Sig 232

R

RoyM52

Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2013
Messages
439
Reaction score
580
Location
Wis
I've been watching {Lurking} for some time. Finally curiosity has won out.

In all the carry posts nobody ever seems to mention the Sig 232.

Why? seems like it would be a natural.
I have a J...but am still curious

Thanks for any reply
 
Register to hide this ad
side note

part of what makes me so curious about the little gun is that it has some of the same features that first got me interested in Smiths revolvers.

I own a 629-3 6 ", a 629-6 3", a 617 no dash and a 638- 3 1 7/8"

It's a simple gun, no safety, the de-cocker sets the hammer down and blocks it just like a Smith. {It has a hammer block rather than a transfer plate.} A fixed barrel is very accurate. and the 380 cartridge is close in effectiveness to that of the 38 special. {non +P} it's also an all metal gun. and has a reasonable size grip for a small auto. weight is slightly heavier than an air weight J...but not excessive.

so...curious....
 
Hi Roy,

While it was accurate, my P232 was the only less-than-reliable SIG-Sauer I've ever owned. It was also very large for the .380 round (it was, of course, originally designed for the unusual 9x18 Police round), was nevertheless not especially comfortable to shoot due to its light weight and blowback action, and was actually larger than several reliable locked breech 9x19 pistols that were far more powerful and easier to control in rapid fire. Oh, and it also wanted to spit out its slide lock spring whenever the gun was disassembled, which was an unnecessary hassle.

It was pretty, though. :)
 
Last edited:
Thank You

Thanks...it looks like a smooth nice carry. too bad for the reliability. A blow back is such a simple design. It should of been problem free and very little repair issues.
 
I've shot one a good deal (200ish rounds) and the person who owns it at least 800rds, it has been reliable except for 6 malfunctions that were tied to a bad magazine spring.

It is big for a .380, but it is way more accurate than it should be. If I was going to carry a .380 it would be a 232 or a G42. But I'm weird and my 642 works fine as my BUG. I do plan on getting one at some point.
 
I've never owned or fired a Sig P232, but I did own a Sig P230 for quite a while. I probably put a thousand or so rounds through it (I was the 2nd owner, I knew the first owner well, he never mentioned any problems to me.)

Unfortunately, I was of a mind to do some caliber consolidation, and I decided that .380 was one caliber I could live without. So, I sold my pristine ANIB Erma KGP68A and my Sig P230, and today I regret ever having parted with either of them. Especially since I ended up buying even more .380s later.

While working at a LGS, a customer came in and said he was having problems with his brand new Sig P230. I advised him that I had read that the P230 was built to very tight tolerances, and required a 500 round break-in period. A local police officer, in uniform, was standing nearby and said that his department had Sig P230s issued (?) as back-ups. During their initial qualifications, they were experiencing a lot of malfunctions. When they contacted the supplier/manufacturer (I'm not sure who exactly they spoke with), the response was to put at least 500 rounds through all guns. After 500 rounds, any problematic pistols should be returned for service/repair. He said that every pistol that had been having issues began to operate perfectly by the 500th round, and no issues at all since. The customer left, came back later and said his pistol was now running flawlessly.

But again...those were P230s. I've no experience with P232s. I'm not sure how different they are, internally.

Tim
 
the size vs. caliber thing looses me on this gun. it is a sig, quality built, but compared to an lcp or bg 380, its very big. even the new g42 is smaller and it too is a bunch bigger than my lcp. the shiled, xds, pm 9, are same sized and 9mm not 9mm kursk... do your self a favor and get two less expensive guns for the same price. if you got to have a sig, the 238 is one fine .380 gun and much smaller.
 
Totally agree with Erich.

I carried one everyday for about 3 yrs as an alt gun. I had better luck with mine, but in general the malfunction rate was pretty high as a model.

I remember the first time I shot it I thought it'd be like shooting a 22, since our duty guns were .357 Sig.

Yeah, not so much. Little sucker was snappy. I also got something I hadn't gotten since my BHP days...hammer bite and 'rail road' tracks. My grip was high enough that the slide would cut me leaving two parallel marks.

The European bottom mag release was also new to me and although I got used to it, it definitely takes more work to be fast.

It was an accurate gun and for me reliable but there are definitely better choices albeit maybe not as pretty :D In total I put @12000 through the Sig and have the scars to prove it ;)

Earlier this year our selection of alt guns opened up, which led me to this site and an M&P.
 
Well, this is actually a forum for Smith & Wessons, though there are the occasional discussions of off brand firearms.

For the size and weight of a Sig P232, and for less money, one could own and carry one of these, a S&W 3913, or a variant.
Photo713.jpg


I owned and discarded two S&W 3913 pistols. I prefer the DAO S&W 3953, or the Shield, or the 908.
ShieldGlockS_W_006.JPG

00959.JPG


These guns, and other similar firearms, are available in cartridges that are better suited for self defense than a .380 a.c.p.

Here is a photo of a S&W 908 9mm, Walther PP .32 a.c.p., and a Beretta 84B .380 a.c.p. Given the similarities in size, weight, and power which would you carry?
DSCN2724.JPG
 
Last edited:
SIG P230 Fanboy Here

Never owned or fired a P232. I do own this older made in Germany P230 and have found it to be 100% reliable. It is very accurate. This one has functioned fine with any .380 ammo I've tried in it.

I carry it with either Speer Gold Dot or Double Tap JHP's

I'm not a fan of the little plastic .380 pistols.

It is a keeper.

409802506.jpg
 
The 230/232 had excellent reputations for being reliable. While slightly larger than a Walther PPK, I think they are more user friendly. The blues versions I recall had ally frames while the stainless pistols had steel frames and are a bit heavier. They got overshadowed by the subcompact 9s and 40s that came in the market. If you want toCcarry a shootable 380, the 232 is a good option.
 
Thank You everyone

some of the reason I have been thinking about the 232 is that it isn't so tiny that my hand can't hardly hold it. I've been patiently waiting for several months for S&W to ship me the standard grip for my J. I am totally tired of the tiny boot grips . I shot my youngest daughters 360 and it had the standard grips and for me was a nice fit. tiny is definitely more carry friendly...but not so shooter friendly. Looking for a compromise and don't want something that is block y. The new Rem 51 is fraught with bad reviews ...but it too seems "Shaped" I look in my reloading books and even though I have never cared for a 380...the book makes it look reasonable for anything up close. I would prefer a 45...but then you gain width and weight again.....all trade offs. I was curious because it looked like a very nicely designed carry piece. I have held one a few years ago when the LC's and shields came out and it fit my hand size better than either of those. it's real easy to keep upping another caliber until you reach the 500...but since a air weight J is snappy with +P then it starts being down loaded until the 380 and it are close to equal. and with the J there are only 5 rounds the little auto is 7 plus 1 thought it was worth revisiting and wondering why no-one even suggests it but still talk Glock etc even on a S&W forum
 
Last edited:
close

the 239 is more than 10 oz beyond the 232 and 6 oz more than the 232 in stainless. 10 oz more and I would be up to my 3 inch 629....
 
Six ounces is a small price to pay for a more powerful cartridge and firearm that may be easier to shoot and is faster to reload. Is there a range near you where you might rent and shoot these models before you make a purchase?
 
I understand

the jump is what I have been going round and around about....from the shield or LC to the little bit more weight and size of the 232....at 18.6 oz with an AL frame and SS slide...now 10 more oz and the 239 .....10 more oz to the 629 3 inch {a hand cannon}

so I went back and looked at the 232 because I know that it seemed to be about the smallest that even fit my hand.
and was all metal.

Thanks for all the replies it's all food for thought, I don't really NEED to get anything
 
sig 232

i used to own a 232.

i purchased one because a friend of mine who lived in another state said it was his favorite semi auto. at the time i was looking for a bottom feeder the women in my family might enjoy shooting at the range.

they never warmed to it.

even though it was built like a tank, it seemed to have as much or more recoil as my m&p 9c and 3913.

i personally didn't like the mag release. plus like most of the other replies, felt like there were too many better options with similar or lighter weight and larger caliber.

it was actually the only sig i've never really liked.

i ended up selling my out of state friend one of my extra 3913's...which is now his favorite semi auto, relegating his 232 to the safe.

like Erich said about the 232, "it was pretty, though"
 
Erich said:
Hi Roy,

While it was accurate, my P232 was the only less-than-reliable SIG-Sauer I've ever owned. It was also very large for the .380 round (it was, of course, originally designed for the unusual 9x18 Police round), was nevertheless not especially comfortable to shoot due to its light weight and blowback action, and was actually larger than several reliable locked breech 9x19 pistols that were far more powerful and easier to control in rapid fire. Oh, and it also wanted to spit out its slide lock spring whenever the gun was disassembled, which was an unnecessary hassle.

It was pretty, though. :)
Click to expand...

Small 1911's have seldom functioned reliably. I have a feeling the design wasn't meant to be miniaturized.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

W
Sig 320/M17
Replies
12
Views
781
cd228
C
bananaman
Sig P239
2 3
Replies
51
Views
2K
bananaman
bananaman
P
Red Dot Sight on a Small of Back Concealed Carry?
Replies
19
Views
887
GnarlsR2
GnarlsR2
O
Iron Sights Question.
2
Replies
26
Views
1K
gym cat
G
rjm6120
New rail light for my new Sig P320 C
Replies
1
Views
175
Eric300
Eric300

Latest posts

Back
Top