I don't see the -6S as anything particular so special that warrants such high price. But, then, it's all up to the bidders.
Btw, the cheapest -5LS I saw late last year was $9K. And, the cheapest one sold from this earlier this year, by Zeleny, was $8K something, and this was not in as great of a shape as the $9k one. He's listing another one right now, in much better shape, LNIB, and the listed price on that one has been fluctuating between $17k and $20k.
The SAN P210s are cool guns for sure. I've owned a couple and still have one.
For the holy grail, try to find one of these forged Heavy Frame models from the 1970's. Undoubtedly Sig's finest P210 pistols. No MIM parts and all built by hand. Sig built very, very few of them, but they were the best of the best. I think they might be the finest handguns ever built, period.
This one dates from 1975...
Yeah, those guns aren't worth that kind of money to me. Michael Zeleny is just pricing them to market demand, but he certainly knows CNC frames and MIM parts are far past Sig's P210 heyday. There are better P210 examples to look at for that that kind of money or even a bit more.
The later SAN P210's are still great guns, but I have to laugh at what some people have paid for them. I paid $2700 for my SAN P210-6 unfired.
what a beautiful pistol!!
"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing"
Sweet gun, man!
Interesting note about MIM. Any info on when MIM parts started being used on P210’s?
For example, my full German and even my hybrid German-American P22X guns don’t have any MIM parts and I expect most P210’s I come across to be older than them. Any help is much appreciated.
I believe later 90’s. It’s really not a huge deal, as they perform just as well. Not sure about durability, but I never had an issue. I just wouldn’t pay $9000 for one.
Safe bet is to stick with guns using the round SIG logo on the slide. Better yet, stick to those before the 300xxx serial number block.
True, ...nothing 'really' special about it 'for the price'- yet, to me the answer is simple and I am not surprised at all:
- 200 pieces ever made / discontinued model
- they rarely come up for sale
- when they do, serious P210 collectors (and some with deep pockets) are ready to pounce.
It's a perfect supply/demand situation and then collectors will turn it up another notch.
sorry for the duplicate post
....fun to shoot, that's for sure.
I am not keeping it in the safe like the previous owner did for the last 14 years.
No they are not better and there is nothing wiht the second series. It’s a classic old is better discussion, mostly based on emotions, witout technological knowledge of details or know how in industrial manufacturning.
SIG changed manufacturing technology to CNC and used frames made of forged steel castings instead of billets. Some people “feel” the first series to be made of better quality for that reason althoug it's the same material with the same properties just produced with advanced techologies to reduce wast and manufacturing time.
The “MIM” issue is a translation error. Parts of for the new series are made of fine cast steel, not MIM. Fine casting is a different technology then MIM, without composite polymer, but people want to treat it the same. Mostly for prestige reasons because first series pistols are made for SIG, while later pistol of the second series had been made for SAN.
Problems anyhow have not appeared anywhere but in the mind of social media. There is no indicator of one being better than the other. I own several P210’s myself from just about every type and series and if I would judge based on observation, there was more inconsistency in the first series then in the second above P3XXXXX
Most information provided on this forum are based on Michael Zelenys blog. This is a summary of the standard literature and his translation is a great job. Details anyhow got either lost in translation which lead to some questionable opinions about the different production series. I think the biggest flaw of his translation is are details from Döbelis or Rufer's publications and reprints of old DWJ articles from the 70's in which the supply chain for manufacturing is explained as well as Hämmerlis part in P210 manufacturing. If it would have added to his blog, questions about old vs new would become a non issues.
They may not be “better” in any technical way. However, as the owner of multiple San Models over the years, I definitely prefer the feel of the older forged models more. They have a more precise action and just seem tighter. This is not just comparing a couple of each. I’ve owned quite a few and still own several. I’ve shot many more still.
Accuracy is no different, but I’d choose the forged models every time.
It’s OK bac. I collect these pistols as well and own several form the second series as well and one o f it I use in sanctioned Swiss Army pistol matches besides a sporterized P49 also. They feel the same, they shoot the same and they perform equally.
I do not agree with your statement for that reason. You can test it. Pull the reccoil spring and trigger action when assemble and shake it. You will notice an equal slide and frame throughout the series.
Against the believe of a lot of people, SIG did not check tolerances with gauges like Colt did until the early 70’s. SIG has defined plus minus tolerances and these are/where measured. It provides more certainty because there is no gauge that can wear out so there cannot be any difference between old and new manufacturing and I think the assumption of SIG using gauges is one of the reasons there is this opinion.
Another thought. SIG had it’s OEM manufacturer produce several hunder thousand parts over a period of 30 years for the first series and 12 years for the second series. Maintaining constant tolerances throughout the years with this volumes is plain and simple not possible. If you find differences you will find them in all series. This is my experience, but not within one series old or new only.
Forged BTW is not a manufacturing method. It only tells how the billet was prepared. Either foged as a billet and cut or forged as a steel casting close to the shape of a frame. There is no difference in the end. How the components acutally look befor they are milled is actually displayed in several reference books. They look nearly the same.
|3° that never cooled|
OTD, Once again I've enjoyed reading your knowledgeable, Down-to-Earth, comments on these pistols. I admit that my P210s have all been the more pedestrian models in the 3XXXXX serial number range, later the Legends, and now a US model. I guess the jury is still out on the US models, but the others are certainly some of the finest pistols I've owned. I enjoy my regular 210s, but do like seeing the photos, and reading about the more exotic/rare/expensive/desirable models some of our members are so fortunate as to own.
COTEP #640, NRA Life
Thanks OTD for taking the time to reply!!
Are you serious?
As someone that owns and shoots multiple P210 models made in every single decade of manufacturing, I find your summary excellent and very refreshing actually.
Well done. THANK YOU !
Certainly fair enough. I happen to prefer the older models. I’ve had plenty of both. To each their own, of course.
Yes, I understand the forging process. It was just a way for me to differentiate between them.
I’ve have or have had them from the 50’s, 60’s, 70’s, 80’s, 90’s, and 2000’s
Nothing wrong with the newer models. I just prefer the older models.
That’s OK bac. My prefered P210 is a Swiss Army model from the late 50’s which I transformed into a competition gun similar to a -6 except for the trigger stop. It’s probably the roughest “plow” SIG ever made because it looks like the monday work of an unmotivated trainee, but I’m attached to it because I went through several competition with it for the last 25 years but I would not claim it to be better or worse then anything else made before or later. Others, infact all others are much nicer made, but not really better but I still prefer mine for emotional reasons and the success I had with it. So there is nothing wrong with a preference.
Here is a general thought. Annoying is the word “better” in connection with a production date a P210 was made. “Better” means that it would be possible increase an annual scoring average by 1 score point in sanctioned matches, just with a random pistol made in a certain period. This is a hocus pocus for the motivation of the relegations league but really difficult to achieve when somebody has an established score already.
If you want to have a real result for “better”, one has to compare the deviation of the measured real tolerances for every production lot made. For one frame alone it’s 247 operations not only slide to frame fit or a trigger pull that can be adjusted anyway. These area nice feature for repeatable performance but not the key feature since muzzle lock, battery fit and impact bearing, transfer plate and most importantly the tension of the recoil spring have an identical importance which cannot be tested with gut feeling, especially not on pistol which are kept untouched for pride and pleasure.
What we are doing is judging “better” based on the pattern of the depth of roughness in the finis or the way a radius was cut which can be best compared to a women’s make up skills. The fact that she is can apply it well does not mean she has good qualities regardless of her age. So if you have a nicely made, vintage P210 in your closet and are proud of it does not mean the pistol would outperform the Legend of the guy next to your lane. This performance is all that matters in shooting.
|Powered by Social Strata||Page 1 2 3|