New 2 July 2020 SIG P320 Lawsuit and P320 Concerns

[John Hearne]

Random observations:

I picked up a P365 Tac Ops without touching one first as I thought it might be an ideal concealed carry pistol. Got hands on it and quickly realized the "enhanced" slide catch lever interferes with my thumbs high grip. It will be dropped off at my gun dude soon for some refinement.

I have it on good authority that the Texas DPS guns have different sear springs which adds a pound or two to the trigger weight. Apparently, there are different versions that can be specced by agencies if the order is large enough.

[HCM]

Random observations:

I picked up a P365 Tac Ops without touching one first as I thought it might be an ideal concealed carry pistol. Got hands on it and quickly realized the "enhanced" slide catch lever interferes with my thumbs high grip. It will be dropped off at my gun dude soon for some refinement.

I have it on good authority that the Texas DPS guns have different sear springs which adds a pound or two to the trigger weight. Apparently, there are different versions that can be specced by agencies if the order is large enough.

Negative, just asked one of their range staff. Standard off the shelf LE 320.

“We’ll make what you want if there’s enough money in it” is true of any gun company.

[SwampDweller]

Yesterday we had our Sig rep come in to show us a Spear Heavy .308 and Light 5.56. An Air Force serviceman happened to be in at the same time and the rep asked about his experience and opinions on the M18. The serviceman asked "Do you want my honest opinion?" and the rep said yes.

The serviceman went on to describe how he has had three M18s break on him in the past year alone, and that this is a common experience among personnel shooting them. In no uncertain terms, he told the rep that the M18 was "a piece of shit and I wouldn't carry it if I didn't have to."

Seeing as the M17/M18 are P320s, it makes me think the P320 still isn't worthy of being taken seriously. This is far from the first serviceman I've heard these reports from. I live in an area where M17s and M18s are heavily issued and shot by SF, and everyone I get to ask has said they are unreliable pieces of junk that break frequently.

The serviceman yesterday told me he personally carried a G47.

[Tackleberry40sw]

Yesterday we had our Sig rep come in to show us a Spear Heavy .308 and Light 5.56. An Air Force serviceman happened to be in at the same time and the rep asked about his experience and opinions on the M18. The serviceman asked "Do you want my honest opinion?" and the rep said yes.

The serviceman went on to describe how he has had three M18s break on him in the past year alone, and that this is a common experience among personnel shooting them. In no uncertain terms, he told the rep that the M18 was "a piece of shit and I wouldn't carry it if I didn't have to."

Seeing as the M17/M18 are P320s, it makes me think the P320 still isn't worthy of being taken seriously. This is far from the first serviceman I've heard these reports from. I live in an area where M17s and M18s are heavily issued and shot by SF, and everyone I get to ask has said they are unreliable pieces of junk that break frequently.

The serviceman yesterday told me he personally carried a G47.

Did the Serviceman go into detail as to the exact breakages or failures of his M18's?

[SwampDweller]

Did the Serviceman go into detail as to the exact breakages or failures of his M18's?

Unfortunately I wasn't able to take notes as I was on-and-off having to multitask. One that stuck out was several M18s having the grip frame straight up break. I think he said between the grip and the trigger guard? Also something about the takedown lever breaking on the inside and the slide just fell off. Again, I wasn't able to take notes. If I see him again I'll try to get him to repeat to write it down. He also reported frequent experiences in his unit of rear sights flying off. This is something I've heard universally reported over the past 3 years.

What's weird is that I hear negative reports on the M17/M18 all the time from people issued them. They all wish they were issued Glocks like certain units are. my coworker's son is in the Marines and has similar complaints.

To me it all adds up to impress upon me that the P320 is not an adequate hard-use service weapon. There are other well-vetted service-grade pistols that perform very well and don't have that question mark hanging over them.

[GJM]

Human nature is a funny thing. I regularly shoot with and am friends with a number of CBP guys. They are issued a Glock 47, compete with something else and carry something else on their own time. I wonder what percent of people like their issued firearm.

[SwampDweller]

Human nature is a funny thing. I regularly shoot with and am friends with a number of CBP guys. They are issued a Glock 47, compete with something else and carry something else on their own time. I wonder what percent of people like their issued firearm.

Have they had any complaints on reliability/durability of their G47’s? I get wanting to carry on your off time what you want to carry, but the consistent reports of reliability and durability issues with the P320s in my area are on a whole other level. I’m still kind of surprised how consistently I hear bad reports from those servicemen issued them, many experiencing the same problems.

[GJM]

Have they had any complaints on reliability/durability of their G47’s? I get wanting to carry on your off time what you want to carry, but the consistent reports of reliability and durability issues with the P320s in my area are on a whole other level. I’m still kind of surprised how consistently I hear bad reports from those servicemen issued them, many experiencing the same problems.

How would those reliability complaints compare to what they said about the Beretta 92?

I am in no way discounting problems, but I would want to know a lot more about the who, what, how, how often, etc. to draw conclusions. For example, are these new pistols issued to an individual, or are these rack pistols used for quals by many?

[SwampDweller]

How would those reliability complaints compare to what they said about the Beretta 92?

I am in no way discounting problems, but I would want to know a lot more about the who, what, how, how often, etc. to draw conclusions. For example, are these new pistols issued to an individual, or are these rack pistols used for quals by many?

That’s a good question. I don’t know the answer, though if memory serves the complaints started as soon as they were issued in my AO (the M18, that is) several years ago.

I was able to do a little digging on some of the last Berettas that were breaking in Air Force use here and even sourced some broken locking blocks. Some of the parts, I found, were from 3rd party subcontractors. That combined with the fact that many of these Berettas were coming up on 30 years in active use make me suspect the issues were not with the Beretta design or quality itself, but by the spare parts subcontractors’ quality, old guns, and fixing broken guns with parts from other deadlined guns.

Whether similar issues are the reason for the M18’s reliability/durability issues, I do not know. It just seems like altogether there’s enough question marks over the P320 to pass for something with less drama and questionability.

[Suvorov]

How would those reliability complaints compare to what they said about the Beretta 92?

I am in no way discounting problems, but I would want to know a lot more about the who, what, how, how often, etc. to draw conclusions. For example, are these new pistols issued to an individual, or are these rack pistols used for quals by many?

I do think there will always be a bias against whatever weapon military personnel are forced to carry, I have personally witnessed it in my military career and interactions with foreign troops. I was a fresh new 2LT at the tail end of the M9 rollout (it was a lot more drawn out than the M17/18) and everyone was complaining about the M9 mostly before they even shot it. They would cry about it being DA and that they couldn't hit anything with the first shot. Funny thing is that most ranges allowed them to cock back the hammer on the first round (against the FM but the qual also required drawing from the holster and NO ONE was brave enough to run a range doing that), and these soldiers also sucked with the 1911. Also include the piss poor training most Joes receive on the pistol (does not include MPs and SF types) and the general mistreatment of equipment (such as running over M16s with a HUMVEE) or using an M9 as a hammer, and I think any design is going to show its failure points in such an environment. Not saying the M17/18 doesn't have its flaws, just that the deck is stacked against them. The Glock probably would fair better due to it's AK like simplicity but that remains to be seen. But I have to admit I get a chuckle hearing these complaints as I had told everyone I knew who were hell bent to get rid of the M9 that the new pistol would have just as many issues despite the proclamations that it will "Change the face of modern land warfare."

I am one of those funny folks you mention. For more than 10 years my work gun was a USPc 40, but the vast majority of my shooting remained dedicated to the Beretta or Sig platforms. Don't know why, I just enjoyed shooting the other platforms more, the ammo was cheaper, and I was able to shoot perfect quals with my HK. I guess I just liked variety despite the drawbacks that many here warn about. Today I carry a Glock and have decided to dedicate the next year or so to shooting it recreationally as well, and incorporating it as my carry gun (although the P365 will remain my primary EDC).