Sig sued over defective pistols

[Tamara]

The USP getting the distinction of "first service pistol specifically designed with .40 in mind" threw me for a loop as I thought the S&W M4006 would have had that honor. While the M4006 is derived from the M5906, the M4006 was designed at the same time as the .40 S&W round.

The 4006 is just a slight variation on the 5906, basically a caliber conversion of a gun designed for 9x19 to allow it to shoot .40S&W. And the G22 beat it to market, which was probably the opening salvo of an Era of Very Bad Feelings between the two companies that culminated in S&W ripping off Glock's gun, lawsuits, and a multi-year stretch where you couldn't order S&W and Glock guns from the same wholesalers. I can't remember which one Ruger was on the outs with, back then...I think Smith?...so basically you'd be like "Well, I can order Rugers and Glocks from XYZ wholesale, but to get 642's and 5906's, I have to go to ABC wholesale..." Good times, good times.

[Sero Sed Serio]

The USP getting the distinction of "first service pistol specifically designed with .40 in mind" threw me for a loop as I thought the S&W M4006 would have had that honor. While the M4006 is derived from the M5906, the M4006 was designed at the same time as the .40 S&W round. I believe the stated goal was to be able to use the 59xx-series magazine opening so that the new round would not suffer from the complaints of "this gun is too big" like the 10xx-series guns.

Now if the USP was the first all-new design from the ground up for the .40 S&W, that makes sense to me. Perhaps I am splitting hairs, but, for all of their faults, the 4006 stood up to the pounding of the .40 S&W round. S&W did a nice job in 1989-1990 with the design.

I think you and I had the same interpretation of what constitutes a new design vs. a revision of an existing design, but I definitely see Tamara's point about the USP. However you term it, it seems like Smith and SIG put enough R&D into their .40 offerings to avoid the issues seen in other guns.

A Glock 22 slide is an ounce heavier than a 17 slide.

Was this the case in the initial guns? Not being argumentative--legitimately curious. My understanding was that Glock was able to beat S&W to market because there was virtually no change in the original 22/23 from the 17/19, and slowly changes were made as issues came up, such as the three pin frames, eventually the Gen. 4 guns with different recoil spring weights (although it seems like that only came about when the 9mm guns started having issues because Glock again tried a one size fits all approach by putting .40 springs into 9mm guns, instead of 9mm springs in .40 guns like the Gen. 3s). Was the different slide one of these changes, or part of the initial design?

My initial point was that, until the Gen. 4, it seemed like Glock had done very little to accommodate the higher pressure .40/.357 cartridges, and the guns had shorter lifespans and reduced reliability windows as a result.

[KhanRad]

The P229 .40 is not a "bad" gun, but it isn't necessarily a "great" gun either. I carried one on duty for 5 years and I got pretty good with it.....but I could never shoot it as well as any of Sigs 9mm or .45acp guns. I found the recoil characteristics of the P226 .40 to be less controllable than the P229, so if I was forced to go back to a Sig .40 then I guess I would take Todd Green's advice and the P229 would be my choice. However, I think we are going to see less and less company investment and development into the .40S&W in the future. So if I were in the market for a .40S&W I would probably grab a late 1990s or early 2000s gun.

[HCM]

Mi favors the p226 also. Msp and oakland county sheriffs carry them. And I have seen a few smaller departments with them also. I think it is bs how the newer Sigs run. They really were some sweet guns. I second the notion of a higher priced better built Sig.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

MSP carried SIG P 226s for decades but they are supposed to be transitioning to Gen 4 Glock 17's.

[Trukinjp13]

MSP carried SIG P 226s for decades but they are supposed to be transitioning to Gen 4 Glock 17's.

I had not heard that. Be interesting. I know a few troopers who love them. I will have to talk to them about it. Belt will feel a little lighter I guess. But this thread is a prime example of being nervous about buying a bunch of new Sigs.


Edit- I just remembered hearing something along time ago. But did not realize it was going to be legit. Smart move really.

[Tamara]

Was this the case in the initial guns?

Yes.

[GJM]

http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2...olice-lawsuit/

[farscott]

The 4006 is just a slight variation on the 5906, basically a caliber conversion of a gun designed for 9x19 to allow it to shoot .40S&W. And the G22 beat it to market, which was probably the opening salvo of an Era of Very Bad Feelings between the two companies that culminated in S&W ripping off Glock's gun, lawsuits, and a multi-year stretch where you couldn't order S&W and Glock guns from the same wholesalers. I can't remember which one Ruger was on the outs with, back then...I think Smith?...so basically you'd be like "Well, I can order Rugers and Glocks from XYZ wholesale, but to get 642's and 5906's, I have to go to ABC wholesale..." Good times, good times.

I remember that as I bought a G22 before the 4006 was out. That G22 was my second Glock, being paired with a G17. Both were range guns only as my state of residence at that time (Michigan) did not allow concealed carry when not hunting.

I see your point about the USP. I guess it shows how overbuilt the 59xx guns were for 9x19. The other interesting decision S&W made was to "key" the magazines and magazine opening in the frame so that a 4006 magazine would not enter a 5906 frame. While that makes sense from a safety standpoint, it guaranteed that caliber conversions could not be done with the 3rd Generation guns.

[Hambo]

The Ohio State Highway Patrol adopted the 96 and had problems with them. At the time I heard part of the problems they were having was related to the NP3. I have no idea what the real deal was.

LE Glock .40s have certainly had their share of problems, but the force is strong so it hasn't had an effect on sales.

Another of the .40 redesigns was the P7M10, which was a truly horrendous idea. Interestingly M10 mags were usable as M13 mags.

[MSparks909]

http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2...olice-lawsuit/

Soooo what training ammunition are they using? Anyone know? Interesting.