I'm currently trying to decide between these two for a 9mm night stand gun (doubt I ever cc) and something that will be fun to shoot at the ranch. I am leaning towards the Sig but am having a hard time making a decisive decision. I do feel that the Sig fits my hand a little better, but I enjoy the hardiness, ease of use, and maintenance (as well as price) that comes along with the Glock. We do not sell guns in my family so I'm also looking for something I will want to keep forever. I am pretty neutral on a DA/SA vs SA at this point. Thoughts?

[This message has been edited by 12th Non-Reg (edited 9/7/2012 11:38p).]

why the 19 instead of the 17?

I sleep with a 17 because I trust it with my life. I have run at least 2000 rounds though it. It has never misfired or choked, even with "garbage" ammo. I also own a 1911, but it is locked away in my cabinet.

I have no knowledge of the sig.

Basically, for me, there's Glocks and everything else. I have rented several over the years, and have proven to be an adequate shot with them. I just do not like the way they feel in my hand, or how I have go hold them, due to the grip angle, so I was never ale to get really comfortable shooting them. So therefore I would go with the Sig, but in reality, I went with the M&P....

Both are good choices for your intended purpose and would serve you well in my opinion, so I'd say get the one that feels and shoots the best for you. You might also consider the 17 since its a nightstand gun and plinker (though it's not hard to conceal a 17 if you decide to go that route).

If you're not going to CC, look at the 226 and 17/34 instead of the 229/19.

How good are you at handling the transition between DA/SA? If you can't already do it well, how much time do you have to spend mastering it?

For how I shoot, the ergos of the sig are beyond poor and that has colored my perception of them. that being said, if you like the ergos and the trigger, they're a good option.

I find glocks exceedingly easy to shoot well. As long as you can work the control and don't suck at trigger manipulation they are super easy to become proficient with and are inexpensive to own.

You're really not going to be able to make a worry free decision without putting at least 100 through both, so suck up the initial expense for peace of mind and possibly saved money on a 2nd gun purchase down the road.

Good advice by all and valid point on the 17. I have pretty small hands and felt comfortable shooting the 19 so I gravitated toward it. I also thought the slightly smaller size would be better if I wanted to hide it in my vehicle at times. I have not had a chance to shoot the 17 yet, though.

For me, it keeps coming back to the look and feel of the Sig vs the toughness and easy care of the Glock. My friends in the military point to the Sig while my other buddies all swear by their Glocks.

Thanks again for the advice.

If you go with the 19, get a Gen3 rather than a Gen4.

NRH ag, that is a great question. I grew up mainly with rifles, shotguns, and a few revolvers and am relatively new to SA's. Therefore, I think there will be a bit of a learning process with either. The DA/SA is somewhat appealing as a safety feature for me. I know they can easily be added, but I love that the Gen 2 Sig comes with night sites as well.

quote:

---

If you go with the 19, get a Gen3 rather than a Gen4.

---

If you buy a gen 3 made in 2010 or later it will have the same ejector and extractor that caused most of the issues. Only very recent production guns will have the updated designs.

Bronc- For most people, the consistent trigger pull on the glock is easier to learn.

To throw a wrench in the works, have you also checked out the M&P?

quote:

---

I have pretty small hands and felt comfortable shooting the 19

---

Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't the 17/19/26 all have the same "girth"?


I own a Sig P226 and a Glock 17 4th Gen. It's my opinion that you're good either way. I believe that the trigger on the Sig makes it a little more accurate, but the Glock is still a good shooter. You can't go wrong either way.

quote:

---

Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't the 17/19/26 all have the same "girth"?

---

They do, the difference is where the grip hump is. I have medium sized hands with short fingers, and I actually find the 17 more suitable for small hands than its smaller brethren.

Haha, I was hesitant to ask about the M&P for that very reason. Love Smith & Wesson, but just don't know very much about the M&P's. I have been seeing more and more about them lately. Since the guys at the gun store never really made that recommendation, I just thought they may not be a good fit for my hands. Would love to hear more though.

IMO they are great from an ergo and comfort (if that's important to you) standpoint. The stock triggers are workable but could be better. The good news is you can buy them with parts from apex tactical that take the trigger from workable to very good. They won't have the aftermarket of glock, but they're better than sig from what I've seen.

They have had their issues over time. Very early guns hag mags that would drop too easily, then there were some issues with the striker breaking under heavy dryfire, and finally there were some extraction issues in 9mm guns. Those are all solved at this point. The current bugaboo is accuracy past 15 yds. Some guns will hold 2" 5 shot groups at 25 yds from a bench, some will shoot 8" patterns. How much of a problem this is depends on you. I used to like shooting clays offhand at 50 yds with my M&P9pro.

Glocks are the worst guns in the universe

Look at the Sig with the DAK trigger mechanism before ruling it out.

Sig also makes single action only pistols as well.

One thing about Sigs is you can kind of get one how you want- DA/SA, DAO, and SAO.

Glocks only come in DAO without a decocker or safety.

Best thing would be to rent both at a range and see how you shoot them.

quote:

---

Look at the Sig with the DAK trigger mechanism before ruling it out.

---

The worst trigger I have ever dealt with in a pistol.