Accuracy of Sig 229 v. Ruger?

NOTPARS

I have a Ruger auto-pistol in .40 caliber. I like it but its bit larger than I thought it would be. Because I wanted the same caliber, but in a smaller frame, and a good pistol if I was going to shell out the big bucks, I ordered a Sig 229 in .40 caliber.

Last week, at a local range, a friend let me shoot his Sig 228 (9mm). I shot both my Ruger and the Sig at 15 meters. At this range, I was able to achieve almost equal accuracy. However, when I went out to 25 meters, the Ruger's groups spread out, a bit, but the Sig stayed much tighter.

My questions are these: Is the above scenario normal? Why would the Ruger group pretty much equal to the Sig at 15 meters and not at 25 meters? Finally, can I expect the same level of accuracy from my Sig 229...when it finally comes?




"Hitler was a socialist..."

bigdog1

I don't know if you will in the 40 cal, but the 357 SIG caliber is a tackdriver. That would be a plus for me if I were thinking about a 229. I have a 229 with both SIG factory barrels and the 357 bbl. is the more accurate of the two. But then again, I love SIGs. I don't need very much of a reason to get another....

gunpaq

Had just the opposite experience with my Ruger vs a friend's
Sig 229 the other week. When we switched to each other's guns, the results were as you experienced. I think it was the shooters and not the guns in our case.

Pack slow, fall stable, pull high, hit dead center.

leeblackman

I like rugers and sigs. I think the sig is more user friendly. The ruger is a very well engineered and rugged handgun. I heard that at the ruger factory authorized armorers certification school, the instructor takes a brand new ruger throws it up against a brick wall as hard as he can, picks it back up loads it and contiues shooting. But they have one very accuracy effecting downfall. That darn trigger pull. Its just horendous. Overall the sig is a more expensive gun, and rightly so, more was put into its manufacturing process and it is a higher quality gun, and therefore in theory the sig should outperform the ruger. But I guess it would all depend on who's hands it was in, and what type of ammo was used.

Visit me http://www.geocities.com/gunsmithlee

gundummy

For your 1st question, I think it's the gun. The Sig should have felt smoother and more comfortable just a little more than the Ruger to hold a tighter placement farther away. For your 2nd question, you should get just as accurate once you get used to the heavier recoil of the .40 after some practice. The Sigs are so well built that you'll feel like you had it for a while. GD

niklasal

You know, I actually prefer the heavier recoil on the 40 than on the 9mm. The 9mm just seems too snappy, while the 40 has a smoother feel to it.

Maybe it's just practice.

NIKLASAL@hotmail.com

NOTPARS

Gentlemen,

Thanks for your responses and I apologize for being so tardy in answering them. I have had the Ruger two years and am quite used to the recoil. Like you all said, the trigger pull is an issue. However, the Ruger is actually more accurate than I was led to believe by many people.
I have already ordered the Sig 229 in .40. That was two weeks ago and who knows when I will receive it. Am I right in understanding that I can change the barrel for the .40 to a .357 Sig in the very same pistol and shoot that caliber instead?








"FDR was a socialist..."

niklasal

Hey NOTPARS- interesting to read this topic again... I just got my Sig229 about a week ago.

The person who had it beofre me said it was a tackdriver, and he passed his qualifications at 100% for his dept. Probably I'm not used to it yet, but I could barely shoot with the 229. My groups were really wide and putting two in the same place seemed impossible.

Funny thing was that when I put it down and picked up my Glock 22, also a 40, I was shooting like never before. ALL of my shots were touching at 15 yards. I know it sounds like I'm making it up, but i shot 10 rounds in a 2-inch radius at 15 yards.

NIKLASAL@hotmail.com

sig-man

Sounds like a defective 229, I'll be glad to take it off your hands for $100...

niklasal

For $100???

Add another zero to the end of that figure and you got a deal. I'll throw in trijicons, hogues, bianchi holster, 2 10rd mags and 1 hicap. All in case with less than 600 rounds through.

NIKLASAL@hotmail.com

NOTPARS

For Niklasal:

Now you got me worried because you know how much we have to pay for these things (my Ruger was $430). At first, when you said someone qualified with it and scored 100% I was okay. I was an LEO for ten years and I know how badly they shoot. A qualifying score for cops in many departments would probably scare civilians if they knew what little proficiency is required of some in some departments. I don't want to paint with too broad a brush because when I was with the Harford County Sheriff's Office (Maryland) let me tell you those boys could shoot!!! In my last department, the People's Republc of Palo Alto, the might be able to take you down with their tofu guns and harmonic convergence chanting, but hit anything? Ha!

Buuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuut, your comparison with the Glock worries me a little.


"FDR was a socialist..."

NOTPARS

For Sig Man,

Judging by your handle, maybe you can help me out. What do you think of the 229? Is it worth the $600 plus tax? What I liked about it when I saw it was its size. The Ruger is just a tad too big to hide under anything but heavy winter clothing. And, I presumed, based on what I have heard, that this pistol should be as accurate as any other in its price range. I don't have it yet, its only been two weeks going on three.


"Hitler was a socialist..."