Belgian Blue, I’m interested in hearing what you would have done differently to salvage that failed company from imminent bankruptcy with the benefit of hindsight after fifteen freaking years, four new factories, five new divisions, 1800 new employees and hundreds of innovative new products.

That’s my point. As one whose perspective is grounded in actual knowledge of this industry and of SIG SAUER, their people, processes, and their products in particular, I’m open to some fun alternative-history scenarios which would have yielded better results. I hope to read something more plausible than Newt’s Civil War revisionism.

quote:

Oh, not again! The good old days and old school Teutonic guns posts. Life must be very challenging for those "old school" types.

Great first post there, Rookie.

I am quite sure there are those here who can't appreciate the differences between the older SIGs and what is loosely passed off as a SIG Sauer product today. Just for your info, I have a pretty good idea what the US Military buys and believe me, that's not necessarily an automatic stamp of excellence.

While it's true that German SIG Sauer products may have occasionally had a rare issue, it's laughably absurd to attest the (NUMEROUS equally laughable) debacles from the current SIG Sauer brand to the internet. There is a reason that a vintage P228 in mint condition will sell for more than a current production "P228" on the current market. You can make all the excuses you want. You can be a SIG Sauer fan boi. It doesn't change the fact that SIG Sauer has very obviously removed many of the previous quality control steps and mandated manufacturing changes and outsourced in order to produce a cheaper product.

Being it your first post, you may not be aware of the decades of issues we (who have been here a while) have seen in newer SIG products. We've also seen products abruptly discontinued without support.

I say all this and yet I know there are people here who could look at a SIG 556 and a Swiss 551 side by side and not appreciate or comprehend the difference between the two. Similarly, there are those among us who couldn't appreciate the difference between a Wilson 1911 and a SIG 1911. Those are the people who SIG are catering to today.

And for the record... Life's really not as challenging as you might think for us "old school types" because, I for one have plenty of German (and Swiss) Sigs to last me a lifetime and then some. I suspect there are other "old school types" who would say the same.

quote:

Being it your first post, you may not be aware of the decades of issues we (who have been here a while) have seen in newer SIG products. We've also seen products abruptly discontinued without support.

And yet what he says could have come from any number of posts by knowledgeable long-time SF members in any number of threads we've had on this very subject. Maybe he's not so far off for a rookie.

quote:

Originally posted by Il Cattivo:

quote:

Being it your first post, you may not be aware of the decades of issues we (who have been here a while) have seen in newer SIG products. We've also seen products abruptly discontinued without support.

And yet what he says could have come from any number of posts by knowledgeable long-time SF members in any number of threads we've had on this very subject. Maybe he's not so far off for a rookie.

I couldn't help notice his response didn't address a single point that he quoted by Belgian Blue. The best he could do was call him old.

quote:

Originally posted by Keystoner:

quote:

Originally posted by Il Cattivo:

quote:

Being it your first post, you may not be aware of the decades of issues we (who have been here a while) have seen in newer SIG products. We've also seen products abruptly discontinued without support.

And yet what he says could have come from any number of posts by knowledgeable long-time SF members in any number of threads we've had on this very subject. Maybe he's not so far off for a rookie.

I couldn't help notice his response didn't address a single point that he quoted by Belgian Blue. The best he could do was call him old.

I am quite old, graduated boot camp decades ago. The point I addressed is that Blue Belgian's post is doted with self importance, arrogance and Xenophobism. Thanks God, we are entitled to own, collect and appreciate any gun we like. Being old school does not mean that looking down at other people is ok.
Blue Belgian's post and other similar posts in different forums, single out Ron Cohen, the CEO of Sig, as the vilan who ruined their Wagnerian dreams of the perfect gun world. I can't remember a single post that I have seen, related to any gun company that single out, by name, its CEO or any other person, with one exception.
Ron Cohen name sounds "foreign", "strange", "suspicious" to some people and they just don't like it. This dislike has nothing to do with Sigs' failures or successes.

quote:

Originally posted by P-35HP:

I am quite old, graduated boot camp decades ago. The point I addressed is that Blue Belgian's post is doted with self importance, arrogance and Xenophobism. Thanks God, we are entitled to own, collect and appreciate any gun we like. Being old school does not mean that looking down at other people is ok.
Blue Belgian's post and other similar posts in different forums, single out Ron Cohen, the CEO of Sig, as the vilan who ruined their Wagnerian dreams of the perfect gun world. I can't remember a single post that I have seen, related to any gun company that single out, by name, its CEO or any other person, with one exception.
Ron Cohen name sounds "foreign", "strange", "suspicious" to some people and they just don't like it. This dislike has nothing to do with Sigs' failures or successes.

Hi, and a warm welcome to Sigforum.

You’re observations are spot-on. For fifteen years Ron Cohen has been made out as the whipping boy for every real or imagined problem SIG has had. This anti-Cohen, anti-SIG SAUER attitude was started and perpetuated by a small but vocal group of malcontented elitist, Germanophilic collector types, and as you picked up some of this has carried with it a certain unpleasant tinge.

I work with SIG, my company leads in the field, I’m friends with Ron, and my technical knowledge has evolved over the years to give me a very wide and realistic view. My opinions have changed. That doesn’t stop a few people who live in the past from bloviating away about how Ron screwed up a dead company that went broke trying to make & sell an obsolete and problematic product. If you’d like to talk about the reality of SIG SAUER, there are a lot of good folks here to engage with.

-Bruce

quote:

Originally posted by Grayguns:
Belgian Blue, I’m interested in hearing what you would have done differently to salvage that failed company from imminent bankruptcy with the benefit of hindsight after fifteen freaking years, four new factories, five new divisions, 1800 new employees and hundreds of innovative new products.

That’s my point. As one whose perspective is grounded in actual knowledge of this industry and of SIG SAUER, their people, processes, and their products in particular, I’m open to some fun alternative-history scenarios which would have yielded better results. I hope to read something more plausible than Newt’s Civil War revisionism.

Bruce, first off I want to say that I have a great deal of respect for your input and point of view. You're a class act and I hope you know I respect that.

You mentioned that SIG was in “imminent bankruptcy”. I’d like to point out that a lot of businesses have been in this status and recovered. Colt for example, seems to court bankruptcy on a seemingly regular schedule. Many businesses use bankruptcy and the legal options associated with it as one of many financial tools as business as usual. While it’s certainly not an optimum situation, it’s not necessarily the death knell it’s made out to be. As I understand it, HK too has had their share of financial challenges. The key difference between HK and SIG is that HK doesn’t seem to lose focus on their mission statement. We don’t see a plethora of Rainbow Titanium USPs floating around. They seem to be more mission focused. While no company is perfect, I have seen far fewer complaints on HK products related to QA or functionality. Normally complaints are largely subjective. From what I’ve noted quality wise, US made HK products have seemed to fair better than US SIG equivalents vs. their respective German counterparts.

It’s been said we live in a Glock world. Love them or not, I believe it was Glock who put the squeeze on other manufacturers. I think the writing was on the wall in 1982 when Glock won the Austrian military contract over Steyr. It was at that point that other manufacturers should have largely dispensed with their alloy-framed legacy SA/DA pistols, and offered up a polymer framed striker fired alternative at a rock bottom price. I think SIG wasted far too many years chasing Glocks with P220 series pistols. I also believe it was folly to attempt to make a P220 series gun “competitive” price wise to Glock by outsourcing internal parts and cutting corners on QA.

Sure, they had the SIG PRO, introduced in 1998 a full 16 years after the Glock 17 was introduced. That’s 16 years of head start that Glock capitalized on gaining acceptance in Europe and the US. What SIG should have done was build a Glock killer back in the early 80’s. When SIG finally did offer up their version of a Glock, it missed the salient feature that would become the next benchmark for handgun design. The striker fired mechanism. Glock may not have invented the concept, but they sure as hell mainstreamed the concept. It was the 16 years it took SIG with the SIG PRO combined with the fact they apparently didn’t get the whole striker thing. In fact, when they took their next foray into a modernized polymer wonder pistol, it was the P250, with it’s innovative modular frame. But alas they went with a hammer-fired mechanism. Again, more wasted time in a highly competitive market.

Ah, but third time is the charm right? Yeah, in 2014 SIG finally… er… FINALLY… puts all the pieces together. A – POLYMER FRAMED – STRIKER FIRED - PISTOL to compete with GLOCK! Only took them 32 (thirty-two) years!! What a novel idea!

No wonder SIG Sauer was in the midst of “imminent bankruptcy”.

So, after 32 years, we FINALLY have the P320. But what do we actually have with this new wonder pistol? For some reason it looks awful familiar… That’s because it’s a warmed over P250 replete with a frame originally designed for a SA/DA action, thus the not so low bore axis. To be fair though, we’re already at 32 years, so it’s not like SIG had a whole lot of time to reinvent the wheel.

One of SIGARMS’ problems was they were stuck on their paradigm of alloy framed SA/DA action pistols. Trying to compete with a well-established pistol that BY DESIGN costs a fraction to mass-produce and has far fewer moving parts.

To compound SIG’s problems, there was the infamous ATF contract, where they lost out to Glock. SIG’s response?

Apparently SIG felt the ATF put too much emphasis on reliability…

https://www.gao.gov/decisions/bidpro/4023393.pdf

IMO I think SIG should have relegated the P220 series to premium legacy status and offer the P220 series to agencies the specifically request them and to us crazy “old school” collectors in the exact form and with the same manufacturing and QA standards the original German models represented. Don’t try to make them cost as little as a Glock. Don’t diminish the SIG Sauer brand to that of Taurus, Hi-Point, etc. Don’t pander to the Technicolor flavor of the month club.

Another critique I would level against SIG is their disingenuous marketing.

For example, they offered the M11 A1 with the 2D barcode on the frame (like a military issue pistol) except the M11 A1 was never actually issued in any branch of the military. Instead, the M11 was an actual military issued pistol, but outside of the M11B they never offered it to civilians in quantity. SIG took the 556 and rebranded it as the 551 A1, and of course we know it’s really nothing close to a real SIG 551. In my estimation that’s pretty shoddy.

There’s the MCX that was the precursor today’s Virtus. The MCX had some novel features like a self-regulating gas system that ended up not being so self-regulating. Subsequently dropped in favor of the Virtus. Plenty of SigForum members ended up beta testing the MCX.

Bruce, you also mentioned that SIG has four new factories, five new divisions, 1800 new employees.

In the business world, it is possible for companies to grow too fast. When this happens, they can often lose focus on their fundamental principles.

https://www.businessknowhow.com/money/rapidgrowth.htm

Multiple factories mean little unless everyone is on the same page. Of the 1800 new employees, I wonder how many are actual gunsmiths? How many are dedicated to independent empirical Quality Assurance? By independent, I mean are they free from production constraints? Are they able to halt a production line when a deficiency is noted? Do they have a recall program to bring back all affected components when a production deficiency is noted? For some production facilities, quota is king and QA is an afterthought. Sometimes, production personnel are their own QA. Things like keeping their CNC machines serviced on schedule or calibrating their PME isn’t done regularly.

I know of a well-known aerospace corporation that is having a lot of trouble these days. Bean counters and people hired off the street have replaced many of their older experienced engineers and technicians with little or no practical knowledge of aerospace engineering. I audited a facility that had let calibrations on their PME lapse by as long as three years.

You also mentioned “hundreds of innovative new products”. SIG’s track record with new products is a bit less than stellar. More often than not, it’s the customer that ends up being the beta tester.

Hey, Belgian.

I'm just curious. Are you interested in the future of Sig at all? Or just the past?

Holding Bruce's feet to the fire for all this seems unfair, but I realize this is the internet and he is the closest to a representative for the company. So lets beat him up? Maybe next is like is the forum?

Sig isn't doing enough, but also doing too much? They aren't staying in the past, they aren't current, and they aren't the future? Should they invest in a time machine? It seems as worthy an investment as keeping people like you happy.

Oh, here Arc comes to defend Bruce or Sig. No, no. I buy and shoot these guns. No one owns me. No one pays me. You can read my posts of various firearms on the board.

Should Sig, and Bruce, be open to criticism? Surely. But can we make it actually constructive? That would be valuable to everyone. Not just some fantasy measuring stick.

quote:

Originally posted by P-35HP:

quote:

Originally posted by Keystoner:

quote:

Originally posted by Il Cattivo:

quote:

Being it your first post, you may not be aware of the decades of issues we (who have been here a while) have seen in newer SIG products. We've also seen products abruptly discontinued without support.

And yet what he says could have come from any number of posts by knowledgeable long-time SF members in any number of threads we've had on this very subject. Maybe he's not so far off for a rookie.

I couldn't help notice his response didn't address a single point that he quoted by Belgian Blue. The best he could do was call him old.

I am quite old, graduated boot camp decades ago. The point I addressed is that Blue Belgian's post is doted with self importance, arrogance and Xenophobism. Thanks God, we are entitled to own, collect and appreciate any gun we like. Being old school does not mean that looking down at other people is ok.
Blue Belgian's post and other similar posts in different forums, single out Ron Cohen, the CEO of Sig, as the vilan who ruined their Wagnerian dreams of the perfect gun world. I can't remember a single post that I have seen, related to any gun company that single out, by name, its CEO or any other person, with one exception.
Ron Cohen name sounds "foreign", "strange", "suspicious" to some people and they just don't like it. This dislike has nothing to do with Sigs' failures or successes.

You know, when people start using disparaging PC Millennial terms like "xenophobe" instead of presenting an intellectual counterpoint, it usually means the person can't make their case effectively. I guess you are attempting to make the case that the reason I get on Ron Cohen's (see I spelled it right this time. ) case specifically is because I'm supposed to be biased against him because his ethnicity possibly being Jewish? That's pretty laughable considering I own two Tavors.

Nope, I just call it like I see it. When problems occur in a company, ultimately it's the CEO who is usually held accountable. That is to say, it's happening on his watch. What you may or may not be knowledgeable is that Kimber used to be a first rate 1911 manufacturer. Then for some reason, they got a new CEO and he began looking for ways to cut costs on their 1911s. They started using MIM parts and changing a bunch of things that were never broken.

Guess who that CEO was?

Coincidentally, while this was happening at Kimber, SIGARMs seemed to be doing pretty well. Then Kimber's CEO came over to SIGARMS and... as they say... Hilarity ensued. Along with much gnashing of teeth.

As to our most esteemed Subject Matter Expert, I think it should be pretty obvious he has no complaints about SIG's products. After all, Bruce is in the business of offering upgrades to these pistols with perfectly fine Indian manufactured MIM components. So, if SIG actually made their pistols like they used to, I suspect our good friend Mr. Gray would see demand for his bar stock components on the decline. He's got a vested interest in the status quo.

On the other hand, not everyone wants to buy a brand new pistol, then immediately send it off to a custom shop in a perennial blue state to have all it's Indian made MIM parts replaced with bar stock components. Come to think of it, not everyone wants to buy a new subcompact carry pistol only to have the firing pin shear off in a few hundred rounds either.

But like I said, I have enough old German (and Swiss) Sigs to last more than a lifetime, so the new ones don't interest me in the least. For others in the forum like you obviously, you are welcomed to the current line of SIG Sauer products. It's quite likely you would not appreciate the difference anyway.

quote:

I suspect our good friend Mr. Gray would see demand for his bar stock components on the decline. He's got a vested interest in the status quo.

Belgian Blue, that's just over the top. The guy's buisness (which involves a lot more than bar stock parts) is doing fine and he's done a number of things for members here without charging them a penny. There's no reason to think he's trying to mislead anyone "to support the status quo" in order to make a buck.

quote:

Originally posted by arcwelder:
Hey, Belgian.

I'm just curious. Are you interested in the future of Sig at all? Or just the past?

Holding Bruce's feet to the fire for all this seems unfair, but I realize this is the internet and he is the closest to a representative for the company. So lets beat him up? Maybe next is like is the forum?

Sig isn't doing enough, but also doing too much? They aren't staying in the past, they aren't current, and they aren't the future? Should they invest in a time machine? It seems as worthy an investment as keeping people like you happy.

Oh, here Arc comes to defend Bruce or Sig. No, no. I buy and shoot these guns. No one owns me. No one pays me. You can read my posts of various firearms on the board.

Should Sig, and Bruce, be open to criticism? Surely. But can we make it actually constructive? That would be valuable to everyone. Not just some fantasy measuring stick.

Arc, to answer your question directly I'd have to say I obviously have a preference for the vintage SIGs. That's what I most enjoy reading about. Posts such as the P228 thread where one of our members ran a huge number of rounds through a nickel P228. I found that to be a great read. I also like to read about Bruce's insight on how he get's the best reliability out of SIGs and enhancements can offer.

As to new SIG products, I have to admit that I am a bit Gun Shy (obscene pun) about them. I'm really not confident that the product I may receive will meet my expectations. I've had all the "send it back to the manufacturer" fun I care to have with some of my Colts. Not interested in the sequel. These days, it's not just SIG but many manufacturers that let the consumer do the final QA. The new Python is a sterling example.

As I type this, I'm thinking maybe you guys have a point. Maybe I shouldn't be so demanding. Maybe I should just sit back and accept mediocrity. I should look forward to creative new ways for manufacturers to make their products with cheaper components and increase the price at the same time. I guess I'm just an old fudd with xenophobic tendencies.

quote:

Originally posted by Belgian Blue:

You know, when people start using disparaging PC Millennial terms like "xenophobe" instead of presenting an intellectual counterpoint, it usually means the person can't make their case effectively. I guess you are attempting to make the case that the reason I get on Ron Cohen's (see I spelled it right this time. ) case specifically is because I'm supposed to be biased against him because his ethnicity possibly being Jewish? That's pretty laughable considering I own two Tavors.

When people disparage other people and claim intellectual superiority, then make a straw man argument against their racist view, and attempt to verify it by ownership of a gun, the irony is so painful as to demand a response.

As for the "millennial" etymology of "xenophobe," when you take a break from patting yourself on your pseudo-intellectual back, know that the word is a greek language base, with first modern recorded use in 1922. You may want to review the meaning of the term "millennial."

quote:

Originally posted by Belgian Blue:
I know of a well-known aerospace corporation that is having a lot of trouble these days. Bean counters and people hired off the street have replaced many of their older experienced engineers and technicians with little or no practical knowledge of aerospace engineering.

You may not know that company as well as you think. I do. Very well, and it's very clear that you don't understand the politics driving what is occurring there, or in the market. You also do not know the history of that company, including the impetus of their largest sales contracts and advances in the business. If you did, you'd know just how opposite the truth is to your case, and that innovation has long been what put them ahead. Your attempt to draw a parallel to Cohen's product innovations is sorely misplaced, because that's exactly what Sig has done under Cohen's tenure, and it's resulted in a very successful company with some damn good products.

It may be that you'd be happy if Sig manufactured nothing domestically and only sold German imports, or perhaps the company shut down entirely and on traded pistols or rifles made prior to a certain date. You may be one of those who simply declares that he won't shoot tupperware or plastic pistols or some other attempt at ill informed ironic humor.

The truth is that Sig is doing very well, with a high demand for their products. I see an increasing number of P320's at various matches. Local stores can't keep the Legion model on the shelves. The P365 is in demand. It may displease you, but the US military now adopts not one, but two versions of the P320.

I own a number of P220, P226, P229, P2340, P320, etc, and presently shoot the P320 in competition. I'm nobody in the shooting world, but as the middle-of-the-pack fly on the wall at the matches, I talk to a lot of guys with 30,000 hiccup-free rounds thorugh their P320 who run them like no tomorrow. Customizable, adaptable, easily replaceable in incrementsthey appeal in terms of cost, function, easy, ergonomics, reliability, options, availability, etc. They're affordable, can be had in enough versions to suit anyone, and fly off the shelves. You might see that as a failing, but I very much doubt that Sig does. I love my 226's. They don't see a lot of use outside the safe, but I love them just the same. The P320's, presently, are running through 3,000 to 4,000 rounds a month, which is all I can do given the amount of time I'm gone. I haven't had any break.

I'd rather that all the parts were made in the US, as I would most products, but that's not the reality for many things today. So far as their reliability and function, the products work. I ran out of excuses not to carry the P365. I tried to break it. I tried to get it to fail, kept waiting for the other shoe to drop. That original early-model firing pin wouldn't break. Everything functioned; in fact it functioned better with more use, and at length, it found a regular place in my pocket.

It sounds like you have a foul opinion of current Sig offerings, but no experience with them, having soured on opinion and little else. Those responding to you are owners and shooters; the same you're attempting to belittle and put down for lack of intellect, which isn't surprising, given the lack of a substantive response with any experience with the parts and items in question. You're quite right that the traditional Sig firearms are quality products, but you're quite wrong that the current products lack for quality, function, durability, or any other metric.

quote:

When people disparage other people and claim intellectual superiority, then make a straw man argument against their racist view, and attempt to verify it by ownership of a gun, the irony is so painful as to demand a response.

Psst... Hey sns3guppy, I'll tell you a little secret about my two Tavors. Promise not to let it get out though... They accept any AR magazine and work great. Even the steel ones.

Conversely, for those who purchased the first generation of SIG 556Rs, due to SIG's excellent engineering and innovative design know how, it turned out that steel AK magazines would tear up the aluminum lower receiver because in their infinite wisdom, SIG didn't realize that steel mag lugs required a steel locking piece in the alloy receiver.

Initial purchasers were the guinea pigs. You'd think SIG would have saw that coming. Oy vey!!

But like I said, don't let that get out.

quote:

The problem is, this old “SIG sucks now” song is mostly incoherent horseshit these days. By sheer weight of numbers of new and extended products, SIG is producing vastly greater quantity of great things than stinkers. For every Gen 1 MPX there is an entire fucking belt fed military division that is killing it. For one spotty Romeo1, there are seven more RDS’ that rival anything else. But let’s focus on some less-than-perfect 556’s and some early blotchy Legions. I know the numbers. I know the reality. If you’d like to talk about the reality of SIG SAUER, there are a lot of good folks here to engage with.

-Bruce

Hey Bruce, a few questions if you don’t mind.

In a previous post, you mentioned:

quote:

The problem is, this old “SIG sucks now” song is mostly incoherent horseshit these days.

Really, perhaps you might shed some light on this “horseshit” as you call it.

If I mentioned that there were in fact instances of MIM take-down levers among other things breaking on P220 series pistols, would that be “horseshit”? Nobody EVER had a problem with MIM component failures in P220 series pistols? Why is it that top name 1911 builders all advertise bar stock internals. I never seem to hear any of them advertising “We proudly use the best Asscrackistan sourced MIM components in our 1911s? Why is it that many aftermarket manufacturers offer tool steel internals if MIM is “just as good.”?

If I recalled numerous instances of P365 firing pins shearing, would that also be “horseshit”? Sure, you’re likely to say it was only a very small number. That’s all well in good, unless you happen to be the guy who’s firing pin broke while some thug is shooting at you.

Ron Cohen (spelled it right again) was CEO at SIGARMS in 2004 and the 556 was released in 2006. But as you said, somehow the 556 was not his problem child? Was the 556 entirely outsourced or was it a SIGARMS/SIG Sauer product? If in fact the 556 was manufactured by SIG, it would then follow that by definition it was one of Mr. Cohen’s many problem children since he was the CEO at the time. OR, is that somehow “horseshit”?

Bruce, you also mentioned the following:

quote:

“But let’s focus on some less-than-perfect 556’s”

It’s interesting how you phrase that Bruce. It’s almost as if they really don’t matter that much at all. On the other hand, a good number of folks on this forum alone have purchased these things based on the SIG Sauer reputation. They paid good money for these things many of which turned out to be abject trash. Then SIG switched over to the 556xi and claimed it was the new modular 556. Not long after that they abandoned all of the 556s (and their owners) and started churning out AR-15s because as everyone knows, the AR-15 is an “innovative product” and lord knows it takes real engineering prowess to make an AR-15. There are only a very few select manufacturers who can pull off an AR-15. But nope, the 556 owners can just suck eggs I guess. They don’t matter. You seemed to gloss over the gen 1 MPX as well. That was another entirely different can of worms and associated owners who kind of got the short end of the stick as I recall. Or is that “horseshit” as well?

You also mentioned

quote:

some early blotchy Legions

Now, I don’t recall mentioning blotchy Legions in my recent posts, but since you brought up the Legion series, maybe you can fill me in. As I seem to recall, one of their salient features was that they came with your enhanced triggers. They were supposed to be an improvement over the stock P220 series. That sounds great. Tell me Bruce, if I were of the mind to purchase myself a new Legion P220 series pistol today, would it still come from the factory with one of your excellent triggers? OR… Did Sig Sauer decide to out source that part to? If they did, did they lower the retail price on them as an added value to the consumer? OR did they just go ahead and keep the price the same and pocket the savings themselves?

You also mentioned:

quote:

an entire fucking belt fed military division that is killing it.

Wow! That’s impressive!

Just one question though, sort of a minor point I guess…

How many people here on SigForum do you think actually own a fucking belt fed military product from Sig Sauer? I don’t “have the numbers” as you like to say Bruce, but I suspect it’s far less than the number of 556 owners one here. So, I’m at a loss as to how that would be germane to any discussion of SIG Sauer products as offered to the civilian population.

quote:

Originally posted by Belgian Blue:


Psst... Hey sns3guppy, I'll tell you a little secret about my two Tavors. Promise not to let it get out though... They accept any AR magazine and work great. Even the steel ones.

Conversely, for those who purchased the first generation of SIG 556Rs, due to SIG's excellent engineering and innovative design know how, it turned out that steel AK magazines would tear up the aluminum lower receiver because in their infinite wisdom, SIG didn't realize that steel mag lugs required a steel locking piece in the alloy receiver.

Initial purchasers were the guinea pigs. You'd think SIG would have saw that coming. Oy vey!!

But like I said, don't let that get out.

You introduced your Tavor ownership as a straw-man response in your zeal to show your intellectual prowess in putting down others, when you perceived that you'd been called a racist. It was your way of showing that you weren't prejudiced against Israel, as it it proved anything at all. In reality, it was a poor effort, misguided, and said nothing regarding your prejudice.

The irony of your argument, weak as it was, came in it's inapplicability: you attempted to show something on the basis of owning a firearm, while putting down others. Ultimately, it failed as does the effort to back peddle it into an insult against another manufacturer. Further, your effort is also a straw man argument in a thread about Indian-manufactured parts, in which your complaint is about a mag well and mag release. This has no applicability, but you insist on muddying the water in order to show that the house is made of brick. Non-sequitur and straw man, again.

I don't much care: I don't sell sig Products and if I did, it wouldn't make a hill of beans difference if you were a customer or not. What is annoying is the chutzpah and vitriol and your effort to demean others based on your apparent belief in your intellect. What's humorous is that in each attempt, you got it wrong.

quote:

Originally posted by Grayguns:

quote:

Originally posted by Grayguns:

quote:

Originally posted by P-35HP:

I am quite old, graduated boot camp decades ago. The point I addressed is that Blue Belgian's post is doted with self importance, arrogance and Xenophobism. Thanks God, we are entitled to own, collect and appreciate any gun we like. Being old school does not mean that looking down at other people is ok.
Blue Belgian's post and other similar posts in different forums, single out Ron Cohen, the CEO of Sig, as the vilan who ruined their Wagnerian dreams of the perfect gun world. I can't remember a single post that I have seen, related to any gun company that single out, by name, its CEO or any other person, with one exception.
Ron Cohen name sounds "foreign", "strange", "suspicious" to some people and they just don't like it. This dislike has nothing to do with Sigs' failures or successes.

Hi, and a warm welcome to Sigforum.

You’re observations are spot-on. For fifteen years Ron Cohen has been made out as the whipping boy for every real or imagined problem SIG has had. This anti-Cohen, anti-SIG SAUER attitude was started and perpetuated by a small but vocal group of malcontented elitist, Germanophilic collector types, and as you picked up some of this has carried with it a certain unpleasant tinge.

For my part, I work with SIG, my company leads in the field, I’m friends with Ron, and my technical knowledge has evolved over the years to give me a very wide and realistic view. My opinions have changed. Over the years I’ve offered criticism where it’s warranted, and did my best to inform our friends here as an honest broker. Earlier on, much of what I saw from SIG gave me pause. But as the years have gone by, this anti-Cohen / anti-SIG chorus grew tiresome as their drumbeat increasingly went out of time with reality. That doesn’t stop a few people who live in the past from bloviating away about the 556 (which wasn’t even Ron’s problem child) and supposedly inferior American workers and crap QA and how Ron screwed up a dead company that went broke trying to make & sell an obsolete and problematic product.

The problem is, this old “SIG sucks now” song is mostly incoherent horseshit these days. By sheer weight of numbers of new and extended products, SIG is producing vastly greater quantity of great things than stinkers. For every Gen 1 MPX there is an entire fucking belt fed military division that is killing it. For one spotty Romeo1, there are seven more RDS’ that rival anything else. But let’s focus on some less-than-perfect 556’s and some early blotchy Legions. I know the numbers. I know the reality. If you’d like to talk about the reality of SIG SAUER, there are a lot of good folks here to engage with.

-Bruce

Thank you for the warm welcome as a registered member.I am following this forum as well as a very few other for many years. I read posts and try to learn, listen a lot talk far less. I decided to talk this time, can't stand cyber bullies and gun supremacy.

So Cohen killed Kimber and SIG. Despite the evidence to the contrary: both companies still exist (and probably wouldn’t had Cohen not been there). Oh, but Cohen ruined Kimber’s quality. Even if that were true, it’s been over 15 years since he’s been there!!! Shirley, you surely can’t be serious. They haven’t had enough time to “recover?”

Now the basis of your wandering argument seems to be that German SIG>US SIG. I’d agree that the German ones took a lot more hands-on work. But I’ll take the slide milled from one piece than the bent, welded and pinned old style. The one old P226 with the internal extractor I had experience with never worked well. Just couldn’t get proper tension from that extractor. Never had an issue with any external ones myself. Should we even talk about mudrails?

The complaints about innovation. You didn’t seem too impressed by the SP2022, but it was a step in the right direction. And did that come from Germany or the US? My understanding is that started with the US SIGARMS. And so did the P250, which was a step towards the P320. Did any of these come from Germany? What did they innovate? You didn’t like the various colors? No one made you buy one, but guess what? They may have drawn people in that hadn’t bought a gun before. Maybe since that “gateway gun” they’ve bought several others that are more acceptable to you.

Takedown levers...for some reason I seem to recall the actual issue being that they were two pieces attached to each other that lost their attachment. If that’s correct, I don’t see how that has anything to do with MIM failure.

Out of all my firearms, I’ve only had one breakage. Even my POS Remington 870 hasn’t broken anything, even if it rusts and jams up all the time. Anyway, that one breakage was the firing pin on my ‘94 P229. Pretty sure they weren’t using MIM back in ‘94. Hell, it could have German parts in it, since it’s triple serialized.

I care less whether Sig is using MIM than whether the gun was designed to use MIM from its inception. Some manufactuers, most notably H&K, have used MIM for years without any notable issues.

The problem with MIM in the P22X series is that the MIM parts were not used when the design was originally created. I know as I was one of those people who broke takedown levers in their P220 in as few as 8,000 rounds.

I am on record as not being a huge Cohen fan but I have to give the man credit, he has saved the company and is now manufacturing quality, duty grade pistols.

And regarding the ATF testing, let's be honest. The vast majority of the "reliability" issues were failures to lock back due to shooter grip.

quote:

Originally posted by ajp3jeh:
I care less whether Sig is using MIM than whether the gun was designed to use MIM from its inception. Some manufactuers, most notably H&K, have used MIM for years without any notable issues.

The problem with MIM in the P22X series is that the MIM parts were not used when the design was originally created. I know as I was one of those people who broke takedown levers in their P220 in as few as 8,000 rounds.

Excellent point! I agree 100%

First, Indian MIM in sig guns isn’t a great thing. If it was as perfect as some would say in this thread, we wouldn’t have had as many snapped strikers in the 365’s as we did. Mine included.

As for Cohen, can’t both be true? Can’t he have ruined Sig and saved it at the same time? I think folks are talking past each other. Hear me out.

The various different colors and retarded naming schemes (Emperor Scorpion will forever go down as a meme in my mind) are in complete contrast to the “To Hell and Back” reliability many of us remember from Sig...rainbow finish aside.

But at the same time, for reasons I will never understand, folks at the gun store apparently eat that stuff up. So for some he’s ruined Sig, but he’s sold more guns.

The 320 is clearly a huge success as is the 365, and I think the MCX Virtus should be just as huge (awesome rifle imo). He and his team deserve a huge amount of credit for that. I’ve said before that I think Sig is the most innovative by a huge margin. That’s 100% his leadership.

At the same time, we have strikers snapping, we have hollow trigger, mim all over our guns...just stuff the old Sigs never had. There is no doubt that new sigs have used less costly parts. Are they better or worse? I think worse. Some think they are just as good. We all opinions, but no one can say that the parts aren’t different and cheaper.

Did that ruin Sigs? In my mind yes. Did it help contribute to the bottom line and save Sig? Yes. So really, I think both are true.

I spend extra money getting rid of what I consider to be inferior parts. Even in my legions. I think Sig needs a true premium line for those of us who want the old Sig quality. Give me all barstock components and quality. Solid triggers, mec gar mags (checkmate lol), etc. I’ll pay up for that version. Such a line would allow the dudes who are fine with mim and shorty mags to save some money, but those of who want a beat in class parts Sig can still get one without doing it all ourselves after the fact.