SIG P320 AXG Scorpion - A Factory Metal Frame P320

[RevolverRob]

Seems like the easy solution is to use a mag that has a proper floor plate

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Or you know...build a gun with an ejector that isn't made out of weak sauce MIM and/or is replaceable. Like virtually every pistol designed over the previous 120 years.

As mentioned there are factory magazines, meant for a specific grip, that can be over-inserted.

@HCM - My understanding is there are some rolling changes to small parts that cannot be swapped into any FCU. Something to do with pre/post drop recall changes (I'm no expert in this regard). More glaring an issue, to me, is that the thumb safety cannot be added to any non-safety FCU, but any thumb safety FCU can be converted to non-thumb safety. That sort of defeats the purpose of that particular argument for modularity across the whole 320 line.

[HCM]

Or you know...build a gun with an ejector that isn't made out of weak sauce MIM and/or is replaceable. Like virtually every pistol designed over the previous 120 years.

As mentioned there are factory magazines, meant for a specific grip, that can be over-inserted.

@HCM - My understanding is there are some rolling changes to small parts that cannot be swapped into any FCU. Something to do with pre/post drop recall changes (I'm no expert in this regard). More glaring an issue, to me, is that the thumb safety cannot be added to any non-safety FCU, but any thumb safety FCU can be converted to non-thumb safety. That sort of defeats the purpose of that particular argument for modularity across the whole 320 line.

That's an issue. Thumb safeties can be added to non TS FCUs but you have to cut the TS notch. There are some vendors which perform this service though it would likely void your warranty.

S&W used to do the same but eventually just went with TS capable as the basis for everything.

[Texaspoff]

Don't corners potentially induce stress cracks in metal ? The metal around the mag release on the 226/226 is thin and I know you can damage the frame there if not careful when reversing mag catches. the round mag catch is probably a god move.

PA AXG = Alloy Xseries Grip

Very good point, that would be a good reason for sure.



TXPO

[Texaspoff]

While I do like the AXG and the 320 as a whole, generally speaking the 320 is still a beta release. I have been to their armory schools, and subject to the 320 propaganda since it was released. Despite what Sig or anyone says, the R&D put into the 320 was subpart at best.

The 320 is a good idea, and as someone said, the devil is in the details. The whole modular things has been overplayed, and frankly I don't even think Sig knows what it means now. The ejector cannot be replaced without a new FCU, the non safety models can't be converted without aftermarket modification, the original drop issue, as well as numerous changes that were done to the Mil guns and the continued rolling changes. I mean there are several aspects of the 320 that should have been found and resolved before the initial release, and would have be discovered if a decent level of R&D was given to the 320.

Sig simply took a P250 and threw in a striker fired system and marketed it. The 250 didn't have a ton of history behind it either, certainly not enough to warrant a release without much testing. Doing this was a cost effective way to get into the striker pistol market and the new heads at Sig knew it and took the gamble. In some ways it paid off, in others not so much.

Knowing what I know from the industry and Sig's current leadership, I have no doubt, this has driven the 320 program from the start. Profit, profit, and more profit, we will worry about product flaws and revisions as we go. It will be cheaper to fix problems than to delay a release. These issues with Sig products have not been exclusive to the 320 either, see P365.

With all that, I have said this before and still stand behind my statement. The 320 will mature into an excellent platform, modularity aside. Eventually, when all of the design, and specifications issues are worked out, meaning a final version that is more reliable and less prone to damage and failure finally makes it into circulation, the 320 Sig should have made in the first place will be here.

I'm not condemning Sig or the 320, I own several. I will however not purchase any more until the platform has proven itself and it looks like it may take a while.



TXPO

[claymore504]

Looks interesting for sure. I personally will not go back to the P320. I really liked it years ago, but I went DA/SA and got away from the P320 and striker guns in general. With the weird "random going off in holsters" issues being talked about on this forum and the constant changes with the platform by Sig, I just would not feel good about going back to the P320. We had national night out last night here in my neighborhood and some police officers showed up. One was carrying a full size P320 9mm and said he loved it and had had it since the P320 came out. He said he switched from a Glock Gen3 17 years ago to the P320 and his qual scores improved right off the bat. So, for the people using the P320 and enjoying it, I am happy for you and carry on.

[LockedBreech]

I really, really like the look of the AXG. It has beautiful aesthetics and marrying the classic P-series feel with a more modern upper is smart. I just wish I had any faith whatsoever in Sig's ability to pull it off with quality and consistency.

[HeavyDuty]

So, how long before the cease and desist letter from CZ shows up at SIG?

[Zincwarrior]

Technically this is the second metal frame P320 this year. However, I don't know if the first went anywhere as things went all Covidy after the announcement.
https://thegundealer.net/product/sig...order-2162-99/

[HCM]

While I do like the AXG and the 320 as a whole, generally speaking the 320 is still a beta release. I have been to their armory schools, and subject to the 320 propaganda since it was released. Despite what Sig or anyone says, the R&D put into the 320 was subpart at best.

The 320 is a good idea, and as someone said, the devil is in the details. The whole modular things has been overplayed, and frankly I don't even think Sig knows what it means now. The ejector cannot be replaced without a new FCU, the non safety models can't be converted without aftermarket modification, the original drop issue, as well as numerous changes that were done to the Mil guns and the continued rolling changes. I mean there are several aspects of the 320 that should have been found and resolved before the initial release, and would have be discovered if a decent level of R&D was given to the 320.

Sig simply took a P250 and threw in a striker fired system and marketed it. The 250 didn't have a ton of history behind it either, certainly not enough to warrant a release without much testing. Doing this was a cost effective way to get into the striker pistol market and the new heads at Sig knew it and took the gamble. In some ways it paid off, in others not so much.

Knowing what I know from the industry and Sig's current leadership, I have no doubt, this has driven the 320 program from the start. Profit, profit, and more profit, we will worry about product flaws and revisions as we go. It will be cheaper to fix problems than to delay a release. These issues with Sig products have not been exclusive to the 320 either, see P365.

With all that, I have said this before and still stand behind my statement. The 320 will mature into an excellent platform, modularity aside. Eventually, when all of the design, and specifications issues are worked out, meaning a final version that is more reliable and less prone to damage and failure finally makes it into circulation, the 320 Sig should have made in the first place will be here.

I'm not condemning Sig or the 320, I own several. I will however not purchase any more until the platform has proven itself and it looks like it may take a while.



TXPO

I wonder how much of that sub-par R&D was the result of rushing to have a striker fired gun available for the MHS/DOD, FBI/DOJ and various DHS 9mm pistol solicitations. By 2012/2013 it wasn't a secret these entities would be seeking significant numbers of 9mm pistols.

[RevolverRob]

While I do like the AXG and the 320 as a whole, generally speaking the 320 is still a beta release. I have been to their armory schools, and subject to the 320 propaganda since it was released. Despite what Sig or anyone says, the R&D put into the 320 was subpart at best.

The 320 is a good idea, and as someone said, the devil is in the details. The whole modular things has been overplayed, and frankly I don't even think Sig knows what it means now. The ejector cannot be replaced without a new FCU, the non safety models can't be converted without aftermarket modification, the original drop issue, as well as numerous changes that were done to the Mil guns and the continued rolling changes. I mean there are several aspects of the 320 that should have been found and resolved before the initial release, and would have be discovered if a decent level of R&D was given to the 320.

Sig simply took a P250 and threw in a striker fired system and marketed it. The 250 didn't have a ton of history behind it either, certainly not enough to warrant a release without much testing. Doing this was a cost effective way to get into the striker pistol market and the new heads at Sig knew it and took the gamble. In some ways it paid off, in others not so much.

Knowing what I know from the industry and Sig's current leadership, I have no doubt, this has driven the 320 program from the start. Profit, profit, and more profit, we will worry about product flaws and revisions as we go. It will be cheaper to fix problems than to delay a release. These issues with Sig products have not been exclusive to the 320 either, see P365.

With all that, I have said this before and still stand behind my statement. The 320 will mature into an excellent platform, modularity aside. Eventually, when all of the design, and specifications issues are worked out, meaning a final version that is more reliable and less prone to damage and failure finally makes it into circulation, the 320 Sig should have made in the first place will be here.

I'm not condemning Sig or the 320, I own several. I will however not purchase any more until the platform has proven itself and it looks like it may take a while.



TXPO

The approach Sig took with this is the 'American automaker' approach. We'll test it, but then we know there will be rolling changes, recalls, etc. As long as make more money selling them than we do repairing them, then we have it under control.

___

I concur that 'modularity' is overplayed these days. We've already seen most folks aren't actively changing their FCU and configurations around (some are, but most aren't) so it doesn't really matter. Folks are going to end up with multiple pistol sizes pretty much regardless (folks aren't swapping FCUs between frames, as part of a 'carry rotation'). And the general level of 'modularity' only needs to apply to the ability to swap parts with minimal fitting from the end-user/armorer.