New 2 July 2020 SIG P320 Lawsuit and P320 Concerns

[JonInWA]

On July 2nd, a suit against SIG regarding the P320 was filed in Federal District Court, in New Hampshire:

https://bloximages.newyork1.vip.townnews.com/unionleader.com/content/tncms/assets/v3/editorial/f/05/f05682b2-2361-573f-8c21-005cb88abc0f/5f03a0863c886.pdf.pdf

The suit is very interesting; the plaintiff alleges he had a P320 that essentially went off by itself, with no trigger manipulation. The plaintff's P320 is one that had not undergone SIG's "Voluntary Upgrade Program (VUP)."

What's interesting about the lawsuit (and it goes without saying, it's a lawsuit, with one party alleging) is that it cites specific instances of other P320s that HAD undergone the SIG VUP upgrade similarly self-firing; this is a huge concern.

This suit was brought to my attention of p-f member lwt16, who is an active sworn career LEO and also a leader in a large church security team, which is armed with P320s. Both he an I have been delving deep into this as best we can for the past week or so, due to our personal and organizational concerns.

I've read through the complete suit several times, and it provides a seemingly accurate picture of the P320 and SIG. As many of you know, I personally own a 2019 production in 9mm (more about the significance of P320 production dates shortly), originally a Compact RX, currrently (and probably permanently) equipped with a X Carry grip module and a SIG steel shroud for the OEM Romeo1 RDS. To date mine has 1068 problem-free rounds through it, all of it factory cartridges, primarily Sellier & Bellot 124 gr.

Lwt16 has 2, both personally owned, a 2017 and a 2020 production. He'll talk about them in greater detail shortly.

After some research, we've determined what we feel are the essentially 4 production year categories of the P320:

1. Military M17/M18s;

2. Original P320s without the VUP modifications;

3. Pre-4/2018 production P320s that have undergone the VUP modifications by SIG;

4. 4/18 and subsequent production P320s.

Essentially, we believe that P320s in Categorys 1 and 4 are intrinsically good to go, without evidence of self-discharging issues. Categories 2 and 3 are problematic, and of significant safety concern to both users, organizations and bystanders. We strongly suspect (based on component inspections and comparisons of a 2017 and 2020 production P320 components), but have not had officially confirmed by SIG that SIG has induced running changes to the P320 subsequent to the initiation of the VUP in 2017, particularly regarding the sear and sear springs, and that those changes may have become incorporated into April 2018 and subsequent production.

Additionally, Lwt16 is a factory certified SIG P320 Armorer, and has personally detail examined and inspected at least 40 P320s of varying production dates, and found QC issues with 13 of the 40 P320s. I'll let Larry address those in greater detail.

We've had some detailed discussions on the forum regarding SIG's issues and integrity in dealing with them. My personal expereinces with SIG, both recently and back to the 1990s have been superb; I have nothing but praise for the individuals with which I've dealt with, and my personal P320 has been a flawless performer, and is used for duty, IDPA, EDC and home defense. But I'm very troubled by the Category 2 and 3 P320s-particularly with the possibilities that the VUP did not intrinsically resolve the previous safety issues with the P320, and they may not have been resolved until possibly 4/18 and subsequent production.

Realizing that what we're predominantly looking at is a lawsuit, with aggrieved party allegations, yet to go throughly through the legal process, my thoughts are as follows:

1. If you own and use what I've temed a Category 2 or 3 production P320, I would either cease carry/suspend use or carry only Condition 3 (magazine loaded, chamber empty) until the gun was sent to SIG for them to individually examine and certify the weapon-especially upgrading with the necessary current production upgraded/modified components;

2. If you are LEO, I would suggest individually and or organizationally addressing these P320s with your Regional SIG LEO Representative; if a commercial user, I'd contact SIG Customer Service and request a RMA (and shipping label) for inspection and servicing.

Personally, I'm invested in my P320; it's been an accurate and reliable pistol that has earned my trust, and is also being used to test current Check-Mate Industries' P320 magazines (which are also performing flawlessly-collectivelly mine and with multiple other p-f members participating; there are currently about 65 of these magazines being tested).

We've all got a lot to deal with these days, COVID-19 and life in general. We don't need the spectre of a duty/EDC gun having a self-ignition added to that burden. I am hoping that SIG responsibly steps up and thoroughly ventilates and addresses these allegations with urgency and immediacy-legally and publically.

Best, Jon

[lwt16]

To say this has brought strife to my existence is putting it mildly.

Heavily invested in the platform.

[RevolverRob]

Subscribed to this thread with extreme interest.

I would like to request that we self-moderate and allow JonInWA and lwt16 make their various posts addressing their observations and communications, before we begin a conversation in earnest.

[HCountyGuy]

Edit: withdrawing post in agreement with Rob’s request and will re-post down the line.

[98z28]

Huh. Can't say I'm surprised. The hasty nature of the upgrade implementation has always smelled funny. What are the odds that Sig fixed the issue without introducing additional problems just by adding some extra parts and doing sone milling? I've been optimistic the the 320 will get sorted out through the fielding of military guns, but I've been skeptical of the existing commercial P320.

I am very curious about the specific differences y'all have identified between guns in group 3 and 4, as I have a few of them (pre-2018 guns that have been "upgraded" by Sig). My examples have been awesome, I am deeply invested in the P320 system, and I'd like to stay with it, if possible. Are the differences in just the upper or lower (i.e. can you solve it by getting a post 4/18 "conversion kit" and putting it on an upgraded FCU)? Are there specific issues we can look for? Is there anything you are using as a "go/no go" for your personal guns?

Sent from my SM-N950U1 using Tapatalk

[lwt16]

Slight differences in the sear and possibly the dual sear springs. I'll post more (pics) later when I can.

I can tear each down and compare and contrast any other parts if asked. I do know that there was one part no longer installed on the P320s......of recent manufacture....the safety lever spring. I've read that they no longer install this part in the FCUs of recent production. I've seen two examples and own a 2020 variant that did not contain this spring.

My church team decided to pull them temporarily and get qualified on other pistols for the time being. There's been some gnashing of teeth. So far, the messenger hasn't been shot.....but may be in the sight picture. lol

Regards.

57503

57504

Sorry for the pic quality. I spend my cash on ammo and B8 repair centers.

[Clusterfrack]

Deleted

[MK11]

[QUOTE=JonInWA;1084792]On July 2nd, a suit against SIG regarding the P320 was filed in Federal District Court, in New Hampshire:


1. If you own and use what I've temed a Category 2 or 3 production P320, I would either cease carry/suspend use or carry only Condition 3 (magazine loaded, chamber empty) until the gun was sent to SIG for them to individually examine and certify the weapon-especially upgrading with the necessary current production upgraded/modified components;


Any suggestions on how to open this conversation with Sig? I've got a 2017 320 that's been "upgraded" and I previously went through a couple frustrating years trying to unfuck a P220 ST with the bum internal extractor. My experience with Sig reps at the time was denial that there was an issue--until Sig started offering to swap and fit new slides with external extractors (for a not insignificant price).

[farscott]

Really dumb question: How does one know that a particular FCU was made before or after the 4/18 date? Serial number lookup? Visual inspection of a certain part? If serial number, is there a known number which can serve a a cutoff?

While I currently have no P320 pistols, I have friends who do, including more than one HSV LEO. As such, I want to be conversant with the issues and fixes.

[JonInWA]

Guys, both of us have tried to do our due diligence as best as possible before initiating this discussion thread. We're certainly not "out to get SIG" or trying grandstand on this. We're both personally/organizationally invested, and simultaneously troubled and concerned over the details covered in the lawsuit.

We'd like to keep the discussion as professional as possible. We're hoping that some of those who individually and organizationally experienced on the platform can contribute based on their empirical experiences and observations.

Best, Jon

[lwt16]

Due to being in litigation, I doubt there will be too much Sig corporate will say on advice of counsel. It may be a while before it's settled/adjudicated.

I have tried to contact them in the past via armorer support. I found it lacking.

I just got a Wilson Combat grip module for mine...the newer Carry II. It solved the grip problem I had with the gun. I like the thing.......I just feel uneasy with carrying it now.

[lwt16]

Really dumb question: How does one know that a particular FCU was made before or after the 4/18 date? Serial number lookup? Visual inspection of a certain part? If serial number, is there a known number which can serve a a cutoff?

While I currently have no P320 pistols, I have friends who do, including more than one HSV LEO. As such, I want to be conversant with the issues and fixes.

I found my build dates on the box.

[JonInWA]

Really dumb question: How does one know that a particular FCU was made before or after the 4/18 date? Serial number lookup? Visual inspection of a certain part? If serial number, is there a known number which can serve a a cutoff?

While I currently have no P320 pistols, I have friends who do, including more than one HSV LEO. As such, I want to be conversant with the issues and fixes.

It's actually pretty simple-your polymer case that the P320 came in has a barcode sticker with the production date printed on it; on mine it's to the immediate right of the model designation/sku sticker.

If that's not available, I would think that SIG can provide you with the production date based on the serial number.

Best, Jon

[JonInWA]

There may also be limits to the information that SIG/SIG Engineering, etc. provides to their field LEO and Commercial Sales Reps; I've found that to be the case with at least one other major manufacturer in the past.

Best, Jon

[Totem Polar]

I would like to request that we self-moderate and allow JonInWA and lwt16 make their various posts addressing their observations and communications, before we begin a conversation in earnest.

Concur.

[HCM]

Huh. Can't say I'm surprised. The hasty nature of the upgrade implementation has always smelled funny. What are the odds that Sig fixed the issue without introducing additional problems just by adding some extra parts and doing sone milling? I've been optimistic the the 320 will get sorted out through the fielding of military guns, but I've been skeptical of the existing commercial P320.

I am very curious about the specific differences y'all have identified between guns in group 3 and 4, as I have a few of them (pre-2018 guns that have been "upgraded" by Sig). My examples have been awesome, I am deeply invested in the P320 system, and I'd like to stay with it, if possible. Are the differences in just the upper or lower (i.e. can you solve it by getting a post 4/18 "conversion kit" and putting it on an upgraded FCU)? Are there specific issues we can look for? Is there anything you are using as a "go/no go" for your personal guns?

Sent from my SM-N950U1 using Tapatalk

I can't definitively answer your question but if you read between the lines I think the answer to your question is below:

My Agency, with 15,000 armed LEOs has adopted a "DHS" specific SKU / model P320 carry 9 mm with an X grip as our standard issue pistol, replacing the SIG P229R DAK 40. The testing and adoption process spanned 3 to 4 years and over 200,000 rounds of Gold dot duty ammo.

In addition to GOV issued guns, we are allowed to use certain agency approved Personally Owned Weapons (POW). Unlike the approved Glock POWs and the SIG P365 POWs which may be standard commercial / Blue Label/ IOP guns, only DHS SKU P320s (usually purchased via an agency specific program) are authorized for POW/Duty use.

We are allowed (at least on POW) to use most SIG OEM Grip shells (except is the Legion Tungsten) and most SIG OEM Slide / exchange kits (no porting or lightening cuts in the slide permitted).

The DHS sku FCU has been described to me as an M17/M18 FCU without the thumb safety.

Based on this fact pattern, Commercial slides and grips ok - commercial FCU no go, a reasonable person might infer the issues were in the FCU.

[98z28]

I can't definitively answer your question but if you read between the lines I think the answer to your question is below:

My Agency, with 15,000 armed LEOs has adopted a "DHS" specific SKU / model P320 carry 9 mm with an X grip as our standard issue pistol, replacing the SIG P229R DAK 40. The testing and adoption process spanned 3 to 4 years and over 200,000 rounds of Gold dot duty ammo.

In addition to GOV issued guns, we are allowed to use certain agency approved Personally Owned Weapons (POW). Unlike the approved Glock POWs and the SIG P365 POWs which may be standard commercial / Blue Label/ IOP guns, only DHS SKU P320s (usually purchased via an agency specific program) are authorized for POW/Duty use.

We are allowed (at least on POW) to use most SIG OEM Grip shells (except is the Legion Tungsten) and most SIG OEM Slide / exchange kits (no porting or lightening cuts in the slide permitted).

The DHS sku FCU has been described to me as an M17/M18 FCU without the thumb safety.

Based on this fact pattern, Commercial slides and grips ok - commercial FCU no go, a reasonable person might infer the issues were in the FCU.

Excellent info, thank you. This matches with what lwt16 posted upthread as well. It also tells me that this issue has, once again, has been known...and yet a bunch of are still walking around with these things in our holsters. That's as far as I'll go on bashing Sig for now.

The list from the OP calls out "military" M17/18 as probably good to go. Are we reasonably sure that the commercial versions of these do not have the updated FCU, or is that unknown (@lwt16: have you inspected any commercial M17/18's)?

[lwt16]

Excellent info, thank you. This matches with what lwt16 posted upthread as well. It also tells me that this issue has, once again, has been known...and yet a bunch of are still walking around with these things in our holsters. That's as far as I'll go on bashing Sig for now.

The list from the OP calls out "military" M17/18 as probably good to go. Are we reasonably sure that the commercial versions of these do not have the updated FCU, or is that unknown (@lwt16: have you inspected any commercial M17/18's)?

No I have not had the opportunity. Also, my armorer's class didn't cover the manual safety installation or removal although it is in my Armorer's manual.

I'm really curious now as to what a DHS FCU looks like when busted down to the bitty parts.

I am planning on tearing both FCUs that I do own down to see if I can detect any other parts changes. I did take both apart but didn't really look carefully at the rest of the FCU parts. I didn't see anything other than the aforementioned striker safety lever spring omission in the 2020 model.

Thanks to HCM for that post.

[Nephrology]

Subscribed to this thread with extreme interest.

I would like to request that we self-moderate and allow JonInWA and lwt16 make their various posts addressing their observations and communications, before we begin a conversation in earnest.

I can always go back and edit the OP if this thread gets long and we want to consolidate their observations into the first post.

[Wake27]

Interesting. I’ve wondered about the claims with the M17s and M18s not being affected by the previous ADs since I’m issued one.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Tokarev]

Could this lawsuit be filed by someone looking to make a buck? Maybe even someone who has an anti-gun agenda who wants to financially hurt SIG. Or maybe someone who shot a hole in something and is looking to blame the gun/company rather than take responsibility?



Sent from my SM-A505U using Tapatalk

[HCountyGuy]

Reposting my earlier thoughts:

I believe I, and others, expressed some reserved skepticism to see how “upgraded” P320s would hold up. I can’t recall without a search that I’m not ready to commit to currently, but weren’t there some potential mechanical issues identified with the “upgraded” models in regards to one of the internal safety features?

Edit: Quick search, it looks like there was concern over possible issues with the disconnector

Thread (https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?28531-P320-came-back-from-voluntary-upgrade)

[JonInWA]

Could this lawsuit be filed by someone looking to make a buck? Maybe even someone who has an anti-gun agenda who wants to financially hurt SIG. Or maybe someone who shot a hole in something and is looking to blame the gun/company rather than take responsibility?



Sent from my SM-A505U using Tapatalk

Any and all of the above is certainly possible. That's why we suggest you thoroughly read through the lawsuit and extrapolate what you think is pertinent.

I will say that by my reading the background information in it seems to be very solid and consistant.

What would have been helpful would have been the manufacture dates of all the guns cited that experienced an "uncommanded" discharge, but I imagine that'll come out either in the discovery process or at trial.

Best, Jon

[Tokarev]

Any and all of the above is certainly possible. That's why we suggest you thoroughly read through the lawsuit and extrapolate what you think is pertinent.

I will say that by my reading the background information in it seems to be very solid and consistant.

What would have been helpful would have been the manufacture dates of all the guns cited that experienced an "uncommanded" discharge, but I imagine that'll come out either in the discovery process or at trial.

Best, JonI'm not meaning to flame you or say you're pushing an agenda--other than a desire to get the story straight.

Sent from my SM-A505U using Tapatalk

[Lon]

Interesting. I’ll keep watching. We’re buying new duty pistols next year and the 320 is one that is being looked at. Fortunately there are other options as well. The Chief is gonna give us a couple to choose from. Sig is a morally bankrupt a company that should be ashamed of themselves.

[TheNewbie]

Thank you two for the effort and time you have put into understanding this issue, and for making this thread.

[lwt16]

I'm not meaning to flame you or say you're pushing an agenda--other than a desire to get the story straight.

Sent from my SM-A505U using Tapatalk

Welcome to the club.

If someone could prove in writing that it's a non-issue it makes my life a bunch easier.

[psalms144.1]

There have been multiple iterations of the military guns as well, so there's not really any guarantee of a "military" gun being built in any specific configuration at this point.

I think the P320 is an awesome, innovative design that's just not being executed very well right now. Not surprising, given the through-put demands for the M17M18 contract, and the immense complexity of the pistol's design. There are officially 47 parts in the gun, but that counts the "striker assembly" as one part. Last time I saw one of those in pieces, there were a BUNCH of fiddly bits in there. Add to this the fact that most of those small parts come from off-shore suppliers of sometimes shaky reputation, and I'm just not sure the pistol is "ready for prime time."

Because it's the issued pistol for our armed forces, and a big chunk of our Federal, State and Local LEAs, I really hope the platform stands up to hard use. I just have concerns that the company's corporate focus (profits and market share at all costs) is so at odds with the complexity of the platform that things will always be in a state of flux with this pistol. Maybe 10 years down the road it'll have shaken out, but I wouldn't want one for duty at this point.

[lwt16]

57525

57527

57528

57529

[lwt16]

57530

57531

57532

57533

[lwt16]

57534

57535

57536

A few changes but nothing major. The sear springs seem better as does the quality of material for the disconnector and sear.

[Tokarev]

Have you tried any drop tests with a primed case? Or smacking the rear of the slide with a rubber mallet?

Sent from my SM-A505U using Tapatalk

[HCM]

No I have not had the opportunity. Also, my armorer's class didn't cover the manual safety installation or removal although it is in my Armorer's manual.

I'm really curious now as to what a DHS FCU looks like when busted down to the bitty parts.

I am planning on tearing both FCUs that I do own down to see if I can detect any other parts changes. I did take both apart but didn't really look carefully at the rest of the FCU parts. I didn't see anything other than the aforementioned striker safety lever spring omission in the 2020 model.

Thanks to HCM for that post.

My factory armorers class (self funded) did not cover the manual safety either.

We (including field Armorers) are not allowed to disasseble the FCU on our duty guns, including POWs so it will remain a mystery. What ever our faults, we have firearms and ammo test and evauluation capability on par with the FBI. We are currently authorized a dozen or so models of Glock and SIG striker fired 9mms and the only one which cannot be a COTS (commercial off the shelf) model is the P320. Make of that what you will.

[Runt1122]

Another story from this week! Milwaukee PD officer shot with holstered P320.

https://www.wisn.com/article/mpd-gun-manufacturer-linked-to-lawsuits-over-unintended-shootings/33329957

[RJ]

HCM just confirming, your organization is ok with the P365/P365XL series for POW?

[jlw]

Earlier this week, I was about to place an order for a Pro series 320 when I saw a reference to this lawsuit elsewhere. Now I am hesitant.

[HCM]

HCM just confirming, your organization is ok with the P365/P365XL series for POW?

Yes, the P365 is authorized and the P365XL just passed testing and should be on the list as of 1st quarter FY 2021.

Unlike the 320 they can be regular COTS/IOP purchases, just have to pass an armorer inspection. They must be black, with night sights, no thumb safety or SAS models.

[HCM]

I'm not meaning to flame you or say you're pushing an agenda--other than a desire to get the story straight.

Sent from my SM-A505U using Tapatalk

The lawsuit cites examples of post upgrade guns having issues but actual plaintiff's gun is a pre upgrade model which had not been upgraded.

I can tell you the issues with the original pre upgrade commercial guns were a real thing.

What I can't tell you is how the post upgrade commerical guns compare in detail to the thoughly tested models evaluated by our agencies or to the .MIL guns.

[spinmove_]

My factory armorers class (self funded) did not cover the manual safety either.

We (including field Armorers) are not allowed to disasseble the FCU on our duty guns, including POWs so it will remain a mystery. What ever our faults, we have firearms and ammo test and evauluation capability on par with the FBI. We are currently authorized a dozen or so models of Glock and SIG striker fired 9mms and the only one which cannot be a COTS (commercial off the shelf) model is the P320. Make of that what you will.

I’m assuming that mandate is from your department’s management/leadership? Did they give a reason why you cannot have a COTS P320 for duty?

[lwt16]

Another story from this week! Milwaukee PD officer shot with holstered P320.

https://www.wisn.com/article/mpd-gun-manufacturer-linked-to-lawsuits-over-unintended-shootings/33329957

Thank you for posting that.

The messenger here was getting hate from the church folk!!

[HCM]

I’m assuming that mandate is from your department’s management/leadership? Did they give a reason why you cannot have a COTS P320 for duty?

They don't need to give reasons. That's not how paramilitary organizations work. In fact they don't have to allow POWs or choices at all.

Policy allows POWs via a perdiodically updated or revised memornadum with a list of specified aproved weapons.

The DHS SKU version is the version that was tested and approved.

It's either authorized or it's not.

The testing protocols would normally be covered by NDAs.

[Tokarev]

I've said in many threads regarding the 320; SIG shouldn't be messing with the voluntary upgrade.

Sent from my SM-A505U using Tapatalk

[HCM]

I've said in many threads regarding the 320; SIG shouldn't be messing with the voluntary upgrade.

Sent from my SM-A505U using Tapatalk

It is a page straight from the Austrian playbook.

Don't use the R word.

[Tokarev]

Don't use the R word.

PERFECTION!

We make fun of Ruger whenever a new model comes out. "When will they issue a recall?"

At least they acknowledge a problem when they have one.



Sent from my SM-A505U using Tapatalk

[Doc_Glock]

Outstanding work lwt16

[tlong17]

I wish I didn’t shoot the P320 demonstrably better. This is just exhausting to go through again. Starting to wonder if the marginally better performance is worth the continued uncertainty. This week was the first week I legitimately thought about the real possibility that the gun pointed at my leg could go off on its own. And that’s with a 2019 model, still doesn’t inspire confidence. I had forgiven SIG to a degree and moved on but my confidence is waining.

[lwt16]

Outstanding work lwt16

Eh.... it had a high price tag.

A good friendship has been strained over it. Really wanted confirmation that they were safe.

I’m not convinced our copies are.

Regards.

[tlong17]

Eh.... it had a high price tag.

A good friendship has been strained over it. Really wanted confirmation that they were safe.

I’m not convinced our copies are.

Regards.

I would hope your desire for their safety and that of others would overcome whatever else may be an issue. Obviously that is your own matter and not for us to discuss on an open forum. Thanks for the info and pics.

[lwt16]

I would hope your desire for their safety and that of others would overcome whatever else may be an issue. Obviously that is your own matter and not for us to discuss on an open forum. Thanks for the info and pics.

It’s all good on this end.

I’m praying for the one(s) that are cross about all this.

I’m sure that they will eventually agree that it was wise to hit the pause button.

[DpdG]

I seem to recall one of the reported in-holster discharges for post-upgrade guns involved a SRO in a school cafeteria and subsequent investigation/surveillance video showed the officer was messing with the gun in the holster at the time of the discharge (half-draws or something like that). I think I heard the officer in question was terminated for less than truthful conduct in the subsequent investigation. I can't remember what, if any, conclusions were drawn as a result of the Philly area agency (transit maybe?) that reportedly had an unintended discharge.

Not knowing the above information, I wonder if the lawsuit's mention of post-upgrade issues were in fact human error, but those facts are not published or governed by NDAs. Secondarily, the Milwaukee one will be interesting but my initial impression would be to investigate not only the gun's mechanicals, but also the possibility of foreign objects entering the holster. Given the gap around the trigger guard in 6360's configured for WMLs, it's pretty easy for things like seat belts to get into the holster during a close entangled wrestling match like forcing someone into a car.

None of the above commentary is meant to excuse Sig's conduct regarding drop-gate. They screwed the pooch, but it doesn't necessarily mean every lawsuit's claims are justified and a personal injury attorney would not have to make a big jump to attempts to pass of human error in a post-upgrade gun for a mechanical failure given the pre-upgrade's known shortcomings.

[Eyesquared]

Maybe I'm slow or I missed a key post but does anyone have a hypothesis as to what mechanical difference in the "voluntary upgrade" guns would cause ADs? I have shot a decent amount with my P320 but I don't know much about how it works beyond how to field strip it and clean it.

[willie]

Friendships strained over a pistol recommended in good faith may not have been genuine to begin with. After you pray for them, suggest that they shut the fuck up.

[DpdG]

57547

Regarding the WML holsters, this is a 320 Carry in a 6360 and assuming I got the right angle, I could pull the trigger with my index finger. Smaller hands or foreign objects would have pretty easy access to the trigger.

Edit- this is fully holstered with all retention engaged.

[psalms144.1]

57547

Regarding the WML holsters, this is a 320 Carry in a 6360 and assuming I got the right angle, I could pull the trigger with my index finger. Smaller hands or foreign objects would have pretty easy access to the trigger.

Edit- this is fully holstered with all retention engaged.There was a similar issue with a light-equipped Glock not too far back. IIRC, it was a bunch of uniformed guys at an officer's funeral, and somehow one officer's handheld's antenna got into the trigger guard of the officer's pistol next to him, resulting in the unexpected loud noise.

[lwt16]

We have had one ND on our team at the last qualification.

No injury but slight damage to a car seat. We assumed it was a garment in the trigger guard....and I still lean that way.

I’m obtaining that pistol Monday as well as the blade tech owb to see if I can discover any anomalies.

[Beat Trash]

I appreciate the work and for you putting it out there.

Is the P365/P365XL different enough in design from the P320 that one shouldn’t be concerned about the safety of the 365’s?

I only ask be I honestly don’t know. But I am using a 365 as a BUG.

[HCM]

From the Philly Transit police P320 thread:

SEPTA cop whose gun mysteriously fired cleared of wrongdoing, litigation against gunmaker ‘pending’

https://www.phillytrib.com/news/local_news/septa-cop-whose-gun-mysteriously-fired-cleared-of-wrongdoing-litigation-against-gunmaker-pending/article_c6d39ae2-af54-5738-b089-b8639032cd8a.html

Original thread: https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?38507-P320-issue-in-PA

[lwt16]

From the Philly Transit police P320 thread:

SEPTA cop whose gun mysteriously fired cleared of wrongdoing, litigation against gunmaker ‘pending’

https://www.phillytrib.com/news/local_news/septa-cop-whose-gun-mysteriously-fired-cleared-of-wrongdoing-litigation-against-gunmaker-pending/article_c6d39ae2-af54-5738-b089-b8639032cd8a.html

Original thread: https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?38507-P320-issue-in-PA

Honestly, this case is the one that intrigues me and scares me the most.

Would love to see the video that exonerated the officer.

[Nephrology]

In reading the text of the lawsuit, it sounds like there have been dozens (~50 or so) incidents of the P320 discharging without trigger manipulation. Just googling around, I can find multiple individual lawsuits still pending on top of the recent class action settlement in which SIG does not admit liability.

Really struggle to imagine ever feeling comfortable carrying a p320 AIWB.

[Coyote41]

I am almost completely ignorant as to how the Sig P320 works internally. How is this discharge happen? If the striker is just slipping from thr sear, does it not have a striker block?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[lwt16]

I am almost completely ignorant as to how the Sig P320 works internally. How is this discharge happen? If the striker is just slipping from thr sear, does it not have a striker block?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It does have a striker block.

It “should” prevent it.

[OlongJohnson]

Really struggle to imagine ever feeling comfortable carrying a p320 AIWB.

FIFY

At least that's the page I'm on.

I really wish the P365 had the P250 action. Sorry if anyone gets tired of hearing me say that.

[Elwin]

I really wish the P365 had the P250 action. Sorry if anyone gets tired of hearing me say that.

Even as wary as I am of SIG (thread being an unfortunate case in point), I’d totally buy that pistol.

[Sig_Fiend]

The thing I have yet to see anyone really address anywhere is the fact that NOTHING prevents the sear from moving, except for the springs. There appears to be nothing preventing the sear from "bouncing" and releasing the striker if dropped and landing in a relatively upright position. I'm not sure if any of the other internal safeties account for this possibility and prevent the striker from achieving a full drop? I guess maybe the "firing pin safety lock" is supposed to, but that makes me very uneasy that the sear itself is not physically restricted from moving when it doesn't need to be.

[Totem Polar]

I can fairly definitively state that if someone did, no one would remember -- the internet is funny like that.

I love this.

[DpdG]

Keeping in mind I'm no engineer and I've been wrong many times before- If I remove the slide assembly of a post-upgrade 320, disable the magazine disassembly safety, and manually depress the sear alone, it moves the trigger to the rear. In my mind, this means the sear is fully controlled by the trigger bar, and "sear bounce" or whatever you want to call it, is resisted not only by sear spring tension, but also by the trigger bar spring. Further, the sear in the post-upgrade guns has a secondary half-cock notch that appears designed to catch the striker in case of some instance where the striker does somehow jump the primary sear surface. If all that fails, the striker block should prevent ignition. Short of a trigger dingus, it seems pretty industry standard in theory.

In practice, I don't know what to think. It is often difficult to ensure there were no other outside influences like foreign objects acting upon the trigger. I really like the TLR-7/8/9 as they allow holsters to fit much more tightly around the trigger guard and hopefully that will mitigate some of these questionable cases where foreign objects might play a role.

[Polecat]

FIFY



I really wish the P365 had the P250 action. Sorry if anyone gets tired of hearing me say that.


Totally agree, They should reintroduce the P250 in a smaller more 365 like package, for those of us averse to blowing our nuts carrying off AIWB!!! I think it is a missed market segment.

[Tokarev]

Has this page already been linked?

https://www.southwestledger.news/news/sig-sauer-p320-pistol-mishaps-reported#:~:text=A%20P320%20accidentally%20dischar ged%20in%20T%C2%ADarrant%20County%2C%20Texas%2C%20 on%20July,weapon%20until%20repairs%20were%20made.

And a YouTube video detailing some of the alleged uncommanded discharges:

https://youtu.be/-SBpZBs3foA

[Gadfly]

The thing I have yet to see anyone really address anywhere is the fact that NOTHING prevents the sear from moving, except for the springs. There appears to be nothing preventing the sear from "bouncing" and releasing the striker if dropped and landing in a relatively upright position. I'm not sure if any of the other internal safeties account for this possibility and prevent the striker from achieving a full drop?

What does the thumb safety block? Is it just blocking the trigger bar from moving? Or is there a seat interaction on theM17 M18?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Coyote41]

Do I understand this correctly? If the sear is depressed, it moves the trigger, which in turn defeats the striker block? And all this is only kept in balance with springs?

Call me paranoid, but I won’t even carry a non-series 80 1911 (yes, I know what the series 80 was originally designed for), and the 1911 sear is physically blocked by the safety.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[OlongJohnson]

I really wish the P365 had the P250 action. Sorry if anyone gets tired of hearing me say that.

I should clarify that I make that statement in context of an assumption that the P365 will operate exactly as intended. I just don't think a cocked SAO pistol without a mechanical safety (which is what most versions of the P320 and P365 effectively are) is appropriate.


Has this page already been linked?

https://www.southwestledger.news/news/sig-sauer-p320-pistol-mishaps-reported#:~:text=A%20P320%20accidentally%20dischar ged%20in%20T%C2%ADarrant%20County%2C%20Texas%2C%20 on%20July,weapon%20until%20repairs%20were%20made.

That link is suggesting that unintended discharges involving Sig Sauer pistols (likely the hammer fired "classic" series) from as long as 12 years before the first P320 shipped are somehow relevant to the allegations of design defect in the P320. That is not logical.

I did just read through the complaint linked in the OP. All the alleged unintended discharges do involve P320s, at least as they are described in the complaint.

[AMC]

Has this page already been linked?

https://www.southwestledger.news/news/sig-sauer-p320-pistol-mishaps-reported#:~:text=A%20P320%20accidentally%20dischar ged%20in%20T%C2%ADarrant%20County%2C%20Texas%2C%20 on%20July,weapon%20until%20repairs%20were%20made.

And a YouTube video detailing some of the alleged uncommanded discharges:

https://youtu.be/-SBpZBs3foA

That first link lists "accidental discharges" that occurred in my department from 2005 till 2012. Obviously that predates the creation of the P320. We do not, and never have issued or authorized the P320, and we count "negligent discharges" not "accidental". The P320 was one of two finalists for our next handgun....which now isn't going to happen with a $1.7 billion deficit and a mayor and chief of police who are fully on board with defunding the department. I'm very curious to see how this pans out....the P320 has a lot going for it as an agency gun, and is very popular with our officers. Most of these suits seem opportunistic....but a couple are troubling. And Sigs management culture doesn't help with that feeling.

[RJ]

Since we are on the topic of ND (AD?) lawsuits, the subject of trigger travel has come up, as in I believe it’s considered a longer trigger travel is a mitigation in reducing the risk of a ND. True?

IIRC my P30SL LEM V1 had about 1”, my Glock 19 is approx 1/2”, and my VP9 was 1/4”.

Does anyone have the trigger travel distance for the P320? How about the P365XL?

I did a cursory search online but couldn’t come up with hard data on the above, but I swear I’ve seen the Glock trigger of 1/2” somewhere.

TIA

[Tokarev]

And Sigs management culture doesn't help with that feeling.

Unfortunately this is probably the only option SIG management has other than to simply stop selling the gun. Publicy ignore the problem with privately crunch numbers on costs and work for a fix. If there is actually anything to fix.

Ultimately what might be the best approach is to rename the gun. Call it the P330 or the P320-II or something like that. That's in addition to making any design changes or adding a trigger dingus or whatever SIG needs to do to correct percieved or actual mechanical problems.

Sent from my SM-A505U using Tapatalk

[lwt16]

Since we are on the topic of ND (AD?) lawsuits, the subject of trigger travel has come up, as in I believe it’s considered a longer trigger travel is a mitigation in reducing the risk of a ND. True?

IIRC my P30SL LEM V1 had about 1”, my Glock 19 is approx 1/2”, and my VP9 was 1/4”.

Does anyone have the trigger travel distance for the P320? How about the P365XL?

I did a cursory search online but couldn’t come up with hard data on the above, but I swear I’ve seen the Glock trigger of 1/2” somewhere.

TIA

Roughly 1/4 inch on my 2020 model with Apex kit.

I can measure a factory model if you’d like.

[Coyote41]

Unfortunately this is probably the only option SIG management has other than to simply stop selling the gun.

Option C) New marketing campaign.

“A gun so good, it practically shoots by itself”

Then, when they do accidentally discharge, “It’s not a bug, it’s a feature.”


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[lwt16]

57599

If I press down on the sear in the yellow circle, that also lifts the striker safety lever as well as pulls the trigger to the rear.


57600

Which would push the striker lever up enough to clear it.

I think.

Also notice how my striker safety spring has rode under the safety. Not sure why it did that. Was in the striker channel like that when I removed it. It jammed it in the upward fire position.

On mine, there is a good bit of sear holding on to the striker foot. I can’t (so far) make it impact fire.

I could see how poor QC could minimize the amount of sear/striker foot engagement there is from copy to copy. Maybe a perfect storm of crappy parts out of spec, along with the little spring being out of place or broken.....

MIGHT lead to the striker slipping off and flying forward.

Am I on the right track? Getting aggravated.

[Archer1440]

You need to mind those little springs anytime you go digging around inside that striker assembly. Odds are you dislodged it when you removed the striker group. That safety plate spring isn’t much bigger in diameter than a RCH. (Look it up if mystified...). There’s a reason why SIG regards futzing with the striker to be a trained armorer level work item.

The P320 is a fundamentally 100% cocked, single-action design. It needs to be treated that way, with extreme reluctance while holstering and strict adherence to the Four Rules.

However, the likelihood of a non-futzed-with P320 actually “going off” while sitting in a correctly designed holster is as close to zero as one can ask.

Ones that have had hamfisted armory services, “improvement” through reckless Dremel work, or aren’t properly maintained, are as likely as anything else to malfunction, and with a fully tensioned striker, one could well imagine catastrophic consequences.

But as one who knows his way around all the little bits in there, I can’t imagine a scenario where a correctly assembled P320 can simply “go off” without some kind of user interaction of the wrong kind.

Edited to add- I don’t carry any of my 320 series pistols any more having moved to VP9’s, but I still use them for gun games.

[lwt16]

You need to mind those little springs anytime you go digging around inside that striker assembly. Odds are you dislodged it when you removed the striker group. That safety plate spring isn’t much bigger in diameter than a RCH. (Look it up if mystified...). There’s a reason why SIG regards futzing with the striker to be a trained armorer level work item.

The P320 is a fundamentally 100% cocked, single-action design. It needs to be treated that way, with extreme reluctance while holstering and strict adherence to the Four Rules.

However, the likelihood of a non-futzed-with P320 actually “going off” while sitting in a correctly designed holster is as close to zero as one can ask.

Ones that have had hamfisted armory services, “improvement” through reckless Dremel work, or aren’t properly maintained, are as likely as anything else to malfunction, and with a fully tensioned striker, one could well imagine catastrophic consequences.

But as one who knows his way around all the little bits in there, I can’t imagine a scenario where a correctly assembled P320 can simply “go off” without some kind of user interaction of the wrong kind.

Certified p320 armorer since 5/22/2018. Anniston, AL Instructor P. Braun IIRC.

Regards.

[ECVMatt]

Trying to stay out of this one, but with so many functional and proven platforms, why would anyone gamble on this system?

[lwt16]

Trying to stay out of this one, but with so many functional and proven platforms, why would anyone gamble on this system?

My church team has 40 copies.

I’d like to tell them that they are gtg. Presently hesitant to do so.

[ECVMatt]

My church team has 40 copies.

I’d like to tell them that they are gtg. Presently hesitant to do so.

I can understand why. There is something just not right about all this. It does not help that SIG doesn't step up and confront these claims, real or imagined. It just casts a cloud of doubt over the pistol.

I am curious if your church purchased the pistols to be issued or did each individual member purchase their own?

[lwt16]

I can understand why. There is something just not right about all this. It does not help that SIG doesn't step up and confront these claims, real or imagined. It just casts a cloud of doubt over the pistol.

I am curious if your church purchased the pistols to be issued or did each individual member purchase their own?

Individual purchase.

[Tokarev]

Do we know there's an actual difference in civilization vs LE SKU? Do the LE guns have the NP3 internal coatings or nitride coatings or whatever that reportedly seperates the M17/18 from the stock 320?

S&W has a different SKU for the LE guns too. As far as I know all that means is the guns come with three mags and factory night sights. Is the SIG LE SKU pretty much the same deal?

Sent from my SM-A505U using Tapatalk

[Archer1440]

Certified p320 armorer since 5/22/2018. Anniston, AL Instructor P. Braun IIRC.

Regards.

I certainly retract my comment in that context, and apologize for any offense given on that aspect of my post.

[lwt16]

I certainly retract my comment in that context, and apologize for any offense given on that aspect of my post.

All good on this end buddy.

[RJ]

Trying to stay out of this one, but with so many functional and proven platforms, why would anyone gamble on this system?

Commenting from the point of view of a P365 and P365XL owner (which as I understand is an identically designed FCU to the 320, albeit smaller) the answer “for me” is: Glock doesn’t make a 12 shot, 5.0” high or less 1” thick pistol. I went through a G43X for 7 months (Gadget equipped) and did not enjoy shooting it. Same for a Gadget equipped G26.5 (also sold) and a P30SK LEM (sold) and a Walther PPS M2 (which would awkwardly drop mags for me, being a lefty).

My wife bought a P365 last year, and I just picked up a P365XL, hence me being in this thread. Which I have to say has my interest. I don’t carry AIWB with the XL and would not plan to (personal choice).

Will be following with interest.

[Willard]

Will be following with interest. Ditto ref SIG P365XL MS.

[JonInWA]

Ideally, it would be great if SIG credibly met these P320 issues head on, with technical and moral integrity. Secondariy, it would be nice if a truly knowledgeable and qualified gunsmith (such as, for example, Bruce Gray-if he's gotten over his unwarranted early refusal to consider P320 issues, and can be skilled and objective in an analysis of the P320).

On this thread (and in p-f in general), HCM and Lwt16 are knowledgeable P320 users and organizational armorers, certified by SIG. I put a lot of weight in their analysis, knowledge, and how they illuminate what is both said and unsaid. GJM (and possibly others of you here) may fit in this category, but I havent had a chance to personally discuss this with him since we initiated this thread.

I think we're collectively inching our way to the probable identification and causal factors/components involved.

Best, Jon

[flyrodr]

Will be following with interest.

Another ditto. P365 w/ manual safety and RMS-w.

[Doc_Glock]

Delete

[lwt16]

I would be okay with a swap for p365 XL pistols. As far as I know, they haven’t had issues.

I doubt I would attend armorer classes though as it’s been a headache as of late.

Regards.

[HCM]

Do we know there's an actual difference in civilization vs LE SKU? Do the LE guns have the NP3 internal coatings or nitride coatings or whatever that reportedly seperates the M17/18 from the stock 320?

S&W has a different SKU for the LE guns too. As far as I know all that means is the guns come with three mags and factory night sights. Is the SIG LE SKU pretty much the same deal?

Sent from my SM-A505U using Tapatalk


I think we need to specific in our language.

My comments were specific to the DHS sku P320. The GOV/DOD contract M17/M18s and the DHS sku P320s have the coatings specified for the M17/M18. So for those guns, no it is not the same deal as S&W.

That specific DHS SKU is the only one we can carry on duty. P320s bought via SIGs IOP (individual officer program) are not authorized.

The first limited release of Commercial M17s supposedly had these same coatings.

That raises the question does SIG have an LE sku ? Is there a different SKU for the guns sold to state and local agencies and via their IOP program ? If so I’m not seeing it in the IOP guns. I just purchased an L320CA-9-BXR3-PRO:—RXP via the IOP program. What does the L denote ?

The one I purchased had a Romeo1 Pro optic and Suppressor height X Ray night sights and 3 magazines. The other IOP gun the dealer had was the same gun but with standard (non NS) back up irons. So night sights are not indicative of an LE SKU.

From what I have seen the regular LE / IOP gun’s are like the S&W LE guns. So with regard to these guns the answer to your question is yes.

The issues with the Philadelphia transit police (SEPTA) guns and others tend to confirm this, at least circumstantially.

I can tell you that I cannot use the FCU from my IOP gun on duty because it is not a DHS SKU. What makes this noteworthy is that this is not true of any of the other SIG (p365/365XL) or Glock (43, 26, 19, 17) models authorized. Those guns need only be “legally acquired” and pass an armorer inspection. As you know the testing that lead to those parameters is covered by NDA but the end result is not.

Are there small parts differences in the DOD/DHS guns (aka “the good ones”) like ones lwt16 identified between the 2017 production gun and the 2020 production gun ?

If so, how many guns do you have to buy to get “the good ones ?” From what I have seen the answer seems to be 15,000.

Or has SIG made inline changes such that all current production guns are “good ones” ? If so the idea that a name change like the P320 Gen II is in order.

[JonInWA]

It woulld be nice if in fact 4/18 P320 production was in fact the bright line initiating point for "good" P320s (i.e., ones modded to preclude self-firing). It's supposition on my/our parts that because of the "second VUP" notice in 4/18 as cited in the suit that we're attaching significance to the 4/18 and later date-but frankly, that's unproven supposition. Confirmation would indeed be welcome. As would some transparency out of SIG.

Best, Jon

[lwt16]

I sent them an email today asking for someone with armorer support to contact me.

Hopefully, I get a reply.

[AMC]

It woulld be nice if in fact 4/18 P320 production was in fact the bright line initiating point for "good" P320s (i.e., ones modded to preclude self-firing). It's supposition on my/our parts that because of the "second VUP" notice in 4/18 as cited in the suit that we're attaching significance to the 4/18 and later date-but frankly, that's unproven supposition. Confirmation would indeed be welcome. As would some transparency out of SIG.

Best, Jon

This is from our LE rep, so.....we were told that current, post February 2020 production Pro series guns (the LE Skus) were incorporating the simplified FCU noted by other posters upthread, as well as the M17 parts treatment specified by the DHS contract, and that the Pro optics cut was now compatible with RMR and other footprint optics (supposedly this last is also transferring to the commerical guns). They also come with the X Ray night sights and 3 magazines.

[Gadfly]

I took some photos a while back comparing our DHS sku P320s to a commercial P320 that had undergone the voluntary upgrade. The blue “mark up” lines are the DHS pistol. I did not break down the FCU, but you can see the counting difference.

Not a great comparison... but it shows some variation. Hope it helps some.


https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200720/48079d2201009d8665007670bff10b73.jpg

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200720/01f8a128411d92834ec727b4248c61d5.jpg

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200720/8f52f2f17180978f7c5e357312b00612.jpg

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200720/6e030dce6dd3d4e2e44dba8ada798000.jpg

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200720/9358e14bd4a7b5fef91b96a609e89012.jpg

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200720/963b3e27ccafc0573bf95209eaddb5aa.jpg

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200720/e55efe68cfd6f1434d3becdcbde78fcb.jpg


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[farscott]

The side-by-side pictures are fascinating. I would have guessed the commercial slides had less machining than the DHS slides, but the converse is true. More holes and more material removed from the interior of the commercial slide. But the radii appear better for not inducing stress cracking on the ejection port on the commercial slide although this might be the result of the pictures. The commercial barrel's lugs have less machining than the DHS barrel's lugs, which I expected. The DHS FCU appears to be better finished in some areas and not in others. The fire control parts on the DHS FCU appear to have some radii not on the commercial pistols.

[Gadfly]

The side-by-side pictures are fascinating. I would have guessed the commercial slides had less machining than the DHS slides, but the converse is true. More holes and more material removed from the interior of the commercial slide.

The DHS FCU appears to be better finished in some areas and not in others. The fire control parts on the DHS FCU appear to have some radii not on the commercial pistols.

I assume they left more “meat” on the DHS slide because we only issue +p ammo, and that is all it’s expected to eat. Rather that stiffen the springs, the add an ounce or two to the slide.

(Back when HK made the LEM for the INS, we had to buy a specific sku USPc, because our slides were 1.5 oz heavier than commercial slides. Seems our hot .40 ammo could cause the slide to out run the mag springs. The option was heavier recoil spring, but that makes racking difficult for smaller statures agents (female). So the heavier slide was the option HK went with.)

The FCU has more corrosion resistant/self lubricating coatings per the folks I spoke with. Some type of NP3ish Teflonish coating, but don’t know the brand name.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Old Man Winter]

How do the Wilson Combat 320's fit into this? Anyone able to post pics of the WC slide and FCU?

[RJ]

Since we are on the topic of ND (AD?) lawsuits, the subject of trigger travel has come up, as in I believe it’s considered a longer trigger travel is a mitigation in reducing the risk of a ND. True?

IIRC my P30SL LEM V1 had about 1”, my Glock 19 is approx 1/2”, and my VP9 was 1/4”.

Does anyone have the trigger travel distance for the P320? How about the P365XL?

I did a cursory search online but couldn’t come up with hard data on the above, but I swear I’ve seen the Glock trigger of 1/2” somewhere.

TIA

In the FWIW dept, tonight curiosity got the better of me, so I measured the trigger travel of the Center section of the flat trigger on my P365XL to be approximately 7/16”.

In a perfect world, I’d be able to buy an SCD for my Sig. But I’m happier that the travel turned out to be closer to my Glock than my HK.

[L-2]

I think the pictured "DHS" fire control unit (FCU) looks nicely smoothed compared to the commercial version (I don't think it's because the commercial FCU is dirtier in the photos).

This P320/M17/M18 SIG-stuff is just too confusing for me. I'm glad I've got no plans to jump into trying one of these pistols right now; now probably never will (I thought about it though).

I'll just deal with my P225, P229R, and P226R, each with different extractor generations/types. My career has 99% been with Glocks, btw.

[VT1032]

I haven't had a chance to read this whole thread so if this was addressed earlier, my apologies. Is there any indication that this could impact the military M17/M18 pistols? I just recently investigated an incident where a soldier appeared to have a negligent discharge with an M17 which caused damage to property. The soldier claimed it "just went off" when he released the slide on a full magazine and that his finger was nowhere near the trigger.

The weapon was inspected by our state's senior armorer and given a clean bill of health. Without diving into specifics, the dude in question was "multitasking" and definitely wasn't paying full attention to the weapon at the time. I came to the conclusion that he done fucked up but now this has me questioning myself a bit.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

[lwt16]

I haven't had a chance to read this whole thread so if this was addressed earlier, my apologies. Is there any indication that this could impact the military M17/M18 pistols? I just recently investigated an incident where a soldier appeared to have a negligent discharge with an M17 which caused damage to property. The soldier claimed it "just went off" when he released the slide on a full magazine and that his finger was nowhere near the trigger.

The weapon was inspected by our state's senior armorer and given a clean bill of health. Without diving into specifics, the dude in question was "multitasking" and definitely wasn't paying full attention to the weapon at the time. I came to the conclusion that he done fucked up but now this has me questioning myself a bit.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

I suspect you were correct in that being an operator error. Not certain, but suspect that was a trigger finger discipline issue.

I'd try to re-create the discharge a hundred times and then drive on if I were looking into that. I have had one weapon that was a slam fire machine but that was a Taurus PT 58 in .380 way back in the late 80s.

I haven't had the pleasure of running a M17 but can the thumb safety be engaged with the slide to the rear? Or rather, can the slide be locked open, the safety can be engaged to "safe", and then the slide can be cycled or dropped into battery?

[VT1032]

I suspect you were correct in that being an operator error. Not certain, but suspect that was a trigger finger discipline issue.

I'd try to re-create the discharge a hundred times and then drive on if I were looking into that. I have had one weapon that was a slam fire machine but that was a Taurus PT 58 in .380 way back in the late 80s.

I haven't had the pleasure of running a M17 but can the thumb safety be engaged with the slide to the rear? Or rather, can the slide be locked open, the safety can be engaged to "safe", and then the slide can be cycled or dropped into battery?Regarding the safety, I'm not sure how it works and I was wondering the same thing. I've never really messed with P320s much. I put a mag through a civ P320 5 years ago and that's the extent of my experience with them. I did very pointedly ask the soldier in question about whether the safety was on at any point to include when he chambered a round and he couldn't tell me.

I really wanted to recreate it like you're talking but wasn't able to get ammo or range time during the amount of time I had to wrap things up. Our armorer's did go through it pretty good and didn't find and issues. I can't remember what date they said but it was a pretty recent production.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

[98z28]

The side-by-side pictures are fascinating. I would have guessed the commercial slides had less machining than the DHS slides, but the converse is true. More holes and more material removed from the interior of the commercial slide. But the radii appear better for not inducing stress cracking on the ejection port on the commercial slide although this might be the result of the pictures. The commercial barrel's lugs have less machining than the DHS barrel's lugs, which I expected. The DHS FCU appears to be better finished in some areas and not in others. The fire control parts on the DHS FCU appear to have some radii not on the commercial pistols.

The compact 9mm slides have been through several iterations. The commercial slide Gadfly posted is one of the early versions when Sig was obsessed with lightening the slide (2016-ish). There were quite a few reported FTE issues with those slides, though revisions to the extractor, extractor spring, and finally the slide itself (leaving more mass on it) seem to have fixed the issue. Slides made after early 2017 look like Gadfly's DHS gun. I have one of those earlier slides that had extraction issues and Sig was able to get it running by swapping out extractor bits. It cycles noticeably faster compared to the heavier slides.

Here's an older thread with more info on the slide revisions: https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?25688-Personal-SIG-320-Journey&p=617443&viewfull=1#post617443

[farscott]

The compact 9mm slides have been through several iterations. The commercial slide Gadfly posted is one of the early versions when Sig was obsessed with lightening the slide (2016-ish). There were quite a few reported FTE issues with those slides, though revisions to the extractor, extractor spring, and finally the slide itself (leaving more mass on it) seem to have fixed the issue. Slides made after early 2017 look like Gadfly's DHS gun. I have one of those earlier slides that had extraction issues and Sig was able to get it running by swapping out extractor bits. It cycles noticeably faster compared to the heavier slides.

Here's an older thread with more info on the slide revisions: https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?25688-Personal-SIG-320-Journey&p=617443&viewfull=1#post617443

That explains the slide differences. All the lightening cuts were because of a desire to handle a 97-grain frangible round. I have a feeling those early slides will become collectible much in the way the 1910 variant of the 1911 is collectible.

[vaspence]

I suspect you were correct in that being an operator error. Not certain, but suspect that was a trigger finger discipline issue.

I'd try to re-create the discharge a hundred times and then drive on if I were looking into that. I have had one weapon that was a slam fire machine but that was a Taurus PT 58 in .380 way back in the late 80s.

I haven't had the pleasure of running a M17 but can the thumb safety be engaged with the slide to the rear? Or rather, can the slide be locked open, the safety can be engaged to "safe", and then the slide can be cycled or dropped into battery?

In the case of my recently picked up M17 (box date 4/21/2020) the answer to your questions is yes. The safety can be placed on after the slide is locked to the rear. The safety can also be on and then the slide locked to the rear.


57678

[lwt16]

Awesome. Thanks vaspence

[TexasSiegfried]

I just want to thank everyone for this thread. I had tried to put my 320's away and move full time to my SP 2022, but I shoot them so much better that the transition never completely took. (The SP2022 is a great pistol, by the way, and I am so glad to be spending the time on it, because it is making this noob a much better shooter!!).

So as a result of the non-political, data driven approach to this subject, from folks who share my love of the 320 platform no less, I have now finally moved off the dime, called Sig, and my 2016 manufacture pistols will soon be on their way back for the VUP.

I'm very thankful for this forum, for the folks on it, and the wealth of information here which could never by amassed by a single individual, or purchased at any price.

L~

[lwt16]

I was able to obtain our pistol that was related to our ND/AD and I took it down to the individual parts......which I had never done and this pistol was factory fresh with a build date of 10/2017. I entered the s/n into Sig's website "upgrade" checker and it came up good to go per Sig.

However.......

58004

Dual sear springs were crossed and not putting correct pressure up on the foot of the striker

58005

For lack of a better term, apparently this is an older style sear that lacks the nipples or posts that the springs slip over to keep them aligned.

58006

It has dimples instead....and apparently, whoever assembled this thing in 10/17 did so in a hurry.

58007

This is the spring that Sig no longer installs in recent builds. I feel certain that I now know why.

This little spring, which is the spring that retracts the lever that lifts the striker block, was a little hosed up. My thoughts are that the striker block lever was "stuck" in the upward position, with a striker foot not held by proper dual spring tension, and when our guy holstered, when his pistol clicked down and seated, the striker slipped from the sear and fell forward....discharging the HST round.

I have taken several apart from that same general time of year this one was build. They all have the newer style sear with spring posts instead of the dimples.

I'm 90 percent sure this discharge wasn't his fault. We assumed garment on the trigger but now I'm leaning towards the gun. I plan on sending Sig a certified letter this week as I need a replacement sear for this gun as well as any others I come across that have the similar, older style sear.

We have pulled them from duty and most have qualified on other pistols. We will see where it goes. I'd like confirmation from Sig that the fix is to simply remove that striker block lever spring from each copy and to ensure they have the most updated sear. If that's the fix to make them safe, I can do that for nothing for most of the guns we have.

I also appreciate this thread and they way everyone conducted themselves.

[CanineCombatives]

Good info, would appreciate an update when you hear back from them.

[JonInWA]

It's looking more and more that the crucial parts to the "uncommanded discharge" equation are a combination of the older sear with recesses holding the sear springs (later modified by providing suitably protruding posts to hold and position te springs, and the circular striker block spring (eliminated in later production P320s).

And what appears to be some very sloppy assembly, and negligant QC-which coresponds to the QC concerns in the 40 P320s that Lwt16 personlly examined, where, as I recall, some 13 had assembly /QC issues that should have been caught and corrected before the pistols left SIG.

It also corresponds to the testimony of the former CFO in the suit that hinted at rushed assembly processes with the P320.

It appears to me that SIG is applying a design corrective to aid in the assembly and QC process, where, to my way of thinking, they need both the design/manufacturing mods plus INCREASED QC. Especially for a product where some penalty flags have been thrown.

I think Larry has found the key causal factors.

Best, Jon

[Cory]

I personally own a USGI Sig M17. It is part of the original run of pistols sent to the DOD, issued to the Army, which was subsequently returned to Sig and sold to the public.

I would be happy to take any pictures of the internals that may add to this discussion, if desired.

lwt16 JonInWA

[RJ]

Knowing what y’all know, would you guys be comfortable with a P320 X Compact with a build date after “now”?

I have a Mar ‘20 P365XL and a ‘17 early G19.5. I’m pondering trading the 19 in on a P320 Compact for USPSA, I like the XL so much.

[Lon]

Thank you Larry and Jon. Very enlightening. Unfortunately it reinforces my concerns with anything that says Sig on the side of it.

[all42a]

While I am new to this site, I'm not new to firearms. I am however new to the P320 platform. I have an M18 waiting at my LGS until my paperwork comes through.

I have a question about the 320 "family", and specifically the manual safety variants that I'm hoping a qualified gunsmith/armorer such as lwt16 can answer for me. The question is: has there ever been a reported instance, substantiated or not, of any unintended discharge of a P320 equipped with a manual safety on which the safety was known to be engaged before it discharged?

I ask this because I don't know if the manual safety in an FCU so equipped prevents the striker from moving forward directly, or only prevents the trigger from being moved rearward and therefore indirectly prevents the striker from moving forward.

Is an unintended discharge, for example as the result of a jarring, or drop of the weapon, possible on one of these guns if it is equipped with a manual safety and the safety is engaged?

Thank you!

[all42a]

Anybody?

[lwt16]

Anybody?

Just now saw your two post.

I don’t have any experience with the manual safety versions.

[HCM]

While I am new to this site, I'm not new to firearms. I am however new to the P320 platform. I have an M18 waiting at my LGS until my paperwork comes through.

I have a question about the 320 "family", and specifically the manual safety variants that I'm hoping a qualified gunsmith/armorer such as lwt16 can answer for me. The question is: has there ever been a reported instance, substantiated or not, of any unintended discharge of a P320 equipped with a manual safety on which the safety was known to be engaged before it discharged?

I ask this because I don't know if the manual safety in an FCU so equipped prevents the striker from moving forward directly, or only prevents the trigger from being moved rearward and therefore indirectly prevents the striker from moving forward.

Is an unintended discharge, for example as the result of a jarring, or drop of the weapon, possible on one of these guns if it is equipped with a manual safety and the safety is engaged?

Thank you!


Just now saw your two post.

I don’t have any experience with the manual safety versions.

Me neither.

My agency doesn't allow the manual safety version and the manual safety version is uncommon enough that it is not covered in the standard factory P320 armorers class. I believe the manual safety is only covered in the M17/18 armored class.

Per page 23 of the factory armorers manual: When engaged the manual safety blocks the movement of the trigger bar via a tab that engages a notch at the rear of the trigger bar.

[all42a]

Thanks guys.

I wish we could ask someone with a good understanding of this variant if the manual safety removes any and all concern of an unattended discharge. Other than one due to a malfunctioning manual safety itself of course. It is after all a collection of mechanical components. Albeit a very clever collection.

[HCM]

Thanks guys.

I wish we could ask someone with a good understanding of this variant if the manual safety removes any and all concern of an unattended discharge. Other than one due to a malfunctioning manual safety itself of course. It is after all a collection of mechanical components. Albeit a very clever collection.

The answer to your question is in this thread (and other prior threads on this topic here).

TLDR - The manual safety only locks the trigger bar, not the striker so the manual safety alone will not address the concerns about mechanical / accidental discharges.

In reading the older P320 threads I would pay particular attention to member Tom Jones' comments.

[all42a]

Thank you! Do you happen to know Tom Jones' username? I cannot find a tom jones or tomjones

[SiriusBlunder]

Thank you! Do you happen to know Tom Jones' username? I cannot find a tom jones or tomjones

Tom Jones's profile (https://pistol-forum.com/member.php?3-Tom_Jones)

[all42a]

Tom Jones's profile (https://pistol-forum.com/member.php?3-Tom_Jones)

Thank you, and same to the others that have replied to my questions. I've gone back and reread this entire thread and now have a better understanding regarding my question concerning the manual safety; specifically that not enough is known about it by those here to say whether or not it could stop an errant sear/striker disconnnect and subsequent striker forward movement from happening if the safety was engaged and working properly. I am still hoping to find/learn that information, and if I do so from a source other than this forum I will report back with what I find.

[ddown]

I was an early adopter of the P320 the first gun went back to sig twice kept not hitting primer. I think it was a lighter slide with increased sculpting. I said then this is ridiculous how complex they made this pistol. Overengineered and complex to say the least. I said this in the beginning to many little parts.

[lgsg]

I was able to obtain our pistol that was related to our ND/AD and I took it down to the individual parts......which I had never done and this pistol was factory fresh with a build date of 10/2017. I entered the s/n into Sig's website "upgrade" checker and it came up good to go per Sig.

However.......

58004

Dual sear springs were crossed and not putting correct pressure up on the foot of the striker

58005

For lack of a better term, apparently this is an older style sear that lacks the nipples or posts that the springs slip over to keep them aligned.

58006

It has dimples instead....and apparently, whoever assembled this thing in 10/17 did so in a hurry.

58007

This is the spring that Sig no longer installs in recent builds. I feel certain that I now know why.

This little spring, which is the spring that retracts the lever that lifts the striker block, was a little hosed up. My thoughts are that the striker block lever was "stuck" in the upward position, with a striker foot not held by proper dual spring tension, and when our guy holstered, when his pistol clicked down and seated, the striker slipped from the sear and fell forward....discharging the HST round.

I have taken several apart from that same general time of year this one was build. They all have the newer style sear with spring posts instead of the dimples.

I'm 90 percent sure this discharge wasn't his fault. We assumed garment on the trigger but now I'm leaning towards the gun. I plan on sending Sig a certified letter this week as I need a replacement sear for this gun as well as any others I come across that have the similar, older style sear.

We have pulled them from duty and most have qualified on other pistols. We will see where it goes. I'd like confirmation from Sig that the fix is to simply remove that striker block lever spring from each copy and to ensure they have the most updated sear. If that's the fix to make them safe, I can do that for nothing for most of the guns we have.

I also appreciate this thread and they way everyone conducted themselves.


Hi Jon JonInWA and Larry

today I sent an email to Siga sauer just to confirm the lack of the safety lever spring and the latest revision of the sear to be included in my guns that were built in 2019, so here´s the reply I got from Sig CS:

so both came set up with the upgraded components from the factory. Since we removed the safety lever spring with the upgrade parts revision, your pistols do not contain one. The latest Sear revision would also be included in both serial numbers you provided.

[Mitch]

So is it fair to say the assumption in the OP is true? M17/18 and post 4/2018 320s are okay? Everything else suspect?

[psalms144.1]

So is it fair to say the assumption in the OP is true? M17/18 and post 4/2018 320s are okay? Everything else suspect?I would say not. Hearing reports of at least one in-the-holster M17, so God only knows what's "OK" and what's not. There are simply SO MANY changes that have been made on a rolling production basis that it's damn near impossible to know what you're getting UNLESS you're getting a DHS contract pistol. Everything else is a crap shoot as to when it was made, what upgrades were done at the factory/post purchase, etc... And, honestly, we don't know if the current completely upgraded pistols are REALLY OK.

I love the way the P320 feels in my hand, and I pray that Sig gets it right for all our servicemembers and LE who are forced to carry it, but, in a world of Gen5 Glocks, CZ P10s, M&P 2.0s, APXs, VP9s and 1911s, I wouldn't put my money or my safety into one...

[spinmove_]

I would say not. Hearing reports of at least one in-the-holster M17, so God only knows what's "OK" and what's not. There are simply SO MANY changes that have been made on a rolling production basis that it's damn near impossible to know what you're getting UNLESS you're getting a DHS contract pistol. Everything else is a crap shoot as to when it was made, what upgrades were done at the factory/post purchase, etc... And, honestly, we don't know if the current completely upgraded pistols are REALLY OK.

I love the way the P320 feels in my hand, and I pray that Sig gets it right for all our servicemembers and LE who are forced to carry it, but, in a world of Gen5 Glocks, CZ P10s, M&P 2.0s, APXs, VP9s and 1911s, I wouldn't put my money or my safety into one...

It also seems, as noted earlier in this thread, that it could also come down to how well the FCU was put together or put back together as well. There’s plenty of other great options out right now that I don’t think the juice is worth the squeeze. I just hope SIG figures it out soon so this issue is a thing of the past and no one else gets hurt.

[Coyote41]

Judging by what I have seen here and how the mechanism appears to work, I would say any P320 is suspect. People asked for a striker fired gun with a 1911-esque trigger and it seems to be playing out just as expected.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Sammy1]

It's actually pretty simple-your polymer case that the P320 came in has a barcode sticker with the production date printed on it; on mine it's to the immediate right of the model designation/sku sticker.

If that's not available, I would think that SIG can provide you with the production date based on the serial number.

Best, Jon

My red box CPO P320 has a date of July 2019 on the box. Is that the date of manufacture or the date it left the factory as a red box?

[Mitch]

As someone who really wants to AIWB a p365 and have a P320 as a full-size trainer, this is disappointing and frustrating.

[HCM]

My red box CPO P320 has a date of July 2019 on the box. Is that the date of manufacture or the date it left the factory as a red box?

That would be the date it left as a redbox.

[Mike C]

Can I get some clarification, my understanding is that the P365's/XL's do not share the same issues that the P320's did/do. They also have a more simplified FCU correct? I saw a thread that talked about concern over how the manual safety still allows the sear to move downward but don't believe that it was discussed much past that, (maybe that is this thread but can't find the post). Asking for clarification because I am once again looking at the XL as a host for red dots on a single stack because I'm sick of milling slides and waiting. Thanks.

[tlong17]

Can I get some clarification, my understanding is that the P365's/XL's do not share the same issues that the P320's did/do. They also have a more simplified FCU correct? I saw a thread that talked about concern over how the manual safety still allows the sear to move downward but don't believe that it was discussed much past that, (maybe that is this thread but can't find the post). Asking for clarification because I am once again looking at the XL as a host for red dots on a single stack because I'm sick of milling slides and waiting. Thanks.


https://youtu.be/6oT9QpYsTUI

This is about the best rundown on the 365 FCU that I have found when it popped up almost a year ago. Although similar in some regards. I do feel the 365 FCU is more simple and has less in the way of small parts. I have broken down sears and FCUs for 365s built from 2018 through July 31 2020, XL, SAS, regular, manual safety, no manual safety, and have never seen a difference in parts used for the actual FCU. Only the striker assembly (striker itself, spring, channel liner) has seen changes that I can identify. Not counting the flat trigger introduced by X series and flat/small slide release and takedown lever found on the SAS.

[Mitch]

https://youtu.be/6oT9QpYsTUI

This is about the best rundown on the 365 FCU that I have found when it popped up almost a year ago. Although similar in some regards. I do feel the 365 FCU is more simple and has less in the way of small parts. I have broken down sears and FCUs for 365s built from 2018 through July 31 2020, XL, SAS, regular, manual safety, no manual safety, and have never seen a difference in parts used for the actual FCU. Only the striker assembly (striker itself, spring, channel liner) has seen changes that I can identify. Not counting the flat trigger introduced by X series and flat/small slide release and takedown lever found on the SAS.

Thanks for posting that. In layman’s terms, can anyone explain to me where the 320 differs from the 365? What I’ve read is that the 365 is a mini 320, but I’m no engineer.

[Mike C]

tlong17I that is a pretty great run down thank you for that. With that being said since the safety model was not addressed. Why did people express concern over slight sear movement when the safety is engaged? To me and in my layman's understanding having the FPBS, plus drop shelf on striker/sear, (sorry if the terminology is not correct) plus manual safety equals pretty redundant/safe system. Even if the sear moves a minimal amount so long as the trigger bar does not disengage the FPBS and there is not enough movement of the sear to allow the striker to move forward everything seems as though it will do its job.

[JonInWA]

Hi Jon JonInWA and Larry

today I sent an email to Siga sauer just to confirm the lack of the safety lever spring and the latest revision of the sear to be included in my guns that were built in 2019, so here´s the reply I got from Sig CS:

so both came set up with the upgraded components from the factory. Since we removed the safety lever spring with the upgrade parts revision, your pistols do not contain one. The latest Sear revision would also be included in both serial numbers you provided.

After a polite, but relatively fruitless discussion with a SIG Customer Service Rep this afternoon (according to him, everything VUPped or produced subsequent to 2017 is good to go.....Riiighhhhtttt....) My thoughts at this point of the discussion is this (especially since p-f member Lgsg seems to have gotten the most relevant update datable info from the mothership):

Since SIG's official mantra seems to be unchanged (everything with a VUP or produced subsequent to the VUP program's initiation is "good"-which we know is suspect...I think the following shoud be P320 user's protocol for determining P320 safety of use/safety of carry:

If you have a 2019 production P320, I think you're good to go; with the assumption being these have both the posts to retain the sear springs (not the previous dimples/recesses) and the circular sear safety lever spring deleted as discussed earlier.

Anything earlier than 2019 in my eyes in suspect, and should be examined (and upgraded as needed) by either SIG or a SIG-trained and certified armorer (assuming they can get the necessary replacement components).

Best, Jon

[Lon]

Since SIG's official mantra seems to be unchanged (everything with a VUP or produced subsequent to the VUP program's initiation is "good"-which we know is suspect...I think the following shoud be P320 user's protocol for determining P320 safety of use/safety of carry:

Sell it and buy a Glock/S&W/Beretta/CZ/insert damn near any other striker fired gun on the market.



Fixed it for ya. 🤣

[lgsg]

After a polite, but relatively fruitless discussion with a SIG Customer Service Rep this afternoon (according to him, everything VUPped or produced subsequent to 2017 is good to go.....Riiighhhhtttt....) My thoughts at this point of the discussion is this (especially since p-f member Lgsg seems to have gotten the most relevant update datable info from the mothership):

Since SIG's official mantra seems to be unchanged (everything with a VUP or produced subsequent to the VUP program's initiation is "good"-which we know is suspect...I think the following shoud be P320 user's protocol for determining P320 safety of use/safety of carry:

If you have a 2019 production P320, I think you're good to go; with the assumption being these have both the posts to retain the sear springs (not the previous dimples/recesses) and the circular sear safety lever spring deleted as discussed earlier.

Anything earlier than 2019 in my eyes in suspect, and should be examined (and upgraded as needed) by either SIG or a SIG-trained and certified armorer (assuming they can get the necessary replacement components).

Best, Jon

Jon please take a moment to watch at this video

could it be that this person has an early post VUP gun? he is talking about the safety lever spring to be the culprit, based on what sig told me newer guns has that spring deleted from the FCU

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4MaBoXuTxE0

I hope that someone with a youtube account could be so kind to clarify this to this person.

[lwt16]

Jon please take a moment to watch at this video

could it be that this person has an early post VUP gun? he is talking about the safety lever spring to be the culprit, based on what sig told me newer guns has that spring deleted from the FCU

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4MaBoXuTxE0

I hope that someone with a youtube account could be so kind to clarify this to this person.

I only watched the video once before bed last night but he is confusing the disconnector as being the part that engages the striker safety in the upper receiver.

That's not how that part works. The disconnector engages the slide and the slide pressure pushes it down, disconnecting the trigger/trigger bar. Only when the slide is in full battery does the disconnector pop up into the recess milled into the bottom of the slide to allow the pistol to fire again. If I understand the design correctly, this disconnector prevents out of battery detonations only....and has little to do with the striker assembly.

Now, right next to the disconnector is the striker safety lever. On a trigger pull, that safety lever rotates up, engages the striker safety, and clears the way for the striker to fly forward once the sear releases it.

https://www.topgunsupply.com/sig-sauer-safety-lock-p320.html

This explanation provided pre-coffee so I reserve the right to correct myself if I ever wake up fully today.

Regards.

[Texaspoff]

I only watched the video once before bed last night but he is confusing the disconnector as being the part that engages the striker safety in the upper receiver.

That's not how that part works. The disconnector engages the slide and the slide pressure pushes it down, disconnecting the trigger/trigger bar. Only when the slide is in full battery does the disconnector pop up into the recess milled into the bottom of the slide to allow the pistol to fire again. If I understand the design correctly, this disconnector prevents out of battery detonations only....and has little to do with the striker assembly.

Now, right next to the disconnector is the striker safety lever. On a trigger pull, that safety lever rotates up, engages the striker safety, and clears the way for the striker to fly forward once the sear releases it.

https://www.topgunsupply.com/sig-sauer-safety-lock-p320.html

This explanation provided pre-coffee so I reserve the right to correct myself if I ever wake up fully today.

Regards.

That is correct, and the video is incorrect. That birds head, what we called it in our armory course, is only responsible for disconnecting the trigger bar when the slide is out of battery. It has absolutely nothing to do with the firing pin safety.

The piece I circled in red is what deactivates the firing pin safety, and it is not under any spring tension. Yes earlier models did have a spring that did put this under tension, but it was not near enough to overcome the striker safety block tension. Sig removed this spring just as another layer and to say they did it.

https://i.imgur.com/mMYanjr.jpg

The spring circled in red is the one Sig no longer puts in the 320 fire control. They deleted the spring sometime in 2019. I received an armorer update from them about this, I will see if I can dig it up.

https://i.imgur.com/ZyN7DlH.jpg


While I do believe there is an issue with the 320, Folks like this need to be careful when putting out information. They at the very least need to understand how a particular part works.



TXPO

[lwt16]

While I do believe there is an issue with the 320, Folks like this need to be careful when putting out information. They at the very least need to understand how a particular part works.



TXPO

I can't watch the video right now but I think the guy mentioned "the shop" in that we see this in the/our shop. Or maybe I dreamed that.

If he is a gunsmith, he needs to take that video down and learn the platform better.

Regards.

[Texaspoff]

I can't watch the video right now but I think the guy mentioned "the shop" in that we see this in the/our shop. Or maybe I dreamed that.

If he is a gunsmith, he needs to take that video down and learn the platform better.

Regards.


Yup he said it, and most definitely.



TXPO

[lwt16]

Do you still have that armorer's update and if so, can I see it?

I'm still certified and can provide my certificate if needed.

I asked Sig corporate if I could remove that spring and was offered a different solution.

[Texaspoff]

Do you still have that armorer's update and if so, can I see it?

I'm still certified and can provide my certificate if needed.

I asked Sig corporate if I could remove that spring and was offered a different solution.

Yeah let me see if I can find it for ya.

TXPO

[awp_101]

Folks like this need to be careful when putting out information. They at the very least need to understand how a particular part works.
You’ve met the internet before, right?;)

[Texaspoff]

Do you still have that armorer's update and if so, can I see it?

I'm still certified and can provide my certificate if needed.

I asked Sig corporate if I could remove that spring and was offered a different solution.

I can't find it in my emails, I will check my Manual when I get home, it likely made a copy and put it in there.


TXPO

[Texaspoff]

You’ve met the internet before, right?;)


Lol, yes sir I have. :)



TXPO

[RJ]

Thanks for posting that. In layman’s terms, can anyone explain to me where the 320 differs from the 365? What I’ve read is that the 365 is a mini 320, but I’m no engineer.

In support of Mitch’s question (which I have also), I ran across this video of a GG trigger swap. What I believe is tangentially relevant here, is the detailed process depicted of removal of several key FCU components of this process:


https://youtu.be/9mAgSpgXci8

As long as this doesn’t get too far off the topic of the 320: If there are folks familiar with the 320 FCU, would you say the 365 FCU is different? If so, in what way?

[HCM]

I can't watch the video right now but I think the guy mentioned "the shop" in that we see this in the/our shop. Or maybe I dreamed that.

If he is a gunsmith, he needs to take that video down and learn the platform better.

Regards.

It’s his holster making shop but he claims he has worked as an engineer in the firearms industry (KAC and FN).

[Texaspoff]

It’s his holster making shop but he claims he has worked as an engineer in the firearms industry (KAC and FN).

Then I would certainly expect him to understand the importance of disseminating information that has not been checked, validated, and verified.


To quote an opinion is one thing, to state there is a design issue, while exhibiting a lack of knowledge in how the design works is a little foolish IMO.


TXPO

[HCM]

Then I would certainly expect him to understand the importance of disseminating information that has not been checked, validated, and verified.


To quote an opinion is one thing, to state there is a design issue, while exhibiting a lack of knowledge in how the design works is a little foolish IMO.


TXPO

Maybe that’s why he is making holsters instead of engineering guns.

[lwt16]

In support of Mitch’s question (which I have also), I ran across this video of a GG trigger swap. What I believe is tangentially relevant here, is the detailed process depicted of removal of several key FCU components of this process:


https://youtu.be/9mAgSpgXci8

As long as this doesn’t get too far off the topic of the 320: If there are folks familiar with the 320 FCU, would you say the 365 FCU is different? If so, in what way?

I'll have to watch later but until I attend a Sig Academy armorer's class on the 365 model, I won't provide a layman's opinion on it.

I've glanced at them but I have never disassembled one.

Regards.

[Texaspoff]

Maybe that’s why he is making holsters instead of engineering guns.


;)


TXPO

[Texaspoff]

I'll have to watch later but until I attend a Sig Academy armorer's class on the 365 model, I won't provide a layman's opinion on it.

I've glanced at them but I have never disassembled one.

Regards.

I have removed the fire control from a bunch of them, but never took the fire control down. By the looks of it, it appears to work in relatively the same way, but the parts are a bit different and some oriented differently, presumably due to the size constraints of the 365.


TXPO

[lwt16]

I have removed the fire control from a bunch of them, but never took the fire control down. By the looks of it, it appears to work in relatively the same way, but the parts are a bit different and some oriented differently, presumably due to the size constraints of the 365.


TXPO

So...it's not merely a mini 320 but a design on it's own....or at least that is what I gather.

I'd still want to be certified before stripping past the basic field strip on anyone's pistol. If I owned a personal copy I might dabble with it but not with someone else's for obvious reasons.

I spoke to another agency's armorer (issued P320s) and he is interested in this armorer's update as well if you can find it. He has not received it either (600 copies he's responsible for) and is equally curious.

[RJ]

It’s his holster making shop but he claims he has worked as an engineer in the firearms industry (KAC and FN).

I’m confused, which video are you referring to? I thought the one with the sketchy info was the one posted by lgsg, not the one by Stephen of Proteq.

I noticed someone’s already commented in YouTube on the incorrect information on the one lgsg posted.

59079

[Texaspoff]

So...it's not merely a mini 320 but a design on it's own....or at least that is what I gather.

I'd still want to be certified before stripping past the basic field strip on anyone's pistol. If I owned a personal copy I might dabble with it but not with someone else's for obvious reasons.

I spoke to another agency's armorer (issued P320s) and he is interested in this armorer's update as well if you can find it. He has not received it either (600 copies he's responsible for) and is equally curious.

Yeah they are a design all their own. Nothing about it resembles the 320. I haven't had the need to tear one completely down as I don't own one. We host 320 armorers courses, but I won't likely for the 365. I am not aware of any agencies around us that issue them, so filling the class might be difficult. I will probably attend one of the 365 armorers courses if I can find one close by just to say I have.



TXPO

[Archer1440]

Some of you are confused as to which video you’re referring to. The ProTec/former engineer video is not the one with the incorrect information.

[Texaspoff]

Some of you are confused as to which video you’re referring to. The ProTec/former engineer video is not the one with the incorrect information.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4MaBoXuTxE0


This is the video, and the information in it in regards to the firing pin safety is incorrect. I may be misunderstanding, since this video is for Grey Wolf Armory, a shop in FL. Maybe the holster guy is someone else. HCM would know more, I thought he was talking about the same gentleman in that video.



TXPO

[Archer1440]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4MaBoXuTxE0


This is the video, and the information in it in regards to the firing pin safety is incorrect. I may be misunderstanding, since this video is for Grey Wolf Armory, a shop in FL. Maybe the holster guy is someone else. HCM would know more, I thought he was talking about the same gentleman in that video.



TXPO

Unfortunately, in the crosstalk, a number of people fixed upon another video, which correctly discusses the P365 striker safety system. The video with the incorrect P320 analysis is the one you correctly reference in your link above.

[HCM]

I’m confused, which video are you referring to? I thought the one with the sketchy info was the one posted by lgsg, not the one by Stephen of Proteq.

I noticed someone’s already commented in YouTube on the incorrect information on the one lgsg posted.

59079

You’re correct.

I can’t keep up with this thread, nor have I received the armorer update mentioned from SIG. all of which circle back to my concerns about the platform being inconsistent and generally not being ready for prime time.

[Texaspoff]

This thread is causing me to need a drink...:p



TXPO

[Mitch]

This thread is causing me to need a drink...:p



TXPO

You? I just bought a 365. I haven’t even picked it up from my FFL and I’m ready to drink.

[Tokarev]

This thread is causing me to need a drink...:p



TXPO

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200820/79bd726e1904bcf5d799ce75024ad0fb.jpg

Sent from my SM-A505U using Tapatalk

[RJ]

You’re correct.

I can’t keep up with this thread, nor have I received the armorer update mentioned from SIG. all of which circle back to my concerns about the platform being inconsistent and generally not being ready for prime time.

No worries. I’ll have a drink on your behalf. :cool:

[silentsod]

I’ve been carrying a P320c AIWB and this has me mighty uncomfortable.

[lwt16]

You? I just bought a 365. I haven’t even picked it up from my FFL and I’m ready to drink.

I am probably still going to buy a P365. I posted a 25 yard ten shot group somewhere in the 25y revisited thread that was pretty solid for such a small gun. The 365 XL that I shot did even better.

They seem to have the kinks worked out in them. Everyone I know that has one is very pleased with it.

Regards.

[Texaspoff]

I am probably still going to buy a P365. I posted a 25 yard ten shot group somewhere in the 25y revisited thread that was pretty solid for such a small gun. The 365 XL that I shot did even better.

They seem to have the kinks worked out in them. Everyone I know that has one is very pleased with it.

Regards.


I think the 365 at this point is GTG. The officers we have that carry them are pleased, and we have had no issues with any of them.


TXPO

[98z28]

I am probably still going to buy a P365. I posted a 25 yard ten shot group somewhere in the 25y revisited thread that was pretty solid for such a small gun. The 365 XL that I shot did even better.

They seem to have the kinks worked out in them. Everyone I know that has one is very pleased with it.

Regards.

I'm really digging the 365 XL. I bought a 365 first for pocket/ankle/bug duty and thought the XL was the worst of all worlds. Too big to work as a bug and too small to be a primary. If I'm going to put it on a belt, it might as well be a real gun. Then I shot one. The XL surprisingly shooter-friendly. I takes a bit more work to be consistent on the grip out of the holster, but my performance with the XL is extremely close to a full size P320 as long as I am consistently working with it in dry fire. I've had zero reservations about going to it full time while I wait for the latest drop-safe BS to work out.

I do have a complaint about the thumb safety: It's too small. My dry fire work is primarily focused on getting a consistent grip and swiping the safety off. It's bad enough that I've considered with taking it off, and having the thumb safety was one of the reasons I tried the XL in the first place. It's probably less of an issue for someone with smaller hands, and non-issue if someone is using a non-safety version. If someone would make a longer/wider thumb safety, I'd buy a handful of them immediately.

[BillSWPA]

I am probably still going to buy a P365. I posted a 25 yard ten shot group somewhere in the 25y revisited thread that was pretty solid for such a small gun. The 365 XL that I shot did even better.

They seem to have the kinks worked out in them. Everyone I know that has one is very pleased with it.

Regards.

I bought a P365 a little over a year ago after the Indiana State Police selected it as an issued backup gun, and our own Pat Kelley tested one on video. It has become my every day carry gun. In business casual summer attire, it is pocket carried in in Aholster pochet holster, using 10 round flat basepad magazines. Otherwise, it is carried IWB in a JM Custom Kydex #3 using 12 round magazines. I have been very impressed with the concealability and accuracy.

[lgsg]

I was able to obtain our pistol that was related to our ND/AD and I took it down to the individual parts......which I had never done and this pistol was factory fresh with a build date of 10/2017. I entered the s/n into Sig's website "upgrade" checker and it came up good to go per Sig.

However.......

58004

Dual sear springs were crossed and not putting correct pressure up on the foot of the striker

58005

For lack of a better term, apparently this is an older style sear that lacks the nipples or posts that the springs slip over to keep them aligned.

58006

It has dimples instead....and apparently, whoever assembled this thing in 10/17 did so in a hurry.

58007

This is the spring that Sig no longer installs in recent builds. I feel certain that I now know why.

This little spring, which is the spring that retracts the lever that lifts the striker block, was a little hosed up. My thoughts are that the striker block lever was "stuck" in the upward position, with a striker foot not held by proper dual spring tension, and when our guy holstered, when his pistol clicked down and seated, the striker slipped from the sear and fell forward....discharging the HST round.

I have taken several apart from that same general time of year this one was build. They all have the newer style sear with spring posts instead of the dimples.

I'm 90 percent sure this discharge wasn't his fault. We assumed garment on the trigger but now I'm leaning towards the gun. I plan on sending Sig a certified letter this week as I need a replacement sear for this gun as well as any others I come across that have the similar, older style sear.

We have pulled them from duty and most have qualified on other pistols. We will see where it goes. I'd like confirmation from Sig that the fix is to simply remove that striker block lever spring from each copy and to ensure they have the most updated sear. If that's the fix to make them safe, I can do that for nothing for most of the guns we have.

I also appreciate this thread and they way everyone conducted themselves.

lwt16 and JonInWA

if found this youtube video

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PjWsJlFQ8Ao&t=1027s

this video was uploaded in july 28 of 2019..... how old this P320 could be???... lets calculate that it´s a couple of months old or maybe a year..

my point is that if you pay attention to the video,
1.-you will see that the sear in this FCU is the updated sear with the two posts instead of two depressions as the old style, could be a replacement or aftermarket sear from gray guns or may be it´s the factory oem.
2.- when the FCU is taken apart you will see the lack of the safety lever spring.
so... maybe the reply I got from sig CS is true, at least guns built in 2019 and onward is true that they come from factory with the sear with two post for each spring instead of the depressions and the safety lever spring is no longer there.
for a moment I thought about the sear spring coming together or getting linked due to the shooting vibrations or some other reason, but I just realized that each of the two sear spring goes in to two cavities in the sear cage.
so this may support what JonInWA and lwt16 have been investigating.

[Texaspoff]

Do you still have that armorer's update and if so, can I see it?

I'm still certified and can provide my certificate if needed.

I asked Sig corporate if I could remove that spring and was offered a different solution.

Found the page for you, Note Spring, Safety Lever. This is the page with the new parts for the VUP. I received an armorer update package in 2019.

https://i.imgur.com/C6vhBf4h.jpg


TXPO

[lwt16]

Found the page for you. This is the page with the new parts for the VUP. I received an armorer update package in 2019.

https://i.imgur.com/C6vhBf4h.jpg


TXPO

You da man!

Much appreciated.

[Texaspoff]

You da man!

Much appreciated.

Sorry I had to find the addendum, as it was a set of loose papers and I had to track them down.


TXPO

[call_me_ski]

Gravity acts on the gun in a different direction when it is being fired, being carried or when someone with a holstered gun is wrestling a suspect. So in which of these cases does the P320 have a functioning striker safety?

[Texaspoff]

Gravity acts on the gun in a different direction when it is being fired, being carried or when someone with a holstered gun is wrestling a suspect. So in which of these cases does the P320 have a functioning striker safety?

In all cases. The striker safety is spring loaded so it is in the locked position until the trigger is pulled lifting the safety lever up depressing the striker safety lock moving it out of the way of the striker. Whichever way the pistol is oriented has no effect on the striker locks effectiveness.

The spring that was deleted was for the safety lever and had a very small amount of weight much less than what was required to depress the striker lock. Sig removed the spring allowing the Safety lever to just sit freely in the fire control module.

I am not sure what is causing these alleged holstered NDs but with the sheer amount of reported issues there is still likely something going on.



TXPO

[call_me_ski]

The striker safety is spring loaded so it is in the locked position until the trigger is pulled lifting the safety lever up depressing the striker safety lock moving it out of the way of the striker. Whichever way the pistol is oriented has no effect on the striker locks effectiveness.

The spring that was deleted had a very small amount of weight much less than what was required to depress the striker lock. Sig removed the spring allowing the Safety lever to just sit freely in the fire control module.

IÂ’m not sure what is causing these alleged holstered NDs but with the sheer amount of reported issues there is still likely something going on.



TXPO

So the striker safety spring is still there and this is just a spring on the level that pushes up on the safety spring? That makes way more sense.

[Texaspoff]

So the striker safety spring is still there and this is just a spring on the level that pushes up on the safety spring? That makes way more sense.

Yes that is correct.



TXPO

[JonInWA]

Here's the response a p=f member received from SIG when inquiring specifically about his 2019-production P320s:

"Both serial numbers you listed come back with production dates in 2019 so they would have all of the latest revision parts post voluntary upgrade. the safety lever spring is omitted from new models October 2017 and forward when we started adding the upgraded parts to new model firearms."

So it would seem that the key thing is exactly when SIG changed the sear spring retention method from holes to posts on the sear. Until SIG says somethng more specific, I'm sticking with "2019" as being a good date for it, the the p-f member's earliest 2019 production gun was a May 31st production piece.

So certainy any P320 production from May 31st/June 1st on should be fine (i.e., having the sears with posts for sear spring attachment and retention), and inferentially probably those from January 2019 on are good too.

Best, Jon

[Texaspoff]

Here's the response a p=f member received from SIG when inquiring specifically about his 2019-production P320s:

"Both serial numbers you listed come back with production dates in 2019 so they would have all of the latest revision parts post voluntary upgrade. the safety lever spring is omitted from new models October 2017 and forward when we started adding the upgraded parts to new model firearms."

So it would seem that the key thing is exactly when SIG changed the sear spring retention method from holes to posts on the sear. Until SIG says somethng more specific, I'm sticking with "2019" as being a good date for it, the the p-f member's earliest 2019 production gun was a May 31st production piece.

So certainy any P320 production from May 31st/June 1st on should be fine (i.e., having the sears with posts for sear spring attachment and retention), and inferentially probably those from January 2019 on are good too.

Best, Jon

To my knowledge the P320 has always had the sear springs attached to the sear with posts. I have a sear from a 2015 P320 carry and the springs are attached by posts. What I was referring to was the safety lever spring, which is no longer used. The safety lever has no effect on the sear, it's movement or the springs.


Original first production p320 sear.
https://i.imgur.com/399QAH1l.jpg?1

Upgraded current production sear with second notch.
https://i.imgur.com/xtLuY7D.jpg?1


TXPO

[lwt16]

Check post #113 to see what it looks like Texaspoff

[Texaspoff]

Check post #113 to see what it looks like Texaspoff


That looked like a newer one with the secondary cuts. I have never seen one with the holes for the springs. Wonder if that is the most current design. I haven't been in a 20 production 320, so I couldn't tell you. All the 320 we have here at the PD ranging from 2015 through 2019 all have the post mounts.

In the parts listing I posted for you in #117, both sears show to have the posts for the springs. That paperwork was from our 2019 armorer update course.


TXPO

[JonInWA]

That looked like a newer one with the secondary cuts. I have never seen one with the holes for the springs. Wonder if that is the most current design. I haven't been in a 20 production 320, so I couldn't tell you. All the 320 we have here at the PD ranging from 2015 through 2019 all have the post mounts.

In the parts listing I posted for you in #117, both sears show to have the posts for the springs. That paperwork was from our 2019 armorer update course.


TXPO

In your 2019 Armorer Course, did they mention anything specific that had been done/modified/replaced subesquent to the VUP in 2017? In reading the Guay suit, it seemed inferentially that something had been done in 2018, but I haven't come across anything to substantiate that from an authoritative source (like a responsible adult/publication in SIG...), and the Customer Service mantra is everything post VUP is good to go.

The more I think about this, it strikes me that you can have a simple, transparent design that is adequately materialed and well assembled (Glock), or a complex, but well engineered, well materialed, and well QC'd pistol (e.g., HK, Beretta)-but the SIG FCU is complex, and with questionable QC. Material quality is undetermined from what I can tell and observe, but SIG's previous choice of mid-grade MIM from India on other/concurrent SIG pistols is noted.

I like my P320. But I have significant doubts regarding SIG's transparency, assembly and QC. As HCM presciently observed, it's a bit of a disposable pistol. That does not provide me with warm fuzzy feelings, and diminishes my pride in ownership. Operationally, mine has been doing superbly. But I think my interest in the platform had likely peaked with my sample size of exactly one.

Best, Jon

[Texaspoff]

In your 2019 Armorer Course, did they mention anything specific that had been done/modified/replaced subesquent to the VUP in 2017? In reading the Guay suit, it seemed inferentially that something had been done in 2018, but I haven't come across anything to substantiate that from an authoritative source (like a responsible adult/publication in SIG...), and the Customer Service mantra is everything post VUP is good to go.

The more I think about this, it strikes me that you can have a simple, transparent design that is adequately materialed and well assembled (Glock), or a complex, but well engineered, well materialed, and well QC'd pistol (e.g., HK, Beretta)-but the SIG FCU is complex, and with questionable QC. Material quality is undetermined from what I can tell and observe, but SIG's previous choice of mid-grade MIM from India on other/concurrent SIG pistols is noted.

I like my P320. But I have significant doubts regarding SIG's transparency, assembly and QC. As HCM presciently observed, it's a bit of a disposable pistol. That does not provide me with warm fuzzy feelings, and diminishes my pride in ownership. Operationally, mine has been doing superbly. But I think my interest in the platform had likely peaked with my sample size of exactly one.

Best, Jon

We talked about the upgrade program and what parts were changed. We discussed the different variations in the slide cut outs, located at the rear underside of the slide. These were done to change the velocity of the slide due to some variation in ammo that was being use in some P320's. Didn't go into specifics about which ones. Talked about the magazine base plate redesign, and what is was done for.

QC was brought up as well. As an example, I had my hands on a shipment of LE guns at a local dealer. 6 X carrys, and every one of them had something a miss including one that's trigger was extremely difficult to pull. AN examination of the fire control unit revealed the chassis on the trigger side had not be cut or milled high enough and the top of the trigger bar was rubbing against it during the pull. Sights were way off on a few, and one had stripped screws in the optic plate. These kind of things shouldn't get by QC, I mean they were blatantly obvious.

Other than that we didn't talk about anything else that happened prior to the upgrade as far as any rolling changes. The guy teaching did say Sig is constantly testing and upgrading or revising parts if needed. Not sure how much of that really goes on actually.



TXPO

[lwt16]

That looked like a newer one with the secondary cuts. I have never seen one with the holes for the springs. Wonder if that is the most current design. I haven't been in a 20 production 320, so I couldn't tell you. All the 320 we have here at the PD ranging from 2015 through 2019 all have the post mounts.

In the parts listing I posted for you in #117, both sears show to have the posts for the springs. That paperwork was from our 2019 armorer update course.


TXPO

In my p320 armorer class, we were told that we might see the older (at the time) sears with the craters/dimples.

That was in 2018. This copy was circa 10/2019. Not sure if they just reach in a bin and grab whatever.

[Texaspoff]

Check post #113 to see what it looks like Texaspoff


That looked like a newer one with the secondary cuts. I have never seen one with the holes for the springs. Wonder if that is the most current design. I haven't been in a 20 production 320, so I couldn't tell you. All the 320 we have here at the PD ranging from 2015 through 2019 all have the post mounts.

In the parts listing I posted for you in #117, both sears show to have the posts for the springs. That paperwork was from our 2019 armorer update course.


TXPO


I also spoke to a local regional Sig Armorer/LE dealer/Competitor and he said he has never seen a sear with the holes for the springs. He said he was going to call Sig and see what they said about that, cause he was dumbfounded. He has also been extremely involved with Sig and the 320 since it's inception.

You may have a prototype part that somehow made it into a production gun. With Sig's typicall QC that wouldn't surprise me one bit.

I would be interested to see if any of your other department guns have the same sear design in them.


TXPO

[lwt16]

I also spoke to a local regional Sig Armorer/LE dealer/Competitor and he said he has never seen a sear with the holes for the springs. He said he was going to call Sig and see what they said about that, cause he was dumbfounded. He has also been extremely involved with Sig and the 320 since it's inception.

You may have a prototype part that somehow made it into a production gun. With Sig's typicall QC that wouldn't surprise me one bit.

I would be interested to see if any of your other department guns have the same sear design in them.


TXPO

Ask him to send me a modern sear (I'll pay if needed so long as it's reasonable) if at all possible. The owner is scared of it in it's current condition due to shot truck seat. I'd like to bring it up to spec for him.

[JonInWA]

The fact that both Lwt16 and Texaspoff have expereinced repetitive and apparently systemic QC issues (i.e., the specific lack of QC) is discouraging, to say the least. The problem is compounded by the relative complexity and various small components that comprise the FCU, making it seemingly not to be disassembled/reassembled by the untrained and uninitiated.

What I'm hearing is that it's (the FCU) a relatively complex unit, and that SIG can be unsupportive to their armorers and lacking in replacement components, at least in terms of providing them to trained and certified armorers.

It's been pretty well established that a trained monkee can detail disassemble/reassemble a Glock (hey, I'm a trained and certified Glock monkee!), components are easily available and installable, and the design is simple and robust. While I prefer the ergos of the P320, and the modularity of it (and have personally taken advantage of it), I'm getting leerier and leerier about the platform in general.

Mine will probably be a "one and done" P320 platform comittment. It's a shame HK isn't providing adult supervision to SIG, because I think that a well engineered and well manufactured/QC'd P320 has huge potential to a variety of firearms user niches.

Best, Jon

[RJ]

The fact that both Lwt16 and Texaspoff have expereinced repetitive and apparently systemic QC issues (i.e., the specific lack of QC) is discouraging, to say the least. The problem is compounded by the relative complexity and various small components that comprise the FCU, making it seemingly not to be disassebled/reassembled by the untrained and uninitiated.

What I'm hearing is that it's (the FCU) a relatively complex unit, and that SIG can be unsupportive to their armorers and lacking in replacement components, at least in terms of providing them to trained and certified armorers.

It's been pretty well established that a trained monkee can detail disassemble/reassemble a Glock (hey, I'm a trained and certified Glock monkee!), components are easily available and installable, and the design is simple and robust. While I prefer the ergos of the P320, and the modularity of it (and have personally taken advantage of it), I'm getting leerier and leerier about the platform in general.



As someone whose virtual credit card is hovering over the 'buy' button on a P320 for competition use (having switched to a P365XL for EDC from a Glock 43X), I can't say there's anything in the above I disagree with.

Crap.

PS OTOH maybe now I can buy an optics ready G43X. Geezus my wife will kill me. :)

[Texaspoff]

Ask him to send me a modern sear (I'll pay if needed so long as it's reasonable) if at all possible. The owner is scared of it in it's current condition due to shot truck seat. I'd like to bring it up to spec for him.


He is checking to see if he has one. If so, I'll get it and we can work out the details on getting it to you.


The fact that both Lwt16 and Texaspoff have expereinced repetitive and apparently systemic QC issues (i.e., the specific lack of QC) is discouraging, to say the least. The problem is compounded by the relative complexity and various small components that comprise the FCU, making it seemingly not to be disassebled/reassembled by the untrained and uninitiated.

What I'm hearing is that it's (the FCU) a relatively complex unit, and that SIG can be unsupportive to their armorers and lacking in replacement components, at least in terms of providing them to trained and certified armorers.

It's been pretty well established that a trained monkee can detail disassemble/reassemble a Glock (hey, I'm a trained and certified Glock monkee!), components are easily available and installable, and the design is simple and robust. While I prefer the ergos of the P320, and the modularity of it (and have personally taken advantage of it), I'm getting leerier and leerier about the platform in general.

Mine will probably be a "one and done" P320 platform comittment. It's a shame HK isn't providing adult supervision to SIG, because I think that a well engineered and well manufactured/QC'd P320 has huge potential to a variety of firearms user niches.

Best, Jon

I do like the 320 platform, but the one word that comes to mind is messy. I feel like there are so many things that could and should be done better. QC being the biggest one. I have no doubt, based on past history, that alot of this has to do with who is leading the company. Kimber traveled along these same lines with the same person driving their bus.


TXPO

[Sammy1]

Wilson Combat have been producing P320 grip modules and now they have their own P320 version. If there was a inherent safety flaw with the P320 I don't think WC would be associated with it.

[HCM]

Wilson Combat have been producing P320 grip modules and now they have their own P320 version. If there was a inherent safety flaw with the P320 I don't think WC would be associated with it.

That is dangerous thinking. They are as fallible as anyone else and there are multiple examples of problematic WC 1911's to prove it. Now WC is known for their customer service as much as their products and they have stood behind and /or replaced those guns but there is no such thing as perfection or omnipotence in the gun world. The original P320 drop safety issues caught Bruce Gray by surprise and he is both an exceptional engineer and gunsmith and one of the contributors to the design of the P320.

WC's core business model is enhanced version of US Service pistols, the 1911, the Beretta and now that the P320/M17 is the standard service pistol it is only logical for WC to support it. I'm a big fan of the WC grip BTW.

Why else did WC get into Berettas ? Because is a platform which is easy to shoot well. What ever it's flaws that is also true of the 320.

As TLG said so well, when it comes to the gun industry, trust no one.

http://pistol-training.com/articles/trust-no-one-an-insiders-perspective

[Texaspoff]

Wilson Combat have been producing P320 grip modules and now they have their own P320 version. If there was a inherent safety flaw with the P320 I don't think WC would be associated with it.

WC despite having their own version of the 320, is still using a factory Sig 320 fire control assembly. Wilson adds their slide, frame, and does some internal tuning if you op for the enhance version, but whatever issues the 320 has, will carry over to the WC version as well.


TXPO

[arooni]

As a new p320 m18 owner (manufacturer date: May 2020) I very much appreciate the existence of this thread. I knew about this issue prior to purchasing but felt it was addressed to my liking, but after reading 20 pages of this, I'm not so sure.

I posted about this issue on sigtalk and sigforums but many people there felt that the lawsuit recently filed was just someone chasing money. I'm glad to see such a substantive discussion.

I'm still a little unclear on whether my manual safety is simply preventing the trigger from moving and/or affecting the internals of the FCU in a way I can't see or experience.

Would forum members who had a M18 of my manufacture date feel comfortable keeping a round chambered (with the safety on)? Why or why not?

Many thanks!

[ccmdfd]

Why else did WC get into Berettas ? Because is a platform which is easy to shoot well. What ever it's flaws that is also true of the 320.



The owner of a LGS, who is probably in is mid to late 60's,told me once that for years and years, Mr Wilson would go to gun shows looking to pay top dollar for Beretta 92 variants. He especially liked the rare ones.

Thus it seems he has had a passion for the 92 for quite some time.

FWIW.

[HCM]

The owner of a LGS, who is probably in is mid to late 60's,told me once that for years and years, Mr Wilson would go to gun shows looking to pay top dollar for Beretta 92 variants. He especially liked the rare ones.

Thus it seems he has had a passion for the 92 for quite some time.

FWIW.

Yup and that passion is the result of positive feed back Bill Wilson received from the Military and because is a platform which is easy to shoot well. When "Mr. 1911" says he can shoot a platform as well as a 1911 it's worth paying attention.

You can hear it from the horse's mouth here:


https://youtu.be/o5eCGchVrTM

[KevH]

The owner of a LGS, who is probably in is mid to late 60's,told me once that for years and years, Mr Wilson would go to gun shows looking to pay top dollar for Beretta 92 variants. He especially liked the rare ones.

Thus it seems he has had a passion for the 92 for quite some time.

FWIW.

I've heard the same thing. Bill Wilson is (and has been for decades) a Beretta connoisseur.

I know for a fact that he talked Ken Hackathorn out of his Beretta 92G CQB (a one of a kind Ken did a magazine article about). Ken told me that for trade he had WC build him a custom 9mm Government Model with ivory grips (a gun that I have shot which is unbelievably nice). The specs of that gun became the basis of the "Hackathorn Special" that WC offers.

Ultimately, Bill Wilson is a very successful businessman. He combined personal passion for Beretta with filling a market void and I think it paid off. The P320 has been very commercially successful and I think Wilson saw trend and a market gap to take advantage of that would only require minimal effort on his company's part.

[HCM]

I've heard the same thing. Bill Wilson is (and has been for decades) a Beretta connoisseur.

I know for a fact that he talked Ken Hackathorn out of his Beretta 92G CQB (a one of a kind Ken did a magazine article about). Ken told me that for trade he had WC build him a custom 9mm Government Model with ivory grips (a gun that I have shot which is unbelievably nice). The specs of that gun became the basis of the "Hackathorn Special" that WC offers.

Ultimately, Bill Wilson is a very successful businessman. He combined personal passion for Beretta with filling a market void and I think it paid off. The P320 has been very commercially successful and I think Wilson saw trend and a market gap to take advantage of that would only require minimal effort on his company's part.

There have been over 1 million P320s made in 6 years - what ever it’s flaws the market is there.

[98z28]

As a new p320 m18 owner (manufacturer date: May 2020) I very much appreciate the existence of this thread. I knew about this issue prior to purchasing but felt it was addressed to my liking, but after reading 20 pages of this, I'm not so sure.

I posted about this issue on sigtalk and sigforums but many people there felt that the lawsuit recently filed was just someone chasing money. I'm glad to see such a substantive discussion.

I'm still a little unclear on whether my manual safety is simply preventing the trigger from moving and/or affecting the internals of the FCU in a way I can't see or experience.

Would forum members who had a M18 of my manufacture date feel comfortable keeping a round chambered (with the safety on)? Why or why not?

Many thanks!

The thumb safety blocks the trigger bar's movement only. It does not block the sear's movement. The potential drop safe (or lack thereof) issue is from the sear releasing without the trigger being pressed. If a particular gun has the combination of parts, poor QC, and bad luck that will let the sear release uncommanded, then it would not matter if it had a thumb safety or not.

That said, the issue appear to be isolated to a particular date range and set of parts that lwt16 has identified. The first few pages of this very thread isolates the suspected parts and date ranges. Pay particular attention to comments from lwt16.

This thread has some good information about the inner workings of the P320 before and after the "voluntary upgrade program": https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?27008-P320-drop-safety-issues. Pay particular attention to comments from Tom-Jones.

[MGW]

I don’t know if it fits here or not but I have a few pictures of the internals of a new .mil M17. If it adds to the discussion let me know and I’ll add them.

[Zman001]

People are talking about how mamy sigs were sold, didn't glock sell 1 mil. 19X in a little less than a year? With how many people buying guns now, i don't know if 1 million guns is the benchmark it once was

[Cory]

I don’t know if it fits here or not but I have a few pictures of the internals of a new .mil M17. If it adds to the discussion let me know and I’ll add them.

I've offered the same. Nobody seems interested.

[98z28]

I'm definitely interested. I finally have my hands on a manual safety FCU from AB Prototype, though I don't know if it differs from the M17/18 in a meaningful way.

There also seems to be a lot of confusion about how the manual safety on the 320 works, which makes sense given the rarity. Some pictures would be nice.

Sent from my SM-N950U1 using Tapatalk

[DocGKR]

Smart folks would do well to pay a LOT of attention to what psalms144.1 wrote back in post #131:


"it's damn near impossible to know what you're getting UNLESS you're getting a DHS contract pistol...........in a world of Gen5 Glocks, CZ P10s, M&P 2.0s, APXs, VP9s and 1911s, I wouldn't put my money or my safety into one (Sig 320)..."

[WOLFIE]

The thumb safety blocks the trigger bar's movement only. It does not block the sear's movement. The potential drop safe (or lack thereof) issue is from the sear releasing without the trigger being pressed. If a particular gun has the combination of parts, poor QC, and bad luck that will let the sear release uncommanded, then it would not matter if it had a thumb safety or not.

That said, the issue appear to be isolated to a particular date range and set of parts that lwt16 has identified. The first few pages of this very thread isolates the suspected parts and date ranges. Pay particular attention to comments from lwt16.

This thread has some good information about the inner workings of the P320 before and after the "voluntary upgrade program": https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?27008-P320-drop-safety-issues. Pay particular attention to comments from Tom-Jones.

I thought the problem was firing from inertia. inertia caused the trigger to move far enough to the rear for the the pistol to fire. I could be wrong and I always listen to Tom Jones. It is possible I remembered incorrectly

[HCM]

I thought the problem was firing from inertia. inertia caused the trigger to move far enough to the rear for the the pistol to fire. I could be wrong and I always listen to Tom Jones. It is possible I remembered incorrectly

The AD issue is inertia but the trigger /trigger bar was not the primary issue. The trigger bar on the 320 actually moves forward when the trigger is pulled. Reducing the weight of the trigger was just a supplement to the real fix, which was internal.

[98z28]

I thought the problem was firing from inertia. inertia caused the trigger to move far enough to the rear for the the pistol to fire. I could be wrong and I always listen to Tom Jones. It is possible I remembered incorrectly

Again, I'm no engineer, so I might be wrong as well, but my takeaway from reading Tom-Jone's, lwt16's, and JonInWA's comments in this and the other threads over the last couple of years is that the internal safeties can be defeated with inertia on the 320. The trigger moving in the videos is in some ways an artifact of the safeties being defeated.

I was/am confused about this as well. Confused enough that I pulled some bullets and started dropping my TDA guns in single action with primed cases in the chamber to see if inertia could pull the trigger and defeat the internal safeties on those guns as well. The triggers are heavier and the force/distance needed release the sear is less on those guns than on the 320. If the hammer fell, it always fell to half-cock. The primer never detonated like we've seen with the 320. I think something else was/is going on with the 320.

[Sammy1]

The sear on the upgraded P320 has a second notch to catch the striker arm if it comes off the first notch. Do holster AD's include firearms with the voluntary upgrade?

[JonInWA]

Yes, hence the continued concern (and the major reason for this discussion thread). That's one of the things discussed in detail in the suit, which is why it's well worth a thorough read. Best, Jon

[WOLFIE]

Thank you 98z28 and HCM. I have two 320 pistols and am debating keeping them. I love the trigger pull.

[Shipwreck]

Thank you 98z28 and HCM. I have two 320 pistols and am debating keeping them. I love the trigger pull.

I considered buying one recently - but I have passed because of this issue

[WOLFIE]

Again, I'm no engineer, so I might be wrong as well, but my takeaway from reading Tom-Jone's, lwt16's, and JonInWA's comments in this and the other threads over the last couple of years is that the internal safeties can be defeated with inertia on the 320. The trigger moving in the videos is in some ways an artifact of the safeties being defeated.

I was/am confused about this as well. Confused enough that I pulled some bullets and started dropping my TDA guns in single action with primed cases in the chamber to see if inertia could pull the trigger and defeat the internal safeties on those guns as well. The triggers are heavier and the force/distance needed release the sear is less on those guns than on the 320. If the hammer fell, it always fell to half-cock. The primer never detonated like we've seen with the 320. I think something else was/is going on with the 320.

I and I am sure others appreciate you sharing the results of dropping TDA guns in single action mode. I have wondered about this myself. Causes me to appreciate the HK USP models with hammer spurs made out of rubber to prevent the hammer falling if dropped in single action mode.

[jd950]

This doesn't add any technical information but in case it is of interest, a small local department (a little over 200 sworn personnel) that had permitted the P320 just pulled the gun from the approved list and the P320 may no longer be carried on or off duty effective November 1, which is a rather short time frame compared to how these things usually work. No details provided in the internal memo and the only information I am aware of is in the form of rumor.

[Tokarev]

Causes me to appreciate the HK USP models with hammer spurs made out of rubber to prevent the hammer falling if dropped in single action mode.

Is the rubber there to help prevent accidental discharge or to protect the hammer itself from being damaged?

One may complement the other...

Sent from my SM-A505U using Tapatalk

[WOLFIE]

Is the rubber there to help prevent accidental discharge or to protect the hammer itself from being damaged?

One may complement the other...

Sent from my SM-A505U using Tapatalk

It was years ago when I read about it. I do remember that the purpose of the rubber was to prevent the hammer from being knocked out if position; the purpose was to keep the gun from breaking due to a drop when in the cocked position. The spring pressure is there when in the cocked position and therefore the hammer could “spring” forward and fire the gun. You said it better than me.

[HCountyGuy]

58007

This is the spring that Sig no longer installs in recent builds. I feel certain that I now know why.

This little spring, which is the spring that retracts the lever that lifts the striker block, was a little hosed up. My thoughts are that the striker block lever was "stuck" in the upward position, with a striker foot not held by proper dual spring tension, and when our guy holstered, when his pistol clicked down and seated, the striker slipped from the sear and fell forward....discharging the HST round.

I have taken several apart from that same general time of year this one was build. They all have the newer style sear with spring posts instead of the dimples.

I'm 90 percent sure this discharge wasn't his fault. We assumed garment on the trigger but now I'm leaning towards the gun. I plan on sending Sig a certified letter this week as I need a replacement sear for this gun as well as any others I come across that have the similar, older style sear.

We have pulled them from duty and most have qualified on other pistols. We will see where it goes. I'd like confirmation from Sig that the fix is to simply remove that striker block lever spring from each copy and to ensure they have the most updated sear. If that's the fix to make them safe, I can do that for nothing for most of the guns we have.

I also appreciate this thread and they way everyone conducted themselves.


Found the page for you, Note Spring, Safety Lever. This is the page with the new parts for the VUP. I received an armorer update package in 2019.

https://i.imgur.com/C6vhBf4h.jpg


TXPO

Sorry if this seems like a possibly ignorant question, but as I understand it that spring was what kept the lever in the down position and now only gravity keeps it down. So would holding the pistol upside-down and it hitting something (dropped, struck on something or by something) possibly cause a discharge in a similar manner as to what happened with the lever getting stuck in the up position with LWT's guy?

[Bucky]

I just want to thank everyone for this thread. I had tried to put my 320's away and move full time to my SP 2022, but I shoot them so much better that the transition never completely took. (The SP2022 is a great pistol, by the way, and I am so glad to be spending the time on it, because it is making this noob a much better shooter!!).


Is the SP harder to shoot because of the DA to SA transition? If so, just carry it with the hammer cocked. Of course i jest, but seriously a P320, even a working model, is no safer that carrying a 92, 226, 2022 with the hammer cocked. (I need to do a change my mind meme with this ;))

[DpdG]

Sorry if this seems like a possibly ignorant question, but as I understand it that spring was what kept the lever in the down position and now only gravity keeps it down. So would holding the pistol upside-down and it hitting something (dropped, struck on something or by something) possibly cause a discharge in a similar manner as to what happened with the lever getting stuck in the up position with LWT's guy?

In theory, no it should not discharge. The actual striker block (part of the striker assembly) has its own spring that keeps it engaged unless/until it’s deactivated by the safety lever. The safety lever is functionally only a floating transfer bar and the only time it would be only controlled by gravity is when the slide is off the gun.

The malfunction described was the safety lever being wedged in a position not allowing the striker block to engage. I imagine removing the safety lever spring reduces/eliminates the likelihood of that happening, as the old spring was pretty easy to dislodge and I can see how it could wedge the lever in the up position.

All the above said- it’s modern Sig, so who knows and the parts will probably change again for reasons undisclosed.

[Runt1122]

Any updates to this story?! To be honest, the part that bothered me the most was Sig’s response.

Four days later, according to court paperwork, SIG Sauer “issued a press release stating that the P320 could fire without a trigger pull under certain conditions, including vibration, but “reaffirmed” the safety of the P320 to all end users.”

Could fire under certain conditions including vibration?! Are you kidding me?! How does that provide confidence and trust?

After this story I traded away my P320 for a Glock 19 Gen 5 and have been very pleased. I kept my P365 because I had not heard of any similar problems and it performs so well.

[HCM]

Four days later, according to court paperwork, SIG Sauer “issued a press release stating that the P320 could fire without a trigger pull under certain conditions, including vibration, but “reaffirmed” the safety of the P320 to all end users.”



Source for this ?

[jd950]

Source for this ?

I was curious, too. I thought the implication was that this was a recent press release from Sig. Without spending much time on it, I spent some time looking on the internet and I think this was an allegation made in a suit back in 2017, before the "voluntary upgrade" and referring to those guns.

I don't know if it was said or not, but if it was, it was not in relation to the current issue.

I have now obtained and read Sig's Answer in the current lawsuit. Their position is that the gun in question could not have discharged without the trigger being pulled, which is pretty much what one would expect them to say. I doubt they ave made any statements that would contradict their formal position in court pleadings.

[Runt1122]

Source for this ?

https://www.unionleader.com/news/courts/nh-mans-lawsuit-claims-sig-sauer-pistol-fired-without-trigger-pull/article_63c8f130-af21-5eb0-b67d-c12943be8493.html

[HCM]

https://www.unionleader.com/news/courts/nh-mans-lawsuit-claims-sig-sauer-pistol-fired-without-trigger-pull/article_63c8f130-af21-5eb0-b67d-c12943be8493.html

So it’s not in the story it’s in paragraph 46 of the lawsuit complaint here:

https://bloximages.newyork1.vip.townnews.com/unionleader.com/content/tncms/assets/v3/editorial/f/05/f05682b2-2361-573f-8c21-005cb88abc0f/5f03a0863c886.pdf.pdf

It is also not a response to the current 2020 lawsuit, but rather a response to the 2016 lawsuit by the CT SWAT cop.

It’s worth noting that the 2020 lawsuit involves an original design 320 purchased in 2016 which had not been upgraded.

So despite the date, it is not reflective of current production or upgraded guns.

The claim that only 20% of the original design guns have been sent in for upgrades is interesting.

However there are some blatant technical mistakes in the complaint.

In paragraph 63 they show a picture of the Honor Defense 9mm pistol with the FIST frame which is an intentionally extended dust cover designed to prevent out of battery malfunctions during contact shots




FIST stands for Firearm with Integrated Standoff. In practice, this means an extended dust cover so the gun will function properly even during contact shots. It ain’t exactly a gimmick, as there’s definitely a percentage of revolver owners who eschew semi-autos for fears of it going out of battery when the muzzle is pressed up against something.


However in the lawsuit they use a photo of this gun, which is in battery, as an example of a semi auto pistol which is out if battery.

More interesting though is paragraph 84 which describes a CAT scan of a P320 which injured a VA sheriff’s deputy. The CAT scan found the dual seat springs were crossed similar to the malfunction found by PF member lwt16.

@TXPO

Gadfly

[HCM]

So keep in mind, while there are some reports of legitimate unintentional discharges (UD) apparently caused by mechanical or design failure, many of the UDs cited in the lawsuit are really negligent discharges (ND) caused by operator error.

For example, paragraph 93 states:


93. On July 23, 2019, an upgraded P320 fired un-commanded on Officer Walter Collette, Jr. of the Somerville, Massachusetts, police department, hitting him in his leg and causing substantial injuries to his leg. The next day, an upgraded P320 fired un-commanded on a Homeland Security Agent at a firing range in the Bronx, New York.

So the Bronx incident was during transition training from P229 DAKs to P320s, was witnessed, and resulted from the Agent putting their finger on the the trigger during a draw. In other words it was a clear ND.

The claim that this ND was “uncommanded” is not just misleading but outright false.

If you put your finger on the trigger you commanded the gun to fire whether you intended to do so or not.

Also the use of the term “upgraded” P320 in the complaint is a misnomer as the gun in question was a post upgrade model and had not part of SIGs voluntary upgrade program.

https://nypost.com/2019/07/24/homeland-security-agent-shoots-himself-in-leg-at-gun-range/

So while there are some nuggets of useful information in the complaint there are also technical errors, and attempts to exaggerate the extent of 320 issues by mis-categorizing operator induced NDs as mechanical failures.

Cops have NDs. I’ve witnessed and treated enough to state that as a fact. Further, as we know from the LA sheriff’s study. LE agencies transitioning from DA guns to striker fired guns often have a learning curve among those with trigger checking issues resulting in a temporary spike in NDs when the “crutch” of the longer DA pull is removed.

Given that a fair number of agencies adopting the P320 are doing so out of brand loyalty and transitioning from SIG TDA or DAK guns some operator induced NDs are to be expected.

[JonInWA]

I wouldn't be too surprised to hear of NDs caused by officers/agencies transitioning from Glock to the P320. The P320 has a much softer break point compared to Glocks, I can easily visualize an "Are we there yet? BOOM" triggerpull sequence...

Any transition (or initial acquisition) involving short triggerpull/relatively light break weights really need to have an effective transition and qualification program-and the qualification needs to be of a scope beyone merely successfully placing the requisite amount of holes in a target.

I think that it was on p-f here that a member equated many of the contemporary SFA's to be like a 1911-without a manual safety. There's some truth in that.

Best, Jon

[AMC]

I wouldn't be too surprised to hear of NDs caused by officers/agencies transitioning from Glock to the P320. The P320 has a much softer break point compared to Glocks, I can easily visualize an "Are we there yet? BOOM" triggerpull sequence...

Any transition (or initial acquisition) involving short triggerpull/relatively light break weights really need to have an effective transition and qualification program-and the qualification needs to be of a scope beyone merely successfully placing the requisite amount of holes in a target.

I think that it was on p-f here that a member equated many of the contemporary SFA's to be like a 1911-without a manual safety. There's some truth in that.

Best, Jon

The issue with proper transition training is real. When we proposed moving from DA/SA Sigs to a striker fired gun, I insisted that we run a 20 hour transition. Folks complained that a lot of neighboring agencies just make an officer qualify with a new gun/trigger system before hitting the street. I refuse to do that, and think its borderline criminally negligent. The issue isn't getting people to "qualify", as if that really means something.....its getting them to be safe with the gun under stressful real world conditions. That people don't grasp that in this day and age astounds me.

A neighboring agency, which shoots far more than we do, recently transitioned from Sig 226R DAKs to the 320. They did an 8 hour conversion course. When I asked their instructors if they had experienced an increase in NDs, they said no. When I asked the same of a couple of their cops, they said "Oh yeah. All the time. But its all on the range so its good." Nope. No its not.

And as for NDs....half the recent NDs we've seen lately have been guys' off duty Glocks. And our Sheriffs Department still experience several a year with their Glock 17s. Its the one thing that gives me pause about the G-lock easy button for cops. Too many "cleaning accidents".

[Sammy1]

Some good info is coming out on the lawsuits and allegations, thank you to the members digging through this. I'm leaning more towards ND's and not "uncommanded" firing. The latest figures from Sig, they are producing 100,000 firearms per month and not keeping up with demand. I'm guessing that a large number of those firearms are P320s. If the guns were unsafe I think there would be much more reports of this and injuries.

[RJ]

...I'm guessing that a large number of those firearms are P320s...



Or P365s. I'm not trying to drift the thread further, but I still can't quite figure out whether the FCU in the P365 is a "mini-320", or a different design altogether. AFAIK there are no reports of UD from a P365. I should probably start a separate thread to try and get to the bottom of this. I traded my P365XL for a Glock 48, but my wife still likes her P365. I borrowed it this weekend and pocket carried it in a Desantis Nemesis; it is a great little package for 10+1.

[Sammy1]

Or P365s. I'm not trying to drift the thread further, but I still can't quite figure out whether the FCU in the P365 is a "mini-320", or a different design altogether. AFAIK there are no reports of UD from a P365. I should probably start a separate thread to try and get to the bottom of this. I traded my P365XL for a Glock 48, but my wife still likes her P365. I borrowed it this weekend and pocket carried it in a Desantis Nemesis; it is a great little package for 10+1.

Good point, I didn't think of the 365, it would be a large percentage of production. Last time I was at the Pro Shop someone was trying to buy a 40 cal and the clerk told him that they are concentrating on 9mm production at this time to keep up with demand. Also, I didn't see any traditional 22 series on the wall except for Legions.

[HCM]

https://www.psmagazine.army.mil/News/Article/2229115/m17m18-mhs-is-your-pistol-acting-sluggish/


M17/M18 MHS: Is Your Pistol Acting Sluggish?
| June 23, 2020

EMAILPRINT
NATO BG-P Soldiers train on EIB and ESB tasks
Photo by Sgt. Timothy Hamlin

Soldiers, is your M17/M18 pistol acting sluggish or the trigger won’t reset? According to TACOM Maintenance Action Message MA 20-031, a safety and function check must be performed using the guidance in TM 9-1005-470-10 (Mar 19).

If you do this and the trigger resets properly, your weapon is good to go.

If your trigger fails to reset and the trigger bar is stamped with revision number 01-04, request a replacement trigger bar, NSN 1005-01-665-0494, from TACOM. Using a new trigger bar eliminates the problem. You can see the stamped trigger bar at the link below:

https://tulsa.tacom.army.mil/Maintenance/?t=mam&f=RevNumber.pdf

All you have to do is complete the Trigger Bar Request Form and email it to the ILSC Individual Weapons (IW) mailbox at:

usarmy.detroit.tacom.mbx.ilsc-individual-weapons@mail.mil

Your unit’s 91F can replace the trigger bar using the guidance in WP 0011 in TM 9-1005-470-23&P (Jun 19).

Check out TACOM maintenance action message MA 20-031 for more info:

https://tulsa.tacom.army.mil/Maintenance/message.cfm?id=MA20-031.html

[HCM]

https://www.psmagazine.army.mil/News/Article/2218171/m17m18-mhs-new-slide-function-check/


M17/M18 MHS: New Slide Function Check
| June 12, 2020

EMAILPRINT
Soldiers from Task Force Carentan conducted pistol marksmanship training
Photo by Sgt. Justin Navin

Soldiers, do you know the M17/M18 modular handgun system (MHS) has two different striker assemblies? One is called the current striker assembly and the other is the original striker assembly.

Both will operate with or without the reset spring and are mission capable as long as the striker is retained by the safety lock and passes all other function checks.

There’s no need to replace the original with the current unless it fails the function checks.

How do you know which striker assembly is in your MHS? Only by performing a slide function check.

Start with the original striker assembly check in WP 12 of TM 9-1005-470-10 (Mar 19) or WP 10 of TM 9-1005-470-23&P (Jun 19). If your slide fails this function test, perform this new slide function test:

Apply slight forward pressure to the striker pin toward the muzzle end of the slide. The striker pin shouldn’t protrude from the breech face of slide.
Press in on the safety lock.
While pressing in on the striker safety lock, push the striker pin forward. The striker pin should move and protrude from the breech face of the slide.
While holding the striker pin forward, release the safety lock. The safety lock should still be held down.
Release the striker pin and push it back to the rear of the slide. The safety lock should reset. You should hear a slight click.
Apply slight forward pressure to the striker pin toward the muzzle end of the slide. The striker pin should not protrude from the breech face.
Check extractor tension by lifting up the extractor and releasing it. The extractor spring should produce resistance.
Note that a slide function test should be performed any time maintenance is performed on the pistol, as well as during PMCS. The -10 and -23 TMs will be updated with this info.

If you have any questions or need assistance, contact your local Army Materiel Command (AMC) Logistics Assistance Representative (LAR) or your State Surface Maintenance Manager.

For the full message go to:
https://tulsa.tacom.army.mil/Maintenance/message.cfm?id=MI20-029.html

[DrkBlue]

Those US Army maintenance posts are potentially damning in my mind. Understanding that any large scale fielding of a weapon system will find flaws and opportunities for improvements, these issues seem to reinforce the core of this thread.

In this case, these Army directives are presumably going to qualified small arms repairers, which have technical level training in the diagnostic process for malfunctioning or deadlined weapons. That level of formalized training puts the Army personnel at some advantage relative some law enforcement armorers and well beyond casual owners of many P320/other Sig SF pistols.

HCM et al - check me that I am interpreting these issues correctly:

1) Reproducible issues have been found in the M17/18 components that were product improved to address safety issues found in the MHS trials and rather short-fused development phase.

2) Changes in the manufacturing components are implemented in a manner that makes detecting version changes visually difficult. Whether the version changes were disguised or simply subtle would be a opinion, but relative the US Army PCMS the entire subassembly needs to be replaced based on performance/function tests.

[HCM]

Those US Army maintenance posts are potentially damning in my mind. Understanding that any large scale fielding of a weapon system will find flaws and opportunities for improvements, these issues seem to reinforce the core of this thread.

In this case, these Army directives are presumably going to qualified small arms repairers, which have technical level training in the diagnostic process for malfunctioning or deadlined weapons. That level of formalized training puts the Army personnel at some advantage relative some law enforcement armorers and well beyond casual owners of many P320/other Sig SF pistols.

HCM et al - check me that I am interpreting these issues correctly:

1) Reproducible issues have been found in the M17/18 components that were product improved to address safety issues found in the MHS trials and rather short-fused development phase.

2) Changes in the manufacturing components are implemented in a manner that makes detecting version changes visually difficult. Whether the version changes were disguised or simply subtle would be a opinion, but relative the US Army PCMS the entire subassembly needs to be replaced based on performance/function tests.

Unit level armorers are less well trained than your average/factory trained LE Armorer. As you mentioned the unit level armorers are only swapping sub assemblies.

The people you describe are not found until the depot level.

[JonInWA]

HCM and Lwt16, I'm very interested to hear your assessment of these M17/M18 issues; hetrofor, we've assumed that the DoD platform pistols were pretty much good to go, especially given their manual safeties....

We seem to be venturing dangerously close to wack-a-mole territory vis-a-vis the P320/M17/M18. And just when I thought SIG might really have sorted things out...

Best, Jon

[MGW]

I received a 4 hour block of “training” from TACOM on the M17. Our instructor was very pro Sig to say the least. When pressed about the drop issue with the 320 he was dismissive. He claimed the M17 is a “completely different” firearm from the 320 and that the M17/18 never had a drop safe issue.

[lwt16]

HCM and Lwt16, I'm very interested to hear your assessment of these M17/M18 issues; hetrofor, we've assumed that the DoD platform pistols were pretty much good to go, especially given their manual safeties....

We seem to be venturing dangerously close to wack-a-mole territory vis-a-vis the P320/M17/M18. And just when I thought SIG might really have sorted things out...

Best, Jon

I can’t get some of those links to open for some reason. I’ll try tomorrow on my Toughbook.

I’ve yet to see a M17/18 pistol on my bench so I’d like to refrain from commenting until I can at least see those links above.

We’ve not seen any trigger return issues other than in one of the early WC grip modules. I’m hesitant to share this with my cadre until I research it more. Both of the p320s at my home got Apex kits with trigger bars plus 10% extra power trigger reset springs (Galloway precision). Neither have the safety lever spring now even though one came with one.

My son loves shooting his and we both consider them range use only weapons.


Regards.

[MGW]

I took these photos during training. I’m not sure if they help but thought I would add them. Someone may find them useful.

62903

62904

62906

62907

62908

62909

62910

[Gadfly]

While I am sure it’s mentioned somewhere, is the M17/18 manual safety blocking the sear? Or is it just blocking the trigger bar?

[HCM]

While I am sure it’s mentioned somewhere, is the M17/18 manual safety blocking the sear? Or is it just blocking the trigger bar?

Trigger bar per the factory armorer manual.

[lwt16]

What spring are they referring to in this part:

"Both will operate with or without the reset spring and are mission capable as long as the striker is retained by the safety lock and passes all other function checks."

It's in the bulletin talking about 2 different striker assemblies. Are they talking about the striker return spring? The little dinky one?

Or are they talking about the safety lever spring? Which is not part of the striker assembly.

And I still can't get some of the links in the articles to open.

[MGW]

What spring are they referring to in this part:

"Both will operate with or without the reset spring and are mission capable as long as the striker is retained by the safety lock and passes all other function checks."

It's in the bulletin talking about 2 different striker assemblies. Are they talking about the striker return spring? The little dinky one?

Or are they talking about the safety lever spring? Which is not part of the striker assembly.

And I still can't get some of the links in the articles to open.

I’m pretty sure the TACOM sites are password protected.

[roboster2013]

So...it's not merely a mini 320 but a design on it's own....or at least that is what I gather.

I'd still want to be certified before stripping past the basic field strip on anyone's pistol. If I owned a personal copy I might dabble with it but not with someone else's for obvious reasons.

I spoke to another agency's armorer (issued P320s) and he is interested in this armorer's update as well if you can find it. He has not received it either (600 copies he's responsible for) and is equally curious.

First, The disclaimer. I am not an engineer, nor a gunsmith, nor an armorer. I never played one on TV, and I did not sleep in a Holiday Inn Express last night. :-)

The striker block on the P365 is completely different than the striker block o the P320. It is the plunger type with a compression spring as seen with the firing pin blocks on other Sig models such as the P226, 229,220. The P320 has the, for lack of a better term, tab type block with a torsion spring (as demonstrated in the pictures you posted). The P320 striker block is ~0.9mm thick, and it only takes ~ 1.09mm of upward movement for the striker block to allow the forward movement of the striker. The P365 striker block appears to be quite a bit more substantial.

I hope this helps.

[jnc36rcpd]

If it wasn't for the military and, to a lesser extent, CBP and other law enforcement contracts, I suspect we would see the 320, in its initial and now current versions, sink beneath the waves without a trace. Unfortunately, I think SigSauer has got way too much invested in the 320 to simply build a duty-style 365. I was a long-time SIG fanboy, having written the proposals for my former agency to adopt, first. the 9mm SIG 226 and, later, the .40 version. Now I'm afraid to even load the 320 I purchased as an off-duty and retirement weapon.

[roboster2013]

If it wasn't for the military and, to a lesser extent, CBP and other law enforcement contracts, I suspect we would see the 320, in its initial and now current versions, sink beneath the waves without a trace. Unfortunately, I think SigSauer has got way too much invested in the 320 to simply build a duty-style 365. I was a long-time SIG fanboy, having written the proposals for my former agency to adopt, first. the 9mm SIG 226 and, later, the .40 version. Now I'm afraid to even load the 320 I purchased as an off-duty and retirement weapon.

I don't own a 320, but if I did I too would be a wee bit wary of carrying it. Having said that, I'm perfectly comfortable carrying my other Sigs, including the 365. It will be interesting to see what comes about as a result of this latest lawsuit.

[roboster2013]

I was just wondering if there has been anything new on this issue?

[JonInWA]

I personally haven't heard of anything. I assume the Guay lawsuit is meandering its way through the legal process, and SIG is reticent as ever, although in fairness to them, COVID-19 probably hasn't helped matters. From the anecdotal evidence we've gleaned from the thread, I still think that havng a P320 witha manufacture date of May 31st 2019 and later is a major key in feeling comfortable that you have a P320 with at least the right corrected components to prevent an "uncommanded discharge." Having a SIG-certified armorer or gunsmith (or SIG themselves) go through the FCU to ensure that everything was assembled properly is probably a good idea, given presumptive issues with SIG's production QC (or lack therof).

If anyone ese has heard anything differently, please chime in.

Best, Jon

[roboster2013]

I personally haven't heard of anything. I assume the Guay lawsuit is meandering its way through the legal process, and SIG is reticent as ever, although in fairness to them, COVID-19 probably hasn't helped matters. From the anecdotal evidence we've gleaned from the thread, I still think that havng a P320 witha manufacture date of May 31st 2019 and later is a major key in feeling comfortable that you have a P320 with at least the right corrected components to prevent an "uncommanded discharge." Having a SIG-certified armorer or gunsmith (or SIG themselves) go through the FCU to ensure that everything was assembled properly is probably a good idea, given presumptive issues with SIG's production QC (or lack therof).

If anyone ese has heard anything differently, please chime in.

Best, Jon

Thanks Jon. I read that the trial date is 3/15/2022. Not a good omen for Sig. Sig, beware the Ides of March! ;)