Printable View
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
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
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tokarev
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
I'm not meaning to flame you or say you're pushing an agenda--other than a desire to get the story straight.Quote:
Originally Posted by JonInWA
Sent from my SM-A505U using Tapatalk
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.
Thank you two for the effort and time you have put into understanding this issue, and for making this thread.
Welcome to the club.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tokarev
If someone could prove in writing that it's a non-issue it makes my life a bunch easier.
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.