I’m here with another field-tested firearm comparison. This time around, I’ve got a real showdown: the Glock 17 Vs SIG P320.
You’ve probably heard a lot about these two, but I’ve taken them both out to see what they’re made of.
We’re not just talking numbers and specs here; we’re talking real, gritty experience in the field. So, let’s get down to it and see which of these popular handguns comes out on top.
| Feature | Glock 17 | Sig P320 |
| Caliber | 9mm | 9mm (also in .357SIG, .40S&W) |
| Overall Length | 8.03 inches | 7.2 inches |
| Height | 5.47 inches | 5.5 inches |
| Width | 1.26 inches | 1.3 inches |
| Barrel Length | 4.49 inches | 4.7 inches |
| Weight (no mag) | 24.87 oz | 25.8 oz |
| Magazine Capacity | 17 rounds | 17 rounds |
| Trigger Pull | ~5.5 lbs | ~6.5 lbs |
| Frame Material | Polymer | Stainless steel frame in polymer module |
| Barrel Rifling | Right-hand, hexagonal | Conventional |
| Finish | Gas nitride | Nitron |
Glock 17
The Glock 17, a name synonymous with reliability and versatility, has been a staple in the world of firearms since its inception in the 1980s.
Known for its robust design, this piece has served law enforcement and military personnel with unwavering loyalty.
Specs
- Caliber: 9mm
- Length: 8.03 inches
- Height: 5.47 inches
- Width: 1.26 inches
- Barrel Length: 4.49 inches
- Weight (without magazine): 22.22 oz
- Magazine Capacity: Standard 17 rounds
- Trigger Pull: ~5.5 lbs
- Sight Radius: 6.49 inches
- Frame Material: Polymer
- Finish: Gas nitride
SIG P320
The SIG P320, a more recent entrant in the firearm scene, has quickly risen to fame with its modular design and adaptability. It represents a leap in handgun innovation, offering a personalized shooting experience.
Specs
- Caliber: 9mm (also available in .357SIG, .40S&W)
- Overall Length: 7.2 inches
- Height: 5.5 inches
- Width: 1.3 inches
- Barrel Length: 4.7 inches
- Weight (without magazine): 25.8 oz
- Magazine Capacity: Standard 17 rounds
- Trigger Pull: ~6.5 lbs
- Sight Radius: 6.6 inches
- Frame Material: Stainless steel frame inside polymer grip module
- Finish: Nitron
Features Comparisons of Glock 17 Vs SIG P320
1. Ergonomics and Handling
Glock 17
The Glock 17, with its longstanding reputation, offers a solid grip that’s familiar to many shooters.
My experience with it in the field has been one of comfort and reliability. The grip is a bit blocky, sure, but it’s a classic design that’s proven itself over time.
The Gen 5 model I tested has interchangeable backstraps, which I found useful for adjusting the grip size to suit my hand better.
SIG P320
The P320, on the other hand, brings something new to the table. Its modularity is a game-changer. I swapped out frames with ease, allowing for a more customized grip that suited my shooting style.
The grip felt more rounded and filled my hand comfortably, providing a more natural hold during rapid firing sessions.
Winner
It’s a tough call, but I’d say the SIG P320 edges out slightly in this category. The ability to change frames for a custom fit is a significant advantage, especially for a shooter who values a tailored grip.
However, for those who prefer a more traditional and straightforward grip, the Glock 17 still stands strong.
2. Trigger Mechanism and Shooting Experience
Glock 17
The Glock’s trigger is something many shooters, including myself, have come to appreciate for its consistency. The trigger pull is smooth, and the reset is both audible and tactile, which I find reassuring during rapid firing. It’s a predictable trigger that performs reliably every time.
SIG P320
The SIG P320’s trigger surprised me. It’s slightly lighter than the Glock’s, and the pull feels a bit smoother. In my field tests, I found this made a noticeable difference in my shooting accuracy and comfort, especially during extended shooting sessions.
Winner
In terms of the trigger mechanism, I’m leaning towards the SIG P320. While the Glock’s trigger is undeniably good, the P320 offers a slightly better experience with its smoother pull and lighter touch. This feature could make a significant difference in scenarios where rapid and precise shooting is required.
3. Concealability and Carry Comfort
Glock 17
The Glock 17, despite being a full-sized handgun, surprised me with its ease of carry. With the right holster, carrying the Glock 17 was more comfortable than expected. Its thinner grip and shorter length compared to the P320 make it a more practical choice for everyday carry.
SIG P320
The SIG P320, while offering excellent features, falls a bit short in concealability. Its slightly larger frame and heavier weight were noticeable during carry, especially over longer periods. However, its modular design means you can opt for a smaller frame if concealability is a priority.
Winner
For concealability and comfort in carry, the Glock 17 takes the win. Its dimensions and weight make it easier to carry discreetly, an essential factor for many concealed carry users. The SIG P320, while versatile, is a bit bulkier, which might be a deciding factor for those who prioritize concealability.
4. Accuracy and Shooting Performance
Glock 17
In my field tests, the Glock 17 maintained its reputation for reliability and accuracy. Shooting at various ranges, the Glock delivered consistent groupings. Its balance and steady hold contributed significantly to this precision.
The Gen 5’s Marksman barrel seems to have enhanced its accuracy, making it a trustworthy choice for both beginners and experienced shooters.
SIG P320
The SIG P320 impressed me with its shooting performance. Its high bore axis initially made me skeptical, but the gun compensated with a smooth trigger pull and stable firing. In my tests, the P320 showed excellent accuracy, especially at mid-range distances. The modular design didn’t affect its precision, which was a pleasant surprise.
Winner
Choosing a winner in this category is challenging, as both guns perform admirably. However, the Glock 17 edges out slightly due to its consistent performance across various conditions and distances.
Its proven track record and the improved accuracy of the Gen 5 model give it a slight advantage over the P320.
5. Durability and Maintenance
Glock 17
The Glock 17 is renowned for its ruggedness. My personal experience aligns with this; the Glock can handle different weather conditions and rough usage without any significant wear and tear.
Its simple design makes maintenance straightforward, and it’s well-known for its long-term durability without needing extensive care.
SIG P320
The SIG P320 is also a durable weapon, withstanding various field conditions in my tests. However, its modular design means there are more parts and potential points of wear.
While it holds up well under regular use, it requires a bit more attention in maintenance, especially when frequently changing modules.
Winner
When it comes to durability and ease of maintenance, the Glock 17 takes the lead. Its fewer moving parts and simpler design mean there’s less that can go wrong, making it more suitable for those who want a low-maintenance firearm.
The SIG P320 is still a robust choice, but its modularity comes with a slightly higher need for upkeep.
Pros & Cons of Glock 17
Pros
- Proven reliability over decades
- More compact and lighter, easier for concealed carry
- Simple design, easy to maintain
- Wide availability of aftermarket parts
- Consistent trigger feel with a clear reset
Cons
- Some shooters find the grip less ergonomic
- Gen 3 has a slick texture that can be challenging in wet conditions
Pros & Cons of SIG P320
Pros
- Highly modular design, allowing customization
- Comfortable and ergonomic grip
- Not serialized frames enable easy customization
- Slightly better trigger feel in stock form
Cons
- Heavier and bulkier, making concealed carry more challenging
- Requires more maintenance due to modularity
- Higher bore axis might affect handling for some shooters
Similarities between Glock 17 & SIG P320
- Both are 9mm caliber pistols
- Standard magazine capacity of 17 rounds
- Accessory rails for attaching lights and lasers
- Used extensively by law enforcement and military
- Striker-fired mechanism
- Polymer frame construction
Differences between Glock 17 & SIG P320
- Glock 17 is less modular compared to the highly modular P320
- Glock has a longer track record and established reputation since the 1980s
- SIG P320 features a higher bore axis than Glock 17
- P320 frames are not serialized, offering greater customization flexibility
- Glock 17 generally more suited for concealed carry due to its smaller size
- P320 offers easier caliber and size conversion
- Glock has a broader range of aftermarket support
- Trigger mechanics differ slightly, with P320 having a smoother feel
- P320’s grip ergonomics considered superior by some users
- Glock 17 known for its ruggedness and durability in harsh conditions
Final Verdict
After thoroughly testing and comparing both the Glock 17 and the SIG P320, I’ve arrived at my conclusion. Each gun has its unique strengths and caters to different preferences.
My choice leans towards the Glock 17. Its reliability, combined with its comfortable handling and durability, make it an excellent choice for a wide range of shooters, from law enforcement to civilian use. It’s a classic that continues to stand the test of time.
FAQ’s
Which is better Glock 17 or Sig P320?
The Glock 17 offers faster cycling with slightly more recoil, while the SIG P320, with its higher bore axis, provides less felt recoil but more muzzle flip. Both have unique advantages.
Is Glock or SIG more expensive?
Glocks are generally less expensive to produce and purchase than SIG Sauer’s all-metal, hammer-fired pistols due to their polymer-frame, striker-fired design.
How many rounds can a P320 shoot?
The Sig P320 Compact, in its 9mm configuration, typically comes with a 15-round magazine, though 10-round magazines are also available for capacity-restricted states.
Does Sig P320 have safety?
The civilian models of the SIG P320 have two internal safeties that are not user-controlled. They include a primary internal safety to catch the striker and a mechanism to prevent discharge when the slide is drawn backward.
