I am looking for a 45 and I don't know which one to get, Sig compact or the HK compact. Since I'm not real familiar with each gun brand I would appreciate all positive and negative remarks on each gun.
Polack

I like my sig 220 45 real well. Just my 2 cents

I own a Sig P220/ST. I love it. I have never had any problems with it. I can't speak to the HK. Never shot or owned one. Just my 2 cents.

both are great! I like the sig a bit better. the hk to me feels a bit top heavy in the balance. the frame is poly and the slid is steel. the sig is all steel and i think is better balanced. the hk also has a bunch of different choices of hammer styles for different uses.

They both are at the top of the pile, so to speak. Either one will give you a lifetime of trouble free service provided you take care of the gun.

Choose on how the gun feels in your hand and how it shoots (if you can shoot them beforehand).

I have a sig and I love mine

kimber

They are both great pistols. If I wanted a Sig or H&K .45 for CCW today, I would the Sig P245. Though the P220 is my favorite the P245 is a little easier to conceal. My old roommate bought one when they first came out and I loved it. Should have stole it from him

I had the HK .45 compact with the bobbed hammer and absolutly loved it. I put a hogue, handall jr. i think, slip on grip on, and with the HK synthetic bushing that sits around the spring, I swore that it had less of a recoil than my glock 19. Now I know you all are gonna say there is no way that a .45 kicked less than a 9mm, and I'm not saying it did. But as far as perceived recoil, the HK felt less, and I shot way better groups with it than I did the glock. I think it is a beautifully balanced weapon, that looks as good as it shoots. Also, I think the sig uses a post and dot sight, and the HK uses a 3 dot sight. I loved the 3dot sight on the HK, it seemed like it was faster and easier to pick up than the post and dot on the sig.

Just my 2 pennies.