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

[roboster2013]

Back on topic, I have it on good authority the issue is the gun. Not the holster, not the soldier, but the gun itself and something repeatable and endemic to the design. I suspect that more information will become public at some point, but this is not that point. I've said what I can say without betraying a trust, so take it or leave it.

Thanks for the info. It will be interesting to see what follows down the road.

[roboster2013]

Back on topic, I have it on good authority the issue is the gun. Not the holster, not the soldier, but the gun itself and something repeatable and endemic to the design. I suspect that more information will become public at some point, but this is not that point. I've said what I can say without betraying a trust, so take it or leave it.

I do have a question if you are able to answer without betraying your trust. Do you know if it was a recently manufactured gun (2019 or later) or was it older?

[Snapshot]

<snip>For sure if it turns out to be the gun, that'll be interesting for a whole pile of reasons.

CZ is coming, problem will be solved when they offer the Arctic Shadow (TM) to replace all CAF handguns.

[CWM11B]

Back on topic, I have it on good authority the issue is the gun. Not the holster, not the soldier, but the gun itself and something repeatable and endemic to the design. I suspect that more information will become public at some point, but this is not that point. I've said what I can say without betraying a trust, so take it or leave it.

Ditto. From more than one, and long before (but also including) this incident.

[Trooper224]

Right before I retired, I was part of the evaluation team responsible for selecting the next sidearm. I really liked the P320, I mean I REALLY liked it, moreso than any other plastic fantastic I've ever handled. Of course, Sig then fucked up the end game in typical fashion with the whole instantaneous discharge feature.

I find it sad that so many people have gotten their ego so wrapped up in this pistol they simply can't admit there's a problem.

[Joe in PNG]

Yah, the whole "interchangeable" FCU thing is kind of cool and all, but is it really all that useful, especially over the long term?

How often do the real end users swap the bits and configs around on a regular basis?

Kind of like the Stoner 63, where you could make all sorts of cool guns- but most users pretty much just set it up as an LMG, and left it there.

[HeavyDuty]

Back on topic, I have it on good authority the issue is the gun. Not the holster, not the soldier, but the gun itself and something repeatable and endemic to the design. I suspect that more information will become public at some point, but this is not that point. I've said what I can say without betraying a trust, so take it or leave it.

That’s all it took, instead of cryptic grumbling. Thanks for the clarification.

[Bucky]

Yah, the whole "interchangeable" FCU thing is kind of cool and all, but is it really all that useful, especially over the long term?
.

I see it’s usefulness in relationship to how firearms are treated. To be able to change a firearm to different sizes without the paperwork involved, especially in some states, is a plus. For those states (or state) that only allow 3 guns on a permit, would you be allowed to have one FCU as one gun, and switch configurations?

With an LE or MIL unit, this is a non issue. Now that GLOCK has made the 47 (I espoused back when they developed the Gen 4s, why not make the 17 and 19 with compatible slides), a 19 / 47 gives you the ability to make 4 different size configurations. Speaking of which, it’s high time clock made the 19 L, now that they produce all the parts it should be a no brainer.

[GJM]

FIFY

Speaking of which, it’s high time Glock made the 19 L, once they start producing parts again, it should be a no brainer.

[Navin Johnson]

That’s all it took, instead of cryptic grumbling. Thanks for the clarification.

I think Gary said the same thing a few pages back....