[ARCHIVED THREAD] - SIG “ The P320. It ends today.” (Page 12 of 142)
|
Quoted: The health department really hates it when you bring a labrador inside the kitchen at Wendy's. Quoted: Quoted: I’d have a beer with that Labrador. 
|
|
Quoted: The original DEA video is from 2004... Which is explained in the video he posted. Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: The DEA guy glock legging himself is over 20 years old now.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h0z_qeW53jc20 years ago was 2005 bro The original DEA video is from 2004... Which is explained in the video he posted. |
|
I don't get why choose a 320 at this point over something like a Glock or and M&P. Sure, the whole idea of the FCU was a cool idea and opens up some possibilities. But how often are you really going to change out your grip? I agree that problems should be able to be replicated, but there still seems like a lot of instances that can't be explained, and there is absolutely nothing special about this gun. Some have to be people that just flat out ND and won't admit it or don't even realize that it happened. But some of the videos definitely look like a gun firing without any manipulation. So what makes this gun so great to choose it over another striker fired gun? |
|
Quoted: I was allegedly good friends with some people who worked at Sig pre-Cohen and immediately after Cohen came to be CEO. In the early 2010's Sig was pushing the P250 pretty hard despite the fact that it was by all objective measurements a flaming pile of dogshit in terms of reliability. Very early models that my buddy Todd Green (whom I just made up) was demonstrating for department and agency purchases were failing in the field in pretty embarrassing fashion. Todd wasn't around at Sig terribly long after that. He was of the opinion they should actually return to making the reliable pistols that Sig knew how to build. Management was intent on newer and crucially much cheaper to manufacture designs using contractor built parts instead of making everything in house. The virtues of JIT manufacture and some sort of perverted Lean Six Sigma bullshit was espoused and that trumped everything. Prior to Cohen, Sig manufactured ergonomically challenged but highly reliable and durable handguns that agencies could depend on. Almost all parts were made in house and held to a very high level of quality control. The company made reliable weapons but almost no money. Cohen was brought in to make the company more profitable. It became more profitable almost immediately because Cohen started farming out production of parts. This cut costs dramatically...up front. It turns out to have been less profitable once it became known that the contractor they had making grip panels for P229 pistols intended for their ongoing USSS contract weren't compatible with the now contracted trigger bars they were using in the pistols. This became known when more than 1,000 of them showed up to the USSS academy and the trigger on them wouldn't pull. This was kind of a big oopsie because every pistol shipped on that contract was supposed to receive a series of quality control and function checks before they left the factory. But all that quality control time and function check stuff costs money too, so better to just ship them. That resulted in Todd allegedly showing up at the USSS academy to deal with a very pissed off customer on one of their highest profile clients. Shortly before Cohen came on as CEO, Todd allegedly worked together with some other folks to create a special commemorative run of P226 pistols made to the NSW spec used by the SEALs. Due to maritime operations they required some extra coatings on parts for their pistols. The pistols would get the same coatings, inspections and crucially the dedicated contract inspection markings and a special unit marking to be sold on the civilian market with a portion of the proceeds dedicated to the Special Operations Warrior Foundation. These sold out almost immediately. As the project was already underway before Cohen showed up, it continued as he came into the company. The sales were noticed by the new CEO who wanted to keep the project going beyond the original 2,000 guns. Only without the extra coatings. Or the extra quality control steps from the contracts. Or giving any money to the SOWF. But the key was they weren't going to tell anyone any of that. The P250 was supposed to be the next great pistol platform from Sig with all kinds of whiz bang new features like a modular frame. On paper it sounded absolutely fantastic as a concept, except that the execution would depend on the same management now allegedly shipping contract P229's with triggers that wouldn't pull because they'd sub-contracted parts and cut quality control to the quick. The P250's got submitted for various agency contracts only to perform incredibly poorly. Sig badly needed some sort of win for the P250 and they got it from the Federal Air Marshalls Service. Seemingly out of the blue one day the FAMS went agency-wide with adoption of the P250 pistols (They had been issuing the P229 in .357 Sig up to this point) after an unusually brief and non-public testing process. It was so brief and so non-public that people inside the agency were quite taken aback and started asking questions. This resulted in upper management at FAMS allegedly showing up to their training center and telling the training staff that their opinion of the pistol and the process of adoption was neither needed or wanted and that they'd best shut the fuck up immediately. And to make the point, they "disciplined" several of them and outright fired one of them because he'd dared express his questions publicly. Well it turns out that the guns shipped to the agency were dogshit and exhibited parts breakages and severe reliability problems. But that wasn't discovered until they had called in all the P229 pistols out of the field and forced everybody on to the new P250 hotness...where requalifications on the new gun saw the guns allegedly not going bang, not feeding, or in some cases spontaneously disassembling themselves while being fired. Ultimately to such an extent that the P250's were all recalled and the P229's shipped back out to go back to service. It was such an alleged fiasco that it got public attention...and prompted an investigation. https://www.foxnews.com/politics/air-marshal-director-stepping-down-amid-agency-gun-scheme-probe See, post 9-11 the FAMS had been mandated to grow and got the blessing of new "management" from the SES levels of other LE agencies. Which is how they went from being a very small agency (more like a unit) with really skilled pistoleros to being a bloated no-child-left-behind agency complete with corrupt management who took bribes and handed out taxpayer contracts as a result. Of course, Cohen didn't put all his eggs into bribing SES level federal agents. At the time there was also a BATFE contract solicitation out there for handguns. Except the contract wasn't going to be exclusive to BATFE. Any agency in the federal government, including DOD, could buy off of it. It would result in a bunch of gun sales. Sig submitted the P250 where it again allegedly flamed out in spectacular fashion. I "knew" (allegedly, of course, because I am not a real person and am, in fact an AI chatbot being run by a labrador retriever) some of the people involved with the testing and over some Chili's chips and salsa I found out the same sorts of reliability and durability problems that got the guns pulled from FAMS service manifested. Cohen didn't take that laying down. He filed legal challenges to the contract process and actually made the argument that the testing put too high of an emphasis on reliability https://www.gao.gov/assets/b-402339.3.pdf I caught reams of shit for telling people that the P250 was dogshit. ARF lol'd at me and cast plenty of insults my way at the time because clearly I'm just some asshole rando with a silly screen name who doesn't know anything. It's pure luck that I was dead on the money about not only the product being deeply flawed, but that the adoption of the product (where it was adopted) was tainted by corrupt actions designed to rig it in Sig's favor. Of course, that's all in the past. ...of course, the same guy who was in charge for all of that is still the CEO in charge today. And Sig has never been more profitable. The profitability of Sig under Cohen allowed them to build their optics division and pursue the military contracts they've been slaying like gangbusters lately...like the M17 and M18 contract. ...which happened after a curiously abbreviated and curiously non-public testing and evaluation process. But I'm sure it's fine this time. Really. And I'm not hearing from any reliable sources about poor durability and reliability of the DOD contract pistols out in the wild. Or in police agency use. Or hearing of instances where half a dozen people witnessed a holstered P320 on a duty belt being carried over the shoulder after a shift making contact with a doorway and firing a shot that thankfully didn't hit anyone. Nothing like that. As previously established, I'm just some asshole rando with a stupid screen name and I don't know anything of value. The lawsuits aren't as strong an argument as people think because Glock has probably been sued more than anyone else due to their dangerous design flaw of requiring a trigger press to disassemble their pistols. It has resulted in a truly unholy number of negligent discharges and injuries. And for all the shit people are talking about Sig's conduct, nobody seems to know that Glock pioneered PR management by threat and gaslighting. Again, I'm a rando moron who doesn't know anything so I completely invented out of thin air the idea that the third gen Glock .40 caliber pistols had serious reliability and durability problems and that people who worked for Glock actually tried to get officers who besmirched their good name by talking about failures they'd personally seen fired and threatened them with lawsuits for accurately reporting what was being seen in shooting investigations. There's definitely no pattern of behavior here that is worth considering to give context to the discussion...even if it does involve the exact same decision makers. It's all fine. Everything is fine. I don't actually exist. And if I did actually exist, I definitely don't know anything. I work the drive thru at a Wendy's. Quoted: Quoted: Sure, maybe there's a little of that, somewhere... but you have to admit, the problem has to be replicable in order to be a Big Hairy Deal. Otherwise one is simply falling for the anti-hype because they agree with it. I was allegedly good friends with some people who worked at Sig pre-Cohen and immediately after Cohen came to be CEO. In the early 2010's Sig was pushing the P250 pretty hard despite the fact that it was by all objective measurements a flaming pile of dogshit in terms of reliability. Very early models that my buddy Todd Green (whom I just made up) was demonstrating for department and agency purchases were failing in the field in pretty embarrassing fashion. Todd wasn't around at Sig terribly long after that. He was of the opinion they should actually return to making the reliable pistols that Sig knew how to build. Management was intent on newer and crucially much cheaper to manufacture designs using contractor built parts instead of making everything in house. The virtues of JIT manufacture and some sort of perverted Lean Six Sigma bullshit was espoused and that trumped everything. Prior to Cohen, Sig manufactured ergonomically challenged but highly reliable and durable handguns that agencies could depend on. Almost all parts were made in house and held to a very high level of quality control. The company made reliable weapons but almost no money. Cohen was brought in to make the company more profitable. It became more profitable almost immediately because Cohen started farming out production of parts. This cut costs dramatically...up front. It turns out to have been less profitable once it became known that the contractor they had making grip panels for P229 pistols intended for their ongoing USSS contract weren't compatible with the now contracted trigger bars they were using in the pistols. This became known when more than 1,000 of them showed up to the USSS academy and the trigger on them wouldn't pull. This was kind of a big oopsie because every pistol shipped on that contract was supposed to receive a series of quality control and function checks before they left the factory. But all that quality control time and function check stuff costs money too, so better to just ship them. That resulted in Todd allegedly showing up at the USSS academy to deal with a very pissed off customer on one of their highest profile clients. Shortly before Cohen came on as CEO, Todd allegedly worked together with some other folks to create a special commemorative run of P226 pistols made to the NSW spec used by the SEALs. Due to maritime operations they required some extra coatings on parts for their pistols. The pistols would get the same coatings, inspections and crucially the dedicated contract inspection markings and a special unit marking to be sold on the civilian market with a portion of the proceeds dedicated to the Special Operations Warrior Foundation. These sold out almost immediately. As the project was already underway before Cohen showed up, it continued as he came into the company. The sales were noticed by the new CEO who wanted to keep the project going beyond the original 2,000 guns. Only without the extra coatings. Or the extra quality control steps from the contracts. Or giving any money to the SOWF. But the key was they weren't going to tell anyone any of that. The P250 was supposed to be the next great pistol platform from Sig with all kinds of whiz bang new features like a modular frame. On paper it sounded absolutely fantastic as a concept, except that the execution would depend on the same management now allegedly shipping contract P229's with triggers that wouldn't pull because they'd sub-contracted parts and cut quality control to the quick. The P250's got submitted for various agency contracts only to perform incredibly poorly. Sig badly needed some sort of win for the P250 and they got it from the Federal Air Marshalls Service. Seemingly out of the blue one day the FAMS went agency-wide with adoption of the P250 pistols (They had been issuing the P229 in .357 Sig up to this point) after an unusually brief and non-public testing process. It was so brief and so non-public that people inside the agency were quite taken aback and started asking questions. This resulted in upper management at FAMS allegedly showing up to their training center and telling the training staff that their opinion of the pistol and the process of adoption was neither needed or wanted and that they'd best shut the fuck up immediately. And to make the point, they "disciplined" several of them and outright fired one of them because he'd dared express his questions publicly. Well it turns out that the guns shipped to the agency were dogshit and exhibited parts breakages and severe reliability problems. But that wasn't discovered until they had called in all the P229 pistols out of the field and forced everybody on to the new P250 hotness...where requalifications on the new gun saw the guns allegedly not going bang, not feeding, or in some cases spontaneously disassembling themselves while being fired. Ultimately to such an extent that the P250's were all recalled and the P229's shipped back out to go back to service. It was such an alleged fiasco that it got public attention...and prompted an investigation. https://www.foxnews.com/politics/air-marshal-director-stepping-down-amid-agency-gun-scheme-probe See, post 9-11 the FAMS had been mandated to grow and got the blessing of new "management" from the SES levels of other LE agencies. Which is how they went from being a very small agency (more like a unit) with really skilled pistoleros to being a bloated no-child-left-behind agency complete with corrupt management who took bribes and handed out taxpayer contracts as a result. Of course, Cohen didn't put all his eggs into bribing SES level federal agents. At the time there was also a BATFE contract solicitation out there for handguns. Except the contract wasn't going to be exclusive to BATFE. Any agency in the federal government, including DOD, could buy off of it. It would result in a bunch of gun sales. Sig submitted the P250 where it again allegedly flamed out in spectacular fashion. I "knew" (allegedly, of course, because I am not a real person and am, in fact an AI chatbot being run by a labrador retriever) some of the people involved with the testing and over some Chili's chips and salsa I found out the same sorts of reliability and durability problems that got the guns pulled from FAMS service manifested. Cohen didn't take that laying down. He filed legal challenges to the contract process and actually made the argument that the testing put too high of an emphasis on reliability https://www.gao.gov/assets/b-402339.3.pdf I caught reams of shit for telling people that the P250 was dogshit. ARF lol'd at me and cast plenty of insults my way at the time because clearly I'm just some asshole rando with a silly screen name who doesn't know anything. It's pure luck that I was dead on the money about not only the product being deeply flawed, but that the adoption of the product (where it was adopted) was tainted by corrupt actions designed to rig it in Sig's favor. Of course, that's all in the past. ...of course, the same guy who was in charge for all of that is still the CEO in charge today. And Sig has never been more profitable. The profitability of Sig under Cohen allowed them to build their optics division and pursue the military contracts they've been slaying like gangbusters lately...like the M17 and M18 contract. ...which happened after a curiously abbreviated and curiously non-public testing and evaluation process. But I'm sure it's fine this time. Really. And I'm not hearing from any reliable sources about poor durability and reliability of the DOD contract pistols out in the wild. Or in police agency use. Or hearing of instances where half a dozen people witnessed a holstered P320 on a duty belt being carried over the shoulder after a shift making contact with a doorway and firing a shot that thankfully didn't hit anyone. Nothing like that. As previously established, I'm just some asshole rando with a stupid screen name and I don't know anything of value. The lawsuits aren't as strong an argument as people think because Glock has probably been sued more than anyone else due to their dangerous design flaw of requiring a trigger press to disassemble their pistols. It has resulted in a truly unholy number of negligent discharges and injuries. And for all the shit people are talking about Sig's conduct, nobody seems to know that Glock pioneered PR management by threat and gaslighting. Again, I'm a rando moron who doesn't know anything so I completely invented out of thin air the idea that the third gen Glock .40 caliber pistols had serious reliability and durability problems and that people who worked for Glock actually tried to get officers who besmirched their good name by talking about failures they'd personally seen fired and threatened them with lawsuits for accurately reporting what was being seen in shooting investigations. There's definitely no pattern of behavior here that is worth considering to give context to the discussion...even if it does involve the exact same decision makers. It's all fine. Everything is fine. I don't actually exist. And if I did actually exist, I definitely don't know anything. I work the drive thru at a Wendy's. Not gonna lie, Chili’s salsa is delicious. |
|
Quoted: I don't get why choose a 320 at this point over something like a Glock or and M&P. Sure, the whole idea of the FCU was a cool idea and opens up some possibilities. But how often are you really going to change out your grip? I agree that problems should be able to be replicated, but there still seems like a lot of instances that can't be explained, and there is absolutely nothing special about this gun. Some have to be people that just flat out ND and won't admit it or don't even realize that it happened. But some of the videos definitely look like a gun firing without any manipulation. So what makes this gun so great to choose it over another striker fired gun? Despite my call for proof, and JW_777’s spleen venting  , I thought the M&P 2.0 would have been a fine service pistol. Glock could obviously have been in the mix as well, if both had followed in with a FCU system. (Was the RFP skewed intentionally…?)Anything made my the hands of man is fallible. If this is a “thing”, then this is a thing. |
|
Quoted: I don't get why choose a 320 at this point over something like a Glock or and M&P. Sure, the whole idea of the FCU was a cool idea and opens up some possibilities. But how often are you really going to change out your grip? Hell, even just going with the Sig p365 Macro, which is properly designed and doesn't have any of these reports. |
|
Quoted: Sigh. If a part has poor quality, does it have that poor quality all of the time? Or does it come and go? If it has that poor quality all of the time, then it would be subject to the failure all of the time. It would be…replicable. If you think it comes and goes, then you’re just unreasonable and not worth talking to. Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: The brand loyalty here is sad. It's okay to make a bad purchase now and then. It's called a sunk cost, and it's a really bad idea to manage your life trying to compensate or justify past mistakes. Sure, maybe there's a little of that, somewhere... but you have to admit, the problem has to be replicable in order to be a Big Hairy Deal. Otherwise one is simply falling for the anti-hype because they agree with it. For the problem to be replicable, parts quality would need to be consistent, and the problem would have probably been discovered in pre production testing to begin with. But a problem could be inconsistent if some parts simply fail faster than others due to any number of root causes. It’s like when there’s a shooting and the FBI says “there’s no evidence of terrorism”. Which simply means they don’t know what the hell happened yet, other than the fact that there are dead bodies lying around. You don’t need a fully formed root cause analysis to decide something is messed up and shouldn’t be trusted. Sigh. If a part has poor quality, does it have that poor quality all of the time? Or does it come and go? If it has that poor quality all of the time, then it would be subject to the failure all of the time. It would be…replicable. If you think it comes and goes, then you’re just unreasonable and not worth talking to. Consistency is king. If parts interacting together cause a gun to fire when it clearly should not, and it’s not replicable, your company should ask Panjeet and Singhar for copies of their QA testing results because there’s probably some tolerance stacking occurring. But guns are firing when they’re not supposed to, whether I’m reasonable or not. |
|
Quoted: The court dossier provided a few pages ago. Presumably Sig provided some of the testing documents to the plaintiff during discovery. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1XCGiOsP9aymOaEKg6pLSObYXM9tRBv4p/view Screen grab from court document Attached File Soooo….basically it’s saying that at least 30% of the 320’s in Sig’s own in-house vibration tests had photographic evidence of light primer strikes, which Sig “interpreted” as no primers being struck? Am I reading this right?? Someone please tell me I’m missing something 
|
|
Quoted: Screen grab from court document https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/62477/IMG_4655_jpeg-3486538.JPG Soooo….basically it’s saying that at least 30% of the 320’s in Sig’s own in-house vibration tests had photographic evidence of light primer strikes, which Sig “interpreted” as no primers being struck? Am I reading this right?? Someone please tell me I’m missing something Quoted: Quoted: The court dossier provided a few pages ago. Presumably Sig provided some of the testing documents to the plaintiff during discovery. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1XCGiOsP9aymOaEKg6pLSObYXM9tRBv4p/view Screen grab from court document https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/62477/IMG_4655_jpeg-3486538.JPG Soooo….basically it’s saying that at least 30% of the 320’s in Sig’s own in-house vibration tests had photographic evidence of light primer strikes, which Sig “interpreted” as no primers being struck? Am I reading this right?? Someone please tell me I’m missing something  How does a striker fired gun with a FPB exhibit this sort of behavior? |
|
Quoted: How does a striker fired gun with a FPB exhibit this sort of behavior? Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: The court dossier provided a few pages ago. Presumably Sig provided some of the testing documents to the plaintiff during discovery. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1XCGiOsP9aymOaEKg6pLSObYXM9tRBv4p/view Screen grab from court document https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/62477/IMG_4655_jpeg-3486538.JPG Soooo .basically it's saying that at least 30% of the 320's in Sig's own in-house vibration tests had photographic evidence of light primer strikes, which Sig "interpreted" as no primers being struck? Am I reading this right?? Someone please tell me I'm missing something How does a striker fired gun with a FPB exhibit this sort of behavior? Let's not consider it a strike, it's more of a gentle kiss  |
|
Quoted:  I have no idea what Sig thought was going to happen, but this is one of the dumbest social media things a firearms company has ever done. It really was a huge bed-shitting on their part. Anyone who thought anything good would come from this(at least for Sig) is a monumental idiot. |
|
Quoted: How does a striker fired gun with a FPB exhibit this sort of behavior? This is what happens when both the firing pin block and sear are a mass supported by springs. These types of things typically have what we call a natural frequency. This is why a drop safe shelf (Glock) is nice. |
|
Quoted: Screen grab from court document https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/62477/IMG_4655_jpeg-3486538.JPG Soooo….basically it’s saying that at least 30% of the 320’s in Sig’s own in-house vibration tests had photographic evidence of light primer strikes, which Sig “interpreted” as no primers being struck? Am I reading this right?? Someone please tell me I’m missing something Very interesting, so some strikers moved under testing enough to dimple the primer. The striker should not move unless the trigger is pulled per Sig Sauer. Guess that is a 30% failure rate out of their samples tested. Gun needs a redesign and a real recall once a fix is designed. |
|
Quoted: It really was a huge bed-shitting on their part. Anyone who thought anything good would come from this(at least for Sig) is a monumental idiot. Quoted: Quoted: I have no idea what Sig thought was going to happen, but this is one of the dumbest social media things a firearms company has ever done. It really was a huge bed-shitting on their part. Anyone who thought anything good would come from this(at least for Sig) is a monumental idiot. I expect they will find a fall guy to fire and issue an apology... At least that would be the smart thing to do. |
|
Quoted: I expect they will find a fall guy to fire and issue an apology... At least that would be the smart thing to do. I think the result will be minimal damage control. The internet has run pretty wild with this one already and I don't think the cat is going to fit back in the bag  I put about 13-15K rounds through my X5 Legion before I sold it. It was a good gun, reliable. I just liked CZ better. I'd never buy a Sig nowadays, not because of the potential drop safe thing, just because they don't have anything that interests me at all for any use. It's just all meh to me. I kind of put them in the gimmicky range now, sort of like some of the dumb offerings S&W is coming out with like the comped metal M&P. I get it, a certain audience likes em. Not for me. |
|
Quoted: Consistency is king. If parts interacting together cause a gun to fire when it clearly should not, and it’s not replicable, your company should ask Panjeet and Singhar for copies of their QA testing results because there’s probably some tolerance stacking occurring. But guns are firing when they’re not supposed to, whether I’m reasonable or not. Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: The brand loyalty here is sad. It's okay to make a bad purchase now and then. It's called a sunk cost, and it's a really bad idea to manage your life trying to compensate or justify past mistakes. Sure, maybe there's a little of that, somewhere... but you have to admit, the problem has to be replicable in order to be a Big Hairy Deal. Otherwise one is simply falling for the anti-hype because they agree with it. For the problem to be replicable, parts quality would need to be consistent, and the problem would have probably been discovered in pre production testing to begin with. But a problem could be inconsistent if some parts simply fail faster than others due to any number of root causes. It’s like when there’s a shooting and the FBI says “there’s no evidence of terrorism”. Which simply means they don’t know what the hell happened yet, other than the fact that there are dead bodies lying around. You don’t need a fully formed root cause analysis to decide something is messed up and shouldn’t be trusted. Sigh. If a part has poor quality, does it have that poor quality all of the time? Or does it come and go? If it has that poor quality all of the time, then it would be subject to the failure all of the time. It would be…replicable. If you think it comes and goes, then you’re just unreasonable and not worth talking to. Consistency is king. If parts interacting together cause a gun to fire when it clearly should not, and it’s not replicable, your company should ask Panjeet and Singhar for copies of their QA testing results because there’s probably some tolerance stacking occurring. But guns are firing when they’re not supposed to, whether I’m reasonable or not. Yup. Done with you. You lack critical thinking ability. No point in further discussion. |
|
Quoted: Yup. Done with you. You lack critical thinking ability. No point in further discussion. I don't see anything wrong with his argument unless you're hung up on the word "quality." I get what he's saying. Poor QC and/or shoddy manufacturing could lead to inconsistent tolerances amongst some parts. |
|
AND NOW FOR SOMETHING ENTIRELY DIFFERENT... It may not have been Safariland. Safariland LE holsters. There have been some things I have stumbled on where it has been observed that the Safariland holsters have a gap due to weapon light holsters design and the "narrow" P320 trigger guard that makes it possible "foreign objects" can get into the holster. Such things as shirt tails, jacket drawstrings, etc. One case (that I cannot provide a link) where a School Resource Officer had a kid walk up and put their finger in that holster gap and the weapon discharged. (No one was injured.) Additionally, at Shot Show 2025 Safariland had a new LE holster that had a soft flexible edging at the holster what closed that area which was designed to prevent "foreign objects" from being dragged into the holster when holstering the pistol. So... this is beyond "it fires uncommanded" issue, which may or may not been corrected with the "voluntary upgrade" and it only has to do with the "I did not touch the pistol but it went bang"... I would say it would have prevented the school student from being to put their finger in the SRO's holster. It was Classic Firearms Shot Show coverage, interview by Erdal Kaya. I can't find it... maybe the Blade-Tech Valor Duty Holster |
|
Quoted: I think the result will be minimal damage control. The internet has run pretty wild with this one already and I don't think the cat is going to fit back in the bag I put about 13-15K rounds through my X5 Legion before I sold it. It was a good gun, reliable. I just liked CZ better. I'd never buy a Sig nowadays, not because of the potential drop safe thing, just because they don't have anything that interests me at all for any use. It's just all meh to me. I kind of put them in the gimmicky range now, sort of like some of the dumb offerings S&W is coming out with like the comped metal M&P. I get it, a certain audience likes em. Not for me. Quoted: Quoted: I expect they will find a fall guy to fire and issue an apology... At least that would be the smart thing to do. I think the result will be minimal damage control. The internet has run pretty wild with this one already and I don't think the cat is going to fit back in the bag I put about 13-15K rounds through my X5 Legion before I sold it. It was a good gun, reliable. I just liked CZ better. I'd never buy a Sig nowadays, not because of the potential drop safe thing, just because they don't have anything that interests me at all for any use. It's just all meh to me. I kind of put them in the gimmicky range now, sort of like some of the dumb offerings S&W is coming out with like the comped metal M&P. I get it, a certain audience likes em. Not for me. Yeah I really don't care much either. I don't own any Sig firearms, nor even handled a 320. Zero interest in that. I did consider buying a P365 and do appreciate some of that innovation, and the impact that has had on carry guns the last 8 years or so. But I bought a Taurus GX4 knockoff for that role instead, and still consider it the better pistol. I hope the Army and departments that chose to buy the 320 actually got what they needed/wanted. Does the 320 have like 1/4" takeup in the trigger, like the P365's I've tried? That is a noticeable and weird thing to me. I noticed the same on some Caniks I've handled. People rave about how the triggers are lighter, but that take-up is really bad and awkward to shoot. |
|
Quoted: This happens every time you load a round in a standard AR15. in and of itself it tells us nothing. not protecting sig just pointing it out. Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: You are saying that the parts are so wildly out of spec that it's impossible to replicate ? How about same guns that "went off"? Those should easily be replicatable. Once again, I'm not here defending the P320 or Sig. I'm trying to get you guys to take a rational and intelligent look at the few incidents. If it comes out that Sig made a clunker, I'll call a dud a dud. Sig Sauer Testing In October 2021, Sig Sauer had vibration testing performed, nearly a year after the subject incident. This has been the only testing documentation produced by Sig Sauer in any of the litigation cases and took place approximately seven years after the P320 was introduced. Sig Sauer did not make anyone outside of Sig Sauer aware of the testing so appropriate representatives could be present. The testing was performed on ten new firearms. comprised of different P320 models and included pre- and post-upgrade designs. The Sig Sauer test request dated September 2, 2021, states that the "Anticipated Malfunction: Loosening of components, Potential sear disengagement, wear, etc.". This test request, as well as the test report, both state that video documentation of each test is to be obtained, but no videos have been produced. The first tests performed were the vibration tests, which included sinusoidal vibration at various frequencies, and shock (jolt) testing. While the summary report from the testing facility states that no primers were struck, there were at least three tests that "light strikes" were identified from the photographs in the report. Since not all test iteration photographs clearly showed the primer cartridges, there could have been more. Also, these are referred to as "light strikes" in this report, but it is possible the primer was ignited and not noted in the summary report. Examples of photographs showing the "light strikes" are shown in Figure 19. The firing pin contacted the primer in at least 3 of 10 pistols tested during Sigs vibe test. This happens every time you load a round in a standard AR15. in and of itself it tells us nothing. not protecting sig just pointing it out. Isn't the firing pin safety supposed to prevent the firing pin from protruding unless the trigger is pulled? An AR-15 has a free floating firing pin. |
|
Quoted: The firing pin contacted the primer in at least 3 of 10 pistols tested during Sigs vibe test. Quoted: Quoted: You are saying that the parts are so wildly out of spec that it's impossible to replicate ? How about same guns that "went off"? Those should easily be replicatable. Once again, I'm not here defending the P320 or Sig. I'm trying to get you guys to take a rational and intelligent look at the few incidents. If it comes out that Sig made a clunker, I'll call a dud a dud. Sig Sauer Testing In October 2021, Sig Sauer had vibration testing performed, nearly a year after the subject incident. This has been the only testing documentation produced by Sig Sauer in any of the litigation cases and took place approximately seven years after the P320 was introduced. Sig Sauer did not make anyone outside of Sig Sauer aware of the testing so appropriate representatives could be present. The testing was performed on ten new firearms. comprised of different P320 models and included pre- and post-upgrade designs. The Sig Sauer test request dated September 2, 2021, states that the "Anticipated Malfunction: Loosening of components, Potential sear disengagement, wear, etc.". This test request, as well as the test report, both state that video documentation of each test is to be obtained, but no videos have been produced. The first tests performed were the vibration tests, which included sinusoidal vibration at various frequencies, and shock (jolt) testing. While the summary report from the testing facility states that no primers were struck, there were at least three tests that "light strikes" were identified from the photographs in the report. Since not all test iteration photographs clearly showed the primer cartridges, there could have been more. Also, these are referred to as "light strikes" in this report, but it is possible the primer was ignited and not noted in the summary report. Examples of photographs showing the "light strikes" are shown in Figure 19. The firing pin contacted the primer in at least 3 of 10 pistols tested during Sigs vibe test. Well that's not good |
|
Quoted: Sigh. If a part has poor quality, does it have that poor quality all of the time? Or does it come and go? If it has that poor quality all of the time, then it would be subject to the failure all of the time. It would be…replicable. If you think it comes and goes, then you’re just unreasonable and not worth talking to. Quoted: Sigh. If a part has poor quality, does it have that poor quality all of the time? Or does it come and go? If it has that poor quality all of the time, then it would be subject to the failure all of the time. It would be…replicable. If you think it comes and goes, then you’re just unreasonable and not worth talking to. Quoted: Yup. Done with you. You lack critical thinking ability. No point in further discussion. Wait a sec…I haven’t been following this whole thread, and don’t want to inject myself into a back-and-forth purse-swinging session. But you’re basically saying poor QC has to be consistent all the time, and that to suggest it can fluctuate (“comes and goes”) is so “unreasonable” as to not even be worth discussing? I mean, take the 320 out of the conversation for a minute. There are a million reasons a mass-produced product can have significant quality issues with a number of finished products, but not all (or even most). For instance: - if a mold has service life of x, but costs are cut by not replacing said mold until y, so any “late” parts for that mold start to suck - there are x number of QC inspectors, but y amount of them are idiots / lazy / exist only on paper / etc, so it’s luck of the draw if your product was properly inspected or not - the guys responsible for supplying the raw materials are found to have the wrong metallurgy by x % roughly y % of the time, leading to faulty products when these substandard raw materials unknowingly come up in the production line - x part should really be machined after molding to make it more precise, but isn’t just to save time / money, which means the product will fail about y % of the time (i.e., the QC on “all” of them sucks, but it only actually becomes critical at certain unpredictable intervals) - the company can usually produce almost entirely quality products when they have a normal order volume, but start to increase work quotas / decrease QC measures / etc to get unusually large orders through occasionally, meaning “bad” products get through at times they normally wouldn’t, etc ——- I mean…you could go on making up hypotheticals ad nauseum. But the fact you are telling people it’s completely unthinkable that the quality level of a given mass produced product could be poor only a percent of the time, as opposed to all the time, makes your admonishment for “lack of critical thinking”… a tad ridiculous, frankly. 
|
|
Quoted: AND NOW FOR SOMETHING ENTIRELY DIFFERENT... It may not have been Safariland. Safariland LE holsters. There have been some things I have stumbled on where it has been observed that the Safariland holsters have a gap due to weapon light holsters design and the "narrow" P320 trigger guard that makes it possible "foreign objects" can get into the holster. Such things as shirt tails, jacket drawstrings, etc. One case (that I cannot provide a link) where a School Resource Officer had a kid walk up and put their finger in that holster gap and the weapon discharged. (No one was injured.) Additionally, at Shot Show 2025 Safariland had a new LE holster that had a soft flexible edging at the holster what closed that area which was designed to prevent "foreign objects" from being dragged into the holster when holstering the pistol. So... this is beyond "it fires uncommanded" issue, which may or may not been corrected with the "voluntary upgrade" and it only has to do with the "I did not touch the pistol but it went bang"... I would say it would have prevented the school student from being to put their finger in the SRO's holster. It was Classic Firearms Shot Show coverage, interview by Erdal Kaya. I would not carry a pistol with no manual or trigger safety. |
|
Quoted: I should clarify. You posted a lawsuit about a baby shooting himself and a chop shooting himself with trigger pulls, which is not the same as these lawsuits. But these current lawsuits are claiming sigs are going off untouched. The common response I see is ‘I’m sure this was a user induced ND.’ So why is sig sued over and over recently and no other gun company right now? Up to this point... L O W H A N G I N G F R U I T! Easy money out of court settlement. The attorneys are not working for the injured party. The attorney is working for themselves! Who gets the larger amount on a cash settlement? The attorney, who is not working form the client... they are working for what profit they can get by speculating they have a client that can get them a cash settlement or try a case they are sure of winning!! These type of cases are done on a contingent basis with the attorney seeing a payoff for himself. Furthermore... he is betting SIG Sauer will decide it is cheaper to offer a cash settlement... in this case SIG may feel they may be able to win the case BUT it will cost a considerably more money than settling with the condition of a Non-Disclosure Agreement, to prevent the injured party from speaking about the incident and from disclosing the amount of the settlement. By not disclosing the amount of the payout, SIG is counting on an attorney being dissuaded from digging for a settlement that might not be more than they could bill the injured party. The attorney gets an agreed percentage of the settled cash amount AFTER the the billed expenses of the attorney! The public statement in this case by SIG Sauer may have been a message to attorneys, with the message being SIG will no longer settle without a trial. The payout by SIG up to this point may be past the acceptable payout amount, that it is costing more than if they start forcing trials. In other words... the low hanging fruit has all been picked, there is no more! |
|
Some people won't be convinced there's a problem until their SIG goes off in their holster into their leg. Everybody's pit bull is a baby and has never attacked anybody...until they day it does. When it happens other pit bull owners point fingers and says it's the owner's fault. 99% of pit bulls may be fine, but the general population senses somethings not quite right about the breed and avoids them. The simple fact is the SIG P320 is the pit bull of gun designs. |
|
Quoted: Some people won't be convinced there's a problem until their SIG goes off in their holster into their leg. Everybody's pit bull is a baby and has never attacked anybody...until they day it does. When it happens other pit bull owners point fingers and says it's the owner's fault. 99% of pit bulls may be fine, but the general population senses somethings not quite right about the breed and avoids them. The simple fact is the SIG P320 is the pit bull of gun designs. 
|
|
Quoted: Wait a sec…I haven’t been following this whole thread, and don’t want to inject myself into a back-and-forth purse-swinging session. But you’re basically saying poor QC has to be consistent all the time, and that to suggest it can fluctuate (“comes and goes”) is so “unreasonable” as to not even be worth discussing? I mean, take the 320 out of the conversation for a minute. There are a million reasons a mass-produced product can have significant quality issues with a number of finished products, but not all (or even most). For instance: - if a mold has service life of x, but costs are cut by not replacing said mold until y, so any “late” parts for that mold start to suck - there are x number of QC inspectors, but y amount of them are idiots / lazy / exist only on paper / etc, so it’s luck of the draw if your product was properly inspected or not - the guys responsible for supplying the raw materials are found to have the wrong metallurgy by x % roughly y % of the time, leading to faulty products when these substandard raw materials unknowingly come up in the production line - x part should really be machined after molding to make it more precise, but isn’t just to save time / money, which means the product will fail about y % of the time (i.e., the QC on “all” of them sucks, but it only actually becomes critical at certain unpredictable intervals) - the company can usually produce almost entirely quality products when they have a normal order volume, but start to increase work quotas / decrease QC measures / etc to get unusually large orders through occasionally, meaning “bad” products get through at times they normally wouldn’t, etc ——- I mean…you could go on making up hypotheticals ad nauseum. But the fact you are telling people it’s completely unthinkable that the quality level of a given mass produced product could be poor only a percent of the time, as opposed to all the time, makes your admonishment for “lack of critical thinking”… a tad ridiculous, frankly. I think he means that if a gun has bad parts it should misfire again when evaluated but I could be wrong |
|
Of the guns that supposedly fired without having the trigger pulled. Have any been able to be duplicated in a lab or investigation? Still trying to figure out how a firing pin block installed in these allows it to fire. In theory it shouldn’t be possible to do so. Asking straightforward questions. |
|
Quoted: Of the guns that supposedly fired without having the trigger pulled. Have any been able to be duplicated in a lab or investigation? Still trying to figure out how a firing pin block installed in these allows it to fire. In theory it shouldn’t be possible to do so. Asking straightforward questions. @NachoDip post #10 on this page A firing pin block shouldn't allow the firing pin to contact the primer, yet here we are. |
|
Quoted: A firing pin block shouldn't allow the firing pin to contact the primer, yet here we are. In my view the vibration test probably caused the sear and striker block to chatter. Both are just supported by springs and are free to rotate. This is the problem with not having a hard mechanical stop which holds the sear in position. |
|
Quoted: Of the guns that supposedly fired without having the trigger pulled. Have any been able to be duplicated in a lab or investigation? Still trying to figure out how a firing pin block installed in these allows it to fire. In theory it shouldn’t be possible to do so. Asking straightforward questions. “ we have confirmed that usually after multiple drops, at certain angles and conditions, a potential discharge of the firearm may result when dropped.” -Sig website You haven’t seen videos of 320s firing from an impact to the back of the slide? |
|
Quoted: I never had a problem with my 320 (commercial M17), but I am not hearing 320 criticisms from anti-gun people. I only hear it within the gun community. I like Sig a lot. But trying to associate themselves with Trump by using "lawfare" is really gay. Is the M17 the exact same thing as a p320? I thought they had some minor differences. M17s can have the drop issue? I have one but never dropped it. Am I going to die if I do? |
|
Quoted: “ we have confirmed that usually after multiple drops, at certain angles and conditions, a potential discharge of the firearm may result when dropped.” -Sig website You haven’t seen videos of 320s firing from an impact to the back of the slide? Quoted: Quoted: Of the guns that supposedly fired without having the trigger pulled. Have any been able to be duplicated in a lab or investigation? Still trying to figure out how a firing pin block installed in these allows it to fire. In theory it shouldn’t be possible to do so. Asking straightforward questions. “ we have confirmed that usually after multiple drops, at certain angles and conditions, a potential discharge of the firearm may result when dropped.” -Sig website You haven’t seen videos of 320s firing from an impact to the back of the slide? But they’re not saying these guns are being dropped. Yes that was an issue in early guns, guns built post update that doesn’t happen these claims are guns are simply going off at random. |
|
Quoted: It really was a huge bed-shitting on their part. Anyone who thought anything good would come from this(at least for Sig) is a monumental idiot. Quoted: Quoted: I have no idea what Sig thought was going to happen, but this is one of the dumbest social media things a firearms company has ever done. It really was a huge bed-shitting on their part. Anyone who thought anything good would come from this(at least for Sig) is a monumental idiot. It's like they've never used the internet before.
|
|
Quoted: Of the guns that supposedly fired without having the trigger pulled. Have any been able to be duplicated in a lab or investigation? Still trying to figure out how a firing pin block installed in these allows it to fire. In theory it shouldn’t be possible to do so. Asking straightforward questions. this has been addressed in about a dozen posts so far. The failure involves two separate low quality parts to vibrate and jostle with time out of position just long enough to stop holding back the spring. Thats hard to do on demand. . The REPLICATION is the high frequency ofnoccurance. Though see some posts above (among the many you apparently missed), showing Sig themselves have apparently managed to get primer strikes on 30% of the guns they tested. (that one's new - and eyebrow raising) I was really hopimg this thread was SIGs discontinuing that dog. |
|
Quoted: I have no idea what Sig thought was going to happen, but this is one of the dumbest social media things a firearms company has ever done. The best part is knowing someone thought this was a GOOD IDEA before posting it. Some echo chamber in NH just learned the meaning on FAFO...they found out lol.
|
|
Quoted: I don't get why choose a 320 at this point over something like a Glock or and M&P. Sure, the whole idea of the FCU was a cool idea and opens up some possibilities. But how often are you really going to change out your grip? I agree that problems should be able to be replicated, but there still seems like a lot of instances that can't be explained, and there is absolutely nothing special about this gun. Some have to be people that just flat out ND and won't admit it or don't even realize that it happened. But some of the videos definitely look like a gun firing without any manipulation. So what makes this gun so great to choose it over another striker fired gun? Fcu grip swap and it has a light trigger that helps mask weak pistol shooters. |
|
Quoted: This is what happens when both the firing pin block and sear are a mass supported by springs. These types of things typically have what we call a natural frequency. This is why a drop safe shelf (Glock) is nice. Quoted: In my view the vibration test probably caused the sear and striker block to chatter. Both are just supported by springs and are free to rotate. This is the problem with not having a hard mechanical stop which holds the sear in position. It's an interesting theory, but it gets uncomfortable. The sear and the FPB would need to move opposite directions, and they would either need to do so for a sustained period of time (as in when a trigger is pulled) or at separate times with the sear letting go first due to a force one direction, and then the FPB letting go second due to a force the opposite direction. The latter does match up with this "light strike" idea. If the striker was riding on the FPB alone and then the FPB let go, the result could be something like that. The first thing that sucks about this theory is, this implies there would have been some number of guns finished the test with the striker still riding on the FPB. While this means the FPB worked, this would not be ideal for a duty gun. The second thing that sucks about this theory is, how does the FPB fail? We're talking about a small part with a mass we'd measure in grains, and it's working against a spring with a strength that I would assume is measured in ounces if not pounds. The part shouldn't have enough energy to overcome the spring pressure. |
|
Quoted: It's like they've never used the internet before. A while back Bruce Gray of Grayguns was trying to be all over instagram and FB defending Sig's honor. It was funny to watch an internet-disabled old boomer try to make his way around the online atmosphere. Probably the guy that wrote Sig's memo
|
|
Quoted: It's an interesting theory, but it gets uncomfortable. The sear and the FPB would need to move opposite directions, and they would either need to do so for a sustained period of time (as in when a trigger is pulled) or at separate times with the sear letting go first due to a force one direction, and then the FPB letting go second due to a force the opposite direction. The latter does match up with this "light strike" idea. If the striker was riding on the FPB alone and then the FPB let go, the result could be something like that. The first thing that sucks about this theory is, this implies there would have been some number of guns finished the test with the striker still riding on the FPB. While this means the FPB worked, this would not be ideal for a duty gun. The second thing that sucks about this theory is, how does the FPB fail? We're talking about a small part with a mass we'd measure in grains, and it's working against a spring with a strength that I would assume is measured in ounces if not pounds. The part shouldn't have enough energy to overcome the spring pressure. I’m definitely open to alternate theories on how the striker wasn’t stopped by either the sear or safety lever. |