Talk:SIG P210

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled[edit]

There are some new pictures of the SIG 210 Legend in wikipedia commons if anybody is interested. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Michael E. Cumpston (talk • contribs) 15:30, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Primary editors - First of all, many thanks for this perfect article about the SIG P210! I just noted a small error - it is the fact that the SIG P210-1 was also issued to the Swiss Armed Forces in its first version (polished or "feingeschlichtet", as they used to call it, and without a hammer rest position at first, with wooden grip plates). Later on they switched to the SIG P210-2 which is not polished, and has plastic grip plates - most Swiss Army SIG 210s are P210-2 models... You can find both variants on the German Wikipedia, but they don't call them P210-1 and P210-2 there, so that the P210-2 model does not appear on the German Wikipedia page - I don't know why. However, I can assure that here in Switzerland these two models are definitely called P210-1 and P210-2, and both can be commonly found with the stamped Swiss cross, the magazine holsters and the A-numbers so typical for Swiss Army versions.... With greetings from Switzerland, Timo — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.11.5.68 (talk) 20:13, 3 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Cultural impact[edit]

Would any of the primary contributors mind if I added a "Cultural impact" section, where some cases of P210's use in fiction as well as airsoft models styled after it would be mentioned? --Koveras ☭ 20:22, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:GUNS#Pop culture, also, past consensus states no talk of airsoft replicas, and most of the fictional uses are not notable enough to actually be worth having in an article.--LWF (talk) 21:02, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I see. :) --Koveras ☭ 08:43, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think there's something wrong with the following sentence in the entry as it exists as of today -- it appears to be a run on, but I'm not sure how best to parse or fix it :)

"Its hammer action is built into a removable assembly for easy maintenance, and its slide rides inside the frame rails, rather than outside as in the traditional Browning pattern adding Swiss designer Charles Petter SACM Modele 1935 pistolet system, allows for a very tight fit between the slide, barrel, and frame without compromising reliability."

Should it read (in relevant part) "... pattern. Adding Swiss designer Charles Petter's ACM..."? timbo (talk) 05:50, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's definitely not grammatical but a good rephrasing is difficult without understanding the derivation of the P210's action and I know little on that subject. Perhaps "Its hammer action is built into a removable assembly for easy maintenance and its slide rides inside the frame rails in contrast to the traditional Browning pattern. This addition from Swiss designer Charles Petter's SACM Modele 1935 pistol allows for a very tight fit between the slide, barrel, and frame without compromising reliability."

If that's adequate (once links are added) all the better. However if its not the problem appears to be that "adding" has turned into some awful sort of conjunction welding together two separate sentences. The only problem I see with simply inserting a period after "pattern" is that without careful reading it is easy to miss which element of the Modele 1935 action was added to the Browning action. Zhivago533 (talk) 23:10, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've since fixed this, coincidentally using the same idea as yourself (splitting it into separate sentences). I've also stuck that paragraph into a new "history" section. It does leave one gap, though - the Luger is said to have left service in 1945 whilst the P210 entered service in 1949, which suggests that the Swiss army and police did not have a standard pistol between those years. We need to find a Swiss person, and pump him. -Ashley Pomeroy (talk) 13:27, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]


The accuracy seems impressive. But it is unknown which of the avaible calibers reached such an accuracy of 5cm on 50m. If I had to, I would state it was the 22. long rifle. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.201.84.207 (talk) 01:45, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

One firearms website says they regularly ship with test targets with 10 rounds in 2" at 50 meters. That's almost certainly 9mm, but this is a detail that is seldom mentioned.Digitallymade (talk) 01:34, 7 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Photo of opened breech of a Danish Army P210[edit]

Impossible, if you open the breech, the extractor will pull out the cartridge. Picture should be kicked out. -- User:Hmaag —Preceding undated comment added 10:27, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Use in Afghanistan[edit]

This article should probably mention that this pistol was used during the war in Afghanistan. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.83.22.172 (talk) 11:22, 3 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Sig P210 is NOW the Sig Sauer P210[edit]

This page needs to be renamed to reflect the new name.Digitallymade (talk) 01:25, 7 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I've posted one of my photographs with limited public use (requires attribution) on a P210 that was at Harrisburg, Pa, this past Saturday. In low light it focused on the grip, but you can still see it says it's made in Exeter, NH.

Digitallymade (talk) 01:36, 7 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]


They didn't give a new name to the historical pistol, they introduced a new model, to be included as an addition to the "history" section. This article is primarily about the historical pistol, c. 1948-1975. Your new model is at best a marginal addition. --dab (𒁳) 12:20, 23 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Massive numbers of errors concerning pages with Sig Sauer Handguns.[edit]

The ONLY SIG made handgun in history was the SIG P210. This is NOT currently made. SIG has NO firearms business. The SIG P210 design has been passed to Sig Sauer. In January 2107 it was announced that Sig Sauer will start making the Sig Sauer P210 model.

There is NO Sig branded handguns made anywhere in the world today.

Every page on Wikipedia that lists a Sig xxxx as a title is incorrect.Digitallymade (talk) 17:50, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on SIG Sauer P210. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:39, 5 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (January 2018)[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on SIG Sauer P210. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:05, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Article name[edit]

"SIG Sauer P210" is a misnomer for the miliary pistol, which was produced prior to the acquisition of SIG by Sauer & Son. The article should be named "SIG P210". "SIG Sauer P210" may be a proper designation for the new models produced from 2010 (or from 2017), although it should be noted that it is not called that by SIG Sauer, the models are called "P210 Standard" (or "210A-9-B") and "P210 Target" (or "210A-9-TGT") on the sigsauer.com website. [1] From this I deduce that the new model should properly be called "SIG Sauer P210A" for disambiguation with the historical models. And this is what I appear to find in expert usage.[2] --dab (𒁳) 12:26, 23 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, thank you for making this change. "SIG Sauer P210" (or some variation in line with SIG Sauer's own nomenclature) may be appropriate either as a subheading in this article or perhaps as the title of a separate article, but it is not the principal subject of this article. João Do Rio (talk) 04:54, 25 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

SIG P210 vs Petter 1935A[edit]

So, The P210 is "derived" from the 1935A, because it uses the "Petter-Browning system" that Petter designed for his pistol. However, the 1935A uses an unmodified Browning-System with a pivoting chain link. The P210 does not. Instead, the P210 uses the Browning-FN-System that was introduced in the Browning Hi-Power. It's main difference is that the pivoting chain-link is replaced with a linkless cam design.

To summarize: Neither the P210 nor the 1935A use this mystrious "Petter-Browning system". In fact, the two pistols use different lock-up mechanisms althogether.

The only thing the two pistols share is the concept of an integrated fire control system, that Petter used and patended. The Soviet TT-33 used a similiar system, mind you. This is hardly enough to justify the claim that the P210 is "derived" from the 1935A. At best, it's a footnote. 195.176.99.147 (talk) 12:16, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:SIG_P210&oldid=1210375044"