quote:

Originally posted by Sgt 127:
I’ve tried to keep up with this thread, and may have missed it. What function does that rear leg on the sear provide? It appears cutting it off does not affect the function of the pistol in any way.

Yet, an engineer(s) at Sig, determined it had a purpose.

Is there some yet unknown function it provides?

Yep, that's where I'm at now as well.

Just to try to get things back on track: Before this thread went off the rails with people more interested in punishing Sig than solving the problem, we had somebody post a video that demonstrated a timing problem with the safety lever related to the sear's interaction with the trigger bar via that rear leg.

I know for a fact that this is not a universal issue, as I have attempted a similar test on several of my P320s by depressing the sear manually with the gun in battery and a primed case in the chamber, and I was unable to get them to fire (or even strike the primer), because the safety lever did not move sufficiently to defeat the striker safety lock. But the guy making the video was able to get the striker to protrude forward of the breech face in at least one example.

The guy in the video was able to solve his problem by shortening the rear leg of his sear so that it no longer interacts with the trigger bar. Video guy was unable to determine if the removed portion of the rear sear leg performs any legitimate function in the gun. I am not sure if it does, either.

At this point we have a demonstrated example of a design or tolerance problem that affects at least one gun. This is the first time anything like this has been demonstrated to my knowledge. The next step would be to determine why this gun is doing this, and if it's related to that rear sear leg as it appears to be, what function that rear sear leg is supposed to perform. That is probably going to require some input from Sig, as they hold the actual design spec for the gun.

quote:

Originally posted by Cous2492:

quote:

Originally posted by RogueJSK:
Posting snarky pretentious statements about shreds of objectivity and being head-over-heels isn't mere disagreeing.

If you don't want to argue, then reconsider your tone.

Maybe I should have said that I'm not looking to bicker back and forth with the angry mob who read way too much "snark" and "pretentiousness" into my posts.

Totally called it.

It’s our fault.

Don’t worry, he’s calling the chief to get IA cases hung on everyone that won’t comply with the company line. After that, he’s got “coffee with a cop” and a Tik Tok dance video to film. All before the shift pizza party because they can’t figure out why morale is so low…..


Show us on the doll where the mean ole SIG touched you.

quote:

Originally posted by 92fstech:.

The guy in the video was able to solve his problem by shortening the rear leg of his sear so that it no longer interacts with the trigger bar. Video guy was unable to determine if the removed portion of the rear sear leg performs any legitimate function in the gun. I am not sure if it does, either.

At this point we have a demonstrated example of a design or tolerance problem that affects at least one gun. This is the first time anything like this has been demonstrated to my knowledge. The next step would be to determine why this gun is doing this, and if it's related to that rear sear leg as it appears to be, what function that rear sear leg is supposed to perform. That is probably going to require some input from Sig, as they hold the actual design spec for the gun.

Since it came after the drop fire issue. My only thought is that it’s supposed to act as a counterweight to the Sear pivoting if dropped.

That’s all I can come up with.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Sgt 127,

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:
I like my DA/SA hammer-fired SIGs. And Glocks.

Same. I never once considered a P320. I tried to like the 365, shot it a number of times, but prefer Glock for carry. And my backup carry is a P238, low and behold a hammer fired Sig.

quote:

Originally posted by jljones:

quote:

Originally posted by Cous2492:

quote:

Originally posted by RogueJSK:
Posting snarky pretentious statements about shreds of objectivity and being head-over-heels isn't mere disagreeing.

If you don't want to argue, then reconsider your tone.

Maybe I should have said that I'm not looking to bicker back and forth with the angry mob who read way too much "snark" and "pretentiousness" into my posts.

Totally called it.

It’s our fault.

Don’t worry, he’s calling the chief to get IA cases hung on everyone that won’t comply with the company line. After that, he’s got “coffee with a cop” and a Tik Tok dance video to film. All before the shift pizza party because they can’t figure out why morale is so low…..


Show us on the doll where the mean ole SIG touched you.

Oh man, you nailed it. 100% me. Although, you forgot that my wife left me for the Lieutenant.

Really mature of you. And I get accused of being snarky and pretentious.

A couple more videos to digest...


Robert Burke postpones his announcement:






A new issue diagnosis video:

quote:

Originally posted by Cous2492:


Really mature of you. And I get accused of being snarky and pretentious.

I own what I do. Instead of being passive aggressive company man pushing an agenda like you.
I can’t tell if you’re really so stupid you don’t understand what you’re doing, or it’s just some of that thin blue line company scab arrogance.

quote:

Originally posted by jljones:
All before the shift pizza party because they can’t figure out why morale is so low…..

Well last time the only pizza that was left over had green peppers on it. I HATE green peppers on pizza.

quote:

Originally posted by MikeGLI:

quote:

Originally posted by jljones:
All before the shift pizza party because they can’t figure out why morale is so low…..

Well last time the only pizza that was left over had green peppers on it. I HATE green peppers on pizza.

You got peppers? We got half eaten crust and parmesan packages?(3rd shift)

quote:

Originally posted by jljones:

quote:

Originally posted by Cous2492:


Really mature of you. And I get accused of being snarky and pretentious.

I own what I do. Instead of being passive aggressive company man pushing an agenda like you.
I can’t tell if you’re really so stupid you don’t understand what you’re doing, or it’s just some of that thin blue line company scab arrogance.

I don't know what your problem is, but I don't have a "company" or an "agenda". My PD doesn't have the P320 and don't have any worries about anything like this. My PD or my job don't have anything to do with the problems with the P320.

I don't personally like the P320 and I find that the accusations of it being unsafe are credible. I also find the P320 fanboys sudden reversal to be amusing. That's it.

I could stoop to your level and make fun of your thin blue line failed LE trainer schtick, but would that really be productive? Let's keep it to the P320.

OK, guys. Unload and show clear. Everything's cool.

I'm proud of the fact that of all the manufacturer-specific (or type-specific) gun forums, SIGforum is the least partisan. We exhibit minimal fanboydom. I think anyone who frequents this place and who is familiar with other gun forums knows this is true. That being the case, we should be well positioned to discuss a controversial (to say the least) subject such as this.

Cous, you are of course entitled to your opinion, but let's be honest that the post I've quoted below is a somewhat provocative. In no way am I attempting to discourage your input, but let's acknowledge the things we say and the way we say them.

quote:

Originally posted by Cous2492:
All of the SIG P320 fans for the last few years,
"There are no problems with the P320."
"Mine has never gone off in the holster."
"It's the Safariland Holster that's the problem."
"It ends today."


Then someone demonstrates that there is, in fact a problem, as if anybody who has even a shred of objectivity couldn't see that years ago, and all of a sudden the argument changes to,
"It's worth the fix."
"Keep carrying the defective weapons until we get a fix."

SIG knew there was a problem with the P320 from day one. SIG kept producing the P320 and kept selling them knowing there was a problem. SIG screwed every one of those Police Departments, the US Military, and every private citizen who bought one. I'd hate to see my former favorite gun manufacturer go out of business, but they'd absolutely deserve it if that's how this plays out.

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:
OK, guys. Unload and show clear. Everything's cool.

I'm proud of the fact that of all the manufacturer-specific (or type-specific) gun forums, SIGforum is the least partisan. We exhibit minimal fanboydom. I think anyone who frequents this place and who is familiar with other gun forums knows this is true. That being the case, we should be well positioned to discuss a controversial (to say the least) subject such as this.

Cous, you are of course entitled to your opinion, but let's be honest that the post I've quoted below is a somewhat provocative. In no way am I attempting to discourage your input, but let's acknowledge the things we say and the way we say them.

quote:

Originally posted by Cous2492:
All of the SIG P320 fans for the last few years,
"There are no problems with the P320."
"Mine has never gone off in the holster."
"It's the Safariland Holster that's the problem."
"It ends today."


Then someone demonstrates that there is, in fact a problem, as if anybody who has even a shred of objectivity couldn't see that years ago, and all of a sudden the argument changes to,
"It's worth the fix."
"Keep carrying the defective weapons until we get a fix."

SIG knew there was a problem with the P320 from day one. SIG kept producing the P320 and kept selling them knowing there was a problem. SIG screwed every one of those Police Departments, the US Military, and every private citizen who bought one. I'd hate to see my former favorite gun manufacturer go out of business, but they'd absolutely deserve it if that's how this plays out.

It was provocative.

Unloaded and clear.

quote:

Originally posted by Chris17404:
A couple more videos to digest..


A new issue diagnosis video:


[FLASH_VIDEO]<iframe frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/7H4Ri409-5I" width="560"></iframe>[/FLASH_VIDEO]

So what he managed to demonstrate is that if you put the wrong parts in the wrong gun, and re-assembled it improperly without disengaging the takedown safety, AND somehow defeat the striker safety block, the gun might fire on its own.

It's open to debate whether or not Sig should have done more to prevent the issue he's demonstrating from being possible, but IMO there's a limit to how far you can go to stop somebody from doing something dumb. IMO the different FCUs SHOULD AT LEAST be clearly labeled (which they are not), but how far do you need to go to mechanically prevent users from doing stuff they shouldn't?

I agree with him that that's basically a one-in-a-million scenario. I also don't think it's pertinent to the problems that we're seeing in the real world, because police departments and the military don't have a bunch of 10mm FCUs lying around to accidentally get swapped into a 9mm gun. If guns are going off in duty holsters without the trigger being pulled, it's not because they have 10mm/.45 FCUs in them (unless they came that way from the factory).

quote:

Originally posted by Cous2492:
It was provocative.

Unloaded and clear.

Thank you. We're all friends again. Feel free to speak your mind, but whenever possible, let the facts lead the way. That doesn't mean your comments can't have any bite. If all of us were perfectly polite at all times, this place would be too dull to bother with.

quote:

Originally posted by Chris17404:
Robert Burke postpones his announcement:

I can appreciate that. Not having much knowledge of him prior to this, Mr. Burke's credibility just went up a bit in my mind. He's not in a rush to get a video out there just to capitalize on the hype and generate some Youtube revenue. He'd rather examine the new data and let the facts lead his conclusions, even if those conclusions may be different than the ones he had drawn before and was about to publish. As it should be.

quote:

Originally posted by 92fstech:
So what he managed to demonstrate is that if you put the wrong parts in the wrong gun, and re-assembled it improperly without disengaging the takedown safety, AND somehow defeat the striker safety block, the gun might fire on its own.

This right here. So far, anyone who has managed to reproduce any uncommanded discharged has done so only by using non-factory configurations, aftermarket parts, and a bunch of weird stuff.

Now, that said, this video does get closer than anyone in my opinion to what could be a problem which is a misaligned takedown safety bar coupled with a defective MIM'd firing pin safety.

It would have to be proven, though, that the issue happens with a factory assembled pistol with no upgrades or parts swaps. But even if you do that - even if you prove that a handful of some of the 3 million firearms in circulation have a manufacturing defect, it's not near enough for any action on the part of Sig outside of a voluntary upgrade program.

Firearms are like any manufactured thing - prone to quality issues.

Watching that video (P320Truther) and the guy's earlier one, am I correct that no reason has been given or suggested as to why the sear moves by itself?

In the first video, he has to stick a pick in the assembled gun to force the sear to move without pulling the trigger. In the second video, he demonstrates how to prevent the striker block from being disengaged if you force the sear to move without pulling the trigger.

Are we not still at the point where nothing happens unless the trigger is pulled?

quote:

am I correct that no reason has been given or suggested as to why the sear moves by itself?

I've actually searched on that, but so far the consensus seems to be no-one knows or even has a theory.

quote:

Originally posted by trapper189:
Watching that video (P320Truther) and the guy's earlier one, am I correct that no reason has been given or suggested as to why the sear moves by itself?

In the first video, he has to stick a pick in the assembled gun to force the sear to move without pulling the trigger. In the second video, he demonstrates how to prevent the striker block from being disengaged if you force the sear to move without pulling the trigger.

Are we not still at the point where nothing happens unless the trigger is pulled?

The issue he seems to have found is that in a properly functioning gun, even if the sear is manually depressed, the safety lever should not move far enough to defeat the striker safety block. Apparently he has found at least one case where it does. And that shouldn't happen.

Yes he has to manually depress the sear to demonstrate the problem...by doing that he's simulating a hard impact, debris, broken springs, or some other force applied to the gun to cause the striker to disengage. Obviously nobody in any of these incidents held the gun still while somebody reached in there and poked the striker down.

The issue is that the striker interfaces directly with the trigger bar and the safety lever. Moving any one of those parts causes some movement of the others, but they are supposed to be timed so that if that movement is somehow initiated by the sear instead of the trigger, the striker will drop before the safety lever moves enough to disengage the striker safety block. He has apparently found that this is not always the case.

I have tried his test on several P320s, and none of them exhibit the behavior he is demonstrating. So clearly not all guns are affected. He also has yet to determine exactly why some guns do this and others don't, but I think that he's right about the rear leg of the sear causing the issue in the affected guns.

I don't know what the intended function of that rear sear leg is in the design, and neither does he. He took a Dremel to it as a troubleshooting step, and I can appreciate what he's trying to do, but I'm not going to do that to a gun that's going to get used in the real world, and he doesn't recommend that anyone should, either.

I'd say at this point he has come up with a compelling theory about a design issue that affects some guns and could theoretically cause a UD. He's also demonstrated that issue. I'd like to hear Sig respond with what function that rear striker leg is supposed to perform, and why the safety lever timing appears to be off in some guns but not others.

quote:

I don't know what the intended function of that rear sear leg is in the design

According to Sig, the rear leg (added as part of the drop-safety upgrade) is supposed to add additional pressure from the trigger bar and help prevent the safety lever from popping up on its own.

P320 Upgrade Guide