This could be any kind of x pistol vs. y pistol thread, but I'm currently intrigued with the Sig and Glock semiautomatic pistols because one or the other has been selected by so many federal and state law enforcement agencies.
Google provides many threads on the subject, and there seem to be many advocates for either as well as for both. Looks like can't lose choosing either.
At our excellent local commercial indoor firing range, last week I fired a Glock .45 caliber Model 21, and today I fired a Sig .40 caliber P229. I enjoyed both. Here are my main impressions (I'm an older occasional shooter with revived interest in shooting after a couple years of dormancy):
The Glock 21 .45 felt very safe and predictable. I can see why so many police and military issue it -- users generally know exactly what its status is and what it will do in a lot of different circumstances.
The consistent double action trigger pull (5.5 lbs) might be its greatest safety feature. The tradeoff is okay accuracy but not as easy as with a lighter trigger pull. The Glock generally felt safer than any semiauto I've ever seen or read about, and most reports contend it can take more abuse than most any other semiauto.
The Glock 21 could hold 13 .45 bullets, and that is a ton of firepower. Unfortunately, I've never been very accurate with a .45. The Glock was easier for me than the old military 1911s, but I still couldn't hit a quarter coin-sized bullseye even at 7 yards.
The Sig P229 with its 12 .40 caliber bullets is an absolute joy to shoot with its single action (4.5 lbs) after the first trigger pull (12 lbs), which isn't that stiff either. I obliterated the quarter coin-sized bullseye at 7 yards and hit it at 15 yards too.
But the Sig never felt safe to me. It had some kind of trigger decocking which I finally got used to, but the trigger is so sensitive I wouldn't feel safe with a Sig unless there was no shell in the chamber.
That of course slows up self defense considerably, though it is not a problem on the firing range.
It doesn't seem to bother most shooters judging from Internet postings, so that problem may apply only to ultra safety freaks like me (e.g., my home situation fortunately is safe enough that I have never kept a loaded gun in the house).
The magazines in both the Sig and the Glock had springs so stiff that I could never load a full capacity in either. I quit trying after what seemed to me to be enough prudent pressure to avoid crimping a shell case.
Magazine spring reliability is a separate issue. Some threads insist fully loaded magazines should be alternated as often as every month, while other posters insist they can remain loaded for years. (This is one reason why for home defense over the years I just go with a double-action revolver -- the simpler the better.)
The Sig needs better care than the Glock according to many reports on the Internet, and that seems to be simply because the Glock is considered so rugged and reliable it is almost in a class by itself.
The Sig also is the first gun I've fired that several times hit me in the head with ejected shells. Duh, talk about feeling stupid. I was afraid I was doing something dumb, or at least the shells were bouncing off the concrete firing position walls, but they were more direct. The ejection port seems to be more centered on the top instead of biased as much toward one side as most guns are. I think it's a gun idiosyncrasy and not any idiosicme.
Sigs are hundreds of dollars more than Glocks. Other brands can cost even more, but for value Glock seems to have a major edge.
Next week I'm going to fire a Glock .40 caliber and a Glock 357 Sig. As you probably know, it's the same shell necked down in the 357 for higher velocity with the lighter 9mm bullet.
For home defense and all-around use I'm still sticking with my Ruger .357/.38 double action Security-Six, and for plinking with my Browning Buck Master .22 semiauto. But the big caliber semiautos are so prevalent it's fun getting acquainted with some of the more widely used ones.
I've considered Kimbers and Rugers too, but probably will have enough after the Glock .40 and 357 Sig.
This thread is similar to many other gun threads here, but I'm wondering how you might feel about Sig vs. Glock since these seem to be the main handguns selected by so many military and law enforcement agencies (this is considering the Beretta 9mm as essentially a fading one-time quasi political choice).
