Reliability contest, Glock vs Sig??

H

hangfar

New member
More specific, compare the Sig 220 to the Glock 17. I always liked to use a pistol in the caliber it was originally designed to use. Which of the two is the most reliable? Hangfar.
 
I can't tell you about the P220, but the P225, P226, and P228 were all designed around the 9mm. As well Glocks 17, 17L, 19, 26 and 34 were all designed for 9mm.

In my experience, comparing SIG Sauers P225, P226, P228 to Glocks 17 and 19, the former have been more reliable. Not to say that Glocks aren't superb pistols, that they are. I'm just talking in my own first hand experience. I had trouble with a second geenration Glock 19 with JHP, but this was fixed by Glock. With a friend's Glock 19 I had a failure to extract. This could well have been ammo related. Never a single problem of any kind with a SIG Sauer.

------------------
"Get yourself a Pistolet Makarova and lose that pricey western gadget."
 
I, too can only speak to the Sig226, but have owned one for 10+ years, used it heavily under a variety of conditions, trained in several classes and events, and have had exactly zero problems. No FTF, no FTE, no ammo related failures, including my feeble attempt at reloading, although POI did change dramatically during that sad time.

I trust that pistol more than any other machine I own.
 
The Sigs are going to be more reliable. I own both Glocks and Sigs, and my Sigs are 100 percent reliable. My Glocks are very close, but they will malfunction when limpwristed or dirty.
 
In sheer "drop-it-off-a-cliff" ruggedness, the Glock is hard to beat. I'll assume, however, that most of us don't drop our guns off cliffs very often.

Both the P220 and G17 are in that class of reliability that would allow you to go broke buying ammo before either one choked on you, in all probability.

------------------
"..but never ever Fear. Fear is for the enemy. Fear and Bullets."
10mm: It's not the size of the Dawg in the fight, it's the size of the fight in the dog!
 
I agree with most comments made here; and own
or have owned both. :) I find that the Sig P220A is the most reliable pistol of my life.
They work in extremely harsh environments; such as sub-zero weather conditions!!! :D
Don't know about the Glock's; under these
circumstances? Once heard of a frozen Glock
hitting the concrete, and bursting into
several pieces somewhere in Iceland. I wasn'r
able to verify the story!!! :(

Regards,
Ala Dan, N.R.A. Life Member
 
Mechanically, I love my SIG and would never trade it for another gun, Glock or otherwise. However, it seems to me it would certainly rust before the Glock if you were somehow inclined to stand and shoot till it malfunctioned.

In any real-life sense, I find it hard to believe any Glock is more reliable than my 220, but I don't have a lot of experience with them.
 
The P220 was introduced in 1975 and originally designed for 9mm - designated the "P75". But I think as far as reliability goes, either caliber would be in a dead heat with the G17. They're both world class autos. The P220 might have a slight edge in accuracy (in my hands anyway), and the G17 would almost certainly be more durable.
 
If pressed, I'd have to give the edge in reliability to the Sig. It's a slight edge, but an edge nevertheless.

Durability goes to the Glock, though. Hands down, no contest.
 
Never had a G-17 but I do have a G-19 and a 220 Sig.I would get very tired if I had to shoot either one till it malfunctoned.THe sig fits me much better and I am more accurate with it.Advange to the sig in that you can shoot cast in it all day.The Glock leads up badly with the rifling style and has to be kept clean or it go KB.
Bottom line I will take the sig eveytime

------------------
Bob--- Age and deceit will overcome youth and speed.
I'm old and deceitful.
 
When I was running LEO qualifications--lots of rounds and hard training--I had quite a few Glocks (M17s and 19s) on the line, with a smaller number of SIG 220s. Ammo was factory in both cases. Had very few malfs, usually attributable to operator--but did have an extractor break on a Browning BDA (early import SIG 220) once. This may have been from prior abuse of the extractor in dropping the slide on chambered rounds, which is not recommended for any semiauto.

I think I would have to give the nod to the Glocks on balance, although both are extremely good guns. I now own a 220 and my daughter has a G-19.

Bottom line, however, is that the fewest malfunctions over a ten year period were from the issue Ruger DA 'Six' .357 revolvers.

Six for sure.

------------------
 
The first gun I ever owned (still have it) was a SIG 225
(single stack mag, 9mm) I bought it used from a guy who only put about 100 rounds thru it over a 3-4 year period, and the second time I went to the range, it had several failure to feed problems. I went to the guy at the front counter and asked him what he thought, and he looked it over, said it was real dry, squirted some lube on the slide, handed it back to me, and it worked ok from then on.
But you know, I will never trust the SIG the way I trust my G-21, which I bought brand new. I have put at least 700 rounds thru it, and I must confess, not the best grade ammo either, and it just keeps spittin those bullets out, plus, I am more accurate with the Glock than the Sig.

Only problem is, my 20 yr old son shoots the Glock better than I do!
 
I am a fan of both designs. I can say the sig is more tolerant of shooter error like limp wristing than the glock. The glock on the other hand will function better when it gets cold or dirty. Both will serve you well if you operate them properly and take care of them.
PAT

------------------
I intend to go into harms way.
 
I can't go with the SIG unfortunately. The SIG 228 (or M-11) is my carry weapon, but I've seen them go down numerous times on the range. A SIG armorer who was instructing the course I was attending said that the SIGs were only designed for a life of 5,000 rounds. After that things start happening. One of the problems we saw a lot of was a roll pin in the slide that would start to slip out. If it came out more than a millimeter or so, bad things started happening, though nothing life threatening. I personally had two guns go down with failures to fire. Please bear in mind that these were "schoolhouse" guns, a few years old, and each had a few thousand rounds put through them a year. They just needed some regular maintenance, I suppose.

Regards,
Chuck
 
mhannah1

The first sig 225 that were imported were not reliable with JHP ammo. Sig had not tested them with JHP's becasue the gun was designed for the west german police who only use ball ammo. The problem has since been fixed.
PAT

------------------
I intend to go into harms way.
 
BB, Don't believe all the BS that the F.B.I.
puts out!!! :( Being a former LEO myself; I
find that they lie like hell. :D I've NEVER
experienced a problem with a SIG!!! :p

Vennlig hilsen,
Ala Dan, N.R.A. Life Member
 
IMHO, in a reliability contest between Glock and SIG, everybody wins. Both are fine pistols. I own both, shoot both, and trust both equally.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top