quote:

Originally posted by Alma:
I recorded a video last night of installing the Romeo1.
Everything went well once I figured out there sight plate doesn't drift out.
https://youtu.be/XEOsaSWLjQ4

I am with you on the recoil spring. I think it's slightly heavy. I know a very good shooter who has a cut a few coils. Several guide rods options are in the works. I think you won't have more than a week or two to wait before one is available for purchase.
I have also seen an aftermarket adapter plate for others brands of red dots. That's three or four weeks out

I really like the Romeo 1 on my RX, I was thinking of trying a different MRDS on the X5. Do you have a recommendation for a good Carry Optics sidgt?

Thank you for the video, that was very helpful. I may swap over my Romeo 1 after watching it.

quote:

Like all polymer guns I think it begs for either stippling

Why does this one need stippling? Too slippery?

Not all polymer guns beg for stippling, btw. The RTF2 Glock, the M&P 2.0, the P30 are prime examples.

Good info, thanks.

I'm not a fan of lightening cuts unfortunately. I just think they're ugly, but I like that Sig is trying to push the 320 to new territory.

quote:

I'm not a fan of lightening cuts unfortunately

Had a informal discussion a few weeks back about the slide cuts, external and internal. The slides of each caliber are tested and retested based on their weight and where the cuts are made. While the cuts are far from cosmetic, without they, the handgun would be very heavy towards the muzzle with the bull barrel.

Mine shot flawlessly today in a match using my reloads. The first rounds had issues with ejection. The three hundred shot today went with zero issues.

quote:

Originally posted by 12131:

quote:

Like all polymer guns I think it begs for either stippling

Why does this one need stippling? Too slippery?

Not all polymer guns beg for stippling, btw. The RTF2 Glock, the M&P 2.0, the P30 are prime examples.

Mine is a total gamer gun and I don't have the greatest grip strength so I just prefer it. On day's where it is cool I think it helps. Key words, "I think", which is also my worst enemy.

quote:

Originally posted by rscalzo:

quote:

I'm not a fan of lightening cuts unfortunately

Had a informal discussion a few weeks back about the slide cuts, external and internal. The slides of each caliber are tested and retested based on their weight and where the cuts are made. While the cuts are far from cosmetic, without they, the handgun would be very heavy towards the muzzle with the bull barrel.

Mine shot flawlessly today in a match using my reloads. The first rounds had issues with ejection. The three hundred shot today went with zero issues.

To be clear, the cuts are absolutely cosmetic. They can easily remove the proper amount of weight from the underside of the slide, just like they did on the original 320/250/228/229/226/225/220/x5 original/239..etc. They did it to be tacticool.

quote:

Originally posted by Alma:
https://youtu.be/XEOsaSWLjQ4

Thanks for the video Alma. Mine is now sporting one of my Romeo 1's.

quote:

Originally posted by esdunbar:

quote:

Originally posted by rscalzo:

quote:

I'm not a fan of lightening cuts unfortunately

Had a informal discussion a few weeks back about the slide cuts, external and internal. The slides of each caliber are tested and retested based on their weight and where the cuts are made. While the cuts are far from cosmetic, without they, the handgun would be very heavy towards the muzzle with the bull barrel.

Mine shot flawlessly today in a match using my reloads. The first rounds had issues with ejection. The three hundred shot today went with zero issues.

To be clear, the cuts are absolutely cosmetic. They can easily remove the proper amount of weight from the underside of the slide, just like they did on the original 320/250/228/229/226/225/220/x5 original/239..etc. They did it to be tacticool.

No, they did these cuts because that's the only way we could redistribute mass where we wanted it and reduce it from above the boreline where we didn't. It was not possible to remove enough without cuts.

-Bruce

Thank you Bruce! You are an invaluable resource for this forum!!

All I know is after reading all this is that I can't wait for mine to show up at the LGS
Damn the torpedoes, full steam ahead!

quote:

Originally posted by Grayguns:

quote:

Originally posted by esdunbar:

quote:

Originally posted by rscalzo:

quote:

I'm not a fan of lightening cuts unfortunately

Had a informal discussion a few weeks back about the slide cuts, external and internal. The slides of each caliber are tested and retested based on their weight and where the cuts are made. While the cuts are far from cosmetic, without they, the handgun would be very heavy towards the muzzle with the bull barrel.

Mine shot flawlessly today in a match using my reloads. The first rounds had issues with ejection. The three hundred shot today went with zero issues.

To be clear, the cuts are absolutely cosmetic. They can easily remove the proper amount of weight from the underside of the slide, just like they did on the original 320/250/228/229/226/225/220/x5 original/239..etc. They did it to be tacticool.

No, they did these cuts because that's the only way we could redistribute mass where we wanted it and reduce it from above the boreline where we didn't. It was not possible to remove enough without cuts.

-Bruce

I respect you immensely Bruce and your knowledge of firearms is well beyond mind, so I'll take your word for it.

I must say, it does sound like a bit of the company line though. In the video, the Sig employee himself said they could have taken it from the underside but "might as well make it look cool." I guess I should ask you, if it was that important to make holes in the slide for the proper balance, wouldn't everyone do it? Why did the Sig employee say it could have been removed from the underside? I just don't get it I guess.

Maybe it's my perception that Sig is more about tacticool these days than to hell and back reliability coloring everything they do, but I'm trouble buying it.

After putting through another three hundred rounds at a steel match yesterday, not one issue using my hand loaded ammo. Same ammo used for a few years in matches. The few issues had early on with extraction are gone.

Not it's just getting used to the different feel from the 320's I shot previously. Hopefully they can come up with additional magazines soon.

One oddity. they include no additional instructional materials for the unique features like the read sight and removable mount.

quote:

Originally posted by esdunbar:

quote:

Originally posted by Grayguns:

quote:

Originally posted by esdunbar:

quote:

Originally posted by rscalzo:

quote:

I'm not a fan of lightening cuts unfortunately

Had a informal discussion a few weeks back about the slide cuts, external and internal. The slides of each caliber are tested and retested based on their weight and where the cuts are made. While the cuts are far from cosmetic, without they, the handgun would be very heavy towards the muzzle with the bull barrel.

Mine shot flawlessly today in a match using my reloads. The first rounds had issues with ejection. The three hundred shot today went with zero issues.

To be clear, the cuts are absolutely cosmetic. They can easily remove the proper amount of weight from the underside of the slide, just like they did on the original 320/250/228/229/226/225/220/x5 original/239..etc. They did it to be tacticool.

No, they did these cuts because that's the only way we could redistribute mass where we wanted it and reduce it from above the boreline where we didn't. It was not possible to remove enough without cuts.

-Bruce

I respect you immensely Bruce and your knowledge of firearms is well beyond mind, so I'll take your word for it.

I must say, it does sound like a bit of the company line though. In the video, the Sig employee himself said they could have taken it from the underside but "might as well make it look cool." I guess I should ask you, if it was that important to make holes in the slide for the proper balance, wouldn't everyone do it? Why did the Sig employee say it could have been removed from the underside? I just don't get it I guess.

Maybe it's my perception that Sig is more about tacticool these days than to hell and back reliability coloring everything they do, but I'm trouble buying it.

Compensation needed to be made for the added barrel mass, and we experimented extensively with these values before making our recommendations. I'm not a fan of lightening cuts / slots / portholes ect. myself, but this really was the best way to drop that weight from in front of the breechface and above the bore line.

I understand your scepticism. If I hadn't been involved with the background R&D I'd believe it was just for looks myself.

In the case of the Viking Tactics slide, the slots are frankly as much for looks as for direct function; the way I laid out the slide top / sight plane was intended to achieve the same weight reduction effect as in the X5, but to a lesser degree. The X5 slide is proportionally lighter, and the sight plane needed to stay where it is to accommodate Phil's interchangeable rear sight base setup.

So, we get holes.

-Bruce

Why does the X-Carry have a "hole" on top of the slide, also?

OP, here's an excellent, detailed post on the take down lever issue. Provides Sig parts #'s as well.

https://sigforum.com/eve/forums...040060224#3040060224

There are apparently THREE versions out there now. The original (raised) and TWO revisions (flat).

I have the first revision (flat shape) that I replaced my original (2015 w/raised shape) with. Takes three hands to turn it. Slowly improving and takes only 2 1/2 now. In the thread above, the second revision seems to require a normal amount of effort to turn. You may have the same version (first revision) I do.

Thanks for the info Bruce! I really appreciate you answering my question.

300 rounds of 124gr nato this morning through my X5. Not a single issue, I'm really impressed with it and can't wait to put a Romeo 1 on it. After I shoot up the 124gr ammo I'm going to make a guide rod and put a lighter 1911 spring in it. It's definitely sprung a little heavy.

quote:

Originally posted by Nipper:
OP, here's an excellent, detailed post on the take down lever issue. Provides Sig parts #'s as well.

Nipper - Thanks for the info and I'll look into this to see if that is what is causing my issues with the take down lever.

Last night I took the time to remove the rear sight and put on of my Romeo 1's from one of my P320Rx's on it. Thanks Alma for the informative video you linked in the thread. The gun looks pretty good sporting a Romeo.



Had to go to the range this morning to help clean out and organize our USPSA Club Containers to get ready for the start of the season next weekend and took a little time to get the dot dialed in. Ran 100 rounds of my match ammo through the gun with no issues. I'm sitting just a little under 500 rounds of both factory and match ammo and it seems to be working well with whatever I've fed it.

If everything goes right I'll run the gun in our match next weekend.

I decided to not wait another 8 days until my next day off to pick up my X-5. Was a 120 mile round trip, but well worth it as I was anxious to get it, and to get the magazine issue with my new P220 Elite 10mm taken care of. Looking forward to cleaning and lubing it up, and taking it to the range! I picked up a box of SIG Elite 9mm because I wanted something a bit hotter than range fmj to help break it in.

So far, I really like the balance, feel and the grip. It seems like it is weighted such that there is some heft to it but it is well balanced and not muzzle heavy. It is pretty tight also, often not returning fully to battery when working the slide to reset the striker. The undercut is a real winner IMHO, allowing a nice, high grip. I think I am going to shoot it a few times before deciding to install the GG PELT straight trigger I bought in anticipation of getting the new X-5. It feels very good, but there seems to be a bit of take-up once the 'wall' is reached before the striker falls.

quote:

Originally posted by tha1000:

quote:

Originally posted by JimTheo:

quote:

Originally posted by jljones:

quote:

Originally posted by aguilar64:
Do you know if the "regular" P320 full size 15 rounds magazine will work with the P320 X5?

I believe they are going to take a bit of modification.

Which mods? To the compact mag or the full size mag? From what I am reading, the base pads are different.

From what I have read, you will have to file the wings off the side.

I don't have an X5, but I do have a full sized 9mm, with a Springer magwell on it. Also, I have Springer aluminum base pads on all of my regular (17 round) mags. So I have a lot of leftover stock mag base pads laying around. When I bought a 21 rounder, it would not work with the magwell, due to the 'wings'. The simplest solution was to install one of those stock mag base pads on it, rather than modify the 'wings'.