[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Is the p320 safe now? (Page 1 of 2)
Posted: 1/11/2026 4:05:01 PM EDT
| I want to ccw one. I like the grip angle. But hear some nasty stuff about these things. |
|
News cycles have largely moved on. What came of the Airforce thing seems to just strengthen which ever predisposition everybody had. Either it proves that the pistol itself wasn't the issue, or it just shows you that there is a conspiracy afoot and the government is in on it. It seems nobody can recreate the uncommanded discharges, or come up with much of a hypothesis at to what (if anything) is really wrong. Nothing satisfactory has come along to clear up the videos that seem to show uncommanded discharges. A lot of people were offended by the statements Sig made, and those hurt feelings will persist. As far as my take, the P320 is a great range toy and night stand gun. There are better carry guns on the market, so why would you go for something as chunky as a P320 in the first place? |
|
I am not an expert or an amateur. This is just my 2c. Quoted: No repeatable UDs has EVER been produced, ever….. It’s not a pistol for the careless and make sure you have the correct holster for it. Now come to a conclusion yourself about if it’s a safe or not.  Failed To Load Title  SIG 320 discharge to groin This is repetition. You're being told "no repeatable ud" because people haven't been able to recreate the failure mode from these again, after these events. Always beware of suspiciously specific language. Also, note and judge for yourself about the internal documents and testing that have come out.  Two documents prove P320 is unsafe Here's a calm rundown of the situation:  All of the Sig P320 problems, collected Useful picture:  That V-trap you see is open at the back. You will absolutely have to make sure nothing gets in there. If you're going to be serious about the 320, and you don't want to wade into the flamewars: https://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=5&f=14&t=216492&tl=Master-P320-index-thread-NO-opinions-allowed-post-links-and-data-only I think it would be negligent to own this weapon without knowing the function checks for it and doing them on the regular. If you're serious about this you should turn your brains on, sqash your biases as hard as you can, and dig in on the info. |
|
Quoted: Again no one has been able to recreate a UD once...not once. Go figure.... If people won't read that and accept it and then stop digging, you're borked. Regardless, OP now has the information sorces, and he can make his own mind up. |
|
Quoted: And that's all you've really got. If people won't read that and accept it and then stop digging, you're borked. Regardless, OP now has the information sorces, and he can make his own mind up. That's all that's needed if you're saying it's capable of UDs. If you're saying it's something else then I'm all ears but whatever you're saying the problem is I'm sure it can be demonstrated once, just once..... |
|
Quoted: I am not an expert or an amateur. This is just my 2c. OP understand what you're being told here.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z789IuTQLs8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l58e2XvU6BQThis is repetition. You're being told "no repeatable ud" because people haven't been able to recreate the failure mode from these again, after these events. Always beware of suspiciously specific language. Also, note and judge for yourself about the internal documents and testing that have come out. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yY4SicvhEpYHere's a calm rundown of the situation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iuuvu4it1MwUseful picture: https://blog.gritrsports.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/sig-sauer-p320-safety-1.jpg That V-trap you see is open at the back. You will absolutely have to make sure nothing gets in there. If you're going to be serious about the 320, and you don't want to wade into the flamewars: https://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=5&f=14&t=216492&tl=Master-P320-index-thread-NO-opinions-allowed-post-links-and-data-only I think it would be negligent to own this weapon without knowing the function checks for it and doing them on the regular. If you're serious about this you should turn your brains on, sqash your biases as hard as you can, and dig in on the info. informative post, thanks. |
|
Quoted: I own a P320. I warned my son about them before he inherits mine.  lol. I imagine that's what SIG would say about the gun your son inherits. I owned the M17 back in 2018 timeframe and sold it. But I re-bought the M17 again over Christmas again after getting the XM7. My overall opinion is neutral. I never had issues but I will say that unlike the LE or MIL you're not afforded any sort of protection if one goes off. At the very least, any LE or MIL are protected under orders since they are required to use the department/government issues equipment and are free from any malfunction that resulted from it that hurt or killed someone. If someone told you that if you drove a car a small percentage of people driving on the freeway experience all four tires separating from the vehicle and causing a major accident, would you drive the car even though the accident happened 1 out of millions of them out there? One thing I find funny/odd is that when an airplane crashes, they tend to pull every single unit until someone figures out the cause and in most cases they find a major design problem. Like the recent UPS airplane, that aircraft type is pulled even though they had decades of solid performance and one crash where the engine flies off the hook and they ground all of them until they figure it out. Yet a gun goes off they SIG is saying it is all safe and made up but yet have no logical explanation explaining it even with video evidence of it seemingly going off on its own. So I guess with that said, by all said it is probably safe to carry and that there is no problem but until they can conclusively explain why it is going off in a holster with what appears to be nothing happening prior to it then really you can't trust that there isn't a design problem. For me, I would have no problem with carrying one though if I had to. I trust it and do not think there is a problem but I have no background or reason to explain why it should be. |
|
OP in the beginning SIG said the 320 was drop safe. Turns out it was not. SIG back pedaled and blamed everyone and everything but it's self. That was just the beginning of the 320. That tells you from the start what SIG thinks of you. If I'm not mistaken they have currently over 100 lawsuits pending. It's best if you go with anything else. |
|
Quoted: That's all that's needed if you're saying it's capable of UDs. If you're saying it's something else then I'm all ears but whatever you're saying the problem is I'm sure it can be demonstrated once, just once..... Quoted: Quoted: And that's all you've really got. If people won't read that and accept it and then stop digging, you're borked. Regardless, OP now has the information sorces, and he can make his own mind up. We just know it's happening. That's a worse situation to be in than "it uds and we know why but we cant' fix it." So in reality, repeating that "well nobody can figure out how to make the weapons that have had ud's do it again" is a pretty damning situation to be in. I'm kinda surprised anyone who liked the platform would do that. eta: plus it appears we aren't sure how many, when, and exactly what minor revisions have been made to the guns at the maker. That monkeywrenches the heck out of things. |
|
Quoted: So... why is it we have not heard of anymore UD? The news line stopped and the incidents of UD has stopped.. It's a miracle!!!!!! Problem stopped by divine intervention!! Exactly like Glock Leg!!!! They have slowed down since people started droppint the 320 and banning it at ranges and training sites. Which is exactly what you'd expect when there's less of them being used. In order to reasonably say it's stopped, you have to be able to know what was causing it, and show that it was fixed, and that we haven't had any known incidents since. When you make a statement you need to know the things required in order for you to have said that. |
|
Quoted: The situation it and sig are in is that it's continuing to have uds, and because we haven't fully pinned down the full set of failure modes, *we don't know what's causing it.* We just know it's happening. That's a worse situation to be in than "it uds and we know why but we cant' fix it." So in reality, repeating that "well nobody can figure out how to make the weapons that have had ud's do it again" is a pretty damning situation to be in. I'm kinda surprised anyone who liked the platform would do that. eta: plus it appears we aren't sure how many, when, and exactly what minor revisions have been made to the guns at the maker. That monkeywrenches the heck out of things. We have a problem, it's a UD but we can only see this UD once. None of the pistols that are on video that had the UD has been able to have another UD. In fact many random pistols out in the wild have never been able to produce a UD by Sig employees, fan bois and haters but we have a problem. We don't know how the problem haapens but we know the problem is UDs. We can't explain why the UDs only happen once and we can't recreate a UD but trust me, we have a problem with UDs. The definition of a problem is a continuing issue of negative consequences but the negative issue has never been able to be recreated but trust me, we have a problem.... Attached File |
| Why do I get the feeling that this 'answer' is the same level of helpfulness as 'flush your engine with water and Dawn between oil changes'. My only real question is if this will cause a runaway or if it will disable the FCU. |
|
Quoted: Why do I get the feeling that this 'answer' is the same level of helpfulness as 'flush your engine with water and Dawn between oil changes'. My only real question is if this will cause a runaway or if it will disable the FCU. Watch the videos of the mod. Makes the gun vastly safer and runs flawlessly after mod.  Understanding your p320 and lowering potential uncommanded discharges. |
|
Plenty of other options out there in the same category (polymer frame, striker fired, optics ready) without Schroedinger's Discharge and shady corporate practices... M&P VP9 P10C/F PDP Glock Gen 5/6 RXM If you are absolutely dead-set on SIG...then the P365 would be a safer bet, Indian MIM parts notwithstanding. |
|
Quoted: I am not an expert or an amateur. This is just my 2c. OP understand what you're being told here. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z789IuTQLs8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l58e2XvU6BQThis is repetition. You're being told "no repeatable ud" because people haven't been able to recreate the failure mode from these again, after these events. Always beware of suspiciously specific language. Also, note and judge for yourself about the internal documents and testing that have come out. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yY4SicvhEpYHere's a calm rundown of the situation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iuuvu4it1MwUseful picture: https://blog.gritrsports.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/sig-sauer-p320-safety-1.jpg That V-trap you see is open at the back. You will absolutely have to make sure nothing gets in there. If you're going to be serious about the 320, and you don't want to wade into the flamewars: https://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=5&f=14&t=216492&tl=Master-P320-index-thread-NO-opinions-allowed-post-links-and-data-only I think it would be negligent to own this weapon without knowing the function checks for it and doing them on the regular. If you're serious about this you should turn your brains on, sqash your biases as hard as you can, and dig in on the info. What’s the “V-trap” you’re talking about? I googled it and nothing came up. |
|
I heard an unsettling story from an acquaintance over the holidays. They were shooting several guns and were ejecting a loaded round from an AR. The round landed on the slide of a loaded P320 which discharged and put a round into someone’s leg. The bullet was deep enough in the buttock the doctor decided to leave it there. Whether we believe all particulars of this story, it serves as a reminder that SIG either doesn’t know or can’t afford to fix the problems. I consider every P320 potentially unsafe until a definite root cause comes to light. |
|
Some folks simply believe there is a problem without being able to duplicate it. The initial drop issue was able to be replicated/proven. This one, not yet, with years and lots of folks trying. Safety is important to focus on, and use your own judgement. The 320 has a narrow trigger guard, has a very easy to pull trigger, and has the striker fired flaw of being able to discharge if the trigger is pulled far enough to not fire and then be jostled in a way that alters the slide to frame slop inherent in ALL striker fired handguns. That is what we know with 100 percent repeatable, verifiable proof. UD is still just a mystery/conjecture, unless we can classify nd/ad as ud without verifiable/repeatable proof. And no, I do not carry a 320 regularly. I also do not leave any striker fired handguns, in general, laying around loaded in my house. I use da/sa hammer fired for that. And I started doing that years before the 320… |
|
Quoted: What’s the “V-trap” you’re talking about? I googled it and nothing came up. Quoted: Quoted: I am not an expert or an amateur. This is just my 2c. OP understand what you're being told here. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z789IuTQLs8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l58e2XvU6BQThis is repetition. You're being told "no repeatable ud" because people haven't been able to recreate the failure mode from these again, after these events. Always beware of suspiciously specific language. Also, note and judge for yourself about the internal documents and testing that have come out. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yY4SicvhEpYHere's a calm rundown of the situation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iuuvu4it1MwUseful picture: https://blog.gritrsports.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/sig-sauer-p320-safety-1.jpg That V-trap you see is open at the back. You will absolutely have to make sure nothing gets in there. If you're going to be serious about the 320, and you don't want to wade into the flamewars: https://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=5&f=14&t=216492&tl=Master-P320-index-thread-NO-opinions-allowed-post-links-and-data-only I think it would be negligent to own this weapon without knowing the function checks for it and doing them on the regular. If you're serious about this you should turn your brains on, sqash your biases as hard as you can, and dig in on the info. What’s the “V-trap” you’re talking about? I googled it and nothing came up. Don't use google, use your eyes and look at the picture I posted of the internals. See the green bit? where it mates with the striker that rides in the slide? See the V that's laying on it's side there? like so: < Bottom leg of the v is the top of the green piece, top leg of the v is the striker part above it. When the gun is down in the holster that "v" is wide open end up, and it's not covered and stuff can get in there, in addition to the usual fouling that happens in a gun. |
|
Quoted: Some folks simply believe there is a problem without being able to duplicate it. Quoted: Some folks simply believe there is a problem without being able to duplicate it. Pound that into your skull like a nail until you can't avoid it anymore. Getting those guns that have had this happen with them to do it *again* is what you are talking about. We should be honest, open, and clear about it. Quoted: The initial drop issue was able to be replicated/proven. This one, not yet, with years and lots of folks trying. Safety is important to focus on, and use your own judgement. The 320 has a narrow trigger guard, has a very easy to pull trigger, and has the striker fired flaw of being able to discharge if the trigger is pulled far enough to not fire and then be jostled in a way that alters the slide to frame slop inherent in ALL striker fired handguns. That is what we know with 100 percent repeatable, verifiable proof. UD is still just a mystery/conjecture, unless we can classify nd/ad as ud without verifiable/repeatable proof. And no, I do not carry a 320 regularly. I also do not leave any striker fired handguns, in general, laying around loaded in my house. I use da/sa hammer fired for that. And I started doing that years before the 320… They are real events that actually happen. Conflating the uds with the inability to figure out why they happen in the language of posts is wrong and nobody should do that. What nobody knows is *exactly why* these UDs are happening. We have partial reconstruction of some truly repeatable failure modes that are part of the chain of events that must happen for these UDs to occur - for instance we know some guns striker safeties don't work or don't work reliably. I'm pretty sure something is causing the green sear and the striker leg it connects to to move apart from each other, to the point that normal gun handling with nobody's finger or anything else on the trigger and *no trigger action* disconnects the sear from the striker leg allowing the striker to fall. What we don't know is what's causing the sear and sear leg to work themselves away from each other. Those retrofit higher power springs to shove the sear upwards to engage the striker leg with more force may help. A manual safety that shoved the sear upwards and locked it in connection with the striker leg would be another layer of assurance. I don't think sig will do that because that would cause a great many people to look at it as an admission of guitly knowledge on their part. If a UD happened with that style of safety turned off, but not with the safety on, that would also implicate people's design or manufacturing of the 320 in a bad way. |
|
This is a tech thread, not gd. We have confirmed many things with the attempts to explain the occurrence for the discharges. One is that, yes, even a glock could go off if the trigger is pulled far enough to not fire and then be jostled to adjust the slide/frame slop. So, could some of the glock leg incidents have occurred without a finger on the trigger - yes, no doubt whatsoever. But in time glock was accepted to be safe enough to not automatically say all discharges were ud vs ad/nd. Even if it was a holster pop, it was generally accepted that the trigger had to be pulled somehow. We still do not have an explanation for non trigger pull discharges for a 320, yet. But there is a very devout following that simply believe it does without complete verification. |
|
Quoted: This is a tech thread, not gd. We have confirmed many things with the attempts to explain the occurrence for the discharges. One is that, yes, even a glock could go off if the trigger is pulled far enough to not fire and then be jostled to adjust the slide/frame slop. So, could some of the glock leg incidents have occurred without a finger on the trigger - yes, no doubt whatsoever. But in time glock was accepted to be safe enough to not automatically say all discharges were ud vs ad/nd. Even if it was a holster pop, it was generally accepted that the trigger had to be pulled somehow. We still do not have an explanation for non trigger pull discharges for a 320, yet. But there is a very devout following that simply believe it does without complete verification. If the test involves pulling the trigger to deactivate all the safeties and get minimal sear engagement and then trying to force the striker over the edge of the sear, it's not exactly a groundbreaking discovery when the gun in fact fires. I'm not defending Sig, but some of these "tests" that internet "sleuths" started doing were... well...  and 
|
|
Quoted: This is a tech thread, not gd. We have confirmed many things with the attempts to explain the occurrence for the discharges. One is that, yes, even a glock could go off if the trigger is pulled far enough to not fire and then be jostled to adjust the slide/frame slop. So, could some of the glock leg incidents have occurred without a finger on the trigger - yes, no doubt whatsoever. But in time glock was accepted to be safe enough to not automatically say all discharges were ud vs ad/nd. Even if it was a holster pop, it was generally accepted that the trigger had to be pulled somehow. We still do not have an explanation for non trigger pull discharges for a 320, yet. But there is a very devout following that simply believe it does without complete verification. The question was are the guns safe now and the answer is no. |
| My operating theory currently is that I’m not convinced there is a definitive/verified mechanical defect in the design, but the design operates closer to the margins of safety than many competitors. Which makes it more prone to circumstances or operator errors. I won’t use one myself. |
|
Quoted: The fact is that the guns are going off with no handling. That can't be disputed. It's also not happening to other guns. Glock leg is an apples to oranges comparison. The question was are the guns safe now and the answer is no. Jostling, bumping, etc. is handling…. Handling firearms safely is something everyone should focus on, or all guns could be said to be unsafe. That is all we know for certain, at this point. |
|
Quoted: The question was are the guns safe now and the answer is no. Then prove it. 100 percent repeatable and verifiable. Not partially and not conjecture. Otherwise it is just an opinion… Are there still folks with questions and concerns, yes. Has anyone provided definitive, repeatable, and verified proof, no. In fact, some of the -tests- proved sig correct, in that the trigger had to be pulled. Am I 100 percent certain there is no issue? Not entirely, at least not yet, but I am definitely not in the 100 percent 320 is bad crowd, just like I was never in the 100 percent glock is bad crowd during glock leg initially. |
|
Quoted: Then prove it. 100 percent repeatable and verifiable. Not partially and not conjecture. Otherwise it is just an opinion Are there still folks with questions and concerns, yes. Has anyone provided definitive, repeatable, and verified proof, no. In fact, some of the -tests- proved sig correct, in that the trigger had to be pulled. Am I 100 percent certain there is no issue? Not entirely, at least not yet, but I am definitely not in the 100 percent 320 is bad crowd, just like I was never in the 100 percent glock is bad crowd during glock leg initially. |
|
Quoted: Jostling, bumping, etc. is handling…. Handling firearms safely is something everyone should focus on, or all guns could be said to be unsafe. That is all we know for certain, at this point. Quoted: Quoted: The fact is that the guns are going off with no handling. That can't be disputed. It's also not happening to other guns. Glock leg is an apples to oranges comparison. The question was are the guns safe now and the answer is no. Jostling, bumping, etc. is handling…. Handling firearms safely is something everyone should focus on, or all guns could be said to be unsafe. That is all we know for certain, at this point. If the gun will go off b/c you bump the butt w/ your backpack and it shoots you in your bounteous ass, it's unsafe. There are plenty of videos showing it going off while not being handled. If you don't want to believe your own eyes, that's your prerogative. |
|
Quoted: If the gun will go off b/c you bump the butt w/ your backpack and it shoots you in your bounteous ass, it's unsafe. There are plenty of videos showing it going off while not being handled. If you don't want to believe your own eyes, that's your prerogative. The real safety question is what caused it to go off. Was it poor choice of holster/gear/initial handling prior to the bump,etc that partially pulled the trigger, or is it a technical gun issue that can be 100 percent replicated/verified/proven. The only thing we have 100 percent proven/verified/repeatability for is the former. The other is still just opinion/conjecture, at this point. With as many 320s out there, and as many people working to be the first to prove a theory, surely someone would be able to duplicate the issue with 100 percent verified/repeatability. Not partially, but fully. Safe gun handling is important. Otherwise we would have waaayyy more -ud- across all platforms. |