Steel vs. aluminum frame (Sig in particular, but mainly in general)

[OlongJohnson]

I'm contemplating a steel-frame Sig. Found "hearsay" quote from ToddG that he thought they would allow him to shoot faster, but found that not to be true. Can't find an original source from him on that. If anyone has it, I'd love to see it.

I'd be interested in a discussion of the pros and cons of weight in general for gaming-type shooting, as well as finer points like distribution toward muzzle vs. toward grip. This is probably the most detailed discussion I've found, and may pretty much cover the basics:
http://www.brazoscustom.com/magart/light_vs_heavy.htm

I guess, for experienced IDPA/USPSC guys, if you could run a steel-frame version of your game gun, would you prefer the weight for softer recoil, or would you prefer the quicker transitions with the lighter pistol? Or are the comments in that Brazos link accurate that the lighter pistol recovers from recoil more quickly at the expense of a sharper impulse, which is better if the shooter can handle it?

I've handled but not fired aluminum frame Sig P220s with 4.4" and 5" slides, and the difference is dramatic. The long slides are a bit more stable on target for slow fire, but the standard slide definitely is a little quicker and nimbler feeling on the draw and transitions.

I'm a pretty big guy, 6'4" and about 235 lb, so I don't get pushed around much. I don't generally experience recoil as uncomfortable, but I do need to work on controlling it better for quicker follow-ups.

[SkiDevil]

I've owned several P220s in .45 ACP and can state there is a noticeable difference in shooting the steel vs aluminum frame when it comes to recoil.

However, given experience, technique, and familiarity it shouldn't stop you from being able to shoot accurately at speed.

Mr. Langston is here on the board, I believe, so perhaps he will offer his thoughts.

I'll just conclude with the 220 is one of the most reliable pistols that I've owned provided quality ammunition is used. Extremely accurate as well. Only negative that I recall were the price of the factory stainless magazines.

[Jim Watson]

Being in the Golden Years with a bit of arthritis, I find the recoil of an aluminum framed .45 with hardball or duty ammo to be unpleasant and accuracy degrades pretty fast. My P220 and Commander get Asym Practical Match or equivalent handloads, a 230 at 750 which is not bad for moderate practice.

For extended shooting as in matches or all morning practice, it is Minor all the way, either 9mm or .45 Midrange.
For THAT, the lighter gun is the winner. A regular aluminum framed P226 is fine (Bruce Gray said it was "like dryfiring with noise.") or a Springfield Loaded Lightweight converted to 9mm (Mix Master A) which is my pet IDPA ESP.

I prefer sight radius to a "nimble feeling." Gov't Model over Commander, X Five over P-gun when shooting in competition. Shorter guns are for convenient carry, not shooting qualities.

[MK11]

The P220ST is one of my favorite pistols and a joy to shoot compared to the snappiness of the lightweight P220. Of course, mine had the problematic internal extractor and it took 1911-esque TLC to get it running right.

One other thing to consider--John Hearne has written about using a steel-framed P220 as a duty gun and found that it actually wears out some key parts quicker than the lightweight model (which although reliable, is not exactly a high round gun compared to the P226). You may want to search for his posts.

[okie john]

In Practical Shooting Beyond Fundamentals (http://www.amazon.com/Practical-Shooting-Fundamentals-Brian-Enos/dp/0962692506), Brian Enos talks about gun weight. He says, "With whatever power factor load I'm using, I like to have the gun set up in weight to where it feels like a real compromise between short muzzle flip and fast return."

I've found that I get faster splits with an X300 on my G17, but that draws and transitions are measurably faster without the light.


Okie John

[Hauptmann]

Are you making this just a gaming gun?.......if not, I am not a fan of steel framed guns. The weight of them makes for less practical carry purposes, and inhibits your carry comfort resulting in less likely to carry situations. Comfort is king if you want to ensure that you have a gun when unpredictable shit happens.

That being said, yes a steel framed P220 will have less felt recoil than a aluminum frame P220. The downside of course is that the steel framed gun goes not "give" with the recoil, meaning that small parts like the take down lever and locking block do not recoil rearward as much and take more recoil impact. Expect to break many more small parts on a steel framed P220 vs an aluminum framed P220. An aluminum framed Sig also flexes more during recoil which increases parts longevity. In fact, Sig has discontinued many of its steel framed pistol line since they have not been able to address this issue. Sig stopped selling the ultra durable P220 combat take down lever which was about twice as strong as the regular one........a shame.

I'm sure John can give his 2-cents on the steel framed P220.

[Sal Picante]

Coming from a steel framed CZ back to the AL-framed Beretta, I seem to do well with both. There is a slightly different feel to a steel gun and more mass does help to tame some recoil... But... how much does a 9mm recoil?

My only gripe with AL guns is that magwells get beat to shit pretty fast...

[GJM]

Taadski is traveling, but hopefully will chime in. He shoots a 226 for work and USPSA, and has multiples of aluminum and steel lowers, with and without a beavertail.

[OlongJohnson]

Found some on-topic links. I assume it's OK to post links to other forums where ToddG was participating, and the discussion is directly relevant to this one.

ToddG and John Hearne getting into nitty gritty...
http://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?18863-Would-I-be-dissappointed-with-a-SIG

https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?11632-SIG-P220-Series-amp-SAO-model-Durability-Service-Life&p=207472&viewfull=1#post207472

http://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?65111-Sig-P220-in-45&p=794556#post794556

[OlongJohnson]

This may be the ultimate thread on the topic. Individual posts are linked:
https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?9801-Glock-or-Sig&p=166777&viewfull=1#post166777

https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?9801-Glock-or-Sig&p=166786&viewfull=1#post166786

https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?9801-Glock-or-Sig&p=166874&viewfull=1#post166874

And here may be the ultimate answer:
https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?9801-Glock-or-Sig&p=168037&viewfull=1#post168037

https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?9801-Glock-or-Sig&p=168111&viewfull=1#post168111
"IIRC, the extra mass of the frame allows the unlock part of the firing cycle to occur earlier. The unlock is now taking place at a point in time that the chamber pressure has not yet dropped as much as it would have if it opened slightly later. The extra pressure imparts extra velocity on the slide. The extra velocity generates extra momentum which increases the wear on all of the "downstream" parts. This probably explains why I was able to break a hammer strut which would normally be a pretty benign part."

I'd kinda been wondering about whether the effects were due more to the mass than to the "flexing". The greater mass of the steel frame creates lower acceleration for the same force applied, so the frame is moving rearward at a lower velocity when the slide catches up to its stopping point, the locking insert. Correspondingly, the forces required to cause the slide and locking insert to almost instantaneously reach the same velocity are greater, both due to the greater velocity difference and the greater mass of the steel frame. So it's the very "soft recoil" characteristic of the steel frame that causes parts to have shorter lives. It occurs to me that it may be possible to partly ameliorate this change in balance of forces by using a higher-rate recoil spring, which would transfer more force from the slide to the frame for a given slide travel relative to the frame.

https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?9801-Glock-or-Sig&p=168215&viewfull=1#post168215
Here, John says the weight difference is 8.6 ounces. Kinda curious how to reconcile that with the data from Sig on long slide current guns posted above.

[OlongJohnson]

So... I think I've at least figured out this much:

1. ToddG believed there was no speed advantage to a steel frame.

2. ToddG thought the SAO Sigs' control layout was less than optimal, due to the difficulty of reaching the slide release lever; the safety interferes with your thumb reaching it. You can probably adapt in a slow-fire scenario, but fast mag changes may be hindered.

3. The first change you make to a steel (or any) P220 would be a Combat takedown lever, but they may or may not be available. Might be worth a call to Sig CS to see what part the 10mm pistols use, and whether it can be fitted to other P220s.

4. It may be worth testing heavier recoil springs if you have a steel frame.

5. With a steel frame, you're liable to experience shorter service life of easily replaceable parts.

6. The service life of stainless rails, especially with Nitron, should be longer than that of anodized aluminum frame rails. That will be balanced against the unknown future cost and availability of smaller parts that must be replaced more frequently.

7. A long-slide aluminum-frame P220 like the Super Match may have an additional service life/parts replacement schedule advantage over a standard one, as the slide should move more slowly relative to the frame's acceleration.

8. If you want to have a reasonable expectation that your grandchildren will be able to pass it on as long as they clean and lube it, a 1911 might be a better choice for a steel, single-stack .45.

9. If you want a "forever" P series, you're better off shooting non-plus-P 9mm in a P226 than buying a P220 and .45 ammo. And the ammo cost to wear out a P220, compared to the same number of rounds of 9mm, would probably buy several additional P226s.

[OlongJohnson]

https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?9801-Glock-or-Sig&p=168215&viewfull=1#post168215
Here, John says the weight difference is 8.6 ounces. Kinda curious how to reconcile that with the data from Sig on long slide current guns posted above.

Oops. Got my forums mixed up. I'm annoying/entertaining readers on one of the dedicated Sig forums with similar thoughts, but found the answers here, from ToddG and John Hearne, not over there.

----------
From www.sigsauer.com
P220 Match SAO
220R5-45-TAS-SAO
33.6 oz

P220-10 SAO Stainless Elite Kryptek
220R5-10-HP-SAO
39.4 oz

Both are 5 inch slides. The .45 has a bigger hole down the barrel and grips are different materials, but 5.8 oz difference on Sig's site. So that should be approximately the difference in frame weight, with one being Al and one being steel. Hard to imagine the difference between a 10mm bore and a .45 bore in a 5" barrel is 2.8 oz. Although I guess I could do the math...

[taadski]

I've been carrying aluminum P series pistols on the job for almost 20 years. My experimentation in the shooting sports the last several of those drove me to trying the steel framed versions. You know, fixing software with hardware and all. ;)

I can't really quantify the differences in handling. The heavier guns FEEL slower, but I've NOT seen an increase in my draw times or transitions. Perhaps I'm just not at the skill level where that matters, but at my level, it has not shown up on the timer.

The recoil impulse, on the other hand, IS notably lighter with them. But the sight tracking characteristics still seem more dependent on the recoil spring weight, the ammunition PF and the slide weight/length than purely the weight of the frame IMO.

FWIW, I think the flattest shooting pistol I own is a 9mm X-5 Allround frame with a standard 226 slide on top. It shoots FLAT! Alas, I don't believe that combination is production legal (at least until they start importing the stainless 226 LDC). In the mean time my primary game gun will remain a resprung stainless 226. (And incidentally, my carry/duty guns will remain railed aluminum versions).

And not to start a debate, but I love the heck out of the beavertailed frames (yes even the old style ones). :p For hands *my size* (XL but thin), they don't at all negatively affect the height with which I'm able to grasp the grip. The contour up to where the beaver tail starts is identical to a standard frame.

Just my 2 cents.


t

[gqllc007]

Interesting as my flattest shooting pistol is my Sig Level One X-five 9mm

[OlongJohnson]

You know, fixing software with hardware and all. ;)

Thanks for the first-person feedback.

Taking up the tangent of your quote above, I understand the philosophy, but can't abide it being the answer to every question in practice.

My background in mechanical things, motorsports, etc. has given me too many experiences where the way forward WAS a hardware solution. I've seen too many instances where a community of users was unwilling to admit that there was a major shortcoming with the design of their favorite hardware, and simply accepted that they should learn to drive around it. Riding dirt bikes, my first time out was full of problems. Applied a hardware solution and those problems were fixed completely. It wasn't skill, it was proper application of physics. No amount of software can overcome the fundamental effects of physics on the mechanical bits.

You tune an engine's ECU to properly control fuel and air to make the most of your new porting, cams and compression. No amount of moving bits around without the mechanical changes can achieve the results.

Same thing happened early on when I started shooting. I was struggling to shrink my slow-fire groups. Then I loaded some magazines with high-quality defensive ammo I'd picked up on a Black Friday sale, and my groups were less than half the size of what they'd been with the previous magazine. I know I didn't improve that much, that quickly. Switching back and forth showed it to be a repeatable change.

No amount of training can build a level of skill sufficient to cause a mechanism to perform at a level at which it's simply not capable of performing. Trying to train enough to overcome inherent deficiencies of equipment is just as wasteful of time and money as trying to overcome the need to train by buying superior equipment.

[taadski]

I don't disagree with the majority of your post, bud. But I've witnessed enough entitled sorts over the years, in any number of competative arenas, who HAVE to have the latest and greatest equipment but whose skill still doesn't allow them to play at the higher levels of the game.

I realize it's a logical fallacy to then assume, based on that, that better performers don't need the best equipment to perform at the elite levels. But I think there are vastly more folks out there unwilling to put in the work/time/effort to improve their skills and instead attempt to purchase it, assuming what they have won't suffice.

The low hanging fruit in the shooting game is VERY rarely the equipment on hand in my experience. Within reason of course.

[GJM]

Don't let Taadski BS you on the hardware. In just the last year I remember him messing with after market guide rods, lighter recoil springs, a stainless USPSA model with a GGI trigger, an X5, and every possible combination of all those things.

[taadski]

Don't let Taadski BS you on the hardware. In just the last year I remember him messing with after market guide rods, lighter recoil springs, a stainless USPSA model with a GGI trigger, an X5, and every possible combination of all those things.


Ha! I do my intra-platform fiddling with some regularity. Coming from the firearm industry's unofficial crash test guy, I'll take that as an unabashed compliment! It's kinda like having your wife dress up in a variety of lingerie. In contrast to hooking up with a different trollip every weekend. :D

What kind of gun guy are YOU George. :p :p

[OlongJohnson]

trollop

;)

[K.O.A.M.]

Before I had to start purchasing my own ammunition, the pistol I ran for classes was a P226R in .357 Sig with a steel frame. My issue pistol is a P226R in .357 Sig with a standard frame. I have probably 10,000 rounds through each. My observations are that I am slightly faster in my first couple of follow up shots with the steel frame. I had always attributed it to the steel frame having more weight, translating into less felt recoil. I have never run anything other than a few drills on timers to try to prove my hypothesis. I have a P226R in 9mm and a P220R in .45 with steel frames as well, and they shoot fine. I got both at fire sale prices-I would not spend the extra money now.

[taadski]

trollop

;)




Drat! Nice catch! But it appears I'm not alone in the misspelling. (We still need an evil smiley) :D LOL. For your general amusement...


http://i388.photobucket.com/albums/oo324/taadski/Mobile%20Uploads/IMG_1751_zpsuvkheb8h.png (http://s388.photobucket.com/user/taadski/media/Mobile%20Uploads/IMG_1751_zpsuvkheb8h.png.html)

[Hauptmann]

Drat! Nice catch! But it appears I'm not alone in the misspelling. (We still need an evil smiley) :D LOL. For your general amusement...


http://i388.photobucket.com/albums/oo324/taadski/Mobile%20Uploads/IMG_1751_zpsuvkheb8h.png (http://s388.photobucket.com/user/taadski/media/Mobile%20Uploads/IMG_1751_zpsuvkheb8h.png.html)

How do we know that you are not a promiscuous woman?

[GJM]

How do we know that you are not a promiscuous woman?

He has many personality traits of a promiscuous woman, except that he isn't a woman or having much sex.

[taadski]

He has many personality traits of a promiscuous woman, except that he isn't a woman or having much sex.

You're just feeling cocky b/c of your new found freedom from having the MIL living under the same roof all summer. Visiting family this week, I indeed HAVE gained some empathy for your situation. ;)

[Mr_White]

You're just feeling cocky b/c of your new found freedom from having the MIL living under the same roof all summer. Visiting family this week, I indeed HAVE gained some empathy for your situation. ;)

That sounds like a lot of doing just to feel cocky. You could just put your hand in your pocket and there you go.

[Digiroc]

... You could just put your hand in your pocket and there you go.

pocket pistols? Here's mine:

7629

More inside the waistband than pocket carry, but the AirLite carrys well in my jeans pocket, which is where I put it when in a restaurant or other situation where not taking off my coat would be gosh.

The steel 360 Pro Series .357 is far less painful to shoot, but the AirLite is vicious, even with .38's I only fired it once with .357's, five rounds, and that was quite enough. My wrist was sore for three days. Since the photo I added a laser rubber grip with special air channel cushioning over the backstrap which helps felt recoil quite a bit. I still only carry .38's in it (Golden Saber).

Digiroc

EDIT: And the Ladies like them, beautiful and mean. Gemini Carry

[OlongJohnson]

To screw it all up again...

I just went to the LGS and handled an all stainless P220 and an aluminum frame P220 back to back. Aluminum was definitely lighter. It didn't have the heft of the steel, but it lacked the heft of the steel. If that makes any sense at all.

The steel felt really nice, like a 1911 but with a grip that fits me naturally. The weight did seem to slightly calm down the front sight wobble. A little.

I'd previously handled a 10mm with the 5" slide at a gun show, and the 4.4" slide all stainless didn't give me the same sense of front-heaviness that one did. Balanced much like a regular 220, just more gravity.

The Hogues have got to go, though. Can't move the levers with my thumb when it's stuck to the surrounding grip.

[Sero Sed Serio]

I'm waffling back and forth on the SIG aluminum vs. steel thing--I currently have a newer all-stainless P226, but am considering selling it to fund an aluminum-framed MK25. The stainless gun had problems at first, but that was due to a bad extractor spring (it has the long extractor) and is now trustworthy. I like that the MK25 has the short extractor, and the true 1913 Picatinny rail (the gun's role is a desk drawer office defense weapon with a Surefire X300 mounted). I think I can sell the stainless and get a MK25 at no out-of-pocket loss. Is the aluminum going to significantly (pun?) shorten the lifespan of the frame? Does the steel frame shorten the reliability window like with .40 caliber Glocks or sub-5" 1911s? Is one gun significantly better than the other?

[Wobblie]

I'm waffling back and forth on the SIG aluminum vs. steel thing--I currently have a newer all-stainless P226, but am considering selling it to fund an aluminum-framed MK25. The stainless gun had problems at first, but that was due to a bad extractor spring (it has the long extractor) and is now trustworthy. I like that the MK25 has the short extractor, and the true 1913 Picatinny rail (the gun's role is a desk drawer office defense weapon with a Surefire X300 mounted). I think I can sell the stainless and get a MK25 at no out-of-pocket loss. Is the aluminum going to significantly (pun?) shorten the lifespan of the frame? Does the steel frame shorten the reliability window like with .40 caliber Glocks or sub-5" 1911s? Is one gun significantly better than the other?
I had an alloy frame 226. That thing was massive. One would run out of ammo money long before the gun wore out.

[psalms144.1]

I'm waffling back and forth on the SIG aluminum vs. steel thing--I currently have a newer all-stainless P226, but am considering selling it to fund an aluminum-framed MK25. The stainless gun had problems at first, but that was due to a bad extractor spring (it has the long extractor) and is now trustworthy. I like that the MK25 has the short extractor, and the true 1913 Picatinny rail (the gun's role is a desk drawer office defense weapon with a Surefire X300 mounted). I think I can sell the stainless and get a MK25 at no out-of-pocket loss. Is the aluminum going to significantly (pun?) shorten the lifespan of the frame? Does the steel frame shorten the reliability window like with .40 caliber Glocks or sub-5" 1911s? Is one gun significantly better than the other?When they finally forced me to turn mine in, my issued P228 had nearly 20 years of service and probably 60,000 rounds through it, and it still shot as well as any Sig I've ever seen. Add to that, as far as I could determine, NONE of the springs were ever replaced in it's lifespan with my agency. I did put a new recoil spring in it every year (funded out of my own money, of course), but other than that, no maintenance besides clean and lube.

I wouldn't have any concerns with the "longevity" of the Mk25 - though I'm puzzled what advantage a "true Picatinny rail" provides...

[GJM]

I am hoping Taadski weighs in again, post his Bruce Gray course.

[Sero Sed Serio]

I'm puzzled what advantage a "true Picatinny rail" provides...

Right now I have to unscrew the 6 little he screws on the rail mounts of the X300 in order to get the light off the gun. The rounded proprietary SIG rail makes it so that the locking tab won't clear the middle part of the curve without extra room. I believe that this wouldn't be an issue with the flat-bottom (anyone else have Queen pop into your head?) 1913 rail.

[taadski]

Right now I have to unscrew the 6 little he screws on the rail mounts of the X300 in order to get the light off the gun. The rounded proprietary SIG rail makes it so that the locking tab won't clear the middle part of the curve without extra room. I believe that this wouldn't be an issue with the flat-bottom (anyone else have Queen pop into your head?) 1913 rail.


Putting the universal adapter on the X300 instead of the picatinny one will remedy this issue for you. It should have come with both.



I am hoping Taadski weighs in again, post his Bruce Gray course.


My perspective on the steel vs. aluminum frames hasn't changed, FWIW. I still prefer the heft and recoil softness of the steel framed guns for pure shooting. I shot a stainless elite 226 during the OpSpec course. Regarding durability, I'd say worry not with either choice. The aluminum frames will run and run and run and run.

Speaking with Bruce on some of the differences, a couple points I did learn/confirm were (1) the steel frame's comparative lack of flex DOES cause it to unlock earlier and that he believes this can, in some guns, cause them to be more predisposed to extraction issues if everything else isn't perfect; something of a tolerance stacking issue. He mentioned that he has seen slides experiencing some level of extraction issue on a steel frame will sometimes perform without problem on an aluminum one.

And (2), Bruce himself favored the lighter more handy aluminum 226s over the stainless framed ones when he was competing in USPSA with them back in the day.



t

[SLG]

In regards to the non pic spec rail that Sig insists on putting on most of their guns...the curve of the dust cover means that less of the lug is actually in contact with the light mount. When we started issuing railed 229's, we found that various types of impact to the light would knock it off or otherwise disable it a fair bit of the time. This was much less of an issue when tested on pic spec rails. Some lights were better than others, but I don't remember all that we tested. We ended up with the X200's of the day. Striking with pistols was a big part of our training, so it was certainly an issue worth noting.

[Leroy]

Reviving this thread. I am looking for a fun to shoot .45 launcher. Not to concerned with high round count durability especially small parts breakages. Have been shooting a standard aluminum framed P220 and steel framed 1911. I am a big fan of metal framed DA/SA guns, I like the P220 frame except the beavertail is to shallow, when I draw the gun I often end up with some web of my hand above the beavertail. I end up with my best P220 results with ample grip tape applied to the Hogue G10 grips, the grips just don't have enough traction when shooting full power .45 and sometimes can slip around. The 1911 on the other hand does not squirm around but frankly I just don't like the safety on the 1911, I can't work it in a 2 handed grip because my weak hand covers it up (I have XL hands). I am using thick 1911 grips.

I am thinking of a P220 steel frame with the extended beavertail (elite frame). Did the P220 steel framed guns get the extractor worked out? What type of extractor setup is the standard now? Need to know what I should look for.

[John Hearne]

My casual observations are that 45's really benefit from a heavier pistol ala the steel frame. My P220ST with 5" slide reliably turns 45's into 22's. I'm transitioning to the P320 and have shot the 45 version. It was a very shootable and accurate piece but it just moved around a lot more than my P220ST.

Right now, I am carrying a P320 X-Five as my on-duty gun as the P220ST broke another locking insert and I was unwilling to buy another when I had two P320's sitting in the safe. The X-Five, with weight is a dream to shoot and I've been very happy with it.

If I could get a P320 X-Five in 45 (with the grip weight) I would have to think really, really hard about it.

[Leroy]

My casual observations are that 45's really benefit from a heavier pistol ala the steel frame. My P220ST with 5" slide reliably turns 45's into 22's. I'm transitioning to the P320 and have shot the 45 version. It was a very shootable and accurate piece but it just moved around a lot more than my P220ST.

Right now, I am carrying a P320 X-Five as my on-duty gun as the P220ST broke another locking insert and I was unwilling to buy another when I had two P320's sitting in the safe. The X-Five, with weight is a dream to shoot and I've been very happy with it.

If I could get a P320 X-Five in 45 (with the grip weight) I would have to think really, really hard about it.

What about the 4.4" slide on steel frame, any experience? Are they still making a 5" .45s?

[OlongJohnson]

The all-steel P220s feel overly heavy to me, but I really like the balance and steadiness of the 5-inch barrel, aluminum-frame P220s.

[John Hearne]

What about the 4.4" slide on steel frame, any experience? Are they still making a 5" .45s?

The 4.4" slides are the same whether you're using a steel or aluminum frame. The steel frame gets you about 12 ounces of non-reciprocating mass which helps regardless whether the slide is 4.4" or 5". FWIW, the 5" slide assembly is only one ounce heavier than the 4.4" slide. Sig did a lot of slide lightening with the 5" guns to keep the weights close and not require respringing. Sig is still making 5" guns but they all have adjustable sights. Sig made a very small batch (50 or 75 units) with 5" slides and fixed night sights which is what I used.

[MGW]

Reviving this thread. I am looking for a fun to shoot .45 launcher. Not to concerned with high round count durability especially small parts breakages. Have been shooting a standard aluminum framed P220 and steel framed 1911. I am a big fan of metal framed DA/SA guns, I like the P220 frame except the beavertail is to shallow, when I draw the gun I often end up with some web of my hand above the beavertail. I end up with my best P220 results with ample grip tape applied to the Hogue G10 grips, the grips just don't have enough traction when shooting full power .45 and sometimes can slip around. The 1911 on the other hand does not squirm around but frankly I just don't like the safety on the 1911, I can't work it in a 2 handed grip because my weak hand covers it up (I have XL hands). I am using thick 1911 grips.

I am thinking of a P220 steel frame with the extended beavertail (elite frame). Did the P220 steel framed guns get the extractor worked out? What type of extractor setup is the standard now? Need to know what I should look for.


I put several 1,000 rounds through a 226 with Barnhart grips. You want grippy on a classic series Sig then they’re the grips for you.

http://jerrybarnhart.com/shop/sig-220-grip

[OlongJohnson]

I end up with my best P220 results with ample grip tape applied to the Hogue G10 grips, the grips just don't have enough traction when shooting full power .45 and sometimes can slip around. The 1911 on the other hand does not squirm around but frankly I just don't like the safety on the 1911, I can't work it in a 2 handed grip because my weak hand covers it up (I have XL hands).

Which Hogue G10 texture are you using? There are several. I find the checkered Hogues are quite sharply pointed and offer plenty of grip. Is your issue the upper areas without the texture, or the front strap where the grips don't cover, or something else?

I find that the long front-to-back dimension and relatively narrow side-to-side dimension of most 1911 grips combines with my hand geometry to give me greatly reduced contact pressure on the grip panels. Some of them, I can get what seems like it should be a nice shooting grip and still see a sliver of daylight between the right panel and my palm, which is obviously not actually a nice shooting grip. In contrast, a P220 with Hogue G10 checkered just feels like, "That's the shape of my hand." Uniform contact all around.

[Leroy]

My biggest issue is how shallow the beavertail is. The web of my hand can hang up above it. Elite frame fixes that and a little extra weight in the frame would be a bonus.

[Sensei]

My biggest issue is how shallow the beavertail is. The web of my hand can hang up above it. Elite frame fixes that and a little extra weight in the frame would be a bonus.

Have you considered the SAO P220 Legion? The beavertail, checkered front strap, and G10 grips check a lot of boxes.