365 Macro shooting thread

[D-der]

I have to say, my 365, two XL' s and Franken Macro which all cover a span of a few years all have very similar triggers, just about 5lb' s with some take up, a wall,bit of creepy break, two of them have curved and two have flat triggers. I find them to be very stage-able, generally I'm not shy about doing a little trigger work, I haven't felt the need on my 365's, although I did finger a WC 365 at my regular lbs and the trigger sucked, the customer was rightfully unhappy and debating sending it back to Wilson.

[WDR]

I am calling BS on the Sig rolling change things as regards the 365 family. SNIP If you want a reason to hate Sig, there are plenty but the 365 family is not a good reason.

I was speaking to rolling changes and variable Sig quality in general, not specifically the 365. I've shot a small number of various 365's, and they do shoot fairly well, and the ones I played with didn't have any issues. They were also low round count, new guns, so I can't comment on longevity.

I've got other reasons to dislike Sig... but by most accounts the 365 series guns are quite good. If I wasn't heavily invested in 9mm Glocks, I'd maybe give them a serious try.

[frozentundra]

When the 365 first came out, my wife had a battery of 42, 43 and 26 for EDC, and would pick based on wardrobe. She replaced all with a 365 and now has a 365 and 365 Macro combination for 90 percent of her EDC. She has a G19 with a comp and 509T for field use in a Safariland RDS holster.

If you don't mind me being nosy, curious what y'all have settled on for carry and practice ammo in shorter barreled 365 setups? Using the same in XL upper guns too, or different?

I remember some years back there was a thread about certain slimline guns perhaps running more reliably with lighter/shorter ammo, but that may have been more of a Glock thing; I just can't remember clearly now. I finally jumped on the 365 bandwagon. I've been interested in the standard pressure 115 Gold Dot, but I don't think it was on The List, last I checked. Seems like the lightest weight, lowest recoiling round would be ideal for this tiny gun if function and terminal performance are still acceptable.

Vetting carry ammo is quite expensive

[GJM]

If you don't mind me being nosy, curious what y'all have settled on for carry and practice ammo in shorter barreled 365 setups? Using the same in XL upper guns too, or different?

I remember some years back there was a thread about certain slimline guns perhaps running more reliably with lighter/shorter ammo, but that may have been more of a Glock thing; I just can't remember clearly now. I finally jumped on the 365 bandwagon. I've been interested in the standard pressure 115 Gold Dot, but I don't think it was on The List, last I checked. Seems like the lightest weight, lowest recoiling round would be ideal for this tiny gun if function and terminal performance are still acceptable.

Vetting carry ammo is quite expensive

When that thread came out, we started running Gold Dot 115 (standard pressure) in Glock 43/43X and 365 pistols. With a 3.1/PMM comp and the 3.7 barrels we have been using Gold Dot 124+P. Reliability comes first for me.

[RAM Engineer]

When that thread came out, we started running Gold Dot 115 (standard pressure) in Glock 43/43X and 365 pistols. With a 3.1/PMM comp and the 3.7 barrels we have been using Gold Dot 124+P. Reliability comes first for me.

Short barrel or standard version?

[GJM]

Short barrel or standard version?

Standard, but:

1) I don't have any special knowledge of terminal ballistics beyond what I read here.

and

2) 124+P has been my EDC JHP for a long, long time.

[John Hearne]

That's probably the #1 reason I've never really got into anything Sig. Not that fixing something that is actually a problem is a bad thing. It just seems like more of a roll of the dice at any given moment.

To be fair, Sig has gotten a lot better about implementing it well. If you look at most components of any size, they have a code on them. I'm sure that's there to identify manufacturer and date. I did hear somewhere that Sig has moved a lot of its small parts manufacturing in-house. Less Indian MIM it would seem....

[RJ]

I have to say, my 365, two XL' s and Franken Macro which all cover a span of a few years all have very similar triggers, just about 5lb' s with some take up, a wall,bit of creepy break, two of them have curved and two have flat triggers. I find them to be very stage-able, generally I'm not shy about doing a little trigger work, I haven't felt the need on my 365's, although I did finger a WC 365 at my regular lbs and the trigger sucked, the customer was rightfully unhappy and debating sending it back to Wilson.

My experience is almost identical, 4 P365s, one curved, three flat. All measured just over 5#, and very easy to stage.

Re: ammo, same throughout my narrow 9mm experience: AE 124 for practice, Speer GD124+p for carry. I am trying Federal 124 HST as a potentially softer option (getting old) but to be honest it’s pretty zippy as well. No issues with any of it, expect with the first rounds out of two brand new uncycled magazines, once.

[GJM]

There was a time I was more amused by stunting, but lately not so much. This afternoon I got a wild hair and decided to see what I could do with the macro. It is definitely a very shootable little gun. Draws .49-60, 1.75 Bill from a JMCK Range holster on a Safariland CUBL/QLS set up.

[GJM]

I pulled the Macro out at the end of my practice session, and shot steel at 10, 15, 20 and 25 yards. Pretty sure I can shoot this as well as my 19.