Jump to content
zoid

Sig and HK owners, why did you feel it was worth paying more for your gun?

Recommended Posts

Cost too much? What about gunsmith built guns, or purpose built game guns... like $1200 CZ Customs CZ 75's, $3000 Brazos's, $4,000 SVI's, $4500 Predator Tactical guns. They have no issues selling them all.

 

There are people who put emphasis on price, others on value, others on the status/perceived status of owning one.

 

Sig's and HK's are not custom hand made pieces. They are mass produced combat type pistols, just like there cheap counterparts Glock, Beretta, and M&P's

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They are not premium brands, they are just premium prices. :icon_e_surprised:

 

The "premium" brands can not do anything better mechanically than the cheap Glocks, M&P's, etc. After mechanics its just personal preference -- ergos, asthetics, metal, poly, etc.

 

Flame away guys!

 

I don't necessarily disagree even having owned both HK and Sig. But there is a driving

force that compels people to spend the extra money. Just wanted to see the different

reasons.

 

Beretta is actually a gun I feel that has the refinement of the HK/Sig without the heavier

price tag.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What? Please edumacate me on why the glock is the point and shoot camera and on Sigs it is otherwise?

 

Personally, I think it is all in your head.

 

Unless you are shooting the Sig in DAO, there should be no reason you cannot shoot it as intuitively as a glock/m&p whatever else.

 

My opinion is based on multiple experiences w/ a Glock 17 3rd Gen and my 226. This past weekend I've shot an XDM 4.5 , HK P30L, Kimber Custom Crimson, a Glock G34 gen 4 & Glock 17 Gen 3. All of which were shot after warming up w/ my 226. I was all over the place w/ the H&K P30L. I went directly to the Glock 17 gen 3 and was spot on again, but surprisingly went back to my

Sig and had to re-acquaint my trigger pad as i was noticably putting too much finger and grouped to the left. Easy fix, but it definately wasn't as immediate as going to the Glock despite the 2 different sight systems and triggers. I only practice w/ the 226, but shot a tight groups instantly w/ the Glock 17. I guess my hand easily gets used to a longer finger extension w/ a more definative "click" break as opposed to the 226' smooth "glassy" SA break. I love my Sig, but im starting to gain serious consideration for Glocks. :keeporder:

Edited by jcpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Im not saying it cant happen/doesnt happen/never happens as I am sure it does but I do find it interesting the HK is th only pistol I have never seen go doen at a match or on the range. I cannot say the same for SIG/S&W/Glock.

 

As for the point and shoot, as I have said before the Glock is the absolute worst for me!!! The XD is next about half as bad as Glock. The HK and M&P both point well for me as they probably have the closest grip angle to 1911.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Im not saying it cant happen/doesnt happen/never happens as I am sure it does but I do find it interesting the HK is th only pistol I have never seen go doen at a match or on the range. I cannot say the same for SIG/S&W/Glock.

 

 

The other thing is that there are not many HKs at matches. They are definitely the minority.

I think I've seen a total of like 3-5 in all the matches I've shot over the last year an a half, but

then that is just my observation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My opinion is based on multiple experiences w/ a Glock 17 3rd Gen and my 226. This past weekend I've shot an XDM 4.5 , HK P30L, Kimber Custom Crimson, a Glock G34 gen 4 & Glock 17 Gen 3. All of which were shot after warming up w/ my 226. I was all over the place w/ the H&K P30L. I went directly to the Glock 17 gen 3 and was spot on again, but surprisingly went back to my

Sig and had to re-acquaint my trigger pad as i was noticably putting too much finger and grouped to the left. Easy fix, but it definately wasn't as immediate as going to the Glock despite the 2 different sight systems and triggers. I only practice w/ the 226, but shot a tight groups instantly w/ the Glock 17. I guess my hand easily gets used to a longer finger extension w/ a more definative "click" break as opposed to the 226' smooth "glassy" SA break. I love my Sig, but im starting to gain serious consideration for Glocks. :keeporder:

 

Do you own the hk P30? i will be glad to buy it off of you for good price.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love these arguments, now that I don't care anymore, it is like watching hipsters trying to decided between the white iphone and the black iphone.

 

After a while you just want the thing to go bang, without to much muss and fuss, brands mean jack, confidence in the gun is everything. Hell, I want my gun to be boring, easy to use, easy to fix, cheap to replace. I'd shoot a glock if it fit my hands just because it is MORE boring and less "special" then the rest of my guns, but it doesn't.

 

Oh, and I've seen H&Ks break.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is just a personal question on why HK/Sig owners felt it was worth

spending extra money your Sigs or HKs or other "Premium" brands over

lower cost brands like Glock and S&W M&Ps.

 

Me personally I do not think Sigs/HKs are better than their counterparts

in regard to reliability/functionality/accuracy. But I was still willing to pay

more simply because I like them so much in regard to their design and

because I have found I really do enjoy shooting them. The "feel" of them

is more refined to me and the shooting experience was different (I won't say

better) enough for me to be willing to spend a little more.

 

What was your reason for justifying the bigger price tag?

I got a GREAT deal ona barely fired 226 9mmwith 3 sets of grips. $660 or so and just couldnt pass it up.

 

I have swince swapped out for E2 grips and LOVE this thing!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The thing a lot of people seem to forget (not necessarily here, but in general) is that Sigs/HKs are metal frame pistols, where Glocks/M&Ps and the like are polymer frame pistols. You can't manufacture a metal frame for nearly the same cost as a molded polymer frame, it's just not possible. That's largely the difference between the two. I look at it more as the $500ish pistols are (usually) polymer frames where the $800+ are metal, and that's mostly the difference in price.

 

Though I do agree with Ray Ray and diamondd about the 92, even though I'm not from Hudson county. I prefer my 92 to my buddy's 226, and it's WAY more lefty friendly.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I may be very wrong on this, but it seems whenever HK comes out w/ a new pistol, they have fully vetted it and don't use the public as a beta tester. This seems to not be the case w/ the majority of other makes. Even though I am a big fan the Gen4 Glocks I own, I also recognize that a lot of Gen 4's, especially 9mm's, have had "growing" pains..... as have M&P's, as have newer production Sigs (or at least that was the internet has told me).

 

Even though there may be other platforms that may be "better" in certain areas (ergo's, cost, etc.), in my mind, HK combines exceptional durability, reliability and accuracy into their pistols. I understand the suggested service interval on the recoil springs for the P30 is 25K rounds, vs. roughly 5K on most other makes/models. HK's are mechanically very accurate, yet while their triggers are decent, they are far from exceptional. They are extremely tough service type pistols w/ great accuracy. A lot of other makes play in this arena, but they typically don't go through the testing process that HK subjects their guns to. I know Sig's were once considered on par w/ HK, but I understand since 2004 Sig has changed the QC process on civilian and even LEO pistols to not include the same level of testing that they were once subjected to. I have no direct experience w/ post 2004 Sigs, but I've read a fairly large # of complaints from people that seem to know what they're talking about that for me, I would at least think twice on a purchase of brand new Sig. Oddly enough, Sig's 2022 seems to be the unsung hero of the line.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I went with Sig p229 because it "FELT" most comfortable in my hand (small hands - this includes the distance to the trigger) compared to say Glock or SW M&P. However, after trying out a CZ 75 (metal frame at competitive price) I can't justify the price of the Sig anymore - though the Sig still feels more comfortable to hold.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I went with Sig p229 because it "FELT" most comfortable in my hand (small hands - this includes the distance to the trigger) compared to say Glock or SW M&P. However, after trying out a CZ 75 (metal frame at competitive price) I can't justify the price of the Sig anymore - though the Sig still feels more comfortable to hold.

 

I am surprised. I think the doublestack Sigs have the widest grips this side of the Glock 20. Tge CZ is much smaller to me and fits like a glove.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Really? What personal experience do you have with this?

 

personally ...i owned a G22 .40cal until the frame cracked...i still own a M&P 40cal( which i consider better then the G22) but i had the locking block crack on it or whatever you call it ...smith was great at sending me another one i should say....I mainly stick to the 1911s now but before i traded them i had a SIG P220 45 and a USP 40cal ( i really liked 40s for awhile) ran them just as hard as the Glock and smiths and never had any major problems...just going by what i've seen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

personally ...i owned a G22 until the frame cracked...i still own a M&P 40( which i consider better then the G22) but i had the locking block crack on it or whatever you call it ...smith was great at sending me another one i should say....I mainly stick to the 1911s now but before i traded them i had a SIG P220 and a USP 40 ( i really liked 40s for awhile) ran them just as hard as the Glock and smiths and never had any major problems...just going by what i've seen

 

I don't know how many rounds you had through the M&P, but a locking block crack is a good thing from the perspective of pre-designed points of failure. I would much rather have a replaceable part fail than a cracked frame.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

personally ...i owned a G22 .40cal until the frame cracked...i still own a M&P 40cal( which i consider better then the G22) but i had the locking block crack on it or whatever you call it ...smith was great at sending me another one i should say....I mainly stick to the 1911s now but before i traded them i had a SIG P220 45 and a USP 40cal ( i really liked 40s for awhile) ran them just as hard as the Glock and smiths and never had any major problems...just going by what i've seen

 

Out of curiosity, how many rounds through the G22 and M&P? Also what kind of ammo where you using?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would imagine economy of scale plays a large part of why an HK (or the steel sig's) is more money than a Glock. While i don't know the numbers, its probably pretty safe to assume that Glock sells a lot more G17/G19's than HK sells a P30's and usp's. In addition to the lower production numbers, the HK is hammer fired with safety/decocker which is more complex and more expensive to produce. It also comes in different trigger/safety configurations so that costs even more money to make. Add in labor and overhead to assemble said variations in some expensive European country and assume if both companies were to have the similar profit margin to stay afloat, its not hard to understand the price difference.

 

It would be interesting to know what the production costs of an HK are just to see if there is any added premium built into to thier margins. If there is, I bet its not as radical as you would think.

 

But hey, its easier to sit back in a 'blissful' state and say, "both guns are black, they should just cost the same!"

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know how many rounds you had through the M&P, but a locking block crack is a good thing from the perspective of pre-designed points of failure. I would much rather have a replaceable part fail than a cracked frame.

 

Pretty much thats how i saw it.. thats why i kept the M&P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...