Forgive me if you have seen this on another forum…
At the risk of beating a dead horse, I will present my dilemma. I have no intention of starting a caliber war here, just merely trying to receive some input that will help me make a choice. I am an LEO that has a choice of the Sig P series pistols (220, 229, 226) as a service sidearm. My choices in caliber ar 9mm, .40, and .45. I have carried all 3 platforms listed as well as all 3 calibers at one time or another. However, I am faced with choosing the weapon I would like to carry for the rest of my career, and will have to purchase nylon and leather duty gear. Maybe you can give me some input as I “think aloud” here:
My job takes me to areas that are often quite remote (backcountry), and surprisingly to areas that are sometimes very urban (downtown). I often work alone with little or no backup. I often work in areas where I may run into large critters (bear, elk, moose, etc.)and sometimes make a lot of contacts with people when I am working on the road. I sometimes have to put animals down with my sidearm, because they have been hit by vehicles on the roadway (yes, not ideal, but sometimes the situation negates the use of a longarm).
I currently carry a Sig P220 .45. Recently, I have had some misgivings about the 220, although I have carried it less than a year now. I don’t feel I shoot it as well as the .40 or 9mm at this point, although I have no problem qualifying with the .45. I am not just referring to accuracy here. I think I am a little slower from the holster to my first shot (anticipating recoil?). My magazine exchanges seem to be slower with the singlestack mags, and I seem to have more dexterity issues (fumbling) than with the doublestack mags I am so used to. For me, it seems harder to seat the singlestack mags at speed, and they sometimes seem to hang up when I hit the mag release. This may be due to me canting the gun over to the side in order to load a mag? I practice fairly often off-duty and not just when my department sends me to the range.
Modern law enforcement seems to dictate higher capacity pistols, or carrying more rounds. A quad-stack mag carrier seems to be quite a load. Real or perceived, a loaded 220 seems to weigh pretty heavy on my hip compared a to a 229. However, I have never had the opportunity to weigh a loaded 220 or 229. I do know that I now have pain in my right hip (sciatic?), and am considering weighs to reduce weight on my belt. Furthermore, the 220 seems to be harder for me to conceal when I am plain-clothes or off-duty.
Realistically, I know that most gun battles are a quick affair that occur up-close, that are over in a few seconds with only a few shots fired. However, I often think of worst-case scenarios (ex. North Hollywood bank robbery). I sometimes think I would be better off with the higher capacity mags of the 229 in .40, rather than the 7 or 8 rounders for the 220. I have trained under stress and found that magazine exchanges are not what you want to be thinking about under fire. There seems to be little difference in “stopping power” (for lack of a better term) between .40 and .45, particularly with modern, high-quality hollowpoint ammunition. But those 230 grain +P Federal Premium HSTs seem to keep calling me.
So, my choices are either to stick with the 220 I currently carry, or request a .40 cal 229. A .40 cal 226 is really attractive to me, but it is only available to ME in 9mm. I am about to embark on several weeks of training that will include a lot of range time. I am debating forcing myself to learn the 220 during this time, or going to the 229 which feels more natural to me. Your thoughts are appreciated. I would especially like to hear from those people that carry a sidearm for a living, or have in the past. I know I may be overthinking all of this, but to me it is a serious choice.
