P320

[tomr]

Hi Bruce,
Thanks for coming here. I found this over on Sig Forums this morning, "I have decided not to publish that detailed comparison. I like each pistol for what it offers. I have come to clearly prefer the P320 for a number of reasons. Rick here prefers the VP9, and can articulate why just as clearly. I will leave it at that, and say that Rick's doing VERY cool and innovative things with them, but I think the P320 has much, much greater potential for my purposes.

And, I have my purposes.

-Bruce"

Could you elaborate on your purposes?

[Mike C]

My guess is Bianchi Cup. Any bets?

[Bruce Gray]

Hi Bruce,
Thanks for coming here. I found this over on Sig Forums this morning, "I have decided not to publish that detailed comparison. I like each pistol for what it offers. I have come to clearly prefer the P320 for a number of reasons. Rick here prefers the VP9, and can articulate why just as clearly. I will leave it at that, and say that Rick's doing VERY cool and innovative things with them, but I think the P320 has much, much greater potential for my purposes.

And, I have my purposes.

-Bruce"

Could you elaborate on your purposes?

Thanks for asking, and to tomr for speculating on the Cup being involved with this. Yes to that. By the grace of God, I have been blessed to come through my recent health crises and heart surgeries in the best condition I've been in for decades. I am returning to active competition.

However, the cryptic reference to "my purposes" isn't about the personal aspirations of this old shooter. I have disclosed that I and my Crew here at GGI are actively engaged in a cooperative effort with SIG Sauer that is centred on development of the P320 and related stuff. We feel humbled and grateful to be involved, and I believe the results of this effort will be of particular interest to the membership here. The inherent flexibility and adaptability of the P320 modular concept is what makes this project possible and great fun. I don't mean to play the mystery game with my friends here. I promise that I will read you all in on this project when and as I am cleared to do so.

As for my desire to not fulfill my promise to compare these two excellent pistols in detail, I frankly don't wish to jump back into that lobster pot. With our recently evolving relationship with SIG Sauer, I do not wish to ask y'all to take my reputation as an honest man who doesn't troll or B.S. to that high degree of faith. I will say that if SIG made the VP9 instead, our project wouldn't have been considered. The P320 has what we need for "my purposes". (That does sound creepy and arrogant...not intended.) That's no slam on the VP9! The SIG is simply far more adaptable and pliant for what we want to do.

-Bruce

[Bruce Gray]

Welcome Bruce!

Thank you! It is a pleasure to be here.

-Bruce

[JHC]

Thank you! It is a pleasure to be here.

-Bruce

If you ever feel so moved; on this thread or another, I'd value seeing you expound on "ergonomics" as it pertains to pistol design, performance and "feel". IMO there is much confusion on this subject that tilts too far to immediate feel in fondling vs timers and targets. And the former doesn't necessarily assure the latter.

[Mike C]

Thanks for asking, and to tomr for speculating on the Cup being involved with this. Yes to that. By the grace of God, I have been blessed to come through my recent health crises and heart surgeries in the best condition I've been in for decades. I am returning to active competition.

However, the cryptic reference to "my purposes" isn't about the personal aspirations of this old shooter. I have disclosed that I and my Crew here at GGI are actively engaged in a cooperative effort with SIG Sauer that is centred on development of the P320 and related stuff. We feel humbled and grateful to be involved, and I believe the results of this effort will be of particular interest to the membership here. The inherent flexibility and adaptability of the P320 modular concept is what makes this project possible and great fun. I don't mean to play the mystery game with my friends here. I promise that I will read you all in on this project when and as I am cleared to do so.

As for my desire to not fulfill my promise to compare these two excellent pistols in detail, I frankly don't wish to jump back into that lobster pot. With our recently evolving relationship with SIG Sauer, I do not wish to ask y'all to take my reputation as an honest man who doesn't troll or B.S. to that high degree of faith. I will say that if SIG made the VP9 instead, our project wouldn't have been considered. The P320 has what we need for "my purposes". (That does sound creepy and arrogant...not intended.) That's no slam on the VP9! The SIG is simply far more adaptable and pliant for what we want to do.

-Bruce

Welcome aboard Sir. Glad to hear that your health is much improved. It will be very interesting to see what you and your wizards come up with. The new trigger design that you talked about for the P320 seems very promising and is much needed in my opinion. The trigger bite was a real issue for me. On a side note, have you recorded any issues with lockup of any kind with any of the P320 specimens you have on hand or had in the shop?

[Bruce Gray]

"Welcome aboard Sir. Glad to hear that your health is much improved. It will be very interesting to see what you and your wizards come up with. The new trigger design that you talked about for the P320 seems very promising and is much needed in my opinion. The trigger bite was a real issue for me. On a side note, have you recorded any issues with lockup of any kind with any of the P320 specimens you have on hand or had in the shop?" -Mike C

Mike, thank you for your kind thoughts. It's fantastic to be back on so many levels. God is good.

No Sir, the three test bed P320's we have here at GGI as well as others we've handled and worked on have all been fine in regards to lockup, in that they exhibit excellent barrel to slide fits with minimal Z in battery clearance. They are variable within what I feel is a quite good tolerance range. As a result, they shoot exceptionally well.

There are reports of some wear on the ejection port side of the barrel hood. You've noticed that the barrel chamber block has an tapered clearance cut increasing from the locking shoulder to the barrel hood. This cut has the effect of reducing hood bearing area on the ejection port side. One of my recommendations is for this cut to be changed a bit to restore full barrel hood area. I suspect this wear pattern which affects some pistols has been the source of internet complaints about lockup.

I have read of two different online reports in which a P320 was claimed to have blown a case with resulting damage. We have looked at the images presented of these cases and cannot duplicate the conditions which would permit a P320 to fire significantly out of battery, much less to the degree that case failure could result. In one of these cases that was reported on Sigforum.com, the owner presented images suggestive of a lockup / chambering issue that could cause a failure. My reasonable familiarity with the manufacture of these pistols strongly argues against this possibility, though of course anything is possible.

I hope this drift into the P320 realm isn't inappropriate here. Thank you!

-Bruce

[Mike C]

My fault for the derail, your post was enlightening and I wish I had not parted with the gun now that I have heard what you have to say. The issue was probably fixable, it sucks to be young and impatient at times. Thank you for sharing your thoughts. I will certainly be watching with great interest.

[ksxdguy]

I am pleased to find this thread. Personally, I've adopted the Glock with a low mounted RMR and suppressor BUIS. However, I'm certainly not locked into one system at the expense of everything else. I briefly owned a P250, liked the concept, but ultimately didn't adapt well to it. When the P320 was introduced I was intrigued enough to buy one and I am simply knocked out by it. Enough that if I can find someone to mount an RMR, the Glocks might be spending all their time in the safe. I hope this is a direction that Sig is headed. The one shown at SHOT tells me that this might be the case.

[mizer67]

I for one will be watching GGI closely for P320 projects.

I know the money in guns these days is in parts, but I for one would like to see GGI start fitting these and give the Accu Shadows a run for their money at ~2/3rds of the price of entry.

[tomr]

For the record, what is now post #1 of this thread, was written as a response to Bruce's discussion in "Bruce Gray VP9 Trigger Work" post #133. I'm not sure how this happens, who did it, or why. But lets go with it.

Most of us I'd bet had followed the saga of Bruce vs Rick on the 320 vs VP9 and had been waiting for the promised more complete review. When Bruce came here and wrote #133, for me at least the intrigue was heightened and I wrote the question, "Could you elaborate on your purposes?" based on Bruce's comment, "And I have my purposes."

To digress for a sec, I live in California. I have never seen a 320 in the flesh. They don't exist here. We have the infamous "Single Shot Exemption" for a couple more months and that is the only way to get one's hands on these. Most full service retailers do not participate in the program. If somehow internet discussion inspires, you find the odd dealer performing the SSE and buy - but buy blind. With that in mind, if my questions seem naive - they are.

The modularity of the 320 seems cool and almost revolutionary, but is it? We are told we can buy different sized grip frames, to accommodate our different sized hands and just swap out the originally purchased guts of the pistol. But wait a minute, I have to buy a different grip to get the gun to fit? What do I do with the original grip that didn't work? This reminds me of the screw choke vs extra barrel thing back in my Remington days in the '80s. We were selling the highly profitable extra barrels like hot cakes till screw chokes were introduced. The obvious advantages of screw chokes over the pieces of pipe that we had been selling, ended that game, But what if things had been reversed. What if screw chokes came first and then somebody came up with the bright idea to market extra barrels? With regard to this specific aspect of the 320 isn't this what's happening? The VP9 comes with 9 grip panels included (screw chokes). With the 320, I have to go buy a new grip? (extra barrels). The market was already evolving towards supplying grip accommodation with each pistol and now this?

With the purchase of one pistol, we are told, we can now have three. For a reported $400.(?) the parts to convert the 9mm originally purchased, to a 357 Sig or 40 can be had. Cool. Cool? Following this Forum, for the past several years the obvious trend is towards 9 and away from 40. The 357 Sig, with few exceptions, never quite caught on. Do I really want to convert calibers? Some will no doubt, in Tamara's words, "Just cuz," but is this a revolutionary great idea? Maybe we don't know about it yet, but is there yet a another caliber coming down the pike - yikes! Why?

For another $400. (again, I'm not sure of price) we are told we can change from full size to compact, to... Is this a good thing? Why would I want to do this? For $500, I could buy a whole new Glock and now I have a second mechanism and am not subjecting the first to constant wear and tear.

The trigger bites. Huh? Didn't they check this out? We have to buy a trigger from Gray Guns to fix this?

The idea that one can remove the chassis, hose it down, blow it out and reinsert, as a cleaning facilitator is cool. It would seem that pulling out the chassis facilitates smithing, also cool.

I get that Bruce can't reveal future plans. And I am intrigued. It would seem the real benefit of the 320 has yet to reveal itself. But what do I know?

[JV_]

I'm not sure how this happensThe posts were moved by a staff member because it was off topic. That thread was about the VP9, not the 320.


who did itI did it.


or why.See my first explanation.

[JHC]

edit: My system locked up and I sort of double posted. The below was cleaner.

[JHC]

This https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=844333802252872&set=gm.797173473668893&type=1&theater

combined with the pics I've seen of the compact grip mated to a full size upper plus the reports of the trigger interest me. From a design of relative simplicity.

The pinching trigger doesn't afflict all - seems like HKs, Jody's new P series gun with SRT that he's going to modify.

[tomr]

This https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=844333802252872&set=gm.797173473668893&type=1&theater

combined with the pics I've seen of the compact grip mated to a full size upper plus the reports of the trigger interest me. From a design of relative simplicity.

The pinching trigger doesn't afflict all - seems like HKs, Jody's new P series gun with SRT that he's going to modify.

Not able to access that link/picture, got another address?

I get that the trigger pinch is different for different folks, (and why). And this is true of several different pistols. CZ, at least, sells a couple different triggers to help deal with this. Might that be a place for Sig also to innovate - different grips (panels or not), different triggers?

[JHC]

The FB link is a picture Bruce put up of a 5 shot group from 50 yds of 2.5". It's lot like the one on the other thread he put up of someone else's gun's group.

The short grip with full size upper I saw on a multipage thread about the 320 on the Sig forum.

[EricM]

I think there are some advantages to offering different grip modules as opposed to interchangeable inserts. With the grip modules, the entire grip can be scaled appropriately while grip angle and other proportions remain consistent. With something like the VP9, the backstraps significantly change the size and shape of the "hump" without really altering the dimensions at the tang. Put all large inserts in a VP9 and it feels a bit lumpy and awkward to me...personally, I like the shape of the VP9 grip with all small inserts -- minimal hump and flattish sides -- but need it to be significantly larger. The large P320 grip module is distinctly large while having an even surface all around. IMO the P320 grips do a better job at simply fulfilling the small/medium/large concept...but obviously so many people love the way the P30 or VP9 feels, and a big part of that may be the little tweaks you can make. As always, YMMV. (I own a VP9, and once owned a P250 -- which uses the same grip modules as the P320 -- and had collected all three grip sizes to try.)

I do agree completely regarding the inconvenience of how the grips are sold. To me every dealer selling the P320 ought to stock all sizes of grip modules so you can take it home with whatever fits best. Maybe even offer loaners so you can shoot with the different sizes. Availability is a big issue too, AFAIK the grip modules are hard to come by at the moment even online.

What would really make things interesting would be third party grip modules from Crimson Trace or SureFire. Or maybe a grip module with an integrated mount for a non-reciprocating RDS. Heck somebody could make a grip module that takes VP9 inserts, best of both worlds! ;)

[JBP55]

I think there are some advantages to offering different grip modules as opposed to interchangeable inserts. With the grip modules, the entire grip can be scaled appropriately while grip angle and other proportions remain consistent. With something like the VP9, the backstraps significantly change the size and shape of the "hump" without really altering the dimensions at the tang. Put all large inserts in a VP9 and it feels a bit lumpy and awkward to me...personally, I like the shape of the VP9 grip with all small inserts -- minimal hump and flattish sides -- but need it to be significantly larger. The large P320 grip module is distinctly large while having an even surface all around. IMO the P320 grips do a better job at simply fulfilling the small/medium/large concept...but obviously so many people love the way the P30 or VP9 feels, and a big part of that may be the little tweaks you can make. As always, YMMV. (I own a VP9, and once owned a P250 -- which uses the same grip modules as the P320 -- and had collected all three grip sizes to try.)

I do agree completely regarding the inconvenience of how the grips are sold. To me every dealer selling the P320 ought to stock all sizes of grip modules so you can take it home with whatever fits best. Maybe even offer loaners so you can shoot with the different sizes. Availability is a big issue too, AFAIK the grip modules are hard to come by at the moment even online.

What would really make things interesting would be third party grip modules from Crimson Trace or SureFire. Or maybe a grip module with an integrated mount for a non-reciprocating RDS. Heck somebody could make a grip module that takes VP9 inserts, best of both worlds! ;)

When you dream, you dream big.

[tomr]

I think there are some advantages to offering different grip modules as opposed to interchangeable inserts. With the grip modules, the entire grip can be scaled appropriately while grip angle and other proportions remain consistent. With something like the VP9, the backstraps significantly change the size and shape of the "hump" without really altering the dimensions at the tang. Put all large inserts in a VP9 and it feels a bit lumpy and awkward to me...personally, I like the shape of the VP9 grip with all small inserts -- minimal hump and flattish sides -- but need it to be significantly larger. The large P320 grip module is distinctly large while having an even surface all around. IMO the P320 grips do a better job at simply fulfilling the small/medium/large concept...but obviously so many people love the way the P30 or VP9 feels, and a big part of that may be the little tweaks you can make. As always, YMMV. (I own a VP9, and once owned a P250 -- which uses the same grip modules as the P320 -- and had collected all three grip sizes to try.)

I do agree completely regarding the inconvenience of how the grips are sold. To me every dealer selling the P320 ought to stock all sizes of grip modules so you can take it home with whatever fits best. Maybe even offer loaners so you can shoot with the different sizes. Availability is a big issue too, AFAIK the grip modules are hard to come by at the moment even online.

What would really make things interesting would be third party grip modules from Crimson Trace or SureFire. Or maybe a grip module with an integrated mount for a non-reciprocating RDS. Heck somebody could make a grip module that takes VP9 inserts, best of both worlds! ;)


JBP55 kinda says it. All things are possible.

Indeed Sig could have designed the modular grips to move humps and lumps around, (proportionately?) but even then will it work for every hand? I use the large panels on a VP and confess looking at it before I went there, I thought it was just adding "hump" that was gonna change things in a funny way. Opposite turned out to be the case. The hump was placed such that, in my hand, it filled the palm and did not add to the hump at the heel of my hand as Glock's do. So the modular grip could (and might already) realign contours as well as add (or lose), girth, but any better than the other systems accommodating through parts? Guess it depends. Looking at the 320, its a set piece, the whole grip changes - it works or it doesn't, it gets bigger or smaller including those attempts at maintaining things. With the "parts" approach seems like there's more opportunity to tweak. We still have to buy. And we're still at the mercy of the supply chain.

[JHC]

I dunno. As long as one can reach the controls and operate them the perfect "ergonomic" perceived feel is pretty much a moot point IMO. Ergonomic should be illustrated on timers and targets and lack of pain or injury. .

I think the importance of the subjective feel of a pistol as soon as one picks it up is one of the great myths of the pistol purchasing. The M&P is a case in point for me. It feels way better than most pistols, certainly better than a 2x4. Yet some shooters, my self among them have found the angular 2x4 to index faster and straighter and squirm less than very round shapely grips. For that reason I like the USP grip more than the more modern HKs.

[Alpha Sierra]

But wait a minute, I have to buy a different grip to get the gun to fit? What do I do with the original grip that didn't work?

You sell it to someone that needs it. You know cragislist (write the ad to skirt their idiot rules), armslist, gunbroker, forums, etc........

[Mike C]

I do agree completely regarding the inconvenience of how the grips are sold. To me every dealer selling the P320 ought to stock all sizes of grip modules so you can take it home with whatever fits best. Maybe even offer loaners so you can shoot with the different sizes. Availability is a big issue too, AFAIK the grip modules are hard to come by at the moment even online.

Availability for the Large grip is zero right now. I had one on order for over a month and a half to replace one that was stolen from my range bag that I had promised to a friend just to call and find out they do not place an order for them until they have sufficient requests or orders placed directly with them. Needless to say I cancelled my order and will get him some extra stuff to make up for breaking my word which I freaking hate to do.

I really do think the P320 has a lot of promise but am a little irritated at availability of things like grip modules most of you. That kind of stuff should be on hand especially seeing as how there are already gen 2 versions of the P250 out in the wild that run the exact same grip module as the P320. Unless they let the flood gates open up making parts and packages more available I won't be picking another one up any time soon. Which kind of sucks because I would like to give them another shake.

[EricM]

When you dream, you dream big.
I guess my point was that I think some cool things COULD be done with the grip module concept, not that I think any of those things I mentioned are remotely likely. The concept creates some interesting opportunities, but no one's going to bother unless the P320 becomes a big hit on its own, creating a sizable market for such products. I'm not holding my breath, though I do hope that Sig has indeed turned a corner and the gun runs well.


You sell it to someone that needs it. You know cragislist (write the ad to skirt their idiot rules), armslist, gunbroker, forums, etc........
Problem is basically everyone with a P320 already has a medium grip module, not that many people need a second one.


I dunno. As long as one can reach the controls and operate them the perfect "ergonomic" perceived feel is pretty much a moot point IMO. Ergonomic should be illustrated on timers and targets and lack of pain or injury.

I think the importance of the subjective feel of a pistol as soon as one picks it up is one of the great myths of the pistol purchasing. The M&P is a case in point for me. It feels way better than most pistols, certainly better than a 2x4. Yet some shooters, my self among them have found the angular 2x4 to index faster and straighter and squirm less than very round shapely grips. For that reason I like the USP grip more than the more modern HKs.
Excellent points. I'm on the verge of changing platforms due to the measurable impact of suboptimal fit on my performance, and I've reached a similar conclusion that an angular 2x4 is not such a bad thing.

[tomr]

Have been thinking some more about this. Its a bit "drifty" to discuss the relative merits of grips and how they feel to each of us. Its all good, and its clearly an issue, depending. The different approaches of various companies affirms its importance.

Is there a larger point? What was Sig thinking about when designing the 320? They could've brought it to market and let it stand vis a vis the competition. How does the 320 stack up based on the usual performance attributes against the other polymer framed, striker fired, pistols? We'd be back to the usual conversation around trigger, ergonomics, sights. We'd be yet again assuming something about materials, (ref. "Why Through Hardening Matters") and we'd never allow ourselves to discuss cosmetics. Hard to gain competitive advantage this way, given the crowded market. A fly on the wall at Sig, might've heard, "We need something special, a "hook," to set us apart from all those other guys jamming in to the market.

Could it be the "new" promotional approach with modularity at its center, evolved out of this theoretical marketing meeting? Interchangeable grip sizes and shapes, barrels and slides to enable customer changeout of pistol size or caliber at first blush seems to promise something kinda cool. But as asked, is this substantive?

What if the point of the 320 was cost driven and the engineering department was challenged with something like, "We have a market problem. Our traditional designs, as good as they are, are not where the market's going. They are costly to manufacturer, leading to a price almost twice that of the polymer wonders. More and more law enforcement agencies, for lots of reasons are buying Glock or Glock derivatives. The .gov agencies are trending this way as well. We need something allowing us to compete in those markets, that will have a manufacturing cost advantage that will take us into the future."

Its harder to go to market on day 1 of a new widget, with the selling point that we now have a manufacturing cost advantage. But isn't that what the 320 delivers in its as issued form? The modular chassis can be anything. A dedicated line, for maximum efficiency can be set up that specializes in the fabrication of just these. The promise is very high efficiency, flexibility and low cost of a key component/sub assembly. Make chassis and turn them in to full size, compact, sub compact, tactical/practical, 9, 40, 357 sig, 45 by adding the appropriate slide, barrel and frame down line as orders dictate. And then there's the efficiencies of the chassis themselves. Cleaning is a snap. Looking for defects, failed parts is facilitated. Gun comes back in with a complaint, but its all gummed up from shooting, etc. In seconds its taken apart, hosed down and air dried. Instead of peering down inside or disassembling the more complicated assembly of most designs, this is easy. Not only is there lower ongoing cost to make a major proportion of the pistol, theres lower cost of maintenance down the road. Hard for the accountants to value, today, but a pretty fair bet that eventually the whole system benefits.

Add this to Mr. Gray's alluded to mods to come and there's plenty to be intrigued by, no?

[JHC]

YES and all that is what I find uniquely intriguing about the 320, even though I tend to hate high bore axis pistols when I commence to shooting them. I know that great fast shooting is possible with them however.

[Drang]

Could it be the "new" promotional approach with modularity at its center, evolved out of this theoretical marketing meeting? Interchangeable grip sizes and shapes, barrels and slides to enable customer changeout of pistol size or caliber at first blush seems to promise something kinda cool.

As I related in another thread, on Saturday we went out to purchase some "emergency" canning supplies. We wound up at the local Farm and Ranch store, which was celebrating the Grand Opening of their new sporting goods department.
Sig had a trailer out front with samples and sales drones.
After threatening (or offering) to leave me there while she shopped, Mrs. Drang followed me in.
When I got to the P320, the first thing the sales guy did was strip it and hold up the Fire Control Module and say "This is the gun, the rest can be mail ordered."
He then demonstrated swapping the full size slide and barrel to the carry size.
So, yeah. the modularity is apparently a big part of the marketing.
They should have had small and large grips on hand, though, and, frankly, they should let you order the combination of grip size and top end you want. "I'll have a Carry Frame with Large and a Full Length Top End, she'll have the same in a small."

[HCM]

The was something on SIG Forum about SIG developing a "build a bear" type website to custom build the gun with your choice of features similar to the one on the Daniel Defense website. They were mostly talking about the MPX carbine but the P320 was mentioned as a candidate for this process.

[Mike C]

HCM that sounds cool. Any mention of timeframe for order date to completion date?

[JHC]

This was published a couple weeks ago but I just stumbled upon it. http://blogs.militarytimes.com/gearscout/2014/10/13/sig-sauer-p320-mhs-edition/#more

[98z28]

I'd really like to see that thumb safety variant available for us cake eaters.

Sent from my SM-N910T using Tapatalk

[JMorse]

I find it odd I can't find one with 10 round mags. I can buy them separately from Sig of course, but...

[LSP972]

I really do think the P320 has a lot of promise but am a little irritated at availability of things like grip modules ....

History repeating itself. I distinctly remember the area Sig rep bringing a P250 by the range and leaving it with us for T&E. The agency I was working for post-retirement issued Sig pistols at the time, as did the agency I had just retired from. Mind you, this was not a pre-production sample to test the waters, so to speak… the gun was in production when we got it.

We were mildly interested in the pistol (the concept was/is ingenious). When the dude came back around we asked him for examples of the various grip frame sizes, to let "regular" deputies try it, etc. There followed a lot of hemming and hawing; you could tell the man was embarrassed to admit that such advertised extra modular goodies were, at that time, vaporware. We looked at each other, then the boss handed the poor sod his demo gun back and politely thanked him for his interest.

I have often wondered how many times that scenario played out at various other LE agencies across the land; especially after reading many complaints like Mike's on various fora, following the gun's "official" introduction. You would think that Sig, especially in light of all the claims of "new & improved" attention to quality, innovation, customer needs/wants, etc., etc. would have learned a lesson from the P250.

I found the P320 to be large, blocky, meh trigger, and in general unremarkable. I could certainly live with it if nothing "better" (to my tastes) was available. But one thing has surprised me… a lot of folks (at least in my limited circles) who know guns are still suspicious of earlier Sig QC and unnecessary bling issues and have ignored the P320 for precisely those reasons.

.

[HCM]

HCM that sounds cool. Any mention of timeframe for order date to completion date?

No they seem just to be beta testing.

On another note, I recently got to handle a 320C. It felt / pointed much better to me than the full size.

[Jeep]

But one thing has surprised me… a lot of folks (at least in my limited circles) who know guns are still suspicious of earlier Sig QC and unnecessary bling issues and have ignored the P320 for precisely those reasons.

.

I have seen the same thing from gun store salesmen who have been burned too often in the past by Sig.

[PPGMD]

Availability for the Large grip is zero right now. I had one on order for over a month and a half to replace one that was stolen from my range bag that I had promised to a friend just to call and find out they do not place an order for them until they have sufficient requests or orders placed directly with them. Needless to say I cancelled my order and will get him some extra stuff to make up for breaking my word which I freaking hate to do.

Call the Sig Academy Pro Shop, I've heard that they have them all in stock.