I have an M17. I was wondering if applying the manual safety before holstering would protect me from this problem. Does the manual safety block the striker or does it only block the trigger?

I have not heard of or seen any reports of a P320 going off in the holster or otherwise, with a manual safety engaged.

The problem is non-existent. Keep your finger off the trigger unless you are ready to shoot. Use a proper holster and follow other gun safety protocols. The safety WILL prevent the gun from firing with a trigger pull when activated, but it should never come to that.

You say this based on what?

In the main thread on this, I posted a link to a large, multiplaintiff (where several of the plaintiffs are LEOs and LE organizations) that documents a large number of incidents. The outcome of this lawsuit will go a long way in determining if the issue is a defect in the gun.

And if you want to blame bad gun handling on the part of the carriers for all these incidents, why isn't this happening with, Glocks, M&Ps, etc.? Why aren't there large scale lawsuits against those manufacturers? Are those brands magically protected from bad gun handling? Or maybe the P320 has a defect/weakness that other striker guns don't.

quote:

Originally posted by Fredward:
The problem is non-existent. Keep your finger off the trigger unless you are ready to shoot. Use a proper holster and follow other gun safety protocols. The safety WILL prevent the gun from firing with a trigger pull when activated, but it should never come to that.

As I've asked in other threads about this, how come this only happens in holsters?

If the guns were going off by themselves, they'd also go off in gun safes, on headboards, on coffee tables, everywhere guns are placed.

But they don't. They only go off in holsters.

quote:

..why isn't this happening with, Glocks, M&Ps, etc.? Why aren't there large scale lawsuits against those manufacturers?

They have been, just not a recent.

I know one of Glock's attorneys.
They've been sued "a ridiculous amount of times" since the 90s for "accidental discharges".
Glock went through exactly what SIG's going through now - just 20-30 years ago.

A quick Google search will reveal a plethora of them - the overwhelimng majority just as ridiculous as the 320 suits.

Take this moron, trying to install a WML on a loaded gun at the range. Sues Glock citing it should have had a manual safety.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/ne...accident-loaded.html

Or how about the Chavez lawsuit mentioned in the article? He forgets his gun is in the backseat and his 3 year old son shoots him. Says the Glock should have had a grip safety and the trigger is too light.

The Milwaukee PD was the epicenter of the recent spate of claims. They switched to the G45. Let's see if they keep having problems or not.

Sure, the manual safety would give you an extra margin of safety, which is no doubt why the military adopted this version. But if you're going to use a safety, you must be consistent about it. For holstering and carry, engage the safety. Train yourself to wipe off/down/whatever (disengage) the safety after you clear the holster and the gun comes up on target. (Keep your finger off/away from the trigger unless/until you actually intend to fire.) Engage it again as the gun comes back down and you re-holster. Continue the exercise until you're proficient and it becomes a habit. Forgetting to disengage your safety when you need to shoot is more dangerous than your shooting yourself. Most self-shootings are survivable. Being shot by your attacker because you were unable to get a shot off in time may not be.

I have personally chosen to carry a "safety-less" P320 (and the similarly operating P365). But that's just me.

Any “it just went off” incidents involving Glocks and probably all M&P’s, I feel comfortable enough dismissing as unsafe (often tragically) weapon handling and or weapon storage. I do not have that degree of comfort with the P320 series pistols.

I posted this commentary some time ago in another thread, but I believe it's relevant here again:
==============

For those who believe that a P320 could fire without the trigger’s being pressed/pulled to the rear: How? How could it happen?

The reason I ask the question is primarily because of one part in the pistol’s striker assembly, the “striker safety” whose function is to block the forward movement of the striker unless it is moved out of the way by the action of pulling the trigger. Don’t pull/press the trigger, and the striker safety prevents the striker from hitting the cartridge primer.


“Well, what if the striker safety malfunctioned and didn’t stay in position to block the striker?”
In that case, there would have to be another mechanical malfunction at the same time. The striker would have to be released from its normal position where it’s held captive by the sear. It has been posited that the retention hook on the striker could somehow be jarred or vibrate off its normal position in contact with the sear. That’s evidently why SIG added a second engagement point to the sear ahead of the normal ledge that keeps the striker held in position at the rear. If the lug somehow slipped off the first ledge, it would be stopped by the second.

Striker lug:




Two sear engagement points:




Some Internet experts decry the fact that the engagement between the sear and striker lug is very small, and so it is. If it were deeper and rougher and the striker spring were stronger it would be harder to disengage the sear from the striker when pulling the trigger. How many of us P320 shooters would like that? If you have a Classic line SIG like a P226 or P229, how much engagement is there between the hammer and sear when the hammer is cocked? If you’re frightened by the P320’s mechanism, a helpful hint: Don’t look.

And that takes us back to the striker safety. To reiterate, it blocks the striker unless the trigger is pulled. But even if it were completely missing from the assembly, that wouldn’t release the striker.

So, if the striker safety blocks the striker and the sear holds the striker back until the trigger is pulled, how was it possible for the pre-“upgrade” guns to fire when dropped in a certain way?
In the same way it’s possible to fire the gun by pulling the trigger. The difference was that the trigger was “pulled” to the rear by its inertia: the gun stopped moving when it hit the surface, but the trigger didn’t. It moved to the rear far enough to disengage the striker safety and sear, thereby allowing the striker to do its thing of firing the round.

That fact about the original triggers isn’t something SIG is evidently happy to have bandied about, but did they in fact recognize it and do something about it? The answer, I believe, is obvious from an examination of the original triggers and the upgraded models. The originals were solid at the rear whereas the new types are hollowed out at the rear to reduce their weight, and thereby keep their inertia from being enough to fire the gun if it’s dropped. Some (all?) of SIG’s straight triggers are even skeletonized to further reduce their weight.

So, to return to my question, if the P320 can be fired without pulling the trigger in the normal way by the shooter’s finger, pressure of a foreign object on the trigger, or by being dropped from a great enough height to allow the trigger’s inertia to perform the mechanical task: How? How it is possible? (Please cite examples and show your work.)

The actions of the striker safety, striker, and other features of the P320 are illustrated very well by the videos of SIG Mechanics. https://www.youtube.com/c/SIGMECHANICS

quote:

Originally posted by erikpolcrack:
I have an M17. I was wondering if applying the manual safety before holstering would protect me from this problem. Does the manual safety block the striker or does it only block the trigger?

You don't 'need protection from this problem' but to answer your question, from the SIG website:

"The SIG SAUER P320 is offered with an optional ambidextrous manual safety. The manual safety mechanically blocks the movement of the sear, preventing release of the striker."

The function and operation Manual Safety is explained in the P320 Operators Manual provided with your Pistol. It's on pages 20-21 of P320 Manual (dated 12/26/18) at the following link:

https://www.sigsauer.com/pub/m...DATED-12-26-2018.pdf

It's ALWAYS a good idea to read the manual...

quote:

Originally posted by nhracecraft:

quote:

Originally posted by erikpolcrack:
I have an M17. I was wondering if applying the manual safety before holstering would protect me from this problem. Does the manual safety block the striker or does it only block the trigger?

You don't 'need protection from this problem' but to answer your question, from the SIG website:

"The SIG SAUER P320 is offered with an optional ambidextrous manual safety. The manual safety mechanically blocks the movement of the sear, preventing release of the striker."

The function and operation Manual Safety is explained in the P320 Operators Manual provided with your Pistol. It's on pages 20-21 of P320 Manual (dated 12/26/18) at the following link:

https://www.sigsauer.com/pub/m...DATED-12-26-2018.pdf

It's ALWAYS a good idea to read the manual...

The M-17 manual does not mention the sear or the striker. It only says the safety will block the movement of the trigger bar, thus preventing the trigger being pulled. That is why I asked the question in the original post.

^^^It's my understanding that the M17 is no different than any other P320, excluding a sticker/QR Code, unique coloration of 'some' parts, possibly the packaging, and as you indicate, the manual, which may or may not be the one provided with the .mil version. Just as an example, I believe there have been no less than three versions of the 'M17' available from SIG in the commercial market. It all depends on which variant one has...This is 'Classic SIG', by the way!

That said, it's interesting that the P320-M17 manual currently on SIG's website (dated 5/30/19) indicates, as you say, "The manual safety mechanically blocks the movement of the trigger bar so the trigger cannot be pressed to the rear." One has to wonder...

https://www.sigsauer.com/media...PDATED_5_30_2019.pdf

Welcome to SIGforum

When I went through the P320 armorer's course, they didn't address the manual safety versions at all. I've also never owned one with a manual safety, nor does anyone that I know, so I've never had a chance to really examine how it works. This thread got me intersted, so I watched a couple of youtube videos.

In this one, he's showing how to remove it, but you get a pretty good look at the parts and how they operate in relation to the rest of the FCU (he gets to the safety lever portion of the video around 5:30):



It appears that the manual safety functions by locking the disconnector in the down position by means of a detent. That disengages the trigger bar from the sear and prevents the gun from being fired by pulling the trigger. So far as I can tell, actuating the manual safety lever does nothing to block the sear.

So assuming my understanding is correct (like I said, I've never been trained on it, nor have I actually handled one in person), if you're of the school of thought that the P320 will just go off on it's own due to a flaw in the design of the sear and striker engagement surfaces, having the manual safety engaged will do absolutely nothing to protect you from this.

If, however, you attribute these reports of unintended discharches to accidental pulls of the trigger by a finger or some other foreign object, the manual safety could offer some protection against a negligent discharge.

quote:

large, multiplaintiff

buls***
if lawsuits give you any comfort the above suit actually acknowledges in its filing that the manual safety would have prevented the discharges being asserted.

A very simple google search will show how to put the M17/18 safety into the 320.

Kinda like putting the manual safety into the 365 like I did.

This reeks of a troll post.

quote:

Originally posted by Mars_Attacks:
A very simple google search will show how to put the M17/18 safety into the 320.

Kinda like putting the manual safety into the 365 like I did.

This reeks of a troll post.

The manual safety P320 FCU has an extra machined hole that the standard non-safety FCU doesn't have so you can't just do that without having the FCU machined for it.

quote:

buls***
if lawsuits give you any comfort the above suit actually acknowledges in its filing that the manual safety would have prevented the discharges being asserted.

Which, if true, would indicate that the NDs were in fact caused by the trigger being pulled, not a mechanical fault of the gun. Hence a user problem, not an equipment problem.

quote:

Originally posted by 92fstech:
Which, if true, would indicate that the NDs were in fact caused by the trigger being pulled, not a mechanical fault of the gun.

Irrefutable logic.

quote:

Originally posted by Mars_Attacks:
This reeks of a troll post.

Whether or not it is- the members of SIGforum are not emotionally invested in accusations made against SIG-Sauer products. We discuss these things quite objectively, in my opinion. So, if someone wishes to troll us, they will need some other approach.

If someone wants to troll us, all they need to do is trash talk this forum and/or its members, and then I'll be on them like white on rice.