Sig M11-A1

[FUBAR]

I can't seem to get this handgun out of my mind. I'm in the process of getting a Glock Gen4 G17 and a Glock Gen4 G26 but I keep thinking about that damn Sig M11-A1. Should I pass on the Glocks and get the Sig. I already have the Gen4 Glocks G19 and G34 and was gonna complete the series. Decisions, decisions...

[penguin0123]

Trust yourself to make the choice. No one can make it for you.

To me, Sig vs Glock really boils down to trigger and ergo. Sig is a DA/SA and Glock is for all intents and purposes an SA. To me, I hate dealing with slop and am very familiar with two stage triggers, so the Sig's DA/SA fits me quite well. I personally can't stand the Glock trigger feel which is very light but is indistinct (kind of like a mosin trigger but a lot lighter). You need to try both (fire or dry fire) to determine for yourself. Some people tell you trigger reset on Glock is superior (Sig offer an SRT as well, but you have to pay for it); but I don't shoot the reset method, so YMMV.

For ergo, Glock has a more slanted grip than a Sig. You need to grab both and see which fits your hand better. If you've never shot a Sig before and have been shooting 1911s, you'll need to modify your grip or else you'll ride the slide release.

[GoZoner]

Get them all! You complete the Glock series and start a Sig series.

[aca72]

Yeah get 'em all!

In my experience, I'm more accurate on my SIGs than GLOCKs.

[Lead Waster]

I see some has been reading American Rifleman!

[Elysium]

EBR works has three in stock.

http://www.ebrwebstore.com/sig-m11a1-228-9mm-ns-3-9-15r/

They can do an SSE. Do it before its illegal.

$999 sounds expensive but its a bargain for something that has an SRT, sig night sights, three magazines and a battle hardened tactical QR code

If you have the funds do it. If you buy it and don't like it, I'll buy it from you for a fair price.

[67goat]

If you do get the m11-a1, please replace the grips as that gun is not a 228. While it is still a great gun, all the aesthetic (grips, name, "military" holo id) are just marketing with no truth to them. They should call it what it is, a non-railed 229 with SRT and corrosion resistant internals.

[GoZoner]

If you do get the m11-a1, please replace the grips as that gun is not a 228. While it is still a great gun, all the aesthetic (grips, name, "military" holo id) are just marketing with no truth to them. They should call it what it is, a non-railed 229 with SRT and corrosion resistant internals.

[thread jack]
Or, buy 1,000,000 228 grips, pass them out to all the 229 owners to use as replacements? Said another way, the evolution of the 226 over its life (steel stamped -> milled) is the same as the 228+229 evolution. The only difference is that Sig kept the 226 name but flipped the 228->229->229+228 naming around.

[67goat]

[thread jack]
Or, buy 1,000,000 228 grips, pass them out to all the 229 owners to use as replacements? Said another way, the evolution of the 226 over its life (steel stamped -> milled) is the same as the 228+229 evolution. The only difference is that Sig kept the 226 name but flipped the 228->229->229+228 naming around.

The history of the 228&229 is very different from the 226. The 226 was always offered in 9mm, .40, and 357SIG. All versions used the same frame. The 228 was only offered in 9mm. The 229 was initially offered in .40 and 357SIG only. The frame was measurably larger than the 228 frame. Sig decided to discontinue the 228 (except for military contracts and limited runs for the general market). They slapped some milled slides on surplus 228 frames and called it the 229 9mm. Unlike the 226, the 229 could not truly share mags between 9mm & .40/357SIG guns. Later, they dropped the 228 frame from the equation altogether and made the 229-1 frame that was shared between all three calibers. The m11-a1 uses this frame, thus shares nothing with an actual 228.

The 226 was always a unified platform (1 gun). The 228 and 229, however, were two distinct guns. The original 229 9mm was sort of a franken gun, but current 229 9mm guns are not part of the 228 line of guns or an evolution of them.

Further, the 226 was a stamped slide gun that was converted to a milled slide as production shifted to the US (and eventually Germany converted their factories). The 228 was always a stamped slide up until it was discontinued. The 229 started life as a milled slide gun. So no, their histories/evolution are not the same at all.

[GoZoner]

I think the history is closer than you imply. The 226 started as a 9mm; the other calibers were only added later (~1996) at which time the slide on the 226 changed to the milled version. Are post-1996 9mm slides interchangeable with pre-1996 9mm slides? If the slides are not interchangeable then I think my original claim holds:

pre-1996 226 is to a 228 (both only 9mm; both with a stamped slides) as a post-1996 226 is to a 229 (both in 3 calibers; both with a milled slide). Sig kept the 226 name but evolved the platform; Sig changed the 228+229 name and evolved the platform. The feel of a 229 differs from a 228 because of the heavier slide; the feel of a pre-1996 226 differs from a post-1996 226 also because of the heavier slide.

Thus, if you want to say that a 229 is not a 228 then you must also say that a post-1996 226 is not a pre-1996 226. Perhaps post-1996 226 owners should add an asterisk to their grips?