I have a new P227 Enhanced Elite that I ordered last November. It finally arrived this past June. When I got my hands on it, there was no “Elite” roll mark on the slide. My P226 EE slides say “Elite” on the port side of the slide. Sig Customer service thought it odd too, so they sent a tag, and I sent it in for a slide update (probably just swapped it out).

This new slide (I suppose it could be the original slide), has about .156” (4mm) of rail exposed near the hammer.

My P226 (2012-ish, beaver tail, E2, .22lr) whether it has a 9mm Elite slide on it, or .40S&W Xchange kit on it, or the original 22lr slide on it, has about a third as much rail showing. My son’s P226 (same as above but with standard Xchange kits) looks the same as my P226. All of the slides seem align the same at the front (i.e. at the dust cover).





Is this an anomaly? Should I ask Sig to try again? Is it unique to the smaller beaver tail on the P227 EE?

This message has been edited. Last edited by: 3790,

Your pic is not showing, but the beavertail of the P227 EE is smaller than that of the EE P226 or EE P229.

Second try on adding a photo...



Third...

Guess third try is the ticket.

Yep, the P226 22lr beaver tail is definitely longer than the P227 Enhanced Elite’s beaver tail. Think that was a “feature” of the Elite models.

Still not sure if this is a mismatched slide issue, or no issue at all.

Do others have a P227 Elite that can comment on how much slide rail is visible behind the slide?

It looks pretty normal to me. Most Sigs have some of the rail rear exposed. Wait 'till you discover the muzzle end of its barrel is not in the center of the slide... . That'd be pretty normal too by golly. Welcome !

Seems to be more than I have showing.

looks completely normal to me. Even if it was abnormal what possible effect could it have? I can't think of one...

My P227 Carry has a little nub of the rail (backtail) showing on each side... but no where near as much as tht new "Elite".

quote:

Originally posted by hrcjon:
looks completely normal to me. Even if it was abnormal what possible effect could it have? I can't think of one...

Thank you all for your observations.

Not sure, I personally cannot think of a problem that it could cause. However, I thought I’d ask minds greater than mine.

Do find it somewhat less visually appealing, even if the only impact is simply a “cosmetic imperfection”.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: 3790,

I would like to know myself why because it makes it look like a slide for a shorter model. I hope someone else gives a explanation for it.

While I can't see how it could cause any problems I have never owned a Sig (or any other gun) that showed that much mismatch.

Sig might say that it is within spec but this is another poster child of examining a gun before doing the paperwork if at all possible. (I suck at this)

That is a lot of rail out there. It isn't normal imo but it isn't going to cause any problems either.

Edited: I just looked at it again. That is kind of crazy. Compared to the P series next to it, it is easily 3X more rail, to the point that in the normal decocked hammer position the face of the hammer is exposed. I edit my position to say that I would call Sig. The flat of the hammer shouldn't be exposed like that. They will say it is within spec probably but that is not right imo.

Thanks pedropcola, I also think the hammer looks overly extended. I’ll give Sig a call Monday to see what they say.

quote:

Originally posted by David Lee:
I would like to know myself why because it makes it look like a slide for a shorter model. I hope someone else gives a explanation for it.

Thanks David. I’ll call Sig and let you know what there diagnosis is.

Reading through some of the posts here on the forum, it probably won’t surprise anyone that Sig Customer Service concluded my slide is within spac.

Aaron’s email said, “I did run this past my gunsmith and he did confirm this is normal on these firearms. They will vary to one degree or another, but it is within spec for fit and will function reliably.”

I ran it by the counter guys at Proven Arms (formerly Quantico Tactical), where I bought (ordered and waited) for the gun. None of the P series guns they had are quite as “off” as mine. Some did indeed vary. None were a P227 EE.

So as an update to this thread...

Sig customer service sent an RMA and took the P227 in for inspection. They determined that the frame is the difference in length. They tried other slides, with similar rail exposure. New P227 frames are no longer available.

So, they offered to exchange for some other gun, and specifically mentioned a P220. I’m on the fence. I have a couple of 14 round mags for the P227. Chose the P227 over the P220 because I enjoy my P226, and the P227 E2 grip is pretty similar. But it looks like the P227 line is officially abandon. Maybe an unfired P227 Enhanced Elite will be a collectors item. Idon’t Typically collect safe queens.

Any recommendations?

Hmmm, P210

Here's what I would like you to do. Tell Sig you'll take a P220 Combat in exchange because you can get the way cool 10 round magazines for that model. Now, get over to GunBroker and buy yourself a P227 ASE model. That's the awsome silver colored model with rose wood grips. Now sir, you solved the problem and have 2 excellent 45 ACP Sigs to be proud of. Hope I have helped. Let not your hesitator go hesitatin'.

Keep your P227, it's just cosmetic. It'll run forever. They're great guns and since you know it fits your hand well and because you already have the 14 round mags too.

That is not right. I cannot believe Sig CS and gunsmiths claim so. The frame hammer pivot is way to the rear with respect to the slide of every P-series I have owned or seen.

Obviously they changed slides. Not good.

I'm sorry, but that is completely normal, within specs, or whatever you want to call it, but that is no defect. When you blow up a picture so big, you are going to find supposed defects, when they are really not. The back of the slide is curved, so you will always have that little area on the frame rail exposed like so.

Here is a SIG from way back when, my 1991 factory Ni P226. See the "defect" there, also?