SIG P320-M18 Announced

[JonInWA]

My Carry works well with its integral Romeo1, It isn't so much that it works better with a RDS better than any other P320, I think that one of the byproduct advantages of a RDS is there's simply no advantage per se to having a longer slide for an increased sight plane; with with the Carry RX you're getting the benefits of compact sizing/concealability as well as excellent accuracy due to the RDS.

So with the P320 RX Carry you've got everything you need in a 15 round package, and nothing you don't.

Best, Jon

Jeez, I screwed up; my P320 RX is the Compact, not the Carry...It has the short slide, shorter frame... terminology....grrr. Best, Jon

[kwb377]

We also allow the full sized P320 and IME it is over sprung and has a "dip" when recovering from recoil.

The compact slide works better for the normal "bell curve" as a whole for the same reasons it works well with a red dot. Decreased muzzle flip / shorter recoil arc makes it faster to re-acquire the sights, especially when combined with the extra leverage of a full sized grip. In practical use, like most decent LE qualification COF this out weighs the minor benefits of a slightly longer sight radius.

This was exactly my experience. I was toting an X-Carry on duty for awhile, then switch to an M17. I liked the safety...not for actual "safety" use, but more as a thumb shelf (ala 1911)...but found I could definitely feel the added mass/movement of the slide and corresponding added time in reacquiring the sights. I found myself most often carrying a bastardized version of the X-Carry slide on the M17 frame (so, basically an M18 )...and recently I decided to just sell the M17 altogether.

[tlong17]

My Agency did this as part of our recent switch to 9mm. We were going to issue the 320 compact (15 round) and wound up issuing the Carry with an X grip instead based on our test results. With the X carry frame the height difference between the 15 round and 17 round grips is minimal.

There is a reason the USAF and USMC adopted the M18 instead of the M17. Word I got was the USAF's testing with "non gun people" mirrored that of my Agency. Maybe Caleb can shed some light on it.

We also allow the full sized P320 and IME it is over sprung and has a "dip" when recovering from recoil.

As you know most "pistol toters" are not really "shooters." The pinky is significant to control of the gun, especially when time and multiple shots are factors. Some dedicated shooters will shoot better with a smaller G19/26 grip since it forces them be more attentive to their grip. However, among the "bell curve" as a whole, normal people do better with a full sized grip.

The compact slide works better for the normal "bell curve" as a whole for the same reasons it works well with a red dot. Decreased muzzle flip / shorter recoil arc makes it faster to re-acquire the sights, especially when combined with the extra leverage of a full sized grip. In practical use, like most decent LE qualification COF this out weighs the minor benefits of a slightly longer sight radius.

You probably wouldn't notice the difference, and your "bell curve" shooters likely wont notice either. But put them under time pressure and the targets and timers will show the difference.

Good info. What ammunition did you pair it with?

[HCM]

Good info. What ammunition did you pair it with?

124 grain +p Gold dot for duty. We’ve been using it successfully in personally owned Glocks for over 10 years. We tested 147 grain duty ammo before the switch to all 9mm but decided to stick with the 124 +p.

@blues was USCS using standard velocity Gold dot 9mm prior to the merger ?

[HCM]

This was exactly my experience. I was toting an X-Carry on duty for awhile, then switch to an M17. I liked the safety...not for actual "safety" use, but more as a thumb shelf (ala 1911)...but found I could definitely feel the added mass/movement of the slide and corresponding added time in reacquiring the sights. I found myself most often carrying a bastardized version of the X-Carry slide on the M17 frame (so, basically an M18 )...and recently I decided to just sell the M17 altogether.

The dip of the FS can be addressed with an after market guide rod and lighter springs but that’s not a realistic duty option for us.

[HCM]

Jeez, I screwed up; my P320 RX is the Compact, not the Carry...It has the short slide, shorter frame... terminology....grrr. Best, Jon

It’s A $40 grip shell away from being a carry. It’s a modular handgun.

[JonInWA]

Wiseass! I can't say I didn't walk into that one. Seriously, I may get one of the X-Carry receiver shells if I test the Check-Mate contract 17 round magazines, that have been pretty seriously panned by knowledgeable p-f members.

Best, Jon

[Tokarev]

On a somewhat related topic there's a fellow dba as AB Prototype offering to cut a 320 chassis to accept the thumb safety. He has a couple different options. Can cut the chassis only or can cut and install appropriate parts. He also will cut the grip module to accept the levers.

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

[blues]

124 grain +p Gold dot for duty. We’ve been using it successfully in personally owned Glocks for over 10 years. We tested 147 grain duty ammo before the switch to all 9mm but decided to stick with the 124 +p.

@blues was USCS using standard velocity Gold dot 9mm prior to the merger ?

@HCM

Every quarter it seemed to be something different, whether Speer, Federal, Remington, Winchester, Black Talons, sub-sonic etc.

I know we had Speer GD as duty ammo during some of those years but I can't recall if it was standard. Ordinarily, we were issued +P

At one time we had +P+ but I don't recall if that was for autos or revolvers.

The boxes I have left over from back in the day are all +P and mostly Federal 115 grain with a smattering of the others mentioned above.

[John Hearne]

I don't know any of the details, but I was told that similar shooting tests were used to confirm the USPP selection of the Carry version of the P320.