Yes: I'm not confident in the P320's safety record
No: I believe the gun is mechanically sound.
SIG does claim to provide higher levels of QC to LE program guns.Originally Posted by UNK
However:
If the agency has an armorer, and the armorer is on site, the SIG 320 armorer school is only a 1 day detail stripping class. A pre-service armorer inspection of a 320 doesn't even involve detail stripping the FCU. The benefits are minimal other than the ability to swap broken parts or do PMCS.
You would get the same level of support from a local gunsmith or SIG customer service.
How is sending a gun to Sig or a local gunsmith, if you can even find one who is 320 certified, even remotely the same as an agencies armorer?
Do agents mail their guns to the armorer and wait weeks to get it back? Do they have to pay for said service? Does a local gunsmith even if you can find a local gunsmith, much less one who is certified have the level of experience with the 320 as an agency armorer?
While it may be available its not the same level of support.
ETA And with problems found with guns direct from the factory what level of trust could an individual have that a service was done correctly at SIG?
I'll wager you a PF dollar™ 😎
The lunatics are running the asylum
Armorer service typically isn't provided on the range for most agencies....or, rather, most field personnel within most agencies.
Generally, the standard is to bring spare guns. If the gun suffers problems during a range outing, you swap it out for a spare to complete training.
So, when you say, "Yeah but they had armorer support" as a reason why the P320 would not see any problems on a range outing....well, that doesn't really make any sense. Even if you had one on site...which you probably don't......there's nothing that an agency armorer on site would do that would make that P320 perform any different from a civilian's P320. Even if you had an agency armorer on site at a range day, the only difference is that you'd be able to fix problems on site if they were to occur. As MDFA noted they had no issues arise to begin with, so it wouldn't make a difference anyway.
"Are you ready? Okay. Let's roll."- Last words of Todd Beamer
I never said anything about an armorer at the range to ensure function.
The poll was about do you trust the 320. My point is a LE gun with armorer support is not the same situation as a civilian purchased firearm.
I'll wager you a PF dollar™ 😎
The lunatics are running the asylum
You seem to have an unrealistic idea of what is available in terms of on-site support in the 2020s. The days of most departments having an on site armorer who actually repairs, tunes and trouble shoots guns like in the revolver days are long over for most agencies.
In most agencies of any size, anything other than routine issues like swapping grips, adjusting sides, etc. involves the officer being issued a replacement gun and the problem gun being sent to a centralized armory or the manufacturer.
Other than user level maintenance like recoil spring changes, guns are swapped out after 5-10 years or 10,000 rounds because it’s cheaper than the labor for an LE Armorer to do proper PMCS.
Having two or three copies of your hard use gun is pretty standard advice here, regardless of the make and model.
Repairs done by SIG will either be covered under warranty or not. But whether or not the officers have to pay is irrelevant for work on an issued gun that they’re not paying for in the first place.
For an officer using a personally owned agency approved duty weapon, sometimes the agency will cover maintenance and repair for the gun. Sometimes they won’t. For the eight years I chose to carry a personal owned Glock 17 in lieu of the issued 40 I always had an identical G17 (or two) in the safe as a back up at my own expense. There were two reasons for this, first I have sent people home with my gun because there’s was taken into evidence after shooting. We worked in a small office, had no spare guns on site, and the nearest spare guns for a 5 Hour drive away. Second, while my agency will perform maintenance and repair on a personally owned duty gun, they will only do so if they have the necessary parts on hand. If they don’t have the necessary parts, your gun may sit at the armory for six months or more until the next fiscal year when they get funding to buy another batch of parts.
Last edited by HCM; 11-21-2022 at 01:31 PM.
I guess I was confused by you responding to MDFAs range report and saying that it isn't the same thing as a civilian because they have armorer support.
In which case, it still stands. From a LE perspective, your stance makes no sense. This isn't the Cops'n'Robbers version of dungeons and dragons where being part of an agency and having armorer support gives you a +25 reliability modifier.
You have the same ability to keep your gun in serviceable condition as a LEO.
"Are you ready? Okay. Let's roll."- Last words of Todd Beamer
I do. Again my point is its not the same thing. Are we going to do this all day?
I'll wager you a PF dollar™ 😎
The lunatics are running the asylum
If you're going to make a point and either walk it back or resort to "doing this all day" when people point out your point doesn't make sense/isn't based in reality, you may want to do a better job at making your point.
"Are you ready? Okay. Let's roll."- Last words of Todd Beamer
Ive made my points and I stand by my original simple statement. You are the one who misinterpreted it.
I'll wager you a PF dollar™ 😎
The lunatics are running the asylum
I will agree that it is not the same thing in one way: you have to pay for all of it. As others have mentioned, if it's an issued, agency-owned weapon, the agency is gonna pay for the parts and maintenance. That is a big deal if you shoot a lot and have to do small parts and spring replacement at regular intervals.
There are Armorers, and then there are 'armorers'. The latter are those dudes who attended a 1-2 day Factory Armorer Course, and are the agency "Gun Guy". They are often tinkerers, and frankly just as likely to fuck up your gun as fix anything. Most agencies, if they have anything, have someone who fits into this category. So "Armorer Support" is not the silver bullet that people think it is. I think that's the point the guys are trying to get across.
I was very fortunate in my former job to have two full-time, dedicated armorers working on my staff at the range. They were officers who tested for the position, attended factory armorer training for every weapon system we used (including some Master Certification and Instructor courses), and also underwent a six month in house apprenticeship. They've been in the job for years, and have extensive inside industry knowledge and contacts. They bring a level of skill and knowledge that a 1-2 day class on detail stripping just can't match. Ask @Wayne Dobbs about the knowledge and competence of SFPD's two armorers.
All that said, this was the exception, not the rule, in our area. The support for most agencies was non-existent. We often fielded calls for help from other agencies' officers, especially for personally owned duty guns. My guys would stick around and meet those officers ON THEIR OWN TIME....because that's the kind of dudes they are. But again....exception, not the rule. Most other agencies send the guns back to the factory for a fix. Yes....they might have a spare gun to hand out (or likely not if it's personally owned). And yes, it's more expensive and inconvenient to have to do this as a private citizen (believe me I know now that I IS one). But heck....hasn't that been the general consensus on this forum for the last decade?
Reply With Quote