Im interested in purchasing a SIG SAUER 'Sig Pro' in .40s&w. can anyone give me some feedback on whether it is a good pistol or a hunk of frozen pig shit.

I am a 1911 shooter, and I have always avoided plastic pistols. My friend had one in .40 though and I took it to an IPSC match. It shot wonderfuly. For being a polymer framed gun it rooled in my hand like a Metal .45. I also found that the "dot the i" sights helped with quick target aquisition.

I was impressed (although I went into it thinking it would flip like a glock and shoot like a jennings). Those swiss engineers knew what they were doing.

the sig pro is a very good pistol and .40 cal is an excellent caliber as long as it will fit comfortably in your hand

thanks che4rev. what you said has sealed the deal for me.

your criticism of polymer frames are unfounded in relaibility concerns chev, the glock can take more punishment than virtualy any gun I know of short of the AK-47.

I didn't say they arn't reliable, I said they flip like motherfuckers. Have you ever had a glock apart. Compare the weight of the plastic frame to the weight of the metal slide. The large weight deficit makes them flip hard and as a result it is hard to recover quickly from recoil to take the follow up shot.

There is nothing wrong with glocks, it is just that my little bitch wrists have a hard time controling the recoil. at least in a 45

I have not found glocks to recoil hard. I would compare the recoil of a glock .45 to that of a .40 Browning High Power. I believe that this is due to the in-line recoil characteristics that come from the slide being as slim as it is.

[This message has been edited by steelblade (edited 01-25-2002).]

the beauty of the glock for me is that it has a superior grip design phor bein a hi cap. i will allways love the 1911 phor its balance and single action design but i can think of little i dont like about the glock.

my bitch with all polymer phrame weapons is that they seem nose heavy. a phriend of mine carries a ruger P-97 (in a bianchi glock holster) and he agrees that its a bit nose heavy.(a bad characteristic when you concider that most shooters muzzle down subconsciously when phirin a .45 anyway)

as far as the high power or other GP-35 variants go, ive never had a problem with the recoil.(even in .40)

quote:

---

Originally posted by Alan Smithee:
your criticism of polymer frames are unfounded in relaibility concerns chev, the glock can take more punishment than virtualy any gun I know of short of the AK-47.

---

i disagree, glocks are not as sturdy and reliable as many think. i am a sworn beretta fan and will never trade the 92f for any glock. i asure you that a 92f will withstand more than a glock pistol. aside from that they are a bit odd to hold in your hand. i think the 92f is a superior weapon for defense and combat. aside from that they just feel a lot better in my hand than any glock i have ever held.

most guns will be as relibale as an Ak if you take care of it and clean it. but m9/92f can take shit that would put the plastic wonder to shame. the us miltary test for a new sidearm even screwed up the 1911.

glock: made of plastic, light weight
internal safety system.
suited for: personal defence, law enforcement

sig pro: made of plastic, light weight
manual safety,
suited for: personal defence
note:the sig pro are not as sturdy as other
sig pistols like p226, p228,

recommended:H&K USP, FN Fourty-Nine,
FN Five-seveN(impossible for civillians).
IMI baby eagle, desert eagle,
Beretta M92F...

FN 49? Have you ever fired an FN fourtynine? It has a trigger like a staple gun. They have all the negative qualities of a glock with a new york plus trigger without the availability of high capacity magazines or comfortable grip.

Further more, have you ever fired a desert eagle? What posative qualities can one atribute to a Desert Eagle aside from a long sight base, single action trigger, and powerful cartreges? They are big, clunky, and they are jam-o-matics for the first 500 rounds. Even after that they only work with certain amunition.

I shot against a guy with a desert eagle at a bowling pin shoot once. His gun jammed 4 times before I ended the match by knocking over my pins.

They do have the latent benifit of being a good feild expedent hammer in a pinch.

The problems with the Desert Eagles jamming are not caused by the gun, but by the shooter. Someone who has a Desert Eagle says that whenever he lets someone else shoot his gun, it jams every time, but once he shows them how to hold it, they do not experience any jams. From my own experience, that is correct. If you hold it correct way, the recoil hurts like a bitch and really stresses your wrists, but it is as reliable as any handgun.


[This message has been edited by steelblade (edited 01-29-2002).]

I test fired one at the local shooting club some time ago. I only fired it very briefly, though, because the shells were about $2 each. Anyway, the recoil didn't strike me as very bad. It is more of a pusher than a kicker, and I've fired .357 revolvers that were worse with regards to felt recoil.

It jams a lot if you don't grip it firmly enough, and if you limpwrist just a little bit, it will either jam or eject the spent brass straight into your face. IMHO it is a good gun within its relatively small envelope, but it is not an ideal carry gun as depicted by Hollywood.

~Snake

The Desert Eagle is a gas operated pistol. Therefore one must first ensure that the gas port is imaculate or it will not work. Furthermore, as stated in the manual, it will only work with certain factory amunition. If one is hand loading for the desert eagle he must use a mid-range shotgun powder for it to work properly. I have never met a desert eagle owner who's gun worked properly all the time with all ammo.