quote:

Maybe, a short trigger with no trigger safety is more susceptible.

That's all I'm saying.

quote:

Hiney

posted December 29, 2022 11:11 AM Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Paten:
quote:
Originally posted by roboster2013:
I do however, wish Sig offered more 320 choices with a manual safety, and not just the M17 and M18.


The only other current P320 available with a manual safety is a compact model, 320C-9-BSS-MS-MA.


You can buy the safety from Sig and install it yourself. Someone here has done exactly that in a thread here. Or you can buy an FCU with a safety from AB Prototype but since they modified the FCU, the warranty is voided. I don't know if installing the safety you get from Sig voids the warranty.

Thanks for the reply. I’d rather not void the warranty, so for now I guess it’s either the M17 or 18.

I guess I’ll drop a couple more pennies in. I personally don’t think the 320 is necessarily unsafe without a manual safety, but I do think it is safer with one. I kinda wish my Glocks had one as well. But they don’t, so I’ve done what I consider is the next best thing and installed a Striker Control Device. That way I can apply thumb pressure to the backplate when holstering.

Video wasn't clear, but it looks like he exits the rear of a small 4dr car, the gun is exposed and his shirt or cover garment is halfway over the firearm perhaps even in between the gun and his body, wedged into the holster. Hard to tell.

Back in 2017 when all this came to a head G&A did a good article on the sensitive internals in the drop issue, the solution/fix and testing to ensure the drop issue was resolved.

Link

From that article,

To date, SIG Sauer has sold approximately 500,000 P320 pistols since it debuted in 2014. There are three documented cases of unintended discharges from within the law enforcement community and only one in the civilian market. The latter was not formally reported to SIG Sauer. All four of these incidents have occurred within the last year; two of the four were found to be negligent, while the other two are still under investigation. The sole civilian market incident was learned about on Aug. 6, 2017.

It was noted that at that time there were 4 total incidents, 3 LEO, one Civilian, and that two of the 4 were determined to be the falt of a negligent act. So two, out of 500,000 at the time were possible fault of the design, then again, they were dropped by the user in some manner in order to make it happen. Sig addressed and fixed that issue.

As for AD in the holster, there are over a million of these guns in the field, the majority of handling is most likely LEO, since these are tools of the job. In part of that video you see a law enforcement officer resting his arm and then his hand on the back of the firearm as holstered.

Since these are on the hip all the time, possibly if the holster contains clothing, debris, or a foreign object, press on the back of the gun moving it forward, and thus the trigger would move back and then fire.

These guns are not going off sitting still in the holster, carried my PPQ with a similar trigger, zero issues, as with the P320, which my
neighbor carries as well.

Since we as civilians, and undercover LEO's have to by nature carry covered, perhaps it's not simply the gun, but the method required where clothing is more apt to get into the way.

In the end, if you feel the P320 is the problem, and you can't get comfortable with it, sell it and get what you trust.

quote:

Originally posted by roboster2013:
Thanks for the reply. I’d rather not void the warranty, so for now I guess it’s either the M17 or 18.

So you don't want a factory compact P320 with a manual safety? Cause that is available right now. No modification necessary. No voided warranty.

So I decided, just as a data point pertinent to this discussion, it would be interesting to get some actual trigger pull weights.

I realize it's not a definitive test, the sample size is small, and it doesn't take into account the progression of the pull (although sbjectively, I can't feel much of a difference), but I broke out the trigger pull gauge tonight and did some testing.

I don't own a Glock anymore, but my FIL conveniently forgot to take his Gen 5 G19 home tonight after we to the range, so I used that as my Glock sample. The two P320s I used were my original gun purchased back in 2017 that was sent in for the upgrade, and my current duty gun, that was purchased in 2022 and came from the factory with the upgraded trigger. All three guns have factory triggers and have not been modified with any polishing or aftermarket parts (ETA: I guess that's an assumption on my part regarding the Glock. He's a relatively new gun owner, and not one to modify things like that. I know my P320s are completely stock)

All three guns were set in a vice, and each got 5 pulls with the lyman electronic gauge. All results rounded to two decimal places.

Glock 19:
4.00 lbs
3.41 lbs
4.18 lbs
3.79 lbs
3.49 lbs

Glock 19 Average: 3.77lbs


P320 Carry (Sent back to the factory for upgrade):
4.81 lbs
4.75 lbs
4.31 lbs
5.03 lbs
4.84 lbs

P320 Carry Average: 4.75lbs

P320 Full-Size Factory post-upgrade gun:
4.99 lbs
4.07 lbs
4.81 lbs
4.01 lbs
4.19 lbs

P320 Full-Size Average: 4.42 lbs


I'll be honest, I was suprised by the results. I expected the Glock trigger to be heavier, but that was not the case. Granted, it's a sample size of one, but the measured weights are close that I imagine even the variance between samples would not yield drastically different results.

quote:

Originally posted by 92fstech:
So I decided, just as a data point pertinent to this discussion, it would be interesting to get some actual trigger pull weights.

Thank you.
I thought about posting something similar, but decided it would be a waste of electrons.

I actually mentioned this in one of my previous posts. The Glock actually has a lighter trigger pull weight than the P320. But I also mentioned that it isn't the pull weight alone, it's the force profile.

Maybe someone can do a study on just the Stage 1 pull force? I think the 320 has a higher number than the Glock through the initial pull.

quote:

Originally posted by kkina:
I actually mentioned this in one of my previous posts. The Glock actually has a lighter pull weight than the P320. But I also mentioned that it isn't the pull weight alone, it's the force profile.

Maybe someone can do a study on just the Stage 1 pull force? I think the 320 has a higher number than the Glock through the initial pull.

Ok, so I just tried that too. As you stated, the pulls are very different. The Glock trigger has basically no wall...the pull just gradually increases until it breaks. The P320 has a light first stage, then it hits a wall. This makes it very difficult to measure with the equipment that I have, because if you bump into that wall, or go through the break, it throws the numbers off. What I did was take a piece of masking tape and mark on the trigger guard the point immediately before the wall on the P320, and the break on the Glock. It's not perfect, because it's still dependent on me getting a clean stop at the correct point, but here were the results:


Glock 19:
3.63 lbs
3.56 lbs
3.06 lbs
3.38 lbs
3.36 lbs

Glock 19 Average: 3.40 lbs


P320 Carry (Sent back to the factory for upgrade):
2.00 lbs
1.43 lbs
1.36 lbs
1.51 lbs
1.63 lbs

P320 Carry Average: 1.59 lbs

P320 Full-Size Factory post-upgrade gun:
1.56 lbs
1.41 lbs
1.14 lbs
1.42 lbs
1.36 lbs

P320 Full-Size Average: 1.39 lbs

Beautiful work, 92fstech! The pull on the 320 is less than half of the Glock.

This combined with the Sig's shorter Stage 1 travel is exactly what I'm talking about.

Fully cocked striker with no safety.

Please compare this to a 1911.

I still contend that practically speaking, there's not enough difference there to make one safer than the other, especially when using the larger muscle groups of your arm and hand to re-holster. I don't think I'd be able to detect a snagged trigger with either of them before it was too late.

What I do know, is that with this discussion at the forefront of my mind, I made DARN sure to make sure that my trigger was clear every time I put my gun back in the holster today on the range, and made sure that the others did as well. My son also got some good practice covering the hammer of his CZ75D with his thumb as he reholstered. If nothing else, this thread has been a good reminder, and hopefully makes us all a little safer regardless of what we're carrying.

OK. Well, I still say that it's not about what the operator feels, it's how likely a trigger will be pulled during incidental contact.

A piece of clothing brushes against two triggers. One has a longish, heavier pull, the other has a short, light pull. Which one is more likely to go off?

If the operator doesn't feel it, then they're both going to go off in the given scenario. The only safety advantage that the pull weight provides is that it give the operator a chance to feel the snagged trigger before the gun fires. Both are relatively light pulls. Compared to a DA/SA gun, both are extremely light. The P320 actually requires more force to discharge the gun. Length of pull might be a factor if you realize that something is snagged and need some time to stop your motion before the gun is discharged, but at the pull-weights and strokes that we're talking about that's more academic than reality. Both triggers are short and light enough that you're not likely to notice the extra effort exerted until after the gun goes bang.

Vigilance needs to be exercised when holstering any gun, even moreso a gun with a light trigger and no manual safety. Simply shoving a gun into a holster without visually ascertaining that the opening is clear of clothing or other hazards is a recipe for disaster. Carrying a gun is dangerous. At the end of the day we are responsible for our own safety and handling practices, and trying to blame the manufacturer over the design when the gun does exactly what it was designed to do, is just wrong.

quote:

cut
posted December 29, 2022 07:11 PM Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by roboster2013:
Thanks for the reply. I’d rather not void the warranty, so for now I guess it’s either the M17 or 18.


So you don't want a factory compact P320 with a manual safety? Cause that is available right now. No modification necessary. No voided warranty.

Thanks for the reply. I have not seen any of these where I live. Do you know who might carry them?

You could ask your preferred dealer to order it for you. The SKU is 320C-9-BSS-MS-MA.

I bought mine on Gunbroker. Just do a search there on P320 MS and a page full of them will load. Add a -M17 and -M18 to remove those models from the search.

Edit: Just wanted to add that this is a Massachusetts compliant model, so it comes with 10 round magazines. The one I bought was used and came with 15 round magazines.

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

There's a dead horse being beaten MERCILESSLY in this thread...

'kkina' - As you indicated (back on page 5) that you've NEVER ACTUALLY HANDLED a P320, you might want to wander into your LGS and check one out...Just Sayin'

quote:

'kkina' - As you indicated (back on page 5) that you've NEVER ACTUALLY HANDLED a P320, you might want to wander into your LGS and check one out...Just Sayin'

You can do a surprising amount of failure analysis ex vivo.

quote:

If the operator doesn't feel it, then they're both going to go off in the given scenario.

Looks like we're working off different scenarios. The short, light trigger is more likely to go off from incidental contact. It's not about what the operator feels, and that he has a chance to pull back if he feels resistance. That's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about contact that the operator doesn't feel at all.

quote:

Originally posted by nhracecraft:
There's a dead horse being beaten MERCILESSLY in this thread...

I think a lot of good has come out of this thread. As a result of the comments, Sig Sauer may be releasing a new 1911 with no manual/grip safety.