oldzy

Like we haven't seen this on the net hundreds of times before Oh well, asking here anyway

Which would you prefer and why... Glock 17 or Sig P226, both 9mm, range gun. There is also no CCW here (we have to call 911 and die). I have both, and would like only one. I do shoot the Sig better, but the Glock has many strong points. Just can't make up my mind. At worst, I will just keep both. thx

Aceshigh

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qQzkjXBYrqs

Sig P226 is probably the finest gun Sig Sauer ever made.
There's so many variants http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SIG_Sauer_P226#Variants
Blackwater, Navy SEAL's, etc etc etc.

That's why Navy Special Warfare teams replaced the HK Mark 23 with it.
I can't stand Glocks personally. I'm an HK USP guy myself. But Sig > Glock anyday.

Here's more info on the comparison from the Firing Lines forum.
http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=77909

oldzy

"Being a 9mm, some people might say... well it's only a 9mm, it won't do anything... BUT... when I put two rounds though your heart and one through your head, you won't know the difference"

LOL.

toro455

I think both handguns are excellent. The SIG is an attractive gun that is well made and shoots good. The Glock 17 however is no fuss, point and shoot, is extremely reliable but one ugly duck.

I prefer the Glock over the SIG and I also have both. I think it is because of functionality over workmanship. I think the SIG is nice to look at and the bottom line is what you shoot better with and what you prefer. I think of a self defense gun as something you can operate without thinking in a stressful situation and thats why I think the Glock is good.

I actually prefer the Colt Python over the Glock and SIG, only because it is such a beautiful and well made gun. If I were you, I would keep both ! You can never have to many....just like cars !

defiant1

Since you have no option for concealed carry I would stick with the 226. The main reason is that it is a firearm that you can accurately use and not "spray and pray". That should be the biggest consideration. In a dire situation IMO you want a pistol that you can manipulate the trigger without having to think about it. If it fits in your hand comfortably and you can acquire a sight picture quickly I would stick with that handgun.

I like that the Sig has the decocker lever. I am also impressed with their reliability. I don't like that you have to pull the trigger on the Glock in order to disassemble it.

My wife loves the Glock 17 as it was the first pistol she seriously put a lot of rounds through. She is very accurate with it. However, her duty gun is a HK P2000 that you can replace the inserts on the frame to accommodate your hand size. She is still getting use to this one.

At any rate, both pistols are tried and true. If it was me I would trade the Glock in on a Sig in .45 Of course, I own 3 .45 caliber pistols.

d1

MDchanic

This is the key.

That being said, I'm very fond of my ParaOrdnance (Canadian) - 12 rounds of .45 ACP, but not for small hands.

- Eric

firefrost gold

IM GLAD HE'S ON MY SIDE Keep them both . JMO

501Paratrooper

Keep both.
I prefer H&K but have been forced to use Glock 22's, I have to say they have grown on me...There are so many lights, holsters etc for Glock.

Try this do keyhole drills with your SIG and then another day with your Glock, I'll bet you'll do better with the Glock.

oldzy

Sig won, even though it had less seniority. Oh well, one had to go to catch up on some bills!

Olds64

That is a pretty gun.

With the Glock you could have gotten a conversion kit to shoot .357 SIG, or .40 SW. You can also buy a seperate slide and magazine for the Glock to shoot .22.