Canadian Special Forces pulls P320s from service after soldier injured by misfire

[DocGKR]

If you are at all intelligent, you will pay very close attention to what "psalms144.1" wrote above...

[DocGKR]

As posted by an informed individual at LF:

From the Special Operations Aviation Training Battalion (TF-160's feeder selection and training unit):

M17/M18 Product Quality Deficiency Report

Background —
• SOATB is having a new issue with our SIG M18's
• The Safety Lock as pictured is shearing and disabling the Drop Safety.
• Weapon will still fire and function normally but can be unsafe if dropped.
• If not correct weapon could accidentally discharge.

Ongoing Actions —
• Inspected and repaired as required.
• PQDR submission to TACOM
• The affected part can only be replaced as an entire assy: Striker Assy (1005-01-665-3082).
• Request that armorers keep Striker Assemblies on hand as Shop Stock.
• 3 x of the 115 on hand were found broken during inspection.
• Round count on the affected pistols was approx. 5-6000 rounds.

Recommendations —
• Adjacent Unit Armorers one time inspect all weapons of the affected area on the underside of the slide
• Reinspect every time the weapon is issued.
• Implement the Safety of Use Message or MAM once distro



-------------------------------

From Army's PS Magazine:

M17/M18 MHS: New Slide Function Check
June 12, 2020

Soldiers, do you know the M17/M18 modular handgun system (MHS) has two different striker assemblies? One is called the current striker assembly and the other is the original striker assembly.

Both will operate with or without the reset spring and are mission capable as long as the striker is retained by the safety lock and passes all other function checks.

There’s no need to replace the original with the current unless it fails the function checks.

How do you know which striker assembly is in your MHS? Only by performing a slide function check.

Start with the original striker assembly check in WP 12 of TM 9-1005-470-10 (Mar 19) or WP 10 of TM 9-1005-470-23&P (Jun 19). If your slide fails this function test, perform this new slide function test:

Apply slight forward pressure to the striker pin toward the muzzle end of the slide. The striker pin shouldn’t protrude from the breech face of slide.

Press in on the safety lock.

While pressing in on the striker safety lock, push the striker pin forward. The striker pin should move and protrude from the breech face of the slide.

While holding the striker pin forward, release the safety lock. The safety lock should still be held down.

Release the striker pin and push it back to the rear of the slide. The safety lock should reset. You should hear a slight click.

Apply slight forward pressure to the striker pin toward the muzzle end of the slide. The striker pin should not protrude from the breech face.

Check extractor tension by lifting up the extractor and releasing it. The extractor spring should produce resistance.

Note that a slide function test should be performed any time maintenance is performed on the pistol, as well as during PMCS. The -10 and -23 TMs will be updated with this info.

If you have any questions or need assistance, contact your local Army Materiel Command (AMC) Logistics Assistance Representative (LAR) or your State Surface Maintenance Manager.

[JAH 3rd]

Just go back to the 1911

[HCM]

I agree that using the wrong holster is user error. However that doesn’t automatically mean it is the user error that caused the problem. It should be a fairly easy failure mode to test. Either the holster can be made to contact the trigger when in the holster or it can’t. I imagine Sig tried their best to have the holster cause the problem. The multitude of small parts inside the gun have many more variables in testing. This combined with the numerous other reports of problems and history of Sig openly lying to customers about the issue(beyond the typical no comment companies give) has kind of lost them the benefit of the doubt in my mind.

I wonder if the guns were pulled from service immediately and it was just reported of if they were pulled a few months later, after an investigation. If the unit waited to pull the guns after an investigation it may be more telling than any statement from Sig.

They were pulled immediately.

The not drop safe issues and SIG not being honest about them are real but not nearly as prevalent as they are made out to be. The biggest issue is still loose nut behind the trigger.

For example in the July lawsuit (which involved a non upgraded original P320) they cite multiple examples of P320s going off "uncommanded" however at least 2/3 were clearly ND not AD. In particular one involving my agency in NYC was witnessed on the range during training and is 100% ND not AD.


Even if the user didn't touch the trigger, holsters are not used in a vacuum. Things get in trigger guards and result in ND's all the time, especially when wearing gear, winter clothing etc. That's before you factor in not using the correct holster.

[Doc_Glock]

As posted by an informed individual at LF:

From the Special Operations Aviation Training Battalion (TF-160's feeder selection and training unit):

M17/M18 Product Quality Deficiency Report

Background —
• SOATB is having a new issue with our SIG M18's
• The Safety Lock as pictured is shearing and disabling the Drop Safety.
• Weapon will still fire and function normally but can be unsafe if dropped.
• If not correct weapon could accidentally discharge.

Ongoing Actions —
• Inspected and repaired as required.
• PQDR submission to TACOM
• The affected part can only be replaced as an entire assy: Striker Assy (1005-01-665-3082).
• Request that armorers keep Striker Assemblies on hand as Shop Stock.
• 3 x of the 115 on hand were found broken during inspection.
• Round count on the affected pistols was approx. 5-6000 rounds.

Recommendations —
• Adjacent Unit Armorers one time inspect all weapons of the affected area on the underside of the slide
• Reinspect every time the weapon is issued.
• Implement the Safety of Use Message or MAM once distro



-------------------------------

From Army's PS Magazine:

M17/M18 MHS: New Slide Function Check
June 12, 2020

.....

Press in on the safety lock.

While pressing in on the striker safety lock, push the striker pin forward. The striker pin should move and protrude from the breech face of the slide.

So the Safety Lock is what I call a striker block. And it is failing. Not ideal. And it means the striker is still falling with impacts with the potential of getting past the broken safety block. It saddens me that this is what we are giving our soldiers.

[Duelist]

As posted by an informed individual at LF:
...snipped out lots of words about checking to see if a gun is broken from two military parent orgs...

The overriding message or TL;DR I got from those is: “these guns might not work right when needed, we should have bought Glocks.”

[TGS]

Just go back to the 1911

Canada did not issue the 1911 previously.

Can't "go back" to what you don't have......not to mention it'd be a terrible idea.

Though, I do think it'd be hilarious if some motivators in the USMC command ranks referenced this (among all the other P320 issues) as a reason to halt procurement of the M18 and expand M45A1 procurement to rearm the entire fleet. That would be amaze-balls, and such a USMC moto thing to do that I can almost see it happening.

[CWM11B]

BLUF:

SIG lost my trust well over ten years ago with their unethical corporate conduct and crappy QC.


My West German claasic guns are solid.

I don't like or trust the 320, and will not own one. I've seen the thing drop fire and have discussed it previously.

That said, a friend who is dialed in on the 320 and it's issues has told me this occured when the pistol was being reholstered with a finger on the trigger, so I am inclined to give some benefit of doubt to Sig. Fair is fair, regardless of how morally bankrupt I think the company is.

I believe the M17/18 will be the shortest lived service pistol in US Military history, and the acquisition will go down as one of the greatest debacles in weapons procurement ever.

[RevolverRob]

Canada has been jerking around since 2011 in replacing pistols that should’ve been replaced 20 years ago. The problem is they want to have the guns made by colt Canada which is their only serious small arms production facility. While Canada has a large landmass they have a small population. A Canadian military pistol contract is not large enough to make licensing production I called Canada worthwhile for any of the major gunmakers makers.

It may not be an issue in a minute.

If CZ succeeds in purchasing Colt, Colt Canada is part of that intellectual property and business. In relatively short order the Canadian government will be able to have a Canadian-manufactured CZ P10 or P09/P07 combination delivered to their doors. Because I can imagine CZ can streamline licensing its own IP to one of its subsidiaries.

Note: I'm not saying that CZ helped push this information out the door to drum up controversy. But I mean...if you were in CZ's shoes, trying to keep contracts from getting got, before you could compete for them, and you already had a gun in inventory with a NATO Stock Number, and you were buying the factory, and you really don't want to make your competitor's guns...Wouldn't you at least think about drumming up a bit of controversy and slowing things down?

And it's not like the P320 is without controversy - so folks won't suddenly be surprised that "This great gun is all fucked up."

Here's where I'm at - if CZ succeeds in buying Colt, I put it 80:20 that the new Canadian Military Pistol will be a 'CZ' made by Colt Canada. Shortly after the RCMP will be carrying the same. If the contract gets made before CZ succeeds in buying Colt then I put it 90:10 in favor of the P320 being made by Colt Canada.

[RevolverRob]

Canada did not issue the 1911 previously.

Can't "go back" to what you don't have......not to mention it'd be a terrible idea.

Though, I do think it'd be hilarious if some motivators in the USMC command ranks referenced this (among all the other P320 issues) as a reason to halt procurement of the M18 and expand M45A1 procurement to rearm the entire fleet. That would be amaze-balls, and such a USMC moto thing to do that I can almost see it happening.

It would be such a Marine thing to do...

And frankly I'd be for it, why the fuck not? It's not like pistols really matter that much in a military context. The M45A1 does everything the M18 can do, except it's boat anchor heavy. Whatever they're Marines and their great grandfathers, grandfathers, and fathers toted them to wars across 4 continents over the 20th Century.