P239 in 40S&W - Page 2

P239 in 40S&W

This is a discussion on P239 in 40S&W within the Defensive Carry Guns forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; Originally Posted by Rollo Sig lists the width on the website as 1.20. Not sure where I got the 1.25 number from. Maybe Sig measures ...

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 36

Thread: P239 in 40S&W

  1. #16
    VIP Member Array pogo2's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Southwest
    Posts
    3,150

    Comments

    Quote Originally Posted by Rollo View Post
    Sig lists the width on the website as 1.20. Not sure where I got the 1.25 number from. Maybe Sig measures it from control to control. Not trying to disparage anyones gun choice but I feel that 29.5 oz empty and 1.20 inches thick is pretty big and heavy for a single stack pistol.
    The 9mm P239 is smaller than the .40 caliber gun. It weighs 27.5 ounces. The .40 caliber gun is also a little wider and has more material in the slide, which is where the extra weight comes from.

    Gun companies often measure gun thickness at the controls, which stick out from the slide. This is misleading, however, as 98% of the slide will be the "flat to flat" width, and a small slide stop or decocker will be somewhat wider. I guess the gun companies want to err on the side of conservatism.

    I would point out that many single stack guns are much heavier than a P239, such as the majority of 1911s.
    Firearms are second only to the Constitution in importance; they are the Peoples' Liberty's Teeth." - George Washington


  2. #17
    VIP Member Array shooterX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    2,848
    Quote Originally Posted by pogo2 View Post
    I have a Sig P239 and was just measuring it with an engineering ruler. The slide, from flat to flat, is right on 1.00 inches. The grip, with Hogue aluminum grips, is 1.10 inches. The slide stop and decocker stick out slightly further. The P239, at least in 9mm, is a fairly small gun.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rollo View Post
    Sig lists the width on the website as 1.20. Not sure where I got the 1.25 number from. Maybe Sig measures it from control to control. Not trying to disparage anyones gun choice but I feel that 29.5 oz empty and 1.20 inches thick is pretty big and heavy for a single stack pistol.

    I EDC a P239 .40 daily, IWB and have found it much more comfortable than the XD sub-compact it replaced, I also found it to be thinner than advertised. I wanted the slightly longer barrel, and the single stack mags so I could just slide one in my pocket when I want. Capacity is less than the XD sub, but I carry a j-frame from time to time so round count wasn't my main motivation. As far as the 40 being snappy I can't say I have really noticed it that much, but when I shoot I usually have an auto in .40 and a .357 mag smith or two. I will say that I shoot my P226 better.

  3. #18
    VIP Member Array Rollo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    3,007
    Quote Originally Posted by shooterX View Post
    I EDC a P239 .40 daily, IWB and have found it much more comfortable than the XD sub-compact it replaced, I also found it to be thinner than advertised. I wanted the slightly longer barrel, and the single stack mags so I could just slide one in my pocket when I want. Capacity is less than the XD sub, but I carry a j-frame from time to time so round count wasn't my main motivation. As far as the 40 being snappy I can't say I have really noticed it that much, but when I shoot I usually have an auto in .40 and a .357 mag smith or two. I will say that I shoot my P226 better.
    Ill defiently admit that a spare single stack mag is a heck of alot easier to carry then a spare double stack mag. Knowing that the width is in reality closer to a inch it ALMOST makes me want one. I stil think that 27.5 empty is pretty heavy for a 9mm with that capacity HOWEVER it is a all metal gun so if that was a impotant factor to you I would definetly see why one would lean towards the 239.
    -It is a seriously scary thought that there are subsets of American society that think being intellectual is a BAD thing...

  4. #19
    Senior Member Array Freedomofchoice's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Wesley Chapel, Florida
    Posts
    1,028
    Up until very recently, I owned a Sig 239 in 40 S&W. In every respect it was a great gun, but just one of those guns I never bonded with, kind of like my Glock 30, which I also sold.

    Here's what I think:
    Positives: Slim single stack grip
    Considered to be light weight (the 40 weighs 1 oz. more)
    great trigger
    100% reliable, never had a single failure in about 1000rounds
    accurate

    Negatives: I own several 40 cal. guns, the Sig 239 seems to exhibit greater felt recoil than the others.
    The gun rattles. Slide fit is rather sloppy...every other 239 I ever handled rattled also!
    Follow up shots seemed to take longer than with my 9mms.
    Even though the gun is considered light and small for a Sig, to me it always felt bulky, and as a result, I did not carry it often.
    Considering size and weight, magazine capacity is negligible.

    My recommendation is if you get one, get it in 9mm. Easier shooting, and slightly lighter in weight.


    Hope this helps.
    .

    Too light for heavy work, too heavy for light work!

    pb

  5. #20
    VIP Member Array shooterX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    2,848
    Quote Originally Posted by Freedomofchoice View Post
    Considering size and weight, magazine capacity is negligible.
    This can be said about many 1911's out there, and I still see them being carried daily.

  6. #21
    Senior Member Array Gun Bunny's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    IN
    Posts
    759
    I have shot both the 9/.40, and own a 9mm. I love the 239, it is a great gun, not the thinest, lightest but I think a great carry piece! i carry all day when not at work and it just feels great. I feel it is just drop-dead reliable, and accurate.
    Kahr CW9
    Sig P239/9mm
    Ruger LC9 (when the girlfriend lets me carry her gun)


    "First Duty is To Remember"

  7. #22
    Senior Member Array imthduke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Sweet Home Alabama
    Posts
    753
    This is a fat grip but I have big hands....It shoots like a charm.
    http://www.treasureislandbedandbreakfast.com
    Ed Brown Kobra Carry | HK P7M8, P2000sk, P30s | Sig P238, P239SAS, 1911 C3, P232, P938 | Colt Defender, Mustang Pocketlite, 1911 | Rohrbaugh R9 | Kimber Covert Ultra II | Browning HP, Buckmark 22LR(suppressed| Walter PPK(1966) | Kahr PM9 Black Rose |

  8. #23
    Senior Member Array mr surveyor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Texas, South of the Sabine
    Posts
    1,149
    I have a P239 in 40s&w and love the gun. Just my opinion, it is a bit wide for comfortable IWB carry, but it is still one of my favorite carry guns. I don't find the .40 cal overly agressive to my hand/wrist in the P239 platform. Although I tend to carry a snubbie during the work day, and a Kahr CW9 (a heck of a lot thinner profile) most of the time when off work, the P239 gets a lot more carry time than the 1911. I wish I'd taken advantage of the deal Sig had a year or so ago where they would install night sights, replace springs, and inspect and replace worn pins, etc., for $130. My only complaint with my P239 is the Heine sights..... other than that, it's a near perfect machine.


    surv

  9. #24
    Member Array got2hav1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    294

    P239

    I don't have the .40 239, but I do have it in 9mm. I to love the look of the two tone but settled for the black version. In 9mm it is deadly accurate and reliable. Best SA trigger I've ever pulled. Oh yeah mine rattles a little as well. The P6 I have is much older but no rattle.

  10. #25
    Distinguished Member Array kazzaerexys's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    1,838
    I use a .40S&W P239 as my most often carried gun. It is very concealable in my MTAC. As for the cartridge, I find the .40 to be very shootable out of this gun. I generally go for 180gr and keep Federal HST as my defensive rounds. It's a great little shooter!
    “What is a moderate interpretation of [the Constitution]? Halfway between what it says and [...] what you want it to say?” —Justice Antonin Scalia

    SIG: P220R SS Elite SAO, P220R SAO, P220R Carry, P226R Navy, P226, P239/.40S&W, P2022/.40S&W; GSR 5", P6.

  11. #26
    Member Array GettingOld2's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    240
    Quote Originally Posted by Ceapea View Post
    The 239 is a bit smaller and "snappy" MAY become a problem.
    I have one, originally purchased as a .357, that I obtained a .40 barrel for as well.

    I'd say that the .357 is a little snappy with 125gr rounds, but 180gr rounds in the .40 is really smooth and easy. So much so I'm going to ask my wife to try it.

    I'm not a big guy and have small hands. I find that the P239 really fits comfortably.

  12. #27
    Senior Member Array Freedomofchoice's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Wesley Chapel, Florida
    Posts
    1,028
    Originally posted by: Freedomofchoice:
    Considering size and weight, magazine capacity is negligible.




    Quote Originally Posted by shooterX View Post
    This can be said about many 1911's out there, and I still see them being carried daily.

    That is absolutely true, you can also say many people still carry 5 shot revolvers as well, myself included from time to time. But there is a reason why most police depts. or military personnel no longer carry revolvers. Many will even argue that the 1911 is an outdated platform.

    The original poster asked for opinions of the Sig 239 40S&W, and having had experience with that particular gun I gave my opinion. The point I hoped to make was that when selecting a gun for carry, if you're going to spend +- $700 for a carry gun there are better choices than the 239.
    .

    Too light for heavy work, too heavy for light work!

    pb

  13. #28
    New Member Array specship's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    W. Washington
    Posts
    3
    I bought a new P239 six months ago w/ 3 clips, nite sites, srt, 40. It does rattle a little when you pick it up, but not when you shoot it. I'm not so experienced, but another guy at the range shot it and he buried everything tight at 40'. I can't blame the gun. The short return trigger is an added bonus I never thought about, but when this showed up with all the clips, brand new at $650 shipped, I bit. I am not disappointed. When I occasionally carry, I have my P232SS - 380, which let's face it.. that's gonna hurt. I've shot several of the Glocks in 40 and this gun seems to handle the recoil better. Maybe it's a physics thing with the hammer being vertical that helps keep it down better.

  14. #29
    Member Array Ceapea's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Midwest
    Posts
    381
    Quote Originally Posted by specship View Post
    I bought a new P239 six months ago w/ 3 clips, nite sites, srt, 40. It does rattle a little when you pick it up, but not when you shoot it. I'm not so experienced, but another guy at the range shot it and he buried everything tight at 40'. I can't blame the gun. The short return trigger is an added bonus I never thought about, but when this showed up with all the clips, brand new at $650 shipped, I bit. I am not disappointed. When I occasionally carry, I have my P232SS - 380, which let's face it.. that's gonna hurt. I've shot several of the Glocks in 40 and this gun seems to handle the recoil better. Maybe it's a physics thing with the hammer being vertical that helps keep it down better.
    For $650, is that the 2-tone? That isn't the SAS is it? That is a good price but I am considering the SAS two tone and will end up spending a bit more (unless you have found the ultimate deal) to get it.
    I too have a P232 SS and carry it often. Usually as a BUG but not necessarily so. In the summer, it or my Smith M36 go nicely into a pocket holster for cargo shorts carry as my primary.
    The man's nuts....grab 'em!
    A pistol free zone is a crime spree zone!
    NRA Life Member
    Thugs that comply, don't die!
    Thugs that comply, don't die!
    Repeat...

  15. #30
    Senior Member Array Freedomofchoice's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Wesley Chapel, Florida
    Posts
    1,028
    Quote Originally Posted by Ceapea View Post
    Thanks. I am not really looking at the thickness. I like a thicker grip on a smaller gun anyway for the sake of controlling it. The dimensions look a lot like my P232 and that gun is like an extension of my arm...sweet! If I had noticed the 239 at the time I was looking at the 232, I wouldn't have gotten the 232. I love my 232, but even though I consider the .380 to be viable, it is too hard to get. The 239 would have won out for that reason alone. Actually, thinking about it now, I did look at the 239, but thought that it was too "blocky"...I don't think that the SAS version was available at that time. I remember saying to the counter guy that "if the 239 was as smooth and sleek as the 232, I'd have it".

    Ceapea
    You said you like a thicker grip, but, the grip isn't thick, the slide is thicker. The slide on the 239 40 S&W is actually thicker and taller than the slide on the 239 9mm. That accounts for the fact that the 40 weighs 1 1/2 oz more than the 9mm, and also holsters for each are different.

    I had a 239 in 40 cal. and did not like the way it shot. Seemed snappier than my Glock 23 and 27. I ended up selling it because there were just better choices for its size and weight, like the Sig 250. Weighs just 25 oz. and holds a good deal more rounds than the 239.
    .

    Too light for heavy work, too heavy for light work!

    pb

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Sponsored Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. IWB for Sig P239
    By Counsel Dew in forum Defensive Carry Holsters & Carry Options
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: July 25th, 2009, 04:33 PM
  2. Sig P239
    By QuickDrawMcGraw in forum Defensive Carry Guns
    Replies: 31
    Last Post: September 30th, 2007, 11:20 AM
  3. Sig P239
    By EW3 in forum Defensive Carry Holsters & Carry Options
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: August 27th, 2007, 10:21 AM
  4. My Sig P239
    By dr_cmg in forum Defensive Carry Guns
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: May 13th, 2006, 02:08 PM

Search tags for this page

9mm small pistol
,
aluminum grips p239
,

p239

,

p239 aluminum grips

,
p239 in .40 s&w
,

p239 stainless

,
p239 viable edc
,
sig p239 grips aluminum
,

sig p239 slide width

,
sig p239 two tone 9mm
,
smallest 9mm handgun with decocker
,
stainless p239
Click on a term to search for related topics.