View Full Version : The Navy and The Sig P226
30 cal slut
03-30-09, 17:27
Not too long ago I was having a conversation with a good fishing buddy of mine.
He's retired UDT and no stranger to firearms.
I think I recall a conversation with him in which he briefly alluded to a Navy study of the Sig P226 9mm pistol.
This document, which I have not seen, supposedly discussed the P226's finickiness with non-ball (i.e., defensive) ammo.
Can anyone point me to this study, if it's available to the public?
Thanks!
-slut
Todd G would be the one to ask
Dan Goodwin
03-30-09, 18:06
Perhaps early 226s were, but I can tell you from personal observation the frogmen from various Teams I trained with or saw training (2, 5 and DevGru) at MISS in the late '90s were using P226s almost universally (one had G19). And if anyone would be using HP, it would be those dudes.
They liked playing with the HUGE HK Socom suppressed, but said they wouldn't want to carry it.
Both the P226/Mk24 and P228/M11 work perfectly well with JHP ammunition.
Not too long ago I was having a conversation with a good fishing buddy of mine.
He's retired UDT and no stranger to firearms.
I think I recall a conversation with him in which he briefly alluded to a Navy study of the Sig P226 9mm pistol.
This document, which I have not seen, supposedly discussed the P226's finickiness with non-ball (i.e., defensive) ammo.
Can anyone point me to this study, if it's available to the public?
Thanks!
-slut
When magazine springs wear out after years and years of constant compression and relaxation you can get feeding problems. Particularly with straight walled 9mm magazines. The 9mm case is tapered unlike the .40S&W and .45acp......so, in order to have full contact between the cartridges the 9mm is optimal in a curved magazine like the MP-5. When you use a straight walled magazine, there is space between the front of the cartridges and some play. When those magazine springs get weak, you get nose dives during feeding with the 9mm. More handups would occur with JHP than FMJ when the springs are in this condition. Those stories that you've heard of enlisted men in Afghanistan and Iraq stretching out their M9 magazine springs and only loading them up with 10rds for reliability is true because their magazine springs did not have the necessary tension to ensure proper feeding.
The 9mm is a great cartridge, but because it uses a tapered case you start to run into reliability problems with straight walled magazines and weak magazine springs. Magazines that are in military service are particularly effected by this since they are constantly loaded, unloaded/shot, reloaded,......etc which really wears out the springs. Agencies that replace their 9mm magazine springs at scheduled intervals don't suffer from this problem.
I'm a Sig armorer, range master, and work for the DOI and feeding problems with JHP and the 9mm rarely occur unless the magazines being used have been in service for over 10yrs and are overdue for spring replacements. Straight walled cartridges seem to have a longer magazine spring lifespan as I've run a number of .40S&W Sigs through a lot of range work and many of them had magazines that were near 15yrs old and had been heavily used over the years.
He's retired UDT and no stranger to firearms.
I think I recall a conversation with him in which he briefly alluded to a Navy study of the Sig P226 9mm pistol.
This document, which I have not seen, supposedly discussed the P226's finickiness with non-ball (i.e., defensive) ammo.
The amount of shooting and testing that USN did with "non-ball" ammo prior to '01 was pretty tiny to begin with, so I'm not sure where such a report would have originated. Regardless, the P226 in both its original stamped steel slide incarnation and the current forged stainless slide version (both of which have been in NSW armories) have never had a systemic problem with JHPs.
Perhaps someone (not necessarily your friend) put "we can't use JHPs" and "we have SIGs" together and somehow came up with "we can't use JHPs because we have SIGs."
sigmundsauer
03-31-09, 06:59
The amount of shooting and testing that USN did with "non-ball" ammo prior to '01 was pretty tiny to begin with, so I'm not sure where such a report would have originated. Regardless, the P226 in both its original stamped steel slide incarnation and the current forged stainless slide version (both of which have been in NSW armories) have never had a systemic problem with JHPs.
Perhaps someone (not necessarily your friend) put "we can't use JHPs" and "we have SIGs" together and somehow came up with "we can't use JHPs because we have SIGs."
Todd, SIG forges their stainless slides? I thought they simply cut them from stainless barstock, unforged? At least, I remember the 1911's were quietly known to be, partially compensated for with their great mass.
Oh,...and SIG P226's run perfectly well on hollow point ammunition. :D
Tim
sigmundsauer -- You're absolutely right. People, including folks at SIG, often called them forged (don't know why), but they are individually CNC machined from bar stock.
30
twice i tested the 226 for my agency. during that test the weapons fired to the tune of 20,000 rds.(ammo used 124gr. +P gold dot). the guns had to be cleaned every 500 rds. but many times we put well over 2500 rds. thru them before cleaning them. no major issues at all the guns ran fine. i also work part time in a place that NSW personnel train, and see the 226 put thru its paces. granted they are shooting ball ammo. the gun will feed either ball or jhp with no issues.
I own a p226R Navy and have yet to have any failures with any type of HP. I've shot lots of ammo through it such as Speer Gold Dot, Hornady XTP, Corbon DPX, and Federal HST with no problems.
The Dumb Gun Collector
03-31-09, 20:21
Sig 226s are some of some of the least picky guns I have ever seen.
Most "Navy" 226's that Sig has sold have nothing in common with the SEAL 226 except the anchor on the slide. Just saying...
Most "Navy" 226's that Sig has sold have nothing in common with the SEAL 226 except the anchor on the slide. Just saying...
SIG had written permission from the US Navy WARCOM JAG to produce 2,000-4,000 "Navy" guns for commercial sale, proceeds of those sales going to the Special Operations Warrior Foundation (http://www.specialops.org). I still have the letter hanging on my bulletin board in my office.
After first delaying the project for fear it wouldn't sell, SIG was overwhelmed by the demand once the first 2,000 guns were manufactured. But rather than build an additional 2,000 and donate more money to SOWF, the company decided instead to stop using the special serial number, pretend the "Navy" gun was a regular catalog item, and sell it without donating any money to anyone ... which is not what the Navy agreed to.
Since then, there has been a variety of models sold under the "Navy" name: with and without rails, with and without the anti-corrosion internals, with and without the special magazines the Navy gets, etc.
One of the original guns (I had to give this one back, sadly ... still have #13, though):
http://greent.com/webimg/NAVY/P226NAVY-0911.jpg
One of the original guns (I had to give this one back, sadly ... still have #13, though):
Why did you HAVE to?
Why did you HAVE to?
Because when they fired my ass, they made me give back everything in my sample kit. :cool: Unreasonable bastards.
30 cal slut
04-06-09, 09:49
thx for all the replies. very interesting.
i just picked an older 226 last thursday for a song. put 300 rds. thru it friday. will shoot it again today, i have about 400 rds. ready to go down range later today. my gun was made in 1992, gun is in great shape.
Just make sure you replace the inner & outer slide roll pins every 10k rounds or so and it should stay that way.
thanks todd,
i thought it was every 5000rds along with the recoil spring. either way it will be changed.
You know, I think you're right and it is every 5k. Doh!
todd,
no issues, i want this one to last awhile. it won't see any +p as it's going to be a trainer for when i have to work with certain units. if i need a sig for carry i have a 228.
Because when they fired my ass, they made me give back everything in my sample kit. :cool: Unreasonable bastards.
Bastardos!!!
John_Wayne777
04-06-09, 18:58
Because when they fired my ass, they made me give back everything in my sample kit. :cool: Unreasonable bastards.
With your charming personality and overall loveableness I fail to see how anyone could bear to fire you.
It would be like...kicking a kitten...or something.
NinjaMedic
04-06-09, 19:00
Todd,
If you get a chance is there any way that you could do a compare/contrast on an NSW/ Actual Navy issue P226 vs a standard non-railed P226, maybe with pictures. I have always been curious as to the specific differences, such as which small parts are different in design and/or finish, differences in the navy issue magazine, etc. and I am sure many others have been as well. You are one of the few in the know that could actually lay out ALL of the differences in your standard excellent detail. Do you think that could be facilitated? Thanks!
Todd,
If you get a chance is there any way that you could do a compare/contrast on an NSW/ Actual Navy issue P226 vs a standard non-railed P226, maybe with pictures. I have always been curious as to the specific differences, such as which small parts are different in design and/or finish, differences in the navy issue magazine, etc. and I am sure many others have been as well. You are one of the few in the know that could actually lay out ALL of the differences in your standard excellent detail. Do you think that could be facilitated? Thanks!
I second that...
If you get a chance is there any way that you could do a compare/contrast on an NSW/ Actual Navy issue P226 vs a standard non-railed P226, maybe with pictures.
(1) I can't do pictures. The only P226 I have is a NSW model so I've got nothing to compare it to, and it's NIB so I'm not stripping it down for a photo shoot. Sorry.
(2) For genuine to-the-Navy guns, the "internal parts" are phosphated. I'm embarrassed to say I don't know which ones are and aren't, we always said "all internal parts" and it's been too long since I had to remember the details. I might be able to get that info for you, though.
(3) The original NSW guns were built to the exact same spec (at that time) as the genuine Navy guns, except for the special serial number. The anchor engraving is on the real Navy guns and was incorporated so that it would be easy to identify the newer (stainless one-piece slide) guns from the older (folded two-piece slide) guns.
(4) Subsequent iterations of the "Navy" model have had a hodgepodge of genuine and not-so-genuine parts. Even SIG, at times, seemed unsure what they were putting in the guns.
(5) The Navy gets either phosphated magazines with the rubber floorplates or a special (more corrosion resistant) finish which we simply called "agate." A major domestic LE agency also gets this finish on its mags, because said agency insists on storing its magazines in a box container half-flooded with seawater. :cool: Ironically, the Navy went back to the phosphated mags once issues arose in sandy places with the thicker, tackier agate finish. The fact that SIG did (and sometimes still does) recommend that end-users add lubricant to the inside of their mag tubes may have had something to do with those sand problems, too. :rolleyes:
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.