P239 in 9mm, .40, or .357 Sig?? Can't make my mind up... Help!

D

Dogger

New member
A P239 is my next purchase... as soon as I decide on a caliber. Purpose is CCW personal defense. I have no experience with the .40 caliber round or the .357 Sig. I currently own a Browning HiPower in 9mm (which is fabulous) and a Colt CCO in .45. Common sense tells me the 9mm is perfectly adequate with a quality round, say Speer 124 grain Gold Dots. 9mm gives me 8 rounds in the P239. Gun will be lighter, less recoil for faster follow up shots, and 1 more round than the .357 Sig or the .40 cal versions. What are your experiences with the P239? Your thoughts and recommendations? Should I bypass the 9mm and go for the .40 or .357 Sig? Thanks
 
I just faced the same decision and went with
a 40S&W Sig 239. My Logic, I wanted a hard hitting caliber that I could afford to buy
ammo for. I've owned 357Sig and the ammo
was 30% higher than 40S&W. Sigs are among the best defensive pistols available and the 239 is a great selection for CCW.

John
 
I am not a big 9mm fan for self defense so that is out for me. I think that a .40 is just as smooth but more lethal. If you are recoil sensetive then the .357 SIG in a small package may not be the gun for you. So my experience with the .40 and .357 Sig are both seem very accurate with the .40 having less recoil therefore being easier to control.
 
Dogger,

Mine is in .357. I guess I decided on that caliber over the .40 because I believe the poop sheets in the caliber viability.

The recoil isn't that bad, you should be able to handle it as easily as 9mm with practice. My scores are basically the same between my USP9 and the SIG, firing just as quickly.

It is a noisy little sucker, a bit more than the .40s.
 
hey, Dogger -
I went with 9mm for mine. I did it out of practicality, as a I already own several 9mm and .45 cal. handguns and I just don't want a gun locker full of misc. calibers. I don't feel undergunned with the 9mm, I shoot it well, and given the availability of cheap 9mm ball ammo, I can afford to practice a lot. I have nothing against .357 or .40, I'm just trying to keep life simple where I can. FWIW, it's a very nice gun in any of the above, so its hard to go wrong. I have about 800 rnds thru mine and the trigger is like butter, with typical SIG reliability & accuracy. It's a pleasure to shoot, but I think maybe a nice set of Hogue's in Pao Fero or Cocobolo might be in order. Take it easy, m2
 
IMO, the 239 in 9mm is too bulky, and if you were to get a 9mm you could get it in a smaller package just not from SIG. Where the 239 really shines is in the .40 and .357 SIG calibers.
With the 239 in .357 SIG or .40, there is an adequate blend of power, and concealability.
You may give up 1 round as opposed to the 9mm, and have a little more recoil to deal with in the larger calibers. But the recoil can be taken care of with a set of Hogue grips and a little practice.
 
Dogger: I've got both the 9mm and the .357 SIG 239s. If you're used to the 9mm and can shoot it well, then select high performance ammo for carry and stay with it. Your practice rounds will cost less and you can get 10 rd. magazines to stick in your pocket or use in IDPA. Either way it's a great gun. Regards, Dennis
 
thanks for the replies... although I am no closer to a decision :)

I am leaning towards the 9mm with the .40 a close second.
 
OK, how about this: How many agencies are switching from the .40 and .357 SIG to the 9mm? And how many are forsaking the 9 for the other two? Gotta be a reason...
 
robins, yours is a valid comment. But... I am not a LEO, and my pistol is for CCW. I figure the pistol will be employed when I least expect it (otherwise I would have my shotgun or rifle!) and the range will be close. Seems to me that for CCW encounters the extra round will be comforting, and 9mm should be adequate for the task. My carry load is Speer Gold Dot 124 grainers. The 9mm P239 is lighter by a couple of ounces, which does make a difference for carry.
 
Go with the 40. Settles the 9 vs 45 arguement by splitting the difference. The 357 is good if it expands, which may not happen if the hp gets plugged by clothing, then you have a hardball 9mm. Go with a fast 135 grain hp, for more knockdown. Speed kills. The heavier bullets in this caliber kick harder and give lower energy figures.
 
Check out the new (3/00) issue of Gun Test. Good review of 3 FBI approved carry guns. One is the SIG 239 in .357 SIG which gets a strongly positive review, and a "Buy it" recommendation. Regards, Dennis
 
I'd go with the 9mm or the .40. I like the light recoil of the 9mm, but the power of the .40 is nice, too. I'm not fond of the .357 SIG because you have to carry fewer rounds (than a 9mm), and they cost more, and they produce only a little more energy than a 9mm+P. Further, the .357 SIG hasn't proven that it's going to make it in the market, yet. I'd wait and see.

You really can't go wrong with any of them, though. They are all perfectly adequite stoppers.

[This message has been edited by J. Fielder (edited March 09, 2000).]
 
Just for the record, the .357Sig 239 has an identical round count as the .40.

I'd go for the .40, since you can convert it to .357 Sig and, I believe, 9mm.
 
Dogger
My vote is for the .40 cal. More stopping power than the 9mm and almost as many rounds. .40 cal is more abundant than .357 sig with less recoil.
 
Decision made... .40S&W... thanks for all the replies. My local shop has one in stock. Double action pull is the sweetest I have seen on a Sig. Am going to try the 155 grain HydraShok for carry ammo. Thanks guys for the posts. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top