229 vs 226 [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : 229 vs 226


JordanL
02-14-2010, 06:15
Hello all. i have been going back and forth about the 226 and 229. im new to sigs since i only own a glock 22, but i am looking for a second pistol. i would go with the .40 cal to start with and then maybe pick up a .357 barrel. what are the differences/ similarities?

Fire_Medic
02-14-2010, 07:31
I will make a comparison for you using Glocks since you're familiar with the platform. Think of the P226 as the G22 size wise, and the P229 as a G23 size wise.

Also the P229 is beefier and handles the 40SW better in the "long run", it was built for the 40SW while the P226 was originally made for the 9mm. The P229 is also the Carry gun for many federal agencies and their employees in either 40 SW (most used) or .357 Sig.

You can't go wrong either way. I just recently picked up a P229R in 40SW and couldn't be happier. Looking to a a P226R in the future.

MySiK26
02-14-2010, 08:09
I will make a comparison for you using Glocks since you're familiar with the platform. Think of the P226 as the G22 size wise, and the P229 as a G23 size wise.

Also the P229 is beefier and handles the 40SW better in the "long run", it was built for the 40SW while the P226 was originally made for the 9mm. The P229 is also the Carry gun for many federal agencies and their employees in either 40 SW (most used) or .357 Sig.

You can't go wrong either way. I just recently picked up a P229R in 40SW and couldn't be happier. Looking to a a P226R in the future.

Back to 40sw?? Get that Dillon ready :supergrin: I shot the 23 yesterday at the range along with the AR and .22lr......good times.

Fire_Medic
02-14-2010, 13:57
Back to 40sw?? Get that Dillon ready :supergrin: I shot the 23 yesterday at the range along with the AR and .22lr......good times.

The Dillon is always ready. :supergrin:

And not back to 40SW, added 40SW.

wingspar
02-14-2010, 15:01
Think of the P226 as the G22 size wise, and the P229 as a G23 size wise.

Thatís an interesting comparison. Cost may keep me from doing it, but I am interested in a P226 and a P229 in .40. I didnít realize that kind of comparison. When I get somewhere I can look at both, I will. Thatís how I decided on the G17 over the G19. The 19 was too small, and Iím not interested in CCW.

The P226 is also the standard issue for Navy Seals. That alone has to place the P226 very high on the dependability list, and give it some drool factor.

Fire_Medic
02-14-2010, 16:24
Thatís an interesting comparison. Cost may keep me from doing it, but I am interested in a P226 and a P229 in .40. I didnít realize that kind of comparison. When I get somewhere I can look at both, I will. Thatís how I decided on the G17 over the G19. The 19 was too small, and Iím not interested in CCW.

The P226 is also the standard issue for Navy Seals. That alone has to place the P226 very high on the dependability list, and give it some drool factor.


Yes just remember that the P226 the seals shoot is in 9mm and that's the caliber the frame was built for. The P229 was built for the 40SW from the ground up.

As for the size, I also chose a G17 over the G19 because of the reason you listed but with the Sig the P229R just feels right at home, the grip is perfect and the size is perfect, however, if you're not concerned with CCW then get the bigger gun. :cool:

Cobra64
02-14-2010, 17:07
Thatís an interesting comparison. Cost may keep me from doing it, but I am interested in a P226 and a P229 in .40. I didnít realize that kind of comparison. When I get somewhere I can look at both, I will. Thatís how I decided on the G17 over the G19. The 19 was too small, and Iím not interested in CCW.

The P226 is also the standard issue for Navy Seals. That alone has to place the P226 very high on the dependability list, and give it some drool factor.

As a reference, these are a couple of my all stainless steel SIGs.


P220ST (.45ACP) - P229ST (.40 S&W) - P226ST (9mm Luger)

http://i24.photobucket.com/albums/c2/Davis1950/Weapons/Sig%20Sauer%20Guns/Marks%20Sigs/P226/P1000523-Louis.jpg




P226ST 9mm for training and competition

http://i24.photobucket.com/albums/c2/Davis1950/Weapons/Sig%20Sauer%20Guns/Marks%20Sigs/P226/P1000564.jpg




P229ST currently with Bar Sto 9mm conversion barrel (not shown) for carry

http://i24.photobucket.com/albums/c2/Davis1950/Weapons/Sig%20Sauer%20Guns/Marks%20Sigs/P229/P1010212.jpg



http://i24.photobucket.com/albums/c2/Davis1950/Weapons/Sig%20Sauer%20Guns/Marks%20Sigs/P229/P1000607.jpg




.

wingspar
02-15-2010, 00:38
Yes just remember that the P226 the seals shoot is in 9mm and that's the caliber the frame was built for. The P229 was built for the 40SW from the ground up.

As for the size, I also chose a G17 over the G19 because of the reason you listed but with the Sig the P229R just feels right at home, the grip is perfect and the size is perfect, however, if you're not concerned with CCW then get the bigger gun. :cool:

Well, if the P226 is made in .40, Iím sure it would be just fine, and Iím never going to put thousands of rounds thru it anyway, but Iím a long way from buying one if I ever do. Just starting the thinking process.

Without looking up the data, I may be putting my foot in my mouth here, but arenít the G17 and G22 frames the same, and didnít the 17 come before the 22?

As a reference, these are a couple of my all stainless steel SIGs.


P220ST (.45ACP) - P229ST (.40 S&W) - P226ST (9mm Luger)

Thanks for the photos. I can see how much bigger the P226 is than the P229. Of course, I would never decide on one over the other without actually holding both of them, and that wonít happen till I make a trip to the city sometime this summer. I still have way too much to learn about Sigs before I actually make a decision. The price tag gives me concern also.

panzer1
02-15-2010, 03:40
Well I carry a sig,226R in 357sig/40s&w. It came with the 40s&w barrel & I carry it that way most of the time. I went with the 226 over the 229 because as far as I know they are the same size but for the slide/barrel is only 1/2 longer. So if I can carry the 229 I could carry the 226 being only 1/2in longer. It's NOT to big to carry.IMO. One very good gun I must say.

Cobra64
02-15-2010, 03:49
Well I carry a sig,226R in 357sig/40s&w. It came with the 40s&w barrel & I carry it that way most of the time. I went with the 226 over the 229 because as far as I know they are the same size but for the slide/barrel is only 1/2 longer. So if I can carry the 229 I could carry the 226 being only 1/2in longer. It's NOT to big to carry.IMO. One very good gun I must say.

The 229 grip is a little shorter than the 226.

http://i24.photobucket.com/albums/c2/Davis1950/Weapons/Sig%20Sauer%20Guns/Marks%20Sigs/P1000554.jpg

232SL - 239TT - 229ST - 226ST - 220ST




.

JordanL
02-15-2010, 06:14
Hello all. i have been going back and forth about the 226 and 229. im new to sigs since i only own a glock 22, but i am looking for a second pistol. i would go with the .40 cal to start with and then maybe pick up a .357 barrel. what are the differences/ similarities?

i was more concerned about accuracy. does the .5" longer 226 have any real advantage? cause if not then the 229 is the obvious choice. keep in mind that the sigs im looking at are bare bones- no short trigger reset, nothing special. and why is there a 229 "sas" is that because it is in service with the SAS? if so then that would put it in a pretty good spot also... lemme know.

Larry V
02-15-2010, 07:05
I owm both and love both . That being said , my 229 is extremely accurate.

Glock30 Guy
02-15-2010, 07:53
I have never had a 229 but have had a few P226's over the past 20 years. In fact of all my guns, it's the one model I never trade without immediately replacing with another 226. My current 226 is in 40 S&W and is the Equinox version. I love my 226 and recommend it highly. It was my duty gun, my main carry, and it has endured a great deal of real world use. I'm sure the 229 is equally fine.

Fire_Medic
02-15-2010, 09:10
Without looking up the data, I may be putting my foot in my mouth here, but arenít the G17 and G22 frames the same, and didnít the 17 come before the 22?


Yes it did, when did I say otherwise......:dunno:

wingspar
02-15-2010, 19:40
Yes it did, when did I say otherwise......:dunno:

No, you didnít say otherwise. I was just exploring the comparison of the P226 in 9mm and .40 with the G17 and G22.

If the P226 being designed for 9mm could make it a weak design for the .40, then wouldnít the G17 being designed for 9mm make for a weak design for the G22?

Iím not making any kind of statement, or trying to make a point at all. I truly do not know. Iíve not paid much attention to the G22, so not aware if there are any weaknesses due to being designed for the 9mm cartridge. Seems like I see a lot of love for the G22 here on GT.

Iíve recently purchased a Sig Mosquito (fun little gun), and it is the first time Iíve seriously started to think about another centerfire handgun. If I was to do this, then why not .40? Seems to be a very popular cartridge. Iíve never shot one. Not sure I see a reason for another 9mm. Iíve got a Marlin Camp 9, (a 9mm carbine), and the G17. Time to explore another cartridge should I get another centerfire handgun. Itís not something Iím going to dive right into, but I do think it would be a Sig if I do it. The P226 and P229 are at the top of my list, but as I learn more about Sigs, there is always the possibility that could change.

Iím in a remote area, so it will have to wait a few months till I get to an area where I can actually look at every model Sig offers in one store. In the meantime, I just want to drink in all the info I can.

Fire_Medic
02-15-2010, 21:21
No, you didnít say otherwise. I was just exploring the comparison of the P226 in 9mm and .40 with the G17 and G22.

If the P226 being designed for 9mm could make it a weak design for the .40, then wouldnít the G17 being designed for 9mm make for a weak design for the G22?

Iím not making any kind of statement, or trying to make a point at all. I truly do not know. Iíve not paid much attention to the G22, so not aware if there are any weaknesses due to being designed for the 9mm cartridge. Seems like I see a lot of love for the G22 here on GT.

Iíve recently purchased a Sig Mosquito (fun little gun), and it is the first time Iíve seriously started to think about another centerfire handgun. If I was to do this, then why not .40? Seems to be a very popular cartridge. Iíve never shot one. Not sure I see a reason for another 9mm. Iíve got a Marlin Camp 9, (a 9mm carbine), and the G17. Time to explore another cartridge should I get another centerfire handgun. Itís not something Iím going to dive right into, but I do think it would be a Sig if I do it. The P226 and P229 are at the top of my list, but as I learn more about Sigs, there is always the possibility that could change.

Iím in a remote area, so it will have to wait a few months till I get to an area where I can actually look at every model Sig offers in one store. In the meantime, I just want to drink in all the info I can.

You're correct, and if you search the internet especially off of GT to get unbiased reports you will see the problems there have been with the 40SW Glocks over the years.

In 2004 DHS did some testing on handguns to consider for agency issued weapons and the only ones that held up until the end of their test were the Sig P229's and the HK P2000's and HK USPc 40's.

I'm not knocking the Glocks in 40 but it is what it is. Hence why I moved away from them and found another platform for the 40SW because I like the caliber. I also like 9mm and 45 ACP, and the last thing I'm trying to do s start a caliber war here or anywhere else.

Both the P226's and P229's are great handguns and I was not trying to imply otherwise, all I was trying to mention os that is the gun you purchase is going to be used seriously, or in other words if you're going to shoot the crap out of it, then the pistols that usually hold up the best over time in 40SW are the ones that were built for the caliber.

This is all of course my opinion and what I have learned over time in researching many things handgun related and having to do with the different calibers.

My opinion again, you'll hear a lot of folks say well the 40SW is an LE round and I don't see a use for it for Civilian CC, well I don't know about you or where you live but down here in South FL me and the local LEO's all drive on the same streets and visit the same places, so why wouldn't I want what works for them to defend my life as well.

All this being said, find the caliber you like and then find the best platform for it. I like Glocks in 9mm, Sig's in 9mm and 40SW, HK's in 9mm/40SW/45 ACP, and 1911's in 45 ACP. Everyone has their likes and dislikes and lucky for us all there are so many options out there.

Any of the standard service calibers will suffice you just need to find what works best for "you" and more importantly what you're most proficient with. Shot placement!

FM :wavey:

wingsprint
02-16-2010, 03:39
i was more concerned about accuracy. does the .5" longer 226 have any real advantage? cause if not then the 229 is the obvious choice. keep in mind that the sigs im looking at are bare bones- no short trigger reset, nothing special. and why is there a 229 "sas" is that because it is in service with the SAS? if so then that would put it in a pretty good spot also... lemme know.

Forget accuracy- Both guns are supremely accurate, the only thing needing improvement is the person pulling the trigger. Only the most skilled professional shooter would be able to tell the difference between the two.

SAS: Sig Anti-Snag - a rail less and edge melted version of Sigs that are designed for concealed carry.

I like to think of the 229 as the compact version of the 226. Try to shoot both, or at least hold them and make your choice based on what feels good in your hand.
:cool:

Cobra64
02-16-2010, 03:49
i was more concerned about accuracy. does the .5" longer 226 have any real advantage? cause if not then the 229 is the obvious choice. keep in mind that the sigs im looking at are bare bones- no short trigger reset, nothing special. and why is there a 229 "sas" is that because it is in service with the SAS? if so then that would put it in a pretty good spot also... lemme know.

This might answer your accuracy question:

http://i24.photobucket.com/albums/c2/Davis1950/Weapons/Targets/P1020200.jpg




Shot with this SIG P229ST .40 S&W with a Bar Sto 9mm conversion barrel.

http://i24.photobucket.com/albums/c2/Davis1950/Weapons/Sig%20Sauer%20Guns/Marks%20Sigs/P229/P1010212.jpg



.

JordanL
02-16-2010, 04:47
come on guys.. give me something. based on what i know so far, i want both. are they both metal frames?

Cobra64
02-16-2010, 04:53
come on guys.. give me something. based on what i know so far, i want both. are they both metal frames?

That question is embarrasing.

I'm though wasting my time on this thread.

JordanL
02-16-2010, 08:52
That question is embarrasing.

I'm though wasting my time on this thread.

1. i dont know anything about sigs and its easier to ask questions then look it up. i have plenty of other guns and i made my choices based off threads like this and then incorporated that knowledge into practice.

2. im through with you wasting my time too.

SigFusion
02-16-2010, 19:38
That question is embarrasing.

I'm though wasting my time on this thread.

Cobra, your attitude toward this potential new Sig owner is what's embarrassing. Give him a break. All you're doing is making us Sig owners look pompous. I am NOT pompous.

Jordan, both guns are metal frame. Personally, I don't think the small difference in barrel length will make a significant difference in accuracy. And don't use Cobra's above picture as a reference because it wasn't shot with the original barrel.

All in all, I think you'd be happy with either one. :)

bac1023
02-17-2010, 23:43
You can't go wrong with either one.

wingspar
02-18-2010, 00:39
You're correct, and if you search the internet especially off of GT to get unbiased reports you will see the problems there have been with the 40SW Glocks over the years.

Thanks for taking the time to reply. Been away from my computer for a couple of days. It does seem like I vaguely remember seeing some issues on the G22, but didnít follow them since wasnít interested in the gun. What you say seems to reflect my own thoughts on what little Iíve read.

Iím a plinker. Paper targets, tin cans, water jugs, and plan on building something to hang some steel targets on. I donít carry, and donít plan on it, unless some unforseen circumstance arises, and I donít wish for that to happen. I do not keep loaded guns in the house. Iím in a small town on the Pacific Ocean with a remote national forest just a few minutes away. It was my office for 31 years, and now itís my target range. So if I should actually acquire a .40, it would never see heavy use. I stepped away from all shooting for a good 20 years, and just got back to it about 6 months ago, and added the G17, something Iíve wanted for years. Iíve never been good with handguns, but Iím starting to get serious with accuracy, and plan on a hand gun course in the near future.

When you talk of shot placement, Iím still very unhappy with my groups, or lack of groups actually, with my G17. I took possession of a new Sig Mosquito this week, and after a couple hundred rounds with the Mosquito, my shot placement with the G17 was the best Iíve ever had by a long shot, so maybe Iím starting to get the hang of it. I wondered if the Mosquito could help, and I am happy to report that it has. If I do pick up a .40, I might look for a used one to help keep the cost down.

RedTape
02-18-2010, 01:00
Yes, both are metal frames. However, you can get the aluminum model or the stainless steel model. Aluminum will be lighter, but not as durable. If it's a range/plinker gun I'd go with the heavier stainless model.

Either the 229 or 226 will be fine for .40 S&W. I wouldn't say the 229 frame was designed for the .40 S&W, it's the same as the 228 frame which is a 9mm.

Personally I prefer 9mm. Higher capacity, cheaper ammo, less recoil and, if you ever decided to use it as a home defense gun, there is little different between the 9mm and .40S&W with quality ammo. If you're just looking for a plinker you might want to consider the 9mm.

bac1023
02-18-2010, 01:04
I also much prefer 9mm.

JordanL
02-18-2010, 06:29
na. i dont do 9mms. mt dealer is out of 226s. i may have to go with the 229 for now. unless someone knows where to get cpo 226s in .40

wingspar
02-18-2010, 16:38
na. i dont do 9mms. mt dealer is out of 226s. i may have to go with the 229 for now. unless someone knows where to get cpo 226s in .40

http://www.budsgunshop.com/catalog/index.php/cPath/21_28

Defender77
02-18-2010, 16:50
My P229 is 9mm and it shoots very well.

Very easy for repeat shots, as it feels like the heavier front end makes for a steadier shot and less recoil, plus the rails are long and extend right down the frame.

The one bad thing about it is the right frame rail is worn down to bare metal....about an inch worth.

Cobra64
02-19-2010, 03:23
My P229 is 9mm and it shoots very well.

Very easy for repeat shots, as it feels like the heavier front end makes for a steadier shot and less recoil, plus the rails are long and extend right down the frame.

The one bad thing about it is the right frame rail is worn down to bare metal....about an inch worth.

You may want to take a look at this: http://grayguns.com/guide-to-sig-sauer-pistol-inspection/

JordanL
02-19-2010, 04:53
im not knocking 9s. i just like .40

Wingspar: looks like buds out of them too.

guess its the 229 for me... to bad i dont have anything it would go well with.

Defender77
02-19-2010, 15:47
You may want to take a look at this: http://grayguns.com/guide-to-sig-sauer-pistol-inspection/

Thank you Cobra.

I saw this link before and it is very helpful....and also very sad. :crying:

JordanL
02-20-2010, 04:37
well... i did it. and it will b here monday. and i will have to post pix 4 yall! i cant wait.

bac1023
02-20-2010, 20:04
na. i dont do 9mms.

I guess that's your loss then.

There are much nicer guns chambered in 9mm then there will ever be in 40S&W.

J.R. Bob Dobbs
02-21-2010, 10:24
I have both a 226 and a 229 in 357sig. The 226 grip fits my hand better, perhaps perfectly. The 229 fits my hand almost as well but not quite. The 226 is a bit larger, if you're going to carry it. The 226 holds one more round than the 229 (in 40/357).

I like them both very much. I slightly prefer the 226. The 226 is a nightstand gun for me. If I was to pick one for carry, it would be the smaller 229, but I generally carry smaller lighter guns than the Sigs.

You'll have to handle both to decide for yourself which fits your hand (and needs) the best, but you'll probably be super-happy with either.

nomoreets
02-22-2010, 11:46
I truly love my P229R S&W. As a matter of fact, I feel better shooting .40 S&W in this P229 than I shoot 9mm in my Glock 19. It is very smooth and accurate. The weight is just right.

tx787
02-22-2010, 17:09
So I was lurking on this thread trying to make the same decision, and ran into a 228 in the shop and walked out with it, was that a good idea? I think it looks great and it's all German, new but not in their current catalog, and was inbetween the 229 and 229sct in terms of price including night sites.

One question, are the magazines the same as the 229 and will any 229 magazine work in a 228?

JordanL
02-23-2010, 12:20
http://i27.photobucket.com/albums/c182/dat_boy_juice/IMG_0911.jpg
here it is! my first sig! since its glock talk i had to put my glock in there too.

<a href="http://s27.photobucket.com/albums/c182/dat_boy_juice/?action=view&current=IMG_0912.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://i27.photobucket.com/albums/c182/dat_boy_juice/IMG_0912.jpg" border="0" alt="Photobucket"></a>
is this normal? i know this sig is a refurb, but it looks like the top of the barrel has been ground on (since there is no finish on it). are the barrels generally square?

cysoto
02-23-2010, 12:59
<a href="http://s27.photobucket.com/albums/c182/dat_boy_juice/?action=view&current=IMG_0912.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://i27.photobucket.com/albums/c182/dat_boy_juice/IMG_0912.jpg" border="0" alt="Photobucket"></a>
is this normal? i know this sig is a refurb, but it looks like the top of the barrel has been ground on (since there is no finish on it). are the barrels generally square?
Not to worry; this is how they normally look after it has had a few hundred rounds through it.

Congratulations on your new Sig!! :wavey:

JordanL
02-24-2010, 05:17
yea right after i saw that i looked at cobras sigs and theyr all the same as mine (except maybe better). i will follow up with a range report soon.

JordanL
02-24-2010, 09:04
so is this one metal, aluminum, or stainless?

RedTape
02-24-2010, 21:53
so is this one metal, aluminum, or stainless?

Wow. OK. Sig makes a few polymer guns...i.e. the SigPro series, Sig 250 etc. As others have said, the classic P series are metal, either aluminum or stainless, yours appears to be aluminum.

Have you actually received the gun? Metal feels nothing like polymer. Aluminum feels nothing like steel. You should look at the Sig Web site to get basic specs on the gun.

JordanL
02-25-2010, 06:34
i know what polymer is. and i know what all the other metals are (since im a welder). the slide says stainless so does that mean the frame is too? i looked at the website and it did not specify. i know st is not magnetic, but then agian neither is alu, and its obviously not polymer.

JordanL
02-25-2010, 06:54
on the frame it says AL 55. this probably means aluminum. is stainless any better than aluminum? whats the difference?

bac1023
02-25-2010, 21:35
so is this one metal, aluminum, or stainless?


:faint:

Isn't it your gun?

Does it look like metal or plastic?

P229s are metal. :)

bac1023
02-25-2010, 21:49
on the frame it says AL 55. this probably means aluminum. is stainless any better than aluminum? whats the difference?


I prefer steel, whether it be stainless or carbon.

Aluminum is lightweight, which is its sole advantage. Its disadvantage is its weaker and also doesn't soak up recoil like steel.

Defender77
02-25-2010, 22:30
Nice SIG!

I see yours has the rail too

Cobra64
02-25-2010, 22:44
:faint:

Does it look like metal or plastic?



:dunno:

bac1023
02-26-2010, 04:30
:dunno:


I felt the same way, Cobra.

:brickwall:

JordanL
02-27-2010, 09:54
i called sig and asked them if it was sst or alu and he said what color is it? lol

JordanL
02-27-2010, 09:56
:faint:

Isn't it your gun?

Does it look like metal or plastic?

P229s are metal. :)

where did i say anything about it being polymer?

Cobra64
02-27-2010, 20:05
I felt the same way, Cobra.

:brickwall:

http://i24.photobucket.com/albums/c2/Davis1950/Weapons/ALUMINUMORSTAINLESS.jpg



:)

bac1023
02-27-2010, 23:57
:laughabove:

RedTape
02-28-2010, 06:37
where did i say anything about it being polymer?


so is this one metal, aluminum, or stainless?

You wrote..."so is this one metal." That would imply you are asking is this one metal or polymer.

Sig asked what color it is because the vast majority of stainless frames are...stainless. However, there are stainless frames that are covered in Nitron.

JordanL
02-28-2010, 07:09
i still dont see it but ok.

i went to the range yesterday and shot the glock and then sig. i only shot about 60 rounds out if each. and here are my observations: i felt more recoil with the glock. it felt "snappier". the sig felt more consistant and it had more muzzle flip up. both guns performed flawlessly, and shot better than i could. it didnt help it was like 30o that day at the outdoor range. overall.... it was too cold to tell.

bac1023
02-28-2010, 11:28
You wrote..."so is this one metal." That would imply you are asking is this one metal or polymer.

Sig asked what color it is because the vast majority of stainless frames are...stainless. However, there are stainless frames that are covered in Nitron.

Exactly.

When you say "so is this one metal?", how else should that be taken?

Either way, it doesn't matter.

Cobra64
02-28-2010, 11:54
Exactly.

When you say "so is this one metal?", how else should that be taken?


It depends...

http://i24.photobucket.com/albums/c2/Davis1950/Weapons/000_0133.jpg


:)

JordanL
03-01-2010, 04:49
carbon...? no that cant be it.

dpadams6
03-08-2010, 17:20
I have both the 226 and the 229 in 357 sig/40...there magazines both hold 12 rounds...And the 229 WAS designed from the ground up for the 40S&W and later 357 sig...matter of fact, sig took longer to release there 229 then the other manufactures, to "get it right" And that they did with the 229...love my 229...226 is nice too...

RMTactical
03-09-2010, 11:16
I just got a 9mm P226ST and I almost wish I had a P229 instead... :)

bac1023
03-09-2010, 11:18
It depends...

http://i24.photobucket.com/albums/c2/Davis1950/Weapons/000_0133.jpg


:)

:rofl:

Cobra64
03-09-2010, 13:14
I just got a 9mm P226ST and I almost wish I had a P229 instead... :)

Same weight within an ounce. Balance-wise, the 229ST is a bit more top heavy compared to the 226ST.

JordanL
08-21-2010, 01:07
does anyone know if they make threaded barrels and compensators for the 229/.40?

backbore
08-21-2010, 10:09
Try Barsto and contact Tod at http://www.customizedcreationz.com . I think I saw something on his site about threading barrels.

JordanL
08-21-2010, 20:38
I guess that's your loss then.

There are much nicer guns chambered in 9mm then there will ever be in 40S&W.

like what browning hi powers?