Sig P365: Glock 43 Killer?

The quote you guys posted left out the part where the declarant notes that this just may be the real Glock Killer.

Every time I see a thread about a new "Glock killer" I kind of roll my eyes a little and look at specs of a firearm that, like many before it, is much more like a Glock than different and fails to differentiate itself from all the Glocks already out there and all the "Glock killers" that have come before.

I really was going to mention that here. But the size comparisons that I am seeing, coupled with the capacity, seem to indicate Sig might actually have done something different here. If you can actually gain 4 rounds in capacity with a dimensionally and functionally similar product you might have actually gained something meaningful enough to care.
Click to expand...

4 additional rounds
Rated for +P
Siglite sites
Good trigger

Like most all, I agree that know one will be able to tell for sure until they can get there hands on a 365 and take it to the range. Also if I had something that fills the bill for a small belt gun, I would probably not rush out to buy this new Sig. But since I don't have anything smaller than a P229 . . .

It it only had an external safety.
 
The G43 will still be much thinner and more concealable.
Click to expand...

The G43 is 26 mm (1.02 in) wide and the P365 is 27 mm (1.06 in). Does anyone really think a single millimeter is "much thinner" when you gain 4 rounds in a standard magazine, 6 in the extended one?
 
The G43 is 26 mm (1.02 in) wide and the P365 is 27 mm (1.06 in). Does anyone really think a single millimeter is "much thinner" when you gain 4 rounds in a standard magazine, 6 in the extended one?
Click to expand...

I've been thinking about this one for some time last night. The G43 really pushes the idea of a "pocket" pistol in my opinion. The G26 is 4MM wider than the G43 (30 vs 26) and 4 longer (163 vs 159). No one seems to be arguing that the G26 is a "pocket" pistol here and very few do.

So while 1MM is not a lot we are also discussing a very small window. I assume, having not held this new Sig, that we are not talking 1MM worth of safeties or controls on the side but 1MM of full width. I like what Sig has done with this at least from the reports I am hearing - design around a mag specification. The rail doesn't concern me - I would think anyone mounting anything to a rail generally does so with a larger pistol. Its interesting in discussion to see where this goes for others. As noted I'm not rushing out to buy one because I already have the niche of "oversized pocket pistol / small belt gun" covered with a P938.
 
Last edited:
wmg1299 said:
...I have a Taurus PT111, and I love the dimensions. However, I am always worried about the manufacturer's past reliability issues...
Click to expand...

Has the pistol ever failed on you or showed alarming signs of wear? I have one of these and the only failure I've ever seen was a limp wrist by my 14 year old daughter. I only had one of the bum trigger safeties that "hicupped" during the pull. I recently replaced the trigger on mine (25usd total shipped) and now its so good I'm considering switching over to it as my EDC.
 
Why does every new gun have to be a "killer" of an existing gun? There's room out there for all of them...All guns matter!!!
 
There is room but there is a finite number of customers with a finite amount of money.

The next 10 years or so are going to be interesting. Manufacturers now are making essentially the same pistol with generally minor differences between them. Getting enough of the pie to stay afloat could be interesting, especially in periods such as now when there isn't a panic to drive sales.
 
TunnelRat said:
There is room but there is a finite number of customers with a finite amount of money.

The next 10 years or so are going to be interesting. Manufacturers now are making essentially the same pistol with generally minor differences between them. Getting enough of the pie to stay afloat could be interesting, especially in periods such as now when there isn't a panic to drive sales.
Click to expand...
Hasn't it always been kind of like that though? For most of the 20th Century, DA revolvers were the bulk of guns sold. In the 1980's, just about every manufacturer produced TDA double stack autos. It is those minor differences that might make the differences in sales and ultimately, success.
 
JN01 said:
Hasn't it always been kind of like that though? For most of the 20th Century, DA revolvers were the bulk of guns sold. In the 1980's, just about every manufacturer produced TDA double stack autos. It is those minor differences that might make the differences in sales and ultimately, success.
Click to expand...

Perhaps that why the Shield is so popular. People who are completely new to handguns (like me) have heard of Sig and Glock, but have always known Smith and Wesson. And we weren't paying attention, or had any interest, when the locks were added to the revolvers. S&W was the one name associated with guns, particularly handguns.

So, when looking for the first CC handgun, you look at the names you know, read some reviews, and look at price. S&W is the name you know best, the reviews on the Shield are positive, and the price is lower. Easy decision.
 
The trouble with easy decisions is all too often they are not the right decision. I have to agree with Lohman that if you already have a large pocket pistol/small belt gun there is not reason to run out to snap up a p365. I, however, only have a rather large belt gun, a Sig p229, and am in the market for a large pocket/small belt gun.
 
Hasn't it always been kind of like that though? For most of the 20th Century, DA revolvers were the bulk of guns sold. In the 1980's, just about every manufacturer produced TDA double stack autos. It is those minor differences that might make the differences in sales and ultimately, success.
Click to expand...

To a point I'd agree, but I think with the current crop of "safe action" striker fired pistols there are even fewer differences and notably more offerings from each manufacturer. At least that's how it seems to me. I think those minor differences will see offerings for a lot of preferences, which is good for the consumer, I just wonder about the market going forward. We're already seeing it with the AR companies.
 
I've got a few Glocks, to include the G43. While the extra capacity is nice, what interests me most about the P365 is the trigger. If it's as good as the P320, I'm sold.
 
The 43 is not the top dog in that category , so it is not there to be killed . It probably will hurt the Shield .

Glock has a cult like following , many people are going to buy Glock's for just the name if for nothing else . They do make a good product too , not the best IMO , but very good .
 
redrick says,
It probably will hurt the Shield
Click to expand...

My exact thought when I saw the info on the P365.

I love my Sig P320 RX, yet my main Carry is the original 9mm Shield.
If I really like the P365 I would sell my Shield and have a nice Sig Pair: P320 / P365.
Not to mention when I go to the range, I'd rather shoot my P320 than my Shield!
If the P365 feels like my P320, just smaller........it's a no brainer!
BUT...I haven't even seen one yet so this is all conjecture...
But it has me thinking....

Mackie244 / Bud
 
Last edited:
I think the term Glock killer is wrong.

I may however kill the small single stack autos (any brand) that are really carried IWB most of the time.
 
Last edited:
To a point I'd agree, but I think with the current crop of "safe action" striker fired pistols there are even fewer differences and notably more offerings from each manufacturer. At least that's how it seems to me.
Click to expand...

Exactly my thoughts. In the early part of the 20th century, there were only a few big names around. S&W, Colt, and H&R were probably the biggest in the revolver world. In the late 20th, we had Beretta, Glock, Sig, S&W, Hi-Power clones, and 1911s in the semi-auto game. Ruger was getting big in the revolver game and beginning to dabble in semis. Yes there were more, but these were the big names. There were very real differences. Weight (by a wide margin), DA/SA, SAO, DAO, capacity, and material (all steel, aluminum alloy, or polymer). The current crop of m&p, Glock, Walther, Ruger, SIG (p320), CZ (p10), and the like honestly have far fewer differences than did the S&W semis of the 90s and the Beretta 92 series. And other than weight, those were two of the more similar models from back in the day.

I've seen nothing truly revolutionary in a while. I would say about 10 years now when the current crop of micro 9s came to field. The Ruger LCP, along with kel tec and kahr, were pioneers in this field. The S&W shield, as said, is probably more vulnerable to this new SIG than anything. The shield wasn't a first either. It doesn't do much that kahr or kel tec hasn't already done, if not make it slightly more reliable (I've never had a problem with kahrs, apparently other have).

That was my point. Even the new eave of micro 9s, a market in which Glock was seriously late to the game, hasn't proved to hurt Glock very much, and these are very popular pistols. This SIG isn't head and shoulders above anything on paper. We will see when IBM has some road tests.
 
The S&W shield, as said, is probably more vulnerable to this new SIG than anything.
Click to expand...

As long as S&W can continue to sell the Shield for the low prices they sell them for, I feel it is going to be somewhat insulated from any impact the P365 might bring to the market.

I know plenty of folks who picked up a Shield based largely on its very low price (even I had to pick one up when they could be had for $215 with the rebate). I don't see this SIG matching that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top