Why doesn't the SIG P232/230 get any respect?

C

Cruzer

New member
First of all, this is NOT a caliber war. I really want some well thought out reasons why the SIG P232/230 (alloy) doesn't get any respect. Here's why I think it is a great little pistol...

- Unquestionable reliability...much better than a Walther PPK
- Over 1,000 fps; 225 fpe; 0.6 inches expanded; 9-13 inches penetration (twice the energy of a .32 ACP)
- 71% one-shot stops (if you believe M&S; better than 32ACP and 38 special by a comfortable amount)
- Only 17.4 ounces (unloaded)!! 17% less than a Kel-Tec P11 or Walther PPK, almost 30% less than a Kahr "brick", and unloaded even less than a Kahr Polymer Covert (remember all those 9mm rounds are HEAVY)
- Natural pointer-shooter unlike those micro "bricks"
- DA/SA not DAO; follow-up shots are crisp and sweet
- Great trigger; unlike the Walther or any of the DAOs
- World-class brand name...made in Germany; not a no-name hunk of roughed-out metal made in a chop-shop in Alabama (sorry to those from Alabama)

Allright...done ranting. Flame away my friends ;) ;) ;)
 
Oh, BTW. My current carry gun is a P239, 40S&W...which will blow anything away. I am considering lightening the load by going to a p230. Reasonable opinions may sway my decision :)
 
Because it is no longer size efficient. I can get a Kahr MK9 that is smaller, yet is 9mm not .380. And the 230/232s mag release on the heel significantly slows down mag changes.

Personally, I don't see the point of the 230/232 anymore.

M1911
 
Thanks M1911. I think the Stainless SIG P230/232 is heavy enough to be "obsolete" as you say. The alloy version is much lighter, and together with other factors is, IMNSHO, definitely a great candidate for CCW.

My thoughts on the MK9:


- DAO trigger (7 - 7.5 lbs; long trigger pull) vs. SIG DA/SA (9.9 lbs/3.7 lbs)
- About 27 ounces loaded (26% heavier) vs. SIG 20 ounces loaded
- 2 finger grip vs. SIG "perfect extension of your hand"
- 15-20% smaller than a SIG P232
- Six 9mm rounds vs. SIG Six .380 rounds

I have two beefs with the MK9. First, at 27 ounces, I can't carry it in my pocket. If I'm carrying 27 ounces in a holster, I'll carry a real gun like a Glock 26 or 27, which give me up to 10 rounds of 9mm/.40S&W with a much better trigger.

Second, the two finger hold. Again, if I'm carrying in a holster, adding another 1/2 inch to the grip doesn't affect my ability to conceal.

To summarize, "I don't see the point to the MK-series" and I am beginning to believe that it is "obsoleted" by more powerful/same weight guns and less powerful/lighter guns. ;)
 
adding to my agreement with M1911...

and the locked breech design of the Kahr means it recoils less than the blowback of the 230/232. Arguably, this is subjective but not very.
 
I've read that the blowback design of the P232/230 has harsher recoil than a 9mm, but that's not my experience. I'd welcome some thoughts from others who have shot a P232 or P230.
 
I've always had this theory that most people who want the P232's job done get the PPK instead because so many of us have this silly little James Bond thing.

Granted, I overwhelmingly prefer the Sig, myself, but I think we're swimming against the Ian Fleming current.

Steve
 
I own both the stainless 232 and the MK9.

Yes, the MK9 is a bit on the heavy side for its size. But, at only 5.3 inches long, it is a cinch to conceal. The construction of the gun is one of its strong points. Goes bang each and every time. I use it in a small Pager Pal holster. With a good belt, it doesn't pull the front of your pants at all.

I love the 232 too. Simple and beautiful. Don't think I'd have the 232 unless it was stainless. Too beautiful this way. Recoil? Some, but nothing hard to manage. Might be a bit worse in the blued version (lighter). My only complaint with the 232, if one at all, is the mag release. European style release takes some getting use to and my mags also rub the inside of the well....hard to pull out. Actually, has started to cut a groove into my mag.

For conceal carry, IMHO the MK9 is a better bet.
 
OK, I'll chime in here with another 2¢...

I think the Sig is probably a fine gun (I own a 229 in .40 & .357 Sig myself), BUT:

For $450 plus, what can the 232 do that a $150 Makarov can't??!

If I were swimming in dough, I'd probably get a Sig just because, but there are other solutions to the ballistics/size/weight/dollar equation out there.
 
I happen to respect the Sig P232 alot. Enough to allow it, when loaded with Cor-Bons, to protect my wife when I'm not around!:)
 
Cruzer:

I conceal my MK9 in a pocket holster in the front of my jeans or dockers. Do it all the time. Is it a bit heavy? Yup.

If you're wearing a belt holster, why bother with something as wimpy as a .380? It doesn't take much more to conceal something with a lot more punch. There's a bunch of small 9mms (Kahr K9, S&W 3913, Sig P239) that aren't a whole lot bigger. Even a Kimber Compact is a cinch to conceal in a belt holster. And I still can't stand the heel mag release.

But whatever floats your boat. The 232 is a decent gun. Just doesn't work for me. You asked why people don't like it, so I told you.

Regarding the MK9, have you shot one? It doesn't recoil much, and I don't have any problem at all with the 2 finger hold. Try it sometime; you might be surpised at how accurate and easy to shoot the little puppy is.

M1911
 
THanks, M1911, I'm getting snooty because you're tempting me with all that MK9 talk :o I do value your opinion. Just a little friendly banter.

I do understand the pros and cons, they're just bouncing around in my head. I'm going to look at MK9's again in the future...haven't really had a chance to shoot one though. I am definitely buying the P230 tomorrow. I saw a NIB P232 today...absolutely sweet. I almost bought it on the spot, but it was $490 (I'm getting the P230 for $349).

For some reason, I just shoot great with SIGs. Thanks to all for your comments!
 
Most of my thoughts have already been stated, but let's review:

Not size efficient anymore (it once was, but now you can get a 9mm, .40 S&W, or .357 Sig, and even a .45 ACP just as small or smaller)

Not a highly respected caliber (althought the .380 is plenty lethal, let's face it...it aint no 9mm, .40 S&W, .357 Sig, or .45 ACP)

Blowback rather than Recoil operated = more felt recoil

Heel vs. thumb magazine release = slower reloads

Expensive compared to other guns in its class

Pros: I had one and fit and finish was excellent. It felt great in my hand as well. Much better choice than a PPK.

Cons: I had one and it consistently deformed hollowpoint ammo when it hit the feed ramp on its way to being chambered. It was not completely reliable like my other Sigs.
 
Why I carry a P232:

1. My department limits me, in the off-duty autoloader department, to the Seecamp, the P232, the Walther PPK, and any S&W semiauto chambered in 9mm or 45ACP. Seecamps are expernsive and finicky, the PPK is unreliable, and S&W autos just plain bite, for every possible reason. So, my choice was pretty simple...

2. The ergonomics are superb. I mean, superb. They're not quite browning hi-power quality, but they're very good. The gun is a natural pointer and it fills the hand just so.

3. The .380 round, while on the weak side of adequate, can get the job done, and with the aforementioned superb ergonomics I can unload the entire magazine into COM at a pretty scary pace. Slow down a tad and I can unload the entire magazine into the B27/TQ-15's head. The recoil is insignificant. Follow-up shots flow in a zen-like manner. I dig it. Its groovy. ;)

4. Its not space efficient. I like that. Sure, they could make this thing smaller, and have it point like a kid's cap gun, or make it 9mm and have it kick like a mule and be pain to shoot. They didn't do that.

5. Its reliable. My P232 went through a fit where it was not showing me much love, but it went back to Sig and it seems to have gotten over its snit. My wife still manages to limp wrist it on occasion, but other than that its OK.

Mike
 
Coronach nailed it.

If, as I suspect, you can put 8 rounds more precisely on target quicker than you can with your SIG .40, then it doesn't matter whether the mag has a heel release or the .380 is wimpier than the .40.

The lighter weight and better pointability and better controllability of the P-232 make it easier for you to get the shot on target when the stress is high, right?

And it is more accurate than the P-239, right?
 
Last edited:
Mike, do you have the stainless or alloy frame version? I like your thinking...exactly the way I feel. It IS almost a zen-like feeling to hold a p230 (or any SIG for that matter). I have SIGs, H&Ks, Kel-Tecs, Rugers... Every single SIG I have shot is sweet.

I'm also troubled with the concept of "size efficient." What does THAT mean? If you look at the prime examples, it must mean "brick shaped object capable of launching ballistic projectiles without regard for human ergonomic needs." :o
 
I had a P230SL, stainless, that I sold off for some inexplicable reason and have regretted it ever since. I have looked at P232s and like the current models even better and have asked my dealer to order one for me but they seem to be scarce at the moment in his normal supply channels. He has my standing order to get me one when available. Yes, it is longer and taller than the MK9. Also slimmer (through the slide), not as high or tall through the slide, and lighter, even in its stainless version. True, the .380 is a pipsqueak compared to even a standard 9mm but adequate for nearly any scenario for which designed. Also, I just prefer hammered pistols over striker-fired pistols for no rational reason other than personal preference. Lately, I have had a .380 bug which started by thinking about a PPK which led me back to the Sig. I'd also like an alloy P232 and know of a dealer with a very good price on a duo-tone model with night sights (which I don't care about for my purposes). I've even been seriously thinking of picking up a very pretty CZ83 in my dealer's case to ease my craving while waiting for the Sig. My earlier P230 was beautifully crafted and put together, fed everything and was quite accurate. What's not to respect? By the way, I like the Kahr pistols a lot. I have an older K9 in blue that is superb, had a P9 I didn't like so much (early issue) and will probably get an MK9 one of these days, but still respect the P230/232 (and *like* them better).
 
By the way, I like the Kahr pistols a lot. I have an older K9 in blue that is superb, had a P9 I didn't like so much (early issue) and will probably get an MK9 one of these days, but still respect the P230/232 (and *like* them better). Obsolete doesn't mean no good in my book but I love single-action revolvers. :)
 
Coronach you da man!

I carry a Makarov off duty. I just hooked up a guy on my squad with a sig P230 from our local gunstore. He got a super deal. Traded a older large wheelgun.

Guys, all handgun rounds stink. Any real shooting should be done with a rifle. Granted you can't tuck most rifles in your dockers.

Sigs are beautiful, extremely well made, SUPER reliable pistols. Cruzer I'll buy your Sig off you if it makes you feel so inept. ;) Just kidding, the sig is a great choice....
 
I own a P230SL....

And it was an easy choice for me. I honestly don't think that they get a bad rap. Yes, all the aforementioned criticisms are valid: stainless a little heavy for the class, .380 weaker than 9mm/.40cal, blowback design a touch harsh, etc...

BUT

The .380 is still a very serviceable round. The difference between a .380 and a 9mm, while measurable, is really not all that great when compared to rifle rounds or even magnum handgun rounds.

Also, it is NOT a hard shooting gun. The wives love its size, fit, and looks. Add it to an easy to opperate platform and the womenfolk will actually shoot it. That goes a long way in most married guys lives.

As was mentioned before, ergonomics are superb. When I went to buy a compact .380/9mm, my criteria were as follows:
1. Manufacturer of excellent reputation
2. As small as possible
3. Not so small as to be a hinderance in use
4. Shape smooth enough to not snag on clothing
5. DA/SA, preferably with a decocker, no safety necessary
6. Points naturally (this gun probably wouldn't get aimed)

I went in with an open mind. I grabbed every .380 and 9mm at the time and performed a functions check and then pointed it. The difference was startling. I really didn't know much about Sig other than that they had a good reputation. Had the result of my impromptu counter tests turned up a glock or something else, I would have gone that way, but it didn't.

Subsequently, I did a bunch of searches on TFL and rec.guns and found that the little sigs had an excellent reputation, making them one of the most recommended especially when the wife would shoot it as well.

Now after 5 years with the little beggar it has NEVER failed to feed, NEVER stovepiped a round, ALWAYS been more accurate than I (offhand), and my wife has now taken it over as "her" gun. I have concealment holster for it and should I need to carry in public, this is usually my choice.

As far as "size efficiency" goes, I have a problem with the concept. I own one of the lightest, smallest, most powerful 11oz guns on the market in a titanium S&W .38sp +P. This gun is truly an amazing work of "size efficieny." But My wife can't shoot it. And I cant get every round on paper beyond about 25ft without slowfiring it. It kicks like a mule (like setting off the bullet IN your hand!), and requires a tranquil mind not to flinch with it. I train with it for camping (esp. backpacking), but its truly a niche gun.

There is such a thing as size efficiency cross indexed with user friendly. It is in this compromise terretory that I think the Sig 230/232 excels. The tiny .45s are at one end of the spectrum. The compact .380 berattas are at the other end. The Sig falls nicely in between, offering a superbly machined pistol in a small, but ergonomically friendly package.

I like it!

JT

as usual, IMHO, FWIW, YMMV, and all that...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top