P226 vs P229

[NorthernHeat]

I picked up a P229 with reduced reach trigger, SRT and E2 grips.

I love the feel and handling of the SIG and was wondering from people that have both, do you prefer the P226 or P229 with the features I listed?

If you prefer one or the other could you explain why...

Thanks

[rathos]

I prefer the P229. For some reason I shoot them more accurately. Other than that there really isn't much of a difference. The 226 isn't any harder to hide than the 229 for concealed carry. I don't like the reduced reach trigger. While I have smaller hands, the standard trigger keeps my hands and fingers in the correct place and keeps them from getting pinched. E2 grips are a little more comfortable but I don't prefer them over the standard grips.

[psalms144.1]

I vastly prefer the P226 over the P229. For me, the difference in "concealability" between the two is minimal. The P226 obviously offers more capacity, longer sight radius, and less recoil.

The biggest advantage, IN MY HANDS, of the P226 is in balance. The P226 seems to point extremely well and balance very well in my hands. The P229 feels "dead." Oddly enough, when you go back one generation, to the P228 and the folded-slide P226, I feel exactly the opposite. So, if I could have any classic Sig 9mm for free, I'd ask, in order, for a P228, a new slide P226, then a P225, and a P229 last.

Regards,

Kevin

[David S.]

I prefer the P226 only because I get pinky pinch with the P228/9 and SigPro models. As said above, the difference in size and concealment is minimal.

[Lon]

I've used and carried both for work. I've used and carried both for off duty and competition. All 9mm models. I prefer the 229. Conceals better and for me, tracks better when shooting fast.

My first duty gun at my agency was a 228. I loved that gun. Shoulda bought it when they traded em in.

[gtmtnbiker98]

I carried a P226 from 1997 to 2004. From 2004 to 2013 I carried the P229. So I have a little experience with both. I much prefer the P226 in the form of the MK25 when it comes to SIG pistols. It is hard to beat 20-round MecGar magazines and flush fit 18-round mags.

[John Hearne]

In 40 S&W the P226 doesn't have a capacity advantage over the P229. Despite that, I prefer the P226.

[hrcjon]

I'm one of those that prefers the 226. To me the 229 is an oddball, not much smaller than a 226 yet huge compared to a 239 (next size down).

[ssb]

I considered buying a P229 before settling on the P226. The length of the gun is a wash for me, and honestly I feel like the P226 balances a bit better due to the longer slide. Height on the P229 doesn't quite hit that G19 sweet spot, so to me there wasn't much of an advantage concealment-wise. At the time I shot them I didn't notice much of a difference in how they shot -- however, there are people far more skilled than I am who could give a better answer on that. I went with the P226, primarily for balance reasons. I don't regret it one bit.

[Comedian]

The 229 in 9mm was my first ever pistol. I prefer the 226 due to slightly less recoil.

[jwperry]

I don't know what it was about the 9mm P229 I had, but it was unwieldy when compared to a P226. I have smallish hands (size 9/medium Mechanix gloves) and the P229 would also beat me up when I'd shoot it. After about 200 rounds I'd really start feeling it in my wrists. I don't have those problems with the P226.

[Paul]

I prefer the P226 it feels easier to shoot and there are a couple little quirky things that can make the p229 harder to work on. While it's not an issue with the E2 grips, the p229 in the .40/.357 format and new 9mm, there is not much thread engagement with the grip screws. It's easy to strip the threads and screws just don't like to stay secure. I thought the 1/3 height slide serrations on the old p229 were pretty cheesy. The old style slide and a stuck solid FPPP could be a real nightmare to get out because the side of the slide is not flat.

In plain clothes and concealment, the plastic base plates on the p229 magazines are easier on clothing and tend not to chew holes in the back of shirts and bolsters on car seats. The plastic base plates are also a little more durable, tend not to get ding up or peened in place when dropped at the range.

[will_1400]

Having fired (but not owned) both the 226 and the 229, I personally prefer the 229. For me it feels like I'm faster in getting back on target with the 229, but since I haven't been on a timer with either, that could be subjective feel rather than objective results.

[Jeep]

I have fairly small hands and like the E2 grips. For me (in 9mm) it's 226>228>229, and it's all a matter of feel. Overall I like the 226 and 228 and dislike the 229. That being said, if I were getting a .40 caliber pistol I'd look for a 229 because they handle the .40 very well in my experience.

[5pins]

I agree. I picked up a P229 a few weeks ago and it’s the best shooting .40 I have ever shot. I can’t compare it to the P226 because I can’t pick mine up until later this afternoon.

[LSP552]

I much prefer the 226 to the 229. I also prefer the standard grips over the E2s. I tried the E2s on a 226 and 228 and removed them from both. They tend to slide around a bit after awhile, or at least both sets of mine did. I have large hands so the E2s are not necessary for fit. I really dislike the larger hump on the left grip on the 229, and the balance. When it comes to SIGs, I strongly prefer the 226R. For the rare occasion I want a smaller SIG, I like the 239 over the 228/229. All these comments are about 9mm guns.

[ToddG]

FWIW, put me in the P229 camp. Having tested it pretty extensively during the five years I was at SIG, for me the P229 cycles faster, shoots flatter, and transitions from target to target faster.

[JV_]

I agree with ToddG. The 229 cycle speed was much faster for me too.. It was most noticeable with a hot ammo.

[GJM]

A forum member and USPSA 226 shooter has been experimenting with lighter springs to great effect with the 226. Makes me think the 226 is quite over sprung, and that might explain the perceived difference between 226 and 229.

[ToddG]

The P229 9mm recoil spring is heavier than its P226 counterpart, fwiw.

[ReverendMeat]

FWIW, put me in the P229 camp. Having tested it pretty extensively during the five years I was at SIG, for me the P229 cycles faster, shoots flatter, and transitions from target to target faster.

How about 228 vs 229? I would assume the former cycles faster but I wasn't aware that that's a good thing. In fact, I've been convinced that slower = better and now I'm confused.

[taadski]

How about 228 vs 229? I would assume the former cycles faster but I wasn't aware that that's a good thing. In fact, I've been convinced that slower = better and now I'm confused.

It's not that black and white, IMO. There's a good bit of preference involved. Some prefer to tune the recoil impulse of a given gun so that it's as soft as possible and will give up some slide return speed to do it. Others prefer to have the slide return as quickly as possible and are willing to endure more subjective sight lift or more perceived recoil to get it.


t

[Artemas]

Having less than 100 rounds with either the 226 and *228, I find the 228 balances and points better for me, but the smaller hammer guard(?) make it difficult to acquire a pinch free grip.

[Rich]

I got my permit in 1983 and to date the short extractor Sig P229 40cal is so far my favorite for conceal carry pistol.

P229 Height = 5.4 Anything higher in height I have to go up a size larger in Tshirt.

Like with my HK P30S V3 9mm H= 5.43

Then again I`d rather wear a larger t shirt and go MK25 than take a gamble on a long extractor P229 9mm.

[YVK]

Some guns do certain things better than others. When I carried a 228 (JM AIWB), I found it unbelievable fast out of the holster. Don't know what about it, grip shape, balance, but it felt like it was spring loaded or something.