[ARCHIVED THREAD] - SIG “ The P320. It ends today.” (Page 73 of 142)
|
Absolutely zero details on the type of firearm, but an interesting story nonetheless. I would be interested to see what type it was. https://wsvn.com/news/local/miami-dade/the-guy-dropped-the-gun-florida-man-accidentally-shoots-himself-at-walmart-startling-weekend-shoppers/ |
|
Quoted: Very interesting video from the guy that showed the sear drop with a punch test.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_30DVjmaJsFantastic video, and great that he referenced the Sig Mechanic, who I'm hoping will follow up and pursue this further. This type of independent analysis is exactly what needs to be done, instead of continuing to treat this issue like fanboy defense vs. snarky Sig bashing. Sig must have a reason they added the leg, but it's easy to see how it's causing issues. They need to be forced to weigh in on this, and perhaps Edmund can help with that. No doubt, lawyers are paying attention. I wouldn't be surprised if we're looking at a second "upgrade" program. |
|
Quoted: Fantastic video, and great that he referenced the Sig Mechanic, who I'm hoping will follow up and pursue this further. This type of independent analysis is exactly what needs to be done, instead of continuing to treat this issue like fanboy defense vs. snarky Sig bashing. Sig must have a reason they added the leg, but it's easy to see how it's causing issues. They need to be forced to weigh in on this, and perhaps Edmund can help with that. No doubt, lawyers are paying attention. I wouldn't be surprised if we're looking at a second "upgrade" program. https://web.archive.org/web/20190528161002/https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u9vIY2EoJwE Starting around 3 minutes, he explains that the leg was added to the sear to have the tension of the trigger bar help prevent the striker block safety arm from raising up and help prevent the sear from dropping down, basically as several expected was the case. Unfortunately it created a linkage where if anything were to cause the sear to drop, then it would also push up on the safety block arm. Also, a funny bit I noticed in that part of the video, the guy shows how you can easily move those parts on the pre-upgrade example, but in the upgraded one he just points to them, doesn't try moving them. Maybe he/they knew it would look kind of bad if he were to push down on the sear and show that it also raises up the striker safety arm as a result? 
|
|
Quoted: If the claim about .45 ACP takedown levers ending up in 9mm guns is true, and knowing the takedown lever can trip the sear, I wonder if this has something to do with it all. Quoted: Quoted: They're junk. We received 22 M18's when they were first fielded. 2 were deadlined and red tagged right out of the box. How do you ship a pistol that can't cycle a single round? Not test-firing that's how. It was one of the first P320s sold. I won't carry it until there is a proven fix. |
|
Quoted: No the slide has to be locked back to rotate the take down lever. I dont own a 320, but on a 365 the take down lever wont rotate unless the slide stop is holding the slide back ( up position ), I assume they did the same on the 320. @bigfatOTMs: Appreciate the clarification. Seems OK to me in the end, then. |
|
I think there is 2 "fixes" for this. One change the angle on the striker and sear so the striker spring is pushing on an angled surface that causes the sear to try to rise. The would make the sear get "cocked" a little more by the movement of the sear, kind of like a Glock trigger works. This would of course make the trigger on the 320 a lot heavier and do away with the good trigger they have. But this only gets us part way there. Another option would be some sort of latch that prevents the sear from being pushed down unless the trigger bar moved first. It would have to be a positive system that locks the sear. |
|
Quoted: Here's an archive version of a now removed video on Sig's Youtube channel detailing the upgrade changes. https://web.archive.org/web/20190528161002/https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u9vIY2EoJwE Starting around 3 minutes, he explains that the leg was added to the sear to have the tension of the trigger bar help prevent the striker block safety arm from raising up and help prevent the sear from dropping down, basically as several expected was the case. Unfortunately it created a linkage where if anything were to cause the sear to drop, then it would also push up on the safety block arm. Also, a funny bit I noticed in that part of the video, the guy shows how you can easily move those parts on the pre-upgrade example, but in the upgraded one he just points to them, doesn't try moving them. Maybe he/they knew it would look kind of bad if he were to push down on the sear and show that it also raises up the striker safety arm as a result? Oof. So a direct connection from the sear to trigger bar, even in reverse, appears to be intentional. So they got rid of the drop-fire problem but allowed the sear alone to deactivate a safety, possibility creating more problems. The amount of bullshit in this gun is astounding. Even if we weren't dealing with ADs, I wouldn't touch this gun with my worst enemy's dick. Or maybe I would. 
|
|
Quoted: I think there is 2 "fixes" for this. One change the angle on the striker and sear so the striker spring is pushing on an angled surface that causes the sear to try to rise. The would make the sear get "cocked" a little more by the movement of the sear, kind of like a Glock trigger works. This would of course make the trigger on the 320 a lot heavier and do away with the good trigger they have. But this only gets us part way there. Another option would be some sort of latch that prevents the sear from being pushed down unless the trigger bar moved first. It would have to be a positive system that locks the sear. Or...three. Don't buy from a company who is clearly incompetent at engineering and also gaslights customers into thinking that the customer is the problem. |
|
Quoted: To those who say they'll stick to classic SIGs, the biggest problem here is not the 320 going off, it's SIG's response. Why would you give them money? Also, why do you think the QC problem is specific to 320s and not their entire product line? Buy an older one. In 2010 my department went from 2340/2022s to 229s. Out of the 20 people in my familiarization course 5-6 had broken recoil guide rods within the first 100 rounds. That was my first experience with SIG under Cohen. Well I guess ya gotta decide what makes a "Classic" line. There are those that will say a SIG with a stamped and folded slide is a Classic. There are those that will say P220s, P225s, P226s, P228s, P229s and the like with either stamped or mono slides, rails or no rails are Classics. Either way, buy used. Whatever your definition of a classic SIG, they are fairly user serviceable, no need to deal with the Exeter Klan. Keep in mind, the "Classic" line of guns werent without their problems. Those can go back to the late 80s and early 90s with frame cracking P226s, the P220 .45acp magazine debacle, and in the early to mid 00s when SIG first started using Indian MIM for parts like the takedown lever that snapped while shooting necessitating sending guns back to SIG. Cohen took over in 2004, so the SIG Pro was probably your first experience with SIG under Cohen. He brought them into the country. Its saying something when they were always considered an afterthought of SIG but overall have probably been the best pistol they've been a part of since they came out. |
|
Quoted: Cohen took over in 2004, so the SIG Pro was probably your first experience with SIG under Cohen. He brought them into the country. Its saying something when they were always considered an afterthought of SIG but overall have probably been the best pistol they've been a part of since they came out. I think the 2022 is a very underrated pistol. |
|
Quoted: No the slide has to be locked back to rotate the take down lever. I dont own a 320, but on a 365 the take down lever wont rotate unless the slide stop is holding the slide back ( up position ), I assume they did the same on the 320. @bigfatOTMs: Quoted: Quoted: 3. Not mentioned in suit man's video is that I consider the takedown lever dropping the sear a design flaw as well. Unless I'm missing something, this means the takedown lever literally releases the striker and is only depending on the striker safety to prevent an ND.  Granted, if someone follows safe gun handling practices, this shouldn't matter, but dear God, this has to be worse than requiring a purposeful trigger pull given that the dropped sear disables its own safeties.No the slide has to be locked back to rotate the take down lever. I dont own a 320, but on a 365 the take down lever wont rotate unless the slide stop is holding the slide back ( up position ), I assume they did the same on the 320. @bigfatOTMs: But, is the takedown lever connected to the takedown bar, or does it just push the bar? In other words, if the right conditions are met, can the takedown bar be made to release the sear without the takedown lever moving? |
|
Quoted: I'm wondering if chopping the leg increases the chances the pistol will fire when taken down. First off, you can't rotate the takedown lever to the full release position unless the slide release is pushed up, which would require the slide to be locked back. Then, there is a bar along the side of the FCU that pushes back when the takedown lever is rotated, and that bar pushes on the sear to lower it, so you can remove the slide without having to pull the trigger. Again to even get that to happen, the slide has to be locked back so the sear is being dropped here when the striker is way back with the slide and well off the sear. The area on the sear where this bar impinges is the step just above where the cut is made to remove that leg, so as long as you don't cut too high, it will still function normally. |
|
Quoted: But, is the takedown lever connected to the takedown bar, or does it just push the bar? In other words, if the right conditions are met, can the takedown bar be made to release the sear without the takedown lever moving? Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: 3. Not mentioned in suit man's video is that I consider the takedown lever dropping the sear a design flaw as well. Unless I'm missing something, this means the takedown lever literally releases the striker and is only depending on the striker safety to prevent an ND. Granted, if someone follows safe gun handling practices, this shouldn't matter, but dear God, this has to be worse than requiring a purposeful trigger pull given that the dropped sear disables its own safeties.No the slide has to be locked back to rotate the take down lever. I dont own a 320, but on a 365 the take down lever wont rotate unless the slide stop is holding the slide back ( up position ), I assume they did the same on the 320. @bigfatOTMs: But, is the takedown lever connected to the takedown bar, or does it just push the bar? In other words, if the right conditions are met, can the takedown bar be made to release the sear without the takedown lever moving? The takedown lever pushes the bar rearward and a spring returns it forwards. That said, the takedown bar can't move to the rear if a magazine is inserted. |
|
Quoted: The takedown lever pushes the bar rearward and a spring returns it forwards. That said, the takedown bar can't move to the rear if a magazine is inserted. |
|
Quoted: Oof. So a direct connection from the sear to trigger bar, even in reverse, appears to be intentional. So they got rid of the drop-fire problem but allowed the sear alone to deactivate a safety, possibility creating more problems. The amount of bullshit in this gun is astounding. Even if we weren't dealing with ADs, I wouldn't touch this gun with my worst enemy's dick. Or maybe I would. Quoted: Quoted: Here's an archive version of a now removed video on Sig's Youtube channel detailing the upgrade changes. https://web.archive.org/web/20190528161002/https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u9vIY2EoJwE Starting around 3 minutes, he explains that the leg was added to the sear to have the tension of the trigger bar help prevent the striker block safety arm from raising up and help prevent the sear from dropping down, basically as several expected was the case. Unfortunately it created a linkage where if anything were to cause the sear to drop, then it would also push up on the safety block arm. Also, a funny bit I noticed in that part of the video, the guy shows how you can easily move those parts on the pre-upgrade example, but in the upgraded one he just points to them, doesn't try moving them. Maybe he/they knew it would look kind of bad if he were to push down on the sear and show that it also raises up the striker safety arm as a result? Oof. So a direct connection from the sear to trigger bar, even in reverse, appears to be intentional. So they got rid of the drop-fire problem but allowed the sear alone to deactivate a safety, possibility creating more problems. The amount of bullshit in this gun is astounding. Even if we weren't dealing with ADs, I wouldn't touch this gun with my worst enemy's dick. Or maybe I would. They could have just added a tabbed trigger. |
|
Quoted: DoD has bottomed out and hit cervix Quoted: Quoted: so, how balls deep is the DOD in with these? How many units contracted and how many delivered? DoD has bottomed out and hit cervix Nonsense, they're past the second wall™. The interwebs says the military is close to half a million m17/m18s. Just a little oopsies. |
 Gun manufacturer Sig Sauer faces legal battles over alleged safety flaw |
|
Quoted: The takedown lever pushes the bar rearward and a spring returns it forwards. That said, the takedown bar can't move to the rear if a magazine is inserted. Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: 3. Not mentioned in suit man's video is that I consider the takedown lever dropping the sear a design flaw as well. Unless I'm missing something, this means the takedown lever literally releases the striker and is only depending on the striker safety to prevent an ND. Granted, if someone follows safe gun handling practices, this shouldn't matter, but dear God, this has to be worse than requiring a purposeful trigger pull given that the dropped sear disables its own safeties.No the slide has to be locked back to rotate the take down lever. I dont own a 320, but on a 365 the take down lever wont rotate unless the slide stop is holding the slide back ( up position ), I assume they did the same on the 320. @bigfatOTMs: But, is the takedown lever connected to the takedown bar, or does it just push the bar? In other words, if the right conditions are met, can the takedown bar be made to release the sear without the takedown lever moving? The takedown lever pushes the bar rearward and a spring returns it forwards. That said, the takedown bar can't move to the rear if a magazine is inserted. Okay, that's where I was going with this. If you have a .45 takedown bar in a 9mm gun (this was mentioned as a potential issue earlier) can the takedown bar move to the rear with a 9mm magazine inserted? Given that a .45 mag will be longer front to back, does this mean that when a .45 takedown bar is used with a 9mm gun, can it move back far enough to release the sear, even though a (shorter front to back) 9mm mag is inserted? |
|
Quoted: Here's an archive version of a now removed video on Sig's Youtube channel detailing the upgrade changes. https://web.archive.org/web/20190528161002/https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u9vIY2EoJwE Starting around 3 minutes, he explains that the leg was added to the sear to have the tension of the trigger bar help prevent the striker block safety arm from raising up and help prevent the sear from dropping down, basically as several expected was the case. Unfortunately it created a linkage where if anything were to cause the sear to drop, then it would also push up on the safety block arm. Also, a funny bit I noticed in that part of the video, the guy shows how you can easily move those parts on the pre-upgrade example, but in the upgraded one he just points to them, doesn't try moving them. Maybe he/they knew it would look kind of bad if he were to push down on the sear and show that it also raises up the striker safety arm as a result? Quoted: Quoted: Fantastic video, and great that he referenced the Sig Mechanic, who I'm hoping will follow up and pursue this further. This type of independent analysis is exactly what needs to be done, instead of continuing to treat this issue like fanboy defense vs. snarky Sig bashing. Sig must have a reason they added the leg, but it's easy to see how it's causing issues. They need to be forced to weigh in on this, and perhaps Edmund can help with that. No doubt, lawyers are paying attention. I wouldn't be surprised if we're looking at a second "upgrade" program. https://web.archive.org/web/20190528161002/https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u9vIY2EoJwE Starting around 3 minutes, he explains that the leg was added to the sear to have the tension of the trigger bar help prevent the striker block safety arm from raising up and help prevent the sear from dropping down, basically as several expected was the case. Unfortunately it created a linkage where if anything were to cause the sear to drop, then it would also push up on the safety block arm. Also, a funny bit I noticed in that part of the video, the guy shows how you can easily move those parts on the pre-upgrade example, but in the upgraded one he just points to them, doesn't try moving them. Maybe he/they knew it would look kind of bad if he were to push down on the sear and show that it also raises up the striker safety arm as a result? Great find, pretty noticeable he did not press the sear on the so called upgraded fcu like he did the original. |
|
Quoted: So has SIG even commented on the sear issue yet? If this can be proven, SIG is in a really bad place with these guns. The best they could hope for is a huge $ change order for the Mil guns and paying out the ass for every person who shot themself with one. ND or not. Worse case is eating all of those guns via contract terminations and driving a coffin nail into their reputation. Again, I say "if", and am curious how this plays out. |
|
I did the punch test on both my 320/M17's. They both pass the "disconnector tests" as shown in the video. Checked a coworkers pistol, it failed the test. Have no idea if it makes a difference. Both of mine are manual safety FCU's. His is not. We both watched the video again. He is going to get another trigger bar and see if it makes a difference. Will update with results of his trigger bar swap. |
|
Quoted: I did the punch test on both my 320/M17's. They both pass the "disconnector tests" as shown in the video. Checked a coworkers pistol, it failed the test. Have no idea if it makes a difference. Both of mine are manual safety FCU's. His is not. We both watched the video again. He is going to get another trigger bar and see if it makes a difference. Will update with results of his trigger bar swap. Quoted: [b]Quoted:[/b https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KuTxhHZ0uiAI did the punch test on both my 320/M17's. They both pass the "disconnector tests" as shown in the video. Checked a coworkers pistol, it failed the test. Have no idea if it makes a difference. Both of mine are manual safety FCU's. His is not. We both watched the video again. He is going to get another trigger bar and see if it makes a difference. Will update with results of his trigger bar swap. Thanks for testing. |
|
Quoted: Thanks for testing. Quoted: Quoted: [b]Quoted:[/b https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KuTxhHZ0uiAI did the punch test on both my 320/M17's. They both pass the "disconnector tests" as shown in the video. Checked a coworkers pistol, it failed the test. Have no idea if it makes a difference. Both of mine are manual safety FCU's. His is not. We both watched the video again. He is going to get another trigger bar and see if it makes a difference. Will update with results of his trigger bar swap. Thanks for testing. I did it on my civilian M18 when the test first came out. It passes with the factory trigger and the Apex one I installed, not that I expected it to change the outcome. |
|
I’m curious if anyone has changed their mind on the overall safety of the 320s as a result of performing one of the listed tests on their Sig? My Legion X-Five has passed but it has been relegated to not only a range gun, but a “once loaded and made ready, it’s not put down until slide lock,” gun. |
|
Quoted: I’m curious if anyone has changed their mind on the overall safety of the 320s as a result of performing one of the listed tests on their Sig? My Legion X-Five has passed but it has been relegated to not only a range gun, but a “once loaded and made ready, it’s not put down until slide lock,” gun. The firing pin safety test was the last straw for me. Once I could see the failures on some guns, that was it. To add insult to injury, Sig even found that under their own testing that the firing pin was contacting the primer hard enough to seriously dent it. This isn't a floating firing pin like the AR15 and there's no reason that should be happening. It's unacceptable that there's a chance, almost at random, that the firing pin safety could fail to stop it from hitting the primer. That's a hard "NO" for using the P320 for me, now. |
|
Quoted: The firing pin safety test was the last straw for me. Once I could see the failures on some guns, that was it. To add insult to injury, Sig even found that under their own testing that the firing pin was contacting the primer hard enough to seriously dent it. This isn't a floating firing pin like the AR15 and there's no reason that should be happening. It's unacceptable that there's a chance, almost at random, that the firing pin safety could fail to stop it from hitting the primer. That's a hard "NO" for using the P320 for me, now. Quoted: Quoted: I’m curious if anyone has changed their mind on the overall safety of the 320s as a result of performing one of the listed tests on their Sig? My Legion X-Five has passed but it has been relegated to not only a range gun, but a “once loaded and made ready, it’s not put down until slide lock,” gun. The firing pin safety test was the last straw for me. Once I could see the failures on some guns, that was it. To add insult to injury, Sig even found that under their own testing that the firing pin was contacting the primer hard enough to seriously dent it. This isn't a floating firing pin like the AR15 and there's no reason that should be happening. It's unacceptable that there's a chance, almost at random, that the firing pin safety could fail to stop it from hitting the primer. That's a hard "NO" for using the P320 for me, now. Which brings up a sincere ethical dilemma. Do you sell a gun to someone that you believe in your heart is unsafe even if the manufacturer denies it? I know buyer beware, but I don’t think I would be able to sleep with myself, knowing that I sold an unsafe gun to a random person, regardless of what the manufacturer claims. |
|
Quoted: Which brings up a sincere ethical dilemma. Do you sell a gun to someone that you believe in your heart is unsafe even if the manufacturer denies it? I know buyer beware, but I don’t think I would be able to sleep with myself, knowing that I sold an unsafe gun to a random person, regardless of what the manufacturer claims. I think it's ethically OK as long as you give full disclosure of the problems and why you're selling it. Of course, that also means selling it at a likely significant loss, but no ethical issue if the above criteria are met, imo. Legally, though? I wouldn't sell one of these to anyone and would consider it a dead gun, even for range use. Even if you give full disclosure, if someone shoots themselves with the gun after you sell it, there is a non-zero chance they will sue you for selling them a known shit gun. Not worth that exposure, imo. If I owned any variant of P320 at this point, I'd park it in the back of the safe and wait for the second recall-not-recall from Sig. Even then, I think Sig is enough of a shit company that I probably wouldn't trust the gun after that. I'd probably just keep it as a collector's item at that point, never to be used again. |
|
Quoted: Which brings up a sincere ethical dilemma. Do you sell a gun to someone that you believe in your heart is unsafe even if the manufacturer denies it? I know buyer beware, but I don't think I would be able to sleep with myself, knowing that I sold an unsafe gun to a random person, regardless of what the manufacturer claims. Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I'm curious if anyone has changed their mind on the overall safety of the 320s as a result of performing one of the listed tests on their Sig? My Legion X-Five has passed but it has been relegated to not only a range gun, but a "once loaded and made ready, it's not put down until slide lock," gun. The firing pin safety test was the last straw for me. Once I could see the failures on some guns, that was it. To add insult to injury, Sig even found that under their own testing that the firing pin was contacting the primer hard enough to seriously dent it. This isn't a floating firing pin like the AR15 and there's no reason that should be happening. It's unacceptable that there's a chance, almost at random, that the firing pin safety could fail to stop it from hitting the primer. That's a hard "NO" for using the P320 for me, now. Which brings up a sincere ethical dilemma. Do you sell a gun to someone that you believe in your heart is unsafe even if the manufacturer denies it? I know buyer beware, but I don't think I would be able to sleep with myself, knowing that I sold an unsafe gun to a random person, regardless of what the manufacturer claims. I couldn't. It'd go in the safe and either get used as a range gun occasionally or it would sit there until there was a fix I trusted. |
|
Quoted: I’m curious if anyone has changed their mind on the overall safety of the 320s as a result of performing one of the listed tests on their Sig? My Legion X-Five has passed but it has been relegated to not only a range gun, but a “once loaded and made ready, it’s not put down until slide lock,” gun. Quoted: I’m curious if anyone has changed their mind on the overall safety of the 320s as a result of performing one of the listed tests on their Sig? My Legion X-Five has passed but it has been relegated to not only a range gun, but a “once loaded and made ready, it’s not put down until slide lock,” gun. Quoted: Which brings up a sincere ethical dilemma. Do you sell a gun to someone that you believe in your heart is unsafe even if the manufacturer denies it? #1) youre on a limited budget and need to recoup your $$ #2) you're willing to be upfront an honest as to why youre selling it, and willing to take a loss if need be. Im not selling mine. This will eventually get resolved one way or another. I have other handguns to shoot, so for me its no big deal to sit on them and wait. I understand some people dont have that luxury, but if I didnt, I'd adhere to #2 above. |
More gaslighting: Sig Breaks Silence - The P320 Interview |
|
Breaks silence? All they've done is deny, deny, deny. Attached File |
|
It's getting bad if they have to pay MAC for an hour long promo piece. We're not seeing 320s @ CDNN yet, are we? |
|
Why does anyone still listen to that shill? |
|
Quoted: Why does anyone still listen to that shill? Quoted: Why does anyone still listen to that shill? I just unsubbed from MAC for this video |
|
They couldn't have picked a better guy to do that with, it's like poetry. |
|
Ah yes, an entity who has proven over the years to have little ethical reliability, loves pushing products of inferior quality while representing them as elite goods, and relies on marketing and legal dollars for monetary growth rather than producing things users can trust... ...and then there's Sig. Mac being part of this does not help their case like they think. He's as big of, or even more of, a garbage-tier lying twat as Sig. |
|
32:05 They talk about vibration testing and say that none of the pistols fired. And yet... Attached File |
|
Quoted: 32:05 They talk about vibration testing and say that none of the pistols fired. And yet... https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/520283/1000012161_jpg-3539120.JPG Them ignoring the fact that there are indentions on a gun with a firing pin block and yelling "well it didn't go off" tells you everything you need to know. |
|
Quoted: I just unsubbed from MAC for this video Quoted: Quoted: Why does anyone still listen to that shill? I just unsubbed from MAC for this video I stopped watching MAC after he fucked over an arfcommer on importing Russian SVDs then price gouged the fuck out is them. Now he’s doing a puff piece for sig. what a money hungry piece of shit. |
| I don’t know shit about MAC, but if his channel is popular, that means most of his viewers don’t think he’s a shill. Doesn’t matter what a few of us in this thread think. SIG is good at marketing, most of the time. Choosing MAC was likely calculated, and might even be effective. |
|
Quoted: I don’t know shit about MAC, but if his channel is popular, that means most of his viewers don’t think he’s a shill. Doesn’t matter what a few of us in this thread think. SIG is good at marketing, most of the time. Choosing MAC was likely calculated, and might even be effective. No, it's completely tone-deaf |
|
Quoted: I don’t know shit about MAC, but if his channel is popular, that means most of his viewers don’t think he’s a shill. Doesn’t matter what a few of us in this thread think. SIG is good at marketing, most of the time. Choosing MAC was likely calculated, and might even be effective. Oh, you're 100% right that this was calculated. However, Sig's marketing team, like their engineers, miscalculated in their efforts. His subscriber count vs. the number of people that think he's a piece of shit is orders of magnitude higher for "piece of shit". You can see this in the fact that the video/MAC/Sig getting dragged in all the top comments already. At least Sig is consistently making bad calls across departments.
|
|
Quoted: 32:05 They talk about vibration testing and say that none of the pistols fired. And yet... https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/520283/1000012161_jpg-3539120.JPG This is awful. What is the source for the picture? |
|
Quoted: This is awful. What is the source for the picture? Quoted: Quoted: 32:05 They talk about vibration testing and say that none of the pistols fired. And yet... https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/520283/1000012161_jpg-3539120.JPG This is awful. What is the source for the picture? Ditto... |