to watch out for.

[Fishbed77]

Striker fired pistols aren't just cheaper, but have proven to be more reliable and rugged too.

Depends entirely on the pistol. There have been plenty of striker-fired pistols over the years that were not reliable.