SIG X-6 vs p210

R

rt11002003

New member
Just returned from the range where I shot my SIG p210 6 9 for the first time. Took the X-6 along to compare. The X-6 has had more than 2,000 rounds through it, so I'm comfortable with it. It's one of my more accurate guns, m/b the most accurate.

So, how did the p210 do? I'd judge it's worth most of the praise laid on it. I can't shoot it as well as I do the X-6; no surprise. It shoots about 2-3 inches high. We'll see if that holds over time, or if it's me with a new gun/sight picture. The trigger isn't as smooth as the X-6, expect that will improve with use. I like the break better than the break on the X-6. Opinion on the front sight is still open; it's very narrow compared to my other SIGs, m/b all my guns. It shoots a nice group though.

I hate the magazine release; it's really stiff. I have several other handguns with the butt magazine release. They're all much easier to use.

I think the p210 may have only had the factory folks shoot it. There are no marks anywhere, including the magazine. It's a 1982 model; includes the .22 conversion kit; everything has the same serial numbers. A repair order from 1996 states the weapon replaced the one submitted for repair; I think that's what it said. It also appears the .22 conversion kit was part of the new gun. The owner was charged $520 for the conversion.

Surely wish I had a couple of spare magazines. If you'd like to see the targets, let me know.
 
I generally think that for most purposes and most shooters, the X6 is the more modern and better shooting gun. The P210 surpasses it in build quality, and accuracy at 50m by a few millimeters, but I feel it loses out in ergos and just plain shootability.
 
I generally think that for most purposes and most shooters, the X6 is the more modern and better shooting gun. The P210 surpasses it in build quality, and accuracy at 50m by a few millimeters, but I feel it loses out in ergos and just plain shootability.
Click to expand...

I've owned both. The build quality of the P226 X-Five I owned was stunning: the fit and finish superb. About the same as the P-210-6. The P-210 was impressive, but the X-Five was visually stunning!

If you wanted to CARRY a P226-X Five you'd probably never carry it concealed: it's a big gun. And heavy. Far less practical in that way. Capacity is substantial, however.

The hammer on the P-210 can bite some hands -- it didn't bite mine. It's smaller, lighter, more concealable. The mag release is awkward and would take some getting used to. The safety lever can be hard to use for a long time, unless you do some work on it.

Parts for either one aren't cheap. Little things like recoil springs are a problem, too. There are so few (or no) after-market mags for the P-210 that you've got to think about spending big $$$ to have some spare mags. The P226 X-Five CAN use standard P226 mags, and while the FACTORY mags for the X-Five models are costly, you can find Mec-Gar branded alternatives that are more reasonable.

If I were to spend the money for either, now, it would probably be the P-210-6 (like the one I once owned.)

But I'm a shooter, not a collector, and I'd probably spend my money on something almost as good but not nearly as expensive -- like the top-end CZ or Tanfoglio IPSC guns, or get another Sphinx -- maybe a full-size one similar to my SDP.
 
Last edited:
I had a P210-6 with adjustable sights, couple -2s, much later an X-5. The X-5 displayed finer machine work internally and a finer finish externally than my P210s. Barrel to slide and slide to frame fit of the X-5 was very very good, just not quite as precise as the fit of these components on the P210s. Shooting carefully over a rest, the X-5 would shoot groups as small as the P210s, just not as often for me. Likely due to the shooter, rather than any detectable difference in intrinsic accuracy. The P210s bit the web of my hand badly and the heel mag release on my guns was a bear to deal with. I smoothed the sharp edges on the rear of the hammer on one of the guns, which did reduce the blood letting. I much prefer the more svelte lines, grip and overall size of the P210s. Over time though, I sold or traded all of 210s, mainly due to the mag release and bloodshed. I have another pistol or two with heel mag releases. I don't care for the heel releases, but still easier to deal with than the P210 mag releases. More recently I acquired fixed sighted and adjustable sighted German P210 Legends. For actual shooting, as opposed to just investing in, admiring, collecting, etc, I much prefer the P210 Legends. Especially the Legend Target with the adjustable sights. And, no bloodletting or struggling with the heel mag release......ymmv
 
The P210 series are excellent handguns but lets not forget they are an older design now and were designed for combat.

The X series is a modern handgun built solely for target shooting.
 
morgo said:
The X series is a modern handgun built solely for target shooting.
Click to expand...

I'd argue that "modern" isn't the Key; I'd argue the fact that they are well BUILT is the key point.

Many 1911-based designs CAN and DO compete quite well against the high-end SIGs in the target world, and double-stack versions of the 1911 do well in the combat competition venues (where speed and ease of use plays a big role). The higher-end CZs, Sphinx, and Tanfoglio models also do well. I would note that these are all WELL BUILT guns, and all were originally designed to be service pistols.

Modern? The 1911 design is 100+ years old, the P-210 (M49) is at least 65 years old. The others, including the newer SIG, are based on designs that are at least 40 years old! (The P-226 is a variant of the original SIG P-220 design which was introduced in 1975 as a single-stack, DA/SA 9mm SERVICE PISTOL replacement for the very costly P-210. It wasn't until several years later (with the P-226) that SIG added a double-stack mag.)

All of the guns cited above perform well in target or combat competition because of the care and attention paid to them during their manufacture. They are all well built.

If SIG Arms (or one of the other subsidiaries) would build a slim double-stack version of the P-210, I suspect they could sell quite a few of them -- despite what would likely be a high sticker price.
 
Last edited:
I've often said "I wouldn't have a gun I couldn't shoot regularly". I sincerely doubt the p210 will get heavy use, but I expect to treat it like my carry guns/home defense guns. They get to the range at least every six weeks, most of the time every month.

Fun to shoot: #1 HK Mark 23 or CZ75 TS (tie); #2 SIG X-5; #3 SIG X-6; #4 Springfield RangeOfficer 9mm; #5 S&W Model 41; #6 STI RangeMaster 9. Can't rank the rest; as group, the remaining HKs (USPs).

This list will likely change within a month. I tend to favor those guns more recently shot. Short attention span, or poor memory, I guess.:)

The p210 will never make the top 10 of shooters. I love it, but the mag release is too much trouble to be fun.
 
By modern I meant the X series has all the refinements, ergonomics for target shooting and technological advancements in machining/materials/production used in its design and production to give it that advantage over the 50+ year old P210 design.
Being well built I'd argue is due to in part to being a modern firearm, yes there were well built firearms in the past but modern technology means there are more better built firearms for a relatively lower price.

I wonder what an X series would cost today if it was built to the same standard but using only 1950's machinery?

I was only referring to the P210 when referring to modern as the P210 has not been changed, excluding the newer legend series.

If you want to compare an original service 1911 from the same period as the P210 then I'm sure the X series would wipe the floor with it.

Modern 1911's are the not the same as the 1911 from the period when the P210 was made. 1911's of today incorporate all of the above mentioned advantages that the P210 has not seen in the last half century or more.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top