Nevada Highway Patrol Transitions to SIG P320

[HCM]

Nevada Highway Patrol Transitions to SIG SAUER P320

http://soldiersystems.net/2020/02/21/nevada-highway-patrol-transitions-to-sig-sauer-p320/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=facebook


NEWINGTON, N.H., (February 21, 2020) – SIG SAUER, Inc. is proud to announce the Nevada Highway Patrol has transitioned to the SIG SAUER P320 9mm pistol as their official duty pistol. The Nevada Highway Patrol is a division of the Nevada Department of Public Safety responsible for law enforcement across the entire state of Nevada with over 480 sworn Troopers.


“SIG SAUER is honored to continue our long-standing relationship with the Troopers of the Nevada Highway Patrol through their selection of the P320 as their official duty pistol,” began Tom Jankiewicz, Executive Vice president, Law Enforcement Sales, SIG SAUER, Inc. “We are proud of the positive feedback we have received during their transition to the P320, and with the inclusion of the optics-cut on their slides they have the ability to easily expand the pistols capabilities in the future with the addition of a red dot optic.”

I believe they previously issued Classic P series SIGs. First state police agency I’m aware of to issue optics cut slides though.

[CanineCombatives]

Thought about posting it but..........glad someone did.

[Brianjkeene]

Thought about posting it but..........glad someone did.

I’m still amazed at the rapid adoption of this platform.

[JonInWA]

From the image on the Soldier Systems article, it looks like they went to the X Carry set up-is that true?

Best, Jon

[ssb]

From the image on the Soldier Systems article, it looks like they went to the X Carry set up-is that true?

Best, Jon

Looks to me like a Professional model (DPP cut, rear dovetail for BUIS), but SIG seems to constantly pump out "new" models.

[JonInWA]

I’m still amazed at the rapid adoption of this platform.

I'm also a bit surprised, but on some reflection, the combination of the influential M17/M18 contracts wins and the Lego-like combinations of grip modules, slides/barrels and chamberings has been compelling. Out of the three, my thought is that having relatively inexpensive grip modules that really do affect the index has probably been the most significant.

While Glock far and away is still the easiest and most viable to detail disassemble, the reality is that most end-users simply don't, and have no perceptual reasons or inclinations to perform detailed disassemblies-so the relative intricacy and difficulties in disassemblies of the P320 firing control module is somewhat irrelevant.

Additionally, for some administrators and organizations, the lack of needing to pull the trigger to initiate field-stripping/detailed disassembly of the P320s is compelling.

As I suspect that more LEOs are embarking on more frequent and higher round count training, the round counts indicating platform replacement (or increasingly expensive component maintenance/replacement) is more quickly reached, facilitating entire platform replacement opportunities. Additionally, SIG-Sauer's provision of actual skus with optics organically provided, not just platforms that are optics ready (although they have those, too) could be compelling for purchasers-along with one-shop SIG proprietary Romeo optics as OEM available for the platforms.

SIG also can provide organizations with more "vertical integration" of their organizational weapons needs, having pistols, rifles, optics, and support packages available, simplifying the organizational acquisition (and possibly maintenance) process.

And, good as Glocks are, the P320 in my opinion simply has a more natural and instinctive index for many, which may not only be prefered, but may decrease necessary familiarization and training times, which for organizations can be a tangible reduction in costs and man-hours.

Best, Jon

[John Hearne]

I am aware that the P320 & M17/18 cause a lot of heartburn to forum members. However, for an agency the design has certain compelling features.

Not only do you not have to pull the trigger to field strip it but you also cannot begin disassembly until the magazine is removed as well. For liability conscious admin types, the safer design can be compelling.

The pistol is very easy to service, especially if you have an ultrasonic. You can field strip it, pop the firing control module out and pull the striker/extractor apart in the blink of an eye. You run that in an ultrasonic. When done, you blow it out with air and reassemble. There are no pins to drive out, you just push in a plunger.

The modular part is nice but I don't see parts being swapped around that much. I see the modular design being used to facilitate rapid maintenance.

[lwt16]

You can field strip it, pop the firing control module out and pull the striker/extractor apart in the blink of an eye.

A word of warning to anyone wanting to disassemble the striker group. There is a MINISCULE spring inside that is easily lost and often not even noticed as one slides the striker out of the housing. This spring rebounds the striker back after firing. There is also a small spring on the right side of the housing that is somewhat small as well.

They are so small that in Sig armorer school they told us to not bother looking for them if we lost them and come up front and get another one out of the boxes. You can lay both on a dime at the same time and still have real estate left over.

Regards.

49109

[KevH]

They went with the P320 Carry Pro, which currently seems to be un-obtanium.

As much as I despise SIG as a company, I'm trying to order one of these since they are rapidly popping up in my own department and neighboring agencies.

I just called our SIG factory rep (the guy for California), who stopped by a couple months ago, and found out that he'd been fired. That has to be over a dozen factory reps in the past fifteen years (for comparison Glock and S&W are still on the same guys for the same time period). It doesn't seem to be hurting them though.

[PNWTO]

I am aware that the P320 & M17/18 cause a lot of heartburn to forum members. However, for an agency the design has certain compelling features.

While it is a small sample a local department has gone to the X-Carry. A friend who works there says that off-duty carry has gone up now that officers can buy their own grip/slide combos and “convert” for their off days. This has made enough of an impression that the agency is actually looking at issuing the necessary components for officers, instead of individual purchase.

The “LEGO” novelty factor is still high so time will tell if this approach wears off or not.

[TGS]

I'm also a bit surprised, but on some reflection, the combination of the influential M17/M18 contracts wins and the Lego-like combinations of grip modules, slides/barrels and chamberings has been compelling. Out of the three, my thought is that having relatively inexpensive grip modules that really do affect the index has probably been the most significant.


Jon,

My observation has been that many of the departments running metal framed SIGs are simply switching over to the striker option from the same manufacturer. Most of the departments running other guns are still running them.

What departments do we know of are actually selecting the P320 because of the unique features of the P320 that are not present in other striker fired polymer options?

What's the percentage of departments switching over to the P320 who did not previously carry SIG metal framed DA guns?

My suspicion is that PDs are saying, "It's time for metal framed DA guns to go away", and so they're swapping to the P320 out of convenience......not really due to the MHS program, any unique attributes that the P320 offers over Glocks, M&Ps, or whatever. Maybe I'm too cynical, but I highly doubt that most PDs adopting them are doing so because of the relatively inexpensive grip modules affecting index. They want a cheap striker fired plastic gun, and it's an easy solution from a supplier and support network they're already working in. It could be a rebadged SD9, and most of them would probably still buy it.

[AMC]

Jon,

My observation has been that many of the departments running metal framed SIGs are simply switching over to the striker option from the same manufacturer. Most of the departments running other guns are still running them.

What departments do we know of are actually selecting the P320 because of the unique features of the P320 that are not present in other striker fired polymer options?

What's the percentage of departments switching over to the P320 who did not previously carry SIG metal framed DA guns?

My suspicion is that PDs are saying, "It's time for metal framed DA guns to go away", and so they're swapping to the P320 out of convenience......not really due to the MHS program, any unique attributes that the P320 offers over Glocks, M&Ps, or whatever. Maybe I'm too cynical, but I highly doubt that most PDs adopting them are doing so because of the relatively inexpensive grip modules affecting index. They want a cheap striker fired plastic gun, and it's an easy solution from a supplier and support network they're already working in. It could be a rebadged SD9, and most of them would probably still buy it.

I will say that modularity/adaptability to different hand sizes is a major selling point for us. It's a requirement for us for our next pistol. I had suggested an approved roster of firearms, but was overruled. An adaptable, modular grip at least gets beyond the "one size fits all' crap.

[TGS]

I will say that modularity/adaptability to different hand sizes is a major selling point for us.

Something that is offered by literally every single polymer service handgun these days. Glock, M&P, Walther, HK P30/VP9, FN, etc.

[AMC]

Something that is offered by literally every single polymer service handgun these days. Glock, M&P, Walther, HK P30/VP9, FN, etc.

Oh I agree. Some do it better than others, but virtually every manufacturer has some degree of modularity built in at this point.

Some of the points John raised are very important here.....specifically the "pulling the trigger to field strip" issue. And as much as I like the Gen 5 Glocks...its a legitimate criticism.

[Inspector71]

Pre 9/11, Customs had a rash of in-office/port level “negligent discharges”. Led to a bunch of wall posters being pushed out to the field on how to properly field strip the Glock. Rumor has it that when a new pistol was being considered for brand new, stand-up CBP, that a high level manager made it known to the selection committee that any gun requiring the trigger to be pullled for disassembly was out. Hello P2000 ! Now that they are swinging back to a Glock, hopefully the troops will be well trained.

[John Hearne]

Something that is offered by literally every single polymer service handgun these days. Glock, M&P, Walther, HK P30/VP9, FN, etc.

I have not handled all of the brands you listed but, from what I've seen, the "small" offerings from Sig are legitimately small. I'm not aware of a double stack frame that is going to be smaller than what you can get with the P320.

[HCM]

Pre 9/11, Customs had a rash of in-office/port level “negligent discharges”. Led to a bunch of wall posters being pushed out to the field on how to properly field strip the Glock. Rumor has it that when a new pistol was being considered for brand new, stand-up CBP, that a high level manager made it known to the selection committee that any gun requiring the trigger to be pullled for disassembly was out. Hello P2000 ! Now that they are swinging back to a Glock, hopefully the troops will be well trained.

Pulling the trigger for disassembly is an issue in all organizations but was not the deciding factor in CBPs prior duty gun.

Customs inspections was combined with INS Inspe tions and USBP when CBP was created. US BP traditionally dominated the INS firearms program and US BP was significantly larger than the US customs inspection branch, even before including the INS inspectors.

Border patrol was already in the process of transitioning to the HKUSP compact LEM when the merger occurred. INS had begun transitioning plainclothes agents and officers to the LEM in 1999.

Glocks were a POW option for INS and border patrol prior to the transition to 40 caliber. The big ding on Glock from the USBP point of view (at that time) was the lack of a second strike capability.

[JonInWA]

I simply see the major players for organizational contracts as being Glock, SIG and Smith & Wesson. I'm a little surprised that Beretta hasn't made more inroads with the APX, and I'm pretty dismissive of FN-too many issues, too little depth, and at least perceptually capricious long term platform commitment and support.

Walter seems more oriented towards the shooting sport venues than to LEO/.mil applications, at least to my perceptions in the US.

HK's another surprise, particularly with the lowering price points for the domestically produced P30 line, and the intrinsic price points of the German-produced VP lines. While there was apparently some organizational reluctance due to HK's paddle magazine releases versus button releases, I think that the real issue may have been for the resource times needed for detailed disassemblies and reassemblies for annual programmed inspections.

I think that the HK VP and P30 platforms provide the most individual tunability-but at the cost of more components and time. The SIG solution is quick and easy.

The point that John Hearne makes about the ease of cleaning the trigger group module via ultrasound is huge; I suspect that that takes the resource time required per gun close to, if not bettering Glock's. And from what I've picked up anecdotally, trigger group issues are resolved by the mothership simply swapping out trigger groups en bloc, as opposed to encouraging actual armorer dinking around at the individual component level to achieve necessary repairs-HCM and lwt16 (and other willing to chime in), is this what you're experiencing?

Best, Jon

[KevH]

This thread prompted me to call the latest SIG factory rep and he is going to stop by my department later today for an introduction.

Anything you guys want me to ask him?

[deflave]

Man some of you guys work for some pretty sophisticated departments and agencies.

[John Hearne]

And from what I've picked up anecdotally, trigger group issues are resolved by the mothership simply swapping out trigger groups en bloc, as opposed to encouraging actual armorer dinking around at the individual component level to achieve necessary repairs-HCM and lwt16 (and other willing to chime in), is this what you're experiencing?

I went through armorer's school the week the drop-safe issue made itself known. I'm hoping to recert this summer and get the updates for the added parts.

Any way, we played with the "sear box" but were strongly encouraged to stay out of it. The only reason I could see for someone to root around in there is trigger enhancement. I'd trust Bruce Gray to do it but Officer Bubba should keep his hands and punches out of it. Realistically, the trigger is "good enough" that only competition guys might see some benefit from mucking with it.

[TGS]

The point that John Hearne makes about the ease of cleaning the trigger group module via ultrasound is huge; I suspect that that takes the resource time required per gun close to, if not bettering Glock's. And from what I've picked up anecdotally, trigger group issues are resolved by the mothership simply swapping out trigger groups en bloc, as opposed to encouraging actual armorer dinking around at the individual component level to achieve necessary repairs-HCM and lwt16 (and other willing to chime in), is this what you're experiencing?

Best, Jon

How many departments are actually conducting any sort of regular ultrasonic cleaning on a systematic level that makes it a legitimate reason to buy the gun?

How many departments are so backlogged on pistol repairs that they are unable to maintain force readiness?

Again, goes back to my point that the platform might have all sorts of neat features compared to other striker fired polymer pistols......but pretty much none of them are actually meaningful. They're just "neat", are likely completely under-or-unutilized, and the real reason for agencies buying them (I hypothesize) is because they already have SIGs, want to stay with the company/support network they already know, and so they buy the polymer pistol that SIG has to sell.

I guess about the only exception to that would be if an agency had a "no trigger pull for disassembly" rule. How many of the agencies adopting them have that rule?

[lwt16]

This thread prompted me to call the latest SIG factory rep and he is going to stop by my department later today for an introduction.

Anything you guys want me to ask him?

Why Sig can't keep trigger return springs in stock?

I sent them an email today. I need 30-40 copies. Part 22 on their website schematic.

[lwt16]

I went through armorer's school the week the drop-safe issue made itself known. I'm hoping to recert this summer and get the updates for the added parts.

Any way, we played with the "sear box" but were strongly encouraged to stay out of it. The only reason I could see for someone to root around in there is trigger enhancement. I'd trust Bruce Gray to do it but Officer Bubba should keep his hands and punches out of it. Realistically, the trigger is "good enough" that only competition guys might see some benefit from mucking with it.

I can tear a P320 down to the bits in no time now. Full disassembly, cleaning, and re-assembly in less than an hour.

My armorer instructor was pretty good. An excellent teacher with calm demeanor. The sear assembly isn't that bad once you get the hang of it and learn the tricks. I never find much grime in them but still bust them apart.

And he taught us a great trick for the trigger return spring. I can pop those on and off with no damage and no tools needed.

I detail cleaned one yesterday before church while enjoying my morning coffee. 2300 round mark and it really wasn't that dirty. Replaced the trigger return spring as it was not what it once was. The owner does quite a lot of dry fire in addition to live fire. His was an early copy that had to go back for the upgrade/recall.

Regards.

[KevH]

Why Sig can't keep trigger return springs in stock?

I sent them an email today. I need 30-40 copies. Part 22 on their website schematic.

I just sent you a PM.

[lwt16]

I just sent you a PM.

Thank you.

Just for giggles I timed myself jus now on a detail strip of a P320

49117

49118

49119

No cleaning though. Takes me less than 20 minutes.

Regards.

[AMC]

This thread prompted me to call the latest SIG factory rep and he is going to stop by my department later today for an introduction.

Anything you guys want me to ask him?

Yeah....ask him what time hes gonna be in SF tomorrow! Hasn't returned my email about the appointment time!

[HCM]

I am aware that the P320 & M17/18 cause a lot of heartburn to forum members. However, for an agency the design has certain compelling features.

Not only do you not have to pull the trigger to field strip it but you also cannot begin disassembly until the magazine is removed as well. For liability conscious admin types, the safer design can be compelling.

The pistol is very easy to service, especially if you have an ultrasonic. You can field strip it, pop the firing control module out and pull the striker/extractor apart in the blink of an eye. You run that in an ultrasonic. When done, you blow it out with air and reassemble. There are no pins to drive out, you just push in a plunger.

The modular part is nice but I don't see parts being swapped around that much. I see the modular design being used to facilitate rapid maintenance.

Not sure of they mentioned it when you went through the armorer school but when I went through in June last year they specifically advised against use use of ultra sonic cleaners.

Their rationale was that SIG only recommends use of cleaners and lubes specifically made for firearms and there is no ultrasonic leaning fluid specifically for firearms.

[Trooper224]

I've never seen a department clean by ultrasound. I'm not saying it doesn't happen, but in nearly thirty years I never saw it.

When we T&E'd the P230 I was a big fan. I loved the way the large grip module fit my hand and it shot very well. This was before the whole drop-safe fiasco. However, I think all of the P230's supposed advantages really don't amount to much in reality, in either military or LE application. Most of them simply won't be utilized. In the end, the P230 can't do anything on an institutional level the Glock isn't already doing.

[El Cid]

I've never seen a department clean by ultrasound. I'm not saying it doesn't happen, but in nearly thirty years I never saw it.

When we T&E'd the P230 I was a big fan. I loved the way the large grip module fit my hand and it shot very well. This was before the whole drop-safe fiasco. However, I think all of the P230's supposed advantages really don't amount to much in reality, in either military or LE application. Most of them simply won't be utilized. In the end, the P230 can't do anything on an institutional level the Glock isn't already doing.

I’m not trying to be a smart ass - but since you were in LE back when the P230 was popular, are you referencing the .380? Or was that a typo and you meant the P320?

[AMC]

I've never seen a department clean by ultrasound. I'm not saying it doesn't happen, but in nearly thirty years I never saw it.

When we T&E'd the P230 I was a big fan. I loved the way the large grip module fit my hand and it shot very well. This was before the whole drop-safe fiasco. However, I think all of the P230's supposed advantages really don't amount to much in reality, in either military or LE application. Most of them simply won't be utilized. In the end, the P230 can't do anything on an institutional level the Glock isn't already doing.

We do ultrasonic cleanings. The machine is loaded with MPro7. Surprised about the "no ultrasonic" thing from Sig, though, HCM. I'll ask our guy about that tomorrow.

[Trooper224]

I’m not trying to be a smart ass - but since you were in LE back when the P230 was popular, are you referencing the .380? Or was that a typo and you meant the P320?

I think it's my early onset dementia kicking in. Yes, P320.

[El Cid]

I think it's my early onset dementia kicking in. Yes, P320.

Lol! I blame how Sig names/numbers their guns.

[Trooper224]

Lol! I blame how Sig names/numbers their guns.

Well, I was forever scarred at a young age by Smith & Wesson's 3rd Generation numbering scheme. Maybe Sig is giving me PTSD flashbacks.

[TGS]

We do ultrasonic cleanings. The machine is loaded with MPro7. Surprised about the "no ultrasonic" thing from Sig, though, HCM. I'll ask our guy about that tomorrow.

When/for who/how often/for what reasons do you guys perform ultrasonic cleanings? Thanks in advance.

[HCM]

How many departments are actually conducting any sort of regular ultrasonic cleaning on a systematic level that makes it a legitimate reason to buy the gun?

How many departments are so backlogged on pistol repairs that they are unable to maintain force readiness?

Again, goes back to my point that the platform might have all sorts of neat features compared to other striker fired polymer pistols......but pretty much none of them are actually meaningful. They're just "neat", are likely completely under-or-unutilized, and the real reason for agencies buying them (I hypothesize) is because they already have SIGs, want to stay with the company/support network they already know, and so they buy the polymer pistol that SIG has to sell.

I guess about the only exception to that would be if an agency had a "no trigger pull for disassembly" rule. How many of the agencies adopting them have that rule?

How many agencies will adopt a modular handgun and then prohibit officers from utilizing that modularity ? (Hint- the answer is more than you think)

[LockedBreech]

Doing a quick mental check, seemed like Sig now has 4 or so State Patrol agencies...then I realized it's quite a lot more.

Nevada
Ohio
Oklahoma
North Dakota
Virginia
Texas
Kansas

So, 7 that I can think of. For 50 state patrol agencies that is surprisingly rapid adoption. Is it because like an earlier poster said a lot of them were Classic P-Series Sig agencies?

[Trooper224]

Doing a quick mental check, seemed like Sig now has 4 or so State Patrol agencies...then I realized it's quite a lot more.

Nevada
Ohio
Oklahoma
North Dakota
Virginia
Texas
Kansas

So, 7 that I can think of. For 50 state patrol agencies that is surprisingly rapid adoption. Is it because like an earlier poster said a lot of them were Classic P-Series Sig agencies?

Kansas is Glock.

[LockedBreech]

Kansas is Glock.

Oh, thanks for nothing Google. I based it on seeing a KHP P320 Armorer Course listed.

[TGS]

Doing a quick mental check, seemed like Sig now has 4 or so State Patrol agencies...then I realized it's quite a lot more.

Nevada- Yes
Ohio- Yes
Oklahoma- Edit: I'm seeing YES, they were issued SIGs, Troopers could buy Glocks though
North Dakota- Yes
Virginia- Yes
Texas- Yes
Kansas- N/A as noted by Trooper224

So, 7 that I can think of. For 50 state patrol agencies that is surprisingly rapid adoption. Is it because like an earlier poster said a lot of them were Classic P-Series Sig agencies?

My notes in red. 6 out of 6 issued SIGs prior to switching to the P320.

[TheNewbie]

My notes in red.

I thought Oklahoma did. At one time I believe OHP had personally owned weapons list. Not sure if they still do.

https://www.americanrifleman.org/articles/2015/6/23/oklahoma-highway-patrol-chooses-the-sig-p320/

[TGS]

I thought Oklahoma did. At one time I believe OHP had personally owned weapons list. Not sure if they still do.

https://www.americanrifleman.org/articles/2015/6/23/oklahoma-highway-patrol-chooses-the-sig-p320/

Noted. The article I read appears to be confused about the idea of personally owned/authorized vs issued. Photos seem to indicate P226s as the issued sidearm.

LockedBreech, seems to be 6 out of 6 State agencies on that list who issue P320s were issuing SIGs before the switch to the P320.

A quick search of local PDs indicates that SIG went heavy with a loss-leader strategy and offered one-for-one trades to PDs at no cost, some of them openly admitting that's the reason they switched pistols.

Kind of just seals it for me that the adoption of the P320 has virtually zilch to do with any of its features outside of possibly a specific few customers.

[Trooper224]

Oklahoma is currently issuing the P320. I don't know if they still allow personally owned weapons.

[AMC]

Noted. The article I read appears to be confused about the idea of personally owned/authorized vs issued. Photos seem to indicate P226s as the issued sidearm.

LockedBreech, seems to be 6 out of 6 State agencies on that list who issue P320s were issuing SIGs before the switch to the P320.

A quick search of local PDs indicates that SIG went heavy with a loss-leader strategy and offered one-for-one trades to PDs at no cost, some of them openly admitting that's the reason they switched pistols.

Kind of just seals it for me that the adoption of the P320 has virtually zilch to do with any of its features outside of possibly a specific few customers.

You're not wrong....but I think a lot of it has to do with the "not Glock" factor as well. Folks seem to forget the numerous issues Glock has also had throughout the years, and their habit of threatening police armorers/instructors with civil actions if they badmouthed the guns...

And I say this as a guy who likes Glocks. And M&Ps (personal favorite). Even HKs.....though you lot are a bunch of freaking cultists.

ETA: about the ultrasonic question.....our armorers will do it every 10,000 rounds or so on a service, or more often depending on need. Did it to a few dozen academy recruits guns that were subjected to a week long torrential downpour, then put away wet, with predictable results. Did it to one of my 226's that had gone 6000 rounds with no cleaning, and when I disassembled it pieces of carbon were falling out you could hear hitting the table.

[TGS]

You're not wrong....but I think a lot of it has to do with the "not Glock" factor as well. Folks seem to forget the numerous issues Glock has also had throughout the years, and their habit of threatening police armorers/instructors with civil actions if they badmouthed the guns...

And I say this as a guy who likes Glocks. And M&Ps (personal favorite). Even HKs.....though you lot are a bunch of freaking cultists.

As an H&K cultist that used to hate on Glocks something harsh, and a guy that is currently super happy with my issued Glock 19M that replaced my SIG P229 that I liked as well.....

….I hadn't heard about Glock threatening lawsuits against armorers for badmouthing their guns! There's certainly a very storied history of Glock using the end-user as beta testers, something that H&K is definitely not in the habit of doing.

H&K went the unfortunate route of going too shootable on the trigger from the backlash/unpopularity it suffered with the DA/SA and LEM guns. The one example I handed was in no way shape or form acceptable as a carry gun sans thumb safety. Ditto the PPQ. So, while I really think H&K is unique with the quality of the products, R&D, and QA processes they use, it's simply a shame that their current striker option isn't suitable for anything but shooting at the range (in my opinion, YMMV).

[JBP55]

As an H&K cultist that used to hate on Glocks something harsh, and a guy that is currently super happy with my issued Glock 19M that replaced my SIG P229 that I liked as well.....

….I hadn't heard about Glock threatening lawsuits against armorers for badmouthing their guns! There's certainly a very storied history of Glock using the end-user as beta testers, something that H&K is definitely not in the habit of doing.

H&K went the unfortunate route of going too shootable on the trigger from the backlash/unpopularity it suffered with the DA/SA and LEM guns. The one example I handed was in no way shape or form acceptable as a carry gun sans thumb safety. Ditto the PPQ. So, while I really think H&K is unique with the quality of the products, R&D, and QA processes they use, it's simply a shame that their current striker option isn't suitable for anything but shooting at the range (in my opinion, YMMV).


I have owned several VP9/VP9SK pistols and the trigger pull weight was similar to my Gen 5 Glocks and heavier than my PPQ's.

[98z28]

...

And he taught us a great trick for the trigger return spring. I can pop those on and off with no damage and no tools needed.



I'll buy the drinks if you'll share that trick!

Sent from my SM-N950U1 using Tapatalk

[DocGKR]

"I hadn't heard about Glock threatening lawsuits against armorers for badmouthing their guns!"

Most definitely happened in the dark days of the gen 4 introduction fiasco....

[Kirk]

I'm really not at all trying to get out of my lane wrt LEO, but it is really surprising to me that such a big force behind these procurement decisions is whether or not the gun requires a trigger press to disassemble. I realize it may not be a primary decision maker, but the fact it plays such a major role is interesting to me.

[John Hearne]

Not sure of they mentioned it when you went through the armorer school but when I went through in June last year they specifically advised against use use of ultra sonic cleaners. ... Their rationale was that SIG only recommends use of cleaners and lubes specifically made for firearms and there is no ultrasonic leaning fluid specifically for firearms.

Really? Sig is infamous for not having any institutional memory. Pretty sure Lucas was the lube de jour a couple of years back and guess what Lucas makes:

https://lucasoil.com/products/out-door-line/lucas-extreme-duty-bore-solvent-ultrasonic-gun-cleaner

I haven't done a lot of guns in it but as best I can tell, it is keeping its promise to have rust preventatives and be a one step process.

[John Hearne]

When/for who/how often/for what reasons do you guys perform ultrasonic cleanings? Thanks in advance.

Most folks I know, do it as a labor saving device. Most folks will strip, run through with a cleaner, and then relube with an oil bath. No detailed scrubbing involved. A fellow armorer tries to run his stuff through once a year - it's not perfect but it solves 95% of the clean/lube problem for very minimal labor investment.

I had a Spaulding class coming up and wanted a clean gun. From start to finish I was done in less than 30 minutes.

I know one agency that gave up on its guys cleaning their Glocks. The armorers can run them in the ultrasonic once a year and keep everything working.

[HCM]

I'm really not at all trying to get out of my lane wrt LEO, but it is really surprising to me that such a big force behind these procurement decisions is whether or not the gun requires a trigger press to disassemble. I realize it may not be a primary decision maker, but the fact it plays such a major role is interesting to me.

It’s a factor, it’s not the factor some in this thread make it out to be but “Glock hand” is a very real thing.

Some places make it a selection factor but given that NYPD (38k LEO) and now CBP (45k LEO) - the two largest LE Agencies in North America issue Glocks it’s not THAT big a deal

Most LEOs are in the middle of the bell curve and as competent with firearms as they are required to be. However, in any group there is always a bottom end of the bell curve who are borderline incompetent. Some are truly incompetent but most are simply so indifferent they have devolved into incompetence.

Every ND I’m aware of involving pulling the trigger to disassemble a Glock was the result of someone who did not understand the pistol’s cycle of operation. They either 1) reversing the clearing process i.e rack a round THEN take the mag out, not realizing they chambered another round or 2) lock the slide back without removing the magazine, then having seen a round come out of the chamber, drop the slide not realizing they just chambered another round.

I don’t know what you do for a living but most of those on the bottom of the bell curve have exactly as much interest in their firearm as you might have in the fire extinguisher in your office or the spare tire in a rental car - i.e. not much until you need it.

[HCM]

Really? Sig is infamous for not having any institutional memory. Pretty sure Lucas was the lube de jour a couple of years back and guess what Lucas makes:

https://lucasoil.com/products/out-door-line/lucas-extreme-duty-bore-solvent-ultrasonic-gun-cleaner

I haven't done a lot of guns in it but as best I can tell, it is keeping its promise to have rust preventatives and be a one step process.

Their reason may be BS but they were definitely a “no” on ultrasonics for the P320.

[spence]

Oklahoma is currently issuing the P320. I don't know if they still allow personally owned weapons.

I'm a long ways from LE, so it's no surprise I did not know this. I do my best to avoid interactions with OHP. When did they make that switch, and how long ago did they issue Glock 32s? I've got a customer who has an OHP marked G32 he bought off a former trooper.

[TheNewbie]

I'm a long ways from LE, so it's no surprise I did not know this. I do my best to avoid interactions with OHP. When did they make that switch, and how long ago did they issue Glock 32s? I've got a customer who has an OHP marked G32 he bought off a former trooper.


I don’t think they issued G32. He might have had it personally marked that way.

Oklahoma was issuing 686s to Reserve Game Wardens well into the 2000s before switching to the Glock 22. The G22 being the duty pistol of full time wardens.

[0ddl0t]

I thought Sig just didn't want you using ultrasonic cleaners on night sights?

[Bucky]

H&K went the unfortunate route of going too shootable on the trigger from the backlash/unpopularity it suffered with the DA/SA and LEM guns. The one example I handed was in no way shape or form acceptable as a carry gun sans thumb safety. Ditto the PPQ. So, while I really think H&K is unique with the quality of the products, R&D, and QA processes they use, it's simply a shame that their current striker option isn't suitable for anything but shooting at the range (in my opinion, YMMV).

I kind of feel the same about the P320.

[lwt16]

I'll buy the drinks if you'll share that trick!

Sent from my SM-N950U1 using Tapatalk

I'll see if I can explain it in pics later when I get off work.

[Trooper224]

I'm a long ways from LE, so it's no surprise I did not know this. I do my best to avoid interactions with OHP. When did they make that switch, and how long ago did they issue Glock 32s? I've got a customer who has an OHP marked G32 he bought off a former trooper.

Can't say on the G32. OHP adopted the P320 pretty soon after its introduction. I believe they were one of the first agencies to do so. Sig was in the running with the KHP, but being Sig they completely fucked up the end game. I was enthusiastic about the 320 after shooting every example Sig offered. Some of our firearms cadre were glock fanboys, no matter what. So, it was kind of neck to neck until the drop-safe issue arose. The decision still hadn't been made when Sig claimed the issue was resolved. Consequently, a new day was scheduled for a new round of tests and what did Sig do? They didn't show up. No phone call, email, etc. Just left a bunch of us at the range with our hands in our pockets. Glock it was.

[ST911]

Not sure of they mentioned it when you went through the armorer school but when I went through in June last year they specifically advised against use use of ultra sonic cleaners.

Their rationale was that SIG only recommends use of cleaners and lubes specifically made for firearms and there is no ultrasonic leaning fluid specifically for firearms.

Somewhere along the way here or elsewhere, I remember a pretty brainy discussion of the effects of ultrasonic cleaning on certain types of plated parts and/or in conjunction with certain chemicals. Anyone else?

[Zincwarrior]

Looks like Sig sales team has their stuff really dialed in. :rolleyes:

[CWM11B]

You can definitely add the NCSHP to the 320 list. They are transitioning from P229s,and staying with the .357 Sig. I'm very interested in seeing how it holds up to that. I've been told their range staff has had them a while and run them pretty hard.

[HCM]

Somewhere along the way here or elsewhere, I remember a pretty brainy discussion of the effects of ultrasonic cleaning on certain types of plated parts and/or in conjunction with certain chemicals. Anyone else?

Given the number of small plated parts in the SIG FCU and striker assembly this would make sense.

[LockedBreech]

H&K went the unfortunate route of going too shootable on the trigger from the backlash/unpopularity it suffered with the DA/SA and LEM guns. The one example I handed was in no way shape or form acceptable as a carry gun sans thumb safety. Ditto the PPQ. So, while I really think H&K is unique with the quality of the products, R&D, and QA processes they use, it's simply a shame that their current striker option isn't suitable for anything but shooting at the range (in my opinion, YMMV).

This was the reason I got rid of my VP9. It was a solidly built gun, ran without issue, and I shot it like a sniper, but in dry fire practice next to my G19 the break was consistently TOO light, to the point I sometimes wasn't ready for it. Good for a target gun but I wasn't interested in a trigger that light for a carry/defense gun.

[LockedBreech]

You can definitely add the NCSHP to the 320 list. They are transitioning from P229s,and staying with the .357 Sig. I'm very interested in seeing how it holds up to that. I've been told their range staff has had them a while and run them pretty hard.

Gotta say, the decision to stick with .357 Sig in 2020 is by far more surprising than the platform swap.

Edit: sorry for the double tap, had two tabs open and didn't realize I was responding to the same thread.

[ccmdfd]

Gotta say, the decision to stick with .357 Sig in 2020 is by far more surprising than the platform swap.

Edit: sorry for the double tap, had two tabs open and didn't realize I was responding to the same thread.

They LOVE the .357 SIG. I mean LOVE big time.

At least every trooper I've ever met.

cc

[TheNewbie]

In 2020 the NHCSP still wears long sleeves and ties all year. .357 seems deeply logical compared to that.

[CWM11B]

And dont get out of the car without that hat on!
The .357 Sig is religion to that organization. To speak of it in anything other than reverent terms is to risk a fight. Nothing against them or the cartridge, but they are rather cultish about it.

[TGS]

So, that's 7 state police agencies mentioned in this thread that have adopted the P320, and all 7 of them were previously issuing SIG.

[TheNewbie]

If I was given plenty of ammo, then I wouldn’t mind the .357 sig all that much. When I was issued one, we got our duty ammo and a box of practice.

[LockedBreech]

If I was given plenty of ammo, then I wouldn’t mind the .357 sig all that much. When I was issued one, we got our duty ammo and a box of practice.

I have a .357 barrel for my M&P40 but it almost never gets shot specifically because of ammo prices. I had a P226 .357 Sig as well but sold it for the same reason.

[TheNewbie]

I have a .357 barrel for my M&P40 but it almost never gets shot specifically because of ammo prices. I had a P226 .357 Sig as well but sold it for the same reason.

I was issued a .357sig DAK P226. With unlimited free ammo I still prefer the 9mm, but I didn’t find the round unpleasant out of that gun. A P2000 LEM I had in .357 sig was not fun to shoot.

[JonInWA]

At one point, I was fairly heavily invested in .357 SIG, to the point of having both .40 and .357 SIG barrels for my P229s and Sigpro 2340; my final .357 SIG pistol was my Beretta 8357 Cougar, which was beautifully made, but an operational disaster. ToddG and I had several detailed conversations on that....

While I still have some boxes of .357 SIG on hand, I no longer have any pistols chambered for it. I guess I could get a barrel for my Glock Gen4 G22, but I've resisted the urge so far...

It's not that .357 SIG is a "bad" cartridge or concept, it's just that it seems to be a niche cartridge sandwiched in between 9mm and .40 (which is having it's own struggles these days...).

The best light that I can personally cast on it is as a flat shooting 9mm with all the recoil of a .40.

I'd have to check, but as I remember, .357 SIG shot to a different POA/POI than .40 did if you were just swapping barrels in a given pistol, and you were trying to use the sights calibrated for the .40...

As others have said (including DocGKR), if they were given free .357 SIG, they'd be a lot more predisposed to it. Otherwise, it doesn't seem to do a lot more than 9mm +P/+P+ in a 5"+ barreled 9mm, and costs a whole heck of a lot more, with more recoil and blast drama to boot.

Best, Jon

[HCM]

The question with the P320 .357 is will the gun hold up to the round ?

NC HP thought the M&P was gonna be GTG in 357 based on testing but it didn’t work out that way. As I recall they went from Beretta 92’s two Beretta cougars to Sig P229 then the M&P then back to Sig P226.

The Sig classics (P226/229 and SP2022) and the HK USPC/P2000 Are the only guns I have seen so far that will stand up to any significant quantity of 357 ammo without durability issues.

The Smith and Wesson M&P In 357 was an abject failure with all LE agencies I’m aware of. Their choice was to stick with the MP in a different caliber or go to a different platform. The Glocks in 357 also had durability issues beyond those seen with .40 cal.

[JonInWA]

The question with the P320 .357 is will the gun hold up to the round ?

NC HP thought the M&P was gonna be GTG in 357 based on testing but it didn’t work out that way. As I recall they went from Beretta 92’s two Beretta cougars to Sig P229 then the M&P then back to Sig P226.

The Sig classics (P226/229 and SP2022) and the HK USPC/P2000 Are the only guns I have seen so far that will stand up to any significant quantity of 357 ammo without durability issues.

The Smith and Wesson M&P In 357 was an abject failure with all LE agencies I’m aware of. Their choice was to stick with the MP in a different caliber or go to a different platform. The Glocks in 357 also had durability issues beyond those seen with .40 cal.

I seem to recall that the Glock G32s also had some operational issues; one of the former SF-guys-turned-trainer carried one for awhile, until he encountered chambering/magazine cartridge travel issues when exposed to dust/dirt.

Best, Jon

[LockedBreech]

The Smith and Wesson M&P In 357 was an abject failure with all LE agencies I’m aware of. Their choice was to stick with the MP in a different caliber or go to a different platform. The Glocks in 357 also had durability issues beyond those seen with .40 cal.

Well shit, I guess that explains why the .357 barrel only cost me like $65

[Wayne Dobbs]

Kansas is Glock.

I was about to say the same thing...

[CWM11B]

The question with the P320 .357 is will the gun hold up to the round ?

NC HP thought the M&P was gonna be GTG in 357 based on testing but it didn’t work out that way. As I recall they went from Beretta 92’s two Beretta cougars to Sig P229 then the M&P then back to Sig P226.

The Sig classics (P226/229 and SP2022) and the HK USPC/P2000 Are the only guns I have seen so far that will stand up to any significant quantity of 357 ammo without durability issues.

The Smith and Wesson M&P In 357 was an abject failure with all LE agencies I’m aware of. Their choice was to stick with the MP in a different caliber or go to a different platform. The Glocks in 357 also had durability issues beyond those seen with .40 cal.

I believe it was Beretta 96, Cougars, 229 DAK, M&P, then 229 Classic, and they are just starting the transition to 320. All prior guns were .40 until the DAK IIRC.

[JonInWA]

I believe it was Beretta 96, Cougars, 229 DAK, M&P, then 229 Classic, and they are just starting the transition to 320. All prior guns were .40 until the DAK IIRC.

NC HP used the 8357 Cougar in .357 SIG, and we're very possibly the driving impetus behind it. The 8357 was withdrawn well before reaching it's forecasted lifespan due to operational issues. Best, Jon

[CWM11B]

I remember they had serious problems with them. My agency looked at the cougar in .40 before going with the SigPro 2340 in .40. The Cougar had the propensity to malf with failure to feed in our evaluation, especially when dirty. Not to nit pick, but the Cougars were .40s, and they rebarreled them to .357 when it came out. I know they had a lot of issues with it. Also, I forgot they did run 92s for a while before going to the 96. Prior to the 92s, it was S&W 686s

[MGW]

I'm pretty sure Oklahoma HP issued the P220 at some point and possibly the P226 but I don't remember for sure. It's been a long time since I've been around any OHP.

[LockedBreech]

I remember they had serious problems with them. My agency looked at the cougar in .40 before going with the SigPro 2340 in .40. The Cougar had the propensity to malf with failure to feed in our evaluation, especially when dirty. Not to nit pick, but the Cougars were .40s, and they rebarreled them to .357 when it came out. I know they had a lot of issues with it. Also, I forgot they did run 92s for a while before going to the 96. Prior to the 92s, it was S&W 686s

I own a pair of Cougars (9mm and .40) and yeah, they're unfortunately the PX4 before Beretta perfected the design. Sleek, sexy, but not at all stake-your-life reliable.

[JonInWA]

I remember they had serious problems with them. My agency looked at the cougar in .40 before going with the SigPro 2340 in .40. The Cougar had the propensity to malf with failure to feed in our evaluation, especially when dirty. Not to nit pick, but the Cougars were .40s, and they rebarreled them to .357 when it came out. I know they had a lot of issues with it. Also, I forgot they did run 92s for a while before going to the 96. Prior to the 92s, it was S&W 686s

We're probably saying essentially the same thing about the 8357. Other than changing the rollmarking from "8040" to "8357" I literally think that that's all they did. They used the 8040's sights, calibrated for .40 for the .357 8357, which was ridiculous (and didn't work well....), and there were never any optional or aftermarket sights for the 8357 that would have corrected the POA/POI issue to the best of my knowledge.

The primary issues HC HP encountered with the 8357 had to do with extraction and jams. BUSA first tried specifying that NC HP utilize different cartridges; when that didn't work, BUSA then modified the extractor assembly, I believe attempting a double-nested extractor spring-which didn't work either.

My understanding is that NC HP walked away from the Cougar platform at that point.

Lubrication with the Cougars, especially with the .40 8040 and .357 SIG 8357 was huge. Beretta persisted in specified using only oil as a lubricant, which on the reciprocation surfaces of the rotating barrel, cam tooth and breech areas tended to evaporate/migrate/cook off-at which point the gun would solidly lock up, and you couldn't free it up until either it sufficiently cooled down or applied brute force to the rear of the slide. Specifying grease or TW25B or similar on these areas probably would have significantly ameliorated the seizing-up issue, but then there were the extraction issues inherent to the 8357.

I had a BNIB 8357 F Cougar (probably surplus from the NC HP production order), so I'm very well acquainted first hand with its issues, which I personally encountered all of the above on mine. I really wanted to like the damned thing-I thought the rotating barrel concept could play exceptionally well with the .357, and the ergos on the Cougar were generally exceptional-much like the SIG P225 (they would even share the same holsters). Unfortunately, it was insufficiently developed, particularly regarding .40 and .357 SIG cartridges. It was also authorized for LAPD in its .45 ACP chambering (designated 8045 as I recall), albeit with an extended barrel (produced by Beretta to meet that requirement), but for what it was, capacity was low, weight was relatively high, so I doubt that all that many were procured by LAPD officers, but I've never seen any hard figures on that. I have not heard of systemic issues with Cougars in 9mm or .45ACP .

As most of you probably already know, Beretta sold/transferred Cougar production machinery and manufacturing to Stoeger in Turkey, who marketed them for years with the Stoegar rollmark.

They then went to the PX4, which pretty much languished for the most part, perhaps unfairly tarnished by being in the shadow of the Cougar, until Ernest Langdon pretty much single-handedly revived interest and sales, and came up with some excellent mods/enhancements.

Apparently there was some significant internal controversy and disaffection between BUSA and Beretta Italy regarding the Cougar, which probably didn't help subsequent fielding and marketing.

Best, Jon

[ccmdfd]

I remember they had serious problems with them. My agency looked at the cougar in .40 before going with the SigPro 2340 in .40. The Cougar had the propensity to malf with failure to feed in our evaluation, especially when dirty. Not to nit pick, but the Cougars were .40s, and they rebarreled them to .357 when it came out. I know they had a lot of issues with it. Also, I forgot they did run 92s for a while before going to the 96. Prior to the 92s, it was S&W 686s

Yeah they hated them.

I was under the impression that they also felt BUSA left a lot to be desired from a customer service standpoint.

Curious if their new 320's will have safeties. They had a couple of lives saved from the 92's safety when the bad guys got a hold of the guns.

cc

[HCM]

I believe it was Beretta 96, Cougars, 229 DAK, M&P, then 229 Classic, and they are just starting the transition to 320. All prior guns were .40 until the DAK IIRC.

I have a surplus NC HP marked 92. They definately used them at one time. Per a buddy who was the firearms training Sgt at their academy, they went from revolvers to 92s in 9mm. Unless they did a stint with 96's in between the 92s and the cougars.

I was told the M&P's in 357 were replaced with P226R's though I don't recall if they went DAK or DA/SA.

[HCM]

I believe it was Beretta 96, Cougars, 229 DAK, M&P, then 229 Classic, and they are just starting the transition to 320. All prior guns were .40 until the DAK IIRC.

The cougars were a disaster of "we don't talk about the Cougars" proportions.

I was told the M&P's in 357 were replaced with P226R's though I don't recall if they went DAK or DA/SA. One of the driving forces in the move from the 229 DAK to the M&P was the constant issues with losing 229 grip screws and guns having to be deadline because bubba gorilla'ed the steel grip screws and stripped out the threads in the aluminum frame. in case you were wondering why SIG came out with the E2 grip.

[CWM11B]

Yep, corrected myself a couple of posts back. They did have the 96 for a period before the Cougars. Who was your bud?`I may know him

[HCM]

I'm pretty sure Oklahoma HP issued the P220 at some point and possibly the P226 but I don't remember for sure. It's been a long time since I've been around any OHP.

My recollection is they mirrored TX DPS HP. revolvers, the SIG P-220s then P-226s in .357 SIG plus a very liberal personally owned weapons policy.

[CanineCombatives]

Since we are looking at state agencies it may be fair game to morph it into city agencies that have gone 320, but limit it to the prominent ones, say 500 sworn or larger, of those, the most recent and significant is Milwaukee PD who switched from M&P.

Oh, and back to state agencies, just heard Nevada Highway Patrol went 320 as well:)

[HCM]

Yep, corrected myself a couple of posts back. They did have the 96 for a period before the Cougars. Who was your bud?`I may know him

Chk your PM

[lwt16]

I'll buy the drinks if you'll share that trick!

Sent from my SM-N950U1 using Tapatalk


It helps to have a home made armorer’s block.

49159


49160

Start with the trigger bar engaged with the trigger, keep your left thumb on that end, and place the end where the trigger spring engages the trigger bar with that part BEHIND the sear housing.

49161

Engage trigger return spring in that end like so.
49162

Take your left index finger and engage the trigger return spring to that part.
49163

Push the trigger bar around the sear housing while maintaining left thumb pressure on the trigger/trigger bar part and it should pop right into place.

[El Cid]

Oh, and back to state agencies, just heard Nevada Highway Patrol went 320 as well:)

Um, that’s literally the title of this thread. Lol!

[CanineCombatives]

Damn, and I was the second post in the thread too! Glad I could provide some satire.......