what is the differance
in a sig P226 and a 229? they look the same to me except magazines won't interchange.
0
-
If you look at the specifications instead of just the pretty pictures you will find that the P229 is a smaller gun overall than the P226.
A friend had a P229 and neither one of us could hit squat with it.
He traded for a P220 and I bought a P226 and things improved right away.0 -
Some say the 229 being more compact, is top heavy and just doesn't feel right. Whereas the larger 226 is more even balanced. Hold/try both if you get the chance. 0 -
I have a P229 made in 1996 Stainless it feels great in my hand it also shoots great. It's a 40 cal but doesn't have the light, laser groove. 0 -
The 229 is the older 228 that they changed the number to 229 when it was made in 40cal. They added a stainless steel slide for more weight to it.
I use my 226 mags in my 228 all the time. They just hang below the grip some.
EDIT,riomouth, read what I said about the slides [:0] The 228+229 frames are the same. I've owned, carried and shot Sigs for too many years.0 -
229 and 228 are not the same gun in different calibers, the slides are totally different. The 228 was basically a shortened 226, (picture a 225 (single stack) slide mounted on a slightly shortened double-stack grip, for 13 rounds instead of the 226's 15).
The 229 was made ground-up for the .40-.357 Sig with a heavier milled slide...which is why it's "top heavy" when compared to the stamped slide of the 228. Look at the slides; the 228 is more "slab sided", while the 229 has a bit of shape to the sides.
Both are good guns (I still have a 228).0 -
The 4.4 in. barreled 226 was designed as a 9mm firearm, but was later modified slightly and offered in .40 S&W.
The 3.8 in. barreled 229 was SIG's first pistol designed from the outset to fire the .40 S&W cartridge. It has a heavier built, slightly wider frame and was also their first pistol produced using a one piece slide machined from stainless steel. All of their Classic series pistols (including the 226) now come with this type of slide.
As for magazine interchangeability, the longer 226 magazine can be used in the slightly shorter grip framed 229 but the 229's magazine can't be used in the 226. Also, despite dimension differences these both have a capacity of 12 rds. in .40 S&W.
Though their appearance is very similar, the 229 isn't simply a 228 chambered in .40 S&W. The 228 uses a multi-piece, carbon steel slide that is welded together and utilizes a separate breechblock that's roll pinned in place. In fact, their slide designs are so radically different that none of it's internal components are interchangeable.
In addition the 229's frame is built quite a bit heavier than the 228.0 -
I have carried the 229 for service since the late 90's. I have the Sig .40 S&W barrel and a BarSto .357 barrel. Rio has the design details dead-on. Some confusion may come from the fact that the 229 was/is also offered in 9mm. I liked the 229 so well that I bought a 239 and a 226 also with both barrels. I found the 226 to be awkward and poorly balanced compared to the two shorter pistols so I got rid of it, but that is just my experience. They all typify the old statement - "Its a Sig, of course it works!" 0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
7 comments