Is there any logic to the naming of the sig pistols?
P226... P229... etc..

I heard with glock it's the order of the patents that they submitted. Anyone know how sig gets the names?

At this point, I think it may boil down to what's available within a given range of numbers.

None that I know of.

Well, you start with P210 and go on from there...

When did you first start having these headaches?

Just as logical as things like the Short Reset Trigger (SRT). Which, of course is not a trigger...it's a sear and safety lever.

I liked things better in 1995 when I bought my first Sig P229. Us Old Farts are like that.

quote:

Originally posted by Nipper:
Just as logical as things like the Short Reset Trigger (SRT). Which, of course is not a trigger...it's a sear and safety lever.

As opposed to the Short Reach Trigger (the other SRT), which actually is a trigger...

quote:

Originally posted by RogueJSK:

quote:

Originally posted by Nipper:
Just as logical as things like the Short Reset Trigger (SRT). Which, of course is not a trigger...it's a sear and safety lever.

As opposed to the Short Reach Trigger (the other SRT), which actually is a trigger...

Yes...the migraines are beginning to start again.

Don't even get me started on having a Glock 40. No. Not the S&W, the 10mm.

I just hope the damn model 45 is actually a 45 ACP ?%@$#*!"}+_

^^^
Just went through that yesterday at the range with my Glock 22.

"I didn't know Glock made a 22"

They don't, it's a .40.

"But you just said it was a 22"

I could not agree more , as a member of the old club , simple is all ways better .

quote:

Originally posted by Nipper:
Just as logical as things like the Short Reset Trigger (SRT). Which, of course is not a trigger...it's a sear and safety lever.

I liked things better in 1995 when I bought my first Sig P229. Us Old Farts are like that.

quote:

Originally posted by RogueJSK:

As opposed to the Short Reach Trigger (the other SRT), which actually is a trigger...

Except that SIG Sauer called it a Short Trigger, which is actually thinner, not shorter.

I think there originally was some scheme, but it got waylaid early on.

SIG Sauer's first pistol was the P220 (1975) which was designed to succeed the Swiss SIG P210.

Next came SIG Sauer's P230 (1976).
Correction: The P225 was second and then the P230.

Then came a compact version of the P220 that they called the P225 (1976), followed by the P226 (1983), then the P228 (1988), and the P229 (1992). Don't ask me why SIG Sauer skipped over the P227 in the mid '80s because I don't know.

When they ran up against the P230, then all heck broke loose with the P239 (1996) and P245 (1999).

The original SigPro models made some sense, the SP2009 being 9mm and the SP2340 being available in 357 and 40. And the SP2022 was designed to fulfill a French contract that runs until the year 2022.

Here's my theory:
They started with the P210.

Next they made the P220, which was a significant design difference, so they skipped 10.

Then came the P225/P6, which was just a bit shorter. Why 225? Halfway to 230?

The P245 is easy. It's the 200 series chambered in .45.

Then the P226. Back to being full sized, but now double stack. Why 226 and not 221-224? Because going backward in numbers may indicate moving backwards.

The P230 was a different design basis, so they jumped to the next 10. The P232 puzzles me, because they didn't change enough to warrant a new designation (IMO) and they stopped offering the .32 chambering (save some rare ones?)

Then P228. A shorter version of the P226. Wonder if a P227 was a prototype that didn't make it, and the P228 was the one that went to production.

P229, an updated version of the P228.

P239 is interesting, because it's still classic P series, but maybe because it's a smaller pistol like the P230, but offered in the same chamberings as the P229, it got P239.

Then the SP2340. The 40 comes from its initially being offer in .40. Why the 23? Got me there. Then it became the SP2009 with 9mm. Dunno why they changed to 20xx from 23xx. Just sounds better? Futuristic? Maybe cuz it was released right by the millennium change. The only real fact I have is it changed to the SP2022 when it was adopted by the French in 2002 with a service life to...2022.

The P250 and P290? Dunno. P240 would be the next set of 10. 290 is way out there.

Almost forgot the P238. Fits with my theory of P23x being small sized pistols. And it's chambered in .380. The P938 is the same thing in 9mm.

Then you have some fillers, the P227 and P224. Surprised they didn't reboot the P245 instead of going P227.

The P320. Well it's striker which is new so makes sense to go with 300s. Why 20? It's a nod to the P220 that started it all?

I might have some of the timeline off, forgive me. And all of this (save the SP2022) is pure conjecture on my part and based solely on nothing!

Yes it has its problems, but I prefer it to the marketing of today. I just do not like the new names the marketing people dream up for guns. The Legion is not bad for a name but these others are a little over the top. The Saint from Springfield, the Victory from Smith and Wesson, The Commander from Springfield, the Curve from Taurus etc. Number and caliber is fine with me.

quote:

Originally posted by .38supersig:
Don't even get me started on having a Glock 40. No. Not the S&W, the 10mm.

I just hope the damn model 45 is actually a 45 ACP ?%@$#*!"}+_

Yeah, and the Smith and Wesson Model 357 is actually a 41 mag.

John 3200.
the hardest time for me to explain to new potential buyers,is the sw model 57 is a 41 magnum.Okay what is a model 41, 22lr. Whats a 58 ? 41 magnum,no sights.What is a victory model? Old military pistol from ww 2.Why does that silver 22 have victory on its tag.It replaced the 22a.And on and on.

quote:

Originally posted by GP229:
^^^
Just went through that yesterday at the range with my Glock 22.

"I didn't know Glock made a 22"

They don't, it's a .40.

"But you just said it was a 22"

Which is why I've taken to calling Glocks by saying Gee-22, 32, 40, etc. Working at a gun shop and dealing with a neverending run of newbies does alter one's behavior, I've discovered.

EDIT:
WAG (skipping 'P227'): maybe SIG was considering a carry size P226 at the time along with the compact P228 (y'know, shorter slide over full height frame). Kind of like the P225 was to the P220, especially when the P220 was available in 9mm. One was given P227, the other P228. The "Carry" designation has since been a reoccurring 'thing' with SIG Sauer pistols over the years. When it came down to finally deciding, they figured that they didn't need both and the P228 won out. Maybe? Perhaps?

If SIG's numbering scheme drives you nuts; try wrapping your head around S&W's back during the peak of the 3rd generation days.

probably the same people who thought up the golf scoring scheme.