Is the SIG 365 series a better design than the 320?

[Redhat]

It seems to me the P365 series might be a better overall design than the P320.

They can cover the micro requirements as well as larger capacity stuff.

I haven't heard of the 365 series having the same mechanical concerns.

(I'm including the XMACRO in this conversation).



What do you guys think?

[HCM]

It seems to me the P365 series might be a better overall design than the P320.

They can cover the micro requirements as well as larger capacity stuff.

I haven't heard of the 365 series having the same mechanical concerns.

(I'm including the XMACRO in this conversation).



What do you guys think?

A P365 FCU is a P365 FCU. It doesn’t matter whether it’s in a macro format or not.

The P365 FCU is not stamped sheet metal and the P365 uses a different (more conventional) striker block / safety design.

Of course, Sig had the benefit of hindsight and starting with a fresh sheet of paper when designing the P365. As opposed the P3 20 which was adapted from the ill faded P250.

There are no documented cases of P365 series guns having P320 style “uncommanded” discharge issues but it’s still a gun with a short light trigger pull. Being “easy to shoot” is both its strength and its weakness.

The standard X macro’s built in comp causes accuracy issues which sag refuses to acknowledge or address in typical sig fashion. They get away with it because most people don’t shoot actual carry guns much and/or can’t shoot well enough to tell the difference.

[Redhat]

A P365 FCU is a P365 FCU. It doesn’t matter whether it’s in a macro format or not.

The P365 FCU is not stamped sheet metal and the P365 uses a different (more conventional) striker block / safety design.

Of course, Sig had the benefit of hindsight and starting with a fresh sheet of paper when designing the P365. As opposed the P3 20 which was adapted from the ill faded P250.

There are no documented cases of P365 series guns having P320 style “uncommanded” discharge issues but it’s still a gun with a short light trigger pull. Being “easy to shoot” is both its strength and its weakness.

The standard X macro’s built in comp causes accuracy issues which sag refuses to acknowledge or address in typical sig fashion. They get away with it because most people don’t shoot actual carry guns much and/or can’t shoot well enough to tell the difference.

I guess what I meant was the 365 seems to have the range of use covered from small to almost duty size capability. Even the OEM grip sizes go from small to full size don't they?

I had not heard about the slide comp and accuracy issues.

[TDoor]

I guess what I meant was the 365 seems to have the range of use covered from small to almost duty size capability. Even the OEM grip sizes go from small to full size don't they?

I had not heard about the slide comp and accuracy issues.

Whether it's a better design I think depends a lot on your priorities. It's certainly been a commercial success but so has the P320, albeit for very different reasons. It's certainly more size efficient. It has proven to be more suitable for adaptation to a wide spectrum of sizes/form factors. And I believe that it is more elegantly engineered.

But I'm not sure if the P365 being more versatile makes it better for all intents and purposes. As a duty handgun (something I have no use for), is the slim form factor really relevant? Does robustness matter? I don't know either product well enough to say, but I would be a little surprised to learn that the large-format P365s are more resistant to abuse than the P320.

And does it really matter if one gun can fill these different roles anyway? I don't think many people want to swap out grip modules and slides very frequently, and last I looked a few years ago, slides were so expensive that it always seemed more economical to just own multiple guns.

If my only choices for a handgun were a P365 or a P320, I would definitely buy the P365. I'm really glad those aren't my only choices.

[RJ]

And does it really matter if one gun can fill these different roles anyway? I don't think many people want to swap out grip modules and slides very frequently, and last I looked a few years ago, slides were so expensive that it always seemed more economical to just own multiple guns.

If my only choices for a handgun were a P365 or a P320, I would definitely buy the P365. I'm really glad those aren't my only choices.

I recall thinking like that when the P320 came out; what is the use of a chassis-based firearm given N=1, unlike institutional users like Big Army or large LEO departments. Three years into owning a P365X, I’ve bought a huge number of extra parts to go from a 10 round pocket pistol to a 20 round USPSA carry optics pistol. I really don’t see buying any other type of semi at this point. I can also tell you after spending a lot of time over on the Sig brand-specific forum, quite a lot of people do the same thing. It’s like a Lego set for Adults, that shoots bullets.

I would like it if Sig would announce the Long Slide P365 they teased at AUSA I think it was. Maybe at SHOT.

On topic, fulfilling the MHS contract means the 320 chassis is going to be in production for quite a while. Whether they do a ‘2.0’ 320 based on the 365 chassis is anybodies guess.

[G19Fan]

I recall thinking like that when the P320 came out; what is the use of a chassis-based firearm given N=1, unlike institutional users like Big Army or large LEO departments. Three years into owning a P365X, I’ve bought a huge number of extra parts to go from a 10 round pocket pistol to a 20 round USPSA carry optics pistol. I really don’t see buying any other type of semi at this point. I can also tell you after spending a lot of time over on the Sig brand-specific forum, quite a lot of people do the same thing. It’s like a Lego set for Adults, that shoots bullets.

I would like it if Sig would announce the Long Slide P365 they teased at AUSA I think it was. Maybe at SHOT.

On topic, fulfilling the MHS contract means the 320 chassis is going to be in production for quite a while. Whether they do a ‘2.0’ 320 based on the 365 chassis is anybodies guess.

Same I don't plan to buy any non p365 family handguns going forward

[Sig_Fiend]

There's another safety factor with the P365 manual safety worth considering. The manual safety physically restricts movement of the sear. Reference the video below, and pay particular attention to ~11:18-11:30 (https://youtu.be/MGf_64iInlU?si=8JlpMXFuTMxJCvT_&t=624) for a demonstration.
This is something even the P320 manual safety does not do. This is great in that, if the sear can't move, that goes a long way towards preventing the striker from dropping prematurely regardless of the situation.

As far as I'm aware, I haven't seen another striker-fired handgun, with a fully cocked striker, that has a mechanism like this to physically restrict sear movement. That's a big plus for the P365 w/ manual safety IMO.

The main potential issue to be aware of is, some people have issues with the ergonomics of the factory P365 manual safety levers while others don't (https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?51208-Wilson-Combat-Launches-P365-Grip-Modules&p=1312292&viewfull=1#post1312292). YMMV.
Unfortunately, there doesn't currently seem to be an aftermarket upgrade for this, and the Armory Craft version (https://www.armorycraft.com/product-page/armory-craft-sig-sauer-p365-extended-safety) will probably still be "coming soon" for quite some time.


https://youtu.be/MGf_64iInlU?si=8JlpMXFuTMxJCvT_&t=624

[7enderbender]

They seem equal to me. My wife has both and they work great. I don’t see how the 320 has any “mechanical concerns” that haven’t been taken care off. I don’t believe the “accidental discharge” stories from police departments. Seems more a story of negligence and poor training.
She has both versions with no “safety”.