Hello Everyone,

I was reading through a thread about the SIG P226 on another forum. A few people said that SIGs are overpriced for what they are. Someone made the comment that you can buy a brand new GLOCK 17 or Beretta 92 for half the price of a new P series SIG and get the same results. I feel that way about H&K pistols, but I know a lot of people love them. A friend of mine showed me his pristine Ruger P89 last week, and my girlfriend asked me "What's the difference between that and your P226?" All I could say was "About $800." Does anyone here think we're paying too much for our beloved SIGs?

Hmmm.... similar comparison:
Chevy Sonic or Chevy Corvette.
Both get you there.
It is a matter of how you got there.

Man, this horse has been beaten to death many times over. My bottom line is, I buy whatever the heck I like and do not pay attention to the herd.

always gonna be haters and fanboys of other brands. I own Berettas, HK's, Walthers, Colts but I now own 11 Sigs. I like what I like and I buy what I like without all the noise from the 'know betters' out there.

For end results, there’s really no difference. They’re shooting a bullet down a barrel. No pistol is any more deadly than the next.

It’s basically the ergos they make the difference. You have a Glock that has a utilitarian trigger, different grip angle, usually plastic sights, spartan grip that is just customizable with backstraps, and is basically ugly (if looks matter). Or the SIG, which has some factory trigger options, good trigger feel out of the box, usually night sights, countless grip options, both factory and aftermarket, and soaks up recoil (but the trade off is weight). Then you can go all fancy with the SIG and get different finish, trigger, serrations, beavertail, etc. with different models. Glock you can choose...which generation to buy?

So I disagree that it’s the difference between a Sonic (whatever that is) and a Corvette. It’s the difference between a Chevy and the comparable Cadillac, or Ford/Lincoln, Toyota/Lexus, Nissan/Infiniti, Honda/Acura, Chrysler/anythingbutchrysler...you get the idea. Or even a base model versus the XLE or platinum package.

Does it do anything different? No, the difference is how it does it.

I believe the Sig classic P series is worth the current price point. The design itself has been proven for decades to be utterly reliable and the fact that they are still in production says a lot.

I just picked up a new P226 Navy today for a grand. I would have loved to have picked it up for $600, or $800, or $500 but they are a grand new. Did i get what i paid for ?? Sure i got a P226 Navy with the night sights, the chrome lined barrel, the salt water resistant finish, all in a package that will shoot very accurately and reliably.
Not sure what else can happen if you want a new P226 Navy. You pay, you get one

Not everything we “get” is tangible or even measurable.

To "get what you pay for" you have to be aware both of your own needs, and the actual quality you're buying.

The answer is actually, always, YES.

You do get exactly what you pay for, whether you buy an inexpensive pistol, or an expensive one.

You may or may not have the skill to use said pistol to its potential, but you did indeed get what you paid for.

The reason, is capitalism.

Goods are not worth more than what people will pay.

This is not a secret.

The human element is the variable, and if you haven't tried a variety of brands to see what you shoot best, you're cheating yourself.

There are no actual shortcuts.

I get full value for every nickel I spend. Yes, I have some very expensive pistols. When I die, I will have experienced the joy of owning and shooting them. My heirs can sort out the rest.

Business 101. You have to make a profit on whatever product you are selling. Free market 101. If a customer is willing to pay whatever you're asking for your product, it's worth it.

Sure, Sig could sell classic Sigs for the same prices as plastic. Then they could go out of business in three years. Classic Sigs and 1911's for example, cost more to manufacture. Folks are still buying them

Regarding the "worth it" part, see 12131's post.

Ravens and Highpoints launch bullets just like classic Sigs. I can think of a number of good reasons why the latter are "worth it". Worth is in the eye of the beholder, it has nothing to do with price.

quote:

Originally posted by elberettas:
A friend of mine showed me his pristine Ruger P89 last week, and my girlfriend asked me "What's the difference between that and your P226?" All I could say was "About $800." Does anyone here think we're paying too much for our beloved SIGs?

I think some of the sigs are overpriced; some are exceptional values for the price. There's no point comparing a P89 with a P226; they're not in the same ballpark as far as form, function, design, materials, etc. The P226 is one of the single best off the shelf duty handguns made. There's no question that a Glock is a good handgun with an enviable sales and service record. Ruger makes a great entry level pistol that's economical, but which is not at all in the same class as a P226. Comparing them is not a like-comparison (apples).

Re-sale value? I don't buy collector items, so I don't deal with that. I rarely sell anything I buy; it's for use: mine, and my family. It's not an investment, and I suspect I'd likely lose money on whatever I do try to sell, so I don't bother. I buy firearms because they interest me, because I want to try them out, and if I don't like them, they end up in the safe, if I do, they get carried and used. There aren't many that I don't like.

I rarely pay retail for a a firearm. I'd have a lot less, if I did. I do love a good bargain, and fortunately, there are many to be had.

Sig has had some issues, as have other manufacturers. I have a number of P320's, 2340's, P226's, P229's, P239's, etc. Several P365's, and looking at another. I "invest" in them by equipping them with sights I prefer, and the various handguns are sometimes altered, such as straight triggers in the P320's, etc. If you count the vickers slide stop and mag release, trijicon sights, mag well, and other features on my Glocks, there's no way I'm getting back out of them what I spent, but that was never the goal.

I wouldn't have bought any of them if I didn't think the cost was worth it to me. What others might or might not spend is irrelevant to me.

No, they are charging German prices for a gun filled with Indian made MIM parts.

If by "do you really get what you pay for?" do you mean more expensive means better, than no that's not always true. I don't think anyone can honestly say more expensive always means higher quality or better performing. Name recognition, import tariffs, local labor rates, economies of scale, and various other reasons can often cause a product that may be of lower or similar quality to sell for more.

What is the difference between a Harbor Freight electric drill and a Milwaukee electric drill. They both drill holes right? A professional could easily tell the difference within a few minutes of use while others that own Harbor Freight electric drills will say they are fantastic and spending more on a drill is just a waste of money.

People buy what they want to buy at whatever price point they find a value to them. Some would say why a Ruger 89 when you can buy a new Taurus auto loading pistol brand new for less? What does the new Taurus do that a Hi Point won't do?

The P226 also has several models at different price points and I think it is a huge stretch to say a new Glock 17 or Beretta 92FS is half the price of a new P226. I see new P226s on occasion at local gun store at around $800.

IMO it is difficult to put a price on pride of ownership and appreciation of engineering, and quality of a design. I like my Glock 19 as a tool but I like my P226 at a whole different level besides its utility value. Many will understand that and many others will not.

I do think sigs are a little overpriced but I still keep buying them.

Sig’s manufacturing costs per “P series” unit are higher than a Glock, hence the higher retail price. They also have R&D costs to factor in for innovation such as the P320 development although that products retail price is closer to that of a Glock. Basic, supply chain economics at work here.

quote:

Originally posted by CQB60:
Sig’s manufacturing costs per “P series” unit are higher than a Glock, hence the higher retail price. They also have R&D costs to factor in for innovation such as the P320 development although that products retail price is closer to that of a Glock. Basic, supply chain economics at work here.

Sort of, and you are completely right on premise. But, the technology and machinery have been long paid for to pump out classic guns, and they aren't that expensive to make. SIG actually makes more profit on the P Series guns.

Notwithstanding, people who like Glocks and buy into the whole way of life, are also the ones who complain that SIG beat them by being "cheap" in the Army pistol trials. The whole "you get what you pay for" thing. If they all do the same thing, then why have the double standard. Just the same as why I do not understand the vitriol from the Beretta fans about the SIG beating them out.

Value is in the eye of the beholder. I've never "paid too much" for a classic P Series gun, because from a performance standpoint "Perfection" has way too many fleas. I like the 320s, and M&Ps. But, neither hold a torch to classic guns, and they are well worth being "too much".

Get what you pay for is different than "overpaid" in any particular case. I like P series guns. I prefer them to plastic guns, and I don't like striker guns for both safety and trigger pull reasons. (Although tuned Glocks, and the 320 are pretty good).

I recognize that all metal, machine formed guns are more expensive, but because I prefer them, I am willing to pay for them, thus I get what I pay for. I might not get more reliability than a Glock, M&P or 320 with my P guns, but I get a gun I like better, and to me that is worth the difference. So if all you are buying is reliability and capacity, then the plastic striker guns are perhaps a better value. If you want to whole experience offered by the P series or any other all metal machine manufactured gun, then they cost what they cost.

I think it is all relative. Ruger makes a decent gun and I own a few but even I admit they are not as streamlined or as, for the lack of a better term,"sexy". Some pistols are great for function but are not as pretty as others,like the Glock. I am not knocking them as I have a few as well and really like them. They are plenty accurate for me but some other guns have different options/mechanisms and I understand with having to pay a higher cost. The only downside to owning/buying higher end guns, is when you ever decide to resell them you might have difficulty selling it as you get into a niche area-people with the funds to buy what you have or even want it. At that point you can lose quite a bit more than others. I tend to buy used guns now so I don't get hit as hard if I ever have to sell them.