OK gun knuts... discuss Sig P238

I only have the 238, but used to work part-time at a gun store in town and can head in tomorrow during lunch and put 'em all together for a quick pic.
 
Yes, but I own a PPK, and it doesn't fit well in a pocket---hammer and tail of frame hanging out pretty well destroy any hopes that you're legally concealed. It's not much bigger, but it is bigger. And the PPK is smaller than a PPK/S, which is smaller than a PP, which is the same size as a P232.

I managed to get loose at lunch today and swing over (also took the opportunity of paying on a couple of layaways while I was there).

Here you go---the best quick and dirty set of comparison pics I could get of the three guns mentioned. I really wanted to find a black slide 238, or a chrome slide LCP, as the brightness difference plays with size perception, but you get the idea.



The P232 is an extremely well made service pistol--and a service pistol is what it is. In Europe, this would ride in a hip holster on a policeman's belt, just like Walther PPs did in recent decades. Easy to shoot and comfortable, it's easier to conceal in a tuckable holster than what we Americans tend to consider a "full size" gun, but in most non-BDU pants, a holster of some kind will absolutely be required. As long as you know that going in and are willing to deal with it, it can be a great choice if it fits you. Galco's Skyops holsters are readily available and really do a pretty good job of comfortable deep concealment for the money. They're just a pain to put on every day.

That first pic is with the beavertails/tangs all lined up on the edge of the box from overhead, though it looks like they're hanging off in the picture due to the angle. Major knock against the 232 for concealment isn't just its length and height but also the width---that big palm swell feels great in shooting, but it also nearly doubles the width of the gun.
 
Last edited:
t1mpani said:
Yes, but I own a PPK, and it doesn't fit well in a pocket---hammer and tail of frame hanging out pretty well destroy any hopes that you're legally concealed. It's not much bigger, but it is bigger. And the PPK is smaller than a PPK/S, which is smaller than a PP, which is the same size as a P232.

I managed to get loose at lunch today and swing over (also took the opportunity of paying on a couple of layaways while I was there).

Here you go---the best quick and dirty set of comparison pics I could get of the three guns mentioned. I really wanted to find a black slide 238, or a chrome slide LCP, as the brightness difference plays with size perception, but you get the idea.



The P232 is an extremely well made service pistol--and a service pistol is what it is. In Europe, this would ride in a hip holster on a policeman's belt, just like Walther PPs did in recent decades. Easy to shoot and comfortable, it's easier to conceal in a tuckable holster than what we Americans tend to consider a "full size" gun, but in most non-BDU pants, a holster of some kind will absolutely be required. As long as you know that going in and are willing to deal with it, it can be a great choice if it fits you. Galco's Skyops holsters are readily available and really do a pretty good job of comfortable deep concealment for the money. They're just a pain to put on every day.

That first pic is with the beavertails/tangs all lined up on the edge of the box from overhead, though it looks like they're hanging off in the picture due to the angle. Major knock against the 232 for concealment isn't just its length and height but also the width---that big palm swell feels great in shooting, but it also nearly doubles the width of the gun.
Click to expand...

awesome! thanks a ton for that.. it appears there is not that much of a difference in the 238 and the LCP as in size.. if i had to do it all over again i would be getting the 238.. i like my lcp and i love that it drops in the pocket and you dont know its there bc its light. after all its a up close and personnal protection pocket pistol.. still digging that 238 though. i bet i could shoot it better than the lcp
 
The 238s I've seen at the show were stunning. Seems to be one of the best made tiny .380s on the market. Better sights than the LCP or P3AT. But for me, for a defensive gun I don't want to be fumbling with a tiny manual safety. As an alternative you can get replacement sights, tritium in the front, that are as visible as those on the 238 installed on your LCP or P3AT from innovativearms.
 
My personal opinion is that Sigs quality has gone down the tubes in recent years. They aren't the guns they used to be. Lot's of people have problems with them these days. The Colt Mustang copy is cute... but I'd rather have the colt.
 
Having the Colt is nice, but shooting it very much is a mistake. They do not hold up---that isn't hearsay, that's fact. During that time (80s and early 90s) Colt wasn't delivering what they used to, either; which is why Kimber was able to come along and kick their asses and all but entirely knock them out of the handgun market. Like I said, with half a dozen colt 380s that I own, most are now almost inoperable, with less than 1,000 rounds through any of them.
 
t1mpani said:
Having the Colt is nice, but shooting it very much is a mistake. They do not hold up---that isn't hearsay, that's fact. During that time (80s and early 90s) Colt wasn't delivering what they used to, either; which is why Kimber was able to come along and kick their asses and all but entirely knock them out of the handgun market. Like I said, with half a dozen colt 380s that I own, most are now almost inoperable, with less than 1,000 rounds through any of them.
Click to expand...

Wow that sucks. I don't really have a use for a 380 anyway so I don't guess I'll ever own either. What's up with gun companies now a days. Kimbers quality has slipped quite a bit as well.
 
Something else to keep in mind is that in the "old days" there were fewer gun buyers (market is the largest it has ever been in this country) and FAR fewer ccw permit holders, meaning far fewer pistol shooters. If you sell twice as many products, you"ll have twice as many product failures, with no change in quality.

Also keep in mind the VERY strong tendency for stories to get better and bigger on the Internet. One guy has an issue and posts about it. Then somebody else pops in and says, "I think my gun may be doing that too!". By the end of the weekend and sixty posts later, it's become an epidemic and the guns from that company made before 20XX suddenly rise in value because it's been concluded that all the later stuff is junk.

According to the assistant manager at my haunt--which is one of the largest (by volume) dealers in the country--they've had exactly one 238 returned to Sig out of almost 200 sold, from the very first batch that came out. That's one half of one percent on a new product. My own experiences with them tend to reinforce what that ratio points to.
 
I don't own a Sig but I do troll the Sig forum everyday, great forum by the way, and the impression I get is that Sig quality as of late is hit or miss. I too had look into getting the Sig but went with the Ruger LCP instead. I havn't had any problems with it and for the price it was a good all around deal.
 
Well....
Expect a range report from me sometime in the future... will be buying one this Saturday. Have a Bi-tone with night sights on hold for me at Cabela's. Will be making a call to Robert Mika for one of his fine pocket holsters in just a few minutes. Now, gotta locate some cheap range ammo and a dedicated carry ammo and run about 250-300 rounds through it before I deem it worthy.
 
t1mpani said:
Having the Colt is nice, but shooting it very much is a mistake. They do not hold up---that isn't hearsay, that's fact. During that time (80s and early 90s) Colt wasn't delivering what they used to, either; which is why Kimber was able to come along and kick their asses and all but entirely knock them out of the handgun market. Like I said, with half a dozen colt 380s that I own, most are now almost inoperable, with less than 1,000 rounds through any of them.
Click to expand...

Might want to Sell them - the market is pretty stong on the little Colts
 
t1mpani said:
Something else to keep in mind is that in the "old days" there were fewer gun buyers (market is the largest it has ever been in this country) and FAR fewer ccw permit holders, meaning far fewer pistol shooters. If you sell twice as many products, you"ll have twice as many product failures, with no change in quality.

Also keep in mind the VERY strong tendency for stories to get better and bigger on the Internet. One guy has an issue and posts about it. Then somebody else pops in and says, "I think my gun may be doing that too!". By the end of the weekend and sixty posts later, it's become an epidemic and the guns from that company made before 20XX suddenly rise in value because it's been concluded that all the later stuff is junk.

According to the assistant manager at my haunt--which is one of the largest (by volume) dealers in the country--they've had exactly one 238 returned to Sig out of almost 200 sold, from the very first batch that came out. That's one half of one percent on a new product. My own experiences with them tend to reinforce what that ratio points to.
Click to expand...

Didn't sig recall the first lot due to a serious defect? Also what I've read has nothing to do with a double in the market. Sig took on new blood in the management department that thought cutting corners would bring in more money. If you want me to take the time to find the info I can, but there has definitely been a down turn in Quality Output at sig in recent times. Not to say they still aren't good. Just that they ain't what they used to be by any means.
 
Infi-del said:
Didn't sig recall the first lot due to a serious defect? Also what I've read has nothing to do with a double in the market. Sig took on new blood in the management department that thought cutting corners would bring in more money. If you want me to take the time to find the info I can, but there has definitely been a down turn in Quality Output at sig in recent times. Not to say they still aren't good. Just that they ain't what they used to be by any means.
Click to expand...

Yes, the difference between that and the Colt, however, is that those Sigs were a manufacturing mistake and not up to spec, whereas the Colt was built to a lesser spec from the get-go.

I know what you're talking about in terms of the 'new blood' at Sig, but my understanding was that those decisions involved a movement to more polymer frames (Sig 250's modular design, etc.) which, while not a direction I herald, has nothing to do with intentionally reducing quality on their existing models. It takes an enormous amount of money to re-tool an existing manufacturing process. Now, I'll fully admit, the practice of shipping them with only one magazine was pure cheap-ness and ticked me off, but they've listened to the vitriol and mended their ways on that count, apparently.

As to selling the Colts, I know their value has risen, and am confident it will continue to rise. :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top