“Reports” are they changed the design of several parts, and it doesn’t matter how much it costs, they’re replacing the parts that need replacing. We have 3 post February 2019 P365’s, and they have all of the updated parts.Originally Posted by psalms144.1
Ah, yes, the UNANNOUNCED voluntary upgrade plan. I'm not poking Sig in the eye on this, darn near every one of the major manufacturers has pulled similar shenanigans over the years...
I ignored Glocks for years, but finally bought a Glock 19 Gen 5 last week. I also looked at some of the MANY complaints people have had over the years about Glock in general. The pistol I bought is a great shooter, so I don’t know.
Updated parts? Interesting...
We've learned over time what's old, and new in the world of GLOCK parts. Who knows exactly what are included in the P365 updated parts?
I sent in my P938 for a broken mainspring housing. When it was there they found a crack in the frame and replaced the entire pistol. I suppose they could have stripped the frame, replaced it with new internals, and kept the same slide, but from my perspective as a customer they really went the extra mile in replacing the whole gun.
Updated parts I’ve seen in person: Sights, striker, striker spring (length).
I'm getting one of these in the next week or so and this (recent design updates) is why I'm going to insist they order me one rather than take whatever's in stock.
I'm new, or will be new, to Sig. How does one determine the "born-on" date?
There’s a manufacture date on the side of the case. These pistols are flying off the shelves, so the one in the shop is probably a 2019 pistol.
When I bought mine, the local gun store told me that they had tried a couple of times in the past to get one in their store, without success. They checked their distributor while I was there, and found exactly one, which they ordered for me. It has a manufacture date of April 2019. The chances of finding a new one with a manufacture date prior to the design changes is small to say the least.
The number of rounds through mine is small, but so far it has been reliable and accurate. It allows me to have a 10+1 9mm with good sights under circumstances wherein I would have previously been limited to a 6+1 .380 (or 6+1 9mm had I purchased a G43).
It is currently being issued by the Indiana State Police as a backup gun. Patrick has an out of the box to the match video review.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Any legal information I may post is general information, and is not legal advice. Such information may or may not apply to your specific situation. I am not your attorney unless an attorney-client relationship is separately and privately established.
That makes perfect sense, as the value of the "saved" parts from the guts of that pistol would be lower than the cost of an armorer's time to strip the frame and reinstall them in a new frame. What we're talking about here is an extraction problem that leads to a complete new slide assembly (less striker) and barrel - what I would estimate is about 75% of the "value" of the pistol (there are a lot of manufacturing costs in assembling the FCU, even though the small parts are inexpensive, they're tiny and have to be assembled largely by hand, if my information is correct). That seems like a financially INefficient way of dealing with a problem that, in another platform, would be remedied with an extractor swap.
Again, no doubt Sig is churning out constant updates to these guns as they come back from the field with issues - it is, frankly, almost magically small based on its capacity, so I'm guessing that every little piece of it has to be "just right" to avoid tolerance stacking leading to reliability issues. It just seems to me to be indicative of a pistol that was rushed to production (gasp) and not ready for prime time yet (double gasp - from SIG? Say it ain't so...)
Reply With Quote