Sphinx SDP vs. Sig Sauer P229
- Thread starter ingEneer22
- Start date
I was guessing at a $200-$250 difference and labeling that as a "lot". Obviously I've been "caught on on my guessing" though and it's not a $200 difference. The SDP isn't nearly as expensive as I thought it was. That changes things. I guess you would need to pick the CGW P-07 or the SDP based on merits rather than a price gap. Would be an interesting decision. I've got very little trigger time on an SDP and zero trigger time on a CGW P-07 so I probably shouldn't comment on the merits.
WALT
I plan on sending mine to CGW as soon as I can part with it. Might mean buying a second P-07 while my other one is away. Or maybe I'll just buy one already done off of them like I suggested above and do a comparison. Would make for a nice thread as long as I can abstain from guessing...
It really is. I have a few thousand rounds through my P-07 at this point and can honestly say it's my favorite gun I've ever owned. It fits in that Glock 19-size envelope very well and holy crap it's a shooter. I've got less than 200 rounds through an SDP and on that limited round count I think it's a nicer gun but maybe not that much of a better gun if that makes sense.
I plan on sending mine to CGW as soon as I can part with it. Might mean buying a second P-07 while my other one is away. Or maybe I'll just buy one already done off of them like I suggested above and do a comparison. Would make for a nice thread as long as I can abstain from guessing...
Independent George
New member
Can I ask where you ordered it from? Up until now, the lowest price I've been able to find was $900. $860 including shipping and fees brings it back down to acceptable levels for me.
Walt Sherrill
New member
And I have a Gray Guns P228r with Heinie Straight Eight sights. It has the GG Reduced Reset Comprehensive Duty Package installed. It's a very nice gun, but I like the SDP better, and shoot it better. (Those additions added about $500 to the original cost for the original buyer; I'm the second owner -- so I got a better deal.)
The Trijicon tritium inserts dimmed after four years, so they're back to Heinie for warranty coverage [or replacement at my expense -- depending on their intepretation of the cause.] I banged the rear sights once, so I may have damaged them -- and just didn't notice it at the time. The front sights are dead, too, so maybe Trijicon will fix them under warranty.
Once that guns is repaired, I'm selling it to buy the SDP. That's how much I like the SDP
That said, I will probably also get a P-07, one of these days, too...
The Trijicon tritium inserts dimmed after four years, so they're back to Heinie for warranty coverage [or replacement at my expense -- depending on their intepretation of the cause.] I banged the rear sights once, so I may have damaged them -- and just didn't notice it at the time. The front sights are dead, too, so maybe Trijicon will fix them under warranty.
Once that guns is repaired, I'm selling it to buy the SDP. That's how much I like the SDP
That said, I will probably also get a P-07, one of these days, too...
Found this this afternoon too:
Gun Review: SPHINX SDP Compact VS. CZ P-07
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2014/07/jeremy-s/sphinx_vs_cz/
Gun Review: SPHINX SDP Compact VS. CZ P-07
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2014/07/jeremy-s/sphinx_vs_cz/
I just kept an eye on the auction sites like Gun Broker and Gunsamerica for quite a few months. They have some on there right now that would be close to what I got mine for.
I got two spare magazines about a month ago for about $30.00 each plus shipping at Cheaper Than Dirt. I see they now have them at about $55.00. CPF arms has them for about $35.00 each plus shipping.
ingEneer22
New member
Thanks for all of the input! I think I'm leaning towards the P229 for now at least. I would love to find a SDP that I can shoot but I think they just are not common enough right now. I will most likely end up buying one though just due to all of the great reviews. That will give me time to search for a good price.
khornet224
Inactive
The heritage of a handgun is important
Walt Sherrill said: "Have YOU had a chance to try an SDP -- or is your opinion based solely on your appreciation of SIGs?"
I own the P229 in Sport and regular configurations in 357 Sig caliber (8,000+ rounds through one frame); however, I do not know much about the SDP except for its profile. Notice how both guns have a Swiss origin and both have full rails. The SDP seems to have a competition-target shooting heritage; the P229--combat.
Think of the Browning Hi-Power as the standard for modern, compact, hi-capacity side arms. Compare the Hi-Power's profile to the Sig P229 and you will see a match.
Now compare the profile of the SDP to a Glock and you will see a match.
Is the Glock a combat proven firearm? No. Is the Browning Hi-Power a combat proven firearm? Yes.
The key point is that the barrel length and the tapered front end of the Browning and the Sig is ideal for concealed carry and use at handgun fighting distances; the other handguns are capable just not ideal.
Walt Sherrill said: "Have YOU had a chance to try an SDP -- or is your opinion based solely on your appreciation of SIGs?"
I own the P229 in Sport and regular configurations in 357 Sig caliber (8,000+ rounds through one frame); however, I do not know much about the SDP except for its profile. Notice how both guns have a Swiss origin and both have full rails. The SDP seems to have a competition-target shooting heritage; the P229--combat.
Think of the Browning Hi-Power as the standard for modern, compact, hi-capacity side arms. Compare the Hi-Power's profile to the Sig P229 and you will see a match.
Now compare the profile of the SDP to a Glock and you will see a match.
Is the Glock a combat proven firearm? No. Is the Browning Hi-Power a combat proven firearm? Yes.
The key point is that the barrel length and the tapered front end of the Browning and the Sig is ideal for concealed carry and use at handgun fighting distances; the other handguns are capable just not ideal.
ingEneer22
New member
So let me get this straight...You are comparing a metal framed, hammer fired Sphinx SDP that has a MSRP of around $1300 to a Glock?
You, my friend, may have just lost ALL of your credibility!Uncle Malice
New member
Call me crazy, but I believe there are many more military agencies worldwide running the Glock than the Browning Hi-Power....
Walt Sherrill
New member
Uncle Malice said:
A lot of those militaries also have big tanks. And like their Glocks, darned few of them have ever fired a shot in anger. Hard to say "combat tested" if they've not been used in combat.
Do I think Glocks are hardy, durable weapons? Yup. Do I think they'll hold up in combat? Yup. But that's what I think, from what I've seen and experienced, and it's not based on a what I know from reports of how they've performed in combat.
The British Army just began the transition to Glocks from BHPs, so maybe ONE country's Glocks will soon see action. Their BHPs have seen action over the years -- from WWII to Malaya/Malaysia, Northern Ireland, the Faulkland Islands, to Iraq...
Beretta seems to be the champion in this category, thanks to U.S. combat actions in Panama, Somalia, Afghanistan, Iraq, Kuwait, etc.
Last edited:
The UK also has tanks last I looked, and planes, and personnel carriers, and more importantly rifles. I'm not arguing the BHP is somehow not proven. But let's not make it seem like it was anything more than a sidearm through all those conflicts as well. Special forces units, Delta, in the US used Glocks all throughout the past 13 years as well. To the numbers of someone like Beretta? Not for the US. But there is a long list of Glock users across the world in plenty of inhospitable places.
I a little confused on use of the word "Profile". At first it looks to be used in the sense of an informal biography of military use. The last part talks more about physical appearance and shapes.
The BHP is a single action pistol that is bigger in size than the Sig P229. The P229 is much closer in size (including barrel length) to the Sphinx SDP and the Glock 19 for that matter. The G 19 is a striker fired polymer gun though. The Sig P line gets compared to the newer Sphinx SDP line for good reason. They are DA/SA models (minus a few Sig variations) that have decockers, great out of the box triggers, excellent accuracy, and great quality.
I'm not sure why the Sphinx SDP would not be ideal at handgun fighting distances. I would put the SDP's inherent accuracy right there with Sigs.
Walt Sherrill
New member
TunnelRat said:
Agreed. But the point was that just because some military has them doesn't mean they use them in combat. The U.S. has a bunch of ballistic missiles too, but nobody claims they are "combat tested" just because we have them, in silos, in hangers, or onboard subs.
TunnelRat said:
I've heard that said, but I've seen nothing that really substantiates the claim. The only seemingly credible listing of agencies and military units (on Wiki) using Glocks show only a US Army Ranger Regiment (and that hasn't been confirmed) and Delta folks. I think Delta is kind of like the SEALS: they can use just about anything they want, and that changes from mission ro mission.
One acquaintance is a trainer who works with Delta and other special forces; he says they spend a lot of time with longer-barreled weapons; while they try to be proficient with all of the weapons they use, and are very handy with handguns, handguns are typically seen as a last resort.
TunnelRat said:
I've looked at that list on Wikipedia, and if that's your source you'll see almost NO military unit on that list -- except perhaps France. The French Army sees action from time to time. I've looked and have not found other sources about who uses what.
I'm not disparaging Glocks in saying this -- I've had several, still have my favorite Glock 38. I'm just disputing the claim that some make about Glocks being "combat tested" -- as though they've been used in a lot of military conflicts. (I see the same sort of claims made about CZs... and that's even less credible. I like CZs, too, so that's not a put-down of CZs.)
The British BHPs do have a long record of combat use -- but the British Army seems to think that new Glocks might be better choice than new FN Hi-Powers. I don't think they're dong anything stupid by going that route.
If you've got better sources about combat usage of Glocks, feel free to share them with us -- I'd like to know whether there are grounds for the claims.
Last edited:
Exactly. So until you point me to a vast array of firsthand accounts of Browning Hi Powers being used in modern conflicts, the same goes for it as well. Just because it gets deployed to the war zone doesn't mean it's actually used extensively. Mostly they ride around in holsters of rear-echelon personnel, officers, or MPs. How many ever get used? Then let's compare that percentage that actually gets used from service-wide pistols to those used by elite units. In either case I imagine it's very small, but I foresee smaller elite units using pistols more as they are more often in close in work. I may be wrong.
That's true of all handguns and has been discussed endlessly on this forum. The whole "combat handgun" term to me is pointless. We don't fight wars with handguns, Browning Hi Power, M9, Glock, or otherwise. Cases where they are used are relatively infrequent, especially compared to overall operations. They're very romantic and part of Americana, but we as civilians see them as more essential than any military unit.
I'd ask you to tell me what exactly "combat tested" even means. Glocks have been around for decades, they're hardly the new kid on the block anymore. In that time they've gone through who knows how many police trials and no doubt a number of military trials for those nations that do list them (what those trials involve I honestly don't know, but I imagine we can agree it's more than nothing). Heck we can go on the YouTube right now and watch Billy Joe bury it in his yard and then shoot it in his pool. In addition there are documented Glocks with over 100,000 rds fired. The idea that Glock is somehow less proven simply because it hasn't been in a "World" war isn't credible to me.
Last edited:
Walt Sherrill
New member
So, by your standards, even the BHP isn't combat tested. Good, let's drop the claim for all weapons except M9s. BHPs were used by the British in combat in the sand boxes, by the SAS (in some anti-terrorist missions, including one that ended up on TV), and by a number of Israeli commando units. Not to mention both Allied and Axis troops units in WWII. The guns they used in WWII were, in many cases, the same guns used today. We can say those weren't examples of combat, too.
As for the M9s used in combat: I do know that the U.S. military changed its handgun training several years ago because M9s used in combat in Afghanistan and Iraq were often not going into battery when troops wearing gloves released the slides using the sling-shot or hand-ovr method. That prompted a change to training. incorporating the slide stop/release method. (Use the strong hand if you could, to release the slide, or several fingers of the the off hand if you couldn't.)
I had a couple of friends who served in elite units; one did black ops in Africa. He didn't and couldn't talk much about what or where, but was good with handguns. He preferred more powerful weapons. One SEAL I knew said he'd rather carry an extra canteen -- he seemed serious, but he may have been pulling my chain. He did prefer sub-guns to handguns. Several friends who saw combat as Green Berets preferred sub-guns; they were both snipers during part of their careers.
But great -- let's quit saying "combat tested" when we talk about handguns. It won't bother me. I didn't introduce the term in the first place... I'll agree it's overused. Especially if used with Glocks.
