Glock vs. Sig

[STAGE 2]

It isn't more prone to accident. untrained people are more apt to shoot themselves or others. The Glock is simpler. A more complex weapon would present an even larger learning curve.

Sure it is. For starters, any pistol that requires you to violate one of the rules of gun safety to field strip it, isn't doing things right. Thats a majority of the problem right there.

Secondly, with no external safety and a short and reasonably light trigger you also have a much higher potential for a AD.

 

[STAGE 2]

That's not true. Higher bore axis translates into more muzzle flip which slows follow up shots. This is a FACT.

High bore axis translates into more muzzle flip if all other things are equal. They usually aren't. The weight of a pistol and the recoil system among other things, also play major parts in how much muzzle rise there is. Case in point. The HK USP has one of the highest bore axis of any handgun yet it is one of the softest recoiling pistols available because of its recoil reduction system. The 1911 has a pretty high bore axis as well, but its also a hefty chunk of steel which mitigates much of the recoil.

Couple that with a long trigger reset and a poor trigger to begin with and you got a gun that will be more difficult to control in a stressful environment opening its groups drastically.

But here's the kicker. If the pistol is more accurate to begin with, then this offsets the issues with a higher bore axis and hitting shots at speed.

Firearms arent black and white. Everything effects everything else so statements like "because X then Y" don't work. Yes the glock has a low bore axis. However it is also a very light pistol. So you have one quality that lowers felt recoil and one that raises it.

You simply can't make a blanket statement based on a single factor.

 

[Rob72]

A lower bore axis lessens felt recoil. This has nothing to do with the speed at which a weapon can be shot. Bore axis is only one in series of factors that affect felt recoil.

Lower bore axis increases the ability to control recoil, not simply provide a "feeling"; a polymer frame helps as well.

Caliber is the other primary factor(9mm has faster recovery than .45 or .40), followed (within reason) by grip angle. Same shooter, same caliber, same level or training, generally performs better with Glock in 9mm. Always? No, but the vast majority.

If the pistol is more accurate to begin with, then this offsets the issues with a higher bore axis and hitting shots at speed.

Yes the glock has a low bore axis. However it is also a very light pistol. So you have one quality that lowers felt recoil and one that raises it.

You shooting GM, brother? No, I don't either, but that is one of the most flagrantly ignorant statements I've heard.

From a paper/e-forum gamer perspective mechanical accuracy may be God, but in practical terms (IDPA/ISPC) mechanical accuracy has a fairly well defined limit, beyond that point, it is that ability of the shooter to run the weapon.

Glock's polymer frame mitigates (not enhances) recoil transmitted to the shooter. Not "felt" recoil, transmitted recoil (ie, "measurable").

I'm not competent enough with a rifle to appreciate any difference between a TRG and a stock Rem 700 PSS, but there is a difference, and in the hands of someone practiced with rifles the difference is notable.

I like Sig and Glock. I have enough time and rounds to be able to quantify practical differences in both platforms.

If you were typing faster than considering what was being communicated, I do that my self, not infrequently. If the above statements are meant to be empirical, they are, unfortunately, incorrect.

 

[Jason B.]

From a paper/e-forum gamer perspective mechanical accuracy may be God, but in practical terms (IDPA/ISPC) mechanical accuracy has a fairly well defined limit, beyond that point, it is that ability of the shooter to run the weapon.

So true.

The gun will always shoot better than you until you get to the point you can shoot better than the gun, the problem is it takes thousands of rounds and long days of practice to get to that level. A better gun can make you shoot better but a better shooter with a lesser gun will still out shoot you.

 

[STAGE 2]

Lower bore axis increases the ability to control recoil, not simply provide a "feeling"; a polymer frame helps as well.

The ability to control recoil and felt recoil are the same thing. The lower the bore is in relation to my hand, the less I'm going to have to fight against muzzle flip. Thus I'm going to percieve that the pistol has a less amount of recoil.

But as I said before, bore axis is only one factor in regards to recoil.

Caliber is the other primary factor(9mm has faster recovery than .45 or .40)

If you're talking about fast as in rounds per minute, that has little to do with caliber and lots to do with the platform. Glocks, sigs, 1911s and others will all shoot faster than is humanly possible to pull the trigger anyways so thats a moot point. If you are talking about fast as in how quick it takes to get the muzzle on the target, then I disagree as well. For as long as these two calibers have been around, 9mm has been described as "flippy" where as .45 has been described as a "push". As a result, recovery is going to be, if anything, a matter of preference depending on the particular shooter.

You shooting GM, brother? No, I don't either, but that is one of the most flagrantly ignorant statements I've heard.

Glock's polymer frame mitigates (not enhances) recoil transmitted to the shooter. Not "felt" recoil, transmitted recoil (ie, "measurable").

Sorry, but as I said before physics dont change because gastons name is on the pistol. Yes a lower bore axis will mitigate felt recoil. Yes a polymer frame flexes and accepts some of the energy from the round fired. Weight, however, is still an issue. The lighter something is, the more its going to move when subjected to a constant force.

A glock 17 weighs in at 625 grams unloaded. A sig 226 weighs in at 870 grams unloaded. The sig is nearly 40% heavier than the glock. Since the energy expended by both pistols is exactly the same, the shooter is going to experience 40% less recoil with the sig. Now if we take into account bore axis and the frame flex of the glock, that 40% shrinks.

However even if we are overly generous and say that it will completely mitigate the weight differential, which is highly doubtful, we are still left with a draw.

This, of course, is what I said at the very start. Every pistol has its advantages and disadvantages. So someone that opines that the glock is better because of a lower bore axis, or that bore axis is the end all be all of pistol ratings is either being ignorant or dishonest. There are many factors that go into whether a pistol is great or not, and these factors change in priority from person to person.

Simply put, any statement that says the (insert pistol here) is the best combat/defensive pistol out there, is hogwash. The best defensive pistol is the one that works best for you. And as much as some people hate to hear it, there are lots of people that find that glocks don't work best for them.

 

[SIFU1A]

though a lotta LEO's carry them i have always thought that the glock trigger wasnt the best when its used to hold suspects at gunpoint, 1911 isnt either imho, just too easy to have a AD with the lite trigger, i suppose if ya get enough training it shouldnt be a problem?

but what do i know lol?i do know ya cant compare a $3K P210 to a P220, 225, etc, of course its gonna be more accurate, other than the swiss police not many LEO's use 210's though, if they even use them anymore, they are sure nice pistols though, a bud had one back in the early '80s and they are pretty accurate pistols, i guess at that price they outta be though IIRC back then my bud paid right at $2K which was a hefty sum in the day.

 

[Superfuzz]

Glock was not selected as a weapon for the US Armed Forces as one of the key requirements for consideration (submissions due by Jan '84) was an external manual safety. It had nothing to do with reliability or quality of the weapon system...good thing as the Glock has been proven to outperform many of its competitors (including the Sig) in field condition stress tests.

Sig is a fine firearm but I prefer Glock. Guaranteed to make a loud noise every time I pull the trigger.

 

[STAGE 2]

Glock was not selected as a weapon for the US Armed Forces as one of the key requirements for consideration (submissions due by Jan '84) was an external manual safety.

The sig has no such safety either and yet it has found its way into the US military.