Tried a HK USP in .45 ACP today

[Lord Skeletor]

For me, the most agreeable statement in this thread.

That saidd, the usp still feels horrible to me in hand. The HK45 feels great, though.

Eh...they feel fine in mine. If you have girly-hands (being female) or undersized man-hands, then it might not be a good gun for you to wrap your paws around. For most guys...it's a good-fitting gun. It shoots extraordinarily well from an accuracy standpoint, although its sights are average. Does its price warrant a $150.+ over the Glock? Probably.
Does a SIG warrant a $300+ price difference over a Glock? Eh...maybe. In the end...it all depends on what you like and how much money you want to spend.

To the average shooter that doesn't shoot that often or once/twice a month---either gun (the HK or the Sig) may not be worth the money to you. But for those of us who shoot all the time, I'd say...yeah; probably worth the money for the function, style, and reliability.

[Don Gwinn]

I think "most" is a stretch, though I never tried a .40/9mm and sometimes think those would probably have fit me pretty well.

No need to lash out at my fine aristocratic hands just because you found a gun that fits your enormous, low-born shovel-claws.
:p

[Cassius]

I have large gorilla hands, but I still prefer something more svelte than gigantic clunky H&K pistol grips.

[IMightBeWrong]

I have the exact opposite experience with SIG and HK than LS. I would say the USP should be sold for barely more than Glock prices and that the SIG is very fair priced. It's not often that you hear somebody say the SIG isn't worth its price tag, but its a VERY common thing to hear HKs called over priced, even among owners I've met. Having have owned both a USP Compact Tactical .45 and a SIG P228 myself, I would put the SIG lightyears ahead of HK in quality. The only advantage. Would give HK is weight.

Also, for me it isn't that the HK is too big for my hands. It simply feels cheap and has an uncomfortable grip shape with controls that click instead of functioning smoothly. There just isn't any attraction to the design for me. HK really got the new 45 right, but the price tag once again wrong imo since their compact 9 and 40 versions of the same pistol are a whole 250 dollars cheaper. Why pay more that much more for the other caliber? Anyway, were thickness an issue for me I wouldn't be the big fan of Glock that I am.

[Cassius]

I think SIGs are overpriced and overhyped. Less so than H&Ks, but still up there.

[IMightBeWrong]

I loved my SIG. Second most reliable gun I've owned behind the Makarov. What do you find overrated about the design? Don't want to hijack the thread for a SIG discussion but I am curious?

[Cassius]

I loved my SIG. Second most reliable gun I've owned behind the Makarov. What do you find overrated about the design? Don't want to hijack the thread for a SIG discussion but I am curious?

A group of us shot the P228/9 series side by side with the glock 19 and 23, S&W XD 9 and .40, Smith and Wesson M&P, and H&K USP. All three of us felt perceived recoil and muzzle rise at both 9mm and .40S&W SIG was highest out of those pistols, and that follow up shots took noticeably longer. The M&P was next worse after that, but the SIG had a much much better trigger. I've also shot the P226 in .40, and didn't care much for that, either. Same reason as listed above: The pistol has a lot of muzzle rise compared to an XD, USP, or Glock. I definitely prefer SIGs to the M&P series. The M&P pistols have a long ways to go, in my opinion. Which is humorous, because when I first started shooting pistols, I liked them best, simply for the ergonomics.

To be fair, (and with the exclusion of the M&Ps I've shot), I think all of these pistols are excellent, I just happen to like the SIG significantly less than the rest of them. Doubly so after factoring in price.

[IMightBeWrong]

That's odd. For myself as well as all the friends of mine who have fired the P228 I had it kicked less than any 9mm I know of. For me, it was as if the muzzle rise was nonexistant, or close to it.

[Don Gwinn]

The P-series SIGs do have a high bore axis. The Glocks, M&Ps, etc. have the line of the bore located lower in the hand, which means that the recoil impulse is transferred closer to straight back into the bones of the arm.

How much that affects an individual shooter depends somewhat on his grip and his perception of recoil . . . . the first is kind of objective, the second totally subjective.

[IMightBeWrong]

Ttrue, but in 9mm the difference between a high and low bore axis should be very minimal. The SIGs bore axis being "high" is a bit of an understatement in my experience, but I find it to be more of an ergonomic issue than anything else. Never bothered me. I love the feeel of the newer SIG grips.