SIGforum.com    Main Page  Hop To Forum Categories  SIG Pistols    The P239 - Why?
Page 1 2 3 4 5 
Go
New
Find
Notify
Tools
Reply
  
The P239 - Why? Login/Join 
Prepared for the Worst, Providing the Best
Picture of 92fstech
posted
So I picked up this P239 a couple of weeks ago in a local auction as kind of an impulse buy. It’s in .40, and came with 5 mags and Hogue rubber grips and the original box. Unfortunately, the original grips were not included.

I’ve only shot a couple of P239s in the past and could never really warm up to them. I figured picking up one of my own might give me the time to figure it out and learn it.

Once I got my hands on it, I was surprised at how big it is. It’s almost as long and tall as my P229, and only weighs 2 oz less unloaded. It is a bit slimmer, and has a shorter length of pull, which has always been a problem for my long hands.





The first time out to the range I blew the extractor off with some bad reloads…my fault, not the gun’s. I’ve since fixed that, and my load data, and was pretty pleased with how it handles the .40. If I do my part and take the time to consciously establish a proper grip on the gun, it’ll put them right where I want them. The problem is, it takes some effort to establish that grip, whereas my hand goes right where it’s supposed to on my P220, P225, P229, and P226. I trimmed the finger grooves off the Hogue grips because they were all wrong (I really wish Hogue and everybody else who’s doing it would cut that crap out) but I still have a hard time closing my hand around the diminutive grip without bunching up my palm and leaving a gap. I’m not sure how the factory grips would compare since I don’t have them, but I imagine they’d be even worse as they’re slimmer. I’m curious if there might be some grips out there that would fit me better and help me establish a natural and consistent grip. I know Hogue makes G10s for it, but they’re like $100, and I’m not sure I’m sold enough on the gun yet to drop that kind of cash on it.



At the end of the day, there’s nothing wrong with the gun. It’s actually a really good gun mechanically. But when I think about it in comparison to other Sigs that I already own, I keep coming back to this question: “What’s the compelling purpose of this gun?” What does it do that my P229 doesn’t do better? Dimensionally overall, it’s not much smaller. It’s not much lighter. It is a bit slimmer, but not so much so that it offers carry options that couldn’t be fulfilled with the P229. All of those things are at a cost of 50% of the ammunition capacity, and it’s also discontinued so finding parts and mags is getting harder and more expensive.



I’m looking to you guys to explain the P239 to me. What’s it’s niche? Under what circumstances would this thing be a better carry choice than my P229 or P245/P220 Compact? What are the best grip options to make it work with big hands? What’s it going to take to make me glad I bought this gun?
 
Posts: 9428 | Location: In the Cornfields | Registered: May 25, 2006Reply With QuoteReport This Post
PopeDaddy
Picture of x0225095
posted Hide Post
I loved mine in my younger days … seemed the perfect size at the time.

I eventually sold it because of the rattle can feature. But in all other respects it was wonderful. Just bigger and heavier than the soon to be Ruger LCP’s and the like that were coming down the pike.

In hindsight of my post…I post this edit to say that in this day and age of remakes, if Sig would relaunch the 239 without it shaking like a box of rocks, I’d buy it back n a heartbeat.

It was a perfect size to carry with confidence.


0:01
 
Posts: 4321 | Location: ALABAMA | Registered: January 05, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
On paper the 239 is pretty close to a 229 or even a G19. But I think it carries much better than either of them. At least my 9mm does. I can conceal a 239 much better than I can a 229 or even a G19.
Edited to add- As for the capacity, you are correct, you lose a whole lot of rounds with the 239. But as an off duty or ccw gun IMHO that's ok. I routinely carry a 239 with an extra mag. That gives me 19 rounds (Plus One), more than my G19. But it's not a duty gun it's as I said, either a off duty gun or a ccw gun and 19 rounds should be more than enough for those roles and for those reason I love mine and carry one.
 
Posts: 5806 | Location: Chicago | Registered: August 18, 2010Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Prepared for the Worst, Providing the Best
Picture of 92fstech
posted Hide Post
This one doesn't rattle. It's nicely fit and put together.

Bulldog, I probably need to actually carry it a bit just to see how it compares. I made a holster for it and have used it at the range, but haven't actually carried it around. I have no issues toting my P229 around (when my back isn't hurt), but maybe I'll notice more of a difference if I actually put some miles on the P239.

Mine being a .40 I give up one round compared to the 9mm, but I don't really mind that with this gun. If it's going to be low capacity, they might as well be big.
 
Posts: 9428 | Location: In the Cornfields | Registered: May 25, 2006Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Oriental Redneck
Picture of 12131
posted Hide Post
quote:
The P239 - Why?

Because it is obviously smaller than the P229. Dimensional differences might not sound like much, but for carrying purpose, it works out well for a lot of people. And, not everyone wants to, or can legally, carry 15 rounds.


Q






 
Posts: 27942 | Location: TEXAS | Registered: September 04, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Firearms Enthusiast
Picture of Mustang-PaPa
posted Hide Post
Over the years I have bought 3-4 P239's in 40SW/357sig and 9mm and while I like them as a Sig P series gun I just never ended up keeping any of them.

Think what did it for me was laying it side by side with a P225 which is just a little longer in the grip and Bbl length.

I preferred the P225 over the P239 so they all were let go.

Did the same with the P245 and my P220, just wasn't any advantage for me over my P220 for my needs.

I really like the P239's and P245's but in the end they were let go.

Anymore if I need small I went Glock 43x with 15rd mags. Big difference in capacity for my choice in CCarry guns.
 
Posts: 18169 | Location: South West of Fort Worth, Tx. | Registered: December 26, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Prepared for the Worst, Providing the Best
Picture of 92fstech
posted Hide Post
quote:
Because it is obviously smaller than the P229


Except it's not. The grip is obviously smaller...the rest of the gun is just barely incrementally so. I was expecting a significant difference overall, akin to say a P320 vs P365, or maybe something a little closer to a P290. When I compared them side by side, though, I discovered that it's basically a P229 with a grip for little people.

I'm not small, and I live in a place with actual "common sense" gun laws...basically, carry whatever you want provided you're not insane or a criminal. How do I make this gun work for me, and what role can it fill? I'm ok with the reduced capacity if I'm trading it for some other benefit (I carry J-frames a lot), but I'm trying to figure out what that benefit is for me with the P239. Normally when I buy a gun, I have a role in mind and shop to fill it. This one kinda fell into my lap unexpectedly and without a plan, so I'm working backwards.
 
Posts: 9428 | Location: In the Cornfields | Registered: May 25, 2006Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Oriental Redneck
Picture of 12131
posted Hide Post
quote:
Except it's not.

Why are you arguing/defending what's not true? You can try to justify your personal case, but, name one thing in my entire post that is not true. Funny, you say "basically". You know, that means they ain't the same. Look at the huge grip length difference (you even acknowledged the "obvious" difference), and grip length is important, when it comes to conceal carrying to many people. And physically laying the smaller gun on top of the bigger one, making it appear bigger than it really is, for comparison purpose is just pointless, and everyone who has done a fair amount of gun comparison photography knows this.

https://www.handgunhero.com/co...-p229-nitron-compact

Btw, I have owned both guns, so I'm not just talking out of my rear end.


Q






 
Posts: 27942 | Location: TEXAS | Registered: September 04, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
I have owned them all (p220, 226,229,239,938,238)..and on and on…..
I still have my p239…it’s well made, I like the smaller grip, NO RAIL, and it’s SA/DA decocker I like. Only change I made was to install a SRT to improve crisp follow on shots. With an extra mag or two it’s a wonderful house, car, personal defense weapon.
 
Posts: 384 | Location: Williamsburg, VA,  | Registered: June 29, 2003Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Prepared for the Worst, Providing the Best
Picture of 92fstech
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by 12131:
quote:
Except it's not.

Why are you arguing/defending what's not true? You can try to justify your personal case, but, name one thing in my entire post that is not true. Funny, you say "basically". You know, that means they ain't the same. Look at the huge grip length difference (you even acknowledged the "obvious" difference), and grip length is important, when it comes to conceal carrying to many people. And physically laying the smaller gun on top of the bigger one, making it appear bigger than it really is, for comparison purpose is just pointless, and everyone who has done a fair amount of gun comparison photography knows this.

https://www.handgunhero.com/co...-p229-nitron-compact

Btw, I have owned both guns, so I'm not just talking out of my rear end.


You're creating an argument where there is none. I'm not trying to argue or justify anything, and I agree that the P239 is smaller...it's just not smaller enough to matter anywhere except the grip. It's a couple of ounces lighter, but as a percentage of overall weight that's not enough that I can feel a difference when picking up either gun, and the slide bulk is only a fraction of an inch less than the P229. As to setting the smaller gun on top of the bigger one for the photo, I'm not sure how else to do it, as if you stick the bigger gun on top it'll obviously completely cover the smaller one. In this case, the photo serves to show how little difference there actually is.

I'm not arguing that the P239 is worthless...as you pointed out, it meets some specific needs for many people. I'm just trying to figure out, and looking for input, on what possible use it might have for ME in my situation, and what I could potentially do to optimize it for that role.
 
Posts: 9428 | Location: In the Cornfields | Registered: May 25, 2006Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
Honestly, the only reason I bought mine was Sig had discontinued the P225 and I think the P239 was the replacement - this would have been in the late 1990’s and I was in my early 20’s. My Dad had the P225, which introduced me to Sig Sauer. I’ll never sell mine - it’s my first Sig.

Since then I’ve added a P229 and P226 Mark 25 - all three are in 9mm. Also have a Mosquito.

My Dads getting older, so now I have his P225 and his Beretta 92FS in the safe too Smile

In terms of carrying, I really don’t, although I did buy a Mitch Rosen holster for my P239. I think I’ve worn it twice. If I got serious, I’d carry my P239 for awhile and then get a good holster for my G19 and see which one was more comfortable.

Not very scientific, but that’s my story.

MDS
 
Posts: 397 | Registered: November 30, 2006Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of RichardC
posted Hide Post
Ooooh, this is getting good. Razz
The I'm possibly a jerk thread has cooled down to embers, is it OK if I post in this one?


____________________



 
Posts: 16271 | Location: Florida | Registered: June 23, 2003Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of SevenPlusOne
posted Hide Post
The slide on the 9mm P239 has significantly less mass than the .40/357.



"Ninja kick the damn rabbit"
 
Posts: 4648 | Location: Oklahoma | Registered: October 11, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Prepared for the Worst, Providing the Best
Picture of 92fstech
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by SevenPlusOne:
The slide on the 9mm P239 has significantly less mass than the .40/357.


That may be a factor here as well. My 9mm P229 SAS definitely feels noticeably trimmer than my legacy .40. Perhaps I need to get my hands on a 9mm variant.

Honestly, if I can't find a fit in the lineup for this gun it can get traded off to someone who it fits better and appreciates it more, but I'm trying to give it a fair shake before I do that.
 
Posts: 9428 | Location: In the Cornfields | Registered: May 25, 2006Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Prepared for the Worst, Providing the Best
Picture of 92fstech
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by RichardC:
Ooooh, this is getting good. Razz
The I'm possibly a jerk thread has cooled down to embers, is it OK if I post in this one?


You're always welcome, Richard Big Grin!
 
Posts: 9428 | Location: In the Cornfields | Registered: May 25, 2006Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Prepared for the Worst, Providing the Best
Picture of 92fstech
posted Hide Post
quote:
Honestly, the only reason I bought mine was Sig had discontinued the P225 and I think the P239 was the replacement - this would have been in the late 1990’s and I was in my early 20’s. My Dad had the P225, which introduced me to Sig Sauer. I’ll never sell mine - it’s my first Sig.



I do like the P225/P6. I don't carry it much anymore just due to other options eclipsing it's capacity/size ratio, but it does still get range time. The grip on that gun feels great in my hand, and provides an optimal length of pull, which is somehow different than the P239 despite both being single-stack designs.
 
Posts: 9428 | Location: In the Cornfields | Registered: May 25, 2006Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Oriental Redneck
Picture of 12131
posted Hide Post
Never mind. Enjoy.


Q






 
Posts: 27942 | Location: TEXAS | Registered: September 04, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Prepared for the Worst, Providing the Best
Picture of 92fstech
posted Hide Post
I'm sorry you took it that way, that was not my intent. Thanks for your input.
 
Posts: 9428 | Location: In the Cornfields | Registered: May 25, 2006Reply With QuoteReport This Post
10mm. It's like two
40s with every shot.
posted Hide Post
I pretty much agree with your assessment. I bought my P239 in 2004 when CC passed in Ohio. At that time, you could get a new 239 for around $500 or so. A P229 would have been over $800. So it was an economical choice then for my first CCW gun. Now keep in mind I already had a Glock 19. Which in hindsight is what I should have carried. But I wanted a Sig so went and got it. It is out of the carry rotation now. I mainly carry my M&P Shield in 9mm. Much smaller and lighter. If I went shopping now there would be many other options. All that being said, I am keeping my 239. In fact, took it to the range two weeks ago. It is still a great pistol.

As for the grip, I replaced my factory ones with Hogue wood grips. They get rid of the finger groves and make it easier to handle. I had those rubber wrap arounds on for a month or so and hated them.
 
Posts: 621 | Registered: March 08, 2004Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
I don't carry mine as often as I used to; I still have several P239's (two in 9mm and two in 40 S&W). As I am spending time with a P365XL and P365X-Macro.
I put Hogue G10's on all of them and that combination works for me.
It's dimensionally smaller than my P229's but carries so well I don't really know that it's there.
When I look at downsizing my collection of SIG's the P239's stay.

StarchedCover
 
Posts: 189 | Location: The Blue Ridge Mountains of NC | Registered: October 29, 2010Reply With QuoteReport This Post
  Powered by Social Strata Page 1 2 3 4 5  
 

SIGforum.com    Main Page  Hop To Forum Categories  SIG Pistols    The P239 - Why?

© SIGforum 2024