Is the Sig P6 viable anymore?

[98z28]

GJM,

From my limited experience, they are good pistols. I had one in 40S&W years ago and it was as accurate as any classic P-series Sig. I didn't have any problems out of it, but I didn't shoot much back then either. If I put 500 rounds through it in two years, I would be surprised.

They were an option at my old PD and we didn't have any problems out of the few that were issued. I bet fewer than 10 people out of 300 chose the P239 though, so that is still a small sample size.

They are roughly the size of a G19, but carry 8+1 in 9mm in a single stack magazine. They make a lot of sense for someone that is looking for a TDA gun, but needs something shorter and slimmer than a P229, for example. It would be a solid choice if you were issued a P226/P229/P228 and needed something smaller for off duty or plain clothes (concealed) work.

Despite the fact that other guns offer more rounds in a similar size, the P239 is one of those pistols that just seems to work well for a lot people. My wife has pretty small hands and there are only two of my many handguns that she has ever enjoyed shooting: the P220 and the P239. I have stupid big hands and the P239 still works very well for me. It fits a wide range of shooters and handles like a larger gun than it is.

I use it because I generally carry a P226, but my current job requires a great deal of discretion. The thin P239 disappears in a smart carry and still works just like the P226 that I spend a lot more time shooting. I also carried a G26 in a smart carry for a while when I used a G17 at work. Despite the fact that the P239 is larger than the G26, it is much less noticeable because of the slimmer grip.

[Suvorov]

GJM,

From my limited experience, they are good pistols. I had one in 40S&W years ago and it was as accurate as any classic P-series Sig. I didn't have any problems out of it, but I didn't shoot much back then either. If I put 500 rounds through it in two years, I would be surprised.

Not to take this down a P239 tangent, but how stiff is the recoil spring on the P239 (or the 225 for that matter). My Kahr fits my wife's hand perfectly but the stout recoil spring is far too stiff for her to cycle.

[JodyH]

My Kahr fits my wife's hand perfectly but the stout recoil spring is far too stiff for her to cycle.

Which Kahr?
My 9 year old boy can rack the slide on my Kahr K9, if your wife is stronger than a scrawny 3rd grader she should be able to rack the slide if she's using the correct technique.

[Suvorov]

Which Kahr?
My 9 year old boy can rack the slide on my Kahr K9, if your wife is stronger than a scrawny 3rd grader she should be able to rack the slide if she's using the correct technique.

It's a K9. I'm sure technique as well as desire has a lot to do with it.

[shootist26]

It's not; the magazine feed lip spread issue seems to have been limited to the P225/P6 magazines. I've never come across reports of any issues with the P239's magazines, in any of its chamberings.

Best, Jon

Are P225/P6 magazines compatible with a P239?

I am a new carrier of a 9mm P239. It is a good choice for those of us stuck behind enemy lines. Magazines, unfortunately, are expensive. Not necessarily hard to find, just expensive. I paid $30-40 each for my stash of 6.

I see P239 mags on ebay for $50-150, WTF...

[GJM]

Are P225/P6 magazines compatible with a P239?

no

[JonInWA]

I've owned all of the "Big 3" German service pistols.
P5, P6 and P7.
If I was going to pick one of them to carry it would be the Walther P5.

Of course all three are outclassed as a CCW by the lowly Glock 19, but in my experience the P5 was the best all around gun out of the three.
btw: I sold my last P225 within a few days of buying a Kahr K9, there was just no way to justify the P225 when placed side by side with the K9.

I've had 2-3 P5s, and a P5C, Jody. The P5 was a great pistol-IF you were willing to dedicate the necessary hammer time to get totally grooved in with the trigger pull, as it was slightly on the heavy side for the DA pull, and had a distinct "hitch" as the final portion of the triggerpull mechanically lifted the firing pin into position to be struck by the falling hammer.

The German plastic OEM grips were a bit fragile, and susceptible to cracking/marring/softening when exposed to common US cleaning solvents-Earl Sheehan of Earl's Repair specifically recommended Kleenbore's Formula 3 as one of the few US ones that were viable without causing harm to the grips.

Walther's rifling also extends a bit further into the chamber more so than pretty much any other contemporary combat pistol that I can recall, making chambering some cartridges dicey, if not impossible; Cor-Bon's 115gr hollowpoints come to mind.

I automatically simply replaced my P5 grips with a set of Hogue rubber Cobblestone grips-apparently Hogue got the Dutch Police contract for P5 grips-they may even still be a catalog/available item-otherwise there are the beautiful, ergonomic Nill grips, but they're very pricey.

I never really liked the P5C. It's balance never really felt "right," I thought it's aesthetics were ugly to the point of homely (yeah, not a criteria for an efficacious gun, but at Walther prices it was a bit off-putting), and, most critically, the hammer strut was embedded in a plastic fillet piece, which, as Walther's plastic of the day tended to do, over time crystallized and cracked, loosening the hammer strut from its mooring, rendering the gun TOTALLY unfireable. This was a TOTAL deal-breaker for me-I had Earl's repair it, and promptly sold it. I've anecdotally heard that the Brits for their contract P5Cs had the polymer fillet piece replaced with a metal one to preclude what happened to mine, but I've never been able to physically verify that.

This problem is unique to the P5C-the P5's hammer strut is anchored to the frame by a hanger protrusion as I recall.

Mechanically the P5 is an engineering marvel-beautifully manufactured and fitted. Unfortunately slight dimensional differences and a different heel latching system preclude magazine interchangeability with P.38/P1/P4 magazines, which can usually be found at a lower cost. I believe that some enterprising souls did experiment with cutting or punching a rectangular latch receptacle in the spines of such earlier model magazines, but the practice never became wide-spread, and as I recall such modded magazines protruded a bit from the magwell, and looked a bit odd.

A beautiful gun, and very viable within its limitations, but pretty much totally rendered obsolescent by the Glock G19, among others...

Best, Jon

[justintime]

when I first started carrying aiwb I used the p6 as I preferred having the hammer. It was thin, accurate, and reliable. I still love the p6 but ultimately I felt better carrying more rounds.

[Clyde from Carolina]

I've had 2-3 P5s, and a P5C, Jody. The P5 was a great pistol-IF you were willing to dedicate the necessary hammer time to get totally grooved in with the trigger pull, as it was slightly on the heavy side for the DA pull, and had a distinct "hitch" as the final portion of the triggerpull mechanically lifted the firing pin into position to be struck by the falling hammer.

The German plastic OEM grips were a bit fragile, and susceptible to cracking/marring/softening when exposed to common US cleaning solvents-Earl Sheehan of Earl's Repair specifically recommended Kleenbore's Formula 3 as one of the few US ones that were viable without causing harm to the grips.

Walther's rifling also extends a bit further into the chamber more so than pretty much any other contemporary combat pistol that I can recall, making chambering some cartridges dicey, if not impossible; Cor-Bon's 115gr hollowpoints come to mind.

I automatically simply replaced my P5 grips with a set of Hogue rubber Cobblestone grips-apparently Hogue got the Dutch Police contract for P5 grips-they may even still be a catalog/available item-otherwise there are the beautiful, ergonomic Nill grips, but they're very pricey.

I never really liked the P5C. It's balance never really felt "right," I thought it's aesthetics were ugly to the point of homely (yeah, not a criteria for an efficacious gun, but at Walther prices it was a bit off-putting), and, most critically, the hammer strut was embedded in a plastic fillet piece, which, as Walther's plastic of the day tended to do, over time crystallized and cracked, loosening the hammer strut from its mooring, rendering the gun TOTALLY unfireable. This was a TOTAL deal-breaker for me-I had Earl's repair it, and promptly sold it. I've anecdotally heard that the Brits for their contract P5Cs had the polymer fillet piece replaced with a metal one to preclude what happened to mine, but I've never been able to physically verify that.

This problem is unique to the P5C-the P5's hammer strut is anchored to the frame by a hanger protrusion as I recall.

Mechanically the P5 is an engineering marvel-beautifully manufactured and fitted. Unfortunately slight dimensional differences and a different heel latching system preclude magazine interchangeability with P.38/P1/P4 magazines, which can usually be found at a lower cost. I believe that some enterprising souls did experiment with cutting or punching a rectangular latch receptacle in the spines of such earlier model magazines, but the practice never became wide-spread, and as I recall such modded magazines protruded a bit from the magwell, and looked a bit odd.

A beautiful gun, and very viable within its limitations, but pretty much totally rendered obsolescent by the Glock G19, among others...

Best, Jon

Great info. as usual, Jon. P5C always looked weird to me, tho' I didn't know that about the hammer strut plastic piece thing. Very interesting.

[David Armstrong]

Agreed. The P5 is a beautiful gun and a mechanical marvel, and if I went back to a single stack 9mm I'd have a hard time deciding between int and my S&W 39. I carry mine as an oddball barbeque gun mostly, since it makes for great show and tell. As a fighting gun it has been outclassed by the Glocks, like so many other guns, but it will still do the job.