Posted: 2/12/2004 3:11:06 PM EDT
| Im turning 21 in April and have been looking for certain handguns for concealed carry. I was thinking of a Glock but became hypnotized by the beauty of Sig. Im kind of leaning towards a .45, so I was looking for pros/cons between the P220 and the P245. I know the P220 might be a little big for CCW but Im also 6'2" and 260lbs, which I'm thinking might make it a little easier to conceal. I saw someone had posted that they heard bad things about the P245. I just want to get some input from some people that might own these model handguns. Just trying to make the right purchase the first time. Thanks guys and sorry for being so long winded. |
|
I own a P220, and a P228, which is a semi compact 9mm. A Sig is like a Mercedes, in comparison the Glock is like a tractor. At your size, get the P220, you shouldn't have any problems concealing it with the right holster setup. I am 6', 180, trim build, and I can conceal the P220 just fine. The P245 doesn't serve any purpose to me. It is top heavy, the grip is too short for my hand, and it only holds 6 rounds. If I only get 6, it will be with a snubby .357 mag. If Sig made a compact .45 that fit my hand like a P228 does, I would trip over myself to buy one. I would also consider a P226 (full size in 9mm, .40/.357sig) or a P228/P229. While there is a lot to be said for the time honored .45, 9mm ammo is so much cheaper to practice with, premium 9mm hollow points are very effective in social settings, and there is something to be said for having 14-16 rounds in your CCW piece. Here is my theory: I keep the .45 (and 12ga) handy while at home, anyone breaking into my home is more likely to be hyped up than someone I would run into on the street. So in the house I might need the extra knockdown power of the .45. Out on the street, the 9mm is smaller, lighter, and holds twice as many shots. Out on the street I figure I am more likely to engage multiple targets. And since CCW is the idea, I don't want to lug two extra mags if I don't have to. Just my thoughts on the matter. MO doesn't have CCW yet, so I won't get to put any of these into practice until we do. Bottom line, you will not regret buying a sig. And if you get a P226 in 9mm and do a lot of plinking and practice with it, the P220 in .45 feels almost identical, and all holsters are interchangeable. All my holsters fit both my P228 and my P220, and when I get the P226 they will fit it also. You will want several, I assure you. One sig (my beloved .45) held me for a long time, but now I have a list of about 5 more that I want. You won't be dissapointed. |
| I think you will be happier with a standard, alloy framed 220. Everyone I know who has bought a 245 has gotten rid of it and gone back to the 220. (4 guys now) I know of no real "problems" with the 245's function, but somehow the package is just not as "balanced" as, say the 225...which is what they should have converted to .45. The 220 is the same approximate size and weight as a lightweight Colt Commander, which has long been considered an excellent compromise between size and weight for CCW and still having enough gun to grab quickly and hit well with if you really need it. |
|
I kinda pirated my comparison of Glocks and Sigs from a motorcycle guy. He was educating me about various brands. He said that Moto Guzzi's had a very "agricultural" feel to them (tractors), and that Jap bikes had all the soul of a well engineered toaster oven. And that Ducati's are the Ferrari's of the two wheel world (which everyone knows anyway). But I do like how well it translates over to handguns. :) |
| I own both a 220 and a 245, I can't say anything bad about either of the pistols. But this I am certain of. The 245 that I have will shoot rings around the 220. The 220 is plagued with the 4 and 1 syndrome. Supposedly after much firing this will correct the problem. The 245 will shoot with my Kimbers which is saying something. Although you'll not be disappointed with either as a choice! |