Beretta vs Sig arms

well the way i look at it is if u see special forces and delta and civilian contractor like blackwater and triple canopy the dont use the m9 they all use something else me personally the only reason the m9 is a good weapon for the army is because they're are too many stupid people that dont know squat about guns over here and without all the safety features it has they would shoot themselves in the foot everytime they drew it lol me personally the army should go back to the 1911a1/1911 thats what i carry everyday in the civilian world and its never failed me

 

I have used and carried both at one point or another. The beretta M9 is a great gun. Extremely reliable and accurate BUT the 9mm round (or .40) are NOT inherintly effective manstoppers. The military went to 9mm for two reasons, NATO ammo and political correctness. The Sig however, comes in nearly every caliber and configuration imaginable. Including the always reliable .45 ACP!! (Why do I carry a .45..... because the don't make a .46!!!)

 

It's pretty complex to explain all the different things that come into play- but it basically boils down to what mission we are doing at the time.

We carry .40cal during non-DoD missions. The USCG is not restrained by posse comtatis so we do A LOT of missions that do not fall under DoD purvue.
Some units do go on DoD missions and those get issued M9s and carry 9mm ball to comply with the CGs. They also have to take the OC Pepper spray off their belts- but we use it stateside occasionally.

 

I have a sig P229 and love it, never owned or used the berreta.

 

But they do make a .50

 

wow...great responses guys...and wasnt the reason the military uses 9mm field points instead of hollow points because of an old law that prevents the unethical killing from usage of hollow points or something like that?

and another question...concerning the Sig...i know the coast guard uses .40 cal preferbly for the non DOD missions, but how accurate and about whats the maxium effective range on a sig vs the M9?

 

at what distance? 25? 50 yards?

 

hahaha....really gave a new meaning to the term " hotwheels" LOL..125 feet....wow.

 

And I think between NATO rules and Geneva Conventions non-hollow point 9mm bullets are the "standard"
I've shot from 3meters to 25meters and was consistently better...I scored higher with the SIG than my best score with the M9 all but first two times I shot it.

 

Having carried LEO for 15 yrs the SIG 228 and having qualifed with it the accuracy is impressive right out of the box and never had an mechical issue.
I also own SIG 220, Colt 80 series, & Glock 21, but prefer the SIG's out of the box.

 

The use of "expanding projectiles" against military forces of other countries was banned in 1907 by the Hague Accords, hence no hollow points, soft points, etc.

As far as the Beretta vs. Sig question, both are very reliable and accurate handguns. I've owned both. The Beretta has gotten a lot of shit thrown its way b/c of military stories regarding slide breakage issues, feed/extraction issues, etc. Most of these were the cause of inferior metallurgy techniques used to manufacture the slides and non-factory magazines.

However, I will admit that the Berretta is more complicated than it needs to be. It uses a movable locking block with wing type protrusions to lock/unlock the slide from the barrel. This is the most breakage prone part of the design, but is also pretty cheap and easy to replace. The 92FS also has pretty small sites and the front post is a fixed part of the slide making upgrading difficult.

Other differences include the open slide design of the Berretta vs. traditional ejection port on the Sig. Not a huge deal, it's more aesthetic than anything, but get enough sand and crud on the Beretta and it will hang it up for sure.

The Beretta also uses a slide mounted safety vs. the Sig's frame mounted decocker. The Sig's design is more convenient and easier to operate IMO, but I don't like how they reversed the positions of the slide release and decocker from the traditional placement that started with the 1911.

Both guns are superbly accurate and reliable in both 9mm and .40. My other beef with the Sig though is the grip. It uses to plastic pieces that meet in the rear that forms an ugly seem and can pinch your hand sometimes. Not a problem with the Beretta's all aluminum grip.

Trigger pull is pretty blah on both guns, mostly because I am spoiled by my custom 1911 triggers. Double action pull is tolerable on both, right around 11-12 lbs. I'll admit that the Sig single action pull is a little better than the Beretta. The 92's single action pull is kind of heavy with an obscene amount of overtravel.

Overall I'd say the Sig is a better package for the price, but you really can't go wrong with either. If you get a Sig just get a Hogue wrap around grip and you're good to go.

 

Just bought my first handgun which is a Sig P245. It is a compact .45 I got from my buddy for $400. The only problem is that I want a 2nd Sig already. I took my CHL training course yesterday. It is a blast to shoot and I am now drinking the Sig Kool-Aid! I am now wanting to get a Sig 226 9mm Blackwater edition.

 

does your .45 have night sights? or jsut regular sights?

 

It has night sights. The only drawbacks are the magazine only holds 6 rounds since it is a compact.

 

ahhh.well u gonna conceal with it?

 

I think so but I am still determining what I will carry regularly!

 

the bad thing about beretta is that it has the exposed barrel which can get mucked up... the sig is contained...