Yes, it's not really fair to compare apples and oranges, or service to competition pistols ;-) The Sig cost me four times as much as the Glock but had to have trigger service after a mere 1000 rounds thru it after I bought it brand new. Whereas the Glock doesn't need any tuning at all.

Gentlemen recoil only affects your follow up shot. The glock didn't do to bad especially if you factor in the sigs weight compared to the glock......

This is a good informative video for me. It would also be nice to see the same X-Five vs Glock 34 with its longer slide.

Precisely what I was looking for! Thanks..

I have owned both. Glock is no match against a Sig. We used to carry Glock on the force and more than half would jam miss fire and handle poorly. Sigs can be field stripped in 40 seconds. 30 if your good. But to me and what I carry. 1911 45. Never had any problem with it. My other is Dan Wesson 357. Had it 40 years never had any problems.

@xavierid Sig's are very nice, but when it comes down to it, they are both going to get the job done every time without failure.

I have the same experience that light guns, while the recoil might be "snappier", do recover more quickly for follow-up shots. I have a Glock 19 and X-Five 5" model chambered in .40 S&W. Different calibers, but even compared to other .40 guns the SIG seems more stable, but slower to shoot.

@Blaze666BE: I owned both guns in the clip and made a fairly good comparison between the two. It is true that the mass of the Sig (almost twice as much as the Glock) helps to tame the recoil. However, I feel that the polymer frame of the Glock helps to distribute the recoil over time. I don't feel that it recoils as much as you'd expect considering the mass difference. But recoil is also somewhat subjective.

never realized till today, thank god for the beavertail on the sig! love the siggie...hands down.

Absolutely! Bang on.

The sig has a higher bore axis but weighs a bit more to compensate for it, cool comparison and both are awesome guns but if I had to choose just 1 I would take the sig.

for competition/accuracy and self defence go for sig.

I own Both and the Sig is in another league Sig Accuracy owns! Glocks are good but not that good!

This is my conclusion also. But in all honesty - I haven't made any extremely thorough comparison between these two pistols. An earlier comment suggested that I held the Sig more loosely which might be true. You can do that and get away with it with the heavy Sig. The Glock on the other hand is not that fun to shoot with anything but a "crush grip".

Nice video idea, but it should be Glock 34 VS P226 X-Five Competition just so its 2 firearms being compared that are in the same class, and barrel length etc.

@exabitster this is not a fair comp. w/ the sig being the high end tricked out model. which has a flared mag well built on the frame and extended beaver tail. against plain jane g17.

@exabister that wud mean the opposite, the higher weight of the sig would weigh down the recoil better than the glock. Y do u think heavy mg's r so accurate? Because they're so heavy. I almost like the larger mass of the x-five. It sits better in my hand.

@exabitster As Android602715 says: It is quite the opposite, I own a a P226 X-Five and I've fired Glocks too. The Glock's recoil is way harder than the P226 due to its light weight. Once you've fired both guns you'll definitely know the difference :)

The Glock may appear to recover more rapidly, however the lighter weight will likely give a "snappier" feeling, where as the Sig would be more of a push.

hehe, yeah ive shot the glock alot and tried the same modell sig not so long ago, the recoil felt totally diffrent. Not sure what i felt though, it coulld have been that its heavier and gives a softer recoil but still takes a bit longer time to come back =)

its really har do compare muzzle flip just like that, but 2 me it looks like the glock 17 aquiers its sights faster if you count the seconds it takes for the gun to come back again for the next shot

To me it seems that the Glock "recovers" faster from recoil, while the mass (almost double) of the Sig makes it move around more.

you can buy 2 glocks for the price of 1 X-five.

@Lord666Belial that was the point!

The block recoil is more out of control by the looks of it. The sig has more mass being a all metal gun unlike the inferior glock allowing for a more controlled recoil to get back on target asap

Lol all the Sig boomers mad in the comments. Glock requires less maintenance and ladt longer than sig p226. Multiple records of Glocks exceeding 100k round mark. SIGs are luxky if they reach 30k shots.

WHERES THE FULL AUTO SIGS?

Accuracy on my P226 is way better than any Glock i tested, how is that they are both going to get the job done if you cant hit it! When the SHTF that little edge is know as not getting killed! Sig over Glock any day!

@exabitster from the vid, they look identical to me the way you shot it.

I have a X5 and a glock. Both are awesome but my x5 gives me a 3" group at 50 yards. So combat glock, at the range x5 all the way... ...

Why does this video have 50% dislikes, it displays exactly what is in the title

No question here, you get what you pay for. It's an apples to oranges comparison though. The X5 is SIG's creme de la creme. You can get like 5 G17s for the price of 1 X5. A competition vs duty oriented gun. The Glock already would have its work cut out for it against a base model 226 which I believe the 226 would still edge out in terms of features and quality workmanship. Comparing a 34 to an X5 would even be blasphemous. It'll probably be, at best, closer to a 226 Elite. Besides, it's striker polymer frame vs hammer fired metal frame. In this case, that's a 5inch bull-barrel, all steel, competiton SAO. Don't get me wrong, they're both great brands, but its not a fair comparison.

recoil looks about the same.. but for looks. i think the sig is the winner!

I can't believe this is a real comparison. I own both there is no comparison, its not even close. You might as well be comparing an S class Mercedes to a VW Jetta.

people probably dislike it cuz it doesnt reinforce that the heavier sig makes recoil less . in this video it looks more . Is it doctored ?? sig doesnt feel that way in the hands to me . i came here looking to see that the sig was better in this regard . i think people just dislike the video if they disagree or dont like it rather than the content being off subject or the picture showing something else and the video being different . the latter being a justified dislike

Wow, I have found the X-Five recoils less, recovers faster and is much "easier" to shoot than any Glock 17... Very strange. I'm not a "fan boy" either. So - I guess I would disagree...

The X-five is far more accurate than the glock. The glock is much cheaper and much lighter, and made for the police and military. The X-Five is a competition gun. Glock for carrying. X-five for competition and accuracy

Glock = Toy gun for children plinkering on beer cans.

Da ist wohl einer nicht ganz fit im Kopf?

Uhhhh....

I would say that the Sig was held more loose and the Glock more tightly... completely ass backwards to my experience. I own the Glock 17 and only WISH I had an X-Five...