[ARCHIVED THREAD] - SIG “ The P320. It ends today.” (Page 137 of 142)
|
Quoted:Things I would not expect a state crime lab to be able to do with a firearm:
Forget the diagnosis though, if a lab can even make the failure repeatable (in realistic holster circumstances), straight up "if X then Y", that'd be huge. We had the youtube flurry post-USAF but that's it. |
|
Quoted: I agree. Forget the diagnosis though, if a lab can even make the failure repeatable (in realistic holster circumstances), straight up "if X then Y", that'd be huge. We had the youtube flurry post-USAF but that's it. How exactly are they going to repeat a failure without diagnosing it first? Cart. Horse. |
|
Quoted: It seems it is about 3 in 100 chance of going off randomly. Quoted: Quoted:
It seems it is about 3 in 100 chance of going off randomly. I think it's a lot lower than that. There's several million of these things out there and we have around a hundred reported incidents? Of which, at least some we suspect are ordinary NDs. We also expect there are some UDs that have not been reported, b/c they were thought to be ordinary NDs. Also, the time span can be from a few weeks of carrying to months or years. I think if we're going to throw a SWAG out there, it should be 1/x per year, x being a fairly high number. Chance of being struck by lightning is 1/million per year. The SIG P320 UD problem is seemingly higher than that, but lower than 3/100 per year. |
|
Quoted: How exactly are they going to repeat a failure without diagnosing it first? Cart. Horse. Quoted: Quoted: I agree. Forget the diagnosis though, if a lab can even make the failure repeatable (in realistic holster circumstances), straight up "if X then Y", that'd be huge. We had the youtube flurry post-USAF but that's it. How exactly are they going to repeat a failure without diagnosing it first? Cart. Horse. What caused Taurus to settle their lawsuits was the Brazilian policeman shaking his Taurus on the range and having it go off repeatedly. Taurus' sear design was worse than SIG's. Safety on or off:  Watch Taurus 24/7 pistol fire just by being shaken |
|
Quoted: What caused Taurus to settle their lawsuits was the Brazilian policeman shaking his Taurus on the range and having it go off repeatedly. Taurus' sear design was worse than SIG's. Incomprehensible logic chain. "Somebody needs to make the failure like this other failure." Nope. They're not the same. Can't force a round peg and all that. |
|
Quoted: Incomprehensible logic chain. "Somebody needs to make the failure like this other failure." Nope. They're not the same. Can't force a round peg and all that. Quoted: Quoted: What caused Taurus to settle their lawsuits was the Brazilian policeman shaking his Taurus on the range and having it go off repeatedly. Taurus' sear design was worse than SIG's. Incomprehensible logic chain. "Somebody needs to make the failure like this other failure." Nope. They're not the same. Can't force a round peg and all that. Agreed. But the failure also doesn't necessarily have to be diagnosed to be repeatable. We just need a few thousand policeman simulators to simulate an officer going about his duties, working 24/7. 
|
There has been another Sigcident at the USPSA Area 3 championship. I found some comments on Instrgram left by fellow competitors from the match:    If those comments are correct, it looks like this is the holster that was in use: https://www.webertactical.com/product/original-gear-range-holster-for-sig-p320-rh I am virtually certain that USPSA will take no action on the P320 over this, even with a stock gun in a conservative non-light-bearing holster and multiple witnesses. They are in Sig's pocket, Sig sponsors their magazine as well as USPSA national matches every single year. |
| The 320 debacle is dragging down the rest of the Sig product line and it has hit used Sigs as well. I watched a 516 get offered up and no buyers at PSA money. Sig has doubled down and it is showing on the entire product line. Sig had crapshoot customer service long before the 320 though . |
|
Quoted: There has been another Sigcident at the USPSA Area 3 championship. https://i.imgur.com/fBUUq2b.jpeg I found some comments on Instrgram left by fellow competitors from the match: https://i.imgur.com/44SXwWh.jpeg https://i.imgur.com/NEwRNHG.jpeg https://i.imgur.com/oZDkqvr.jpeg If those comments are correct, it looks like this is the holster that was in use: https://www.webertactical.com/product/original-gear-range-holster-for-sig-p320-rh I am virtually certain that USPSA will take no action on the P320 over this, even with a stock gun in a conservative non-light-bearing holster and multiple witnesses. They are in Sig's pocket, Sig sponsors their magazine as well as USPSA national matches every single year. |
|
Quoted: There has been another Sigcident at the USPSA Area 3 championship. https://i.imgur.com/fBUUq2b.jpeg I found some comments on Instrgram left by fellow competitors from the match: https://i.imgur.com/44SXwWh.jpeg https://i.imgur.com/NEwRNHG.jpeg https://i.imgur.com/oZDkqvr.jpeg If those comments are correct, it looks like this is the holster that was in use: https://www.webertactical.com/product/original-gear-range-holster-for-sig-p320-rh I am virtually certain that USPSA will take no action on the P320 over this, even with a stock gun in a conservative non-light-bearing holster and multiple witnesses. They are in Sig's pocket, Sig sponsors their magazine as well as USPSA national matches every single year.  You could get a q-tip in the trigger guard, therefore, expect a zillion what if conspiracy theories. *Again.* |
|
Here's the link to the instagram discussing it: https://www.instagram.com/benstoeger/p/DPJk0g6DuvW/ comments from the insta from the time I copied the link: benstoeger's profile picture benstoeger 1d DM me the deets joeyblendz757's profile picture joeyblendz757 1d The Notorious S.I.G. Like Reply View all 4 replies josephyoung01's profile picture josephyoung01 1d I spoke with her yesterday at Scheels in Rapid City. She said she had holstered. Finger indexed and it went off. No one was filming her run. Her husband and the RO both stated to Andy the match director that she clearly didn't have her finger on the trigger. They both run 320s. First time its happened to them. They are both switching to CZ Like Reply house_work_migs's profile picture house_work_migs 1d Hands were Not criss cross apple sauce? Didnt happen. Like Reply alex_pego's profile picture alex_pego 1d “Unless their hands are crossed and it’s on video I don’t wanna hear it.” Like Reply View all 2 replies reiding_books's profile picture reiding_books 1d Arms not crossed, DJ Shipley won’t believe it. Like Reply View all 3 replies jcmartinez.750's profile picture jcmartinez.750 1d We need to give ROs body cams Like Reply View all 1 replies gunghis_kahn's profile picture gunghis_kahn 1d HERE WE GO AGAIN! Like Reply emersoncustom's profile picture emersoncustom 1d There was several people running 320’s in my last match and it made me very nervous. I traded mine in to scheels a month ago and never looked back Like Reply View all 5 replies myselfactual's profile picture myselfactual 1d ?? But were his arms crossed? Like Reply c45_70's profile picture c45_70 1d At this point we should start recording every person the moment they chamber a round in a 320. Like Reply View all 2 replies soitojc's profile picture soitojc 1d Seems like issue went away when everyone stopped using their 320's for a little bit. Crazy. If it was negligence you'd think it would be static among all firearms. Like Reply View all 3 replies zorp.z's profile picture zorp.z 1d I was there. I was the holster. I pulled the trigger, sorry guys Like Reply z71s_and_bigguns's profile picture z71s_and_bigguns 23h Great, let's het the un-holstered- unaltered firearm in it's post UD condition and do a legit investigation into the parts. Not that shit from the FBI Like Reply View all 5 replies dsellenlb's profile picture dsellenlb 6h I bet she has no manual safety or a agency arms trigger blade safety. Huh? Like Reply View all 2 replies cmartz3's profile picture cmartz3 1d There’s definitely something wrong. SIG needs to do a massive recall or discontinue and come out with the SIG p321 ????. Like Reply cmartz3's profile picture cmartz3 1d There’s definitely something wrong. SIG needs to do a massive recall or discontinue and come out with the SIG p321 ????. Like Reply View all 3 replies we_three_pews's profile picture we_three_pews 1d She was in our squad. She had made ready, had just put the gun in the holster. Her hand was barely on the grip. Finger no where near the trigger. Fun goes off an everyone had a WTH moment. Thankfully no one was hurt. Super disappointed for her through because she’s a good friend and has been working hard to compete. Like Reply View all 17 replies View all 3 replies 2,626 likes 1 day ago |
|
Quoted: Statistically, it happens less than the shake awake issue Taurus had. Taurus settled, and it cost them a lot, but they survived. SIG is trying to stave off the black eye of recalling millions of guns and replacing them with a safer model. Brazil isn't the United States. Taurus wasn't implicated in causing severe injury to hundreds of Americans with most of those being LEOs. The stakes are nowhere near the same. |
|
Quoted: There has been another Sigcident at the USPSA Area 3 championship. https://i.imgur.com/fBUUq2b.jpeg I found some comments on Instrgram left by fellow competitors from the match: https://i.imgur.com/44SXwWh.jpeg https://i.imgur.com/NEwRNHG.jpeg https://i.imgur.com/oZDkqvr.jpeg If those comments are correct, it looks like this is the holster that was in use: https://www.webertactical.com/product/original-gear-range-holster-for-sig-p320-rh I am virtually certain that USPSA will take no action on the P320 over this, even with a stock gun in a conservative non-light-bearing holster and multiple witnesses. They are in Sig's pocket, Sig sponsors their magazine as well as USPSA national matches every single year. Some updates on this including info from the actual shooter:     So the info we can gather from all this:
For those that might claim hogwash on the 20,000 rounds claim: when I was more actively shooting USPSA and 3-gun, that is approximately how many rounds I would shoot in a two year span, shooting anywhere from 1-4 matches a month plus practice. It's a very believable number in that context. And I didn't have to practice excessively to hit those numbers. |
|
Interesting development today: TACOM published a safety message on the M17/M18. Inspection of the striker assembly is added to the annual 20 level PMCS, inspection of the sear, striker block lifting lever (called the captive safety lever in the message), takedown safety lever, and the manual safety lever are added to the before/after PMCS, and commanders are directed to only allow the use of approved holsters and accessories and to "keep weapon handling areas free from distractions". My read on this is that someone at PEO Soldier or TACOM is getting nervous about the mechanical safety of the P320, but that it's going to take some more proof before the Army drops them. TACOM safety messages aren't terribly unusual, but the things they're telling soldiers to inspect tell me that someone is paying attention to what people are saying online. |
|
Quoted: Interesting development today: TACOM published a safety message on the M17/M18. Inspection of the striker assembly is added to the annual 20 level PMCS, inspection of the sear, striker block lifting lever (called the captive safety lever in the message), takedown safety lever, and the manual safety lever are added to the before/after PMCS, and commanders are directed to only allow the use of approved holsters and accessories and to "keep weapon handling areas free from distractions". My read on this is that someone at PEO Soldier or TACOM is getting nervous about the mechanical safety of the P320, but that it's going to take some more proof before the Army drops them. TACOM safety messages aren't terribly unusual, but the things they're telling soldiers to inspect tell me that someone is paying attention to what people are saying online. This video may explain the concern. The overall video is well done comparing Glock to P320 by what I believe is an armorer for both manufacturers. However, at around the 7:00 minute mark he shows the striker block (safety) on the slide being a plunger on the Glock. Thereafter, he points to the P320 with 'rocker-like' striker block (captive safety lever) which according to accounts in the video can "gum-up" and has lead to that specific feature being defeated. Interestingly, the P365 has the plunger design.  Glock vs. Sig P320: The Ultimate Internal Safety Showdown! |
|
Quoted: However, at around the 7:00 minute mark he shows the striker block (safety) on the slide being a plunger on the Glock. Thereafter, he points to the P320 with 'rocker-like' striker block (captive safety lever) which according to accounts in the video can "gum-up" and has lead to that specific feature being defeated. Interestingly, the P365 has the plunger design. Yeah, we've been all over that in this thread for a while now. It's easy to see why: large surface area, relatively weak spring, easy ingress routes, difficult to clean the component without dislodging it or losing the spring. In fact, that last bit is why .mil contract guns actually require a tool to remove the striker assembly (including the striker block lever or "striker safety lock") and disassembly by the end user isn't allowed, it's an armorer-level task. So you can imagine how gummed up .mil guns can get when the individual troop isn't even able to properly clean and inspect it. |
|
Quoted: Yeah, we've been all over that in this thread for a while now. It's easy to see why: large surface area, relatively weak spring, easy ingress routes, difficult to clean the component without dislodging it or losing the spring. In fact, that last bit is why .mil contract guns actually require a tool to remove the striker assembly (including the striker block lever or "striker safety lock") and disassembly by the end user isn't allowed, it's an armorer-level task. So you can imagine how gummed up .mil guns can get when the individual troop isn't even able to properly clean and inspect it. Quoted: Quoted: However, at around the 7:00 minute mark he shows the striker block (safety) on the slide being a plunger on the Glock. Thereafter, he points to the P320 with 'rocker-like' striker block (captive safety lever) which according to accounts in the video can "gum-up" and has lead to that specific feature being defeated. Interestingly, the P365 has the plunger design. Yeah, we've been all over that in this thread for a while now. It's easy to see why: large surface area, relatively weak spring, easy ingress routes, difficult to clean the component without dislodging it or losing the spring. In fact, that last bit is why .mil contract guns actually require a tool to remove the striker assembly (including the striker block lever or "striker safety lock") and disassembly by the end user isn't allowed, it's an armorer-level task. So you can imagine how gummed up .mil guns can get when the individual troop isn't even able to properly clean and inspect it. If troops can't clean the striker assembly that could be a problem. |
|
Quoted: Yeah, we've been all over that in this thread for a while now. It's easy to see why: large surface area, relatively weak spring, easy ingress routes, difficult to clean the component without dislodging it or losing the spring. In fact, that last bit is why .mil contract guns actually require a tool to remove the striker assembly (including the striker block lever or "striker safety lock") and disassembly by the end user isn't allowed, it's an armorer-level task. So you can imagine how gummed up .mil guns can get when the individual troop isn't even able to properly clean and inspect it. Quoted: Quoted: However, at around the 7:00 minute mark he shows the striker block (safety) on the slide being a plunger on the Glock. Thereafter, he points to the P320 with 'rocker-like' striker block (captive safety lever) which according to accounts in the video can "gum-up" and has lead to that specific feature being defeated. Interestingly, the P365 has the plunger design. Yeah, we've been all over that in this thread for a while now. It's easy to see why: large surface area, relatively weak spring, easy ingress routes, difficult to clean the component without dislodging it or losing the spring. In fact, that last bit is why .mil contract guns actually require a tool to remove the striker assembly (including the striker block lever or "striker safety lock") and disassembly by the end user isn't allowed, it's an armorer-level task. So you can imagine how gummed up .mil guns can get when the individual troop isn't even able to properly clean and inspect it. Yep. There's not much an individual user can do other than soak it in CLP. This issue is going to have me, perhaps unfairly, judging other guns with rotating type striker blocks and torsion springs. The plunger and coil spring combo is obviously more reliable and more resistant to failures, and I can't think of a compelling reason to re-invent that wheel. |
|
Quoted: Yep. There's not much an individual user can do other than soak it in CLP. This issue is going to have me, perhaps unfairly, judging other guns with rotating type striker blocks and torsion springs. The plunger and coil spring combo is obviously more reliable and more resistant to failures, and I can't think of a compelling reason to re-invent that wheel. Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: However, at around the 7:00 minute mark he shows the striker block (safety) on the slide being a plunger on the Glock. Thereafter, he points to the P320 with 'rocker-like' striker block (captive safety lever) which according to accounts in the video can "gum-up" and has lead to that specific feature being defeated. Interestingly, the P365 has the plunger design. Yeah, we've been all over that in this thread for a while now. It's easy to see why: large surface area, relatively weak spring, easy ingress routes, difficult to clean the component without dislodging it or losing the spring. In fact, that last bit is why .mil contract guns actually require a tool to remove the striker assembly (including the striker block lever or "striker safety lock") and disassembly by the end user isn't allowed, it's an armorer-level task. So you can imagine how gummed up .mil guns can get when the individual troop isn't even able to properly clean and inspect it. Yep. There's not much an individual user can do other than soak it in CLP. This issue is going to have me, perhaps unfairly, judging other guns with rotating type striker blocks and torsion springs. The plunger and coil spring combo is obviously more reliable and more resistant to failures, and I can't think of a compelling reason to re-invent that wheel. What other striker designs use a rotating striker block? |
|
Quoted: The 320 debacle is dragging down the rest of the Sig product line and it has hit used Sigs as well. I watched a 516 get offered up and no buyers at PSA money. Sig has doubled down and it is showing on the entire product line. Sig had crapshoot customer service long before the 320 though . Sig has been doing that all on their own. Following great leadership and product lines at Kimber, infecting Sig. |
|
Quoted: What other striker designs use a rotating striker block? Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: However, at around the 7:00 minute mark he shows the striker block (safety) on the slide being a plunger on the Glock. Thereafter, he points to the P320 with 'rocker-like' striker block (captive safety lever) which according to accounts in the video can "gum-up" and has lead to that specific feature being defeated. Interestingly, the P365 has the plunger design. Yeah, we've been all over that in this thread for a while now. It's easy to see why: large surface area, relatively weak spring, easy ingress routes, difficult to clean the component without dislodging it or losing the spring. In fact, that last bit is why .mil contract guns actually require a tool to remove the striker assembly (including the striker block lever or "striker safety lock") and disassembly by the end user isn't allowed, it's an armorer-level task. So you can imagine how gummed up .mil guns can get when the individual troop isn't even able to properly clean and inspect it. Yep. There's not much an individual user can do other than soak it in CLP. This issue is going to have me, perhaps unfairly, judging other guns with rotating type striker blocks and torsion springs. The plunger and coil spring combo is obviously more reliable and more resistant to failures, and I can't think of a compelling reason to re-invent that wheel. What other striker designs use a rotating striker block? I think both the VP9 and P10 families do. |
|
Quoted: I think both the VP9 and P10 families do. Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: However, at around the 7:00 minute mark he shows the striker block (safety) on the slide being a plunger on the Glock. Thereafter, he points to the P320 with 'rocker-like' striker block (captive safety lever) which according to accounts in the video can "gum-up" and has lead to that specific feature being defeated. Interestingly, the P365 has the plunger design. Yeah, we've been all over that in this thread for a while now. It's easy to see why: large surface area, relatively weak spring, easy ingress routes, difficult to clean the component without dislodging it or losing the spring. In fact, that last bit is why .mil contract guns actually require a tool to remove the striker assembly (including the striker block lever or "striker safety lock") and disassembly by the end user isn't allowed, it's an armorer-level task. So you can imagine how gummed up .mil guns can get when the individual troop isn't even able to properly clean and inspect it. Yep. There's not much an individual user can do other than soak it in CLP. This issue is going to have me, perhaps unfairly, judging other guns with rotating type striker blocks and torsion springs. The plunger and coil spring combo is obviously more reliable and more resistant to failures, and I can't think of a compelling reason to re-invent that wheel. What other striker designs use a rotating striker block? I think both the VP9 and P10 families do. I'm not a massive H&K fanboy, but if nothing else I would trust them to over-build that gun. I don't believe I've heard of a single case of a VP9 going off by itself; has anyone here? |
|
Quoted: I'm not a massive H&K fanboy, but if nothing else I would trust them to over-build that gun. I don't believe I've heard of a single case of a VP9 going off by itself; has anyone here? Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: However, at around the 7:00 minute mark he shows the striker block (safety) on the slide being a plunger on the Glock. Thereafter, he points to the P320 with 'rocker-like' striker block (captive safety lever) which according to accounts in the video can "gum-up" and has lead to that specific feature being defeated. Interestingly, the P365 has the plunger design. Yeah, we've been all over that in this thread for a while now. It's easy to see why: large surface area, relatively weak spring, easy ingress routes, difficult to clean the component without dislodging it or losing the spring. In fact, that last bit is why .mil contract guns actually require a tool to remove the striker assembly (including the striker block lever or "striker safety lock") and disassembly by the end user isn't allowed, it's an armorer-level task. So you can imagine how gummed up .mil guns can get when the individual troop isn't even able to properly clean and inspect it. Yep. There's not much an individual user can do other than soak it in CLP. This issue is going to have me, perhaps unfairly, judging other guns with rotating type striker blocks and torsion springs. The plunger and coil spring combo is obviously more reliable and more resistant to failures, and I can't think of a compelling reason to re-invent that wheel. What other striker designs use a rotating striker block? I think both the VP9 and P10 families do. I'm not a massive H&K fanboy, but if nothing else I would trust them to over-build that gun. I don't believe I've heard of a single case of a VP9 going off by itself; has anyone here? All 30 of em? Figured at least 25 of em were kept lovingly in presentation cases and oiled nightly.
|
|
Quoted: The 320 debacle is dragging down the rest of the Sig product line and it has hit used Sigs as well. I watched a 516 get offered up and no buyers at PSA money. Sig has doubled down and it is showing on the entire product line. Sig had crapshoot customer service long before the 320 though . SIG USA has been doing the "Customers Beta test for us" for a long, long time.... P250, P290, MPX, MPC, 516, you name it. Pretty much everything SIG USA touches has fleas and ticks for the first 6-24 months minimum. By then it'll be a Gen 2 (whether it's called that or not, depends sometimes), or a random safety upgrade. A problem with SIG is they change things all the time, it's hard to figure out what they are doing with different lines - it's probably part of the problem they have assembling stuff as well. Funny to watch but glad I am out of the SIG USA game. Glocks, ARs, SCARs, and Lever Actions for me. |
|
Quoted: All 30 of em? Figured at least 25 of em were kept lovingly in presentation cases and oiled nightly. Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: However, at around the 7:00 minute mark he shows the striker block (safety) on the slide being a plunger on the Glock. Thereafter, he points to the P320 with 'rocker-like' striker block (captive safety lever) which according to accounts in the video can "gum-up" and has lead to that specific feature being defeated. Interestingly, the P365 has the plunger design. Yeah, we've been all over that in this thread for a while now. It's easy to see why: large surface area, relatively weak spring, easy ingress routes, difficult to clean the component without dislodging it or losing the spring. In fact, that last bit is why .mil contract guns actually require a tool to remove the striker assembly (including the striker block lever or "striker safety lock") and disassembly by the end user isn't allowed, it's an armorer-level task. So you can imagine how gummed up .mil guns can get when the individual troop isn't even able to properly clean and inspect it. Yep. There's not much an individual user can do other than soak it in CLP. This issue is going to have me, perhaps unfairly, judging other guns with rotating type striker blocks and torsion springs. The plunger and coil spring combo is obviously more reliable and more resistant to failures, and I can't think of a compelling reason to re-invent that wheel. What other striker designs use a rotating striker block? I think both the VP9 and P10 families do. I'm not a massive H&K fanboy, but if nothing else I would trust them to over-build that gun. I don't believe I've heard of a single case of a VP9 going off by itself; has anyone here? All 30 of em? Figured at least 25 of em were kept lovingly in presentation cases and oiled nightly.  *one guy accounts for 18 of them in ALL the trigger versions and sizes and special edition colors they have* |
|
Quoted: SIG USA has been doing the "Customers Beta test for us" for a long, long time.... P250, P290, MPX, MPC, 516, you name it. Pretty much everything SIG USA touches has fleas and ticks for the first 6-24 months minimum. By then it'll be a Gen 2 (whether it's called that or not, depends sometimes), or a random safety upgrade. A problem with SIG is they change things all the time, it's hard to figure out what they are doing with different lines - it's probably part of the problem they have assembling stuff as well. Funny to watch but glad I am out of the SIG USA game. Glocks, ARs, SCARs, and Lever Actions for me. Quoted: Quoted: The 320 debacle is dragging down the rest of the Sig product line and it has hit used Sigs as well. I watched a 516 get offered up and no buyers at PSA money. Sig has doubled down and it is showing on the entire product line. Sig had crapshoot customer service long before the 320 though . SIG USA has been doing the "Customers Beta test for us" for a long, long time.... P250, P290, MPX, MPC, 516, you name it. Pretty much everything SIG USA touches has fleas and ticks for the first 6-24 months minimum. By then it'll be a Gen 2 (whether it's called that or not, depends sometimes), or a random safety upgrade. A problem with SIG is they change things all the time, it's hard to figure out what they are doing with different lines - it's probably part of the problem they have assembling stuff as well. Funny to watch but glad I am out of the SIG USA game. Glocks, ARs, SCARs, and Lever Actions for me. Gonna get the lever action SIG MPX when it comes out? Takes P320 mags...
|
|
Quoted: Gonna get the lever action SIG MPX when it comes out? Takes P320 mags... Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: The 320 debacle is dragging down the rest of the Sig product line and it has hit used Sigs as well. I watched a 516 get offered up and no buyers at PSA money. Sig has doubled down and it is showing on the entire product line. Sig had crapshoot customer service long before the 320 though . SIG USA has been doing the "Customers Beta test for us" for a long, long time.... P250, P290, MPX, MPC, 516, you name it. Pretty much everything SIG USA touches has fleas and ticks for the first 6-24 months minimum. By then it'll be a Gen 2 (whether it's called that or not, depends sometimes), or a random safety upgrade. A problem with SIG is they change things all the time, it's hard to figure out what they are doing with different lines - it's probably part of the problem they have assembling stuff as well. Funny to watch but glad I am out of the SIG USA game. Glocks, ARs, SCARs, and Lever Actions for me. Gonna get the lever action SIG MPX when it comes out? Takes P320 mags... At least a lever action MPX would probably cycle reliably. I waited for gen 2 for mine and still got a turd. Between it and the 365, Sig fooled me twice, shame on me. 
|
|
Quoted: I'm not a massive H&K fanboy, but if nothing else I would trust them to over-build that gun. I don't believe I've heard of a single case of a VP9 going off by itself; has anyone here? Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: However, at around the 7:00 minute mark he shows the striker block (safety) on the slide being a plunger on the Glock. Thereafter, he points to the P320 with 'rocker-like' striker block (captive safety lever) which according to accounts in the video can "gum-up" and has lead to that specific feature being defeated. Interestingly, the P365 has the plunger design. Yeah, we've been all over that in this thread for a while now. It's easy to see why: large surface area, relatively weak spring, easy ingress routes, difficult to clean the component without dislodging it or losing the spring. In fact, that last bit is why .mil contract guns actually require a tool to remove the striker assembly (including the striker block lever or "striker safety lock") and disassembly by the end user isn't allowed, it's an armorer-level task. So you can imagine how gummed up .mil guns can get when the individual troop isn't even able to properly clean and inspect it. Yep. There's not much an individual user can do other than soak it in CLP. This issue is going to have me, perhaps unfairly, judging other guns with rotating type striker blocks and torsion springs. The plunger and coil spring combo is obviously more reliable and more resistant to failures, and I can't think of a compelling reason to re-invent that wheel. What other striker designs use a rotating striker block? I think both the VP9 and P10 families do. I'm not a massive H&K fanboy, but if nothing else I would trust them to over-build that gun. I don't believe I've heard of a single case of a VP9 going off by itself; has anyone here? No, but remember: the UDs require multiple systems to fail, not just one. I don't think it's hard to debate that the plunger type systems have a major mechanical advantage here. -There's less room for debris to interfere. -They only move on one axis. -Engagement is more consistent. -Most importantly: spring failures are a completely different animal. With a rotating type striker block, you're looking at a small torsion spring. Torsion springs tend to have a much higher rate of failure than coil springs, and when they fail, they tend to physically break. If the spring breaks, the system is completely compromised. It no longer works. It's also possible (and has been observed with P320s) for the legs of the spring to be mis-aligned off of the part. Meanwhile, with plunger type striker blocks, you're looking at a compression type coil spring. These are one of the most reliable types of spring. Typically, when they fail, they don't actually break, they just weaken. And in this application, even if one does break, the system will most likely continue to work. Depending upon the gun and how much space there is in the slide around the spring, you could probably remove the spring, cut it in half, put both halves back in the gun, and function test it, and the striker block will probably still work. It could be solid, or it could be iffy. It might make the trigger crunchy in pretravel. But it should still move the plunger as intended. |
|
Quoted: What other striker designs use a rotating striker block? Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: However, at around the 7:00 minute mark he shows the striker block (safety) on the slide being a plunger on the Glock. Thereafter, he points to the P320 with 'rocker-like' striker block (captive safety lever) which according to accounts in the video can "gum-up" and has lead to that specific feature being defeated. Interestingly, the P365 has the plunger design. Yeah, we've been all over that in this thread for a while now. It's easy to see why: large surface area, relatively weak spring, easy ingress routes, difficult to clean the component without dislodging it or losing the spring. In fact, that last bit is why .mil contract guns actually require a tool to remove the striker assembly (including the striker block lever or "striker safety lock") and disassembly by the end user isn't allowed, it's an armorer-level task. So you can imagine how gummed up .mil guns can get when the individual troop isn't even able to properly clean and inspect it. Yep. There's not much an individual user can do other than soak it in CLP. This issue is going to have me, perhaps unfairly, judging other guns with rotating type striker blocks and torsion springs. The plunger and coil spring combo is obviously more reliable and more resistant to failures, and I can't think of a compelling reason to re-invent that wheel. What other striker designs use a rotating striker block? If I recall, I think maybe the VP9, but it’s a different configuration than what the P320 has. |
Looks like Chicago PD just banned its use as well: Chicago police ordered to stop carrying controversial handgun |
|
Quoted: The 320 debacle is dragging down the rest of the Sig product line and it has hit used Sigs as well. I watched a 516 get offered up and no buyers at PSA money. Sig has doubled down and it is showing on the entire product line. Sig had crapshoot customer service long before the 320 though . In their bid to not rock the boat on government contracts they are gutting their civilian customer base. Eventually those gov contract will go away and Sig will admit what's already obvious to everyone, but by then it might be too late. |
| I have a VP9a1 k and a couple of 320s. I can take pics next to each other. The VP9has like a meaty hooked one that’s attached under the slide horizontally. It is significantly more substantial than the p320s counterpart. I really like the p320, I like shooting them, but I definitely wouldn’t conceal carry one now. It’s too bad. It was a pretty cool idea and almost done really well. Like you said I don’t think they can fix it contractually but I wish they would. |
|
https://news.wttw.com/2025/10/01/federal-judge-orders-cpd-ban-gun-union-says-likely-misfire Chicago police officers should “immediately” stop using a gun while on duty that police union leaders believe could accidentally discharge, according to the federal judge overseeing the effort to reform the Chicago Police Department. U.S. District Judge Rebecca Pallmeyer said in a written order issued Monday that she agreed with leaders of the Fraternal Order of Police Lodge 7 that officers who have an alternative service weapon that “meets appropriate standards should be required immediately to use that alternative weapon.” Pallmeyer said city officials did “not fully answer” her questions about on-duty officers’ continued use of the Sig Sauer P320, a popular weapon with police officers and members of the military that has been the subject of dozens of complaints that it can fire without the trigger being pulled. This is a follow-up action after the FOP already called for the discontinuance of P320 usage back in April. |
|
Quoted: To confirm: the VP9's striker safety is not a plunger, but it also does not rotate in the same way as the P320's. Very different design. Obsessive correction: Not rotate. Lever. Moves like a lever, supposed to pull the finger down so it hits the safety stop. 
|
|
Quoted: That can only happen if UDs stop happening or if people stop caring about UDs happening. Neither of those seem terribly likely. Quoted: Quoted: Based on what I’ve seen… Sig is clearly hoping this will just go away. That can only happen if UDs stop happening or if people stop caring about UDs happening. Neither of those seem terribly likely. UDs will probably stop happening, or at least slow down significantly, just from statistics. Look how many PDs and shooting leagues have banned their use. That's a lot of guns no longer being carried around, loaded. Then look at how many guys base what they buy and carry, even partially, on "what the cops use." A lot of THOSE guys are either not buying, or no longer carrying, the P320. It would be interesting to know how many fewer loaded P320s are being carried today, than 2 or 3 years ago. Or even one year ago. I bet it's a significant difference. Even the guys who are aware of a potential problem and change practices will make a difference. Guys who maybe clean the guns more often, or who now keep the gun completely unloaded except when they're on the firing line. There will also be a point in time (maybe we've already reached it) when, should a UD happen, the user will no longer want to publicize it. Instead of being looked at as "yet another victim of Sig's dangerous design" they'll be viewed as, "an idiot who was still using a gun he should have known better than to use." Stubborn Sig users who have a UD will go, "oh, shit! They were right," quietly look around to make sure no one else noticed, put the gun in the safe and never use it again. They'll just quietly stop using the gun rather than experience the "I told you so" from the rest of the gun community. |
|
Quoted: Obsessive correction: Not rotate. Lever. Moves like a lever, supposed to pull the finger down so it hits the safety stop. Hopefully you will find exactly zero other designs like this. The actual benefit of the VP9 design is that it seems to be mostly balanced about the pivot point. This means that linear impacts in whatever X,Y,Z direction will not defeat it. What's required to defeat it is an impact that imparts rotational inertia. The tradeoff with the VP9 design is that it's a little more complex and susceptible to fouling, and may use a spring design that has a shorter lifespan than a coil compression spring. What Sig did instead is combine the worst of both worlds. They made the unbalanced mass mistake on their trigger, too. That's what got them caught up in the whole not-a-recall-VUP situation. They also made the same mistake with the sear. To an almost comical degree. |
|