By that logic, it makes sense. I've stated several times I shoot the 320 a little better than the Glock but the durability / reliability risk isn't worth the slight performance reward for me.Originally Posted by Eyesquared
By that logic, it makes sense. I've stated several times I shoot the 320 a little better than the Glock but the durability / reliability risk isn't worth the slight performance reward for me.
I already mentioned this before in this thread. I bought multiple Glocks for carry. I bought a P320 specifically for competition. I would be fine carrying either but the 320 I own is too heavy to lug around at 43oz unloaded and has no backup ironsights to the red dot. Didn't feel the pressing need to buy more P320s to replace the Glocks, nor do I feel a pressing need to get rid of my P320.
Having a non-replaceable ejector integrated into the FCU body is just plain dumb. Ejectors can and do bend and break. Essentially having to replace the pistols (because that is what the FCU is) is unbelievable shortsighted.
Regarding over-insertion...
I learned long ago with 1911's that there had a to be a mechanical means on the base of the magazine to prevent over insertion otherwise bad things would happen. The Wilson 10 rounders have the metal tab on the front that should keep them from being over inserted, but they wear and break over time and have to be re-tacked on. I won't use Wilson ETM's with plastic base pads because of major over-insertion issues under normal use in training where there was just enough flex for the mag body to come up high enough and lock the gun up. Put on a steel base pad which acts as a stop and it totally solves that issue. I've also broken the plastic base pad on 47D's under normal use. Consequently, any new type of gun I purchase, or any magazines I use, I look for a mechanical stop. The exception are Glocks which have spoiled me silly. Just a damn good design.
@Eyesquared
The P320 is primarily marketed towards LE and military. LE and military break guns...frequently. They abuse the ever-loving crap out of them sometimes through negligence and stupidity, sometimes through environmental wear (humidity, salt exposure, heat, sand, etc.) and often through just normal use. This is nothing new, it has always been the case. I've talked to plenty of old timer armorers who had to deal with the absolutely moronic things that officers did to S&W 19's and 66's and there are plenty of stories about stupid things soldiers did to their guns in WW1 and WW2.
I have no idea what you do for a living or why you are so seemingly offended by people that use guns for their work and have to maintain them talking about the issues they see in a design. I personally find it enriching. I had exactly ZERO experience with the P320 in the first couple years it was out, but was able to learn about issues others were having from this forum. I would rather learn from other's misfortune than experience it myself when I can. Under stress and with fatigue mags get slapped into guns...it's just a fact of life. I had to go to a week long SWAT training extravaganza (not a lot of sleep at night, scenarios and shoot all day sort of thing) some years back. By day four on the range there were a plethora of weapons malfunctions, mostly operator error due to fatigue. I saw four broken plastic baseplates that day...two CMC Powermags, a Wilson ETM, and a Wilson ETM. When you get tired, you tend to do things more forcefully.
I'd rather have a gun that's inherent design prevents as many potential pitfalls as possible. Besides the real world, this forum is a great place to learn where those pitfalls might lie.
I am not offended by anyone discussing issues they have experienced. I am annoyed when people don't read what I posted before, making me repeat myself, when they make snide "drive by" remarks about my naive civilian worldview rather than actually making a coherent point, or when they erroneously assume I am arguing out of some bias. We are having a civil discussion and it's not my intent to shit on people for presenting useful information. If I have been uncivil, I hope I have directed that appropriately to people who have been rude to me, and if anyone feels wronged then I'm sure they can let me know. The main reason I am posting is because I felt there were obvious logical holes in the arguments being made by others around this issue which is that this issue can happen with many firearms including those not made by SIG. Furthermore for concealed carry I'm not convinced this is an issue for anyone who wants to vet their equipment. Obviously SIG charges you more to get it fixed if you bust an ejector which bothers me.
Last edited by Eyesquared; 09-08-2020 at 11:33 PM.
Your post reminded me this isn’t the first time SIG has had an seemingly minor issue that could deadline a frame /gun.
For some reason the grip screws on the P229s Had very little thread engagement and came loose on a regular basis. IME this was never an issue with other classic P-Series guns, just the P229. Blue Loctite helped and SIG started putting it on the threads of P229 grip screws from the factory but it was still a constant maintenance issue.
On the P229 the steel grip screws thread directly into the aluminum frame. There is no removable or replaceable bushing and due to the limited thread engagement it was very easy to strip out the grip screw holes in the aluminum frame. While it was possible to drill out the stripped screw holes and insert a bushing the labor required exceeded the government contract cost of a new gun/frame. If someone stripped out the grip screw holes they basically dead lined the gun.
Apparently this was a common enough occurrence in some agencies such as the North Carolina Highway patrol that it was cited as part of the justification for moving to a different platform. In response to these lost contracts SIG developed the E2 style grip which did not require grip screws.
Along those lines maybe we will see a P320 version 2.0 featuring a replaceable ejector.
For you guys on the institutional side of things what’s the labor cost for the paperwork of having to replace a serialized firearm vs an $8.00 piece of stamped metal that isn’t a serialized firearm?
im strong, i can run faster than train
@HCM
SIG has had other past faux-pas like the extractor issues on the P220ST's (I owned one...then sold it), P220 slide-lock issues, and numerous other things, both pre and post Cohen era.
Honestly, I wish SIG would re-think it's business model for how they treat their customers, especially LE, and how products are released. I miss the company from pre-2006 and will admit I was a bit of a fanboy back then and still have my P226, a P228, and a P239. I shoot the P320 really well, especially the X5 Legion which is just too damn easy to shoot really well (especially with an optic) and purchased a P320 Pro Carry since I have so many dudes in my own department and other local departments running them.
I admire Bruce Gray and think the P320 and the P365 are both very innovative, but I'll be damned if they aren't completely half-baked designs and roll-outs. It feels like they totally rushed it and truly used the consumer, especially LE, as the test bed for what should have occurred long before any guns ever left the factory. Mix all the garbage that has happened with the P320 (the recall that wasn't, lawsuits of guns firing themselves, poor quality control, 58 billion ever changing variations) along with revolving door of LE reps and you have what adds up to a general bad taste left in the mouth. I want the P320 to work. I just don't trust it or the company at all.
I haven't had to send anything back to SIG in years (thankfully), but I have had to send plenty of guns back to the factory recently (typically to S&W, H&K, or Glock).
For me in a municipal department, it's just a pain in the butt. I'd much rather just swap out a part in ten or fifteen minutes, do a function check and/or test fire, and hand the gun back to the guy. Super easy.
Sending the gun back means I have to get the user another gun and do the paperwork (electronically) to issue it to him and then go qualify him with it. Then I need to sit on hold or wait for an e-mail to get and RMA from the manufacturer, record it leaving our possession, package the gun up, drive to our shipping department (about two miles away) and fill out their paperwork to send it out. Then I have to wait for it to return and make sure that whatever the issue was that caused it be sent out is fixed (usually through a function check and/or trip to the range). Then it needs to be re-logged into inventory and either re-issued or placed into storage.
Figure you're looking at 90 min of my time in total, give or take, and at my hourly rate I cost a whole lot more than an $8 part.
Last edited by KevH; 09-09-2020 at 12:35 AM.
What kind of issues did you send the HKs, SWs, and Glocks back for?
S&W
Recently had a cracked slide on an M&P 40 (I took pics of it which I think I posted here somewhere...it was weird). I had one M&P that wouldn't hold zero to save it's life and they ultimately replaced it (poor girl who kept failing to qualify with it kept getting blamed and having to remediate..it was actually the gun). When we first went to the M&P we had a bunch of them that had rust issues on the slide which S&W replaced.
Glock
The last Glocks were a Gen2 G19 that was missing a chunk of frame on the right side near the magwell where it finally gave way after being banged on a metal patrol car console by its owner for 30 years and a Gen3 G35 that had the frame worked over (thinned) about 15 years ago and cracked at the magwell (Glock replaced the frames on both for free).
H&K
Sent back a guy's personally owned USP to be converted to LEM because I didn't feel like doing it
Reply With Quote