Sig P228 opinions

[Rock185]

otis, Yes, the P228 has the folded slide. FWIW I bought my first SIG 35+ years ago. Carried a P226 with folded slide on duty for several years, trained and qualified with it, shot it recreationally, etc. I was a firearms instructor and later became an armorer. I just never saw functioning, bending, cracking or breaking issues with my, or other officer's, SIGs. I've had folded slide 220s, 226s and 228s; more than one of each. Just never a functional or durability issue with any of them, other than the standard slide finish was not very rust resistant. But even a coworker's SIG, with a badly rusted slide, still functioned normally.

SIG's going to a one piece machined stainless slide made sense to me, but I still like the folded slide 228s....

 

[alwslate]

I never saw the issues you keep bringing up. By your standards the guns would have never made it out of the Academy.

Once again the “standards” are not mine. The issues and data are taken directly from the US Government’s testing of 9mm guns to replace the 1911s. It was back in 1984
When the decision was made to choose the Beretta 92FS as the replacement. It isn’t MY made up anything. The testing procedures are easily researched. No secrets here. If you don’t like my posts on the subject, which is normal and expected on here, don’t come after me with pitchforks. Look up the info and read it yourself if you want. Do I expect Sig owners to actually do that?

 

[Racer X]

Don't assume all Sig owners are alike. 1. I'm not arguing about any of this. 2. I look up supporting data all the time. 3. If I'm wrong, I admit it.

I own a DAK P229 in .40 with a spare .357 SIG barrel.

 

[Screwball]

Once again the “standards” are not mine. The issues and data are taken directly from the US Government’s testing of 9mm guns to replace the 1911s. It was back in 1984
When the decision was made to choose the Beretta 92FS as the replacement. It isn’t MY made up anything. The testing procedures are easily researched. No secrets here. If you don’t like my posts on the subject, which is normal and expected on here, don’t come after me with pitchforks. Look up the info and read it yourself if you want. Do I expect Sig owners to actually do that? [emoji85]

Funny how you tell people to read… have you?

http://archive.gao.gov/d4t4/130439.pdf

Reference page 21 of the PDF (19 of the document). Weird how “technically acceptable finalist” is written next to both the Beretta and SIG. Wonder why the P226 wasn’t listed as “terminated by Army,” like the four other pistols that weren’t voluntarily pulled from the trials (Steyr and Colt both pulled their submissions)? Maybe… just maybe… Beretta and SIG both passed the tests?

But if you want the clear part of the decision on the Beretta… skip down to page 50-52 of the PDF (48-50 of the document). On 50 (48), under Pistol Prices… you can see the unit prices of both pistols. $178.50 for a Beretta 92. $176.33 for a SIG P226.

Keep reading, and go down to the end of 51 (49) to the first two lines of 52 (50). Costs of spare parts and magazines were cheaper on the Beretta… giving a lower overall cost for the Beretta. Very much explained in there.

Figuring out the package prices per sale unit… it is 400x of magazines per pistol and 10x the parts per pistol; with the differences, the US government/tax payers saved $1,181.53 per unit (that also pulled out the $2.17 difference between the pistols). Don’t believe me… go/read for yourself and pull out a calculator.

Personally, I couldn’t care less of what you want to say about X, Y, or Z… but how about next time, back your comments up with actual legitimate info instead of an inaccurate synopsis of a military trial. You like the Beretta? Great… me too. But stop with the victim card because you can’t come up with a better argument for your personal preference than “it won the M9 trial.”

 

[alwslate]

Actually I have read more on the testing. A lot more than I’m going to waste my time on filling a page here. Yes the cost per gun was a bit less for the Sig vrs the Beretta but became higher per gun gun because of the higher cost of the spare parts for the Sig. That’s what I said so what’s your point? And both guns did pass the tests AFTER the requirements were lowered. I said that so??? And accusations were made that part of the reason for choosing the Beretta was that the testers simply preferred it over the Sig. Maybe so. After spending lots of hours with both guns humans being human might actually like one better than the other. So what’s the point of your rant? I didn’t choose the Beretta over the Sig the testers did. Ok?

 

[alwslate]

Don't assume all Sig owners are alike. 1. I'm not arguing about any of this. 2. I look up supporting data all the time. 3. If I'm wrong, I admit it.

I own a DAK P229 in .40 with a spare .357 SIG barrel.

Yeah me too. I own a lot of guns including 18 different 9mm semi autos. There is no such thing as a perfect gun. Now that I’m in my “golden” years I’ve reached the point where my ego isn’t as huge as it used to be and I am able to admit that every thing I own isn’t the best of the best because it belongs to me. I am always trying to learn more about guns and life and will do so until the day I die. There’s no downside to increasing your knowledge

 

[alwslate]

One thing about the Government’s tests make a lot of sense. The original durability requirement was 10,000 rds, lowered to 7,000 rds and finally lowered to 5,000 rds. Now both Beretta and Sig were able to pass the test. So optimal situation for the procurer. You set back and watch two companies brutally duke it out competing for the contract. With only one surviving gun how do you get tough on price with the maker? With two competitors you have two winners. The company and the procurer looking for the best deal. Smart move on the Gov’s part to let Sig in.

 

[clang444]

Can someone please tell me of a Sig that they personally witnessed fail due to a “sheet metal” slide bowing? There’s been several responses on this thread and nobody has mentioned that particular issue yet.

If Sig did have failures during the government trials, don’t you think they might have learned something from them and implemented improvements?

 

[alwslate]

Can someone please tell me of a Sig that they personally witnessed fail due to a “sheet metal” slide bowing? There’s been several responses on this thread and nobody has mentioned that particular issue yet.

If Sig did have failures during the government trials, don’t you think they might have learned something from them and implemented improvements?

The testers certainly witnessed it. They had Sigs with broken frames. The cause was discovered by the typical method of high speed photography. So ask them. I think Sig did learn from the experience. All their guns now have one piece stainless slides I think. I’m not highly knowledgeably about Sigs but I think they no longer make guns with stamped, oops, folded sheet metal slides. A win for everybody, especially Sig. They won the most recent Gov contract did they not? Many people in this world have a simple maturity problem that causes them to be unable to differentiate between themselves and the things they own. So any criticism of their stuff is seen as a criticism of them and must be rejected at all costs. There are no perfect guns period just like there are no perfect people, children, cars, trucks or dogs no matter who owns them

 

[Mark8]

Yeah me too. I own a lot of guns including 18 different 9mm semi autos. There is no such thing as a perfect gun. Now that I’m in my “golden” years I’ve reached the point where my ego isn’t as huge as it used to be and I am able to admit that every thing I own isn’t the best of the best because it belongs to me. I am always trying to learn more about guns and life and will do so until the day I die. There’s no downside to increasing your knowledge

I think what people don't like is that you're making this out to be a bigger issue than it is. From the country where SIG actually developed the stamped sheet metal construction back in the sixties for the new pistol of the Swiss Army (P220/P75 replacing the P210/P49), I can tell you that real-word problems with this design are extremely rare. In fact, I haven't heard of or come across a single P220/P75 with a cracked or bent slide so far. Former military P220/P75 pistols are ubiquitous around here, many are beat-up from a long service life without all that much maintenance and care. They're ugly, cheap, and no one wants them, yet they still work just fine. The history of guns is full of really bad designs that just didn't work, but the stamped sheet metal slide of the P220/P75 is not one of them. It's a non-issue. I'd take a stamped sheet metal slide SIG to a fight without a second's hesitation.

Speaking of long-term trials: Production ended a long time ago, but 47 years later, these stamped sheet metal guns are still in active service with the Swiss Army. Holding up quite well I'd say.

 

[ProCarryNAustin]

alwslate
Care to post sources?
Saying that you read it someplace with no sources is just embarrassing.

 

[alwslate]

I think what people don't like is that you're making this out to be a bigger issue than it is. From the country where SIG actually developed the stamped sheet metal construction back in the sixties for the new pistol of the Swiss Army (P220/P75 replacing the P210/P49), I can tell you that real-word problems with this design are extremely rare. In fact, I haven't heard of or come across a single P220/P75 with a cracked or bent slide so far.

And where did you see that I said anything about cracked or bent sheet metal slides? If you actually bothered to read my posts you would have seem that the problems with the sheet metal Sigs were cracked FRAMES, caused by flexing or “bowing”, the military term, of the slides during recoil. Sometimes I get the feeling that I am the only person on the forum capable of comprehending the written word

 

[BAM-BAM]

alwslate vs the Forum.......day 5

William Shakespeare sumed up this debate.... "Much adu about nothing!"

My comments are at post 32.... day 2

Both the Beretta and the Sig are not the same guns they were in 1985.

Sig went to milled slides.... new style grips, short triggers etc.

Beretta 92F became the FS, 3rd gen locking blocks, and a bunch of little changes and variations.........


I've owned both. Still own multiple Sigs and Berettas ....both are good guns IMHO

 

[alwslate]

alwslate
Care to post sources?
Saying that you read it someplace with no sources is just embarrassing.

I have an entire book on the development of the 92FS and it also is a reference to information on the testing procedure.One of the posts above provided a link to the information.If you want to learn about the tests research it yourself instead of tying to discredit me. It’s not exactly secret Government information. Anyone can read it

 

[BAM-BAM]

To the Rawhide Theme ..........


Trolling, Trolling, Trolling...
Through they're disapprovin..
keep this fight a going....
Rawhide!
Don't try to understand them
Just rope and throw then brand 'him
Trolling Trolling Trolling..............

 

[ProCarryNAustin]

alwslate
Name of that book?

If asking for your sources is trying to discredit you, how embarrassing for you as it defines your position.

 

[alwslate]

alwslate
Name of that book?

If asking for your sources is trying to discredit you, how embarrassing for you as it defines your position.

If you had read the posts up to this point instead of coming in late and just trying to climb on the band wagon with your post you could answer your own question.

 

[ProCarryNAustin]

What is the name of your book?

 

[ColbyBruce]

None of my P225’s or my Beretta 92fs have cracked or exploded yet either. Perhaps I got defective samples?

 

[Mark8]

None of my P225’s or my Beretta 92fs have cracked or exploded yet either. Perhaps I got defective samples?

You hiding those cracks with blue tape?