P229r

[Kram]

I forgot to pose my question. What kind training ammo were they using?

The ammo used is FACTORY Speer Lawman 124grain FMJ training ammo. Some of the P229s also had issues with the duty issued FACTORY Speer Gold Dot 124 grain. Yet there were never any issues with this same "training" ammo with the previous SIG P228s. The current Glock 19 is also having zero problems with the ammo.

If anyone is wondering about the guns they were the Enhanced Elite P229's with external extractor. Front strap checkering, night sights, SRT trigger, beaver tail, FCS, etc. The issued guns were no different then those sold on the commercial market. The trigger pull was not altered or changed either. They had the standard 10LB/4.5LB pull.

[Sensei]

I seldom join in one these technical threads, but I have to say "What the....?".

I realize that we don't have a definitive study here, but I suspect most people on P-F and some other forums are known to regularly participating members or can be quickly identified. While I realize there are some posts positing what has been heard or read, we also have posts by people working for organizations that have issued several dozen guns and experienced problems with them. Granted, it would be good to know if they all were purchased in one year or came from one run, that would be great to know, but in many cases impossible.

While I can't speak for other members who have posted their experiences, I assure you that I did not create my agency or its experiences out of fantasy. If someone comes here seeking information or advice, I think we should provide what knowledge we have rather than saying that we don't have scientific research and heading back to the Mila Kunis fan club page on Facebook.

Nobody said or implied that your reported experience was fantasy or fabricated. Not even a hint.

What I did say was: 1) The Legacy P229R might be a reasonable option for people who come to the table already shooting the P-series platform better than the alternatives 2) There are variations in quality when reporting data with anonymous case reports being the least helpful and large agency published reports being the best (and most rare) that we can expect in the gun industry; 3) Ascrbing a specific failure rate across an entire product line using anonymous reports is poor form.

Now, stop and ask yourself if what I said above is all that controversial.

[psalms144.1]

I've posted before that my agency had numerous "growing pains" with P229r and P239s in .40 S&W and DAK trigger when we first adopted circa 2008. Issues ran the gamut from FTFeed, FTFire, FTExtract, FTEject, with some random dead trigger/trigger reset issues and other stuff thrown in for good measure. I personally purchased a P229R DAK 40 in advance of the transition in order to get competent with it as an FI before the roll out, and my personally purchased (retail, through a LGS) P229R DAK had to be replaced three times by Sig before they got me a pistol that would function reliably. The last pistol they sent me was "hand selected" by one of their muckity mucks at QC, almost certainly due to my duty position at the time. It did, in fact, work, and I off loaded it once I verified its functionality - because I was just plain done with Sig by that point.

What's the point? If you have a Sig that was produced before 2005, KEEP IT. If you have a Sig produced post 2005, and it works well for you, KEEP IT. If you're looking to buy a new or used Sig produced post 2005, you might get a great pistol that's worth the high price of the gun, or you might get an expensive, capacity challenged POS that needs a lot of work to ever be reliable. Sig is NOT what it used to be.

[MGW]

The ammo used is FACTORY Speer Lawman 124grain FMJ training ammo. Some of the P229s also had issues with the duty issued FACTORY Speer Gold Dot 124 grain. Yet there were never any issues with this same "training" ammo with the previous SIG P228s. The current Glock 19 is also having zero problems with the ammo.

If anyone is wondering about the guns they were the Enhanced Elite P229's with external extractor. Front strap checkering, night sights, SRT trigger, beaver tail, FCS, etc. The issued guns were no different then those sold on the commercial market. The trigger pull was not altered or changed either. They had the standard 10LB/4.5LB pull.

I misread the details of this story earlier or just assumed that these pistols were in .40. Shouldn’t matter with the 229 but it’s even more disheartening that 9mm 229’s were self destructing.

So now that I understand the 229 issue, are 9mm 226’s cracking frames too or just .40’s?

[QuickStrike]

Damn this thread makes me miss my berettas.


I regret....







EVERYTHING!!

[Sensei]

Damn this thread makes me miss my berettas.


I regret....







EVERYTHING!!

Well, PM me if you ever make it out of that pot-ridden, commi state and find yourself in the piedmont region of NC. I’ll let you have a conjugal visit with one of mine. We have 17 and 20-round magazines, so they will love you long time.