It's Official SIG P320C is the new ICE /HSI duty gun

[HCountyGuy]

After putting 1000 rounds thru the P320c I bought and installed a Carry frame, fired an additional 3000 rounds. Even though the Compact frame was fine control wise the full size frame gave me additional leverage on the gun. Had to shave the takedown lever quite a bit in order to stop substantial skin removal from my support hand thumb.

Can't say I thought the 320 was a huge performance boost over the Glocks but I did enjoy shooting them. The grip angle was very 1911ish.

Team Sig certainly put a lot of rounds downrange with this platform.

FYI Sig has a flat takedown lever available for the P320.

My thumb looked the same way after every range visit, but my original takedown lever would get HOT after only a mag or two. I wasn't even rapid firing. Sent it to Sig and they replaced the lever, no more heat issues.

GrayGuns just released trigger kits for the P320. Almost makes me wish I still had my P320. Maybe I'll buy another one down the road.

[98z28]

The original P320 armorer's manual was geared towards .Mil specifications where they denote serviceability at the unit armorer level or full serviceability at the Depot level. This was a military requirement for submission. This pretty much covers the striker and sear housing assemblies that can be changed as a complete unit, however they are fully serviceable via individual parts. I am not aware of the protocols at the time of this writing for implementation or training of Military armorers, however general P320 armorer courses offered to LE and qualified civilians, the assemblies are fully covered including complete disassembly / reassembly and individual parts or entire assemblies can be purchased. Certifications are good for 3 years.

While I don't currently do much with Sig Sauer as an adjunct, I do still try to remain on the roster and up to date at least annually with the armorer stuff and with the master shooting instructor quals. I will be doing this again in May and will have the most up to date info and manuals at that time.

Just wanted to add that taking down the FCU isn't bad at all. It's no worse than detail stripping M&P, and it's easier to put back together than a classic SIG. And I say that as someone who had to send a P320 FCU back to SIG in pieces when they first came out. These days there is info available from folks who have been through the armorer's school and there are decent videos out there. Alma has a complete FCU disassembly video: https://youtu.be/-JMcyq4xx60


Bruce Gray has a good one on replacing the trigger and sear housing pin: https://vimeo.com/198510269

Gray Guns will eventually release an armorer's video on the P320, which will no doubt be as good as their other videos.

[Tango]

So, I guess we're just gonna have to set up a grudge match shoot 'em up between the Marines, SEALS and FBI on one side vs. the Army, Homeland Security et al. on the other.

Depends upon your point of view. The Army just opted for the 320, so more than likely as time passes so will the holsters of the Marines and Seals. A guy with time on Force Recon and MARSOC was lementing the other day about enjoying the M45A1 and Glock before the MHS really took over. The 320 could really make the services a 1 handgun place all over again ala when the 1911 ruled the land.

The 320 does everything that a G17/G19/G26 does and now has the major contract. As things wear out in SOCOM/JSOC land, I bet the 320 finds a place there. It will just be hard to argue against not procuring it. It's a newer modular striker fired platform. A potentially newer/better mouse trap than the Glock. The old arguments against the 1911 or M9 that might have allowed or called for Glock procurement may not hold water anymore.

So at the end of the day, will it be the FBI with the G17M/19M vs DHS and DOD with the 320?

[blues]

Depends upon your point of view. The Army just opted for the 320, so more than likely as time passes so will the holsters of the Marines and Seals. A guy with time on Force Recon and MARSOC was lementing the other day about enjoying the M45A1 and Glock before the MHS really took over. The 320 could really make the services a 1 handgun place all over again ala when the 1911 ruled the land.

The 320 does everything that a G17/G19/G26 does and now has the major contract. As things wear out in SOCOM/JSOC land, I bet the 320 finds a place there. It will just be hard to argue against not procuring it. It's a newer modular striker fired platform. A potentially newer/better mouse trap than the Glock. The old arguments against the 1911 or M9 that might have allowed or called for Glock procurement may not hold water anymore.

So at the end of the day, will it be the FBI with the G17M/19M vs DHS and DOD with the 320?

Apostasy!!! Heresy!!!

[psalms144.1]

Depends upon your point of view. The Army just opted for the 320, so more than likely as time passes so will the holsters of the Marines and Seals. A guy with time on Force Recon and MARSOC was lementing the other day about enjoying the M45A1 and Glock before the MHS really took over. The 320 could really make the services a 1 handgun place all over again ala when the 1911 ruled the land.

The 320 does everything that a G17/G19/G26 does and now has the major contract. As things wear out in SOCOM/JSOC land, I bet the 320 finds a place there. It will just be hard to argue against not procuring it. It's a newer modular striker fired platform. A potentially newer/better mouse trap than the Glock. The old arguments against the 1911 or M9 that might have allowed or called for Glock procurement may not hold water anymore.

So at the end of the day, will it be the FBI with the G17M/19M vs DHS and DOD with the 320?

The sad reality is this: USSOCOM has to pay out of its own operating budget for any equipment that is not DOD-standard. That's why USSOCOM did not keep the Mk16 SCAR (L), in the end it wasn't "better" enough to be worth the cost of paying for them (and all accessories, parts, maintenance, etc) over the M4/Mk18 that are "service standard." I project that, in short order, the P320 will become the "standard" issue for USSOCOM and its service components, with some small smattering of GLOCKs left over for specialty applications only...

[Jimichanga]

A good choice.

If this follows prior acquisitions they should start being issued to academy classes in six months to a year.

I don't know what ICE's obsession is with Sig Sauer but it runs deep. When they sent out that survey a few years back asking the field what we wanted in a duty weapon it didn't take a statistician to see they were looking for a specific answer (Sig!). The Sig was the shit in the 80's, hell, I love my West German made P226, but like lacoste shirts, shoulder pads, parachute pants time moves on...

The P229 DAK was a horrible choice. That boat anchor's ridiculous trigger pull was a lawyer's/administrator's dream. It was almost universally hated by the troops and the shooting scores went down accordingly. Thankfully the powers that be allowed personally owned weapons. Almost everyone in my office carries a personally owned G17/26

I played with the 320c and I noticed it had the same high bore axis as most Sigs. It pointed nice and I like the fact that you don't have to drop the striker to break it down and we won't have hammerheads ND'ing in the cleaning room. I'll give it a go when they show up.

[HCM]

I don't know what ICE's obsession is with Sig Sauer but it runs deep. When they sent out that survey a few years back asking the field what we wanted in a duty weapon it didn't take a statistician to see they were looking for a specific answer (Sig!). The Sig was the shit in the 80's, hell, I love my West German made P226, but like lacoste shirts, shoulder pads, parachute pants time moves on...

The P229 DAK was a horrible choice. That boat anchor's ridiculous trigger pull was a lawyer's/administrator's dream. It was almost universally hated by the troops and the shooting scores went down accordingly. Thankfully the powers that be allowed personally owned weapons. Almost everyone in my office carries a personally owned G17/26

I played with the 320c and I noticed it had the same high bore axis as most Sigs. It pointed nice and I like the fact that you don't have to drop the striker to break it down and we won't have hammerheads ND'ing in the cleaning room. I'll give it a go when they show up.

I'll go in reverse order:

- you underestimate the hammer heads. We've had people ND with DAKs and LEMs. We've had people loading 9mm ammo into 40s and trying to load 40s into 9mms despite the ammo being color coded. We point guns at al lot more people than we shoot. The DAK is a good "people management" trigger and it's good at helping prevent NDs when people are using public restrooms.

- most of the "troops" are not gun people 40 cal HK LEM's and DAKs are all they have ever known. I still have people who think 40 is "the man gun" and 9mm are practically a less lethal round.

- As a result, the agency firearm preference survey results almost perfectly described a Glock 23.

- hard to say "scores went down" since ICE adopted a new qualification course at the same time as the P229DAK.

- if you can shoot a DA revolver or a Beretta 96D DAO you can shoot the DAK. It's not my favorite trigger, because it is slow compared to DA/SA or SFA but it is quite shootable, if you can shoot. That said both the Glock and the P320 are easier for most to shoot.

- prior to the creation of ICE both INS and US Customs had practically eliminated their POW lists. The Brertta 96D made the P229 DAK look good. The USPC was likely the most durable and reliable pistol we have issued but the LEM trigger like the DAK is an "Acquired taste". I've only seen handful of issues with .GOV contract P229s which cannot be traced back to 1) operator error; 2) lack of lube; 3) failure to change recoil springs per factory recommendations.

- I held onto my HK as long as I could, it went home with a colleague after his was taken as evidence in an on duty shooting. I carried the P229 DAK as my primary for 5 years because as an instructor I felt it was important to set the example that the basic issue equipment could get the job done. When I moved on to other duties I chose a Glock 17 simply because 1) it was lighter; 2) high volume .40 was starting to hurt as I got older and 3) I could shoot the Glock faster, though this was as much, or more the 9mm round than the platform.

- most of the Glock love you see internally is tied to the fact it was the only 9mm option.

-"bore axis" As Thulsa Doom learned about the riddle of steel in Conan the Barbarian, I have found that "low bore axis" means far less than I used to think it did.

This PF thread covers "why" pretty well:
https://pistol-forum.com/showthread....mportant-is-it

Oh yeah.., LOVE me some Thulsa Doom:

[AMC]

"What is a pistol, compared to the hand that wields it?"
Thulsa Doom, circa 2017

[blues]

...
- you underestimate the hammer heads. We've had people ND with DAKs and LEMs. We've had people loading 9mm ammo into 40s and trying to load 40s into 9mms despite the ammo being color coded. We point guns at al lot more people than we shoot. The DAK is a good "people management" trigger and it's good at helping prevent NDs when people are using public restrooms...

- prior to the creation of ICE both INS and US Customs had practically eliminated their POW lists. The Brertta 96D made the P229 DAK look good. The USPC was likely the most durable and reliable pistol we have issued but the LEM trigger like the DAK is an "Acquired taste". I've only seen handful of issues with .GOV contract P229s which cannot be traced back to 1) operator error; 2) lack of lube; 3) failure to change recoil springs per factory recommendations.

NDs were a great tradition on the job. I've been around to watch guys shoot themselves putting a loaded Glock back into the OEM tupperware box...and shoot a round into the wall in a hosting PDs briefing room (where there were a zillion signs saying no loading, unloading, cleaning or handling weapons in the room). Ah, the good old days...how I miss them. (Not! )

Here's my recollection of the firearm continuum with Customs from 1987 through 2004.

1987: I was issued a 2.5" S&W Model 19 the day I lateraled down from NY and later a Colt Gov't model Series 70. (I think the Colt may have been a seized firearm and I know it was issued to another agent before I inherited it while I was on SRT.) You could carry issued or personal firearms as long as you qualified with them and they were .380 caliber or larger.

After a bunch of us started carrying our own Glocks and Sigs for a few years, the first semi-auto we were issued en masse was the S&W 6906. I personally shot it well but hated field stripping and cleaning it...so I carried my Glocks for the most part but qualified with the S&W quarterly.

Later on the S&W was recalled by the brass and the agency began issuing Glock 19's and 26's. We could still carry our own personally owned G19 and G26 for a good while afterward. (NY triggers were mandated in agency and personally owned Glocks.)

At some point later it was determined that we must only carry the issued Glocks and could no longer carry our personally owned (and qualified with) G19 or G26 on duty...and this was the policy through the merger and creation of ICE in 2003 and my running out the door as fast as I could at the end of that year (since I met the age and service requirements).

I don't know what the INS guys were carrying as I never met or worked with any prior to my departure. (I was working in a narcotics smuggling group out of Homestead AFB most of that final year. We were assigned a couple of INS related cases to assist on and investigate but never had any contact outside of legacy Customs personnel.)

[Chaswick]

I loved my legacy Customs issued Glock 19. After we merged, I took one of the HKs as my second gun. I personally think INS made a solid choice with the HK USPc. I even bought one to play with after I turned it back in to get the issued Sig.

Now I use my POW 17 and 19. I have shot a P320...it seems like it might be pretty decent.