testtest

SIG responds to MONTVILLE CT video

Ok, I would have to believe that there are more p320s in use by civilians than police and military put together, probably a lot more, but that's just a guess and opinion. It seems logical that there would be proportionately more civilian "unintentional discharges" using typical civilian holsters if it were a mechanical failure wouldn't it?

Why does it seem as if it is so heavily weighted towards law enforcement/service personnel in duty type holsters?

There has got to be some disconnect in the training/holster/pistol dynamic which is far more important to solve than simply blaming the handgun. If the complete issue is not resolved, eventually it is going to crop up again. It occurred with other popular pistols and they worked around it but did they ever solve the root cause.

Instead it seems the police community want to blame the pistol and holsters, the holster companies want to blame the pistol and officer training, the gun company blames officer training and holsters. Who is looking at all three plus whatever else may be part of it.
 
Last edited:
2 things come to mind. 1 guess no LEOs with Glocks or M&Ps have ever struggled with a suspect with a hood open on their holsters
And 2 if the Sig 320 was a Boeing product it would have been grounded a long time ago!

Ok now in a serious I have followed the Sig AD clams like most for a while and what I saw a lot of times seems like user error. Especially when we have seen purse carry improper holster etc.

But what I haven’t seen is out of the larger agencies like Texas, Ohio and Virginia Troopers for a combined 5-6000 troopers and haven’t heard of any issues with their 320’s but all the 30-300 agency departments do?!?!?

However with this latest one I’m not so sure. There is also speculation that Safariland 7xxx series holsters are a common denominator (not sure what this department uses) that holster is reported to put pressure on the 320 frame and that pressure allegedly can cause a Sig to release the striker. Not so sure that’s a holster issue IF air pans out.
 
Sld1959 said:
Ok, I would have to believe that there are more p320s in use by civilians than police and military put together, probably a lot more, but that's just a guess and opinion. It seems logical that there would be proportionately more civilian "unintentional discharges" using typical civilian holsters if it were a mechanical failure wouldn't it?

Why does it seem as if it is so heavily weighted towards law enforcement/service personnel in duty type holsters?

There has got to be some disconnect in the training/holster/pistol dynamic which is far more important to solve than simply blaming the handgun. If the complete issue is not resolved, eventually it is going to crop up again. It occurred with other popular pistols and they worked around it but did they ever solve the root cause.

Instead it seems the police community want to blame the pistol and holsters, the holster companies want to blame the pistol and officer training, the gun company blames officer training and holsters. Who is looking at all three plus whatever else may be part of it.
Click to expand...
The P320 is a big and bulky brick. I says while more civilians "may" have them, the overwhelming number of them aren't carrying IWB and are certainly not open carrying them. I'd assume L.E. would by far actually log more hours actually carrying these weapons.

The military have a different version than civilians as theirs have a thumb safety, and there have been several cases of civilians claiming their example fired in the holster too.

I can't say I've see videos of Glocks or other popular pistols going off in the holster. It also should be pointed out that the P320's striker is fully cocked whereas most other strikers are half cocked and have a trigger safety. It's also a possibility that it could be a QC aka execution issue on Sig's part and not a design issue. That could be an explanation as to why it's not readily repeatable with all P320s. Then it could be that the P320's design is just more prone to these type of issues simular to how a 1911 without a grip and thumb safety would be more prone to ND thus why no one would carry that way.
 
Last edited:
Mr.W. said:
I wouldn't think this response will surprise anyone. I respect the company by and large, but I still wouldn't own that model if one were given to me.
Click to expand...
Sig to this day are sticking with the story that the P320s without their "Voluntary Upgrade" are perfectly fine for carry, and nothing is really wrong with them. I doubt Springfield, Glock, S&W, HK, and other reputable manufacturers would have came to that conclusion or handle things that way. Sig knew well ahead of time about the issue, but kept quiet, and continued to sell their P320 grenades to unsuspecting civilians. I lost all trust and respect for them, and I take anything they say with a grain of salt.
 
All I can say is, of the unintentional discharges I investigated, invariably the first thing out of the involved person's mouth was, "it just went off". And invariably, investigation revealed something pulled the trigger. With one exception, involving a Taurus 24/7.

When Colt's first semi auto pistols were released in the early 1900's, unintentional discharges were an issue. It was enough of a concern that Browning designed the grip safety. Many LE and military leaders preferred the revolver over safety concerns with semi-autos.

When Glock was first introduced during the massive migration to semi-autos by LE, there were unintentional discharges all over, so many that many departments at first wanted nothing to do with Glock. S&W and Sig benefitted with their DA/SA platforms. "Glock leg" entered the lexicon. It came down to the light trigger, sometimes poorly designed holsters, coupled with faulty training of officers who had become accustomed to a 10-12 pound trigger pull on their revolvers. Something had to pull the trigger.

So along comes the P320, which captured a HUGE market share with LE, the military, and civilian markets. They have hurt Glock in a profound way. They built a gun to meet user demands for ergonomics and shootability while Glock slept. I think their mistake was not putting a manual safety on the gun, but they were after the Glock market.

Glock, and Glock aficionados were spring loaded to find something to detract from the P320 platform. The truth is, just like Colts in 1900 and Glocks in 1980, something is pulling the trigger.

All firearms are unsafe if handled unsafely. Proper training and handling, and proper equipment minimize the risk.
 
Belt Fed said:
Mine are paper punchers, nothing more. i have no clue if all the guns going off on their own is true but i ain't takin no chances. Mine are too big to conceal carry anyway.
Click to expand...
I had a Sig P320 Compact. It was not hard for me to conceal it but after I started hearing about the issues(mine had been upgraded) I decided to part with it.

I like Sig Sauers a lot. I don't have one currently but I've owned P220, P229's, P239's, Sig Pro's, etc. I plan to get a P365 one of these days. I don't think Sig Sauer has handled this problem correctly. There's are of good handgun choices nowadays, if Sig is not careful they might become the firearm version of Bud Light.

I just don't trust a P320, at least with a round in the chamber. I like this firearm a lot. I conceal carry daily. Once I don't trust a firearm I get rid of it.
 
I like Sigs and own several. I do not have a P320 and don't want one.
Sig has a valid point about the gun not being properly holstered.
However, there does seem to be some sort of issue as the P320 seems to have an inordinate amount of ADs. I doubt if the reason will ever be found. If so, it'll certainly never be made public.
I don't see the P320 as being around much longer. People just don't trust it. I'll bet Sig already has a replacement in the works. Meanwhile, just the usual corporate CYA. :rolleyes:
 
I've had a couple P320s in different configurations and didn't have any problems with them. Traded them for something else to guys who really wanted them. But I was always careful when I opened the safe to make sure they weren't waiting to ambush me. 🫣 Actually I'm just not a Sig guy.
 
Grayfox said:
I like Sigs and own several. I do not have a P320 and don't want one.
Sig has a valid point about the gun not being properly holstered.
However, there does seem to be some sort of issue as the P320 seems to have an inordinate amount of ADs. I doubt if the reason will ever be found. If so, it'll certainly never be made public.
I don't see the P320 as being around much longer. People just don't trust it. I'll bet Sig already has a replacement in the works. Meanwhile, just the usual corporate CYA. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Sig is actually expanding their P320 line currently.
 
WellArmed said:
The P320 is a big and bulky brick. I says while more civilians "may" have them, the overwhelming number of them aren't carrying IWB and are certainly not open carrying them. I'd assume L.E. would by far actually log more hours actually carrying these weapons.

The military have a different version than civilians as theirs have a thumb safety, and there have been several cases of civilians claiming their example fired in the holster too.

I can't say I've see videos of Glocks or other popular pistols going off in the holster. It also should be pointed out that the P320's striker is fully cocked whereas most other strikers are half cocked and have a trigger safety. It's also a possibility that it could be a QC aka execution issue on Sig's part and not a design issue. That could be an explanation as to why it's not readily repeatable with all P320s. Then it could be that the P320's design is just more prone to these type of issues simular to how a 1911 without a grip and thumb safety would be more prone to ND thus why no one would carry that way.
Click to expand...
Not quite true that most others are partially cocked. Glock is, M&P, Sig, Springfield XDM and I believe Canick are all fully cocked strikers. I own several M&Ps and XDM pistols along with Glock. The Glock mechanics are very different from any of the others mentioned. I have not shot Canick or FN but I have examined the Canick and it appears to be fully cocked. That is how they get better triggers than Glock, they don't have to complete the cocking process. The new Glock Performance Trigger changes a Glock to fully cocked as well. I love by M&P 2.0 pistols but I carry the Shield Plus with a safety, as it is also fully cocked.
 
Rangerman said:
Not quite true that most others are partially cocked. Glock is, M&P, Sig, Springfield XDM and I believe Canick are all fully cocked strikers. I own several M&Ps and XDM pistols along with Glock. The Glock mechanics are very different from any of the others mentioned. I have not shot Canick or FN but I have examined the Canick and it appears to be fully cocked. That is how they get better triggers than Glock, they don't have to complete the cocking process. The new Glock Performance Trigger changes a Glock to fully cocked as well. I love by M&P 2.0 pistols but I carry the Shield Plus with a safety, as it is also fully cocked.
Click to expand...
I know for a fact that Glocks are not fully cocked, I don't know about the ones with the new trigger you mentioned but I believe you. I'll have to look into that. I don't really keep up on what's going on with Glocks.

WellArmed said:
whereas most other strikers are half cocked and have a trigger safety.
Click to expand...
I think you missed the "and." I was not saying that Sig is the only striker-fired pistol on the market that's fully cocked. Off the top of my head, Walther PPQ and Beretta APX are also fully cocked. The thing is, all the pistols I know of that are in that have strikers that are fully cocked therefore they're essentially SAO pistols have a trigger safety, and in the case of the XDM you mentioned, a trigger AND grip safety.

[Edit] I misinterpreted your post to mean something else at first. I just reread what I wrote and what you where responding to, e.i., I did say most other strikers were "half cocked." I know that the Walther PPQ, Beretta APX, and P320 were fully cocked, but I never heard anything mention or bring it up about the M&P line. Thanks for pointing that out.
 
Last edited:
Grayfox said:
I don't see the P320 as being around much longer. People just don't trust it. I'll bet Sig already has a replacement in the works. Meanwhile, just the usual corporate CYA. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Sig sells millions of P320s and has become the world’s largest exporter of handguns. You know they’re not exporting millions of classic P-series guns, they’re selling P320s and P365s. The P320 is not going anywhere. Certainly not without incontrovertible proof that the gun is fatally flawed.
 
The myth that the 320 is inherently unsafe has been perpetuated by social media warriors jumping on the bandwagon. A questionable drop safety test raised the question first, but the fact is if you drop just about any handgun enough times at the right angle and height it will eventually fire. Of the millions sold have some failed? Probably. But, If you understand the internal trigger mechanism, you understand it is nearly impossible to fire without trigger manipulation. The trigger is smooth and easy to operate which is a selling point to shooters. Guns going off in holsters and handbags happen because of poor holster design, or foreign objects, or no holster at all. I have said all along that the P320 should have come with a manual safety as a safeguard against stupid. (I said the same about Glock back in 1980). The military understands this, which is why M17 and M18 versions all have a manual safety. But we should never underestimate people's ability to circumvent any safety mechanism.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top