FYI: SIG P290 SUB-COMPACT 9MM available soon. - Page 2

FYI: SIG P290 SUB-COMPACT 9MM available soon.

This is a discussion on FYI: SIG P290 SUB-COMPACT 9MM available soon. within the General Firearm Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; Here is a quick review of the 290 at the 2011 Shot....

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 31

Thread: FYI: SIG P290 SUB-COMPACT 9MM available soon.

  1. #16
    Member Array mandalitten's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Newport, RI
    Posts
    362
    Here is a quick review of the 290 at the 2011 Shot.


  2. #17
    Distinguished Member Array LanceORYGUN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    ORYGUN
    Posts
    1,517
    Quote Originally Posted by mandalitten View Post
    Here is a quick review of the 290 at the 2011 Shot.

    That dude is not very knowledgeable, or even articulate. He complains that the gun is only 6+1, and then compares it to the Kahr PM-9, yet it has the exact same ammo capacity. And his entire biggest rant about the pistol being a lot thicker than the competition is totally off base too.

    He does not appear to me to be experienced with smaller carry guns. Yes, the gun is heavier than the competition. But that is really the old valid point that he raises.

    And if 20 oz makes a gun too heavy to carry, then a lot of us here are going to have to dump our current carry guns.

    .

  3. #18
    Member Array mandalitten's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Newport, RI
    Posts
    362
    It was his opinion that it was heavy, and it wasn't really just that it was heavy. It was the combination of weight, thickness, and capacity that made him dislike them. Obviously if you are used to carry a full size 1911, then this won't be a problem. I think his point was that the specs weren't that impressive when there are other options out there, such as the Keltec, or the Kahr PM9 (quite a bit thinner than the 290) that I know he carries.

    The video wasn't meant to be a pro review, and it was obviously done on the fly. I have seen a few of his videos on youtube, and I think he is pretty knowledgeable, at least compared to most of what's out there. He is ex millitary/LEO and has as of right now 760 videos with probably millions of views on youtube so he must be doing something right.

  4. #19
    VIP Member Array Rollo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    3,007
    Quote Originally Posted by LanceORYGUN View Post
    That dude is not very knowledgeable, or even articulate. He complains that the gun is only 6+1, and then compares it to the Kahr PM-9, yet it has the exact same ammo capacity. And his entire biggest rant about the pistol being a lot thicker than the competition is totally off base too.

    He does not appear to me to be experienced with smaller carry guns. Yes, the gun is heavier than the competition. But that is really the old valid point that he raises.

    And if 20 oz makes a gun too heavy to carry, then a lot of us here are going to have to dump our current carry guns.

    .
    I have watched the vast majority of his video reviews and for the most part he is knowledgeable. As far as not being articulate I don't agree. His videos are generally shot "from the hip" without a ton of edits and no scripts so I don't expect them to flow like a Shakespearean production. That being said... If you guys thought I was a sissy when it came to weight nutnfancy makes me look like the universes manliest man. He pretty much labels anything over 15oz as to heavy for CCW.

    Edit - One thing he did say that I totally disagree with. I don't think thickness has anything to do with comfort. I think it has EVERYTHING to do with concealment but not comfort. I would argue that weight primarily and length secondary are the most important attributes when it comes to comfort. Thickness and height being most important for concealment.
    -It is a seriously scary thought that there are subsets of American society that think being intellectual is a BAD thing...

  5. #20
    VIP Member Array Rollo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    3,007
    Quote Originally Posted by Rollo View Post
    I have watched the vast majority of his video reviews and for the most part he is knowledgeable. As far as not being articulate I don't agree. His videos are generally shot "from the hip" without a ton of edits and no scripts so I don't expect them to flow like a Shakespearean production. That being said... If you guys thought I was a sissy when it came to weight nutnfancy makes me look like the universes manliest man. He pretty much labels anything over 20oz as to heavy for CCW.

    Edit - One thing he did say that I totally disagree with. I don't think thickness has anything to do with comfort. I think it has EVERYTHING to do with concealment but not comfort. I would argue that weight primarily and length secondary are the most important attributes when it comes to comfort. Thickness and height being most important for concealment.
    Edit 2 - I have since changed my mind about the super small pocket 9's as a primary. I am not interested. My Ruger sp-101 conceals like a dream. It may carry 2 less round and be slower to reload but the .357 magnum cartridge is....well...the .357 magnum cartridge. Since the vast majority of self defense shooting are solved in less then 5 rounds I feel the 101 is the better choice. I am still interested in the DB9 but only if it' s is truly pocketable.
    -It is a seriously scary thought that there are subsets of American society that think being intellectual is a BAD thing...

  6. #21
    Distinguished Member Array LanceORYGUN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    ORYGUN
    Posts
    1,517
    Quote Originally Posted by mandalitten View Post
    I think his point was that the specs weren't that impressive when there are other options out there, such as the Keltec, or the Kahr PM9 (quite a bit thinner than the 290) that I know he carries.

    Both of these guns have an identical slide thickness of .9 inch. I fail to see how one could possibly argue that one is significantly thicker than the other. I carry a PM9, that this P290 doesn't look any thicker than my pistol. This point comes across as being an obvious exaggeration on his part.

    And the 6+1 capacity is exactly the same as the PM9's capacity. And even weight is not that big of a factor, either. Kahr PM9 with magazine is 15.9 oz, compared to 20.5 oz for the Sig P290 with a mag. Dude, that is only a difference of 4.6 oz

    So his arguments really fall apart when comparing the gun to a PM9. Capacity and thickness are identical, and while I admit that the gun is significantly heavier, another 4.6 oz is not necessarily a deal breaker.

    So his review definitely comes across to me as being inaccurate and exaggerated.


    Quote Originally Posted by mandalitten View Post
    The video wasn't meant to be a pro review, and it was obviously done on the fly.
    He does need to buy a video camera with image stabilization built into it. Most decent video cameras now have that feature. The video was way too jerky.

    .

  7. #22
    Distinguished Member Array LanceORYGUN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    ORYGUN
    Posts
    1,517
    Quote Originally Posted by Rollo View Post
    I have watched the vast majority of his video reviews and for the most part he is knowledgeable. As far as not being articulate I don't agree. His videos are generally shot "from the hip" without a ton of edits and no scripts so I don't expect them to flow like a Shakespearean production. That being said... If you guys thought I was a sissy when it came to weight nutnfancy makes me look like the universes manliest man. He pretty much labels anything over 15oz as to heavy for CCW.
    Well, if he can take such strong exception with a gun like the P290 that weighs 20.5 oz, I would have to think that he would burst a vein or two reviewing your Ruger SP101.

    This review by him comes across as being rather biased, in my opinion. It seems unnecessarily harsh.

    The simple fact is that there is no perfect gun. Every gun has its advantages and drawbacks. And he is definitely exaggerating the P290's drawbacks.

    .

  8. #23
    VIP Member Array Rollo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    3,007
    Quote Originally Posted by LanceORYGUN View Post
    Well, if he can take such strong exception with a gun like the P290 that weighs 20.5 oz, I would have to think that he would burst a vein or two reviewing your Ruger SP101.
    .
    He actually does have a review on the SP101 and rags on the weight a few times through out the video. I find it perfectly comfortable to carry...Even light weight. He doesn't agree. To each his own. I do understand his point of view on the 290 to some extent though. It's not that the gun is to wide or to heavy. It's that (to me) it is to wide and to heavy for what you GET. In this it reminds me a lot of the p239. When I look at the specs and the capacity of the 239 I find myself going "seriously??". It's the same way with the 290. If you stack it up weight wise with the other single stack 9mm's in its class (lc9, kimber solo, DB9, PF9, PM9) it's fails pretty harshly. Width is debatable. the ambi safety adds quite a bit so I am willing to give that a pass. I have no issue taking on more weight If I am getting something in return. Take my SP101. It's low capacity and heavy (27 oz) when you compare it to other sub compact pistols. But for that weight I am getting a more effective cartridge so I can justify the weight. With the p290 what are you getting for that extra 4 oz? More capacity? Nope. More potent cartridge? Nope. The only advantage I can see for the extra weight is reduced recoil.
    -It is a seriously scary thought that there are subsets of American society that think being intellectual is a BAD thing...

  9. #24
    Distinguished Member Array TerriLi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    1,231
    After firing a awhile ago and carrying a Grendel P12 .380 I learned one thing, A gun can be too light. So honestly the weight issue isnt much of one. Dimension are the biggy, to thick it prints easier, to long and it jabs you all day, and prints at the smallest movements.
    If you fire a .380 out of a firearm that is more aptly weighted for a .22lr then it will kick harder then a .357. (Got the sore hands and bruises to prove it).
    So the weight issue is over blown, the thickness not so much.
    A good rig makes carrying a dream, and sometimes the right grips can help too.
    I know not what this "overkill" means.

    Honing the knives, Cleaning the longguns, Stocking up ammo.

  10. #25
    VIP Member Array Rollo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    3,007
    Quote Originally Posted by TerriLi View Post
    After firing a awhile ago and carrying a Grendel P12 .380 I learned one thing, A gun can be too light. So honestly the weight issue isnt much of one. Dimension are the biggy, to thick it prints easier, to long and it jabs you all day, and prints at the smallest movements.
    If you fire a .380 out of a firearm that is more aptly weighted for a .22lr then it will kick harder then a .357. (Got the sore hands and bruises to prove it).
    So the weight issue is over blown, the thickness not so much.
    A good rig makes carrying a dream, and sometimes the right grips can help too.
    I agree that a gun can be "to light" but when the vast majority of the competition is weighing in between 12-16 ounces and your coming in at 20.5.... I'm not sayin, I'm just sayin...
    -It is a seriously scary thought that there are subsets of American society that think being intellectual is a BAD thing...

  11. #26
    Distinguished Member Array LanceORYGUN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    ORYGUN
    Posts
    1,517
    Quote Originally Posted by Rollo View Post
    It's that (to me) it is to wide and to heavy for what you GET. In this it reminds me a lot of the p239. When I look at the specs and the capacity of the 239 I find myself going "seriously??". It's the same way with the 290.
    I would never, ever compare this Sig P290 to the P239. The Sig P239 is in a whole different class size. I experimented with carrying one for a very brief time. But exactly as you have said here, I found myself thinking that I was giving up way too much with the P239, for far too few benefits.

    This P290 is very close in size to the Kahr PM9. Here is a photo that I once took comparing my PM9 ( on the left ) to my Sig P239 ( on the right ). So the difference in size between the P290 and the P239 is going to be something very similar to this:




    And here is what ended up replacing my P239: the Walther PPS:



  12. #27
    Member Array mandalitten's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Newport, RI
    Posts
    362
    It's been a while since I have seen a PM9 myself, but when I saw it I got the impression that it was very slim. I know the specs for the slide is the same on the two guns, but the 290 seems a lot beefier, maybe it's because of the big slide release that makes it 1.1" thick.
    For those that are interested, here is his review of the PM9

  13. #28
    Distinguished Member Array LanceORYGUN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    ORYGUN
    Posts
    1,517
    Quote Originally Posted by mandalitten View Post
    I know the specs for the slide is the same on the two guns, but the 290 seems a lot beefier, maybe it's because of the big slide release that makes it 1.1" thick.
    The Kahr PM9 has a slide release too.

    .

  14. #29
    VIP Member Array Rollo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    3,007
    Quote Originally Posted by mandalitten View Post
    It's been a while since I have seen a PM9 myself, but when I saw it I got the impression that it was very slim. I know the specs for the slide is the same on the two guns, but the 290 seems a lot beefier, maybe it's because of the big slide release that makes it 1.1" thick.
    For those that are interested, here is his review of the PM9
    Sorry, Allow me to clarify. I wasn't comparing the 290 and the 239 against each other. I was comparing the 290 to the 239 in the way that when I looked at the specs I said "WOW!, really??". What I mean is is for a single stack 9/40 the 239 is quite heavy and fairly wide. For a single stack 9mm the 290 is quite heavy and wide.
    -It is a seriously scary thought that there are subsets of American society that think being intellectual is a BAD thing...

  15. #30
    Member Array mandalitten's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Newport, RI
    Posts
    362
    Quote Originally Posted by LanceORYGUN View Post
    The Kahr PM9 has a slide release too.

    .
    I said the "big slide release" on the Sig. On the Kahr it doesn't stick out nearly as much.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

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. Topic: RIA Compact and Compact Tactical
    By los in forum Defensive Carry Guns
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: October 8th, 2009, 03:20 PM
  2. Sig P220 Compact or Springfield Ultra Compact?
    By Jesters Dead in forum Defensive Carry Guns
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: October 3rd, 2009, 10:46 PM
  3. The Glock compact vs sub compact size comparison thread
    By Ram Rod in forum General Firearm Discussion
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: October 4th, 2008, 10:59 AM
  4. Compact and sub-compact 1911's flawed inherently?
    By ExSoldier in forum Defensive Carry Guns
    Replies: 50
    Last Post: March 21st, 2005, 11:37 AM

Search tags for this page

p290 for sale
,
p290 release date
,
sig 290 for sale
,
sig p290
,

sig p290 for sale

,
sig p290 holster
,
sig p290 price
,

sig p290 release date

,
sig p290 review
,
sig p290 vs glock 26
,
sig p290 vs kahr pm9
,
sig p290 vs p239
Click on a term to search for related topics.