UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone!
  Tactical Forums
  Ground Zero
  Glock or Sig in .45ACP for Primary Carry?

Post New Topic  Post A Reply
profile | register | preferences | faq | search

next newest topic | next oldest topic
Author Topic:   Glock or Sig in .45ACP for Primary Carry?
J.Bourne
Novice
posted 12-26-2002 00:59     Click Here to See the Profile for J.Bourne     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I know that the Sig P226 is highly regarded in 9mm by many paramilitary units the world over, including the SEALs.
However, this is in 9mm, and I'm looking for something as highly regarded in .45ACP.

Basically, without the need for a double-strike capacity (i.e. external hammer verse striker fired), would you consider the Glock in .45 as reliable, durable and worthy as a SIG-Sauer?

Or should I just go with the SIG. I already own a Glock .40 S&W, a CZ-75B 9mm, and a Ruger Revolver.

I'm obsessed with reliability and durability issues, as this will be my primary carry weapon from now on.

A genuine thank you for your anticipated feedback.

IP: Logged

Raven
Novice
posted 12-26-2002 05:39     Click Here to See the Profile for Raven     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Both are excellent choices. I don't know if I can say if one is "better" than the other. I carry 1911's now but have also owned and carried Glocks on duty.

The Glock if you are talking about the fullsize Model 21, can take 13 round pre-ban mags (pricey though). If your an LEO this would be a moot point. The grip is thick though.

The Sig I think takes easy to get 8 round mags. 220's have a fairly narrow grip.

Accuracy probably goes to the Sig. My 226 was more accurate than my G-17. But I have to say my G-30 is up there with the best of them.

I like that the Glock has a consistent trigger pull (mushy but at least consistent) and is very durable. Sigs do occassionaly get some rust on the slide depending on the finish.

Both are great guns, glocks have less parts. Try them both and see which fits your hand better.

Both should prove to be extremely reliable.

IP: Logged

Pat _Rogers
Moderator
posted 12-26-2002 22:47     Click Here to See the Profile for Pat _Rogers   Click Here to Email Pat _Rogers     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
J. Bourne,
I note that you posted the same question in both this and the SEAL Forum.
Just FYI, that is in poor taste here.

Ask the questions you want, but limit the same one to a single forum.

Thanks.

------------------
S/F

Pat Sends

IP: Logged

J.Bourne
Novice
posted 12-27-2002 00:06     Click Here to See the Profile for J.Bourne     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Roger that Pat. Sorry.

IP: Logged

Jeff White
Moderator
posted 12-27-2002 00:14     Click Here to See the Profile for Jeff White   Click Here to Email Jeff White     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
My small PD has issued the Glock 21 for a little more then 2 years. They replaced the S&W 5906s we had carried for about 8 years.

We went through a 20 hour transition course before we ever fielded them. I found the Glock easy to shoot although I had to learn a somewhat new manual of arms (no using the slide stop). Did wear new callouses on my trigger finger from that safety lever...

We have had one reliability problem with light primer strikes. The dept. armorer cleaned all of the packing grease out of them before they were issued. Just within the past two weeks he took them in and did it again after some more light hit problems.
My personal opinion is that it's the ammo we're buying to practice with.

All in all, we've had good luck with them.

Jeff

IP: Logged

J.Bourne
Novice
posted 12-27-2002 00:22     Click Here to See the Profile for J.Bourne     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Thanks Raven and Jeff for that info.

Jeff: What type of practice ammo did you experience the light primer strikes?

IP: Logged

jnc36rcpd
Member
posted 12-27-2002 23:48     Click Here to See the Profile for jnc36rcpd   Click Here to Email jnc36rcpd     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Both SIG's and Glocks are likely to be both more reliable and more durable than their operators. While every gun manufacturer has a run of lemons, both SIG and Glock usually produce weapons that should meet your expectations. While it's possible, you're unlikely to choose a weapon that does not meet realistic expectations.

More important to your survival is the fit of the weapon to your needs. In one sense, fit is literal. You need to choose a weapon that fits your hand. While technique can compensate for weapon size, many people choose guns that are just too big (or too small) for their hands. Do not be guided by what immediately feels right. While that's a good indicator whether a pistol is the right choice, changes in gun-handling technique may allow you to pack a weapon that initially seemed the wrong size.

Your need for a high capacity pistol also enters into this. Some operators are very comfortable with a low capacity weapon. In their minds, accurate shooting and some spare magazines will usually prevail. Others strongly believe a high magazine capacity might win the day if coupled with accuracy and cool-headedness. One can adopt one's training and protocol to fit either philosophy, but you should consider these issues before you make a choice.

Good luck and be safe.

IP: Logged

DocGKR
Moderator
posted 12-28-2002 02:10     Click Here to See the Profile for DocGKR     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I will be a dissenting voice. The Glock 45's have not faired well, three have blown up in the past year in LE training here; they also have had magazine related problems. The P226 is a very reliable pistol, however, the single stack Sig's, like the P220, are not as functionally reliable. Don Lazzarini at SCPD can go into the technical details far better than I am capable of. While I do not like their ergonomics, the HK USP is probably a more reliable choice in .45 ACP than the Glock, likewise, I carried a S&W 4566 rather than a Sig P220 when we were only authorized DA pistols for duty.

When properly set-up, a 5" 1911 is extremely reliable. In terms of durability no other .45 ACP pistol can come close to a steel 1911. If you want the most durable, reliable, and combat proven .45 ACP pistol, get a customized 5" 1911--Hilton's recent threads on "base 1911's" provide excellent info on what you might want to acquire.

IP: Logged

Joe 9mil
Member
posted 12-28-2002 16:58     Click Here to See the Profile for Joe 9mil     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I have both.

There is no difference in reliability or durabilty between the two.

That said, if your already familiar with Glock why change weapon platforms?

That said, again, when I went from 9mm(SIG 226) to .40 I decided to try Glock(G22). I liked the same capacity(LEO though)and it was cheaper.

So, why not keep your Glock and go with the SIG. You will take a loss on the Glock if you try to sell or trade it.

IP: Logged

Jeff White
Moderator
posted 12-30-2002 00:56     Click Here to See the Profile for Jeff White   Click Here to Email Jeff White     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
J. Bourne,

Our practice ammo comes from a local manufacturer CNC Cartridge Company. My personal take on the problem is that the primers may be a little hard. So far no problems with duty ammo.

Doc,
That's the value of these forums. No one at my dept. has heard anything about any reliability problems with the Glock 21. ANy details you could provide would be appreciated.

When I started in 85 we were issued S&W Model 65 and 66 revolvers. I carried my own Beretta 92F for about 4 years on a trial basis. When the decision was made to switch to autos came, the S&W Model 5906 was selected. Duty ammo was the 115 gr +P+ load that the ISP carried. Then we sent two officers to UofI PTI for their academy and they couldn't shoot well enough with the Smiths so at the recommendation of the firearms instructor there, the chief bought them Glocks. In 2000 we were going to have to have the night sights replaced on the 5906s and we started looking at replacements, several of us were clamoring for .45s and they found a distributor who sold us the Glock 21s for a few bucks more then replacement night sights would have cost for the 5906s along with trade of the 5906s. That's how we ended up with Glock 21s. No real testing program, just plain and simple economics. We won the chief over to .45 instead of .40 on the cost of the practice ammo. I'd be willing to bet that more departments aquire weapons the way we did, then through any kind of test program or research.

Jeff

IP: Logged

DocGKR
Moderator
posted 12-30-2002 02:05     Click Here to See the Profile for DocGKR     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Jeff,

The Glock's have definitely had problems--I'll get you more info offline. You might also contact Louis Awerbuck--last time he was teaching a class at a PD out here, I believe they had a Glock blow up and I seem to recall he had another one blow up the month before in a class in AZ.

Larry Vickers, one of the true experts on combat handguns, has written this about Glocks: "The 9mm Glocks are the best ( the 40 S&W ones blow up and the full size .45 breaks - it's the worst gun Glock makes )." at http://www.1911forum.com/forums/showthread. php?s=bb546d350596aa79e02c2b827cb87cbe&threadid=2299&highlight=Random+points+of+interest

Mr. Vickers has also written: "None of the double stack 1911's are combat worthy......The HK USP .45 is the most reliable of all the double stacks by far - If you must have a double stack .45, that is the one. Good service pistol - the ergonomics hamper it - it is a big, clunky gun. Accurate and reliable though and well made for what it is" at http://64.177.53.248/ubb/Forum56/HTML/000080.html

FWIW, Mr. Vickers comments exactly match what I have observed.

[This message has been edited by DocGKR (edited 12-30-2002).]

IP: Logged

ajp3jeh
Member
posted 12-30-2002 11:56     Click Here to See the Profile for ajp3jeh   Click Here to Email ajp3jeh     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I have to offer a ringing endorsement of the Sig P220 ST. I picked up a ST in October as a replacement for my P220 that had ~20,000-25,000 rounds through it. The ST went to Thunder Ranch with me where is performed flawlessly. I find that the extra heft of the stainless frame compliments the cartidge well, soaking up a lot of the recoil and making the pistol even more controllable.

I also expect the steel frame to hold up better over the long haul than its aluminum brother. As a bonus, the lastest versions of the ST have a standard rail integrated into the dust cover and allow for the attachment of numerous accessories.

As a single stack, the grip is managable by most, and obviously smaller than any of the double stacks. Finally, unless you have huge hands, I'd recommend Sig's short trigger for the weapon as it does make an improvement in trigger control.

IP: Logged

All times are Mountain

next newest topic | next oldest topic

Administrative Options: Close Topic | Archive/Move | Delete Topic
Post New Topic  Post A Reply
Hop to:

Contact Us | Tactical Forums Home Page

This site is designed, created, and maintained by David Schuff.


Ultimate Bulletin Board 5.45