SIGforum.com    Main Page  Hop To Forum Categories  SIG Pistols    As much as I like the regular P365, I'm going to have to say the P365 SAS is not worth it.
Page 1 2 3 

Moderators: Chris Orndorff, LDD
Go
New
Find
Notify
Tools
Reply
  
As much as I like the regular P365, I'm going to have to say the P365 SAS is not worth it. Login/Join 
Oriental Redneck
Picture of 12131
posted
Got one (SAS) a few days ago, just to see what the hoopla is all about. Got to admit, on paper, everything looks great. Wow, truly snag-free, nothing protruding from the gun, not even the sight. But, the novelty quickly wore off.

Took it to the range yesterday, along with the regular P365, for comparison. Shot 275 rds through the SAS (250 rds Geco 124 FMJ & 25 rds Speer 124 +P GDHP).

Observations:
1- As with my other P365s, the SAS had zero malfunctions.

2- If there was any reduction in muzzle flip, I did not feel any. Both guns felt the same.

3- Didn't see any more muzzle flash with the SAS than with the regular P365.

4- The sight is going to need a lot of practice to get used to. Centering the dot in the circle to shoot is not as easy as it sounds, as I'm so used to the old fashioned lining up the 3-dot front/rear sights.

5- The minimalist slide catch - You simply cannot use it to release the slide. Not gonna happen. Got to sling shot it.

6- Takedown slot - Use a dime or a penny and turn it a little more than 90 degrees clockwise, as you would with the normal takedown lever of the regular P365.

7- The ported barrel - Typical lands and grooves, but the inner surface at the ports' location is cut out circumferentially. It is so strange looking to me.

Conclusion:
The P365 SAS concept looks great on paper. But, in practice, the regular P365 can do everything the SAS claims, i.e., it does not snag on anything and is very controllable. At the same time, it can claim something that the SAS can't. It is easier to manipulate and less expensive. So, thumbs up for the original and thumbs down for the SAS.















 
Posts: 18567 | Location: TEXAS | Registered: September 04, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Giftedly Outspoken
Picture of sigarms229
posted Hide Post
Awesome review, thanks for sharing.

I'm curious to hold one just to see the sight but wasn't going to jump on one the way I did with the XL.



Sometimes, you gotta roll the hard six
 
Posts: 3699 | Location: SouthCentral PA | Registered: December 05, 1999Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Wait, what?
Picture of gearhounds
posted Hide Post
You touched briefly on accuracy- how much of a difference did you see with slow, aimed fire? I assume close range, instinctive shooting sans sights was about the same.

Having handled one, I can say that while a neat sighting system, it certainly seems significantly slower to pick up a clear sight picture with the SAS sights.




"Live every day as if it's going to be your last, and one day, you'll be right.”
Malachy McCourt
 
Posts: 11042 | Location: Martinsburg WV | Registered: April 02, 2011Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of Blackwater
posted Hide Post
Agreed ...I went with the XL because for me the 365 is too small. However, I would like an XL with those sights as they presented well for me and get rid of the porting.


Joe

Oath Keeper
 
Posts: 2259 | Location: Az | Registered: October 28, 2006Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of GataGunner
posted Hide Post
How does one rack the slide with one had without a rear sight?
 
Posts: 39 | Registered: January 25, 2019Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Big Stack
posted Hide Post
I think it's slickness would be a boon to pocket carriers. Noting, including protruding sights, to hang up on the draw. For holster carriers, not some much.
 
Posts: 19227 | Registered: November 05, 2003Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of Poppy6x
posted Hide Post
Thanks for the report 12131. Sounds like a very honest assessment and pretty much confirms my opinion. As a result of nearly 37 years in marketing/advertising, some of which was with companies in shooting sports, I feel like I can spot marketing hype when
I see it. Just as 12131 says, sometimes things look good on paper and sound good in the new product meeting, but just don’t meet up to expectations in the real world. There’s a small segment of the market that will always be brand loyal and interested in the “newest and greatest” but I suspect that the SAS will never capture much market share. Fundamentally, it’s a solution for a problem that may not exist. I have both P365 and P365XL and don’t find either hard to conceal or slow to get on target. They have never snagged on my clothing. And, as many have reported, the benefit of porting seems nonexistent and actually increases need for cleaning.
Now, enter the Hellcat. The P365 product line now has some real competition, barring the emergence of any component flaws. After about 250 rounds of FMJ and variety of popular JHP loads my Hellcat has been flawless and just as accurate as the P365. Also, it just feels better in my hand than the P365 — this is a personal thing and will vary with the individual. I actually like the sights better than the x-ray. I was a Lisa’s leery of buying early production but a local range has one that they’ve put over 3,000 rounds thru with no problems so I went for it.
I won’t abandon the P365 but I am going to work the Hellcat into my EDC rotation.


Sigs
HKs
S&Ws
Rugers
Steyrs
1911s
 
Posts: 108 | Location: St. Louis, MO | Registered: June 15, 2012Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
I am getting ready to jump on a 365. I will get the standard model.
The barrel cut for the port on the SAS seems quite different and odd for a ported gun.


End of Earth: 2 Miles
Upper Peninsula: 4 Miles
 
Posts: 9336 | Location: Marquette MI | Registered: July 08, 2014Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of CQB60
posted Hide Post
Ditto on the slide release. Slingshot it or nada


_____________________________________________________________________
”At pretium libertatus“
امّا شما مشخص خواهد شد كه با همه شما را ملاقات کنند
 
Posts: 11923 | Location: VIrtual | Registered: November 13, 2009Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
Thank you for your detailed review. Your's is a review I trust.

I would like to ask one question...

My distance vision is superb but my close up vision leaves a lot to be desired.

For someone waking up to a bump in the night, would you rather have the regular or the SAS sight if you had "my aging eyes"?
 
Posts: 2092 | Location: St. Louis, MO | Registered: November 24, 2009Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Oriental Redneck
Picture of 12131
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by gearhounds:
You touched briefly on accuracy- how much of a difference did you see with slow, aimed fire? I assume close range, instinctive shooting sans sights was about the same.

The regular gun is slightly better. Of course, it's because one is not used to the new sighting system on the SAS, but, it's probably also because of the inherent design. As said above, centering the dot and shoot takes more effort. But, also, the dot is overly big, to my eyes. Not only that, the entire dot/circle sits deep in the groove, below the top of the slide. So, when sighting the target, it's like everything is blocked from view.

For close range spray and pray, they are about the same.

quote:
Originally posted by GataGunner:
How does one rack the slide with one had without a rear sight?

If you have only one hand, use your knees.

quote:
Originally posted by BBMW:
I think it's slickness would be a boon to pocket carriers. Noting, including protruding sights, to hang up on the draw. For holster carriers, not some much.

Pocket carrying the regular P365 is absolutely a breeze. It can do everything the SAS can.

quote:
Originally posted by Poppy6x:
...the benefit of porting seems nonexistent and actually increases need for cleaning..

Yeah, no doubt about it. You won't see this on a non-ported barrel.

 
Posts: 18567 | Location: TEXAS | Registered: September 04, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Oriental Redneck
Picture of 12131
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by h2oys:
My distance vision is superb but my close up vision leaves a lot to be desired.

For someone waking up to a bump in the night, would you rather have the regular or the SAS sight if you had "my aging eyes"?

Oh yeah, the SAS sight is fiber optic charged, so it depends a lot on surrounding light. It lights up really well when you have plenty light, but in low light situation, it doesn't do very well. So, imo, true tritium night sights are better.
 
Posts: 18567 | Location: TEXAS | Registered: September 04, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by 12131:
quote:
Originally posted by h2oys:
My distance vision is superb but my close up vision leaves a lot to be desired.

For someone waking up to a bump in the night, would you rather have the regular or the SAS sight if you had "my aging eyes"?

Oh yeah, the SAS sight is fiber optic charged, so it depends a lot on surrounding light. It lights up really well when you have plenty light, but in low light situation, it doesn't do very well. So, imo, true tritium night sights are better.


Thank you!
 
Posts: 2092 | Location: St. Louis, MO | Registered: November 24, 2009Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of RioGrande481
posted Hide Post
Great, honest review. I went to the local store and checked out the SAS. Like yourself I found the sight a bit troublesome to quickly line up.

I like my regular P365 and will be staying with it.


RioGrande481

“I didn’t get where I am today by everything smelling of Bolivian Unicyclist’s jock straps!”
C.J. Supercut 1976
 
Posts: 464 | Registered: August 21, 2005Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
Thank you very much. I still want one, but I think I'll just put my want on hold for a while.

Bob
 
Posts: 501 | Location: TampaBay | Registered: May 22, 2009Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of pulicords
posted Hide Post
Thanks for the thorough review. I think I'll just stick with the standard version of the P365. I made a few changes, including swapping out the OEM sights for orange Trijicon HDs and since I don't pocket carry this pistol, am content with it for IWB or OWB purposes.



"I'm not fluent in the language of violence, but I know enough to get around in places where it's spoken."
 
Posts: 8705 | Location: The Free State of Arizona | Registered: June 13, 2007Reply With QuoteReport This Post
His diet consists of black
coffee, and sarcasm.
Picture of egregore
posted Hide Post
quote:
5- The minimalist slide catch - You simply cannot use it to release the slide. Not gonna happen. Got to sling shot it.

It doesn't look much better for manually locking your slide open, which you need to do for, IDK, stripping for cleaning, checking the chamber, clearing a failure to extract, showing clear for the RO.
 
Posts: 22746 | Location: Johnson City/Elizabethton, TN | Registered: April 28, 2012Reply With QuoteReport This Post
The guy behind the guy
Picture of esdunbar
posted Hide Post
This is the dumbest gun I’ve seen in a long time. Not sure what looked good about it on paper.


E.S. Dunbar
________________________________
I'm confused...wait, maybe I'm not.
 
Posts: 7025 | Location: Toledo, Ohio | Registered: April 19, 2006Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
Thank you. The list price was 70 bucks more for the SAS here. Did the porting do anything to reduce felt recoil? Looks like more of a pain to keep clean.
 
Posts: 6734 | Location: MS GULF COAST | Registered: January 02, 2015Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Oriental Redneck
Picture of 12131
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by egregore:
quote:
5- The minimalist slide catch - You simply cannot use it to release the slide. Not gonna happen. Got to sling shot it.

It doesn't look much better for manually locking your slide open, which you need to do for, IDK, stripping for cleaning, checking the chamber, clearing a failure to extract, showing clear for the RO.

Actually, that action is no challenge at all. It's the release of the slide manually that is literally impossible.


quote:
Originally posted by ZSMICHAEL:
Did the porting do anything to reduce felt recoil? Looks like more of a pain to keep clean.

No. Pretty sure there are folks who are sensitive enough to detect the difference. But to me, none. The regular is quite comfortable to shoot, even with +P. The SAS made no differences, whether in muzzle flip or in felt recoil.
 
Posts: 18567 | Location: TEXAS | Registered: September 04, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
  Powered by Social Strata Page 1 2 3  
 

SIGforum.com    Main Page  Hop To Forum Categories  SIG Pistols    As much as I like the regular P365, I'm going to have to say the P365 SAS is not worth it.

© SIGforum 2019