Sig-sauer p320

[eruannu]

What are y'all feeling about the p320? Has anyone been issued one? Bought one out of curiosity? Bought one intentionally? How does the sub compact version handle? How does trigger feel compare with the Glock 19? (Or any other Glock for that matter)

Sent from my E6810 using Tapatalk

 

[mdwest]

too much controversy over whether the p320 is safe for me to be willing to play guinea pig.. Ill let them sort out their issues before I consider buying and stick with my old school G19...

I've owned several sigs in the past to include a 220, 226, 228, and a 230... as a general rule I am a sig fan..

but not so much in this case...


https://www.thetrace.org/2017/08/sig-sauer-p320-drop-fire-safety-defect-handgun/

 

[Prine]

I'm with mdwest, I would have considered buying one before the drop test controversy, but now I wouldn't look at buying one until Sig actually acknowledges the issue and comes up with a fix. The last I saw there was a voluntary recall for them to look at the issue and that was it.

 

[eruannu]

too much controversy over whether the p320 is safe for me to be willing to play guinea pig.. Ill let them sort out their issues before I consider buying and stick with my old school G19...

I've owned several sigs in the past to include a 220, 226, 228, and a 230... as a general rule I am a sig fan..

but not so much in this case...


https://www.thetrace.org/2017/08/sig-sauer-p320-drop-fire-safety-defect-handgun/

That was what I saw. I was a bit confused that the Army adopted it earlier. Perhaps the models they tested were built to a different standard than those in the case at BPS. There seems to be much to like about this pistol and some pretty sobering videos

Sent from my E6810 using Tapatalk

 

[Prine]

The XM17 which was the design the Army selected has a frame mounted safety, so theoretically if the safety is engaged it would not be susceptible to the same drop issue as the p320, but that is only with the safety engaged.

 

[eruannu]

So essentially they are saying the trigger was too heavy and had too much inertia when the total mass of the weapon was accelerated and suddenly decelerated? And the fix is an offer to put the mhs version of the trigger in the commercial weapon? Why is the military trigger so much lighter? Did they know that this was a problem? Did the Pentagon specifically request a different alloy (more expensive)? Was it just part of an effort to minimize the total weapon weight one component at a time?

Sent from my E6810 using Tapatalk

 

[WatchmanUSA]

I worked in a gun shop for many years. I've never been a fan of the convertible handgun. People buy the gun but rarely buy the conversion kits. It's a gun designed around an armorer configuring a handgun to the job but I'm not convinced it is practical. It looks like they sold the concept to some DPs and military based on the concept of repairing guns with universal interchangeable parts. Isn't part of the fun of gun ownership to buy more than one gun? A 1911, small carry pistol, revolver, competition guns, all types of rifles, shotguns of all sizes, metal guns, plastic guns and different calibers....

BTW - a 6.5 pound trigger isn't really that light. However, the real thing that makes a trigger good is a consistent, crisp break with little to no over-travel and a quick reset.

Sorry, but I always saw the convertible gun as a solution trying to find a problem that most civilian gun owners don't have. Sorry, Sig. I like your metal guns (especially the single action X-5s) but there are better plastic ones out there today.

 

[Jmphotog]

I thought Sig stopped production, and a lot of shops I go to won't sell it until they come out with a solution. I've always wanted one, I'll still buy one.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk