Sig Pro or glock 23 ?

Z

ZAZ

Inactive
Hi guys I would just like to introduce myself to the board, and ask a question. I will be getting my first real handgun for christmas, and have a couple of ?'s. I have pretty much settled on either the new sig pro in .40 or the glock 23 in .40. I know the only way to really know which is the best choice is to shoot them both but I dont know if i will get the chance to. This gun will be primarily be used for target practice and home security, I would like to get a concealed to carry permit, But the chances of them giving one to a 24 yr. old guy who does not own a house, his own business or dosn't work in a bad part of town are about as likely as Brittney Spears coming over my house tonight after her show tonight :) .
My qualifications in order of importance are- accuracy, comfort, durability, and quality. I have small hands and am 5'8 about 175lbs. if it makes a diff. Thanks for your replies.
 
IMHO, the Glock 23 is one of the best .40 calibers out there and my favorite compared to the USP/C and the P229. Just make sure the Glock trigger is for you. If it is, its one of the best for defensive shooting. Don't know much about the SigPro but if you want a Sig DA/SA, save up for a P series like the P226 or P229. The P series established Sig's excellent reputation, not the SigPro.
 
My qualifications in order of importance are- accuracy, comfort, durability, and quality. I have small hands and am 5'8 about 175lbs. if it makes a diff.
Click to expand...

I like my Sig Pro, but then I have medium-big hands and outweigh you by a good bit. It is quite comfortable to me in part due to its big grips. It is well made, with a stainless slide and what appear to be stainless slide rails.

Field Stripping is harder than in Glocks, but the manual tells how to hold it so it comes easier. Unlike Glocks you don't have to pull the trigger before takewdown so that eliminates one chance to carelessly shoot your foot. Sig says they think that slide-back takedown is safer and I agree.

It is more accurate than I am.

Cheaper than Dirt has been running a sale on Sig Pro 357 conversion barrels for +/-$147.

My wife hates it, absolutely and unremittingly, but then she is lighter than me and has smaller hands.
 
You're probably going to get lots of different answers, and confused to boot.
Let's get durability and quality out of the way first. There may be some differences in the finish of the slides, but not much real difference. The sig pro should last about 100 years, the Glock another 5 or 10. I think the quality of precision goes to Sig, but again, this difference doesn't become apparent until your grand children are old.
Now you get to the tough subjective stuff. In terms of comfort, I have to go with sig. the glock 23 just doesn't have the weight or double recoil spring to make this a shooting pleasure. Not that the sig is much better, but for me it is. In fact, I think the 23 is more uncomfortable to shoot than either the 22 or 27.
Along with recoil control comes flinch control, and for many shooters, this effects accuracy. the trigger on the sig pro is MUCH better (for me) than the glock's.
Since target practice and home security are you main uses, if you can stick it out and are will to save your dollars, I think you'll be happier with the Sig P229. More comfortable, more quality, much more accuracy. The finish on the slide may actaully be worse of the group, but given reasonable care, it will last your lifetime, even you do start to carry.
But the final thought is that either of the sigs will be safer for you to use for home defense. Unless you train quite a bit, the heavy DA on the first shot of the sig can really help. When poop hits the fan, your fist can inadvertently tighten, and this will give you that extra margin.
I am certain others will disagree, and they will be right for themselves. The decision is a very personal one, and only you can decide what is best for you.
 
Last edited:
My biggest concern with either of the guns is your statement that you have small hands. Both the Glock and the Sig are double-stack designs with relatively large grip circumference. Make sure that you can comfortably reach the trigger without having to scootch your hand around the gun. With the gun lined up so that the slide is basically aligned with your forearm, can you comfortably reach the trigger. If you can't, then the gun won't work for you, and you might want to consider a single stack design, like the Sig P239.

Both are fine guns. The Glock trigger does take getting used to.

M1911
 
I'm with Ian on this one.

Go Glock. I have 2 .40's: a Glock 23 and a Sig 229. The Glock 23 is probably the best carry .40 out there. The Sig 229 is an excellent gun too, but holds two less rounds and is heavier. If you have to have a Sig, I'd go for a 229. I just find the SigPro chunky, and I don't like the feel of the grip. Also, I don't know if hi-caps are available for the SigPro.
 
Thanks for the replies, I have held (but not fired) my girlfriends brothers Glock 23 LEO issue and it was not too big for my hands, but the glock 27 sub compact felt too small and did not seem like it would be comfortable to shoot. I have also held a HKS usp 45 and it felt too big for me. I really do not feel that I will shoot the gun enough to justify spending another 2 bills on a p229 , I would rather put the money towards a house. I am leaning more towards the sig because it sounds like a more comfortable gun to shoot. And glocks seem like the honda accord of pistols, look ok, durable as hell, but everone has one, I like being a little different.
Thanks, ZAZ :)
 
ZAZ

If you put the Plus one Pearce Magazine extension on the G27, It is almost the same as the G23 IMO. I have a G27 and love it.

As far as the choice between the SigPro and the G23, I would get the G23.

I love Sigs, I don't like the SigPros. Not saying they are bad, Its just my preference.
 
Check out the Walther P99. Similar size and style to the Glock, but with a smaller grip. I have one in 9mm, and love it. They do run somewhere between the price of a 229 and a G23.
 
ZAZ,

Durability and reliability is always the top priority in a defensive gun. Whether your life is on the line or whether you gotta get to work you want a machine you can depend on. There's a reason why certain products like Glock and Honda Accords come to the forefront and have stayed there. No amount of clever marketing can do that. A gun that is dependable is never boring.

Anyways, I hope you do more research on this and other boards about the SigPro. TFL is like an amateur Consumer Reports and you'll see more mixed reviews about the SigPro and overwhelming enthusiasm from owners of the Sig P Series pistols. Check with the folks at www.sigforum.com and do a search on the SigPro pistol.

Also, do consider the Sig P239 in .40. Its single stack so its good for ccw and good for people with small hands.
 
Last edited:
Forget about concealed carry

You live in Maryland. Unless you're a retired LEO, politician or relative of one of the aforementioned, you more than likely will not be approved.

As for your question, I can't speak to either weapon as I have no experience with them. However, I love my Glock 36. Reliable and accurate. I'll soon be shopping for a full sized Glock but haven't decided yet on the caliber.
 
ZAZ,

You said you are about to get your first real handgun....have you had unreal ones already?

If your choice is limited to the two guns listed, I would suggest the Glock 23. I am an avid SIG fan, as the forum name suggests, but have not found the SIG Pro line to measure up to the classic models. Your small hands also point to getting the 23, as it is easier to grip (comparatively).

However, if you open the list of possibilities, I'd suggest looking at the SIG 229 in .40 (or .357 or 9mm...your preference). Your hands aren't any smaller than mine, and the gun works for me quite well. A much better choice than the SIG Pro. Full 10 round capacity (12 round hi-caps are available if you have a house to mortgage) and it's smaller than the Pro.

If you're convinced that you want .40 s&w, and must have 10 round capacity, the SIG 229 is the best gun on the market. Of course, IMHO.
 
Reply

ZAZ,

I was exactly in your shoes 11 months ago. I wanted to buy a new handgun and I put a limit on how much I wanted to spend on that gun. I shot and compared the Sig Pro, Glock, and H&K since they were all in that price range and all three guns have great reputations. The Sig Pro (.357sig) felt the best and shot the best out of the group in my opinion. I bought the Sig Pro and have not had any regrets. The Sig Pro might not be as good as its older brothers (P229,etc) but it is priced $200 less then those and I think you get the most bang for your buck with a Sig Pro over the P-229, and etc. They are just too much money for not that much of an improvement in my opinion!!

The best advice I can give you is go to your local dealer and hold both, dry fire them, play with the slide and the buttons and see what one your hand likes best. If you can shoot both of them then you will know which one is the best for you.

J33Nelson
 
I recently faced the same decision and chose the Glock. Im about your height and weight, and just liked it better after shooting both. Not sure where New Windsor is, but I would suggest heading to Chantilly, VA and trying both out at Blue Ridge Arsenal.

Some folks here don't care for them very much, but they do allow you to rent all sorts of guns. Afterwards, you will be in much better shape to decide. Also, ask the guy at the counter to field strip the gun for you. You will see right away why I like GLocks better - but thats just my $0.02
 
This Sig Pro is about as good as any other classic Sig. Its newer and cheaper to manufacture thats why they go for less. This also keeps the costs down for Sig so they can make a profit. It costs to much to machine metal parts,and compete with Glock so Sig pretty much joined the club. They've done a fine job at that. Some would say that the Sig Pro is even more durable because the slide rails are huge and the slide is made of stainless steel. I own both a Sig classic and a Sig Pro 2340 in .40,but I switched over to a .357Sig barrel. I enjoy the plastic pistol as much as my classic,and its about as accurate if I do my part.
The main problems between a Glock and a Sig is the different triggers for me. Also the Sig Pro doesn't feel as ergonomic as the classic Sig line. It feels more similiar to Glock. If you don't have many guns and shoot them all the time so that you've developed a preference I say its a moot point. The Glock will work because you haven't spent much time getting used to a DA,DA/SA or SA trigger. Besides that just pick them up and shoot them if you get a chance. That way you'll know what you like.
 
I have the Glock 23 and a sigpro 2009. I've had the Glock for a few years and just acquired the Sig. I got the 23 for concealability over the 22, but the grip is a little short for my hand. The Sig feels great in my hand. They are both great pistols and I'd have a hard time choosing one over the other. The Sig might be a little safer as you can decock, and the first shot is a long (but smooth) double action pull. If I was looking for something that would be used for considerable plinking, I'd go with Sig as the single action pull is probably a little more precise than the Glocks's "glockish" pull. I find the Glock superb for combat accuracy as the trigger pull is consistant. So I'd say the Glock is better for pure self defense and the Sig better for the dual role of plinking and self defense. Just my thoughts. I doubt you'll regret either but it would be nice to have both if you can swing it. Good luck.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top