Is the P229 viable as a carry gun in 2024?

[MattyD380]

I shot my ‘95ish P229 this weekend (9mm).

I will second @echo5charlie ‘s “fuck yes.”

I’ve been shooting my Berettas a lot lately so I wanted to experience the P229 in “contemporaneous juxtaposition.” While I generally think falling-block and rotating actions offer more feel… a phat-slide P229 is a seriously stable, reassuringly solid 9mm launching platform. Combine that with Hogue’s G10 Contour Classic grips and an Ameriglo front sight… it was hard to miss at 10 yards.



Plus, I find the DA on this P229 extremely shootable. Nice, clean pull… and the gun doesn’t jostle or jerk when the hammer falls. This one does have the newer strut assembly (I think it was updated) so, that does make a difference. Was able to bore a nice ragged hole decocking between shots:



So, yeah… I love my P229. Go buy a cheap old one and be awesome.

[MattyD380]

I recently received a very insightful comment about this subject on my YouTube channel. Long story short: The change from the short extractor to the long extractor was driven primarily by a desire to reduce machining operations in the slide. At least that’s the theory, here.

Here’s the comment, for reference:

I had by chance a long conversation with an Sig armorer who'd spent a considerable amount of time in the mothership. I asked 'Why the change?' because as the misanthropic iconoclast I am, I hate change.

He stated that the machine that milled the stainless slide with the short extractor was getting a bit old, and Sig evaluated the costs of buying a replacement machine. The old machine reportedly had to drill three times at three angles to complete that slide, but if a new machine were going to be bought as a replacement anyway, a longer extractor system would require only two drillings at two angles, thus manufacturing the slide could be done faster and simpler, thus more cost effective.

He did stated that neither style categorically proved to be demonstrably better in terms of reliability, but it is interesting to note that the still-manufactured P226 Mk 25 continues to use the short extractor; maybe due to contractual obligation, or maybe the SEALS know something they're not saying. Also, I noted many of the recently manufactured P220 based .45 ACP pistols used the short extractor til the very end of production.

I mean, “yes”—this is 100% a case of “Well, I heard a guy on the internet say X.” But… that logic makes sense, I suppose. Especially since Sig is still making short extractors out of MIM on their lower-volume guns. It’s not necessarily that the short extractor design precludes MIM construction… it’s just more expensive to cut a slide for a short extractor, regardless of its composition. At least that’s the takeaway, based on what’s here.

Either way, nice guy. Apparently he carried a P239 in .357 Sig on duty… and still does.

[jwperry]

15ish year Sig user, who still carries a P229. As of the last couple years, Romeo2 optic and TLR7 equipped.

My biggest "issue" is holsters. There were a few different sizes of slides, even among the same generation. I'm referring to different radii for the top curve and thicknesses on the sides. Some holsters will fit great, others not so great. My favorite holster, one that works with my light and optic combo is wearing out. I used it for years and it's having a hard time keeping retention. Finding a replacement has been problematic. A P226 is similar enough dimensionally that I can use it in many P320 Legion holsters I've tried. P229 is too fat for the same compatibility.

Viable for us long time users? Yes.
Would I invest into the P226/P229 ecosystem in 2024 if I wanted an optic equipped DA/SA? No, I'd get LTT Berettas.