You’ve probably been around enough cops, long enough, to have seen worse.Originally Posted by TheNewbie
ETA: I’d estimate that special agent’s skill with a pistol at around USPSA B-class, and he’s good with a rifle. He’s not clueless about guns, but I made careful note of nearby tourniquets after seeing his carry method.
Last edited by Le Français; 01-11-2020 at 03:23 PM.
True. I had a cop show me his gun by pointing it at me (not on purpose). When I became upset he said “it’s not loaded”.
This has become a great comic relief thread, and it’s still delivering🤟🏼
This is something I'd be interested in hearing about. I contacted the East Coast Transit PD that had a supposed "spontaneous misfire" in a holster without handling from a 320, but the description and explanation of the event I received was.....not well informed. I'd like to talk to someone in that department about their experiences, if possible. If necessary, could you PM me with the name of the department, etc?
There have been genuine drop fire incidents, but there have also been gun go bang whilst finger fookin' it , but I'll cover it up with the dropped it/banged into a wall story.
No, not for duty use.
My agency issues the P320 and I choose not to carry one. Ours are the law enforcement SKUs referenced previously. I have shot the govt P320 quite a bit and it is a huge improvement over the previously issued Sig. It is light, accurate and functions well. In short, I am uncomfortable with the way Sig has dealt with safety and quality control issues as they have arisen. In my opinion, their decisions are good for their shareholders but not necessarily the individuals using their products. The drop safety recall fiasco and firearm components sourced from India would just be a couple of examples.
Awhile back we were sent the MPX to T&E. This did nothing to alleviate my concerns with Sig's quality control.
For USPSA or some other gun game?
Sure, it is a nice pistol.
What alternate options does your agency authorize and what did you select? Pure curiosity, if you can't answer it's cool.
State Government Attorney | Beretta, Glock, CZ & S&W Fan
I’ve seen multiple references to “shareholders” of Sig and other firearm manufacturers. I’m assuming most mean non-owner/employee shareholders which confuses me since only a few big manufacturers are public companies. (S&W and Ruger)
Ultimately, whether it’s public shareholders or owners and employees, they all stand to benefit from a successful company. If they produce firearms that put peoples lives at risk (more than any other firearm) then they are not going to find long term success as the product will eventually be passed over. I think the incentive to build a durable, safe, and high performing product is there. No company is trying to intentionally create a crappy product.
I was under the impression, and I can't remember why, that Sig had moved all of its parts acquisition back to the U.S. (Maybe the interview Cohen did with Mas?)
Unlike what the radical leftists believe, economics reflect objective reality. There are hard limits to the economic viability of metal framed pistol in a world where your competition is building polymer framed pistols. My educated guess is that Sig's reliance on Indian/Israeli* sourced parts was when the classic Sigs were the majority of their sales. With their victory in the U.S. military pistol trials, I'd say Sig has cracked the code for making a pistol that is price competitive with the offerings from other manufacturers. I'd also point out that the annual "clean-ups" of the Sig pistol line tend to fall much more heavily on the metal framed pistol designs.
With the rise of P320, it is suddenly economically viable to bring the small parts manufacture back to the United States. Though I doubt they'll admit it, the efforts to use off-shore MIM parts in a design not created from scratch to use them was a disaster or at least not as profitable as expected. IIRC, Sig always machined the slides and frames state side. It was the small parts that were outsourced. With the P320, the slide is still made state side. If you pull apart the firing control group, there are a lot of stainless steel parts that are not MIM. There are probably a small enough number of small parts and since the future viability of Sig rode on the P320, that they decided to avoid cutting corners. We can certainly argue that the firing control design is overly complex but that is a different discussion.
Sig is still willing to play games to shave a few pennies - that is how I see the issue of the Checkmate magazines versus the Mecgars.
I also wonder how much of the way that Sig handled the drop-safe issues were driven by their lawyers and designed to limit their legal exposure. If you offer a voluntary upgrade, that is arguably different from a mandatory recall. One is indicative of a fundamental design flaw and the other is a polite suggestion. The fact remains, that the P320 passed all of the industry standard drop tests in existence at the time.
*-it is my understanding that Sig never intended to buy Indian sourced parts. They contracted with an Israeli company who had expertise in MIM. The Israeli company also realized they could make a lot more money if they subcontracted the parts out to the Indian company.
- It's not the odds, it's the stakes.
- If you aren't dry practicing every week, you're not serious.....
- "Tache-Psyche Effect - a polite way of saying 'You suck.' " - GG
I agree the MPX is not ready for duty use. The MPXs we T&E’ed were Gen 2 and sig has unofficially moved on to Gen 3 via internal changes to the 16” PCC model.
In all honesty, SIG dealt with the drop safe and QC issuses in a very similar manner to Glock after incidents in the early 1990s, to include failing a DEA drop test. Glock did the whole it’s an upgrade, not a recall thing decades before SIG.
On another note, have you seen or experienced any failures of the LE SKU P320 with Mecgar mags ? I have not.
Reply With Quote