[ARCHIVED THREAD] - SIG “ The P320. It ends today.” (Page 71 of 142)
|
Quoted: I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong, but couldn't these be fixed with: Trigger safety Redesigned striker block New striker Redesigned sear Heavier springs Of course, you'll lose that sweet sweet trigger pull that SIG was chasing in the first place. Grip safety like in the Springfield XD series prevents the sear from dropping. |
|
Quoted: This supposed fix had better be monumental and absolute. Anything less at this point is going to me met with a LOT skepticism and more controversy. I imagine however if it is successful, Sig is going to try and steal it. |
|
Quoted: I'm more interested in seeing a through explanation and exhibition of what's going on mechanically that's causing this and how they came to the conclusion as to what's causing it. the fact that this has not been established in over 10 years is why I feel the trigger was pulled in all ND's reported. |
|
Quoted: I love the trigger in my 320. BUT the echelon trigger is just as good. Hopefully they dont start going off when not commanded. Hopefully glop can make a trigger better than they do now that doesnt go off by itself. I’ve switched to the Echelon as my primary carry gun. Trigger is good, reliable and I believe their fcu/cog is made out of stainless steel. The quality looks 100 times better than the P320 fcu. |
|
Quoted: the fact that this has not been established in over 10 years is why I feel the trigger was pulled in all ND's reported. Quoted: Quoted: I'm more interested in seeing a through explanation and exhibition of what's going on mechanically that's causing this and how they came to the conclusion as to what's causing it. the fact that this has not been established in over 10 years is why I feel the trigger was pulled in all ND's reported. Oh, you feel they were all NDs. That settles it. ETA: Quoted: This supposed fix had better be monumental and absolute. Anything less at this point is going to be met with a LOT skepticism and more controversy. I imagine however if it is successful, Sig is going to try and steal it. Anyone attempting to design and market a “fix” had better be certain they’ve sorted it out, the liability is huge. Maybe more than what Sig is facing. |
|
Quoted: the fact that this has not been established in over 10 years is why I feel the trigger was pulled in all ND's reported. or it is a product of tolerances and manufacturing QC such that it occurs inconsistently on a portion of guns under certain unusual conditions. |
|
Interesting…just posted a little over a half hour ago. Attached File |
|
Quoted: Interesting…just posted a little over a half hour ago. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/155148/IMG_1542_png-3535925.JPG A lot of people give GT shit. I won't be taking marriage advise from him. But I generally respect his take on things, and look forward to his investigation. He's not as scientific and thorough as I general like, and as implied, but better than many. if he takes this seriously and brings in experts, which he very well may, then this could get intersting. We know some guns do this. We know returned pistols get quickly disposed of. We know this is hard to replicate on demand. It will be intersting to see GT scientifically pull it apart, and compare to several other "not known bad" examples. There is something particular that has to happen with a "bad gun" to make it holster-discharge. That remains unknown. I imagine a combination of failed (or fail prone) safety sear, and some sort of lint/lube/whatever/weakly-reset-main-sear , along with vibration handling creep/walking at just the right force in just the right vector to finally add up enough to slip off the main sear. Gun maintenance and usage condition is rarely confidently reported. Since most are LEO discharges, and not SWAT team at that, I suspect (at an arm chair guess), that congealed oils and lint and dust, create enough friction grip to allow the main sear to walk a bit with vibrations, and the weak (for that sweet trigger) spring is weak enough that it's not pulling the main sear back. So if I were testing it, I'd test a dirty gun for sure, and potentially apply something "gummy" similar to such fouling, the sear surface, combined with a lot of mild (important) jaring and vibrations to see if the sear walks and it discharges. This testing could take quite a bit of time to replicate the discharge. |
|
Quoted: the fact that this has not been established in over 10 years is why I feel the trigger was pulled in all ND's reported. Attached File |
|
Quoted: A lot of people give GT shit. I won't be taking marriage advise from him. But I generally respect his take on things, and look forward to his investigation. He's not as scientific and thorough as I general like, and as implied, but better than many. if he takes this seriously and brings in experts, which he very well may, then this could get intersting. We know some guns do this. We know returned pistols get quickly disposed of. We know this is hard to replicate on demand. It will be intersting to see GT scientifically pull it apart, and compare to several other "not known bad" examples. There is something particular that has to happen with a "bad gun" to make it holster-discharge. That remains unknown. I imagine a combination of failed (or fail prone) safety sear, and some sort of lint/lube/whatever/weakly-reset-main-sear , along with vibration handling creep/walking at just the right force in just the right vector to finally add up enough to slip off the main sear. Gun maintenance and usage condition is rarely confidently reported. Since most are LEO discharges, and not SWAT team at that, I suspect (at an arm chair guess), that congealed oils and lint and dust, create enough friction grip to allow the main sear to walk a but with vibrations, and the weak (for that sweet trigger) spring is weak enough that it's not pulling the main sear back. so if I were testing it, I'd test a dirty gun for sure, and putially apply a think similar to the sear surface, combined with a lot of mild (important) jaring and vibrations to see if the sear walks and it discharges. This testing could take quite a bit of time to replicate the discharge. Quoted: Quoted: Interesting…just posted a little over a half hour ago. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/155148/IMG_1542_png-3535925.JPG A lot of people give GT shit. I won't be taking marriage advise from him. But I generally respect his take on things, and look forward to his investigation. He's not as scientific and thorough as I general like, and as implied, but better than many. if he takes this seriously and brings in experts, which he very well may, then this could get intersting. We know some guns do this. We know returned pistols get quickly disposed of. We know this is hard to replicate on demand. It will be intersting to see GT scientifically pull it apart, and compare to several other "not known bad" examples. There is something particular that has to happen with a "bad gun" to make it holster-discharge. That remains unknown. I imagine a combination of failed (or fail prone) safety sear, and some sort of lint/lube/whatever/weakly-reset-main-sear , along with vibration handling creep/walking at just the right force in just the right vector to finally add up enough to slip off the main sear. Gun maintenance and usage condition is rarely confidently reported. Since most are LEO discharges, and not SWAT team at that, I suspect (at an arm chair guess), that congealed oils and lint and dust, create enough friction grip to allow the main sear to walk a but with vibrations, and the weak (for that sweet trigger) spring is weak enough that it's not pulling the main sear back. so if I were testing it, I'd test a dirty gun for sure, and putially apply a think similar to the sear surface, combined with a lot of mild (important) jaring and vibrations to see if the sear walks and it discharges. This testing could take quite a bit of time to replicate the discharge. Be pretty simple to do the punch test on that gun. Replicating the discharge is highly unlikely in less than a multi-year timespan. |
|
Quoted: What's the deal with infantry needing a "sweet trigger pull" anyway? I shoot, like most, just fine with a 5lb Glock trigger (Or the like). This. Outside of bullseye type shooting, if you can't shoot 5" or smaller groups at 25yds with a stock glock(or any pistol), you suck. |
|
Quoted: Interesting…just posted a little over a half hour ago. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/155148/IMG_1542_png-3535925.JPG Will make an interesting video |
|
Quoted: the fact that this has not been established in over 10 years is why I feel the trigger was pulled in all ND's reported. Quoted: Quoted: I'm more interested in seeing a through explanation and exhibition of what's going on mechanically that's causing this and how they came to the conclusion as to what's causing it. It doesn't tell you why. From that bit, nothing more is justified. What we do now know that we didn't before the punch test is that some 320 strikers are physically capable of hitting the primer without the saftey finger catching them. In other words, it's about one step or so from being shown to be mechanically possible, where it wasn't before. We'll have to see what sigarmorer says on monday. I hope he delivers. |
First I've heard of a using the wrong takedown parts issue. Why Are Sig P320s Going Off On Their Own |
|
Quoted: First I've heard of a using the wrong takedown parts issue.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opM-zDoIRlwThe takedown levers being differently sized for 9mm and other calibers being wrongfully mixed up and theoretically causing more elevation at the back of the gun causing lesser striker sear contact ... that seems something that could be checked. I suspect we should be able to have people check out their takedown levers, and if anyone has one that fails and they have different calibers .... hmm. This might be fruitful to check. |
|
Quoted: First I've heard of a using the wrong takedown parts issue. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opM-zDoIRlwPlausable..... |
|
Quoted: If what he's saying about that the striker safety having been designed and specced to be stamped and the powers that be decided to cut corners and have it mim'ed ... thats damning. Are the takedown levers marked so you can tell the difference? |
|
Quoted: First I've heard of a using the wrong takedown parts issue. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opM-zDoIRlwNo idea on the veracity of this claim, but it certainly sounds plausible. It's part of what I was arguing with someone about earlier in the thread when we went on the "muh 1911" tangent: striker guns separate the sear and trigger bar in the slide and frame, respectively, meaning something being off in slide/frame engagement can allow them to come apart. Interesting to see if any problem guns have .45 takedown levers. |
|
Quoted:
First I've heard of a using the wrong takedown parts issue. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opM-zDoIRlw |
|
Quoted: First I've heard of a using the wrong takedown parts issue. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opM-zDoIRlwNot buying it. $30 more to stamp rather than MIM? One of my clients is a stamper. I can see in my mind one of his machines stamping those little levers from a roll of material at about 4 per second then they go into the tumbler for deburring, then on to SIG. How can stamp be more expensive than MIM for sign a simple part? |
|
Quoted: First I've heard of a using the wrong takedown parts issue. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opM-zDoIRlwPretty good video. |
|
Quoted: First I've heard of a using the wrong takedown parts issue. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opM-zDoIRlwI have a question for our Sig experts. I had assumed the striker safety that this guy is pointing to was a stamped part just because it looks stamped. It just doesn't look like a MIM part to me in the photos that I've seen. Now the striker safety actuator lever that is below the striker safety looks like a MIM part. Am I wrong here? I don’t own a 320 so I can’t verify myself Attached File |
|
Note the sear to striker interface angle in this picture. It looks like it's either neutral or even slightly negative. That's one way to get a really good trigger pull feeling - the kind people refer to as "non-stacking" and "rolls through". It's common on guns fitted for competition. When I was still working on guns I did a crap ton of competition trigger jobs on the M&P. Those guns had a SEVERE positive sear to striker engagement and even had a hump on the sear that held the striker. You could probably launch a loaded M&P from a cannon and it wouldn't go off - that sear was NOT going to move. Part of the work was to machine that hump off to give it that nice rolling feel as well as taking about 0.020" off the top of the sear to reduce engagement then hand stone a small radius into the resulting corner. This is all fine for a gun that will NEVER EVER be carried as EDC or duty but it looks like a more neutral angle is present on this factory gun. Even the 1911 depends on positive engagement for safety against sear slippage. |
|
Quoted: Not buying it. $30 more to stamp rather than MIM? One of my clients is a stamper. I can see in my mind one of his machines stamping those little levers from a roll of material at about 4 per second then they go into the tumbler for deburring, then on to SIG. How can stamp be more expensive than MIM for sign a simple part? Quoted: Quoted: First I've heard of a using the wrong takedown parts issue. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opM-zDoIRlwNot buying it. $30 more to stamp rather than MIM? One of my clients is a stamper. I can see in my mind one of his machines stamping those little levers from a roll of material at about 4 per second then they go into the tumbler for deburring, then on to SIG. How can stamp be more expensive than MIM for sign a simple part? I think his source has his info backwards on the striker safety. Before the 'voluntary upgrade' P320s had a MIM striker block; this was switched to a stamped part in the |
|
Quoted: Not buying it. $30 more to stamp rather than MIM? One of my clients is a stamper. I can see in my mind one of his machines stamping those little levers from a roll of material at about 4 per second then they go into the tumbler for deburring, then on to SIG. How can stamp be more expensive than MIM for sign a simple part? |
|
Quoted: Oh, you feel they were all NDs. That settles it. ETA: Anyone attempting to design and market a "fix" had better be certain they've sorted it out, the liability is huge. Maybe more than what Sig is facing. Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I'm more interested in seeing a through explanation and exhibition of what's going on mechanically that's causing this and how they came to the conclusion as to what's causing it. the fact that this has not been established in over 10 years is why I feel the trigger was pulled in all ND's reported. Oh, you feel they were all NDs. That settles it. ETA: Quoted: This supposed fix had better be monumental and absolute. Anything less at this point is going to be met with a LOT skepticism and more controversy. I imagine however if it is successful, Sig is going to try and steal it. Anyone attempting to design and market a "fix" had better be certain they've sorted it out, the liability is huge. Maybe more than what Sig is facing. IMO the liability far outweighs any potential profit. Best to let Sig deal w/ their own monkey. |
|
Quoted: Note the sear to striker interface angle in this picture. It looks like it's either neutral or even slightly negative. That's one way to get a really good trigger pull feeling - the kind people refer to as "non-stacking" and "rolls through". It's common on guns fitted for competition. When I was still working on guns I did a crap ton of competition trigger jobs on the M&P. Those guns had a SEVERE positive sear to striker engagement and even had a hump on the sear that held the striker. You could probably launch a loaded M&P from a cannon and it wouldn't go off - that sear was NOT going to move. Part of the work was to machine that hump off to give it that nice rolling feel as well as taking about 0.020" off the top of the sear to reduce engagement then hand stone a small radius into the resulting corner. This is all fine for a gun that will NEVER EVER be carried as EDC or duty but it looks like a more neutral angle is present on this factory gun. Even the 1911 depends on positive engagement for safety against sear slippage. Thanks for the insight. |
|
Quoted: No idea on the veracity of this claim, but it certainly sounds plausible. It's part of what I was arguing with someone about earlier in the thread when we went on the "muh 1911" tangent: striker guns separate the sear and trigger bar in the slide and frame, respectively, meaning something being off in slide/frame engagement can allow them to come apart. Interesting to see if any problem guns have .45 takedown levers. Quoted: Quoted: First I've heard of a using the wrong takedown parts issue. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opM-zDoIRlwInteresting to see if any problem guns have .45 takedown levers. Check and see what the average variance is. |
|
Quoted: the fact that this has not been established in over 10 years is why I feel the trigger was pulled in all ND's reported. Quoted: Quoted: I'm more interested in seeing a through explanation and exhibition of what's going on mechanically that's causing this and how they came to the conclusion as to what's causing it. the fact that this has not been established in over 10 years is why I feel the trigger was pulled in all ND's reported. I didn't know GBRS had an account !!! |
|
Attached File Pack your bags, fellas. This one will be solved in no time |
|
Quoted: It would be interesting to see a wide selection of the takedown levers dumped into a precisely measured amount of liquid and the differences measured. Check and see what the average variance is. Regarding SIG having the same part number for all takedown levers, keep in mind that's SIG currently. Was that the case five years ago, seven years ago, or one year ago? |
|
Quoted: Robert Burke (aka The Sig Armorer) says he’s identified the problem and it is an issue with the sear. He will be putting out a video no later than Monday and claims he has a fix. Looking forward to seeing it. I wonder if this affects the gray guns kit as you get a sear with it. |
|
Quoted: Ok. So. Hear me out. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/77421/IMG_1355-3536988.jpg https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/77421/IMG_1354-3536989.jpghttps://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/77421/IMG_1353-3536990.jpghttps://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/77421/IMG_1357-3536991.jpghttps://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/77421/IMG_1359-3537016.jpg https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/77421/IMG_1361-3537017.jpg https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/77421/IMG_1363-3537018.jpg So. The last few images. I noticed that when the safety is on. It ever so slightly pushes down on the trigger bar. Just a tiny bit. Now I have a theory. When I punch test this M18 it fails 100% of the time with the safety off. And passes 100% of the time with the safety on. Because there is some machining needed on the trigger bar it could potentially be done on the sear safety too but that would be harder. (But doable). Look at the spots where the tips of the punches are. I’m thinking a small bevel is needed to resolve this. |
|
Quoted: https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/20662/IMG_1708_png-3536885.JPG Pack your bags, fellas. This one will be solved in no time A paragon of ethics in business. |
|
Quoted: So. The last few images. I noticed that when the safety is on. It ever so slightly pushes down on the trigger bar. Just a tiny bit. Now I have a theory. When I punch test this M18 it fails 100% of the time with the safety off. And passes 100% of the time with the safety on. Because there is some machining needed on the trigger bar it could potentially be done on the sear safety too but that would be harder. (But doable). Look at the spots where the tips of the punches are. I’m thinking a small bevel is needed to resolve this. To add to this, one of my striker assemblies also passes the punch test 100% of the time with the safety on, and about 60% failure rate with the safety off. The striker return spring is broken on that striker assembly though. I will be redoing the punch test after I acquire a new striker reset spring and see if that makes a difference. |
|
Quoted: To add to this, one of my striker assemblies also passes the punch test 100% of the time with the safety on, and about 60% failure rate with the safety off. The striker return spring is broken on that striker assembly though. I will be redoing the punch test after I acquire a new striker reset spring and see if that makes a difference. My striker return spring is 100% still intact and working for reference. |
|
Quoted: A paragon of ethics in business. Quoted: Quoted: https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/20662/IMG_1708_png-3536885.JPG Pack your bags, fellas. This one will be solved in no time A paragon of ethics in business. Sig and MAC: “It got worse today.” He’s their engagement hacking grifter, so it’s totally okay. Maybe they can put the fix up on gunbroker and let the market decide what it’s worth, only at Copper Custom, your one-stop shop for all your firearm needs! |