Originally Posted by
GJM
Here is my take. Sig, at one point, made fantastic quality P series pistols. The Glock, and other polymer pistols, put Sig at a price disadvantage, and Sig tried to compete by cheapening the P series. That didn’t go well, because the quality of the P series pistols suffered, and these pistols, even cheapened, were still too expensive to comepete with strikers. Sig’s polymer DA/SA pistols were pretty good, but the market wanted strikers. The 250 intro didn’t go well. All of that, caused people through direct experience, or from what they learned through whatever predated the “gun internet” to sour (sorry) on Sig. Sig’s CEO became a controversial figure, who was easy to dislike.
Sig was trying to survive, and that caused them to innovate. Without the luxury of other successful product lines to allow them to be patient, they pushed a number of “Gen 1” products out the door, like the 320 and MPX, using customers as their beta testers. The products have gotten a lot better, but early adopters got burned. Either through oversight or willful negligence, the 320 had a problem where it would fire when dropped at a certain angle. Sig certainly learned of it before the “collective we,” but it is unclear whether they tried to hide behind “drop safe per industry standards,” or hoped the problem was isolated enough they could slide through it.
As to the 320 design, my wife and many friends are shooting the crap out of them in daily or nearly daily sessions as USPSA CO pistols. Other than needing a periodic spray cleaning of the FCU, there is no trend of problems with them. The latest Gen MPX is much better. The current 365 and 365 XL pistols are mostly good. The Sig optics are still a work in process, but in fairness so is most every other red dot product. The Cross rifle is very interesting.
Sig is an easy company to hate, especially by folks that are not using and enjoying their products. Most people using Sig firearms are less vocal than those hating on Sig.