Sig P226 vs Berreta 96A1 in .40 S&W

Shooting Centre said:
The Beretta 92 is fragile enough in 9mm, the 96 is just not going to last too long. The SIGs have a much better reputation for durability particularly compared to most of the 40 cal pistols on the market.
Click to expand...

Yeah that's my understanding also. They beefed up the slide on models like the Brigadier but they need to on all of them because I don't think we are even supposed to run +P loads either
 
Shooting Centre said:
Most modern production guns (SIG, Glock, HK, CZ, Kimber) are quite durable and we expect to see at least 80,000rds through them while they are on the range. Minor parts replacement is expected too but on most guns a recoil spring every 5,000rds or so is about all that is required. We scrap a gun when the frame fails. Frame construction means very little, they all break and all the big brands break only after very high round counts. We have run a half dozen Beretta 92 pistols over the past 4 years. Most were written off after less than 20,000rds. Two are still in service. All require constant replacement of small parts (safety, trigger, decocker etc).
Since we log round count it really does not matter what guns are more popular.
Click to expand...

Thank-you for the reply! Awesome wealth of info.
I'm surprised that an aluminum-frame Sig keeps up in durability with the steel CZs and the polymer H&Ks. I would've thought its frame was more in line with Beretta in durability. I suppose I was wrong. And having two Sigs I'm fine with that. :D
 
It is for me..even if I don't actually shoot 80,000 rounds I'd like my firearms to last without major parts being needed.

I liked the Beretta for historical reasons but it looks like I will move to a more robust pistol for my next purchase..
 
Very interesting info from the shooting centre. Thanks.
Can anyone comment on the sig 226 aluminum frame durability ? And how about sig s un-chromed lined barrel ?
 
KDX said:
Isn't it reason enough?
Click to expand...

If the Beretta were total junk, I'd say yes, but it's clearly not. I don't plan to roll around in the mud and sand with it. I don't plan to shoot 30,000 rounds through it. My funds are limited so $1100 vs $800 is a big deal. Geez KDX, I thought you were a more open thinker than that, as you post a lot of interesting stuff:)
 
Bigfoot 870 said:
Have you heard the same, for the "new" A1 series frame, with recoil buffer?
Click to expand...

There doesn't seem to be much info out there. I suspect that the combination of "once burned, twice shy" plus the trend away from .40 will keep it an unknown quantity.

Personally, if I were to roll the dice with my money, I would pass on .40 Berettas. The SIG has more of a track record an I'm skeptical that the 96A1 is enough of an improvement.

That said, I would rather just stick with 9mm. There are a lot more acceptable choices in 9mm than there are for .40 and ammunition cost is lower.

Bigfoot 870 said:
Does anyone want to chime in on my original questions, based on something other than durability?
Click to expand...

A gun that only lasts 10,000 rounds is junk. That would be a service life of less than two years for me. I think that is reason enough.
 
Canada tail said:
Very interesting info from the shooting centre. Thanks.
Can anyone comment on the sig 226 aluminum frame durability ? And how about sig s un-chromed lined barrel ?
Click to expand...

If you don't get a reply in this thread, I'd definitely start a new one because I'd be very curious to know about that, too.
 
tjhaile said:
There doesn't seem to be much info out there. I suspect that the combination of "once burned, twice shy" plus the trend away from .40 will keep it an unknown quantity.

Personally, if I were to roll the dice with my money, I would pass on .40 Berettas. The SIG has more of a track record an I'm skeptical that the 96A1 is enough of an improvement.

That said, I would rather just stick with 9mm. There are a lot more acceptable choices in 9mm than there are for .40 and ammunition cost is lower.



A gun that only lasts 10,000 rounds is junk. That would be a service life of less than two years for me. I think that is reason enough.
Click to expand...

Thanks, I appreciate your response:)
 
Bigfoot 870 said:
If the Beretta were total junk, I'd say yes, but it's clearly not. I don't plan to roll around in the mud and sand with it. I don't plan to shoot 30,000 rounds through it. My funds are limited so $1100 vs $800 is a big deal. Geez KDX, I thought you were a more open thinker than that, as you post a lot of interesting stuff:)
Click to expand...

Thanks. I can definitely see your point, but for me it would be a no brainer as I would pass on the Beretta. The difference in the controls is another. I know I'll get flamed for this one but .22cal and 9mm are adequate for paper, and yes I am a cheap guy that way. If I was buying something to put holes in animate objects that could be a different story, for another thread.

Edit to add...being cheap I ordered a P226 Classic 22 and will put a 9mm X-Change kit on it for a total of $1100-$1200. A good deal I think.
 
Last edited:
KDX said:
Thanks. I can definitely see your point, but for me it would be a no brainer as I would pass on the Beretta. The difference in the controls is another. I know I'll get flamed for this one but .22cal and 9mm are adequate for paper, and yes I am a cheap guy that way. If I was buying something to put holes in animate objects that could be a different story, for another thread.

Edit to add...being cheap I ordered a P226 Classic 22 and will put a 9mm X-Change kit on it for a total of $1100-$1200. A good deal I think.
Click to expand...

:cheers:
 
I had two Beretta 96D's. Both broke the locking blocks within an estimated 3-4000 rounds causing complete malfunctions. I have put many thousands through Sig 229's and 226's without ANY malfunctions. On one particular 229, I was at 12,000 rounds. It ran like a top until it developed some unusual wear on the slide near the safety intercept notch. At no point did it cause any other issues.

You get what you pay for!

Although, if the right deal comes up on a 92, I will buy one!
 
For the amount of shooting most folks do, you probably won't have any issues with either one. There have been threads here where folks have had broken frames in both models mentioned. Personally i'd only buy them in 9mm as that's what they where originally designed for, but if your going IPSC, or just like a bigger bang, I wouldn't worry about either one in 40. I've seen broken 92's, (always the frame, never a locking block), I've never seen a broken sig in person. In my hands they are both on the large side, so it's a wash that way. I can shoot one as well as the other. Buy the one that feels best. If you like them both, you'll probably end up with one of each sooner or later... :)
 
You will wear a SIG barrel smooth bore before you wear out the frame, I have seen this first hand. I was a on the fence with the P226R but after 7yrs of working on them I realized they are the best combat pistol ever made.

As for the beretta... its accurate, reliable in normal conditions and has had afew QC issues "locking blocks and decocking pawls". Having a safety on a SA/DA is foolish IMO and the slide mount safety is a really pain for IA drills.

I am factory Cert on both pistols BTW
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom