Agree ! All of the above.Originally Posted by HCM
Agree ! All of the above.
I tried 6360 and 6390 holsters. WML holsters seemed loose with no light on the SIRT, a 6390 no-light light seemed almost new and was snug. I did not try a 73 series but might be able to find one to try. In the 6360 and 6390, the retention seemed to work on the SIRT gun. Can probably locate a 6280 around here somewhere, but no 070 holsters are lying around as far as I know.
If anyone wants me to search for a 7360 or 7390 or 6280 to try, let me know.
Note that I am NOT in any way suggesting anyone use a 226 or 229 holster for a 320. Even if a 320 fits and locks, that does not mean it is safe and I have no idea if the retention is compromised even thought it seems to hold the gun. Bad way to save a few bucks. This was just an experiment out of curiosity. There are probably other guns that would fit and latch, too.
If anyone decides do this for real and has a bad thing happen, it is not my fault!
Having a newly-issued or purchased pistol fit duty or off-duty holsters for a previous weapon should be considered an unexpected gift of a new suit. You can certainly appreciate it and it will save you some money, but you wouldn't wear an ill-fitting suit. It will have negative consequences at work, at parties, on dates, and at job interviews. Likewise, it's penny-wise and pound-foolish to use a holster that almost fits a new pistol. You or your organization had enough money for a new gun. New holsters aren't all that much compared to the consequences.
Don't get me started on the firearms training coordinator in my previous organization who decided we would only purchase duty holsters that fit our pistols with lights attached. Don't have a weapon-mounted light? Have an older non-railed 226? Harden up, snowflake. You're getting the big holster and you'll darn well like it. The guns without lights were pretty secure, but it was not optimal. I was tempted to suggest that we could further simplify the logistics chain by only issuing right-handed holsters and have the southpaws make do, but sarcasm is a dangerous talent in bureaucracies.
I hope I didn’t convey a desire to put a 320 into a 226 holster- I was trying to say “it’s a bad idea and if it kinda/sorta works, it’s only by happenstance and should not be trusted.” Many of the light bearing duty holsters (looking at 6280 bucket) “fit” damn near anything but also do a very poor job of actual protection/retention. The light bearing holsters, even when correctly fitted, often do not do a very good job of keeping foreign objects out of the trigger guard with the weapon fully seated/secured.
Anything I post is my opinion alone as a private citizen.
Not to me, but somehow it seemed a "warning notice" was appropriate in case anyone mistook an experiment as a suggestion.
Yes, the WML holsters can pose additional risks even for the guns they are designed for.
Couple of friends commented to me yesterday that the involved party was still in selection and they don't see it as a gun problem. They're both out of the unit but still close ties to it, of course.
That doesn't guarantee the accuracy of the information, but that's the back channel stuff I'm hearing.
This is a thread where I built a boat I designed and which I very occasionally update with accounts of using it, which is really fun as long as I'm not driving over logs and blowing up the outboard.
https://pistol-forum.com/showthread....ilding-a-skiff
FWIW, the holster fit of the P320 and classic Sigs is really close. We are transitioning from classic Sigs to P320s and several people have discovered this. I just buy the right holster but the fit is tantalizingly close.
- It's not the odds, it's the stakes.
- If you aren't dry practicing every week, you're not serious.....
- "Tache-Psyche Effect - a polite way of saying 'You suck.' " - GG
Don't go off on a tangent; the problem is not the holster, it is the pistol.
Facts matter...Feelings Can Lie
In this case, my money is on a little of both, and a big dose of operator error.
Ken
BBI: ...”you better not forget the safe word because shit's about to get weird”...
revchuck38: ...”mo' ammo is mo' betta' unless you're swimming or on fire.”
SIG 320s have a history of mechanical drop safety problems (ADs) however that does not make P320's exempt from the handling errors (ND) that all pistols, Glocks, M&Ps, 1911s etc are subject to.
There is an old expression associated with the medical community to the effect that when one hears hoofbeats, they should think horses first, not zebras.
Right now the only public facts are:
A solider with CANSOF had an unintended discharge with a 320.
CANSOF suspended use of 320s pending an investigation.
When the gun was sent to SIG, the holster included was a modified P226 holster and SIG could not attribute the UD to the holster.
At this time, there are no public facts supporting either the holster or a design flaw in that particular 320 aka "zebras." Rather, publicly we are still at the logical starting point, operator error aka "horses."
Reply With Quote