# Navy getting the Sig 225 issued?



## Colin Parkinson (17 Dec 2007)

I know that the MP's and the pilots have been issued Sig 225's. Now I am been told that that the Navy boarding parties have them. My understanding was that the boarding parties were getting 226's?

Since the 225 is no longer made or at least not for sale to Civilians, I am assuming the CF is issuing what it has rather than purchase more 226's?

In fact the only single stack I think Sig makes now is the 220? The new 250 or SP2022 would seem to be a good choice for the Navy type. (Correction the 239 is also single stack)


----------



## CFFB (17 Dec 2007)

I'll warn you that I'm not a huge weapons guy but I'll try to tell you what we used in the NBP.  

We had the Sig that only held 8 rounds, single stack, smaller grip.   We were told on course that the reason we didn't have the same pistols as the MPs is because the Navy wanted a bit smaller weapon that anyone (even those with small hands) would be able to operate effectively.  The Navy's been using that type of Sig (actual nomenclature escapes me) for the last 8 years before I transferred to the Air Force this fall
.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (17 Dec 2007)

8 rds is normal for most single stacks. If it was smaller than the 225, I suspect it may be the 239? 

Here is a link to current Sig pistols

http://www.sigsauer.com/Products/ShowCatalogCategory.aspx?categoryid=1


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (17 Dec 2007)

We use the P225 and according to our trainers the reason why we got it is another agency ordered them and the NBPs was added as an after thought because it was already a contract in progress and we could get them at a lower cost per unit.

I think it will be a long long time before you see the P225 replace in Naval service.


----------



## CFFB (17 Dec 2007)

If the 225 is a single stack, that is the one the Navy uses.  

I know for a fact that it isn't the 239.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (17 Dec 2007)

Ex-Dragoon said:
			
		

> We use the P225 and according to our trainers the reason why we got it is another agency ordered them and the NBPs was added as an after thought because it was already a contract in progress and we could get them at a lower cost per unit.
> 
> I think it will be a long long time before you see the P225 replace in Naval service.



AH!! that explains it, I was wondering where they would have sourced them. Although for a boarding party I think I would rather have a double stacked gun like the 229, more bullets the merrier!!!


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (17 Dec 2007)

The 226 would be nice as would a Glock, but I am content with the P225.


----------



## aesop081 (17 Dec 2007)

Colin P said:
			
		

> I know that the MP's and the pilots  aircrews  have been issued Sig 225's.


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (17 Dec 2007)

Does Tac Hel get Sigs as well or do they still get the Hi Power?


----------



## Colin Parkinson (17 Dec 2007)

Sorry I should have realized pilots aren't allowed to play with dangerous toys.... ;D


----------



## CFFB (17 Dec 2007)

> AH!! that explains it, I was wondering where they would have sourced them. Although for a boarding party I think I would rather have a double stacked gun like the 229, more bullets the merrier!!!



Yeah but with the MP5, or Remington 870 shotgun as your secondary weapon there are more than enough bullets to go around.  As the NBPs mainly deal with civilians, the intimidation factor is there when the blue pajamas come on board with all that.  

That and you don't want the Navy guys carrying too much, what with 5 squares a day at sea!!!


----------



## medaid (17 Dec 2007)

Mmmm we've got 225s as our side arms. I had to qualify this year on them. Nice little pistols, but I think I'll take a 226 in .40 any day though... or even a Glock21.


----------



## Stoker (17 Dec 2007)

We use them for force protection as well as NBP, a nice little weapon that you can shoot some tight groups with. Way superior than the browning. Liked it so much that I bought one for myself.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (17 Dec 2007)

Sigs will grow on you, I have the 226ST and just got the 229Elite in .40cal/9mm and am ordering a .357Sig barrel for it.

Now to convince my wife that I need a 220ST in .45acp and a SP2022 in 9mm.  ;D


----------



## SteveB (17 Dec 2007)

Most Sigophiles I know think the 225 is one of the best in the family.  I've never even handled it but, its double stacked brother the 228 fits my hand like it was made for me.  I love the 220 and the 226 but it can't stand the fact that I didn't buy a 228 before the Politburo decided the barrel was dangerously short. >

Steve


----------



## Fishbone Jones (17 Dec 2007)

My 226 clone arrived today. Going to have to play with it some and see how I like the style. If it works out, I may have to invest in one of the new 250's. I watched the SIG video on the 250 and it looks like a pretty versatile system.


----------



## Stoker (18 Dec 2007)

The 228 is nice, I think though i'm going to buy a 226 navy and use it as my CCW while i'm visiting the states. ;D


----------



## medaid (18 Dec 2007)

Stoker good choice! I wanted to get a P226 Navy too... but it's expensive 

That's why I went the way of the Scrooge and decided on a 226 Clone


----------



## Matt_Fisher (18 Dec 2007)

Stoker said:
			
		

> ...I think though i'm going to buy a 226 navy and use it as my CCW while i'm visiting the states. ;D



You may want to brush up on the firearms laws for the respective states and municipalities you'll be visiting, otherwise you might find yourself in a heap of legal trouble and your new pistol being confiscated.  Like it or not, the National Rifle Association of America is probably your best point of contact for obtaining info on the various Concealed Carry Weapons laws each state, however they will likely have you join the association before they send you any of their information packages.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (18 Dec 2007)

You can get the NP-34 (Norinco clone of the 228) at Lever Arms for $299 or at Marstar for $349. They have apparently redid the design to fix the frame cracking problem. I would have bought one if I didn't just buy the 229.


----------



## KevinB (20 Dec 2007)

THE CCW resource www.packing.org

 It will be a cold day in hell before a piece of red chinese metal graces my gun safe.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (20 Dec 2007)

Infidel-6 said:
			
		

> It will be a cold day in hell before a piece of red chinese metal graces my gun safe.



I'm just happy people are buying firearms, restricted and otherwise.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (21 Dec 2007)

Infidel-6 said:
			
		

> THE CCW resource www.packing.org
> 
> It will be a cold day in hell before a piece of red chinese metal graces my gun safe.



Except for the fact that your safe is likely made in China..... ;D


----------



## medaid (21 Dec 2007)

Colin P said:
			
		

> Except for the fact that your safe is likely made in China..... ;D



If you check and it says M.I.T. it's Made in Taiwan 

But I guess.... two wrongs would make it right eh?


----------



## KevinB (21 Dec 2007)

Proudly made in the USA  ;D

I'm all for people buying guns -- but the Chinese weapon companies are owned by the state and run by the military -- thus we are funding an enemy (or potential enemy for those who feel all fuzzy).


----------



## Colin Parkinson (21 Dec 2007)

Speaking of the Nasty Chinese weapons companies, just got back from fondling the Type-97, interesting design although not as nice as the Tavor. Mag release for the 97 is on the right side and hard to find. You would hate the supplied optics.


----------



## medaid (21 Dec 2007)

Colin, did you play with it at Lever? I played with it awhile back when it first arrived. Thought about it, and then thought that AR would be a better waste of my hard earned deneros. ;D

It's interesting though... would probably buy a Tavor before that... but definitely an AR before both


----------



## Colin Parkinson (21 Dec 2007)

Yep, for $800 I would buy in a flash, but for $1800............

As I missed the AR generation in the Canadian Military, the AR hold no particular attraction for me. 

Also found the stock pull a bit short.


----------



## medaid (21 Dec 2007)

Colin, you're missing out mate! AR is fun to shoot even away from the work weapons. 

I know what you mean about the price. Not overly attractive...


----------



## COBRA-6 (21 Dec 2007)

I have a Utah CCW but they are no longer issuing them to foreigners IIRC. Be advised that you can't bring Chinese made guns into the US.

As far as buying Chinese guns? The more gun owners/guns in Canada the better! Damn near everything we buy is made in China anyways. I've got a HP-9 12 ga,  and have a M-14S on the way... maybe if the US didn't try and block the export of anything remotely tactical we wouldn't have to buy offshore!

I like the Sigs alot, but the CF should have gone with the 228/9 over the 225 IMHO. Or better yet the GLOCK 19!


----------



## Colin Parkinson (23 Dec 2007)

Just reading an article on the Sigs, it said that the 225 is the shortened version of the 220, 3.9" barrel 

weight 29oz
length 7.1"

I suspect that the locking insert would be shorter as is the 229 compared to the 226.


----------



## uzi (31 Dec 2007)

why not glock17 or XD, they are polymer framed, are lighter and have high capacity magazine


----------



## medaid (31 Dec 2007)

Why not a S&W M&P? Why not a Walter P99? Why not a Colt 1911 Commander?

Those are the questions that shall never be answered... just because...


----------



## Stoker (31 Dec 2007)

I think back during the 1st gulf war, Sea King pilots required a compact pistol. A number of these were procured and eventually they were issued to the ships.


----------



## uzi (31 Dec 2007)

MedTech said:
			
		

> Why not a S&W M&P? Why not a Walter P99? Why not a Colt 1911 Commander?
> 
> Those are the questions that shall never be answered... just because...


Walter P99 is too expensive. S&W M&P is too new, needs time to prove. Colt 1911 too old, too heavy, 7 rounds only........


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (1 Jan 2008)

Stoker said:
			
		

> I think back during the 1st gulf war, Sea King pilots required a compact pistol. A number of these were procured and eventually they were issued to the ships.



See reply #3





			
				uzi said:
			
		

> Walter P99 is too expensive. S&W M&P is too new, needs time to prove. Colt 1911 too old, too heavy, 7 rounds only........



oh and the 1 additional round in the mag for our P225s makes a difference? Sorry is we are going to go for a low capacity magazine fed weapon I would take a 1911 anyday.


----------



## Stoker (1 Jan 2008)

Ex-Dragoon said:
			
		

> See reply #3
> oh and the 1 additional round in the mag for our P225s makes a difference? Sorry is we are going to go for a low capacity magazine fed weapon I would take a 1911 anyday.



The .45 is not a nato round, the size and weight of the pistol allows it to be easily handled than a .45 and the P225 has better safety features. That saying I would love to see a .45 as well, Canada would never go for it.


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (1 Jan 2008)

Agreed


----------



## medaid (1 Jan 2008)

I guess my sarcasm escaped some...

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The .45 would never fit all people and that's the main problem. That's why a 9mm was adopted. A 9mm can be handled by a majority of people who needs to use a sidearm, and hand size wise, most people have no problems gripping a 9mm pistol. However a .45 is substantially larger in comparison then the 9mm in grip and recoil would make it near impossible for those with smaller hand sizes to deploy it effectively. That and cost and blah blah non-NATO standard sized round.


----------



## COBRA-6 (1 Jan 2008)

Pistol grip size is related to design as much as calibre though, i.e. single stack mag (1911 or P225) vs double stack (BHP, Glock 17, Sig 226 etc).

Perhaps the next-gen issue sidearm will have interchangeable backstraps like the S&W M&P to fit different hand sizes.


----------



## KevinB (1 Jan 2008)

Back when the contract was let, there was a BUNCH of wrangling to get the buy done, basically they where forced to select the P225 over the P226 as they had to chose a system that could not be considered a service pistol replacement, as then a formal replacement project would have been required..


----------



## Inch (1 Jan 2008)

MedTech said:
			
		

> I guess my sarcasm escaped some...
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> The .45 would never fit all people and that's the main problem. That's why a 9mm was adopted. A 9mm can be handled by a majority of people who needs to use a sidearm, and hand size wise, most people have no problems gripping a 9mm pistol. However a .45 is substantially larger in comparison then the 9mm in grip and recoil would make it near impossible for those with smaller hand sizes to deploy it effectively. That and cost and blah blah non-NATO standard sized round.



I'll echo what Cobra-6 said, design has a lot more to do with grip size than calibre alone. 1911 grips are extremely close size wise to a Browning HP and are considerably smaller than Glock grips. Just because it's a 9mm doesn't mean the grip is smaller. I have taken many people to the range shooting, including girls, and they all agree that the 1911A1 in .45 is much more comfortable to shoot than my Glocks.

I find the P225 grip to be too short, my baby finger is crammed up against the protruding base of the mag and not very comfortable to hold. I own 3 1911's, you can get them in any calibre including 9mm, 40 S&W, .45 and 10mm. You can get 8 round flush fit mags for them or 10 round mags that protrude from the bottom of the mag well slightly. 

As far as the recoil of a .45 goes, I find that a 40 S&W has more snap and muzzle flip than my .45's do. Yet 40 S&W is far and away the popular choice amongst law enforcement agencies.

1911's get my vote, for a design that's coming up on it's 100th anniversary and still is extremely popular with shooters all over the world, you can't go wrong. There are even double stack 9mm versions made by Para Ordnance that have a mag capacity of 18, that's one more than a Glock 17.

And for the record, US SOCOM as well as a few other black pyjama types use .45 calibre HK Mk 23's and 1911A1's. Just because it's non-NATO doesn't mean it's cost prohibitive to use, you can't put a price on something that works.


----------



## medaid (2 Jan 2008)

Inch said:
			
		

> I'll echo what Cobra-6 said, design has a lot more to do with grip size than calibre alone. 1911 grips are extremely close size wise to a Browning HP and are considerably smaller than Glock grips. Just because it's a 9mm doesn't mean the grip is smaller. I have taken many people to the range shooting, including girls, and they all agree that the 1911A1 in .45 is much more comfortable to shoot than my Glocks.
> 
> I find the P225 grip to be too short, my baby finger is crammed up against the protruding base of the mag and not very comfortable to hold. I own 3 1911's, you can get them in any calibre including 9mm, 40 S&W, .45 and 10mm. You can get 8 round flush fit mags for them or 10 round mags that protrude from the bottom of the mag well slightly.
> 
> ...



Agreed. I was oversimplifying my reply... poor decision on my part. No indeed what ever works should be the thing that comes out in the end. Then again... it's also who we work for


----------



## Colin Parkinson (2 Jan 2008)

I suspect price, already a stock item and regulation around contracts all played a part. As much as I love Sigs, the ability to change grip size would be one of the big features I would be looking for in a pistol for issue to a large number of people. Sigs new Polymer pistol the 250 does offer that advantage, although I suspect the way they did it would be more advantage to a police department than military. It would be far easier to stock and carry a palm swell of the M&P than a huge number of frames that would be required for the 250 on a large issue.


----------



## OldSolduer (22 Jan 2008)

So the Navy is getting new pistols?
Very nice!! So how about the Army? Are we stuck with the Brownings? :-\
Personally, having been trained on the Hi-Power, and not familiar with other pistols, I'm bound by my less than vast depth on knowledge on this subject. 
If we could get some rebuilt ones it would be much better than the old worn out ones we have now. Just a thought...


----------



## dimsum (22 Jan 2008)

OldSolduer said:
			
		

> So the Navy is getting new pistols?
> Very nice!! So how about the Army? Are we stuck with the Brownings? :-\
> Personally, having been trained on the Hi-Power, and not familiar with other pistols, I'm bound by my less than vast depth on knowledge on this subject.
> If we could get some rebuilt ones it would be much better than the old worn out ones we have now. Just a thought...



I haven't been following this thread all the way, but if you're talking about P225s, they aren't new to the Navy.  We've had them for at least 7 years.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (22 Jan 2008)

The problem with replacing the pistol is that there are so many thing s to be replaced, the pistols are just so far down the list. They are a decent design and well built, but dated. Consid ring the weight creep of personal equipment, it makes sense that the next pistol for the Army is a polymer based gun with a short slide, something like the G19, but with an interchangeable grip. In the meantime, ensuring there are good magazines for the pistol (the heart and soul of a semi-auto), making sure people know how to properly care for the pistol and use it, plus a decent selection of holsters would make what we have more effective.


----------



## Sub Standard (22 May 2008)

The Navy has been using the P225 for at more than 10 years now as I went on the boarding party in 1997 and it was already a standard weapon at that point.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (22 May 2008)

The long term problem is they are not a standard product for Sig anymore, they may make a new batch if the order justified it and jigs are still around. I suspect if Navy went to Sig right now, they would be steered to the Sig 250 as Sig needs a decent size military contract for their new model, failing that the Sig 2022 would likely be offered.

Currently the US Coast Guard is using the Sig 229 in .40cal stateside and the Berretta M9 in 9mm overseas.


----------

