- Jun 11, 2014
- 14,934
- 20,251
Founding Member
I'm not familiar with the Sig issue within the service. But what you are describing is virtually identical to the berretta issue within the service. Berretta 9mm is the standard sidearm issue for Army and all the things you mention and more are griped about constantly with that pistol. Failure rates high, etc. And yet... just like you mention, the same make/model pistols outside the Army have a great rep and people love them.And yet... the Sig 229s that the govt issues (dak triggers) are the worst pieces of crap I've ever encountered. Friends claim the failure rate is close to 1/3 despite Sig going through numerous recalls and parts upgrades. I'm not even sure it's just the dak trigger because things like op rods, op springs, ejectors and extractors were failing. I swear I'd carry a Rossi or something even cheaper first. I wonder if it's just a govt contract lowest bidder cheaper parts thing because friends with regular 226/229, including the .mil, have no problem.
Interesting, I haven't had any contact with the sig while in uniform.You know, I had a govt model Beretta (it was a 40 fed a steady diet of +P even) that was very worn out when I got it and it never had a problem. As much as I DIDN'T like it, I'd never buy one, I still shoot better with it than anything else. I know the first round of Army Berettas had problems. We still had ancient 1911s back then (80s) and never got the Berettas until later (after they made some mods).
Without going into specifics on the Sigs, I will tell you they get sterling maintenance. We aren't talking .mil here. Sigs contract was basically voided eventually.