[ARCHIVED THREAD] - SIG “ The P320. It ends today.” (Page 122 of 142)
|
Quoted: And that has nothing to do with them being striker guns. The Glock cruciform is blocked and locked in place when the gun is at rest. It cannot move until someone or something unlocks it by pulling the trigger dingus. With the P320, we have the internal problems discussed in this thread AND a razor thin external margin. It just so happens than an external safety revised to block the sear would damn near eliminate both problems. I think with the existing 320 problems, a sear-blocking manual safety that doesn't also force the sear into full engagement, might result in the guns going off without a trigger pull immediately upon being taken "off safe". Or to out it another way, in situations where a 320 can fire from bumps to the slide, if the manual safety is the only thing preventing the firing, then switching the safety off will result in a discharge. I think these guns need a fundamental redesign, not a band-aid fix. |
|
Quoted: I think with the existing 320 problems, a sear-blocking manual safety that doesn't also force the sear into full engagement, might result in the guns going off without a trigger pull immediately upon being taken "off safe". Or to out it another way, in situations where a 320 can fire from bumps to the slide, if the manual safety is the only thing preventing the firing, then switching the safety off will result in a discharge. I think these guns need a fundamental redesign, not a band-aid fix. Welcome back SPAS 12! 
|
|
Quoted: The standard model P320 full size currently retails for $430 + shipping. That's retail. That number includes: The gun. The box, mags, manual, and everything that comes with the gun. Sig's markup. The federal excise tax. The distributor's markup. The retailer's markup. And an unknown amount of shipping between Sig, the distributor, and the retailer. I think it's reasonable to guess that the FCU is well under 20% of this total. Yes, thanks to the wonders of mass production these things do not cost $2000 each. Sig has no infrastructure to rebuild all 2,500,000+ P320's that have already been built, and which took them ten years to build - on a timescale not measured in decades. Their existing staff and facilities can't handle it. Not just the FCU either, grip module too. |
|
Quoted: I think with the existing 320 problems, a sear-blocking manual safety that doesn't also force the sear into full engagement, might result in the guns going off without a trigger pull immediately upon being taken "off safe". Or to out it another way, in situations where a 320 can fire from bumps to the slide, if the manual safety is the only thing preventing the firing, then switching the safety off will result in a discharge. I think these guns need a fundamental redesign, not a band-aid fix. Quoted: Quoted: And that has nothing to do with them being striker guns. The Glock cruciform is blocked and locked in place when the gun is at rest. It cannot move until someone or something unlocks it by pulling the trigger dingus. With the P320, we have the internal problems discussed in this thread AND a razor thin external margin. It just so happens than an external safety revised to block the sear would damn near eliminate both problems. I think with the existing 320 problems, a sear-blocking manual safety that doesn't also force the sear into full engagement, might result in the guns going off without a trigger pull immediately upon being taken "off safe". Or to out it another way, in situations where a 320 can fire from bumps to the slide, if the manual safety is the only thing preventing the firing, then switching the safety off will result in a discharge. I think these guns need a fundamental redesign, not a band-aid fix. If I'm not mistaken, that's a distinction that's more or less determined by the length of the leg on the safety lever. There's no reason to think it wouldn't force the sear into full engagement. |
Ok, this is worth exactly what you are paying to read it, but, according to my FFL, Sig knows there's a problem, and have given them the test on what to look for  I was in picking up a G34, and was waiting for their corporate HQ to OK the transfer, takes an extra 10 minutes usually but anyway, started engaging the store manager in small talk. About guns. And of course the P320 came up, I asked if they are buying used ones, he said yes, but greatly discounted. He said the test was to push the slide back about 1mm out of engagement, then wiggle the shit out of the slide. If the striker drops, its defective and won't buy it. Their corporate FFL auditor was there inspecting the 4473s and the bound book, and she piped in that they also contact Sig before buying and give them the serial number, and they tell them if its in a range of possible defective? I have no idea if its bullshit or not?  Edit, he grabbed a P320 they had on layaway to demonstrate. I would say he used his left hand to push the slide 1mm or so out of battery, then used his right hand to pull up and wiggle the top rear of the slide, over the optic that was mounted. |
|
Quoted: Yes, thanks to the wonders of mass production these things do not cost $2000 each. Sig has no infrastructure to rebuild all 2,500,000+ P320's that have already been built, and which took them ten years to build - on a timescale not measured in decades. Their existing staff and facilities can't handle it. Not just the FCU either, grip module too. Quoted: Quoted: The standard model P320 full size currently retails for $430 + shipping. That's retail. That number includes: The gun. The box, mags, manual, and everything that comes with the gun. Sig's markup. The federal excise tax. The distributor's markup. The retailer's markup. And an unknown amount of shipping between Sig, the distributor, and the retailer. I think it's reasonable to guess that the FCU is well under 20% of this total. Yes, thanks to the wonders of mass production these things do not cost $2000 each. Sig has no infrastructure to rebuild all 2,500,000+ P320's that have already been built, and which took them ten years to build - on a timescale not measured in decades. Their existing staff and facilities can't handle it. Not just the FCU either, grip module too. It didn't take them a decade to build 3.5M P320s. It took them a decade to sell 3.5M P320s. That's a pretty big distinction. It's also worth mentioning that Sig fancies themselves as a top military arms maker. A military arms maker should be able to handle huge volume jobs. During WWII, Springfield Armory was building over 1M Garands per year by themselvs. Those are whole rifles with complicated manufacturing processes made with old timey manufacturing techniques. Today, Glock is selling over 1M pistols per year just to the US market in peacetime. How much could it really take for Sig to crank out and slap together some MIM parts, stamped parts, and springs? If they can do 100k units a month, they'd be done in under 3 years if they replaced the entire production run, but while there would be a huge initial rush, a large percentage of guns wouldn't come through immediately, if ever. Some number of these guns are always going to be out there in their as-built configuration. |
|
Quoted: Ok, this is worth exactly what you are paying to read it, but, according to my FFL, Sig knows there's a problem, and have given them the test on what to look for I was in picking up a G34, and was waiting for their corporate HQ to OK the transfer, takes an extra 10 minutes usually but anyway, started engaging the store manager in small talk. About guns. And of course the P320 came up, I asked if they are buying used ones, he said yes, but greatly discounted. He said the test was to push the slide back about 1mm out of engagement, then wiggle the shit out of the slide. If the striker drops, its defective and won't buy it. Their corporate FFL auditor was there inspecting the 4473s and the bound book, and she piped in that they also contact Sig before buying and give them the serial number, and they tell them if its in a range of possible defective? I have no idea if its bullshit or not? Edit, he grabbed a P320 they had on layaway to demonstrate. I would say he used his left hand to push the slide 1mm or so out of battery, then used his right hand to pull up and wiggle the top rear of the slide, over the optic that was mounted. |
|
Quoted: Ok, this is worth exactly what you are paying to read it, but, according to my FFL, Sig knows there's a problem, and have given them the test on what to look for I was in picking up a G34, and was waiting for their corporate HQ to OK the transfer, takes an extra 10 minutes usually but anyway, started engaging the store manager in small talk. About guns. And of course the P320 came up, I asked if they are buying used ones, he said yes, but greatly discounted. He said the test was to push the slide back about 1mm out of engagement, then wiggle the shit out of the slide. If the striker drops, its defective and won't buy it. Their corporate FFL auditor was there inspecting the 4473s and the bound book, and she piped in that they also contact Sig before buying and give them the serial number, and they tell them if its in a range of possible defective? I have no idea if its bullshit or not? Edit, he grabbed a P320 they had on layaway to demonstrate. I would say he used his left hand to push the slide 1mm or so out of battery, then used his right hand to pull up and wiggle the top rear of the slide, over the optic that was mounted. interesting . |
|
Quoted: It didn't take them a decade to build 3.5M P320s. It took them a decade to sell 3.5M P320s. That's a pretty big distinction. It's also worth mentioning that Sig fancies themselves as a top military arms maker. A military arms maker should be able to handle huge volume jobs. During WWII, Springfield Armory was building over 1M Garands per year by themselvs. Those are whole rifles with complicated manufacturing processes made with old timey manufacturing techniques. Today, Glock is selling over 1M pistols per year just to the US market in peacetime. How much could it really take for Sig to crank out and slap together some MIM parts, stamped parts, and springs? If they can do 100k units a month, they'd be done in under 3 years if they replaced the entire production run, but while there would be a huge initial rush, a large percentage of guns wouldn't come through immediately, if ever. Some number of these guns are always going to be out there in their as-built configuration. If it was so easy and affordable, why didn't they start doing it years ago when they became aware of the problem? I'm trying to explain Sig's actual behavior around this issue. |
|
Quoted: Ok, this is worth exactly what you are paying to read it, but, according to my FFL, Sig knows there's a problem, and have given them the test on what to look for I was in picking up a G34, and was waiting for their corporate HQ to OK the transfer, takes an extra 10 minutes usually but anyway, started engaging the store manager in small talk. About guns. And of course the P320 came up, I asked if they are buying used ones, he said yes, but greatly discounted. He said the test was to push the slide back about 1mm out of engagement, then wiggle the shit out of the slide. If the striker drops, its defective and won't buy it. Their corporate FFL auditor was there inspecting the 4473s and the bound book, and she piped in that they also contact Sig before buying and give them the serial number, and they tell them if its in a range of possible defective? I have no idea if its bullshit or not? Edit, he grabbed a P320 they had on layaway to demonstrate. I would say he used his left hand to push the slide 1mm or so out of battery, then used his right hand to pull up and wiggle the top rear of the slide, over the optic that was mounted. That sounds like what this guy described in this video. I don't own one to test myself if slide out of battery, moves the disconnector and disengages the striker safety, thereby allowing slide movement to cause the striker to slip off the sear (all with no trigger movement).  Sig P320 Theory on Potential Cause of Accidental Discharges (Expanded) |
|
Quoted: The .mil unit price on the M17 is something like $210 per gun. That number includes the optics ready slide, night sights, and the barrel. That's easily the majority of real cost for these guns. Even if the manufacturing math says it's cheaper or more efficient to crank out entirely new FCUs than to convert existing ones, I wouldn't expect the cost to be anywhere near that high. It'll still hurt due to the number of units in circulation, but not a billion dollars worth. Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: The solution was probably never going to be Sig shipping parts to end users for them to swap. Depending upon the design and the work involved, the most likely answers are either Sig converting existing FCUs or Sig scrapping those FCUs and cranking out new ones. Let's pretend it's perfectly okay for Sig to recall a product sold and marketed as having been safe to use without a manual safety, in order to install a manual safety as part of the recall process. I accept that nothing changes for M17/M18's and other P320's that already have the manual safety. Is Sig capable of doing this without going bankrupt? Somewhere north of two and a half million guns. Shipping two ways, labor, parts. They likely need to hire a ton of people and build facilities to even approach getting this done on a reasonable timeline. All that comes with admin overhead BS. If that number gets to $400 per gun, that's a billion dollar liability. Sig got a billion laying around to blow? I bet they already know what it would take to fix the P320, they've already done the math, and that's the only logical explanation for their behavior around this whole thing. They can't afford to fix it. The .mil unit price on the M17 is something like $210 per gun. That number includes the optics ready slide, night sights, and the barrel. That's easily the majority of real cost for these guns. Even if the manufacturing math says it's cheaper or more efficient to crank out entirely new FCUs than to convert existing ones, I wouldn't expect the cost to be anywhere near that high. It'll still hurt due to the number of units in circulation, but not a billion dollars worth. Some have said that it was sold below cost to get the contract. Then they would make their money in the civilian market selling the "gun that the US military uses" |
|
Quoted: If it was so easy and affordable, why didn't they start doing it years ago when they became aware of the problem? I'm trying to explain Sig's actual behavior around this issue. Quoted: Quoted: It didn't take them a decade to build 3.5M P320s. It took them a decade to sell 3.5M P320s. That's a pretty big distinction. It's also worth mentioning that Sig fancies themselves as a top military arms maker. A military arms maker should be able to handle huge volume jobs. During WWII, Springfield Armory was building over 1M Garands per year by themselvs. Those are whole rifles with complicated manufacturing processes made with old timey manufacturing techniques. Today, Glock is selling over 1M pistols per year just to the US market in peacetime. How much could it really take for Sig to crank out and slap together some MIM parts, stamped parts, and springs? If they can do 100k units a month, they'd be done in under 3 years if they replaced the entire production run, but while there would be a huge initial rush, a large percentage of guns wouldn't come through immediately, if ever. Some number of these guns are always going to be out there in their as-built configuration. If it was so easy and affordable, why didn't they start doing it years ago when they became aware of the problem? I'm trying to explain Sig's actual behavior around this issue. Just because it's not a 10 year, $1B effort doesn't mean it's cheap or easy. There's also the lawsuit issue, the military specifications, and the question of market acceptance. And we shouldn't rule out the role that hubris, arrogance, and pride played in getting us here, either. Remember, between the jig thing Sig showed up to the FBI with and the patent we're discussing, we've got documented proof they were working on this stuff last year, and they still chose to come out and be dicks with their PR campaign. That's a big corporate culture problem. |
|
Quoted: Just because it's not a 10 year, $1B effort doesn't mean it's cheap or easy. There's also the lawsuit issue, the military specifications, and the question of market acceptance. And we shouldn't rule out the role that hubris, arrogance, and pride played in getting us here. Remember, between the jig thing Sig showed up to the FBI with and the patent we're discussing, we've got documented proof they were working on this stuff last year, and they still chose to come out and be dicks with their PR campaign. That's a big corporate culture problem. Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: It didn't take them a decade to build 3.5M P320s. It took them a decade to sell 3.5M P320s. That's a pretty big distinction. It's also worth mentioning that Sig fancies themselves as a top military arms maker. A military arms maker should be able to handle huge volume jobs. During WWII, Springfield Armory was building over 1M Garands per year by themselvs. Those are whole rifles with complicated manufacturing processes made with old timey manufacturing techniques. Today, Glock is selling over 1M pistols per year just to the US market in peacetime. How much could it really take for Sig to crank out and slap together some MIM parts, stamped parts, and springs? If they can do 100k units a month, they'd be done in under 3 years if they replaced the entire production run, but while there would be a huge initial rush, a large percentage of guns wouldn't come through immediately, if ever. Some number of these guns are always going to be out there in their as-built configuration. If it was so easy and affordable, why didn't they start doing it years ago when they became aware of the problem? I'm trying to explain Sig's actual behavior around this issue. Just because it's not a 10 year, $1B effort doesn't mean it's cheap or easy. There's also the lawsuit issue, the military specifications, and the question of market acceptance. And we shouldn't rule out the role that hubris, arrogance, and pride played in getting us here. Remember, between the jig thing Sig showed up to the FBI with and the patent we're discussing, we've got documented proof they were working on this stuff last year, and they still chose to come out and be dicks with their PR campaign. That's a big corporate culture problem. The sear locking safety patent would appear to be filed by an ex-SIG engineer; the language in it indicates he was not employed or contracted by SIG at the time of filing. |
|
Quoted: For those that feel bore axis matters, striker guns tend to do well in that area. Except the P320, which has no redeeming qualities. I didn’t see that anywhere in the quoted post…. Quoted: Quoted: Striker guns have other advantages beyond maybe carrying a pistol without a manual safety. They're still way cheaper than hammer guns, they still have a lower parts count, and they're still easier to maintain. Quoted: ...are you are now arguing that the eleventy billion Glocks in circulation are unsafe?  I didn't see it said outright either, but I could see if you are a person that thinks Glocks aren't a good design and/or aren't manufactured well you might infer that. I don't know how many people (that are taken even remotely seriously at least) suggest Glock manufacturing is substandard, but there are a bunch who will tell you they are not the best design, if not horrible designs. It took me a long time to come around to Glock's, but having EDC'd one for over 15 years now, I come to appreciate Mr. Glocks design more & more, especially when stuff like the situation the P320 is having & how Sig is responding to it. My advice to people who have narrowed their choices between a Glock & Sig, get you a Glock! Even if the Sig your looking at isn't a P320, do you really want to do business with them at this point?  |
|
Quoted: ..they still chose to come out and be dicks with their PR campaign. That's a big corporate culture problem. Sig Executive Allegations Dont forget about the thread where one of the Sig Executives was allegedly resizing that USPCA chick's starfish with his man pickle . |
|
Quoted: The sear locking safety patent would appear to be filed by an ex-SIG engineer; the language in it indicates he was not employed or contracted by SIG at the time of filing. Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: It didn't take them a decade to build 3.5M P320s. It took them a decade to sell 3.5M P320s. That's a pretty big distinction. It's also worth mentioning that Sig fancies themselves as a top military arms maker. A military arms maker should be able to handle huge volume jobs. During WWII, Springfield Armory was building over 1M Garands per year by themselvs. Those are whole rifles with complicated manufacturing processes made with old timey manufacturing techniques. Today, Glock is selling over 1M pistols per year just to the US market in peacetime. How much could it really take for Sig to crank out and slap together some MIM parts, stamped parts, and springs? If they can do 100k units a month, they'd be done in under 3 years if they replaced the entire production run, but while there would be a huge initial rush, a large percentage of guns wouldn't come through immediately, if ever. Some number of these guns are always going to be out there in their as-built configuration. If it was so easy and affordable, why didn't they start doing it years ago when they became aware of the problem? I'm trying to explain Sig's actual behavior around this issue. Just because it's not a 10 year, $1B effort doesn't mean it's cheap or easy. There's also the lawsuit issue, the military specifications, and the question of market acceptance. And we shouldn't rule out the role that hubris, arrogance, and pride played in getting us here. Remember, between the jig thing Sig showed up to the FBI with and the patent we're discussing, we've got documented proof they were working on this stuff last year, and they still chose to come out and be dicks with their PR campaign. That's a big corporate culture problem. The sear locking safety patent would appear to be filed by an ex-SIG engineer; the language in it indicates he was not employed or contracted by SIG at the time of filing. Maybe I could have worded that better, but regardless of who commissioned the patent, Sig had to have known it was happening. Even if we pretend the P365 doesn't exist, and we pretend there aren't rumors guys like Herrera are hearing credible stuff from Sig engineers, the fact remains Sig knew stuff was wrong with the P320 and still came out to the public with middle fingers in the air. |
|
Is HK trolling Sig? They just dropped a video showing how safe their VP9 is. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u0oKLcEglHQ |
Gun Engineers Reveal True Cause Of The P320 Uncommanded Discharges Gun Engineers Reveal True Cause Of The P320 Uncommanded Discharges |
|
Quoted: It didn't take them a decade to build 3.5M P320s. It took them a decade to sell 3.5M P320s. That's a pretty big distinction. It's also worth mentioning that Sig fancies themselves as a top military arms maker. A military arms maker should be able to handle huge volume jobs. During WWII, Springfield Armory was building over 1M Garands per year by themselvs. Those are whole rifles with complicated manufacturing processes made with old timey manufacturing techniques. Today, Glock is selling over 1M pistols per year just to the US market in peacetime. How much could it really take for Sig to crank out and slap together some MIM parts, stamped parts, and springs? If they can do 100k units a month, they'd be done in under 3 years if they replaced the entire production run, but while there would be a huge initial rush, a large percentage of guns wouldn't come through immediately, if ever. Some number of these guns are always going to be out there in their as-built configuration. A quick google shows sig in total employs around 3500 ish people across all their businesses (guns, ammo, electro optics, etc.) I’d hazard to bet some healthy money they have less than 600 assemblers putting together guns in NH. WWII Springfield armory had 14,000 staff under wartime manufacturing mobilization directives with likely just about every role save maybe a handful directly related to or supporting manufacturing and assembly. They may not take a decade, but we are still talking in the years, not months for rebuild every pistol if they were to recall in full. |
|
Quoted: Gun Engineers Reveal True Cause Of The P320 Uncommanded Discharges  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XACZxOOcDD8What's up with that dude's eyebrows? |
|
Quoted: This has Walker Trigger lawsuit written all over it. Remington went BK over this same issue...and arguably, the Walker trigger was safe so long as it was relatively clean and not adjusted down below safe levels. It was rust/dirt that contributed to the primary death from the Rem 700 lawsuit. The trigger just wasn't able to tolerate it. Nope. The Remington bankruptcy had nothing to do with the Walker Trigger lawsuit. Intentional mismanagement by Cerberus: How America’s Oldest Gun Maker Went Bankrupt |
 SIG P320 Uncommanded Discharge Thought Exercise & A Theory I humbly submit my current working hypothesis. It’s a compiled scenario from some of my own observations and the other information available. I will prepare for my flogging. |
|
Quoted: Maybe I could have worded that better, but regardless of who commissioned the patent, Sig had to have known it was happening. Even if we pretend the P365 doesn't exist, and we pretend there aren't rumors guys like Herrera are hearing credible stuff from Sig engineers, the fact remains Sig knew stuff was wrong with the P320 and still came out to the public with middle fingers in the air. Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: It didn't take them a decade to build 3.5M P320s. It took them a decade to sell 3.5M P320s. That's a pretty big distinction. It's also worth mentioning that Sig fancies themselves as a top military arms maker. A military arms maker should be able to handle huge volume jobs. During WWII, Springfield Armory was building over 1M Garands per year by themselvs. Those are whole rifles with complicated manufacturing processes made with old timey manufacturing techniques. Today, Glock is selling over 1M pistols per year just to the US market in peacetime. How much could it really take for Sig to crank out and slap together some MIM parts, stamped parts, and springs? If they can do 100k units a month, they'd be done in under 3 years if they replaced the entire production run, but while there would be a huge initial rush, a large percentage of guns wouldn't come through immediately, if ever. Some number of these guns are always going to be out there in their as-built configuration. If it was so easy and affordable, why didn't they start doing it years ago when they became aware of the problem? I'm trying to explain Sig's actual behavior around this issue. Just because it's not a 10 year, $1B effort doesn't mean it's cheap or easy. There's also the lawsuit issue, the military specifications, and the question of market acceptance. And we shouldn't rule out the role that hubris, arrogance, and pride played in getting us here. Remember, between the jig thing Sig showed up to the FBI with and the patent we're discussing, we've got documented proof they were working on this stuff last year, and they still chose to come out and be dicks with their PR campaign. That's a big corporate culture problem. The sear locking safety patent would appear to be filed by an ex-SIG engineer; the language in it indicates he was not employed or contracted by SIG at the time of filing. Maybe I could have worded that better, but regardless of who commissioned the patent, Sig had to have known it was happening. Even if we pretend the P365 doesn't exist, and we pretend there aren't rumors guys like Herrera are hearing credible stuff from Sig engineers, the fact remains Sig knew stuff was wrong with the P320 and still came out to the public with middle fingers in the air. Eh, I'm not sure SIG knows what's wrong, and likely haven't come to a consensus at the top that there IS something wrong. Look at the SIG lovers here that grasp at straws - now add in a $200k+ SIG salary, and you can't admit to YOURSELF that there's anything wrong w/ the gun. |
 Failed To Load Title |
|
Quoted: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u9P_FMMgv-MI humbly submit my current working hypothesis. It’s a compiled scenario from some of my own observations and the other information available. I will prepare for my flogging. 35 godamn minutes come on already jfc . |
|
So given this: Quoted: Basically if you have a combination of three things:
Then you have a gun that can and will go off in the holster without a trigger press. It seems to me that in revisiting this video, he may have prepped the trigger and then decided to reholster. Striker/sear hung up on ledge or burr, and slide movement upon holstering took care of the rest. Just one of the possible explanations. https://www.youtube.com/shorts/cOUfurKIjnI |
|
Quoted: 35 godamn minutes come on already jfc . Quoted: Quoted: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u9P_FMMgv-MI humbly submit my current working hypothesis. It’s a compiled scenario from some of my own observations and the other information available. I will prepare for my flogging. 35 godamn minutes come on already jfc . Please, I even gave you two fake soy face. If you skip to 10:20 there are pictures. We have to set the groundwork for what counts and what doesn’t, and define criteria. I think for what you get it is very condensed, actually. I don’t go off on too many tangents other than as is necessary to dismiss those errant ideas. I can make it longer if that would satisfy you. There are several important topic I abbreviated for the sake of time. What do you expect? Something that has defied everyone for years to be explained by one unicorn fart caught on camera? |
|
Quoted: Yup. Take a gander. 47 minutes of instructions. Think average joe wants ANY part of that? You have to modify the FCU and the grip module using a template, it's not a lego-parts-swapping situation like it is on M&P 2.0's. https://i.imgur.com/5JwNdjVl.jpg Alternative: have someone sell pre-modified FCU's and grip modules. Do you think average joe wants to now be responsible for having a serialized part transferred to him, and needing to dispose of a known-unsafe serialized part? This is only a solution for the 1% hardcore types like us. Nobody normal is touching that with a ten foot pole. I have done three of these thumb safety conversions. I am an advanced WECSOG (Wiley E. Coyote School of Gunsmithing) with a Dremel Cluster, and I say this... doing the conversion is not for the faint of heart. The angles are critical to allow the safety lever to operate smoothly AND if you cut too much, you just fubared the serial numbered receiver! The chassis of the FCU is very hard metal. I found a subcompact P320 and as much as I wanted it... I passed because I did not want to push my luck cutting another FCU chassis to add a thumb safety and what would be the point for me to own one and not convert it! |
The timing of this video is PERFECT. This is how you do marketing.  VP9A1 Safety Features |
|
Quoted: Sig Executive Allegations Dont forget about the thread where one of the Sig Executives was allegedly resizing that USPCA chick's starfish with his man pickle . Don't not fall for the faux rage intended to obfuscate the real issues SIG has. Apparently the accuser has done this a couple of times to others. |
|
Another "our guns are actually safe" video from HK. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P4v5QhgupKE |
|
Quoted: Another "our guns are actually safe" video from HK. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P4v5QhgupKE Their marketing department can be pretty funny at times. Reminds me of “Yeet Kanone” when Hipoint’s Yeet Cannon was recent news. |
|
Quoted: Don't know if it's been mentioned yet(I'm sure it has), but not surprisingly, SIG's case against Washington State has been dismissed. https://thereload.com/judge-rejects-sig-sauers-attempt-to-un-ban-p320-from-washington-police-training-facility/ Thanks, updated the Master Index thread. |
Another small department bails out on the P320: Bloomsburg Police Department to get new guns following Sig Sauer P320 safety concerns |
|
What state is this in? |
|
They should switch to the M&P 10mm. 
|
|
Quoted: What state is this in? Quoted: What state is this in? PA I believe |
|
I wonder if Sig will send them a cease and desist letter? |
|
Quoted: Ok, this is worth exactly what you are paying to read it, but, according to my FFL, Sig knows there's a problem, and have given them the test on what to look for I was in picking up a G34, and was waiting for their corporate HQ to OK the transfer, takes an extra 10 minutes usually but anyway, started engaging the store manager in small talk. About guns. And of course the P320 came up, I asked if they are buying used ones, he said yes, but greatly discounted. He said the test was to push the slide back about 1mm out of engagement, then wiggle the shit out of the slide. If the striker drops, its defective and won't buy it. Their corporate FFL auditor was there inspecting the 4473s and the bound book, and she piped in that they also contact Sig before buying and give them the serial number, and they tell them if its in a range of possible defective? I have no idea if its bullshit or not? Edit, he grabbed a P320 they had on layaway to demonstrate. I would say he used his left hand to push the slide 1mm or so out of battery, then used his right hand to pull up and wiggle the top rear of the slide, over the optic that was mounted. I know this has been quoted already, multiple times, but this is indeed super interesting if true. Dumb luck I actually click on a page with something of note and not just bickering lol! Not looking good in terms of factual evidence for Sig. |
|
Quoted: I know this has been quoted already, multiple times, but this is indeed super interesting if true. Dumb luck I actually click on a page with something of note and not just bickering lol! Not looking good in terms of factual evidence for Sig. If the backstory hovering around the filing of the patent is true, SIG C-suite, legal and senior engineers have known about self-firing issues for years...like criminal level fraud and conspiracy type stuff. |
|
Quoted: I know this has been quoted already, multiple times, but this is indeed super interesting if true. Dumb luck I actually click on a page with something of note and not just bickering lol! Not looking good in terms of factual evidence for Sig. I'm doubtful Sig would even admit there is a defect with certain serials to an FFL knowing it could be re-posted within minutes to social media. At most Sig might be confirming whether a gun was part of their "voluntary upgrade". Anything beyond that and I bet their legal counsel advises them to tow the company line...there is no issue. |
|
Quoted: I'm doubtful Sig would even admit there is a defect with certain serials to an FFL knowing it could be re-posted within minutes to social media. At most Sig might be confirming whether a gun was part of their "voluntary upgrade". Anything beyond that and I bet their legal counsel advises them to tow the company line...there is no issue. And thats what I asked, were they talking about the drop safe update serial number range? She said no, this was for firing from the striker letting go. Again, other than buying some guns and a shitload of transfers I don't really know these folks so it may very well be bullshit. |
|
Quoted: I'm doubtful Sig would even admit there is a defect with certain serials to an FFL knowing it could be re-posted within minutes to social media. At most Sig might be confirming whether a gun was part of their "voluntary upgrade". Anything beyond that and I bet their legal counsel advises them to tow the company line...there is no issue. Quoted: Quoted: I know this has been quoted already, multiple times, but this is indeed super interesting if true. Dumb luck I actually click on a page with something of note and not just bickering lol! Not looking good in terms of factual evidence for Sig. I'm doubtful Sig would even admit there is a defect with certain serials to an FFL knowing it could be re-posted within minutes to social media. At most Sig might be confirming whether a gun was part of their "voluntary upgrade". Anything beyond that and I bet their legal counsel advises them to tow the company line...there is no issue. That SIG would confirm if a pistol had gone through their voluntary "upgrade" makes much more sense. |
|
Quoted: And thats what I asked, were they talking about the drop safe update serial number range? She said no, this was for firing from the striker letting go. Again, other than buying some guns and a shitload of transfers I don't really know these folks so it may very well be bullshit. Quoted: Quoted: I'm doubtful Sig would even admit there is a defect with certain serials to an FFL knowing it could be re-posted within minutes to social media. At most Sig might be confirming whether a gun was part of their "voluntary upgrade". Anything beyond that and I bet their legal counsel advises them to tow the company line...there is no issue. And thats what I asked, were they talking about the drop safe update serial number range? She said no, this was for firing from the striker letting go. Again, other than buying some guns and a shitload of transfers I don't really know these folks so it may very well be bullshit. I'm going w/ they're calling SIG and confirming if the pistol is drop-safe or not. They two people you talked to likely think they're checking if it's holster safe, but I'd bet a P320 frame they're misinformed. |
|
Quoted: I'm going w/ they're calling SIG and confirming if the pistol is drop-safe or not. They two people you talked to likely think they're checking if it's holster safe, but I'd bet a P320 frame they're misinformed. Possibly, but the manager is a gun guy, wouldn't shock me if he had an account here. Again, it could be 100% bullshit too. |