Got this from my Sig rep this morning

Ask your rep if the manual safety version will be available again too.

Is true, a local dealer near me recently had them in stock.

I know we’ve been down this road before but I can’t remember the answer…. Will the grip modules from the other P320’s fit the .45 version?

See a whole bunch on GB.

quote:

Will the grip modules from other 320's fit the .45 version?

No, and apparently the FCU is different.

Fingers crossed for a full-sized model with a thumb safety.

^^ Thanks for that

Even if the grip module fit on the .45 FCU, the .45 magazines wouldn't fit in the 9mm grip module.

True

Hopefully it stays in production long enough, and proves popular enough, for Wilson Combat to make a run of .45 Compact grip modules.

I don't own a 45acp P320 but I think the only differences between the 45 FCU and the 9mm FCU are the takedown safety lever and the slide release, which are caliber specific and some slight dimensional differences on the actual FCU frame. I've tried to find actual references to these differences but I haven't been able to get any answers anywhere.

So if anyone here owns both some actual side by side comparison pictures would be greatly appreciated. I don't need you to break out the micrometer or anything, just some photos highlighting the actual differences in parts would be awesome.

quote:

Originally posted by Paten:
Ask your rep if the manual safety version will be available again too.

I just sent an email. I probably wont hear back until Monday.

I'd like to see the X-Ten offered in 45. I like the looks of that one, but have no desire to jump back into the 10mm game.

quote:

Originally posted by RogueJSK:
Hopefully it stays in production long enough ....

Bears repeating and was my first thought about the model.

There are many past examples of SIGs that people clamored for only to die on the vine when the actual demand didn’t materialize. If pistols chambered for 40 S&W were discontinued because of the cartridge’s unbearable recoil, what’s a Compact chambered for 45 ACP going to be like to shoot? (Yes, slightly sarcastic, but not entirely.)

Although I’m no fan of the round, I would be curious to fire one. If I decide to scratch a new cartridge itch, though, I’ll probably hold out for an XTEN.

quote:

Originally posted by sigfreund:

If pistols chambered for 40 S&W were discontinued because of the cartridge’s unbearable recoil, what’s a Compact chambered for 45 ACP going to be like to shoot? (Yes, slightly sarcastic, but not entirely.)

Wut? I thought the .40/.357 P320 was discontinued due to demand for 9mm. I'd like to see where it's said anywhere the .40S&W had unbearable recoil.
And the .45 Compact P320 has been on Sigs website this whole time, just out of production so the 9mm demand could be met. I guess demand must have dropped off enough so that other calibers can now resume production.

I'm hoping that with the resumption of availability of the .45 compact, it leads to Exchange kit availability as well. A .45 Compact purchase with a 10mm Exchange kit would be in my future then if possible.

quote:

Originally posted by Paten:
I thought the .40/.357 P320 was discontinued due to demand for 9mm. I'd like to see where it's said anywhere the .40S&W had unbearable recoil.

And why the increased demand for 9mm Luger over the 40 S&W?

Yes, some people remain obsessed about magazine capacities, evidently believing that there is a reasonable chance that having 18 rounds in a gun like the full size P320 will allow them to emerge victorious from a gunfight whereas 15 rounds might not.

Much more common, however, are comments I have seen myself about the (unsurprising) greater recoil of the more powerful 40 over the 9mm. Some people rationalize their acceptance of the lower power of the latter by pointing to “better bullets” while ignoring the fact that all other premium handgun cartridges also benefit from the same better technologies. And for some reason, they don’t allow the better bullets justification to lead them to switch to even less powerful cartridges. It’s sort of like Schopenhauer’s comment concerning a different subject that it’s “a hired cab which we dismiss when we have reached our destination.” I.e., power doesn’t matter—until it does.

I won’t go farther into the rabbit hole of why the 9mm has become the most popular defensive handgun cartridge except to say that nothing succeeds like success. If an agency like the FBI says it’s okay for whatever reason (including the undeniable fact that it’s easier to teach novices to shoot it well than more powerful rounds), well, it must be okay. This is something that affects other law enforcement agencies in particular, especially when it saves them money. The cost thing also affects non-LE shooters’ decisions; the cost of ammunition is something I see mentioned here all the time: “It’s just as good and costs less,” is hard to argue against if one accepts the question that’s begged.

As for my observations, I have been a fan of the 40 S&W and owned guns chambered for the round pretty much since it was first made available. I switched my primary reliance to the 357 SIG only when it came along and I recognized its slightly better still terminal ballistics. My interest in the 40 and its decline in popularity are something I’ve therefore followed more than most people, I believe. So when I say that many people dislike the cartridge’s recoil and prefer the 9mm at least partially for that reason, that conclusion is based on more than a few years of paying attention to the issue.

Added: And to return to the original topic of this thread, even if recoil were not an issue, a pistol chambered for 45 ACP still has its disadvantages as compared with the far more popular 9mm: significantly lower magazine capacities and ammunition that is more expensive and sometimes less commonly available.

Added, part deux:
In thinking back about the issue of the 40’s recoil, it occurred to me that it might not always be the shooter’s unfamiliar sensitivity. I recall shooting a Glock chambered for the cartridge one time many years ago. Although I had had extensive experience shooting powerful handguns before that and several that were chambered for the 40 S&W, when shooting that gun it actually hurt my hand in a way I’d never experienced before. If other shooters felt something similar and their only experience with shooting the cartridge was with a Glock, then I could see how the round gained the reputation for being painful to shoot.

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

More money this forum has cost me... I've been wanting one of these for some time. hopefully my LGS gets some

The most comfortable to shoot subcompact .45 I have ever shot was the Sig P245. Hopefully the new(ish) sub P320 .45 will be the similar...

The P320 Full Size would be what I want.

I'm just hoping they release a compact 10mm P320 soon. The X Ten is just too big to make sense for my needs.