Page 16 of 21 FirstFirst ... 61415161718 ... LastLast
Results 151 to 160 of 207

Thread: Why P320 is so popular outside of pistol-forum

  1. #151
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Location
    Living across the Golden Bridge , and through the Rainbow Tunnel, somewhere north of Fantasyland.
    Quote Originally Posted by RAM Engineer View Post
    So which system is the issue M17/M18 using?
    Which system is the current XCompact?
    M17/18 uses the original system, which incorporates the rear sight into the cover plate. No idea if it is identical to the commercial version, but it's essentially the same thing. The X Compact also uses that system.....the Pro Compact is basically the same gun, but with the Pro Cut slide. Saw commercial models of this at SHOT (non LE only SKUs).

  2. #152
    Quote Originally Posted by AMC View Post
    M17/18 uses the original system, which incorporates the rear sight into the cover plate. No idea if it is identical to the commercial version, but it's essentially the same thing. The X Compact also uses that system.....the Pro Compact is basically the same gun, but with the Pro Cut slide. Saw commercial models of this at SHOT (non LE only SKUs).
    You can also buy the RXP versions of either the X series or non-X and then sell the Romeo 1 Pro that comes with it separate. They have been hard to find and you should be able to sell it for at least $200-$250 bringing the cost of the pistol to $610-650ish. You’re paying $30-$70 more than the X compact with rear site attached to plate. But you’re getting installed suppressor sights.

  3. #153
    Site Supporter OlongJohnson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    "carbine-infested rural (and suburban) areas"
    Quote Originally Posted by frozentundra View Post
    Thanks for the pics! That really puts it in perspective. I definitely don't want a grip wider than a glock.
    Note that I don't hang out on stippling forums...

    I haven't seen it done yet, but there's certainly room to slim down the sides of the grip module and restipple them, or just throw on some grip tape. So, for example, if you like the reach from backstrap to trigger you get with a medium, but want the overall width to be slimmer like a small, and perhaps a little slab-sided like a USP, you can do that. It's only time and/or money.
    .
    -----------------------------------------
    Not another dime.

  4. #154
    Quote Originally Posted by AJD21 View Post
    What is exactly different in terms of quality of parts between a contract/Leo/mil P320 and a commercial P320?

    Not perceived but exact.
    Does anyone know? I think that is the point. (Maybe someone at Sig knows, but they aren't sharing it publicly.)

    Some people (myself included) would like to believe/have confidence/know that the QC applied was the same, but we don't.

  5. #155
    Quote Originally Posted by frozentundra View Post
    Thanks for the pics! That really puts it in perspective. I definitely don't want a grip wider than a glock.
    Both measured in two places near the center of the grip, not at the widest point (which would be the flared Glock magwell).
    My Gen 5 Glock 19 grip measures 1.180" thick
    My Xcompact P320 measures 1.225" thick

  6. #156
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    TEXAS !
    Quote Originally Posted by AMC View Post
    This isnt wrong. Especially if you're just concerned with your own needs. Those are great pistols.

    In answer to @frozentundra's question: the 320 Pro series pistols are a "Law Enforcement" product line. X Carry frame, flat trigger, Hi Vis X Ray night sights, and an optic cut similar to the Glock MOS, or M&P CORE. The original Sig RX Series optic cut incorporated an integral rear sight on the plate, that came off with the plate. Due apparently to customer demand, Sig is going to incorporate the Pro optic cut system on their non LE products as well. The original cut was proprietary, and only acommodated the Sig Romeo and Leupold Delta Point optics. The new mounting system they are adopting will also allow mounting Trijicon RMR footprint optics as well.

    Hope this helps. You're right, it is confusing.
    The original RX did NOT have the M17/18 plate system.

    The original RX was cut specifically for the original SIG Romeo optic. The cut was in front of the rear sight.

    Then SIG came out with the M17/18 system In which the entire rear of the slide is cut away and either an optic or a cover plate with a fixed rear sight is mounted. Per the MHS requirements the cut underneath the plate was for the loophole DeltaPoint pro footprint.

    SIG subsequently cane out with the X5 and Xcarry Which both used an M 17 style cut and plate system but it was cut for the footprint of the original Sigg Romeo optic.

    Right around the time CBP released their new pistol requirements. Which specifically excluded the M17 style plate system, SIG released the PRO series with the cut in front of the rear sight like the original RX and the Glock MOS. If I recall correctly these used the leupold DPP footprint but other optics could be mounted with MOS style adapter plates.

    Then SIG changed the optics footprint under the M 17 style plate on the X Carry and the X5 from the original Romeo footprint to the DPP footprint.

    Now SIG has discontinued the X Carry and the X full and replace them with the successor (RXP?).


    SIG currently has optics with the Romeo foot print and two versions of the DPP footprint, only one of which is available commercially.

    SIG literally has to provide their dealers a chart to track what fits with what.

  7. #157
    And their new flagship pistol optic, the Romeo2 is just about to arrive, I'm pretty certain it will be compatible with both the MHS integral slides as well as the pro slides, it has the integrated rear sight that will co witness with the new x-ray suppressor height sights on the newest RXP's, what I'm not certain of is will the still new Romeo1 Pro sort of fall away and be replaced by the romeo 2 or will it continue as more of an EDC type optic since the Romeo 3 MAX is the dedicated gaming optic. Maybe they will clarify things at the NRA meeting.

  8. #158
    Student
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    Location
    Arizona
    zaitcev, have you seen the CCW surveys that Nephrology did a couple years back?

    https://pistol-forum.com/showthread....com-CCW-Survey
    Results start around page 26, but check out the entire thread for extra subanalyses and reflections from the participants.

    https://pistol-forum.com/showthread....com-CCW-Survey
    Results start around page 16, and Tom Jones pops back in to add some embedded infographics.

  9. #159
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    TEXAS !
    Quote Originally Posted by RAM Engineer View Post
    So which system is the issue M17/M18 using?
    Which system is the current XCompact?
    The M17/18 uses the cut all the way to the rear and the cover plate with the fixed rear sight. The optics cut is for the Leupold DPP footprint which is also compatible with the new Romeo1 and Romeo1 PRO.

    The latest x Compact has abandoned the M17 system for a DPP footprint cut in front of the rear sight.

    It may change again in a few months- who knows with SIG.

    Name:  D5641038-AE41-4754-9BE5-E32E8B47E4FA.jpg
Views: 1148
Size:  95.5 KB

  10. #160
    Quote Originally Posted by GJM View Post
    Not defending Sig, but there have been scores of different brand guns that were not drop safe. Walther, Canik, S&W (third gen semi auto pistols and some revolvers), Ruger revolvers, 1911 pistols for years and many more I have forgotten.
    The Walther PPQ will not fire if dropped. If the blow ia hard enough, the striker will release, but will be stopped from hitting the primer by the striker block.
    We wish to thank the United Network Command for Law and Enforcement, without whose assistance this program would not have been possible.

User Tag List

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •