Sig .40's SP2340 (full size) vs P226

[Fidelis770]

All,

Just wondering if anyone has any good info or recommendations on these two pistols. They are both .40's and I have always been impressed with SIG's. I'm going to go fire them both, but if you have any pros or cons on these please share. I know the Sig Pro is a newer model so I may be a bit tentative, plus it is a good bit cheaper then the P226.

Thanks
Fidelis 770

[kennethm3]

Just curious as to why the full-size SIG? Have you looked at the P229? I love mine, nice size, easy to handle, 12+1 rounds of .40S&W. Haven't fired the new plastic SIG's or know anyone who has one. I have fired the P226 in 9mm, it is as big as a Beretta.

[PonchIUP]

My dept. issues us the new Sig Pro .40 Cal 2340. It is a very nice weapon. I am currently in the academy and I just qualified with it last week. We have the newer ones with the plastic frames and night sights. If you have any questions about it feel free to ask.

[Fidelis770]

kennethm3,

I have always gone with a full size, but maybe it is time for a change. I will shoot the 229 and see how it feels. Thanks for the advice.

PonchIUP,

One questions about the weight. How does the 2340 proportion out? Is it top heavy, or does it feel balanced in your hands? Thanks

Appreciate the replies

[PonchIUP]

I had to actually take it out and feel it to answer the question. I couldn't really tell, but if you think about it while your holding the weapon it is sort of top heavy. It is not that bad at all though. Like I said you can not tell at all unless your holding it and thinkin about it. :cool:

[k9cop21811]

If you're looking for an off-duty weapon that's a bit easier to conceal, I would check out the Sig. 239. Size wise it's between a baby Glock and a Sig. 229. So while it's not a ton smaller than the 229 (it holds about five less rounds, I believe), it would be easier to conceal. I have a 229 and it's a hassle to try and coneal. The danger with that is guys end up using their back-up weapon as a primary when they're off-duty. Like a guy I used to work with would say, "It's not a problem until it's a problem." I think the 239 is a good middle of road piece.

[98z28]

There are lots of differences between these guns and, as always, it will come down to a personal preference.

Some basic differences:

P226:

-All metal. 30.6 oz (empty), which is 3.4 oz heavier than the Pro. Some say this is good for recoil, some say it's bad because of the extra weight. I have carried both and never noticed the difference in weight or recoil.

-Slimmer package than the Pro.

-More ergonomic (read: more comfortable to shoot) for many people, including myself.

-Time tested platform. The P226 is the finest frame to fire a .40 S&W round from, IMHO.

SIGPro:

-Lighter. 27.2 oz empty.

-Significantly cheaper.

-Fatter frame that many people with small hands find a bit odd. I found the Pro to be very comfortably to hold and shoot, just not quite as much as the P226.

-Newer, "unproven" design. While this may be true, I have put thousands of rounds through my Pro and know people that have carried them for a few years now without a single problem.

-Slightly harder to field strip until you get used to it.

-Better double action trigger. The SIGPro has the finest double action trigger of any autoloader other than Kahr, IMHO. Smooth and crisp.

They both have the same capacity control surfaces. In the end, it just comes down to a personal preference. I have owned and carried both. I really enjoyed the Pro, but prefer my P226. I cannot for the life of me come up with a concrete reason, though. It just feels better in my hands.

If you haven’t already, check out SIGForum.com (http://sigforum.com/). Some really nice folks over there with lots of opinions about the everlasting SIG Classic versus SIGPro debate.