Glock 21 or Sig P220????? Ahhhhh!!!!!

Ian11:

The fact is that almost all of the federal LEAs have dumped their Sig contracts and gone Glock. Subunits have options however. And the old as dirt SAs are carrying wheelguns becuase that's all they can qualify with.

I still do not trust any bottleneck pistol cartiridiges like the 400 corbon or the 357 SIG because they are prone to jams. As any reloader or gunsmith.

I just don't see the value in the P220 anymore. They still have finish problems. And you just can't get the support that Glock owners enjoy.

I call directly down to the plant in Smyrna at least once month with questions. They're replacing the barrel on my Glock 20 in 10mm since the barrels were upgraded 5 years ago and I have an old one. No charge to me. Mag springs, followers. They will inspect and upgrade older guns for free. That is service.

I could barely get a callback from the service folks at Sig.

Both are accurate guns. BUT the Glock 30 is more acurate than the P220 and recoils like a 9mm +P. And the P220 will give you more recoil slowing your SA shot to boot.

I just think the G30 offers more value especially for the money.

And SigForum.com is part of the BCA network with a dozen other small groups. It's a forum but it's no ktog or GT.

Buy the P220 if you like BUT the Glock is cheaper and the toys are plentiful for the Glock.
 
OK, let's get a few things straight. Yes, the Glock is cheaper. And yes, all things equal, you'd have to say it's more durable than the SIG. However, I don't think you can make a strong case that the SIG is not as durable as just about anybody needs.

Again, triggers are somewhat subjective issues. I still see people telling this poor guy he has to get the Glock or he'll be sorry because he'll have to learn the dreaded DA/SA transition--even after he's told us a couple of times that he loves the SIG trigger.

For me and me alone, hand fit, trigger and accuracy are more important, so the P220 fits the bill. Again, it's got to be fit to your needs. If the G21 is more accurate in your hands, it'd be foolish to buy the 220 because I say it's more accurate. And if you're going to carry it, you don't need the margin of accuracy between the 220 and the G21 AFAIK--what's the difference, half an inch at 25 yards?

As far as cops go, we all know that there are many fine shootists in the ranks of our local, state and federal police. There are also many who have never stripped or cleaned the duty weapons they depend on every day, and who refuse to put in practice time to learn to use devices like safeties or decockers. For such people, there is a very large advantage to the simplicity of the G21; for the rest of us, it's nice, but not a deal breaker. The rusting tendencies of the P220 are a huge problem for a cop who is going to clean it once a month after qualifying; for an avid shooter, this shouldn't be an issue.

This is NOT to put down cops. I'm just saying that police departments are large groups, and when arming large groups, the lowest-common-denominator and the lowest bidder are the keys. Again, this is not to disparage police or Glocks. Glocks are fine guns and anyone who wants one should have one, but they are not perfect for everyone out there.
 
I'm tired of all the Glock fans saying that Sigs can't take "abuse". You people act like the're dainty little rust buckets. Oh, the SEALs NEVER abuse their Sigs!:rolleyes:

BTW, The Sigs are the LONGEST LASTING firearm in the SEALs armory.
 
Despite the counter-arguments above we all make our choices according to our tastes. If we were all "sensible" consumers we'd all be driving Toyoto Camrys and Honda Accords. I'm not equating Glocks to them I'm just saying we like different qualities that different manufacturers provide, despite their quirks. For me, I enjoyed shooting the Sig more than the Glock and that was the most important thing, anything else was secondary. But if needed for defense I know the Sig will do as long as I do my part. Whether I have a Glock or Sig isn't going to matter a hill of beans at that point.

By the way, I didn't mention this before, but my constant primary is a Glock. I like Sigs for their refinement and Glocks because they're more idiot proof. I'm not nuts for liking Sigs and Glocks equally.



Silent-1,

Every lemon, manufacturing fumble, accidents, horror stories, outright lies, rumour and innuendo gets magnified on the internet. Bad news is more common than happy ones; like our local news broadcasts. Its never as bad as its portrayed. Fact is there are a lot of jokers neglecting or doing dumb things to their guns and they are not the rule.
 
First of all what does the number of LEO agencies have to do with anything here. When I bought my Glocks and Sigs I didnt do so because how many LEO are carrying them. Lets face it, they chose issued firearms for different reasons than we do. Most here realise that not all LEOS have as much gun knowledge as the everyday citisen that considered his gun a hobby to take pride in as well as a form of deffence. So, I think that the LEO arguement has no relevence here, it simply doesnt matter. Ulike Law Enforcement we get to chose whatever firearm we want and to me thats a beautiful thing. On every gun forum I have encountered LEO forum members that say they wish they could use a Glock rather than a Sig and vise versa, then there are LEOs that want a Beretta instead of a Glock and so on. You have got to feel for them, arenent we lucky to be able to chose a gun that we trust our life to? I think so.

Now, about your choices. In your post you have mentioned in my opinion the best .45 that Glock offers as well as the best .45 that Sig offers. The choise is tough but you should seriously think if you want a Glock or Sig, they are different enough that you should know what defineatly feels better to you. The good thing about your post is that your choice comes down to two of the best out there, therefore making your choice a win/win situation.

I thought you would have had something by now.:) I wouldnt be able to resist this long.

Good luck,
Jason
 
I have known in the past and still know personally some LEO's. I respect the work they do, but I have yet to see one who gives his firearms proper maintenance. I bought a couple used LEO pistols (cheap) and they were not very pretty. These guys have other things to worry about besides pistol maintenance. That said, I suppose Glocks can take that sort of treatment better than Sigs. I am talking cosmetic, not function here.

Another issue I'm sure Glock fans will not enjoy is: AD's.
Around here in my area at least, there have been at least 3 cases where LEO's have had AD's when holstering their Glocks. 2 resulted in leg wounds. The Glock trigger is just plain easier to have an AD than a decocked SIG.
 
The Sig is the better in my experience. More accurate, fits great, just plain solid feel. The Glock is nice too, especially with some work, but overall, with practice, the sig 220 wins hands down for me.

Raymond
 
Well lets see I have 3 Glocks and none of them have needed work. They all shot right out of the box and very accurate. I use to own 2 sigs and got rid of them I did not like the trigger and they were not as accurate as my glocks. :D
 
Well, I had a G30 and a G21, several extractor problems, sold both of them. I currently own a Sig220 .45 not one hiccup. I've also been thru several 3-4 day tactical pistol classes. Of all the pistols that had problems, they were the glocks in .40 and .45,(mainly the G21, again extractor problems, several had chipped and or broken extractors after several hundred rounds)Sigs in .45 and 9, all Beretta's, all HK's and Glock 9's that went thru the class functioned flawlessly,(although one sig 2340 gave a student some problems.) and like those of you who have been thru tactical pistol classes, you know what the guns are put thru. I'm not biased against glocks, I own 3, all in 9mm, but IMHO, and experience, if I had to choose between the G21 and Sig 220, I'd take the Sig 220, but then again I'd take all of my Colt 1911's in .45 over both the Glock and Sig ;)
 
Man Ian11. looks like you won't find an easy answer.

Buy both. Buy them both used. A used G21 can be had for $430 and used P220 for about $460 if it was a police trade in.
 
Thats a Tough one...

I like both...but if I had to choose...It would be the Sig...It just feels better in my hands...and that makes a world of difference :)
 
I've had both. Recently got rid of both. If I were to do it all again, I'd get the G21. Put the 3.5# trigger on it and don't look back :)
 
I'd suggest a CZ-97 or Beretta 8045, just to add diversity to your collection.

What JT Duncan doesn't have much relevance, comparing the price on a used Glock to a NIB SIG.

Both are fine firearms, and you do not need CCW. The SIG has more style, to me. On the other hand, I find Glock sights to be very fast to aquire.

In your heart, what characteristics are you looking for? Otherwise you just get what people's bias are.

SIG for me, by the way.
 
Hmmm...

I sold two P220's and bought a G21 and G30 and I am also much happier! :)

FWIW, I prefer the G21 over the P220 for carry. For hobby shooting and accuracy the P220 was hard to beat. I qualify in the 90's with all my Glocks. The every time I shot the qualification course with my P220 I shot perfect 100's. As a note, I have never shot the course with my G21 but it does seem to be more accurate than the Glock .40's I have qualified with. I think it's very possible that I could shoot 100's with it.

On the road though, every time it rained I had to go to the PD and strip, dry out and oil the P220 immediately after exposure to avoid light surface rust on the slide. My Glocks have been through real turd floaters and sat in the holster for a week or more afterwards and never rusted. The only rust I have personally seen on a Glock is on my current department issue G22 on the slide catch lever where it engages the slide.

As always, I guess which one I would recommend depends on your intended use.

R6
 
Wow, several really interesting posts...
The Glock is less expensive / Well I purchased my p-220 for 505.oo and my glock 21 for 630.oo Both were brand new, both were the best deal I could find here in town.
The sigs rust easily / Maybe, but I have never seen it on my sigs or any friends sigs or my cop friends that carry 220s or my co-workers that have 220's...
I never trust bottle neck rounds to feed ?? / Geeze , I can't believe that anyone who knows firearms would say that... bottleneck rounds are the best feeding of any round available. One of the main advantages of the 357 sig is it is almost impossible to have a failure to feed.
The glock is more accurate / I have lots of good things to say about glocks, but outstanding accuracy is not high on the list. Glocks use a very loose chamber to insure feeding ,but it also limits accuracy. The glocks trigger at 5.5 lb + does not contribute to accuracy much. My glocks have a 3.o lb trigger with polished parts and are not nearly as accurate as my sig p-220.
Galling the matal frame rails / wow I have a 229 and have never seen that either...maybe because I tend to keep pistols fairly oily I don't get the wear you do. I also tend to use anti seize compound on the frame rails as it is a better lube in those parts.
All in all I would prefer the p-220 over the glock for accuracy and hand fit. If you are looking for a gun to throw in your backpack and take camping and get wet and dirty ... the glock is better in that role.
 
Someone mention rust?

220_astl.gif

No rust here:D

That said, I think the SIG has too much muzzle flip for me. And you can't get a 220 in 10mm, so I pass:D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top