Yesterday, I picked up a new gun from the gun shop. A Sig Saucer P250 in .22 LR. I thought it would add in nicely with my other Sig and my many conversions for it (.40 S&W, .45 ACP, 9MM).
The nice thing about this gun is I can use it with any of my other conversion kits. Or even if I get tired of the .22 LR I could sell it as a kit and keep the firing module and make one of my other conversion kits into an actual gun.
My first target shooting with the .22 showed me something interesting. I was flinching. I dry fire practice and shoot a fair amount, but I hadn’t seen myself flinching for a while. I think I’ve been flinching just slightly, but just hadn’t been noticing. I see this as a positive sign that shooting the .22 will be good for me just like shooting round balls in my muzzleloader with a small load is good for me. It will allow me to focus on being steady while not caring about the recoil.
This gun is super accurate as are my other Sigs. I saw a few shots keyhole at about 10 to 15 yards. I was even able to consistently hit a large steel target I had setup about 125 yards away.
My only wish so far is that the 10 round magazine would have a bigger capacity. It seems like they could fit twice at least that in the magazine. Maybe there is a feeding reason or something. I don’t know, but it would be nice if it was bigger.
It looks to be a fun gun. I really glad Sig came out with this conversion for the p250.
Well, I’ve acquired another gun. A friend of mine was selling his Sig Saucer P250 Subcompact. At the time when he asked me if I wanted to buy it my Kel-tec PF9 was broken and I was having issues getting parts from Kel-tec so I decided to buy it.
My first feelings about the Sig was how sturdy and solid it feels. Then I racked the slide and found that it was smoother and easier to pull back then the PF9.
When I first shot the Sig I was impressed with how accurate it was and how smooth it felt to shoot it. I still have to stage the trigger part way back like my PF9 for longer range shots, but it was easier to stay on target. The PF9 is an accurate gun too, but I would say the difference is the level of focus I required to be accurate. For close range shots the Sig seemed able to shoot very quickly, comfortably, and accurately. In contrast, my PF9 kind of jars your hand a bit and the trigger is uncomfortable. The PF9 at close ranges is so so for me, but if you are close enough even that can become less important.
The size for the Sig is a bit bigger and heavier which I can feel the difference when I conceal carry, but I would not say its necessary a bad thing. On the plus side it has 10 rounds in the magazine instead of 7 like the PF9. Also for me a big consideration is my confidence in its accuracy is much higher for the Sig. On the bad side for the Sig though it does not seem like a good pocket gun at all. In contrast, the PF9 it just barely small enough to pocket carry very nicely.
Another thing that impresses me about the Sig is its ability to change calibers and sizes easily with a caliber exchange kit. So I can change my 40 S&W into a 9mm, .357 sig, 45 ACP, or .380 ACP. The change over looks really easy too and can be done in under a minute with no tools. Also the kits are not registered as a gun so I can get them without going through an FFL which is a big cost saver. A con though is the kits seem to be pretty pricey and sometimes you almost wonder if it would be cheaper to buy another gun. So for now I’m just watching ebay for some used kits to see what time will turn up.
One annoying thing I have noticed about the Sig is that the magazine release tends to stick and jab you if you carry under the waist band. Perhaps, better positioning of the gun can fix this, but it does seem a bit painful at times.
So which one will be my primary carry? The Sig. Why?
.40 S & W (It just seems like a better round then the 9mm)
It feels good in my hands
I am confident in how it shoots
It has a 3 round advantage to the PF9 (barring a mag extension)
I’ll still use the PF9 just not as much. Each gun has something its better at so its about learning which is best for each situation.
So I’ll admit it. I didn’t really know anything about silencers except for what I’ve seen in movies where they use them to shoot people quietly.
According to this article on silencers on arstechnica turns out how silencers are portrayed in movies is incorrect. They say it actually just makes the sound quieter to the point that you don’t need earplugs when you shoot. An exception would mainly be the .22 silencer in the article which does seem to fit the common perception.
The bottom line…silencers really are not just for bad guys doing killings. In the article they pose several reasons why normal people would want a silencers.
You can target shoot without earplugs and avoid disturbing the neighbors quite as much
You can shoot while hunting without going deaf
Animals are not quite as disturbed while shooting at them
Protection of hearing for hunting dogs
Another miss-conception I held was silencers are illegal. According to the article the only states they are illegal in are: “California, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island, and Vermont.” So….actually they are legal in a lot of states.
The bad news is to purchase a silencer does not just require a transaction with an FFL, but also “pay[ment] $200 for a BAFTE tax stamp and fill out some paperwork.” In addition to that the article points out that silencers often cost as about as much as or more then a gun does. So, I don’t think I’ll be getting one anytime soon.
An interesting article though and it goes into how silencers work.
The experiences of a hunter and trapper in Pennsylvania