CCW Sig or Taurus

[kf]

This has been a question I have debated WAY too long.

I presently own a SIG 239 in .9mm ( great gun) I have been looking for a small.45 for a long time.

I am not a glock fan, and decided on the Taurus PT 145.

Now the issue. Do I give up the Sig reliability for the Taurus just to gain 2 rounds and move up to .45?

any advice??

Thanks

Be Safe

[DefensiveCarry.com]

[HotGuns]

A question that only you can answer.

Either one will serve you well.

[rocky]

Personally I don't trust Taurus for quality. I feel Sig is much better. But it's your decision to make.

[retsupt99]

It's your decision, if it were mine...or those two, I go with the Sig, but that's me. OMO

[Ram Rod]

Well, first off

Secondly, I think you spelled things out for yourself:

Now the issue. Do I give up the Sig reliability for the Taurus just to gain 2 rounds and move up to .45?

I wouldn't give up known reliability for anything actually. Is the 45acp something to want and have? Absolutely! If there is any way you can retain your P239 and get the PT145, do it. That way you'll always have something to fall back on, and be secure in your quest. If you have to give up your SIG P239 in order to obtain the PT145, then it's a jump into the abyss for you. Personally, I'd stick with what has never let me down over the unknown. If you don't, you'd be gaining nothing. If you can retain your P239 and get the PT145, then go for it. Otherwise, place your bet on the tried and true.

[srfl]

Welcome to the forum.

[mr surveyor]

SIG




surv

[cmdrdredd]

SIG, but if you must have .45acp get a good 1911. You'll spend more but in the end have a better weapon.

If you want polymer and Glock isn't your thing check out the S&W M&P which is a spectacular weapon system. Maybe even an HK45 compact if you have the funds to go that route which is a most excellent gun in every aspect.

[farronwolf]

That is something your going to have to decide. If you run the PT145 through its paces and it proves to be reliable, eats the ammo, spits it out, and doesn't give you any other problems, then I see no reason not to carry it.

I have two Taurus', one PT111 that I have been carrying for a while and a 24/7 that I just recently got. I will switch them out for daily carry depending on certain circumstances. Both being 9mm. so I can't really argue that carrying a .45 is that much better, since one of them gives me 12 +1 and the other one gives me 17 +1. I have a .45 but carry it rarely.

One of the other members here has a Sig in .40, but chooses to carry a PT145 instead.

It is your choice. If both are reliable it is a tough call.

[SIXTO]

Do I give up the Sig reliability for the Taurus just to gain 2 rounds and move up to .45?

No way, no how.

[Sergeant Mac]

You might consider the Springfield XD. It's not EXACTLY like the Glock (feels better to me, and has a more "normal" trigger), and comes in a compact version.

In case you haven't noticed, the Taurus Millenium Series pistols are striker-fired, just like the Glocks and XDs.....

[AgentX]

Keep the SIG and spend money on ammo and training. The .45 doesn't give you anything better self-defense-wise. A real combat shooting course will have a true payoff.

If you want a .45 just to have a .45, and have the disposible income, go ahead and get one...but the SIG you already have is a truly fine pistol.

If you want to make a practical upgrade, perhaps look at some XS Big Dot sights.

Or sell the SIG and get 2 9mm Glocks.

[Martial Archer]

I'd trust my life to Sig...

[pogo2]

From a reliability standpoint, I believe that going from Sig to Taurus is a downhill move. There is nothing wrong with a Sig P239 in 9mm for carry, but if you want a polymer frame .45 CCW gun with 10 shot capability, I think the best one on the market is the HK 45c, as shown in this photo below by Ken Lunde:

[rstickle]

Stay with the SIG!

If you really MUST have a .45 take a look at the SIG 220 series, I know the SAO trigger on my 220 is really smooth.......