# Sig M17



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

Anyone laid hands on the new Sig Sauer M17?


https://www.americanrifleman.org/ar...diers-the-us-m17-m18-modular-handgun-systems/

Just in case you don’t think this is a big deal, remember the U.S. military adopted its first semi-automatic handgun in 1911, modified it a little bit in the 1920s as the M1911-A1, and that gun served as the standard U.S. military sidearm until 1985. That’s when the U.S. Army embraced the 9x19 mm NATO cartridge with the adoption of the M9, which was based on the Beretta Model 92FS. Changing the general-issue pistol only happens once a generation, actually less than that. The selection of the M17 and the M18 in no way reflects poorly on the continued service of Beretta and the approximately 600,000 M9s acquired by the U.S. military—in fact, new M9s are still being delivered.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

I've never picked up a SIG that felt good in my hand.
This one looks like a Glock with some extra parts.


----------



## GREENCOUNTYPETE (Jul 25, 2006)

had my hands on a sig 320 civilian name for M17 earlier this week , it actually felt very good in my hand. didn't get to shoot it.


----------



## Chuck R. (Apr 24, 2008)

Couple of friends of mine have 320s and I've shot them. 

One friend loves his, the other's lasted about 4 months and he just traded it for an HK VP9. IMHO the 320 is an OK gun, the trigger is pretty good, little mushy, but so are a lot of the striker fired polymer guns. I do think it's one of the uglier pistols going. I keep trying to find the hammer due to he way the slide just kind of ends above the beavertail. 

Honestly for s striker fired gun I prefer the VP9 or the Walther PPQ.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

Bearfootfarm said:


> I've never picked up a SIG that felt good in my hand.


I need to revise my statement.
I actually do like one SIG, the P230.


----------



## Cabin Fever (May 10, 2002)

"Tactical Tupperware" Just call me old school. I like the feel of steel and walnut in both sidearms and rifles. I don't think this 65 yo will ever change his mind. I'm not saying that the GLocks, Sigs, Walthers, Keltecs, etc. are not great defensive handguns, they are just not for me.


----------



## GunMonkeyIntl (May 13, 2013)

Bearfootfarm said:


> I've never picked up a SIG that felt good in my hand.
> This one looks like a Glock with some extra parts.


The only way it could be further from that is if it were a 1911... or a 226, I guess. 

The internals on Sig’s striker-fired guns is only similar to a Glock in that it’s striker-fired. Otherwise it is their own design. 

Also, the grip angle is entirely Sig, so you probably won’t like it. I happen to not like the Glock grip angle, and love the Sig ergonomics, so the 320 and 365 work for me in a way the 17 and 43 never could. 


You should check out the ones Sig did for the 3rd IR- true art-works. The guys who made them snuck some secret engraving into them that the general public will probably never hear of unless/until it makes it into the OG lore book. Those special M17s are drenched in meaningful symbolism. Sig knocked it out of the park.


----------



## GunMonkeyIntl (May 13, 2013)

Chuck R. said:


> Honestly for s striker fired gun I prefer the VP9 or the Walther PPQ.


The VP9 is pretty BA. It would probably be my choice if I wasn’t already such a Sig whore. Probably always will be. Their pistols just suit me.


----------



## Sourdough (Dec 28, 2011)

I handled both the Glock 19X and the SIG M17 at the same time while attempting to choose one of the two. I ever so slightly preferred the G-19X.
Likely because of muscle memory of my G-22 and G-24 and G-35.
But have decided to wait and hope they do a .40S&W "X"-model.


----------



## GREENCOUNTYPETE (Jul 25, 2006)

I have a bit of a problem understanding the 19X why I would want the G17 grip length with a short slide ?
if I am trying to conceal then the 19 grip length is easier to hide and if I am not trying to conceal then the 17 carries very easily and runs great on target

I suppose someone liked the idea 4 inch barrel full size grip because that 0.49 inches was really biting in their side.

the 19 is 595 grams the 17 625 and the 19x is 625 grams so it would seem the shorter slide doesn't even add less weight the 30 gram difference 1.05 ounces.
I like combat tupperware , I said it.

I haven't shot a sig in many years but I used to like the P226 when I did shoot it.

but what do I know I like Glocks 

I don't find the grip angle thing to be much of an issue with any of them I did spend some time back and forth smith and glock and ruger.

oddly glocks are not the most comfortable feeling gun in my hand , but I am comfortable with them and they are certainly familiar. and all the controls are 

if gun shopping was just furniture shopping finding the most comfortable reclining chair in the store and taking a nap glock would lose.

the glock to me is more like that firm chair that you don't get swallowed up in that you can sit in for a long time with out getting sore and can easily stand right up from with out a struggle.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

GREENCOUNTYPETE said:


> I have a bit of a problem understanding the 19X why I would want the G17 grip length with a short slide ?


The shorter grips don't fit everyone's hands.
The barrel length is just personal preference.
There's always a demand for something "different".


----------



## Chuck R. (Apr 24, 2008)

GREENCOUNTYPETE said:


> but what do I know I like Glocks
> 
> I don't find the grip angle thing to be much of an issue with any of them I did spend some time back and forth smith and glock and ruger.
> 
> oddly glocks are not the most comfortable feeling gun in my hand , but I am comfortable with them and they are certainly familiar.


I have a huge issue with the Glock grip angle. I suppose it really comes down to "how much sight" you're using. IF I'm actually "aiming" VS "pointing" I don't have an issue with them, but that takes time. Generally on the close in tgts I'm using either a flash sight picture or slide indexing. For any of the times I've used a Glock, I put those shots high. 

The 19X doesn't make sense to me eitehr, but the guys with big hands like them. I would have thought that a 17X (17 slide on 19 frame) would have been a better combo since there are smiths cutting down 17 frames.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

Knowing how long the 1911 was standard issue, will this Sig become an icon like that? The price was lower than I expected.

I have a SIG Sauer Mosquito. I love the hand feel, but it is very picky on ammo.


----------



## Chuck R. (Apr 24, 2008)

HDRider said:


> Knowing how long the 1911 was standard issue, w*ill this Sig become an icon like that? * The price was lower than I expected.
> 
> I have a SIG Sauer Mosquito. I love the hand feel, but it is very picky on ammo.


Seriously doubt it. Normally the military changes weapons due to developments in munitions and related effectiveness. IF you believe that the self-contained 9mm cartridge is going to hang on, then it's possible that the M17 will too.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

The 1911 being the icon it is, how many avid fans does the Beretta M9 have?


----------



## GREENCOUNTYPETE (Jul 25, 2006)

HDRider said:


> The 1911 being the icon it is, how many avid fans does the Beretta M9 have?


if your asking how many m9 / 92fs pistols do you see in competition , not that many that I have seen

with the G17 at 625 grams the M9 is 945 grams almost 1/3 heavier

I ran into one guy who ran a 92fs in action pistol and he said the biggest issue is with the exposed barrel it was easy to burn ones self on the barrel , he was new to action pistol and running it because he had it I think mainly.

maybe others have seen them in IDPA or USPSA or some other.

our local action pistol league is dominated by glock , smith m&p , Sig and XD and the occasional Ruger there are a few running 1911 and a few running 2011 the 2011 guys tend to be using action pistol as more trigger time for their 3 gun or USPSA.


----------



## GREENCOUNTYPETE (Jul 25, 2006)

Bearfootfarm said:


> The shorter grips don't fit everyone's hands.
> The barrel length is just personal preference.
> There's always a demand for something "different".


barrel length is also sight radius.
I have 2XL hands and like the G17 grip the G19 is a little short but I can make it work and shoot it decently.

I guess I would have issued G17 mags with the sleeves to the people who wanted more grip and issue just the G19 if I the agency was set on a 4 inch barrel if not just run the 17 if you want the larger grip.

but I do understand everyone starts trying to Goldilocks everything to just right for them and manufactures need to sell so offer more and more options.


I suppose the argument of what makes the best personal defensive firearm. could easily go round and round.
and while I like the way the G17 feels on the range the added grip length does make it harder to conceal well. 
the gun you will keep with you is the best personal defensive gun by my figuring.

the especially nice part of the P320 / M17 is that the fire control group is the gun and not the grip/frame or slide so you can make it big or small and replace the part most likely to get damaged in harsh use without changing the serial number.
making it very easy to keep your gun with you if you can run it from small to large without changing guns only accessories.


----------



## Bearfootfarm (Jul 13, 2006)

GREENCOUNTYPETE said:


> barrel length is also sight radius.


Most don't shoot at distances where that would make much difference.


----------



## Sourdough (Dec 28, 2011)

GREENCOUNTYPETE said:


> barrel length is also sight radius.


Don't need "Sight Radius" don't need sights either, when what needs urgent killing is inches from the muzzle.

Kind'a hard to attach any importance to concealment.......when your also packing a fully exposed .375 Holland and Holland.


----------



## Chuck R. (Apr 24, 2008)

GREENCOUNTYPETE said:


> maybe others have seen them in IDPA or USPSA or some other.


I mainly shoot IDPA (3 different clubs) and 3 Gun and can probably count on 1 hand the number of 92s (or DA/SA SIGs) for that matter I see in matches. I also take a couple defensive pistol classes a year, and I see more SIGs, but still not many 92s. In the defensive pistol classes I've taken, 10 or more, the polymer guns rule, and they're predominately Glocks. One of the classes I've taken is conducted by a group of local trainers targeted at the students here at Ft. Leavenworth that are primarily Majors, an occasional LTC and a very few CPTs. You'd think that would have at least a few 92s in that class, a couple of the trainers use them to work with the students that bring them. I've still only seen a couple. 

Most of the guys I've seen in matches running a DA/SA gun to fit that category are running CZs (Shadows or straght 75s). Just last year I moved from a 5" S&W M&P "Pro" to a CZ7a "Accu-Shadow" lite from the custom shop, but I'm shooting it in ESP Division in SA mode.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

Chuck R. said:


> I mainly shoot IDPA (3 different clubs) and 3 Gun and can probably count on 1 hand the number of 92s (or DA/SA SIGs) for that matter I see in matches. I also take a couple defensive pistol classes a year, and I see more SIGs, but still not many 92s. In the defensive pistol classes I've taken, 10 or more, the polymer guns rule, and they're predominately Glocks. One of the classes I've taken is conducted by a group of local trainers targeted at the students here at Ft. Leavenworth that are primarily Majors, an occasional LTC and a very few CPTs. You'd think that would have at least a few 92s in that class, a couple of the trainers use them to work with the students that bring them. I've still only seen a couple.
> 
> Most of the guys I've seen in matches running a DA/SA gun to fit that category are running CZs (Shadows or straght 75s). Just last year I moved from a 5" S&W M&P "Pro" to a CZ7a "Accu-Shadow" lite from the custom shop, but I'm shooting it in ESP Division in SA mode.


I have a CZ 75 B that I like a lot.


----------



## Chuck R. (Apr 24, 2008)

HDRider said:


> I have a CZ 75 B that I like a lot.


I never played with them much. They were very popular when I was stationed in Germany back in he late 80s, cause GIs could get them, Cooper was praising them, and they weren't being imported yet.

3 or 4 of the guys at my club shoot them. I was looking for a high capacity gun last spring to use for both IDPA (10+1 limit) and 3GUN. Was looking at a 2011, when I started reading about he CZ Custom guns. The Accu-Shadow "Lite":










Makes weight, fits in the box with mag pads. It has a bushing barrel (like a 1911) and reduced reset w/lightened trigger all around. Utterly reliable with accuracy on par with my Les Baer's.


----------



## GREENCOUNTYPETE (Jul 25, 2006)

Sourdough said:


> Don't need "Sight Radius" don't need sights either, when what needs urgent killing is inches from the muzzle.
> 
> Kind'a hard to attach any importance to concealment.......when your also packing a fully exposed .375 Holland and Holland.


if your also carrying a rifle this could be somewhat true , your either out of ammo or your rifle is broken and the threat in Alaska is likely mauling you so yes sights are likely not needed.

in many civilian threats this may also be true , not always true but most civilian engagements are likely to be sub 21 feet.
when not in Alaska also carrying a magnum rifle then ability to conceal probably plays more of a part for most who carry.

while not typically a threat to life and limb it sure is a valid secondary use of your side arm to dispatch the raccoon you just flushed from your barn chicken coop or corn crib or that wood chuck that is digging under your barn wall when the opportunity presents it's self and not be running for another gun.

threats vary and needs vary and remember we are talking a military pistol that should really be very shoot-able by everyone fit for service.

if your in house to house fighting in a desert nation and you run low on ammo or your primary weapon is disabled you may still be shooting farther than across the room distances I think 50 yards is an expected distance that the pistol can be shot well too but a gun that shoots farther better without really sacrificing size or weight would seem to be a good choice.


when we look at what would be considered personal defensive pistols that competitors who are focused on shooting the targets as quickly and accurately as possible , what we don't tent do see is people looking for the shortest pistol they can find that fits the division. why , it generally costs them points or fractions of seconds basically the same thing in competition , in life that can mean misses or missed opportunity.

one possible reason the G17 and the 19X have nearly the same weight is the 19X would have been focused on 9mm nato and not 9mm para/ 9mm luger/ 9x19. the 9mm nato is essentially 9mm +p if your designing the gun for just one round and it is a +p round making a slightly heavier slide does make sense on a blow back gun.
the civilian P320 / M17 marked guns are lighter than the true M17 military issue guns the true M17 also has a heavier recoil spring but it doesn't need to work with REM-UMC 115gr and 147 Speer LE+p and everything in between the M17 only needs to run 9mm nato and it needs to run it 100% of the time.


----------



## muleskinner2 (Oct 7, 2007)

HDRider said:


> The 1911 being the icon it is, how many avid fans does the Beretta M9 have?


If you could only have one gun, and didn't shoot all that much, the M9 would be a good choice. Because you could use if for a boat anchor, or a trot line weight. When you weren't shooting.

I carried a 1911 or had one within reach for over twenty years. When the Glock first came out I never touched one for at least ten years. I thought they were just too ugly. And then I shot one. Now I show my 1911 to my friends, and I show my Glock to my enemies.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

I guess the M9 has no fans. I sure hope the Sig makes our guys happy


----------



## GREENCOUNTYPETE (Jul 25, 2006)

as I recall there was a rumor the M9 had more to do with strategic cold war missile defenses than it did as a service side arm.

even if that is un-true , most of the 1986 generation of side arms have a hard time competing against 30 years of refinement.


----------



## Chuck R. (Apr 24, 2008)

HDRider said:


> *I guess the M9 has no fans.* I sure hope the Sig makes our guys happy




It was not a popular weapon..........From the 2006 CNA report:



> Soldier satisfaction, confidence, and experiences Overall, 78 percent of soldiers surveyed reported being satisfied with their weapons. Soldiers were most satisfied with the M4 (89 percent) and least satisfied with the M9 (58 percent). M16 and M249 users were 75 percent and 71 percent satisfied, respectively. In table 2, overall satisfaction and satisfaction with specific weapon and weapon related attributes are reported.





> The highest percentage of soldiers reported weapon stoppages with the M9 (26 percent) and the M249 (30 percent) while engaging the enemy in theater.





> Soldiers were most confident in the reliability of the M4 (80 percent) and M16 (71 percent) and least confident in the reliability of the M9 (54 percent).


https://www.cna.org/CNA_files/PDF/D0015259.A2.pdf

A pretty good study overall for that time frame.


----------



## GunMonkeyIntl (May 13, 2013)

I’m the odd-ball, I guess. I kinda like a Beretta M9/92/96. They fit my hands well, shoot accurately, and are pretty reliable in my experience. 

Not my #1 pick, but I’d own/carry one again, maybe.


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

I used to hate "plastic" guns, I thought they were ugly and flimsy.
Then I actually handled one.
Not a huge Glock fan, although I do own one, and I like shooting it.
The only Sig I have is a West German P226, but I used to have a P938.
For target shooting, I am really starting to like my CZ P-09


----------

