Sig 226 and the Glock 17. Whats the difference?

ForaFewDollarsMore

ForaFewDollarsMore

CGN Regular
Rating - 100%
17   0   0
Location
Ontario
Anyone please correct me if Im wrong about something. To me both these guns seem to my general eye comparable. Now if this is true I was wondering why the sig is around $1100 and the Glock goes for only $600.
 
Sig is a metal gun....glock is plastic....

sig has a hammer with a decocker...glock is striker fired.

I believe the sig also has adjustable grips and backstrap, the glock does not (excluding 4th gen)
 
Interesting. Now because the sig has a few more things its worth that much more? Now I tend to like the Sig (looks wise better, its metal etc..) and I have to say something about the Glock turns me off. No reason why it just does. Mabey cause everyone seems to have one and I want to be different.

As Im thinking down the road if I had to choose one of these guns. I would have to choose the Glock just cause of the price. I have watched and read reviews on both of them and they both seem like amazing pistols minusing personal preference. But if I were to buy a great pistol for the price it would have to be the Glock. Am I wrong for saying this????
 
If you look at the polymer SIGs they are a lot closer in price and features. The Glock is a more simple firearm. Take a look at the thread by TDC with the Glock animation.
 
ForaFewDollarsMore said:
Interesting. Now because the sig has a few more things its worth that much more? Now I tend to like the Sig (looks wise better, its metal etc..) and I have to say something about the Glock turns me off. No reason why it just does. Mabey cause everyone seems to have one and I want to be different.

As Im thinking down the road if I had to choose one of these guns. I would have to choose the Glock just cause of the price. I have watched and read reviews on both of them and they both seem like amazing pistols minusing personal preference. But if I were to buy a great pistol for the price it would have to be the Glock. Am I wrong for saying this????
Click to expand...

I kinda agree what you said, gun is a tool/weapon. what we are seeking is a reliable gun, both are good and why we have to pay more. Sig may have better fit and finish unlike the Glock look cheap, but I am happy with my G17. at least good for the price for what I paid. But lately I heard some not so good review about the Gen 4 Glock but I have the gen 3.5.

Trigun
 
Hold them both. Field strip them both. Touch each part. Get to know the guns. This question answers itself.
 
Trigun;4254806 But lately I heard some not so good review about the Gen 4 Glock but I have the gen 3.5. Trigun[/QUOTE said:
Trigun - Do you have any links for the reviews. I would be interested in the read as I am looking to add a Gen 4 to my Glock collection.
Click to expand...
 
Sig_1959 said:
What did you hear?
Click to expand...

http://glocktalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1192226

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=501003

http://www.defensivecarry.com/vbulletin/defensive-carry-guns/96686-gen-4-glock-alert.html

If this came from Glock talk, It might be something need to be concerned. common believe is the dual recoil sping too tough for the ammo that sold in North America. There are several more topic from the other site which I need sometime to dig them out but I guess you can google them.

Trigun
 
because SIG is one of the best handgun and works like a Swiss watch!
....and looks a little bit better then Glocks...LOL
here is mine, make a difference?

SIG226EliteSS-003.jpg
 
Last edited:
ForaFewDollarsMore said:
Anyone please correct me if Im wrong about something. To me both these guns seem to my general eye comparable. Now if this is true I was wondering why the sig is around $1100 and the Glock goes for only $600.
Click to expand...

Sig is SA/DA with decocker and external hammer.
Glock is "Safe action" or DAO-like, but it cannot actually shoot if you haven't racked it, where the SIG can actually shoot in DA. (lets not start a fight here lol). Ok it's "Safe-action"!

Glock has polymer frame, steel slide: Sig has alumnium frame, steel slide.

Glock is simpler, parts are cheap and mods are plenty. SIg is a bit more complicated, but still easy to clean and strip. Parts are scarser and more expensive.

Glock has polygonal rifling, it requires much more scrubbing imo and shooting lead is supposely bad. SIG has standard rifling.

Glock trigger out of the box is heavy, gritty, tupperwarish... But you can dry fire it to death and do a 25c trigger job.

Glock grip angle is much more pronounced. Sig grip angle is more 1911ish.

SIG trigger is probably one of the best out of the box, and it only gets better.

Why is SIG more expensive? Imo, 95% of the time, you get your money's worth. If you have the chance, handle both, rack the slide and you'll know.

I own both (Well, the G17 is under my name but not technically mine ;)) and I'm very happy I bought a SIG. It's worth the whole 600$ more it cost over a G17 imo.

I would say the G17 is probably the cheapest reliable name-brand pistol on the market. If you want more, you can always spend more. Do both go bang? they sure do! Can you compete and be competitive with both? Of course! Why choose SIG over GLock? Well... the only thing I can say is: Some people drive a Civic and they're happy. Other prefer BMW...

my 2 cents :D
 
Rem700 said:
I guess the reason most north american Police Dept's issue Glocks is because their good maybe, price maybe,and maybe because if they get a little dirty they will still function.
Click to expand...

I think maybe beause they are easy on the bottom line.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom