Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Handguns Let no one say I am not open minded...

I shot it today with a warmish load of AA#7 and the 155 Gold Dots. No smiles in the brass, and accuracy seemed good. The rear sight adjusted down satisfactorily for the load, and had some adjustment left over, so it seems well designed for speedy loads

The Sig weighs 2 lbs 12.4 oz, compared to my Kimber 10mm, which weighs 2 lbs 6.9 oz. The Sig naturally has a beefy slide and rail, unlike the Kimber, so the weight difference is not surprising.

The firing pin indentations on primers are more oblong on the Sig, relative to the Kimber, suggesting the barrel is starting to unlock while the pin is still forward, despite a hellishly strong recoil spring. The Kimber shows the same tendency, though the distortion of the firing pin impression is minimal. I'm not sure if this behavior is really detrimental in the long run, though were this a 1911, I'd be looking for a different firing pin stop, with a square bottom, to delay unlocking a bit. A stronger firing pin spring might help some, as well.

The one area that does concern me a bit is the case support in the barrel. It's better than a traditional unramped 1911 barrel, but not as good as a ramped barrel - at least related to the Kimber. Shown below, a Kimber 10mm barrel, and the Sig on the right.



Here is the same Kimber barrel, versus a factory Colt barrel.



As a practical matter, you'll just have to try your loads of choice in such a Sig, to determine if it's giving the cases sufficient support. As noted above the Buffalo Bore "Heavy 10mm's" (180's at 1350 fps) work fine in the Sig, and show no unsightly smiles.

The 10mm Colts I have owned ate anything, out of any magazine. The Kimber has proven fussier, though I eventually made it reliable. So far the Sig has been totally reliable, though it needs more testing before you could call it good for serious use.

I think the bottom line is, if you prefer the 220 to the 1911, you'll like the 10mm 220. If not, then it's a harder decision...