Glock 17 or Sig P226; the quintessential question with some logic behind it.

[RichardR]

the DAK trigger which is still two pulls a heavy first followed by a heavier reset, my sigs are converted to DAO and to have a reliable DAO trigger pull on a sig its going to be somewhat heavy ( it certainly won't be a 3.5 lb ghost trigger). The dak trigger takes practice to even determine if you Ike IMO had one in a 220 never could get comfortable with it.

Trevor,

I am curious, are you a revolver guy at all? The reason I ask is because I've noticed a trend with regards to the kind of folks who do & do not care for Sig's DAK trigger groups (I've also found that the opposite of which seems to hold true for Sig's SRT trigger groups as well).

Anyway my P226 DAK is 6lbs for the full stroke, 8lbs for the short reset, both of which are smooth as silk & very consistant, and because the trigger is so smooth & consistant the sights stay fixed on the target throughout the entire pull regardless of which reset I am choosing to use.

The best way that I can describe it for the folks who've never had the chance to experience a DAK for themselves is that they feel like you are squeezing the trigger on a lightened, finely tuned Colt Python revolver (in double, not single action).

Now I'm no slouch with a Glock & it certainly isn't what I would call "innaccurate" at all, but my P226 (because of how smooth & consistant the DAK trigger is) will outshoot my G17 all-day-long, the Glock does have one advantage, I can empty the Glock a lot quicker than I can the Sig.

Essentially what I'm trying to say is that I can "mag-dump" the Glock's 17 round magazine & keep all rounds in the black of/on a standard B-21E target @ 21' about twice as fast as I can with the Sig, the gap gets closer if I use the DAK's short reset point, but even using the short reset the Glock still holds an advantage there.

Now I have no idea why anyone would ever want to blast away wildly like that, except for for fun, but I suppose iffin you ever needed to lay down some suppressive fire with a handgun the Glock would be a better choice.

In the end though it is hard to go wrong with either a Glock or a Sig, both are very capable, reliable & accurate handguns, and the Sig's are availible in a wide range of various trigger group configurations.

While I personally love the DAK (Double Action Kellerman) I am NOT a fan of traditional DAO (double-action only) or DA/SA (double-action / single action) trigger groups in semiautos.

But everyone is going to have different preferences in that regard, which is probably the reason why there are so many choices in the first place.

[trevorst]

Without a doubt my 226 and even my 228 is a more accurate gun than my glocks. In answer to your question, in my younger days I used to shoot my python and my old smiths. Those now just sit in the safe well oiled.

Maybe I need to get them out and play some more. I didn't give the DAK much time, I would love to run across a 226 with one to play with and form another opinion.

[RichardR]

Without a doubt my 226 and even my 228 is a more accurate gun than my glocks. In answer to your question, in my younger days I used to shoot my python and my old smiths. Those now just sit in the safe well oiled.

Maybe I need to get them out and play some more. I didn't give the DAK much time, I would love to run across a 226 with one to play with and form another opinion.

Well they way the collectors have driven up the value on the old pinned & recessed Smith's & just about anything with a Colt rollmark it's not surprising that you don't shoot them much anymore.