Look, it's tiring to read the childish snarky comments. You have taken offense where no offense was intended. If you are butthurt by anything I said, get over it because nothing was said by me with malice aforethought. Get over the tribe mentality because you're beginning to make me wonder why I troubled myself to start a thread.

Thoughtful answers are welcome. Kindergarten-like behavior is not. Here's a bit of advice: move your thoughts to another thread if you can't say something productive.

Thank you.

quote:

Originally posted by p226n:
I leave my SIGs box stock without modification.

I've been there and done that and have come to the conclusion that some mods may be good and some are without question bad.

The engineers that design and test these guns are more qualified than I am to decide what works for a particular pistol. I am content with that concept, so after numerous suboptimal experiences of attempting to improve on the manufacturer's engineers' design I now leave the weapon alone and keep it as it comes out of the box.

Sig has to make weapons that suit many people so compromises have to be made. But some people like this trigger or that trigger or they like these grips or those grips or they like certain sights so they make the weapon how they like it. What they feel comfortable with. Having said that, I have six Sigs and all are stock with the exception of my 320 which has a flat trigger and X series grip module.

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

quote:

Originally posted by p226n:
..you're beginning to make me wonder why I troubled myself to start a thread...

You're not the Lone Ranger here.

Kevin Harvick doesn't have to be a motor/chassis/suspension/tire engineer to know that a race car be set up in a way that makes his driving better.

Doug Koenig doesn't have to be a firearms designer, metals engineer, or world-class gunsmith to know that some modifications allow him to shoot more effectively.

Regardless of craft, those who aspire to a higher levels of performance understand that many factory tools are designed for use by the lower-skilled user. If you prefer to keep your tools in a factory-designed state, so be it. Some of us prefer our tools to be sharper.

Fritz, your thinly-veiled insults aside, I get it that you don't have to be an engineer or metallurgist to enjoy mods to your own particular weapon. And based upon his reputation here, I have no doubt whatsoever that Mr. Gray and his team do fabulous work. In fact, if I ever wanted any substantial mods to my weapons, I think Mr. Gray would be at or near the top of the list of those that I would consider.

My past experiences, as a few others have noted, have not been what I had hoped they would be. I have spent large amounts of money, for instance, with a nationally known 'smith who essentially ruined a brand new Combat Commander many years ago. Other mods that I have toyed with have been more useful, others less so.

I am just personally content now with leaving them box-stock because they work and for me, at my ahem 'lower-skilled user' level (nice one fritz), that's my number one requirement. I pull trigger, gun goes bang.

No doubt there are reasons that others choose to modify their own weapons. I have absolutely no problem with that, no judgement from me, I am happy for those folks.

quote:

Originally posted by p226n:
nice one fritz

Thanks!

I don't care for 3-dot sights, so those get knocked off and replaced pretty quickly. I also like more texture on my grips, so Hogue G10s replace the factory plastic if it's a model that didn't come with them. Otherwise, out of the box is fine with me.

It's too bad the thread went sideways, I enjoy the discussion. As the first one to be responded to by the OP asking what type of engineer I was...I didn't take it personally and am happy to tackle that head on.

I don't question that (in most circumstances) the best way to keep a reliable gun reliable, would be to keep it stock. I do question the notion that the gun company engineers know best or that what they designed is the most "reliable" outcome.

First, did the Sig engineers know best when they put scallops in the P226 frame rails resulting in frame cracking with heavy use? These same engineers had to "modify" their own design. Similar issue with the early Beretta 92/M9. Every new mechanical device goes through a refinement process on the 1st gen, so that blows the infallible engineer theory out from the gate.

Next, once we have a mature and reliable design...the same (or different) engineers will keep changing it for a wide variety of reasons. Could be market preference, adding "custom" mods like beavertails, undercutting the trigger guard, better triggers etc. Sometimes going so far as to offer "semi-custom" options from the factory so it's ready to go "out of the box." Other mods to the original design may hurt reliability like switching to MIM parts for cost savings, using a plastic trigger etc. Still other mods may just be to minimize parts and improve commonality or move to an easier manufacturing process like abandoning all folded metal Sig slides and just going stainless for all.

I also don't think (but have no evidence) that the heavy mainsprings are just for reliability. I suspect it is also to hit a desired DA/SA trigger weight for their primary Mil/LE market as well. Heck, look at how absurd NYPD is with their trigger weight requirements demanding they be heavier than stock!

Stock or Box Stock?

Or do you put a stock on it?

This thread has to stock!

Rhino, what are you babbling about?

I like to put ice in my scotch.

I also like to keep some guns "box stock," and modify others.

To each his own.

When it comes to the SIGs, I have to say that putting the SRT in my P225 was a revelation.

There is a place for tricked out custom, and a place for factory stock. In my safe.

Actually I was interested in what the definition of stock vs box stock is, along with a feeble attempt at humor, which failed.

quote:

Originally posted by RHINOWSO:
Actually I was interested in what the definition of stock vs box stock is, along with a feeble attempt at humor, which failed.

Factory, stock, box stock, these terms are generally interchangeable. I would interpret any to mean "commercially available mass produced standard model." Or "In the same condition it left the manufacturer, save typical use and wear."

One of my favorite quotes about engineers is as follows- “There comes a point in every project to shoot the engineer and begin production”. And I find it to be so true.

In the firearms industry, many of the engineers are not shooters. They work in a vacuum of concepts and physics. Many work for a gun company this week, and Coleman stoves next week. Yes, there are rare examples of where engineers are shooters. SIG employs one who is a great shooter and a brilliant mind. But, those guys are the exception and not the rule. And engineers in the industry often don’t like outside input.

It does happen. Look at the Gen5 Glocks. The major changes in the Gen5......started in the after market. Engineers then took those changes and made them work as a factory offering. I bet it would have never occurred if the FBI hadn’t demanded it, but what you see in a factory offering from Glock all started in after market modifications. And man, talking about knocking it out of the park. The Gen5 is awesome right out of the box.

Large ships are just hard to turn. And engineers just don’t like input or change, even if it makes the product better. Just because the engineers are doing it, it doesn’t mean it is best.

Cool story bro. Who cares what other people do with their Sigs. It is their gun, their money, etc.

quote:

Originally posted by jljones:
Just because the engineers are doing it, it doesn’t mean it is best.

Yep. I married an engineer. I get to hang out with a bunch of engineers. Spoiler alert: they’re not always right, and they’re not always smarter than everyone else, no matter who tries to push that nonsense.

quote:

Originally posted by pedropcola:
You kind of got on your high horse there a bit. Would you ask that same engineering degree question to John Moses Browning? I fucking doubt it.

People ask this very same question to JMB all the time. Then they install an 18# mainspring in their 1911's.

I like my guns mostly stock, but have dabbled in idiot proof (mostly) mods like mainsprings, sights and grips.

I screwed up the trigger bar on my Glock 19 by over polishing it. Not a problem since it's a $15 part to replace.

Shoot what you like, like what you shoot. Mod all you like as long as it still shoots!

I leave some of mine "stock" and chose to personalize others. They're mine so the choice is mine. If I screw them up, the responsibility is mine.

It's an interesting topic. To bad personalities got in the way with some replies...

All this talk of engineers, you seem to be forgetting about the accountants and the lawyers who also determine the final product that comes off the factory floor.

The way that the level of quality is going these days is truly sad. I find on most gun forums that many new guns, especially handguns have to be returned to the factory for some reason or another. What has caused this? Could it be that the gun makers have to make more guns in less time aka cookie cutter production? Way too many pistols have to be sent back for repair because in my opinion they were built by kids just out of trade school (read that they work cheaper) and the manufactures have gotton rid of the old-time craftsmen that we're proud of their work and put their heart and souls into it. Also the bottom line has replaced much of the quality that used to come out of factories such as Smith and Wesson. Could it be that the value of West German Sigs and pre-lock Smith's has gone through the roof because of better quality than what is coming down the pike now? Oh sure the new ones will shoot and go bang but for how long? I will keep my old school Sigs and Smiths, you guys can have the rest of the junk. JM2CW