quote:

quote:
Originally posted by kkina:
<<snip>>
The manual safety only stops trigger movement. It doesn't stop the striker from dropping.

In that case, since the trigger bar ALWAYS moves with the trigger, and the trigger bar deactivates the striker safety, shouldn't the manual safety being engaged keep it all locked up properly even if the sear gets pushed down by... I don't know, a screwdriver or something???

Yes, that's true. However, I'm not sure how the manual safety comes into play in the case of a dead trigger. Can it even be actuated, I wonder?

Remember when Audi was crucified for the ‘sudden acceleration’ problem. That it just goes without input from the driver? That was finally debunked…but it didn’t stop the sensational journalism that you can still find online.

When Sig had drop issue, there were numerous YouTubers fighting to get their example videos online. Sig addressed that with the voluntary upgrade. Pretty quickly and paid shipping to and from them. They were responsive because it was an issue.

The only videos I see are people manipulating the guns in all sorts of matter to get it to go off. None has actually shown these going off on their own…as claimed.

Until I see those, don’t be the mask wearing Covid came from a Chinese wet market sheep. Question the narrative. Look for the Bloomberg $.

https://youtu.be/5c_XFqC52pg?s...DDF30T1zPov8N&t=1896

Long video, so picking a start in the middle.
but a historical perspective, plus a subjective concern with transparency of the Sig USA leadership

Honestly, the only videos I want to see are the GrayGuns videos!

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:

quote:

Originally posted by 92fstech:
...I've been following another P320 thread on a local board, and everybody there just seems content to be angry. Sig sucks, your P320 is going to kill you, it doesn't matter why, and if you're not wholly on that bandwagon or even just simply trying to weigh the facts then you're an "apologist".

Where's the moderator?

Just going with the flow I guess. It's not a Sig specific board, and there are a lot of knowledgeable people there, some not so much, and a few outright juvenile. It's not a bad place, and I'm mainly there for the local connection and not looking to change their culture...but as always I'm appreciative of what we have here.

I imagine this is truly a negligent discharge issue being masked as a gun goes off by itself issue.

I've never had a P320 myself, just a P250 and a P365, not the in between.

On both the P250 and P365 I've been unable to make them fire without pulling the trigger, still working on that telekinesis.

I wonder if P320 reputation recovers from this, will SIG USA overall reputation suffer in the end?

I wonder if it affects P365 sales at all.

quote:

Originally posted by P220 Smudge:

quote:

Originally posted by Black92LX:
Simply because a holster design works for other guns does not mean Sig is necessarily at fault.

The problem with this analogy is that charging lithium batteries is closer to rocket science than wrapping a plastic shell around a gun is. For whatever else the marketing would have anyone believe about any holster, the premise is pretty basic: form soft, heated plastic around gun form, trim to fit so the trigger guard is covered. The rest is basically window washing. You got moleskin liners and various locking mechanisms, but God help me, I look at my 6354RDSO and simply cannot fathom how it's the holster's fault.

Let's turn the logic being touted by the Sig apologists around: If it's the holster's fault, can someone reliably prove it and replicate it?

I'm willing to entertain the idea, but at the end of the day, it's a plastic shell, and what's being shoved into it is a complicated mechanical device which should never discharge because of the fit of a holster. If it's somehow the combination of a Safariland holster and an Sig pistol, when it's all said and done, if no other manufacturers are having this problem, is it really still Safariland's fault? That's assuming this hasn't happened inside any other brand of holster, which also hasn't been ascertained that I've seen.

That’s exactly my point. These fire control groups have become so intricate and complicated have we come to the point where simply wrapping some plastic around it and slapping it on our belt is no longer as simple as that?
Add the fact that people are making different grip modules of numerous sizes, thickness, materials we are looking at far more variables being added that were not taken into account when the gun/FCU was designed.
If the gun is the sole issue why are they not discharging uncommanded outside of holsters??????? Is it because somehow these holsters are in fact doing something that in certain circumstances effects the function of the firearm.

If the gun does not fire on its own in NO circumstances but in a HOLSTER DESIGNED AFTER THE FACT can we fully say that Sig is at fault?? Can they possibly foresee all the holster makers design ideas that will be made and make a gun to accommodate a holster that has not been made yet.

I don’t doubt there is a problem but the fact that the problem does not occur until a 3rd party’s accessory is involved makes me stop to say hey MAYBE Sig is not the issue.
Give me ONE uncommanded discharge out of a holster and then my thought process changes.

Not an Sig apologist by any means I am just asking questions that I have not really seen answered or addressed. I love my 320, do I carry it in a holster?? Nope, nope, and nope!

Because you are correct no one can replicate anything at this point holster or no holster so how can we blame Sig or the holster makers?
I am not sure we can lay the blame Soley with either and that is my point.

If you believe these guys, their department has had at least 2 NDs (out of four total) outside of the holster. But I'd be willing to bet it's more of a training issue than a gun issue, simply based on the frequency at which they're experiencing them.

https://www.nhpr.org/nh-news/2...t-sig-sauer-incident

Now Wyoming guy does a video explaining how the striker safety is disabled with the trigger moved to the rear, take-up, slop, whatever word you want to use, stopping at the wall. No Sh*t Sherlock, that's how guns work, like a revolver will complete the cylinder turn way before the hammer is dropped. I suppose some people are of the belief that since there is so little resistance to pull it to the wall, nothing is happening. SIG replaces the trigger in the voluntary upgrade to alleviate the drop safe issue but didn't want to increase the return spring weight to counter ANY friction that might act upon it, or design/install a trigger safety to stop it short of a finger allowing it to move fully rearward.

I still love my LC9s for the fact that the trigger pull is smooth and consistent throughout and the transition from the safety lifter going up and the seer going down is not perceptible. Although there is some take-up if the trigger is pulled without the middle safety being depressed first, nothing is activated in the striker mechanism.

SIG thought they were so cool that they didn't want to copy Glock's safe-action trigger homework?

quote:

Originally posted by Black92LX:
That’s exactly my point. These fire control groups have become so intricate and complicated have we come to the point where simply wrapping some plastic around it and slapping it on our belt is no longer as simple as that?
Add the fact that people are making different grip modules of numerous sizes, thickness, materials we are looking at far more variables being added that were not taken into account when the gun/FCU was designed.
If the gun is the sole issue why are they not discharging uncommanded outside of holsters??????? Is it because somehow these holsters are in fact doing something that in certain circumstances effects the function of the firearm.

If the gun does not fire on its own in NO circumstances but in a HOLSTER DESIGNED AFTER THE FACT can we fully say that Sig is at fault?? Can they possibly foresee all the holster makers design ideas that will be made and make a gun to accommodate a holster that has not been made yet.

I don’t doubt there is a problem but the fact that the problem does not occur until a 3rd party’s accessory is involved makes me stop to say hey MAYBE Sig is not the issue.
Give me ONE uncommanded discharge out of a holster and then my thought process changes.

Not an Sig apologist by any means I am just asking questions that I have not really seen answered or addressed. I love my 320, do I carry it in a holster?? Nope, nope, and nope!

Because you are correct no one can replicate anything at this point holster or no holster so how can we blame Sig or the holster makers?
I am not sure we can lay the blame Soley with either and that is my point.

This is satire, right? Are you actually saying that a gun going off in a kydex holster is the fault of the holster? If yes, I put it to you: What is to be done with regards to holster design such that P320's stop going off inside them? Clearly, Sig needs to design, manufacture and sell their own advanced proprietary holster and put out some sort of legal disclaimer that shields them from lawsuits [laughs] if you carry their intricate, complicated, and fragile gun in anything other than their proprietary holster. They would, of course, need a government contract to provide this proprietary holster for every issued M17/18. Not a bad idea, really.

Guys. Are you serious with this shit? There's nothing a kydex holster should be able to do to a duty weapon of any make or manufacture to get it to go off, short of not enclosing the trigger guard and letting foreign objects in, and last I checked, that was kind of like, the thing a holster is supposed to do. This stuff right here is what the kids today are calling "cope." You love your 320, but you won't carry it in a holster because a holster might make it go off. This has to be me not getting that you're rinsing me with some satire. It just has to be. I'm flabbergasted.

^^ The Holsters in question are NOT Kydex Holsters! Duty Holsters, the vast majority of which are made by Safariland, are completely different that a Kydex Holster. They are often described as a gun bucket, and unlike Kydex, they have a large opening, especially large if designed to accommodate a Weapon Light. They permit the Pistol to drop in and move around a little bit. They simply cannot be ruled out as a contributing factor here.

quote:

Originally posted by P220 Smudge:...

Stuff like this, and calling people "jackals" and "bottom-feeders" puts you on the other end of the spectrum from guys who swear every 320 is just waiting for you to drop your guard and then it'll shoot your dick off.

Just be careful not to paint everyone in the middle who has concerns and an open mind with that broad hyperbole brush.

I never used the term "jackals", and when I do, it is in the proper context of individuals behaving in such manner, that have earned it.

As for "bottom feeders", read for context. You will plainly see I was using that as a literal description of actual bottom feeding life forms, as a reference point for how low the grifters have stooped to become enrichened in money and position in the "influencer" world.

I am in the middle, and not broad brushing. I just have not picked up the drum to beat in this band.


Please refrain from talking for everyone else as if you have access to their mind while using "everyone the middle" as your body armor.
If you feel I've called you out, address that.
My mind is wide open on this.



Make a note, this will be very much along the line as the shit show COVID crap, and again, there is a large majority of people who are following the same behaviors as we saw here over 5 years ago.

FWIW. I do not own a P320, or any striker fired pistol. I have not found a personal reason to want or need one. Every pistol I own is a SIG P series, and with exception of three of them being DAK, everything else are all DA/SA. And a handful of DA revolvers.

Certainly the issue needs to be properly addressed, by industry experts in firearms design, engineering, manufacture, proof testing, and such.

The damage that is being done will affect not only SIG, but eventually (and not to distant) all firearms owners and others that will fall in the shadow of this debacle.

And a great deal of that damage is coming from actual morons (I mean that in its literal use) and ignorant people who have no good business pretending to be experts.

At this point, I am unconvinced that the P320 "reported" firing incidents with no direct input by the user are a result of the P320's design or manufacture.
But I do believe that there are enough reports to warrant investigation, and that is in process.

Look at the number of posts of these questionable "test/demonstration/investigative diagnosing" videos and the discussion that appears to be supportive of them, and frame them and my comments to show me where I am wrong, and to whom I have injured, and I will be quick to apologize.

quote:

Originally posted by Black92LX:
Because you are correct no one can replicate anything at this point holster or no holster so how can we blame Sig or the holster makers?
I am not sure we can lay the blame Soley with either and that is my point.

If you're prosecuting Sig for criminal negligence, then I think there's enough reasonable doubt to get Sig a 'Not guilty' verdict, b/c as you put, how much of a role do the holsters play in UDs?

If you're suing Sig in a civil trial, you only need 'preponderance of evidence,' and IMHO, it's not looking good for Sig. A successful lawsuit doesn't have to place 100% fault on a single party either. A jury could for example, assign 80% of fault on Sig and 10% fault of Safariland (or whichever holster-maker) and 10% fault on the user. If they award the plaintiff $10 million, Sig would be on the hook for $8M of that.

If I were a major holster manufacturer like Safariland, I'd stop making holsters for P320s and issue a recall/buyback of all existing P320 holsters. I know some ppl would interpret that as a strong sign of culpability; however, if someone were to sue you for negligent holster design, then the plaintiff would have to convince a jury that it was the holster's fault and not the P320, which I see as a much more difficult task than blaming the gun or user.

quote:

Originally posted by nhracecraft:
^^ The Holsters in question are NOT Kydex Holsters! Duty Holsters, the vast majority of which are made by Safariland, are completely different that a Kydex Holster. They are often described as a gun bucket, and unlike Kydex, they have a large opening (especially large if designed to accommodate a Weapon Light) and they permit the Pistol to drop in and move around a little bit. They simply cannot be ruled out as a contributing factor here.

I have a 6354RDSO light-bearing holster and a few other older Safariland duty holsters. They're made from Kydex wrapped around a form, regardless of whether it's meant to take a gun with a light an optic, or neither. Maybe your mental definition of a "Kydex holster" is a specific thing like a concealed carry holster, but Safariland duty holsters are indeed made from sheets of heavy Kydex. When I made my post, understand I did so with at least a little bit of experience with these particular holsters and drawing and shooting with them on the clock. I still can't see how a Safariland is any more of a contributing factor than any other brand.

^^ The Safari-Laminate & STX Tactical material of the 6000 series Holsters is Boltaron, and while it is a Kydex-type material and the construction/forming methods are similar, it is different in that it is MUCH thicker than the typical concealment type 'Kydex Holster'. The materials interact differently with the holstered pistol and are much different in terms of retention method(s), as well as fit and flexibility. It's not a 'mental definition', and in this case I believe the distinction matters.

For the record, I was NOT calling out or pointing a finger at Safariland in particular with respect to what is happening with holstered P320 Pistols. I was only indicating that the vast majority of duty holsters on the market/in service are in fact Safariland Holsters. And yeah, I already knew you had a few.

quote:

Originally posted by SigSentry:
Now Wyoming guy does a video explaining how the striker safety is disabled with the trigger moved to the rear, take-up, slop, whatever word you want to use, stopping at the wall. No Sh*t Sherlock, that's how guns work, like a revolver will complete the cylinder turn way before the hammer is dropped. I suppose some people are of the belief that since there is so little resistance to pull it to the wall, nothing is happening. SIG replaces the trigger in the voluntary upgrade to alleviate the drop safe issue but didn't want to increase the return spring weight to counter ANY friction that might act upon it, or design/install a trigger safety to stop it short of a finger allowing it to move fully rearward.

Yep, Wyoming Guy's video shows what any striker gun will do when its trigger is pulled far enough to perch the striker lug on the edge of the sear. Then the slide is wiggled and the striker drops.

quote:

SIG thought they were so cool that they didn't want to copy Glock's safe-action trigger homework?

I think it's fair to say that SIG was arrogant in not providing a trigger blade safety with P320.

I’m a retired engineer and a gun nut. I was wondering what a non-gun person would think about all this. So I asked my wife, who is about as far away from the gun community as you can get without being an anti. She knows I have a lot of guns and shoot them a lot, but doesn’t know that I own a 320. After I laid out that the guns were going off in holsters almost exclusively worn by police, she looked at me like I was an idiot and said “it’s the cops”. We do have friends who are both active and retired LEOs, so I don’t know how that influenced her view, but we in the gun community may see Sig as responsible or to a much lesser extent holster companies as responsible, but the public in general may view it differently.

The gun, the holster, the person.

In these incidents, the gun is not variable, the holster is the next least variable, the person is the most variable.

Which is the least reliable?

As to the assertion, holstered P320s fire without the trigger being pulled, here’s what’s we know so far:

1. People make mistakes
2. A holstered P320 can fire if foreign objects press the trigger
3. Some holster designs allow this to happen
4. Not even one gun out of reportedly 100s of incidents has been shown by the FBI, all the internet influencers in the world, all the lawyers and their experts, etc. to do it again

Something can be done about 1, 2, and 3.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: trapper189,

quote:

Originally posted by P220 Smudge:

quote:

Originally posted by Black92LX:
That’s exactly my point. These fire control groups have become so intricate and complicated have we come to the point where simply wrapping some plastic around it and slapping it on our belt is no my point…

Guys. Are you serious with this shit? There's nothing a kydex holster should be able to do to a duty weapon of any make or manufacture to get it to go off, short of not enclosing the trigger guard and letting foreign objects in, and last I checked, that was kind of like, the thing a holster is supposed to do. This stuff right here is what the kids today are calling "cope." You love your 320, but youcarry it in a holster because a holster might make it go off. This has to be me not getting that you're rinsing me with some satire. It just has to be. I'm flabbergasted.

I am simply asking questions. And here is the one you have yet to answer.

Since it is soley the guns fault and has NOTHING AT ALL TO DO WITH THE HOLSTER, then WHY ARE THE GUNS NOT FIRING UNCOMMANDED OUTSIDE OF A HOLSTER?????????
Or why has it not happened in a leather holster???

quote:

If I were a major holster manufacturer like Safariland, I'd stop making holsters for P320s and issue a recall/buyback of all existing P320 holsters. I know some ppl would interpret that as a strong sign of culpability; however, if someone were to sue you for negligent holster design, then the plaintiff would have to convince a jury that it was the holster's fault and not the P320, which I see as a much more difficult task than blaming the gun or user.

I think SIG would sue Safariland if they were to do something like that. Let’s be honest, if Safariland doesn’t make a holster for a particular duty gun that gun is not going to end up getting sold to any large agency. SIG is suing the State of Washington because of their ban on the use of the 320. Whether you think that case has merit or not, it’s still a lawsuit and based upon SIG’s handling of this fiasco, I have no doubt that they would sue Safariland if they stopped making holsters for the 320 because SIG would argue that such an action unreasonably singles out SIG and makes it more difficult to sell their product.

quote:

Originally posted by Black92LX:

I am simply asking questions. And here is the one you have yet to answer.

Since it is soley the guns fault and has NOTHING AT ALL TO DO WITH THE HOLSTER, then WHY ARE THE GUNS NOT FIRING UNCOMMANDED OUTSIDE OF A HOLSTER?????????
Or why has it not happened in a leather holster???

That’s a fair question. I don’t know that there haven’t been Uncommanded discharges outside of a holster, but if there have been they certainly haven’t been covered significantly. However, if you’re asking that question, I think it also only makes sense to ask the question - why isn’t this occurring with other popular striker fired LE pistols? Why is it only SIG and not Glock, HK, S&W M&P, when all of those pistols are in very common use by law enforcement?

Personally, I think SIG is going to end up facing serious liability damages, but it might not be for a design defect. I think SIG may ultimately end up being found negligent in their marketing as I think that would be far easier to demonstrate. Let me explain - If we were talking about hair trigger target pistols, marketed as Olympic competition guns firing in the holstering process, it would be obvious that people were using the wrong gun for the application. I don’t think most people would consider a target pistol with a trigger measured in ounces to be an appropriate pistol for LE or military use. While it remains to be seen what exactly if any manufacturing defect is present in the P320, it is a fairly unique design in that there is no interlock mechanism that prevents the trigger from moving enough to disengage its safety systems. Perhaps what is being demonstrated is that a LE or combat use striker fired pistol MUST have some type of trigger dingus, interlock, grip safety, whatever in order to be able to withstand the rigors of the anticipated use without firing unexpectedly. If that’s the case, I’d say that you could absolutely make the argument that SIG was negligent in marketing a pistol whose safety systems are so easily disengaged as being a combat rated, ready for law enforcement and military use pistol when in fact the pistol is too intolerant of rough handling.