I think the majority of new Sig's come with night sights so it shouldn't be that big of a deal. I bought a new Sig about 8 months ago that came with night sights and all the others he had in the case had them also. Go with night sights. Mine are bright as hell.

Regarding the sights it's a matter of opinion. Some feel they are worth it, others don't see the need. Personally, I'll take the night sights every time.

Regarding the 220 and the 226, they do shoot differently. I have these brief periods of utter fascination with Sigs, I love them all but own none at the moment.

I had a Sig 220 SAO for a while and every chance I get I shoot a 226/229/232 you name it.

The 226 is one of the most accurate guns I've ever shot, it doesn't matter if it's a CPO deal that a friend got, a NIB purchase that someone's been kind enough to let me shoot, or a range rental beater, the single action shots of a 226 (especially one with the SRT) is just awesome.

It's the double action pull that kills me. I've spoiled myself on SAO guns and while I could get used to the DA triggers, I just don't want to.

The .45 has more felt recoil, the 9mm has less recoil, the 226 in .40 and .357 Sig are different animals that I'm not going to cover only to say that the .40 generally has more muzzle flip than the 9 or .45, I have not shot a .357 Sig 226 but have shot a couple of Glocks in .357 Sig and I didn't care for it that much. Availability of the .357 Sig is another potential issue.

Looking back to the .45 and the 9mm. The .45 is nowhere near as brutal as some make it out to be, is it a litle harder to shoot well at first? Sure. The 9mm is the softer shooting of the two and that will help a new shooter master the fundamentals, reducing error causing issues helps the learning curve. Now a little about recoil. Recoil does not affect accuracy. Anticipating / fearing the recoil causes accuracy issues. By the time the gun is recoiling, the bullet has left the barrel. DON'T BLAME THE RECOIL, balme the shooters actions prior to and during the trigger squeeze.

I would say that the 226 does shoot better than the 220 IN MY OPINION only becuase only due to lesser felt recoil. Howver if one is familiar with both guns, it's hard to say that one trumps the other.
But in terms of performance I will offer this, lesser recoil equals less muzzle flip equals less movement of the front sight when firing equals the front sight coming back on target more quickly thus allowing for faster shooting. Couple that with a short reset trigger (SRT) and it's a beautiful thing and more ammunition in the gun in the same size catgory is always a good thing and the cost savings in 9mm vs. .45 will allow more budget space for practice, accressories and training.

Originally Posted by VAMarine

Regarding the sights it's a matter of opinion. Some feel they are worth it, others don't see the need. Personally, I'll take the night sights every time.

Yup. Given the choice, now that I have them, night sights always.

Originally Posted by VAMarine

The 226 is one of the most accurate guns I've ever shot, it doesn't matter if it's a CPO deal that a friend got, a NIB purchase that someone's been kind enough to let me shoot, or a range rental beater, the single action shots of a 226 (especially one with the SRT) is just awesome.

+1! My 229 SAS Gen 2 has the SRT and I love it and have been forever spoiled. The DA is a bit long and I have to force myself to do a mag or two of DA only shots at the range or else I'd just shoot all the time with that sweet SA.

My preference is 9mm over .45 mainly becuase I'm cheap (AKA my shooting budget is limited) and 9mm is, generally speaking, cheaper than .45. I'm not concerned with ballistics of 9mm vs. .45 because I'm pretty confident in my ability of hitting COM, so IMO, that point is moot. Also, more rounds is always a nice thing to have at your disposal. Not saying I wouldn't want a .45 in the future, because I do, but if I didn't have a gun and the choice was 226 or 220, I'd go 226.