Posted: 7/8/2025 3:17:18 PM EDT
|
I had a student in the range yesterday who had the aforementioned pistol with her. It ran fine with no issues. As noted, it was marked with BOTH the M18 designation and the P320 on the slide. This is the first time I've seen a slide with both of them on it. My question is, is this an actually different pistol model than the "civilian " P320 that is the topic of all the pistols that are having problems? She's an Air Force veteran who knows her way around small arms. She came in for some refresher range work. I wanted to let her know if there's a chance of having problems with it. Not trying to rehash all the other Sig threads, just curious about the dual markings. |
|
Thanks for the info. I've not had an occasion to study the Sig FCU to see if there's any interaction between the trigger linkage and the striker block which seems to be one of the issues from what I have learned from the various threads on the topic. As I understand it, the striker block lever is not spring powered and relies on gravity for its function. I could be wrong about that. I'm sure someone more familiar with the FCU will chime in and let me know about that. As a comparison, the newer 1911 Colts have a trigger actuated lever that clears the firing pin block when shooting the pistol. Again, not trying to stir the pot here, just concerned about my customers safety. |
|
Quoted: I have not followed the P320 saga much but this raises a question. Does the manual safety on the M18 resolve the issues with the P320 and the allegations (or maybe fact) of unexpected discharges? No. One of the more documented cases was a military gun that went off at a base in Japan. Multiple witnesses said the gun went off in the holster with the safety on. |