SIG P226 CO2 pellet pistol - any thoughts?

[Josie & John]

I've not looked at these since they were released, initially I wasn't impressed and the rifles were a real let down, but maybe time to revisit it. I really like Sig guns, and I think my initial hatred for them came partly from me perhaps expecting a couple of airgun unicorns that in hindsight were never going to show up so I probably was unfair and a little harsh in my opinion.

I might have to revisit the pistols for another look, have there been any changes ??

I agree entirely re the SIG rifles. I have played with a couple at the club and they have a tendency to jam. Also quite low powered and inconsistent for what they are. I don't like the idea of the larger and more expensive CO2 cylinders either as starting a session with one kind of commits you to emptying that cylinder before you leave the range or certainly to within a couple of days of fitting it. Fitting an adaptor for a pair of standard cylinders is probably better but there's also the aspect of more expense...

I have just taken the baffles out of the Parker Hale silencer I experimented with in order to reduce weight and this has resulted in the pistol shooting around an inch and a half high rather than the 2 1/2 inches high it was shooting with the silencer fitted. It also feels more pointable as a result. To be honest, even without the silencer, the pistol shoots accurately enough when I place my sights over the target area and the fact shots impact slightly low mean nothing to the tin cans and fairground skittles I have used as targets.

Kind regards,

John

[blooregard]

I agree entirely re the SIG rifles. I have played with a couple at the club and they have a tendency to jam. Also quite low powered and inconsistent for what they are. I don't like the idea of the larger and more expensive CO2 cylinders either as starting a session with one kind of commits you to emptying that cylinder before you leave the range or certainly to within a couple of days of fitting it. Fitting an adaptor for a pair of standard cylinders is probably better but there's also the aspect of more expense...

88 Gram CO2 is another pet hate of mine. It was the reason I searched long and hard for an older Walther Lever action!! 88 gram in the MPX\MCX puts the cost close to shooting .22lr, even if you get every last shot out of a canister.

But I'm going to revisit the Sig Pistols, will go nicely with my 522 Swat.

[Geezer]

88 Gram CO2 is another pet hate of mine. It was the reason I searched long and hard for an older Walther Lever action!! 88 gram in the MPX\MCX puts the cost close to shooting .22lr, even if you get every last shot out of a canister.

But I'm going to revisit the Sig Pistols, will go nicely with my 522 Swat.

Same here on the Winchester, that and the aesthetics of the butt pad.

JM - have you tried an aluminium PH, assuming yours is steel? Might split the vertical difference quite well. You used to be able to get them, though I think they are no longer made.

[Josie & John]

Same here on the Winchester, that and the aesthetics of the butt pad.

JM - have you tried an aluminium PH, assuming yours is steel? Might split the vertical difference quite well. You used to be able to get them, though I think they are no longer made.

I think my silencer is ally - it certainly feels very light, now that I have removed the baffles. The pistol truly is very accurate when compared to a BB/ball firer. It's growing on me by the day.

John

[blooregard]

Same here on the Winchester, that and the aesthetics of the butt pad.

The old 12g models have a much slimmer pad, much nicer but still a little wrong on an 1894.

[Geezer]

The old 12g models have a much slimmer pad, much nicer but still a little wrong on an 1894.

At least the newer 94s often came with a butt pad.

There's a fair bit of detail wrong on the Umarex. The fore end does not extend beyond the barrel band, and the barrel (actually on the Umarex the barrel housing) is straight, not tapered. And the butt-heavy balance is all wrong compared to a real 94. Especially on the short versions.

Still quite a nice thing to have, though.

Just a pity that Umarex couldn't have done a bit better on the realism front (e.g. the grip on the Beretta is a poor copy of the original, the trigger guard on the 225 isn't quite right...).

[Inspector 71]

I bought a new P320 a couple of months ago and have nothing but praise for it.

It feels solid. Authentic sidearm heft.

Blowback is well balanced and the THIRTY shot magazine is reliable and easy to reload.

It shoots low and left which can be easily accommodated for but I do wish the rearsight
Was adjustable; even in just one plane.

I toyed with the idea of a laser mounted on the front piccatinny but got very negative feedback on this arrangement.
Apparently there's not enough adjustment on the laser.

Would definitely recommend the P320 though for reliable fun.

[Daryll]

I bought a new P320 a couple of months ago and have nothing but praise for it.

It feels solid. Authentic sidearm heft.

Blowback is well balanced and the THIRTY shot magazine is reliable and easy to reload.

It shoots low and left which can be easily accommodated for but I do wish the rearsight
Was adjustable; even in just one plane.

I toyed with the idea of a laser mounted on the front piccatinny but got very negative feedback on this arrangement.
Apparently there's not enough adjustment on the laser.

Would definitely recommend the P320 though for reliable fun.

I got a one a couple of months ago, and although i haven't used it much, I enjoyed it and it worked fine... my only concern is the lack of availability of spare mags... the P226 mags are easy enough to find, but the P320 are like hens teeth, and damned expensive if you can find them.