Thread: 9mm vs.45
View Single Post
Old March 23rd, 2005, 10:38 AM
johnlee johnlee is online now
John Lee
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Torrance, CA
Posts: 16,153
Jack, are we talking about the same P226?

Originally Posted by JSQ
i think the sig has to be one of the best double-tap / follow-up pistols out there.

Incidentally, the term "double tap" is an imprecise term. Jeff Cooper uses the terms "hammer" and "controlled pair" to distinguish between the two totally different forms of quick two-shot delivery, and I believe he is completely correct in this regard. The "hammer" has the shooter aim the first shot and the second shot is not aimed. As soon as the pistol comes down from recoil, the shooter presses the trigger again to discharge a second shot. The weapon is aligned kinesthetically for the second shot and there is no sight alignment or verification for the second shot. Obviously, one uses the hammer from very close range. The "controlled pair" is very different and has the shooter aiming both shots. He aims the first and fires, lets the pistol recoil, then aims the second shot and fires. The difference in cadence between the hammer and controlled pair is slight, but it's there. The hammer and controlled pair are delivered at different ranges and circumstances.

The 226 is the one of the best hammer and controlled pair pistols out there? LOL. I think the 226 is one of the worst pistols in this respect. The first shot is DA and the second shot is SA. Both the DA pull and SA pull on the 226 are jacked up. The DA pull is very long and heavy with lots of stack-up. The SA pull has lots of take-up and lots of overtravel after the release. The reach to the trigger is too long in the DA mode and too short in the SA mode. To execute a hammer or controlled pair with the 226, the shooter has to deal with not only two different trigger pulls, but also two terrible trigger pulls. This is a horrible trigger design.

The 226 also suffers from a very high bore axis. Put a 226 in your left hand a Glock or P7 in your right hand. The difference is remarkable. The higher bore axis exerts greater leverage against your hand and increases muzzle flip. Follow-up on the second shot with a 226 takes way longer than it would with a Glock or P7.

In contrast to the 226, let's take the P7 as an example. I think the P7 is the one of the best, if not the best, pistols for hammers and controlled pairs. The P7 has only one trigger action: SA. The take-up is very short and the release is very smooth. There is minimal overtravel after the release. The shooter need learn only one trigger action. There is no need to adapt to different trigger actions during a hammer or controlled pair.

The P7 also has a very low bore axis. The bore axis is considerably lower than the bore axis on the 226, and I believe the P7 has the lowest bore axis of any service pistol. The recoil of the shot is driven almost straight back against the shooter's hand instead of levering the pistol upward.

The P7's method of operation also differs from that of the 226 and this makes a huge difference in how easily and quickly subsequent shots can be delivered. The 226 is a modified Browning short recoil design, so the barrel must tilt downward to unlock the action. This necessitates a high bore line. The recoil operation also requires a heavier slide. The P7, in contrast, is a retarded blowback operation. The barrel is fixed and sits very low on the receiver. The P7's slide is also considerably lighter than the slide on the recoil-operation weapons. This lighter slide necessarily jostles the weapon less as the slide reciprocates to and fro during cycling. The P7 also uses gas pressure to keep the breech closed, which makes for very smooth operation and very low felt recoil. The 226 has none of these features. These features are important and make a significant difference in how easily the pistol can be shot quickly.

Originally Posted by JSQ
now in one sense it's not a true german sig and all that. not made by j.p. sauer and whatnot, but it's a great pistol nonetheless.

Huh? I think you're confusing SIG and J.P. Sauer & Sohn. The 226 was designed by SIG, the Swiss arms maker. But SIG does not export military and police weapons because of strict Swiss laws regarding such, so SIG teamed up with J.P. Sauer & Sohn. Sauer manufactures the 226 under license in Germany and then exports same worldwide. That's why the 226 is called a "SIG-Sauer" and not a SIG.

Note that weapons like the 210 are not SIG-Sauers. Nor is the StG57. Both of these weapons are plain "SIG's" and not "SIG-Sauers", as they are manufactured by SIG in Switzerland.

Originally Posted by JSQ
i still like the beretta 92. It's not reliable at all, but i dig the fixed bbl and i shoot it better than anything else.

Are we talking about the same 92? I have always found the 92 to be very reliable. The 92 has numerous shortcomings but reliability isn't one of them.

And the 92 doesn't have a fixed barrel. The 92 utilizes short recoil operation. The barrel does not tilt as it does on Browning short recoil operation, but the barrel does move front to back. When a round is discharged and the slide starts to move backward from the recoil impulse, the barrel and slide remain locked together and the barrel actually moves backward for a short distance with the slide. Then, the locking block that Beretta copied from the P38 tilts downward and the barrel ceases rearward movement while the slide continues backward. The barrel isn't fixed at all.
Reply With Quote