P320 - GTG?

[gtmtnbiker98]

I have more than a "few" P320's and my primary full-size 9mm has north of 17,000 rounds on it. I've ran 2,000 through it just this week, no cleanings since August in preparation for IDPA Nationals. IMO, they are good to go. But you are sure to hear from the "holier than thou" folks who love to hate on anything and everything.

[Nephrology]

Thanks for all of the replies. Yeah I’m partial to Glock as well (beat up Gen 3 w/ Hackathorn sights). I have no reason to switch what I carry as I’m comfortable and fairly competent with it. My 25 yard bullseye skills leave much to be desired and it’s a skill I’m working on perfecting. I’m not consistent. I’m always curious about other models in the same size/caliber range. I know it’s fundamemtals that I’m struggling with, misses are largely high and right (I’m a right handed shooter), which other shooters more competent than myself have told me it’s either a sight picture issue or a flinch/pre-ignition push. I’ve shot the 320 well in the past, sold mine off when the controvery started but I was able to constantly keep a magazine within an 8 inch circle at 25. Bore axis was a little high for my taste but I really want to dial in my 25 yard skills (3x5 or B8 repair). Looking for any advantage I can get. I’m sure the answer is.. PRACTICE.

If you already own the Glock, then you are most certainly more likely to benefit by spending the cash on ammunition and range time than by replacing it with a new gun. I'd also buy the dry-fire practice book by Ben Stoeger and try to work that into your daily or weekend routine - this will do wonders for your flinch and can be done for free at home. Even the Gen 3 pistol will be capable of at least a 3-4" group at 25yd.

I definitely wouldn't transition from the Glock to the P320 purely for performance gains, especially given recent stunning public failures by SIG. Between the drop safety of the P320 (and their completely unacceptable response) and the issues with the P365 firing pins, not to mention the general quality control issues the company has suffered over the last ~5-10y, I wouldn't spend a nickel of my own money on a SIG product made before the year 2000.

Just my opinion, worth exactly what you paid for it.

IMO, they are good to go. But you are sure to hear from the "holier than thou" folks who love to hate on anything and everything.

That would be me. I prefer the term skeptic. Other companies - S&W, Glock - have had very high profile warts with their products, but the consistency with which SIG lets out lemons is really stunning. I have a good friend who worked as an engineer at their Exeter factory for a while before leaving for another firm outside the firearms industry. Here's something he recently had to say about his time there:

The Newington location is very nice but only maybe half their manufacturing happens there, it's also meant to be shown off. Their two Exeter buildings, where the bolts and barrels are made, aren't nearly as nice. Pistol barrels are made in the oldest building which has such shitty ventilation there's constant visible 'smog' from all the machines. It can look like there's a fire. The other Exeter building (where your guns go to be fixed) is better but not great, it has areas where the floor is so oily you have to be careful. They're constantly moving machines around and rearranging stuff.

A guy making new 210 barrels told me he wouldn't buy one even with the 50% discount because the tolerances were a bitch to maintain and they let some real questionable stuff go. So this:

We got a US Military Contract?! :starts loading boxes marked "Commercial Market" with frames that didn't pass tolerance tests: Hoo boy money is great!

Is more accurate than you think.

They could have the nicest facility in the world it doesn't change their inability to retain good people or have decent hiring practices.

Neat, you can see my red Fiesta on the Google Street View of the Exeter location.

[C.W. Clark]

If you already own the Glock, then you are most certainly more likely to benefit by spending the cash on ammunition and range time than by replacing it with a new gun. I'd also buy the dry-fire practice book by Ben Stoeger and try to work that into your daily or weekend routine - this will do wonders for your flinch and can be done for free at home. Even the Gen 3 pistol will be capable of at least a 3-4" group at 25yd.

I definitely wouldn't transition from the Glock to the P320 purely for performance gains, especially given recent stunning public failures by SIG. Between the drop safety of the P320 (and their completely unacceptable response) and the issues with the P365 firing pins, not to mention the general quality control issues the company has suffered over the last ~5-10y, I wouldn't spend a nickel of my own money on a SIG product made before the year 2000.

Just my opinion, worth exactly what you paid for it.



That would be me. I prefer the term skeptic. Other companies - S&W, Glock - have had very high profile warts with their products, but the consistency with which SIG lets out lemons is really stunning. I have a good friend who worked as an engineer at their Exeter factory for a while before leaving for another firm outside the firearms industry. Here's something he recently had to say about his time there:

Thanks for the response. After this thread I’ll probably never own a Sig product.

Dry firing is something I’ve been doing for quite a while and there is never movement in my sights when I’m at home with an unloaded pistol, on the range is a different story. There are days where I’ve shot fist sized groups (5 shot) at 25 yards but I can never find consistency which I think is due to limitations on where/how often I could shoot. I’ve recently joined a range that I can work on my accuracy drills as much as I want to, as long as I have the ammo.

I’ve tried incorporating ball and dummy drills and others to help with the flinch. It’s amazing, when I’m watching my front sight and have a clean tigger press, my shots go where they are supposed to and I can tell when the shot is released whether or not it’s good. It’s an issue of focus breaking on my front sight and me trying to forcefully send the shot. More time on the range spent focusing on 25 yard shooting is what I asssume will be the ultimate fix for this? Or should I focus on one hole groups at 3 yards or something of the like?

I apologize for detailing my own thread.

[psalms144.1]

If you've got the new gun itch and time invested in GLOCKs, it might be worthwhile picking up a Gen5 version of your current pistol. The triggers are improved, the accuracy is improved, and a lot of folks prefer the no-finger-groove grip - I know I've noticed a marked improvement in accuracy with mine. The difference isn't earth shattering - just makes low probability shots easier...

[John Hearne]

My agency's gradual transition to the P320 continues to go well. No major issues that I'm aware of and the samples that I've seen have all been solid. We spent last week breaking in a co-workers P320 in 45 ACP. While not as soft shooting as my all steel P220, it was a fairly soft shooting pistol. Accuracy was impressive. The owner of the gun fired a 4 of 8 rounds into a 4 leaf clover at 25 yards with WWB.

[CanineCombatives]

I dont even know why I read these threads anymore, SIG hate and condemnation is a right of passage now, your not one of the cool kids unless you pile on, meanwhile the 320 keeps carving out it's place in history in both military and law enforcement in just the 4th year of production.

[LockedBreech]

I dont even know why I read these threads anymore, SIG hate and condemnation is a right of passage now, your not one of the cool kids unless you pile on, meanwhile the 320 keeps carving out it's place in history in both military and law enforcement in just the 4th year of production.

I am usually part of the anti-Sig crowd and it has nothing to do with a rite of passage or being cool. I think my stubborn defense of .40 for years and my insistence on the PX4 while it was trashed for years is proof enough of that. I spent my hard-earned money on six of them. I chose to divest because the company continues to degrade ethical standards and quality control. I haven't heard a convincing argument against those points yet, especially with Gen5 Glocks, M&P 2.0s, among others, on the market and without those issues.

As for...a place in history...yeah, technically true, but the Ford Pinto has a place in history, too. The MHS testing was not done nearly as sensibly or rigorously as the Beretta/Sig testing from the 1980s or the selection of the 1911. But I suppose time will prove out whether the 320 is a worthy successor.

Even if the 320 itself ends up technically competent, the way Sig handled the drop issue will never be acceptable in any era, by any company. Even if I end up giving them my money again down the road, treating an issue that implicates safety - at least one person was shot because of this, a law enforcement officer - as a "voluntary upgrade" rather than a recall is absolutely inexcusable.

The "haters gonna hate" dismissal doesn't work when the critic has spent thousands of dollars on Sig products.

[HCM]

Even if the 320 itself ends up technically competent, the way Sig handled the drop issue will never be acceptable in any era, by any company. Even if I end up giving them my money again down the road, treating an issue that implicates safety - at least one person was shot because of this, a law enforcement officer - as a "voluntary upgrade" rather than a recall is absolutely inexcusable.

As someone who carries a Glock by choice and whose Agency has adopted the P320, I must point out the “voluntary upgrade” in lieu of an actual recall after someone was shot unintentionally originated with Glock in the early 1990’s.

SIG is merely following Glocks proven business model.

SIG’s real ethical issue is continuing to manufacture and sell a design they knew was not fully drop safe and lying about it while at the same time offering a corrected design .MIL and other contracts.

[AMC]

I'm torn on this issue. Sig's handling of the drop safety issue has been....less than stellar, to put it bluntly. The design flaw is now corrected, and from an agency standpoint, the 320 offers modularity that is tough to beat. From matching the gun to the shooter, to matching the gun to it's role on duty. We're looking at transitioning from .40 226's to 9mm 226's....but then going with the 320:s for new hires at some point. Anyone wishing to transition in-service would go through a rigorous (30 hr) transition course. At least, that's what the brainstorm is thinking of recommending right now. Some shooters will never run a 226 well, because of small hands, etc. I've seen those shooters perform well with a 9mm 320 in their hands. There's been, and continues to be, resistance in my agency to striker fired pistols. The potential safety benefits can't be denied, and I'm a DA/SA guy myself. But as I told some of our people, the question is where you place risk. On the person who MIGHT have an ND with a 320? Or the person who WILL MISS with all 13 rounds in their gun under stress in a shooting? My thinking is live with #1.

[LockedBreech]

Hey, I mean, I’m not saying no other company has ever done shady stuff, and I’m guessing the 320 is perfectly adequate for 99% of users. I’m just a staunch believer in capitalism and voting with your wallet, and in 2018 we have Smith & Glock seeming to do very above board business. I’d rather they have my money. Maybe my $500-1500 (what I’d spend on a given pistol system) will persuade Sig to be a little more straightforward next time.

Perhaps that’s impossibly naive of me given the scope of their contracts, but look at Colt’s current situation. The end user having faith in you matters.

I’m not mindlessly “no Sig forever” or anything silly. I just want them to stop smelling their own marketing farts for a minute and dial back in the QC and transparency.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk