Glock vs. H&K vs. Sig Sauer?

Question

Your personal prefrence. No specific gun, just all around excilence. (reliability, shot grouping, quality, price, etc.)

Answer 1

Rather than deal with amateur opinions, I have found that the professionals, both commercial and independent, have given a slight edge to the H-K pistols, from tests run by evaluators from such sources as Guns & Ammo, American Handgunner, and Gun Tests magazines.
In such tests, the H-K USP models had fewer malfunctions and NO (0) failures when tested against, not only the Sig-Sauer, but Beretta, Springfield, and S&W models, as well.
The H-K mk.23 SOCOM is even better than the USP's, as proven by use by the Navy SEALS and other Special Forces units.

In fact, the ONLY catastrophic 'KaBoom' type failures recorded occurring with H-K models happened when the shooters were using un-jacketed lead bullets, which are strictly VERBOTEN by H-K in use with their 'polygon'-type rifling system.

I've run nearly 5,000 rounds through my H-K USP .45ACP, including Hydra-Shok, Cor-Bon, and several equivilent custom handloads, with 0 stoppages EVER, and it's tolerances haven't measureably changed since I first aquired it.
The only negative factors I've dealt with carrying the USP, inherrent in the SOCOM, as well, is it's larger size, but I'm a larger guy and LIKE the more impressive size, and the limited availability of carry systems, but I carry concealed in my own unorthodox manner, anyway.

Answer 2

Glock Vs Sig

Answer 3

You're right, HK is too d***ed expensive for what it is. I've fired some before, and they're nice, but nothing impressive. The XD is a fine gun, decent trigger, but honestly I think it's ugly as sin and there are too many bells and whistles on it. The more bells and whistles, the more can jam up and go wrong. The Glock may be an old design, but just because it's old doesn't mean its obsolete. Look at the 1911 pistol, first designed in - you guessed it - 1911. It's a 100 year old design. Many police officers still carry it as a backup weapon and it's used in competition almost exclusively. Back to the Glock, the S&W M&P, the Springfield xD series, the HK and the SigPro series of pistols are all clones of the polymer frame. Anyhow, the Glock is an excellent pistol and fine choice, reliable, interchangeable parts, almost indestructable. Sig is another excellent choice. My 229 is a easily one of my favorite guns. Easy to shoot, reliable, comfortable to hold. Only problem is it can be expensive to buy, but once you do you'll have a gun for a lifetime. Don't worry about the trigger differences. So long as you practice, you'll be great with whichever you pick, whether you have a $2,000 target pistol or are throwing a brick downrange. Whatever you pick, get it in .40. Glock and Sig have 9mm conversion barrels you can buy so you can fire both 9mm and 40 from the same gun simply by swapping out the barrel (no change in springs, upper, or mag). I have both the Glock 22 and Sig 229 with conversion for both, and they work flawlessly. I'm pretty sure the XD has one too, do a google search of "XD 9mm conversion" and you'll be able to find out. You can only do that from 40>9mm, but NOT 9mm>40. I preach that over and over on this forum, but it's really worth it.

Answer 4

My Glock 20 is on its second barrel, in all that time I've had three failures. I limp wristed it once when it was new and so was I, the guy standing next to me said "for God's sake get a proper grip on it" and that never happend again, I was just being too casual. The other two were badly manufactured reloads that it couldn't chamber, in one the jacket had gone outside the case and in the other the case mouth had been squashed back, neither could be chambered.

I, personally, find the H&K USP gives me more felt recoil, the barrel line seems to be higher than the Glock and that causes it to kick up more.

I'm just buying a Sig 220 Equinox, but because it's pretty and interesting. The G20 has nearly twice the firepower, 16 rounds instead of 9, it's a bit more bulky though.

Springfield XD? Don't make me laugh. And the Beretta 92? Bulky, complex, weak, minor caliber in a questionable quality package. My 92FS Brigadier Inox has machining marks on the outside of the slide and the plastic trigger and external connector both suck. It is accurate enough, but that's the end for good points. I'll trade it for a Browning Hi-Power or a Brno CZ.

If you need something that will certainly work when you need it then get the Glock. If you want something pretty that people can ooh and aah over then the Sig is the thing. If you want to pretend you are special forces and want something bulky then go for the HK. Notice the HK wasn't tested against the Glock, the Glock has no positive safety so it doesn't get in to some trials... but then in 10s of thousands of rounds I've yet to shoot myself with the Glock.

James... you sure you have a clue? For your education, if nothing else, read the Glock 21 torture test below. This guy has been deliberately neglecting and abusing his G21 for ten years just to see what it takes to kill it. Sand, mud, trucks, dropping from an airplane into a field, salt water, you name it. He never cleans it and it always works. He thought he'd killed it once but found a stone lodged between the connector and the frame, after digging that out it was back to normal.

Answer 5

Sales numbers don't lie. People don't buy a crap ton of glocks because they are poor guns. All of the brands are excellent but "bang for your buck" goes to glock. I love my HK USP (.40 S&W) and my glock 22. Do not own a sig but have shot and enjoyed those too. People get spun up to defend the brand they chose to buy. You can't go wrong with and of those. Strictly based on price, you could buy a glock and practice a lot for the retail price of the others.

Answer 6

Out of the three I would go with the H&K. More specifically the USP .45. It feels the best in MY hand and groups really well. I've never had any problems with mine and I love the U shape mag release more than the traditional button type. They are a bit pricey but I think worth it. I have a Sig P226 too but don't like it as much as the H&K. It groups about the same and haven't had any problems with it. Can't say much for Glocks, never owned one and never will. I have shot a few before and just don't like them at all.

Answer 7

This Site Might Help You.

RE:
Glock vs. H&K vs. Sig Sauer?
Your personal prefrence. No specific gun, just all around excilence. (reliability, shot grouping, quality, price, etc.)

Answer 8

I personally enjoy Sig, excellent quality and dependability. Though they can be a bit pricey. I also like Springfield Armory's XD over the Glock, better fit (in my hand at least) better safeties, and just as tough if not tougher than Glock! Don't really care for H&Ks.

Answer 9

I'd say Glock,I have a 21 and 30 I think they are real good.H&K and Sigs are also good but they are more expensive.I used H&K and Sigs plenty of times.It all comes down to what you want.

Answer 10

I've owned a Sig and I currently have a GLOCK. Any of the three will be accurate and reliable. It comes down to which one fits your hand better.