Glock vs Sig

L

locnload

New member
Glock or Sig Sauer? Please, no bias, and no "mines cooler than yours", I'm looking for a solid discussion on why a person would choose one over the other.
First, I'm a Glock fan, I currently own six, and have had three others that I sold so I could buy another model of Glock. I have carried concealed over 16 years, participated in lots of competitions, attended a number of high round count training classes, and sent a lot of rounds into a dirt birm in practice. I have NEVER had a problem that could not be attributed directly to bad ammo, or in one case a weak firing pin spring which I put in the gun hopping for the "more, better, faster" effect. I understand that North of 60% of law enforcement through out the world use Glocks, along with a lot of Military and a very large percentage of armed civilians. So I will never buy the argument that they are undependable junk that dont last, it just aint so. Are Glocks ugly? Eye of the beholder, and as they say, are you trying to impress your friends or your enimies? I am invested in Glocks, I have Glock holsters, Glock magazines, coffe cup, tee shirt, you name it. I carry four extra G17 mags in my vehicle that I can use in any one of four pistols that I might be carrying, or a Kel Tech Sub 2000.
That being said, I've always had a "jones" for the Sig 226 or 229 and probably would have bought one by now if not for the cost being 50% or more over any other pistol I own. Glock and Sig are both designed and built by people that know how to make stuff that works. They are both solid,dependable, and long lasting. But even Navy Seals choose Sig and I'm sure its not because they were impressed by Jack Bower, so what is the benifit of the Sig? Sig guys and gals, sell me on a Sig:confused:
 
I had 17 SIG's, now Im down to one, an old P230 (have a lot of history with it).

Took the money I made on the SIG's and bought Glocks. Havent regretted it in the least.

Nothing wrong with SIG, just I get more for the money with Glocks. SIG got a little to proud for what you get money wise.

The 226 would be a good choice. It was pretty much my favorite of the P series SIG's. Great shooter. Just dont be surprised if you find it doesnt do anything better than the Glocks, other than take more of your money.
 
There are a lot of options now a days for really nice carry pistols with a price line right between glock and sig, I really like sigs and own both you mentioned plus a handful more... BUT XD's are really nice as well as some of the m&p's both of which I prefer to a glock... I have owned glocks and my brother just put a gen 4 32 together, it came really nice, ghost 3.5 lb trigger {got it to around 4lbs+}, extended mag and slide release, and a set of fiber optic sights.. I have shot it and I really like the 357 sig round, the gun shot good and didn't have any issues, we put 300 rounds through it in a saturday morning and no hiccups worth mentioning.. I will say the stock trigger in the gen 4's was a step backwards for Glock, it feels really bad to me, but in all fairness the affordable ghost transformed it... I also don't like the glock sights and the releases are too flat for me to manipulate efficiently...

All that being said, the sigs have treated me well, right out of the box, no tampering needed, run a 300 rounds through cleaning and relubing every 75 {just my ritual} and the guns work awesome forever...

Now I know you didn't ask about the xd or mp, but I just received a performance center M&P and I have to say I am impressed with this guy, accuracy is about the best i have seen out of a factory {excluding my p210's, 952's, and target 1911's handgun} I will put that performance center mp with my X-5!!!! For less money the gun performed well...

Anyway good luck with your decision, I would say get something besides a glock because you have 6 of them, BUT who am I to talk I have a dozen 1911's, lol...
 
Glock or Sig Sauer? Please, no bias, and no "mines cooler than yours"
Click to expand...

Do you really expect that you'll get anything but this? Dozens of this exact type of discussion can be found via Google and/or the search function, and they all go the same way. Everyone has their own preferences and attachments, and they'll stump for the one they like best. Their opinions really shouldn't matter much. Go handle and shoot the guns you're considering. Your opinions subsequent to that are the ones that matter.

In this day and age, a large number of manufacturers "make stuff that works," even if some particularly irrational fanboys of certain brands have convinced themselves otherwise. In choosing among these reputable manufacturers, what matters much more than anything else is the fit of the gun to the buyer, not the particular manufacturer it comes from.
 
Try something different! I like Sigs because they have one of the best triggers allowing for smooth da/sa transitions, intuitive controls (it's like Disney Land for your thumb), they're easy to field strip, reliable, accurate, and plenty of slide real estate to grab on. My major gripe about them is that I can't see anything from behind...block too much of my vision
 
it will be impossible to get a no bias answer here but I will attempt to be as objective as I possible can.

1. glock and sig both have very good reputations for being reliable. glock has the record for most rounds fired from a single handgun, sig, last I know has the second most. in either case, it's way more rounds than 95% of shooters will ever put through a single gun in their entire lives. so I call it a wash, if not tipped slightly in glock's favor.

2. a large number of glocks throw brass to the face. this is not a recurring problem with sigs to my knowledge. I call that a win in favor of sig.

3. glock is a point and shoot design, devoid of any common sense type of safety, if anything like a tree branch or twig, or god forbid attacker's flailing fingers gets inside the trigger guard the gun is liable to go off. most sigs have the same problem but as they are DA/SA rather than DAO, and have a decocker, the shooter can decock a sig and slightly lessen the danger of a neglegent discharge by forcing heavier trigger pull and longer travel.

4. completely subjective but I like the ergos on the sig better, points much more naturally and feels comfortable while I'm shooting.

I vote sig myself but in the end I'm still biased and I will admit it.
 
glock has the record for most rounds fired from a single handgun, sig, last I know has the second most.
Click to expand...

Do you have links to sources for that? I've heard that about Glock, but never about Sig Sauer. (If it the second-place gun were a Swiss SIG P210, I wouldn't be surprised, as a number of those have gone over 300K rounds without failure, but SIG ≠ SIG Sauer. In any event, it's extremely doubtful that any Al alloy-framed pistol would rank anywhere close to that high. Many steel- and poly-framed pistols will have greater longevity.). I'm wondering who's doing the testing, with what degree of maintenance, and so forth. Is this referring to Chuck Hawks' Glock? Or someone else's?

Not that any of this really matters for the vast majority of shooters, who will never come close to breaking their semi-autos.
 
Last edited:
"...always had a "jones" for..." That'd be, "I want one." The best reason there is for buying anything. Unless it doesn't fit your hand.
I find stock Glocks a bit slippery, but that's an easy fix. Never played with a SIG. No budget for that.
 
Im not sure who has the most rounds through what, and I really dont care. All models of both named guns Ive owned, have run 100% out of the box for me, and other than ammo issues (that they all eventually have), were never a problem after that.

I am aware that certain springs on some SIG's have a tendency to fail, over time, but I never had that occur. I do occasionally get brass to the face with my Glocks, but I can pretty much attribute that to my reloads wearing out, so thats really not been an issue either.

I tend to shoot my Glocks more (round wise) than I did my SIG's, but thats mostly because they are 9mm's, and I can afford to shoot them more for the same money. Most of my SIG's were in 357SIG or .45acp. I still shot them on a once or twice a week basis though, just like my Glocks.


I think in reality, its all going to boil down to what you like best and what fits your wallet best. If you like the 226 or 229, by all means, get what you like and try it out. I doubt youll be disappointed.

I will suggest you look at both at the same time, as they both have a different feel in the hand. I always found the 229's to be a bit pudgy, but in no way uncomfortable or an issue shooting. The 226 was the sweetheart for me.
 
So, you've spent an inordinate number of words justifying why you have Glocks and you want us to tell you why you should buy a SIG?

Okay- don't waste your time and money buying a SIG unless it's something like the P226 X-Five, which is a model that is nothing like a Glock and would be a totally different shooting experience.

No reason to buy a P229 they're not unique in any way, especially if you already own a G19. You'd never use the P229. You'll complain about the DA/SA trigger, the gun being bigger, heavier, and harder to carry than a G19, etc.

Unless you have a better reason than you've stated so far, I'd say don't waste your money on "a Jones."
 
No point in over thinking it, buy a P229. You'll like it and they hold there value. For a shooting pistol the Sig P series are really nice (I miss my P229 issued gun.) For a night stand gun I like the P series DA/SA or DAK. Getting up in the middle of the night I prefer a more deliberate trigger pull.
 
Do you have links to sources for that? I've heard that about Glock, but never about Sig Sauer. (If it the second-place gun were a Swiss SIG P210, I wouldn't be surprised, as a number of those have gone over 300K rounds without failure, but SIG ≠ SIG Sauer. In any event, it's extremely doubtful that any Al alloy-framed pistol would rank anywhere close to that high. Many steel- and poly-framed pistols will have greater longevity.). I'm wondering who's doing the testing, with what degree of maintenance, and so forth. Is this referring to Chuck Hawks' Glock? Or someone else's?

Not that any of this really matters for the vast majority of shooters, who will never come close to breaking their semi-autos.
__________________
Click to expand...
if I recall correctly both were done by the manufacturers as marketing ploys. the glock with 300K+ round count is kept in a locked display at their HQ I believe. no links, no data, just stuff I read long ago that I'm really too lazy to find. if I recally correctly, the sig in question was a P226.
 
I'm pretty sure you're thinking of Sig bragging about the total number of rounds fired (through multiple pistols) by some government agency during testing. In any case, I assure you they would still brag about it if it were the case that one of their pistols held some sort of longevity record. And I can also assure you that dozens of steel- and poly-framed pistols will have greater longevity than any aluminum-framed pistol. A P-series Sig is a limp noodle compared to a Swiss P210, for example, which is made of steel alloys that are both much harder and much tougher than anything in use in any mass-production gun. The grades of steel used and the manner of heat-treating them are prohibitively expensive for use in any mass-production gun; in fact, they're cost-prohibitive even for Sig Sauer in its German P210, which uses much more conventional steel alloys than its Swiss forbears.
 
For me:
1) it's a better fit in my hand
2) less recoil (more mass than a Glock)
3) much smoother trigger
4) I like hammers, decockers and obvious 'ready to fire / not indication' you get with a Sig 229

Had a Glock, it was an ok gun for me but no where the quality or feel of a Sig.

Like Fords and Chevys, different strokes for different folks.
 
In 1988 a friend and I bought 9mm pistols, he a Glock 17, I a Sig-Sauer P226. At our shared range sessions, we traded back and forth freely. In the beginning we were pretty equal with both pistols (equally bad ;)) but soon noticed that we were both shooting better with the P226.

Though I have large hands, I found the switch to the short trigger on my P2226 very worthwhile.

The only thing I do not like about the P226 is that it is a hump backed so-and-so though, given how shootable it is, I can hardly complain.
 
300,000 round Glock - you all may be thinking of the on-going "test" by Chuck Taylor of a Gen 2 Glock G17 that he purchased in 1988. He is still using the pistol and has logged over 300K rounds through it since he purchased it - with only preventive maintenance and parts replacements as needed to keep the gun running.
 
Do you like Coke, or Pepsi? The Whopper, or the Big Mac?

Once you get beyond a certain level of quality, all handguns come down to personal preferences rather than any objective criteria. Glocks and Sigs are reliable & accurate - the two most important things in a gun. Everything else is a matter of preference.

Why do I like Sigs more than Glocks? I prefer DA/SA guns with a decocker. I like their ergonomics, trigger, and factory sights better.

Why do I prefer Glocks to Sigs? They're really easy to take apart and tinker with. They're lighter, and accessories are dirt cheap & ubiquitous.

Buy what you like - I won't think any better or worse of you, and you shouldn't care even if I did.
 
I have both. The Sig 226 is my favorite DA/SA design. It is accurate, reliable, and I think it looks good.

I also have several Glocks. They do everything the Sig does, but with the same trigger pull for every shot. They are just as accurate, hold more rounds, and cost about 50% less. They are ugly as sin, but work and I could care less if one is lost, stolen or gets broken. They are a tool just like a hammer.

I ain't selling the Sig, but if a sound wakes me at night, I reach for one of the Glocks.
 
300,000 round Glock - you all may be thinking of the on-going "test" by Chuck Taylor of a Gen 2 Glock G17 that he purchased in 1988. He is still using the pistol and has logged over 300K rounds through it since he purchased it - with only preventive maintenance and parts replacements as needed to keep the gun running.
Click to expand...

Yes, Chuck Taylor, not Chuck Hawks. WTH? I think becoming a parent has rapidly aged my brain...
 
if our mentality is to buy a gun that is better than what we already have we will inevitably be disappointed somewhere down the line. I would buy the sig not because it is better than the glock, but because it is different. As firearm enthusiasts we appreciate the variety of designs throughout history
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top