TexasCHLforum.com

patterson wrote:the SRT trigger makes a big difference

It does, though it takes some getting used to if you're already familiar with the standard Sig DA/SA trigger pull.

XinTX wrote:From what I understand SIG has stopped selling the parts, as they want a "qualified gunsmith" to install them. If you can find the parts, it's really not hard.

They did for a little while a few years ago, but that has since changed. SRT kits for the 239 available right here, ridiculously easy to do yourself.

http://www.topgunsupply.com/sig-sauer-srt-kit-p239.html

one good thing about the .40 cal 239 frame is that you can get the .357 Sig barrel as well as a third party 9mm barrel (I don't think Sig makes a 9mm barrel for their .40 model available). The P239 frame (may be the slide itself) for the 9mm model, if I remember correctly, can not be "upped "to the .40 cal barrels though. My memory may be failing me though.


JD

mr surveyor wrote:one good thing about the .40 cal 239 frame is that you can get the .357 Sig barrel as well as a third party 9mm barrel (I don't think Sig makes a 9mm barrel for their .40 model available). The P239 frame (may be the slide itself) for the 9mm model, if I remember correctly, can not be "upped "to the .40 cal barrels though. My memory may be failing me though.


JD

I believe you are right you cant go from 9mm to 40 or 357 sig but you can go down, maybe its the 9mm frame might not be strong enough for the bigger loads I don't really know the reason behind it

^^ That's what I understand ^^

My EDC is the Sig 239 in .40 cal. I love it. Not too big, not too small, ...just right. The gun has never has had an FTF in a couple of thousand rounds.

Steve

I would have thought that a 9mm wouldn't work in a 40 S&W slide, primarily because of the extractor placement. Some .38 Super guns will shoot a 9mm (with a 9mm barrel) and some won't, because of unreliable extraction. Has anyone actually tried this?

Chas.

Charles L. Cotton wrote:I would have thought that a 9mm wouldn't work in a 40 S&W slide, primarily because of the extractor placement. Some .38 Super guns will shoot a 9mm (with a 9mm barrel) and some won't, because of unreliable extraction. Has anyone actually tried this?

Chas.

Yes, though admittedly not in a 239, instead it was a 229. Never had any issues shooting 9mm in a .40 slide, though I would never have counted on it for anything beyond range use. Bar-Sto (https://www.barsto.com/category_main.cfm?ID=SSB) seems to be the popular favorite among most Sig shooters who do this.

I believe the sig magazines are interchangeable for 40 and 357 Sig also

SigM4 wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:I would have thought that a 9mm wouldn't work in a 40 S&W slide, primarily because of the extractor placement. Some .38 Super guns will shoot a 9mm (with a 9mm barrel) and some won't, because of unreliable extraction. Has anyone actually tried this?

Chas.

Yes, though admittedly not in a 239, instead it was a 229. Never had any issues shooting 9mm in a .40 slide, though I would never have counted on it for anything beyond range use. Bar-Sto (https://www.barsto.com/category_main.cfm?ID=SSB) seems to be the popular favorite among most Sig shooters who do this.

do you happen to know why some Sig models have long extractors and some have the short. My P226 has a long extractor but no issues so far

If aesthetics are important, Sig guns look great (Esp the DAK with wood grips). I think they, like all DA/SA guns shoot horribly on the first shot which is arguably the most critical. This is compounded by a complex manual of arms (decocking to go to low ready, followed by the horrible pull again). I enjoy them at the range, but I think for a modern fighting pistol, I'd stick with the M&P.

gigag04 wrote:If aesthetics are important, Sig guns look great (Esp the DAK with wood grips). I think they, like all DA/SA guns shoot horribly on the first shot which is arguably the most critical. This is compounded by a complex manual of arms (decocking to go to low ready, followed by the horrible pull again). I enjoy them at the range, but I think for a modern fighting pistol, I'd stick with the M&P.

not if you get used to it and triggers are pretty smooth right out of the box but not as good as a 1911 trigger, some of the modern pistols have spungy triggers and typically get trigger work to make them better

sigs are one of the most accurate pistols out of the box I have ever shot

ive shot M&Ps with and without the Apex trigger kit and still no comparison to the Sig trigger and they felt gritty

gigag04 wrote:If aesthetics are important, Sig guns look great (Esp the DAK with wood grips). ..

I rarely get to see my M&P since it's holstered 99% of the time , when wife's P238 Equinox is on the dresser I do admit to giving it more than a passing glance. I'll shoot the 239 next week and see how I like the trigger.

johncanfield wrote:

gigag04 wrote:If aesthetics are important, Sig guns look great (Esp the DAK with wood grips). ..

I rarely get to see my M&P since it's holstered 99% of the time , when wife's P238 Equinox is on the dresser I do admit to giving it more than a passing glance. I'll shoot the 239 next week and see how I like the trigger.

you may or may not like the P239 because it is DA/SA and your wifes Sig P238 is SAO, the first DA pull is long but smooth