sigma bashers flame here

[axslingerW]

S&W's Sigma auto
American Handgunner, *May-June, 2005 *by Charles E. Petty
If imitation is really the sincerest form of flattery Glock should never have sued S&W over the Sigma. But they did. I was one of a group of who were invited to Florida in March of 1994 for the introduction of a new pistol we later learned was the Sigma. It was an obvious effort to compete with Glock in the then relatively new polymer frame pistol business. In those early days Glock was making serious inroads into the law enforcement market and S&W wanted to keep their piece of the pie, Reasonable enough I thought.
So, in a classroom setting S&W laid a brand new gun in front of us and began to explain. Obviously we looked at the outside first. Even though this was a high capacity (14+1) .40 S&W pistol the grip felt great. To me the Glock's had always felt like I was trying to make friends with a 2x4 but this one had a natural ergonomic shape that worked for me.
Then Kevin Foley--S&W's VP of Engineering--explained the lengthy testing and research that had gone into getting the grip just right. They used a series of standardized anatomical measurements from the Air Force and did lengthy blindfold tests with employees to find a shape and grip angle that would be natural. When everything was done they settled on a grip angle of 18 degrees. "It took us months and a lot of money to discover what John Browning knew intuitively," said Foley. The 18 degree angle is exactly the same as the 1911.
Closer inspection showed the similarities far outnumbered the differences. It wasn't long before some wiseguy dubbed it the, "Swock." Without taking measurements, many of the internal parts looked very similar, the takedown was identical and later when I got home I found that a Glock barrel would drop right in. I did not shoot it. but my suspicion is that everything would have worked.
The Same Only Different
But the Sigma turned out to be a perfectly reliable gun and over the years mine has shot bunches of ammo and never bobbled. But did I mention that Glock sued?
The similarities could hardly be accidental, and while the exact details of the suit or settlement are not public S&W did agree to make some changes and as a result they "lost the recipe" for reliability and the Sigma earned a less than lustrous reputation.
And that brings us to the current pistol. One disadvantage the Sigma had was it cost as much or more than the competition, so a part of the fix had to be a competitive price structure. One of the beauties of polymer frames is that molds last a long time and once the very substantial initial cost is recovered the cost per frame is relatively low.
That enabled S&W to reduce the suggested retail price from $593 to $379 for the latest versions. They don't use the Sigma name anymore either, it's the SW40GVE (or 9mm) and there are either black or green frames now. It's impossible to generalize on prices because there is so much variation, but a realistic street price should hover close to $300. And. with the sunset on the magazine restrictions you'll get two high capacity magazines--16 rounds for 9s and 14 for .40s.
That surely would take care of the cost issue so now all we've got to do is find out whether the reliability is back. There is only one way to do that, and that's by shooting one. Lots.
Nota' Torture Test
Customarily this is called a torture test but let me tell you from the outset the gun doesn't suffer nearly as much as the shooter or--worse still the guys loading magazines. The 12 lb. DAO trigger is smooth but the long stroke--which is good for safety--means the shooter can watch his finger and arm pump up from the exercise and fervently wish the thing would run out of bullets before you run out of pulling power.
Smith & Wesson was an enthusiastic supporter of the idea and we elected to test both 9mm and .40 S&W versions. The 9mm test will be reported in GUNS and this report covers the .40 S&W. Originally our plan was to shoot 2,500 rounds through each gun but an extractor broke on the 9mm so that test was expanded to 3,000 rounds. To keep everything equal this one got 3,000 too. I'm afraid most of my buddies are getting wise to my "shoot free ammo" trick so my fence, just like Huck's, is a mite shy of whitewash. To put it another way I got to shoot the majority of this one myself.
As I do with any test this one started with a very thorough examination to search for differences between this gun and the older one. Without measuring individual parts the only obvious point was a change to a conventional round striker (firing pin) instead of the rectangular style used by Glock and the earlier S&Ws.
Anytime you plan a test like this there are logistical problems galore. S&W generously furnished two guns in each caliber so one pair could be sent to Ichi for photography and the others used for the actual shooting. S&W also supplied a quantity of spare magazines, for if we had been restricted to only the two that came with the gun we'd be there forever. Winchester and Black Hills contributed ammo. Lining up help presents scheduling problems too. My initial plan was to shoot 1,500 rounds one day and another 1,500 later. Because of a late start we were only able to shoot 1,000 on the first trip, so the second small scale range run did 500 more. The final assault on the Sigma consumed 1,500 rounds in the space of a little over two hours.
The Plan
The idea was to begin with the brand new pistol, which was inspected and lubricated before shooting began, Our magazine supply for the .40 included both 10- and 14-round magazines, but to keep things as simple as possible we just loaded ten in all of them. At first the plan was for one man to shoot 100 rounds and then give the pistol a chance to cool a bit--another drop or two of lube--and resume blasting. There was no need to lubricate that often and 100 rounds didn't really get it too hot either. Subsequently we expanded the session to 200 rounds, at which time the slide was too hot to touch forward of the ejection port. Cooling was allowed then.
Ambient temperatures were in the 70s so it didn't really take long. I've done similar testing with steel guns and the polymer provided an unexpected benefit. After a bunch of rounds through a steel gun heat is dispersed down the trigger and that part becomes a real hazard unless gloves are worn. The polymer didn't transmit heat that way but I quickly learned that gloves are a good idea anyhow.
One of the primary concerns in tests such as this is whether or not the gun will require cleaning during the test. Our plan was to not clean unless forced to do so because of stoppages and it's a tribute to both gun and ammo that cleaning was not required.
When all was said and done 3,000 rounds were fired without a single malfunction. There were two stoppages which are attributed to shooter error. First of these was a failure to fire that was the result of incomplete closure of the slide. Very often this is called "limp-wristing" and the shooter agreed that was likely. It was near the end of the 1,500 round session and all of us were pretty thoroughly whipped. Shortly after, there was a premature engagement of the slide stop before the last round was fired. This happened to the same shooter and he could not rule out that a loose grip contributed. I'm inclined to think so since in 5.999 other rounds that stoppage had not been seen.
My studies of government-dictated tests shows that stoppages are not counted if the shooter can articulate and explain a shooter-induced condition. But even if we didn't allow that, this test would still pass the customary 1,000 MRBF (mean rounds between failures) that is applied in tests such as those conducted by the FBI.
Accuracy
Our purpose here was not to do an exhaustive accuracy test, but impressions are formed nonetheless. The backstop is 70 yards away and it really does help to have something to shoot at, at least in a general sense. There were rocks, sticks and the odd clay pigeon scattered about and even shooting as fast as I could there is no doubt in my mind I could have made life miserable--or granted glorious martyrdom--for anybody who needed my assistance at that range.
So when it's all done, things have cooled-down some, and we can touch the gun once more, what have we learned? Simple: this time S&W got it right. It has no snob appeal or sycophant followers, but sells for a price that hovers around half of that of their targeted competition. It's safe, really is DAO, fully supports the cartridge case, and can be fired with lead bullets. They already had the ergonomic issues worked out and didn't mess those up. Looks like they found the recipe again.
For more info, contact Smith & Wesson, (800) 331-0852, www.smith-wesson.com.
PHOTOS: ICHIRO NAGATA
COPYRIGHT 2005 Publishers' Development Corporation
COPYRIGHT 2005 Gale Group

[CastleBravo]

Funny, I'm pretty sure the Sigma had a bad reputation more or less INSTANTLY.

It would be nice all the same if the current Sigma is not a Smegma, and works well for that price.

[jonathon]

I will say after seeing how well a buddies SW9VE did at the range, I've added that to the list to get. For the price.. and what its intended to do, its a nice gun. Feels really good in my hand to, I would say better than my Glock does(and it feels decent, comfortable enough not to bother me, or effect my shooting).

I like my Glock, but I'll be getting a Sigma later on 'cause its a nice gun, and an excuse to buy something new

Won't be getting rid of the Glock any time soon, that's for sure

[Handy]

I remember when the first Sigmas came out some rag did a torture test with several thousand rounds. More than a couple problems, including some sort of felt buffer falling right out of the gun. The first guns made their own rep, because there was initially alot of interest in "the more ergonomic Glock".

I would be comfortable recommending the current Sigma - they work fine. But There are more than a few $300 guns that are as good or better.

[SGTF109]

Some say Sigma's are Glock wantabes

[Avizpls]

Sigmas arent glock wanna be's. They are improvments upon Glocks if anything

[SGTF109]

Quote:Sigmas arent glock wanna be's. They are improvments upon Glocks if anything

LMAO !!!!!...ok

[News Shooter]

That two weeks ago I bought my first Semi-Auto.
I was in the S & W Performance Center inSpringfield and this 9mm Sigma gun was less than $300, which is all I had to spend.
I've put five hundred rounds through it so far and I have to tell you I feel like a thief in the night for what I got. If people want to keep bashing these guns then let them. Those of us who have one know better.
I don't claim to be a firearms "expert" but it's a reliable shooter and for those of us in the economy column, it left me some $ to buy other toys. I'm a happy camper

[euclid]

My problem with the Sigma has always been the trigger. Every one I tried was really heavy and creepy and gritty. Granted, the Glock trigger is nothing like a tuned 1911, but is is was a far cry better than the Sigmas I sampled.

[JohnKSa]

The 18 degree angle is exactly the same as the 1911.

No it's not. The 1911 grip angle is about 11-12 degrees, 18 degrees is actually much closer to the Glock grip angle of 19 degrees.

[JBA]

So can the DAO trigger be lightened up and shortened? Glocks have a dozen or so triggers out now and a decent trigger would really make this a decent shooter for the bucks..

[johndavid400]

12lbs??????????? DEAR LORD!

Why 12lbs? Glocks have a factory 5.5lb trigger, so why not a 6 or 7? At least that would be bearable, why not offer a 12lb trigger as a special model that no one would buy if they had a choice?

If they have learned anything by selling the SW99's it should be that the DAO models always end up in CDNN for $339 and the standard AS trigger models (SA with decocker to DA) still sell for full price of $500.

I just don't understand why anyone would want such a heavy trigger? People shoot these things at the range more than they carry them. And people carry Glocks, XD's, and HK's that dont have external safeties and have a 5-6lb trigger (including myself).

I guess it just goes to show who the real "Glock improvers" are.... Springfield Armory!!!!! They put a grip safety on the XD so you don't shoot your jewels off and made it essentially a beefed up Glock that is probably one of the sweetest shooting guns out there right now (for the price). And they have a 5lb trigger! I can shoot 2.5" groups at 10 yards with my XD-9 sub-compact. Excellent weapon.

I would be all over the S&W SW9VE if that dang trigger wasn't so stinking heavy. Oh well, I got the SW99 AS instead, and it is a good gun.

[Handy]

The Glock NY2 trigger is about 12 lbs, and is in all NYPD Glocks. Some people don't like surprises. For a duty gun a heavy trigger helps make sure the officer fired because he meant to. The real world is not a target range.

[jonathon]

Sigmas arent glock wanna be's. They are improvments upon Glocks if anything

I would say a Glock is a much finer weapon than a Sigma, that being said, I'm sure a new Sigma could give a new Glock a good show.

[denfoote]

Mine's gone BANG every time I have asked it to.
It's put the copper clad lead where I have wanted it to go.
It has not coughed, choked, sneezed, or complained.
In short, it has done everything a pistol should!!!
I'm pleased!!!!

[marshall2]

I read the American Handgun article about a month ago, and the Sigma SW40GVE sounded like a bargain. I visited a gun shop the next day, and there was a SW40GVE lying there looking at me. Well, I bought it, and I like it fine. It shoots everything. No failures. The trigger really isn't so bad as lots of people say, kind of like my Kel-Tec P11, or a little better, actually. It shoots straight, too! Come Winter, I think this will be my ccw gun. 14 mag, plus one in the chamber equals lots of firepower. Got some hot Corbon Powrball ammo for it, about 550 ftlbs of force. It's a good gun.
Pictures: http://www.mouseguns.com/my40/my40.htm

[swjr72]

I had a 40VE but could not stand the trigger. I guess I could have paid for a trigger job but the the sear housing assembly had to be replaced as well as the magazine catch . . . 3 strikes and your outta here

[Silent Bob]

The improved Glock was the HK USP...

[Handy]

How do you figure? The two guns have very little in common.

[CajunBass]

I looked at the Sigma and liked it a lot, but I wanted something smaller, so I got a Kel-Tec, P-11. The Sigma will have to wait for another day.

[SW40F]

I was introduced to the SW40F in 1995.

I liked the price tag.

I loved the feel.

It came with hi-capacity magazines.

S&W fixed some early break-in problems at no charge.

It has done everything I wanted it to do since.

For slow-fire target shooting I prefer the SA trigger on my Ruger Blackhawk.

The Sigma trigger is fine for combat-type, point it and fire shooting.

The trigger pull is similar to my S&W 442 Airweight, so no surprises.

[racinstylez]

good thing I didnt buy one.

[7.62]

Yep, I fired about 5 boxes through the Sigma 9mm once. I had planned on shooting 7 boxes, but had to quit after 5 because my finger muscles had worked so hard that my finger couldn't fit in th trigger guard anymore. I just don't like them plastic guns. The thought of a hunk of lead coming out of my hand at 1200+ fps through a gun that the only metal part is the barrel, kinda makes me wonder. Metal guns have worked fine since they were invented. Why mess it up with plastic? Soon I will go in the gun shop and the dealer will ask if I would like that new Glock in paper or plastic. Plastic grips are fine, but thats where we can draw the line in plastic parts.

Also, as far as accuracy goes, I hit more when I threw it at the target. But thats just me. If you can live with 36 inch groups at 10 yards, then this is the gun for you.

Hey, I heard that the new Beretta shotguns are made of cardboard. Yee-Haw!! Can't wait to sink 3 grand into one of those!!!


Please don't take this the wrong way. Just my opinion. Happy and Safe shootin'.

[CastleBravo]

The thought of a hunk of lead coming out of my hand at 1200+ fps through a gun that the only metal part is the barrel, kinda makes me wonder.

It would make me wonder, too, except of course that your statement about the Sigma isn't true.

[7.62]

Which part?