Sig Vs Glock

I own both, G17 and a 226. I think both are great firearms. I find the Sig's finish isn't that durable. Last night while cleaning the Sig I scrapped the top of the slide with the tip of the wire brush and it left a thin but noticeable mark. Also the trigger lock has made some marks on the finish around the trigger guard.
 
redleg said:
It isn't a "weakness" per se, it is the weak spot in their design. Most guns still go a very long time.
Click to expand...
You say that most guns still go a very long time, I'm glad to hear that!! I did just buy another one, I thought the first Glock did me no wrong....I hope this one will last a good 200,000 rounds like many others!
 
Last edited:
awsomeo, I have done the exact same thing, I think you will find that the mark is metal left behind from the brush, and it will rub away, or disapear with time. But we all must remember these guns are primarly duty guns, and for heavy range use sig builds the all stainless models, and the new x5.
 
SIG will rust quicker than a Glock?

Most SIG's have stainless steel black nitron finished slides and aluminum alloy lowers.

I dont think Glocks slides are stainless steel.

I am SIG Armourer certified and if you were to take both guns down right to the bare frame you can see the difference in quality immediately.

Theres a reason alot of the LEO agencies around the world are now going to SIG and passing on the GLOCK. The Glocks are just not holding up and just need too much service to be cost effective. Now I,m not saying the guns are blowing up or cracking all the time but they due to there design need more work than the SIG's.

The issues with the polymer lower metal upper matings have been an issue for some time and the whole polymer thing doesnt impress me.

Also theres really not much difference in weight between the two guns. The G17 weighs in at 905 g / 31.91 oz. and to use a bigger gun in 45acp as an example the SIG 220 DAK is 31.2 oz.

Dont get me wrong I like the Glock and think its a great gun but its no where near the gun the SIG is.

You get what you pay for. The SIG is a bit more money for a reason.

Now as for external safeties on the SIG I dont know of any but I do know of the internal ones.

Just my opinion here
 
Bartledan said:
But you have no pre-determined bias, right? :)
Click to expand...


No not really I had to take the SIG cert course(not by choice trust me on that one it was hell) and prefer the Glock as a simple target shooter.

I find the glock fits in my hand better and is more comfortable.

But if I had to keep one gun of the two and know it was to go through hell and back I,d have to take the SIG.

Now if I had my choice between the SIG and the BHP I'd still stick with my 60+year Browning High Power any day.
 
having shot both many times. I personally love the SIG for its weight and balance and natural accuracy. But the glock as much as I hate plastic guns. The glock is a better shooter. Take both guns and empty a mag as fast as you can. I found the glock was way faster on the trigger than the SIG. For fast style shooting like IPSC or action stuff go with the glock. Having said that I would own and shoot both without a problem. Choosing between the two would only complicate the relationship.
 
I have both Glock 23 and sig226.
Love both.Prefer Glock.Easier to shoot one handed and with either hand. because of the grip angle,sits lower in the hand and easier trigger reach.
I can shoot the Glock 40 faster and more accuratly with iether hand
than I can the Sig in 9.
This is paramout in a defesive pistol since pistols are often shot one handed
and on the move.
regards
 
Own both in .45 (Sig 220 and Glock 21)....both are fine guns and I can shoot both reasonably well. I prefer the Sig....definite shame not to own both. ;)
 
I've messed around with both guns. I like both but have never been able to afford either.

I would probably choose the sig over the glock. I like the way a 226 feels in my hand and the single action trigger pull is pretty slick. Out of the two I found the sig to be the most accurate.

That said my old man can still out shoot me with his glock versus any pistol I've held.
 
MRCLARK said:
SIG will rust quicker than a Glock?

Most SIG's have stainless steel black nitron finished slides and aluminum alloy lowers.

I dont think Glocks slides are stainless steel.

I am SIG Armourer certified and if you were to take both guns down right to the bare frame you can see the difference in quality immediately.

Theres a reason alot of the LEO agencies around the world are now going to SIG and passing on the GLOCK. The Glocks are just not holding up and just need too much service to be cost effective. Now I,m not saying the guns are blowing up or cracking all the time but they due to there design need more work than the SIG's.

The issues with the polymer lower metal upper matings have been an issue for some time and the whole polymer thing doesnt impress me.

Also theres really not much difference in weight between the two guns. The G17 weighs in at 905 g / 31.91 oz. and to use a bigger gun in 45acp as an example the SIG 220 DAK is 31.2 oz.

Dont get me wrong I like the Glock and think its a great gun but its no where near the gun the SIG is.

You get what you pay for. The SIG is a bit more money for a reason.

Now as for external safeties on the SIG I dont know of any but I do know of the internal ones.

Just my opinion here
Click to expand...

Pretty much +1 on my part..

I think the Glock is pretty neat as a simple, effective piece. The SIG has its quirks of bits and pieces and subjectively more involved complete strip along with weird springs(especially the old SIGs before redesign).

That said, I love SIG, high bore axis and all...;)

There are external safety versions in the form of X5, X5 carry versions, etc
 
MRCLARK said:
Also theres really not much difference in weight between the two guns. The G17 weighs in at 905 g / 31.91 oz. and to use a bigger gun in 45acp as an example the SIG 220 DAK is 31.2 oz.
Click to expand...
Your figures are wrong. Glock weights 22 oz with no mag. The mag adds another 2.75 oz.

http://www.glockfaq.com/models.htm

Having said that, I would pick Sig in an instant. Nothing really wrong with Glock (except for the fact that you shouldn't shoot reloads due to unsupported chamber), but Sig has much better fit and finish, a much better trigger, and is definitely much easier on the eyes. Glock is the Toyota Camry of the gun world – it’s reliable and does what it’s designed to do but also ugly as sin and about as exciting to use as an old-fashioned manual meat grinder.
 
Last edited:
I wonder why Sig and Hk beat out glock for the DHS contract? It definitely wasn't because of the price of the SIGs and HK's.
 
might have something to do with specs; did they want DA/SA or DAO? maybe they wanted somethiung with a safety/decocker...dunno

anyways between the two I'd take the Sig
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom