I have never been to this NG before, so hello. I am looking into buying a
new handgun in the next few weeks. After much deliberation, it looks like
it has come down to the P229 Sig Sauer, Beretta's 92FS Brigadier, or the 96
Brigadier. It is my understanding that the Sig is the better gun, but I am
still curious what others think. I fired a Sig .40 last week (P1394 I
think), but didn't like it much. Felt too small in my hand, and had too
much recoil for my taste. Obviously it is not the P229, but they
unfortunately didn't have one of those available for shooting. For anyone's
information, I am about 6'3" tall, and my hand is fairly big. Anyone here
fired both, or one of these guns? If so, how did the recoil form the
Beretta 96 compare to the P229. Also, as far as accuracy and quality, which
gun is preferable. From my days in the military, I am very familiar with
the 9mm Beretta, and think it is a good gun. If the 96 or the P229 don't
work out, I was just thinking about picking up the 92FS for now, until I can
get a chance to try out the 96 and P229. Since most of you sound like you
have more experience than I do in this forum, you understand that either gun
is expensive. While I am willing to put the money forward, I want to try
and maximize my purchase potential? Anyway, the gun will be used for home
defense, along with regular turns at the gun range. I have quite a bit of
experience firing guns, but this is the first I have ever owned. Any
response is appreciated.
Thanks
Rob
--
"God was my copilot,
but I crashed in the mountains and had to eat him."
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
You can learn about rec.guns at http://doubletap.cs.umd.edu/rec.guns
Steve
p226
Christopher
Sig owners generally say that Sigs are better guns; while Beretta owners
are convinced that Berettas are superior.
I own Berettas, and I love them, but I also miss the ex's Sig 230.
Between Beretta and Sig, it really just boils down to which one feels
better to you, and that you can shoot better.
--
-- John E. Jasen (jja...@umbc.edu)
-- In theory, theory and practise are the same. In practise, they aren't.
Robert wrote:
# I fired a Sig .40 last week (P1394 I
# think), but didn't like it much. Felt too small in my hand, and had too
# much recoil for my taste.
My guess, is that you were shooting the P239 in the .40 caliber, which is a
slim, single stack pistol that weighs about 26 ounces, unloaded. Given the
light weight and short barrel of the P239, along with the power of the .40
cartridge, it's going to be a hard kicker for just about anyone.
# fired both, or one of these guns? If so, how did the recoil form the
# Beretta 96 compare to the P229.
When comparing pistols of similar caliber (Beretta 92 series vs Sig P229 9 mm
series, or Beretta 96 series vs Sig P229 .40 series), my experiences have led me
to believe that the recoil will be a bit less when using the Beretta, thanks to
its longer barrel, and a few ounces more weight.
The trigger on the Sig P229, though, felt much nicer to me, in that it was less
"mushy" than the Berettas.
Both the Sig and the Beretta are fine pieces of machinery that will serve you
well. In terms of accuracy, I would think that the limiting factor is going to
be the shooter.
Rob,
Based on the information you have supplied I think you have
already answered your own question without realizing it. Both of
these brands of handguns are tops in quality, workmanship and
reliability. However at 6'3" with big hands then you really must
consider the Beretta over the Sig. The best quality handgun in the
world is worth nothing if it does not fit your hand. Now if you re
really that concerned about the quality of the Beretta then I would
suggest that you consider getting an H&K USP over both of them since
that handgun would fit your hand much better than a Sig.
Ken
#Hello all,
#
#I have never been to this NG before, so hello. I am looking into buying a
#new handgun in the next few weeks. After much deliberation, it looks like
#it has come down to the P229 Sig Sauer, Beretta's 92FS Brigadier, or the 96
#Brigadier. It is my understanding that the Sig is the better gun, but I am
#still curious what others think. I fired a Sig .40 last week (P1394 I
#think), but didn't like it much. Felt too small in my hand, and had too
#much recoil for my taste. Obviously it is not the P229, but they
#unfortunately didn't have one of those available for shooting. For anyone's
#information, I am about 6'3" tall, and my hand is fairly big. Anyone here
#fired both, or one of these guns? If so, how did the recoil form the
#Beretta 96 compare to the P229. Also, as far as accuracy and quality, which
#gun is preferable. From my days in the military, I am very familiar with
#the 9mm Beretta, and think it is a good gun. If the 96 or the P229 don't
#work out, I was just thinking about picking up the 92FS for now, until I can
#get a chance to try out the 96 and P229. Since most of you sound like you
#have more experience than I do in this forum, you understand that either gun
#is expensive. While I am willing to put the money forward, I want to try
#and maximize my purchase potential? Anyway, the gun will be used for home
#defense, along with regular turns at the gun range. I have quite a bit of
#experience firing guns, but this is the first I have ever owned. Any
#response is appreciated.
#
#Thanks
#
#Rob