So Called High Bore Axis in Sigs

[mojust]

I have Sigs. I keep hearing (particularly from Glock owners) that the high bore axis is a real timing problem in competition shooting. Anything to this?

[DefensiveCarry.com]

[rob m]

I hear the same thing about XD's. I'm told a higher bore axis adds to muzzle flip and takes you longer to back on target. Not sure if its true or not.

[C hawk Glock]

Yes indeed I hear the same thing about XD's, but frankly I think they are better shooters then Glocks. Sig's are another level of quality in my opinion.

By the way, this comes from a Glock fan! Look at my name!

[goawayfarm]

This post will show you an example of some 'bore axis' differences:

http://www.defensivecarry.com/vbulle...ig-p239-4.html

look at post #33

[HotGuns]

I suppose if you were a world class competitor, where a few hundreths of a second was the difference between winning the trophy or winning nothing it might make a difference, but most of us dont have to worry about it.

In the real world,you need to practice with what you are going to carry.
Speed comes from not having to think about anything other than putting rounds on the target.

[C hawk Glock]

This post will show you an example of some 'bore axis' differences:

http://www.defensivecarry.com/vbulle...ig-p239-4.html

look at post #33

So are you trying to say that a Glock is a better gun and more accurate then a Sig?

If so, other then "bore axis" please tell me why? By the way, I have quite a bit of experience with both and I might want to hear your thoughts.

[kpw]

Having a higher bore axis isn't the only thing that relates to more muzzle flip. Weight, balance and grip angle also play a part. Caliber is another factor. In 9mm, there really isn't a lot of difference to make it distinguishable to me. In .357, .40 and .45, the higher axis of an XD or a Sig does make it noticeable to me compared to an equivilent Glock or M&P. A huge difference? Nope, not a deal breaker difference if I wanted a Sig (I do) or an XD. As far as competition goes, there are other considerations that may make Glocks a more popular choice but that doesn't make Sigs a bad choice at all.

[NY27]

I just went to the range the other day. I shot my G19 and my Sig 228. While the recoil was not bad on either, the Sig definitely had more recoil. I also shoot my 19 better than my 228. I like the Glock trigger better than the DA/SA of my Sig. I shot them both well, but my groups were tighter with the Glock. That being said, I shoot my Glocks a lot and barely shoot my Sig. I'm sure that if I shot my Sig more, the groups would tighten up.

They are both awesome weapons.

[goawayfarm]

So are you trying to say that a Glock is a better gun and more accurate then a Sig?

If so, other then "bore axis" please tell me why? By the way, I have quite a bit of experience with both and I might want to hear your thoughts.

Didn't say 'Glock was better' or even more accurate.......all I referenced was the bore axis.....& Glock is lower. I own Sigs & Glocks, they are both great firearms. Sig's are a little better in some ways & Glocks are better in others. Both run great out of the box....It's just the muzzle flip is more on a Sig then the Glock. I can say that by comparing the similar guns (Glock 23 & Sig 229, both .40s&w). The Glock is faster on follow up shots due to the lower flip.

[kazzaerexys]

I own a lot of SIGs, and I can't say I really think that SIGs have more muzzle flip for a given cartridge and barrel length than any comparable gun I have fired. As for competition, my SIG P220 SAO has done right well by me in IDPA so far.

I think muzzle flip has a lot more to do with stance, grip, technique, and ergonomics to the shooter than a small difference in bore axis in most standard calibers. I am slower with follow-up shots on a Glock, I think (and this is just a feeling because I haven't compared times with a shot timer), because the grip angle means my natural point-of-aim with one is different, so I find it harder to get the gun to come back down to the original geometry after the first shot. For my SIGs, though, the return to aim is pretty much spot on.

Now, if we were talking .44 Magnum out of a 2--3 inch barrel, then I think we might start seeing some noticeable differences in splits based solely on barrel height...

[Keltyke]

If you want a really low bore axis, check out the Steyr.

[HotGuns]

Steyrs are great guns, but they are even uglier than Glocks.

[SCfromNY]

Someone should invent a gun with the obvious quality and reliability of a Sig. This gun would be lighter and more recoil absorbing with it's polymer frame like a Glock.

WAIT! There is H&K!

[rstrainii]

I have shot my Sig P220 and a friends G30 as well as my PT 845. I have placed many rounds down range with all and I have to say that with the Sig I can get back on target quicker. I was talking to a friend of mine that is an Israeli marksmanship Instructor, he to can get back on target with Metal Frame pistols faster than Polymer (but he is a 1911 guy). I think a lot of it has to do with personal preference such as I know that I can shoot faster with Metal Frame and more accurate than with Polymer frames from experience.

[gottabkiddin]

All I know is, it causes more muzzle flip which would hinder the "back on target" during rapid fire.