Why Glock/HK more durable than Sig?

Status
Not open for further replies.
C

CJ

Inactive
I've seen posters say that HK/Glock are more durable than Sigs. Are these just opinions, or are there tests that prove this?

The reason I ask is that I don't trust the polymer frame design. I bought a USP 45c and promptly got rid of it. The back right frame rail did not completely cover it's mating surface. It had either broken, or came from the factory like that. The exposed mating surface was very rough, causing the slide action to be un-smooth.

In contrast, my newly acquired SIG P229 .357 has steel frame rails (obviously part of the frame - not glued on) that extend all the way forward. It seems to me that the glued-on frame inserts would be an inherent flaw in the HK design.

Is this incorrect? I haven't inspected the internals of any Glocks. Are the Glocks similar? Thanks, CJ
 
Hey CJ,

I am not a Glockaholic or a big fan of HKs (in fact my SIG 226 9mm is my dream come true) but I will let you know of some info that was past on to me from trusted people in the know.

-The Glock (especially the original 17) has a reputation of being the most duriable handgun on the market. The testing the thing has had to endure would probably make our sigs shrival up and blow away. The three guns to survive the military trials in the early 80s were the SIG, Glock, and of course the Beretta. The GLock was kicked because it did not have an exposed hammer or external safety. The Sig was actually the military's first choice, but cost per weapon and projected manufacturing data would not facilitate the orders fast enough. So in essence the Berretta won the contest, not because of performance, but because it met the minimum standards and Berretta could fill orders fast and cheaper. I am not saying the M9 is a bad gun, on the contrary is is a great gun, but is it as good as a Sig or a Glock...That's up to you.

The Navy and other special forces have chosen a HK as their primary tactical sidearm in .45. If the TEAMS choose a polymer weapon, and had their choice of just about anything, I'd say that says alot.

I chose the SIG in 9mm for many reasons, reliability was one of the major one and have not had even a hiccup yet. Even with aftermags and cheap ammo. I'd say you have one if not the finest firearms in the world. DO NOT let anybody tell you otherwise.



------------------
"By His stripes we are healed..."

PeterGunn
 
Mr. Gunn

The Glock did not pass the early 80's military trials. It failed miserably...at being there! :) The gun was not entered because I don't even think its design had been finalized. The Glock did make it to some other,later, trials but it was not picked (I think the Sig 228 was). Don't worry though, the gun that I am sure is the finest in the word was beaten by the Sig and Beretta. The P7 couldn't even pass the rust test! Oh, well, there is always my other favorite...the Rogak. :(...it will rise again.
 
Greg: Let it be said that I stand corrected. The Glock was not at the XM9 trials in 1984. The HK p7 was and it looks as if it was dropped a little prematurely. I cannot find the reason why. Smith and Wesson 459 was also dropped at the same time. The 226 has completed all of the military trials soundly, but they were not chosen due to cost. The 228 was given the status of M11 due to its being chosen to serve as a pistol for general officers and other service personal who needed a more compact arm. Thanks for settign me straight. i really shouldn't pass on info until I check it out myself. Lesson Learned. Sorry...

I still believe the Glock 17 is a VERY durable weapon, though...

------------------
"By His stripes we are healed..."

PeterGunn
 
The steel rails on the HK (and all other polymer framed guns) have the plastic injection molded around them. They are not 'glued on'. The metal part of the rails extend well into the frame.

Not exactly sure what you mean by, "The back right frame rail did not completely cover it's mating surface."

- Ron V.

------------------
 
It is true, with the exception of the SIG 210 (steel frame), the 220 series and 232 and 239 are aluminum frames and rails.
I think that people in general are being a little overly critical about SIG durability. There are all sorts of reports around about how brand "X" went ka boom or the frames cracked or whatever. The bottom line is that you shoot what works best for you. The only possible shortcoming that SIG needs to work on is the finish. Now I personally have never had a real problem with any of mine because I care enough about my stuff to wipe em down after a day out to the range. But I have also seen SIG whose owners werent so caring, and needed attention. I never saw a rusty Glock or USP.
 
The Glock was removed from the trials at Glock's request because they were unwilling to divulge their polymer formula.

Neither the SIGs nor the Glock have any manual safeties.

The Beretta won because it was several cents cheaper that the SIG on a unit per unit basis. As I remember it the score was even.

The SIGs do tend to rust a little faster than the others, but most of the SOCOM folks are going back to the P226 because the new H&K is just too big and heavy. It's the only "crew-served handgun."

The reason they went to the SIG in the first place was because of kB's in the Berettas due to the very high pressure ammo they use. Some SEALs took Beretta slides in the face, hence the slogan "You ain't a real SEAL till you've eaten Italian steel"

The P228 (M11) is available for anyone who needs a smaller-sized weapon due to small hands or concealment needs. CID units carry it as standard equipment.

In any weapon of this caliber, I don't think reliability is a factor. in fact, (not to knock Beretta) it almost appears that the decision was a compromise of the cheapest weapon winning out.
 
D2V - Of course you are right about the P229 having aluminum rails. The last time I posted about this, it was on another forum before I got the P229. At that time, I was comparing the HK to a 5906, which is all steel.

hksigwalther - Thanks! Now I see how the polymer frame, steel inserts can hold up. It did LOOK like they were glued on my USP45c. When I say "The back right frame rail did not completely cover it's mating surface.", I mean the steel does not cover all the area it appears that it should. I think another way to put it is that the right rear frame rail insert is smaller than the left rear. My brother has the gun, so I will get it and measure so I can give a better description of the problem.

It looks like maybe I just got one with a slight defect. Next time I'll field strip and check more carefully before I buy. Thanks all, CJ
 
Where to start?

The Beretta scored better than the SIG in the M9 trials. Reliability was twice as good (MRBF of 1/2000 v 1/1000; both did 1/15,000 in M11 trials, latest for the M9 is around 1/30,000). Both passed, SIG was initial low bid, then DoD asked for more parts/mags. SIG kept same price, Beretta dropped their price! Insider info? Who knows? :)

SIG frames do crack. FBI's FTU (Firearms Training Unit) and academy saw plenty of them do it under 5000 rounds. Not that big a deal; they usually still work, just opens up the groups a bit. SIG usually fixes it free. Don't worry about it.

The Beretta and SIG are more than tough enough for most. I've seen plenty with over 50,000 rounds through them that work fine.

Glocks are toughest. Can probably put more rounds through one than any other gun before replacing anything. The USPs can take hotter loads in 40/45, but the minor parts won't go as far before replacing.

You gotta try hard to find a really bad gun these days? :)

------------------
>>>>---->
 
You know, I recall reading Dick Marcinko's book Rogue warrior, and there was mention about special ordering M9 Slides that were a full once heavier for Seal Units, since team six shot so much they were cracking the slides of their M9's. Those Slides were made by Phrobis (a dive knife maker) and marked with a dolphin for commercial sale these were on sale in the shotgun news for a long time as a replacement part for Barettas.

After hearing about slides "flying off" Berettas.. I can't say I'd want one.

I'd agree that if socom is using an HK its probably pretty darn tough.

What i Don't understand.. with all the talk of corrosion resistance and strength.. why weren't stainless/polymer handguns devloped for milspec use? Anyone? Anyone?

Just curious...

Dr.Rob
 
CJ,

The left rear fram rail in the USP is shorter that the right rear. This is to accomodate the safety/decocking mechanism. It's not a defect or inherent flaw.

I'm sure the design team for the USP had calculated and done extensive testing on whether the shortened length of the left rear frame rail would be able to withstand the rigors of numerous recoil cycles. If anything, and judging by HK's general practice of over-engineering, it's probably at least twice as durable than is needed. (Just look at the P7M10.)

When I say left rear frame rail I am talking from the orientation of the frame pointing away from me as if I was holding the grip normally, i.e. dust cover towards the front.

- Ron V.

------------------


[This message has been edited by hksigwalther (edited September 09, 1999).]
 
Hate to say it, but the Glocks and H&Ks are a bit tougher in my experience. Not neccesarily better, just tougher relating to finish and wear.

At just over 1000 rounds I had the breech roll pin start to back out of my P220. The finish started to wear well before that. My only problems with Glocks have been their flimsy plastic adjustable sights.

No problems with my HK yet, but I'm still under 500 rounds.

Don't get me wrong. Sigs are great guns they just require a bit more care than Glocks and HK USPs in my experience and humble opinion.





[This message has been edited by JJCII (edited September 10, 1999).]
 
If you pack your sidearms as harbor patrol under salt weather conditions, can you rinse
the SIG under tap water and put it away? It
will probably rust. But you can do it with the Glock. Hurray for Polymer technology.
 
i was in a gun shop last month and a guy was there talking about the torture tests he had been doing to a glock 23. he put it in a bucket of water for 3 days, he ran it over with his truck, he threw it out the window, he never clean it for 1000 rounds or so.
he said no matter what he did to it, it just kept on shooting. in fact he said the accuracy was starting to get better now that hes broken it in.
As for H&K, according to their little movie they have, they are milspec.
I have a USP45 and it sure feels milspec.
I love my Sigs, but for abuse, they are not even in the ballpark with glocks or H&K.
 
Here is a question, we all know that many policy agencies have chosen Beretta, SW, Glock and SIG as their authorized sidearms. But other than the US Military special forces, I have not heard any adoption of HK USP by major police agencies.

Not to put HK down, I love their MP5 (even though I couldn't own one) and I do own a P7.
 
I think I've carried one of everthing on duty at some time or another. When it rained the Beretta and Sig had to be cleaned and quickly. As for reliability if it didn't work ALL the time it wasn't carried. I've known people who had Sigs crack after several thousand rounds of +P. I've seen Berettas crack after several thousand rounds of anything. I haven't been around H&K's very long but they are nice to shoot.
Last time I heard a LE academy at Jacksonville State University in AL had a Glock that had just over 100,000 rounds through it. Never cleaned well and no malfunctions. The instructor was to shoot it until it malfuntioned and then send it to Glock. I think you could call that durability.
Two agencies in my area have just gone to USPs. In fact one replaced their P7's with them. Fact is they are all good guns and I would be happy with any of them.

[This message has been edited by General (edited September 12, 1999).]
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top