I’m on the fence about buying a 320, reading about the recall with a lighter weight trigger that won’t ‘pull itself’ when I throw my pistol on the ground and a disconnect installed that kind of makes the lighter weight trigger meaningless...but I digress. I read that the government model is somehow different from the commercial model and so it does not need any modifications to make it drop safe-er.

I can’t, however, find a definitive explanation of just exactly what SIG did to the government model that they didn’t do with the commercial model.

What exactly is different?

First of all, it sounds like most of what you've been reading is wildly inaccurate, and it has the appearance of internet myth and lore.

Second, don't throw your pistol on the ground.

Third, the trigger doesn't "pull itself."

Fourth, when you say "government model," it appears that you're talking about the offering to the US Army.

When the panic and confusion began regarding the P320, Sig announced a fix in short order, and it turned out the "fix" was already in production...in the pistols for the US Army contract. Sig didn't "do" anything to the "government model," it was inherently part of the design.

With the "voluntary upgrade," Sig is modifying existing P320's that have been sold commercially for civil and police use, to match the US Army offering.

A great deal of this information has been covered in excruciating detail already on this site, and is posted as stickies here. The lighter and thinner profile trigger is one of the things done. Reports are being made in threads on this site about those receiving their pistols back, following the "upgrade."

https://sigforum.com/eve/forums...935/m/2390010234/p/1

https://sigforum.com/eve/forums...0601935/m/8700040924

And, of course, the nightmare thread:

https://sigforum.com/eve/forums...0601935/m/8930050824

^^^ Yep.

Here's a good summary with pics of the P320 upgraded components:

http://www.gunsandammo.com/new...ervice-announcement/

In spite of the brouha, I'm not sending my own P320 back for the upgrades. I find it one of the best shooting pistols I have owned over the past 50 years. Per sns3guppy's second point, I don't drop handguns on concrete floors from six feet at a precise negative 31 degree angle.

If you want a P320, just make sure it has the current upgrades. More of a resale issue than a safety issue as far as I'm concerned. If you find a new one without the upgrades, make sure you get a discounted price for the inconvenience, since it will have to be sent back to Sig for the voluntary upgrades (if desired).

Guppy,
Your assertion is that SIG was always going to make the government model with the “safer” internals, but only agreed to the commercially-sold-model voluntary recall after the issue arose? The “internet myth and lore” is widespread enough for SIG to offer a recall. You are, in effect, saying SIG chose to make two different pistols, a safe one for the government contract and another less safe one for commercial sales. Please also note my use of quotes around ‘pull itself’ as a tongue-in-cheek way of describing the situation; when dropped in that manner which causes the gun to fire, the trigger does indeed move rearward, causing the gun to fire just as if you had pulled it. Since you failed to note that, I understand how you would not see the hyperbole when I said, “throw my pistol on the ground.” I would certainly not throw my gun around.

Yes, I’ve seen all the upgrade pictures and explanations. My question was specific about what is different on the 320 made for the government that it does not need the update we civilians would get. Is it simply that SIG incorporated the changes to the contract, but not to the model for civilian sale?

The Guns and Ammo article specifically addresses that question. Did you read it?

Does this affect the MHS pistol?

No, the MHS pistol is a different variant of the P320 platform. It has passed the US Army’s testing protocols (TOP).

I think your question is what is different and that's information you already seem to have. They lightened the trigger and firing pin to prevent inertial firing from a drop. Additionally, they added a disconnector which does not have anything to do with that. Well, assuming it works as most disconnectors do, I haven't seen it myself. The disconnector changes the way the pistol resets after firing. Before, the trigger had to be pulled far enough to get past the second "click" prior to the slide cycling in order to reset the sear. If it didn't, the sear wouldn't catch the striker to recock it. The addition of a disconnector (again I'm assuming as I haven't played with one myself) changes this as the disconnector would engage to cock the striker and hold it until the trigger is released to reset, where the sear then takes over.

So the lightened parts are to solve drop issues. The disconnector is to change the trigger operation/eliminate the "double click".

quote:

Originally posted by kp352g:
Guppy,
Your assertion is that SIG was always going to make the government model with the “safer” internals, but only agreed to the commercially-sold-model voluntary recall after the issue arose?

I made no such assertion. I told you the truth, stated the facts, and provided links in order for you to hear some of the discussion that has gone on.

You are wrong. There is no recall, nor did I state as such. Kindly refrain from attempts to put words in my mouth.

Do some research.

Sig investigated claims, found validity, and offered an upgrade for those who choose to avail.

quote:

Originally posted by kp352g:
The “internet myth and lore” is widespread enough for SIG to offer a recall.

You are wrong.

Sig has offered a voluntary upgrade. There is no recall. If you can provide evidence to the contrary, do so.

You cannot.

Moreover, the upgrade is not the result of myth and lore, but testing on the part of Sig which verified independent claims. To that end, Sig offered the upgrade, which is currently in play.

quote:

Originally posted by kp352g:
You are, in effect, saying SIG chose to make two different pistols, a safe one for the government contract and another less safe one for commercial sales.

quote:

Originally posted by kp352g:
Please also note my use of quotes around ‘pull itself’ as a tongue-in-cheek way of describing the situation; when dropped in that manner which causes the gun to fire, the trigger does indeed move rearward, causing the gun to fire just as if you had pulled it. Since you failed to note that, I understand how you would not see the hyperbole when I said, “throw my pistol on the ground.” I would certainly not throw my gun around.

I'm quite aware of your hyperbole. I prefer facts. Your statements are not, and neither are the words you attempt to attribute to me. I don't guess.

The P320, as offered to the civil market was around long before the military submission. Think about that.

The fact is Sig (hopefully) fixed flaws in the P320 for the military contract but continued to sell flawed guns to civilians and police until they got bit in the ass. And loyal Sig fans suddenly didn’t feel their loyalty was reciprocated.

Oh Jeez. Are we going to start another 84 page P320 Who Shot John thread? We have the original monster thread still available for bitchin. We have the sticky for useful, authoritative updates on Sig's progress/resolution of the issue.

The OP initially asked a valid straightforward question regarding mechanical differences between the military and commercial P320's.

Then he morphs into argument mode after being provided with links to all the gory details involving the P320 drop-fire issue and the mechanical differences between the two pistols. Now, we're beginning to veer off to where we were three months ago.

Reminds me of that WW II slogan: Is this trip necessary?

I admit I did little to answer the OP's question, and I apologize for that. The drop issue has been covered here, but what hasn't been covered as widely is the "double-click" issue, which has apparently also been fixed in the military version. For the uninitiated, this is the issue where you pull the trigger and nothing happens. It appears to be a light primer strike, but it's an issue where the striker never gets fully cocked to the rear, due to a FLAW in the original design.

But yeah, we can continue this wherever is deemed fit.

I wouldn't call it a design flaw. I'd call it a poor design choice. If the trigger is pulled fully to the rear every time, the pistol works. However, nowhere in the manual or anywhere else I've seen is it stressed that for proper operation the trigger must manipulated in this fashion. Some might say that not doing so is improper technique. Personally, I prefer to only put the necessary pressure to break the shot to avoid disrupting the shot. So I don't see it as a flaw, per se. I do think the disconnector is a better design, perhaps simply because it's more commonly used. In other words, you don't have to do something different than other pistols.

That said, I have experienced multiple failures relating to the double click. Now knowing how the pistol was designed to work, I understand them to be user induced. I still think it's a poor design choice and look forward to getting mine upgraded to a disconnector operated trigger.

I have 3 and have never experienced the dead trigger. I might be a caveman on the trigger though so not fully stroking it has never been a problem for me. Lol. 4foot drop and fire is a problem, the double click never seemed like a problem. Design flaw? Maybe a stretch.

The 320 is a great design and will outlive me. Combination of great ergos, module sizes, good trigger for a striker, cheap frame mods, blah blah blah.

Haters gonna hate. This is a good design that is now hopefully being made safer. Shit happens. Easy for me to say since I’ve never dropped one and got shot in the melon.

Once I get mine back it goes right back into the front of my lineup.

quote:

Originally posted by BuddyChryst:
I wouldn't call it a design flaw. I'd call it a poor design choice. If the trigger is pulled fully to the rear every time, the pistol works. However, nowhere in the manual or anywhere else I've seen is it stressed that for proper operation the trigger must manipulated in this fashion. Some might say that not doing so is improper technique. Personally, I prefer to only put the necessary pressure to break the shot to avoid disrupting the shot. So I don't see it as a flaw, per se. I do think the disconnector is a better design, perhaps simply because it's more commonly used. In other words, you don't have to do something different than other pistols.

That said, I have experienced multiple failures relating to the double click. Now knowing how the pistol was designed to work, I understand them to be user induced. I still think it's a poor design choice and look forward to getting mine upgraded to a disconnector operated trigger.

Hey Buddy, you helped me out with my P7M8 issue awhile back, and I hope you know that I respect and support you.

IMHO there is a serious issue if you can't rely on a self-defense implement to go bang each and every time you tell it to, no matter how you tell it to. I hope Sig has fixed this, and I hope to try a new one out soon.

quote:

Originally posted by ether:
IMHO there is a serious issue if you can't rely on a self-defense implement to go bang each and every time you tell it to, no matter how you tell it to. I hope Sig has fixed this, and I hope to try a new one out soon.

I see. So if a person buys a perfectly in-spec Smith & Wesson K-frame .38 for self defense and while practicing with it, refuses to allow the trigger to reset fully forward after every shot and subsequently experiences cylinder advance with no hammer movement (sometimes called "short-stroking," a fairly simple condition to replicate for someone familiar with DA revolvers), then it's because S&W's design is "flawed?" Really? Interesting criteria you have for "flawed" designs.

quote:

Originally posted by ether:
I admit I did little to answer the OP's question, and I apologize for that. The drop issue has been covered here, but what hasn't been covered as widely is the "double-click" issue, which has apparently also been fixed in the military version. For the uninitiated, this is the issue where you pull the trigger and nothing happens. It appears to be a light primer strike, but it's an issue where the striker never gets fully cocked to the rear, due to a FLAW in the original design.

For the initiated, that's not at all what the "double click" is. Do you own a P320?

If the weapon is cocked, it will fire when the trigger is pressed.

If the weapon is not cocked, some P320's, not all, will produce a click when the trigger is pressed. This is not a flaw, nor is it a problem. The only way this becomes an issue is either a misfire, or an empty chamber. The solution is the same in either case: chamber a round. Problem solved.

The click on an uncocked weapon is a useful training feature, and desirable.

Buddychrist is talking about shortstroking the weapon, which isn't easy to do, but will prevent the striker from being cocked during cycling of the pistol. Revolvers do this, too.

While it may be possible to engineer out every potential human failing from a weapon and thus idiot-proof it, this isn't necessary, and few weapons systems are idiot proof.

The P320 is perfectly serviceable without the upgrade, which is perhaps why it's voluntary.

I don't know if I'm misunderstanding people or if they are misunderstanding what is occurring.

Yes, you can short stroke just about any pistol. Though short stroking may be a problematic wording, as it can be used to describe different situations. It can be used to describe the failure of a semi-auto rifle BCG not cycling fully. It can be used to describe a semi-auto pistol slide not traveling far enough back to eject and feed.

Here, we seem to be using the term to describe not allowing the trigger/action to reset. In any firearm I'm familiar with, the reset occurs as you let the trigger forward. I do not know of any pistol other than the P320 that requires the trigger be pulled back further than the sear release to reset the trigger. That is my issue with the design. It works differently than common triggers, and nowhere does the manual or SIG (that I've seen anyway) say that the trigger must be manipulated differently than any others. If they did, they would've saved two round trip shipping costs.

So I don't think a comparison to a revolver is quite accurate, but honestly I'm not as familiar with revolvers as I am semi-autos. A revolver short stroke (or any other I'm aware of) occurs when not letting off the trigger enough, but that's not exclusive to revolvers. You can short stroke a Glock, HK, SIG, etc, though it's easier to do with a long DAO. The P320's original design requires both pulling the trigger past two points and then letting off past a third point. The redesign makes it operate like any other trigger: one point to fire, one point to reset. It's accurate to the extent that it is user induced rather than a mechanical failure. But I think it was a poor design choice (especially without telling everyone "hey, this trigger works differently than any others"), one which they are remedying with the upgrade.

As for the "double click issue" it is a non-issue for most pistols and shooters (and will be moot for upgraded and presumably future production). But it can result in a dead trigger (yes, on a loaded chamber) if (according to SIG) you manipulate the trigger in an "extreme" manner (and I still suspect some stacking tolerances came into play, even though SIG doesn't seem to.

Lastly, I disagree that the clicking makes for good dry-fire practice. The second click by itself does not have the same pull weight as the sear release, nor the same place in the travel of the trigger. So using it as a dry fire practice point means you're practicing for a lighter point further back in the pull. You aren't practicing firing the pistol. Again, that's using the click alone. If you cycle the pistol while dry firing to reset the striker, then you are practicing firing. And though I don't know with 100% confidence, I'm pretty damned sure it wasn't intentionally designed by SIG as a dry-fire aid. I don't know where that got started.

quote:

And though I don't know with 100% confidence, I'm pretty damned sure it wasn't intentionally designed by SIG as a dry-fire aid. I don't know where that got started.

Irrelevant, really.

It works just as well with a Glock, and it has no click, and doesn't need to be "reset" by cycling the slide. Transition between targets or just draw and press; the act of moving from one target to the next, practicing double taps or a mozambique or whatever it is one wishes, the mere practice of pressing that trigger each time there's a shot to be made, is beneficial. Sometimes it's very beneficial to practice moving and pressing repeatedly without needing to reset the trigger or slide between every press.

In the P320, it clicks each time, which is a bonus, not a detriment. The difference between the click and the trip from a reset slide is negligible and not significant enough to detract from the benefit gained by practicing the draw, firing, and transition with a trigger press on every shot. If it can be beneficial with zero trigger movement (a Glock, for example), then it's also beneficial, and a plus, to get the trigger movement and the click each time.

Whether Sig designed that into it doesn't change the fact, and is irrelevant.

If someone chooses to see it as a flaw in the design, so be it, for them. It isn't.

quote:

Whether Sig designed that into it doesn't change the fact, and is irrelevant.

But it was and is an annoyance. Regardless of what anyone think of its intended purpose or its relevance in the actual operation of the gun, that double click feels and sounds unnatural and certainly is not something expected to most anyone who has ever pulled a halfway decent trigger on a firearm, dry-fire or otherwise. Having to explain to customers that the double click they just experienced is 'normal' doesn't go very far to reassure or sit well with more than a few people that showed more than a passing interest in the 320. While the pistol sells relatively well for us, at least a few of its potential sales were lost as some customers instead immediately went over to the VP9, G17/G19s and other guns because of that unsettling "click-crunch" experience. Add the fact that it doesn't happen every time, describing it as 'normal' or 'it's not something to worry about' or 'it doesn't affect the operation or reliability' instead goes to increase any disbelief and skepticism that a customer may end up harboring, both about the gun and the 'gun counter ninja' trying to sell the thing.

Considering that the double click ceases to exist once the 320 upgrade is done to the firearm as reported in another thread, apparently some folks at SIG agrees that it was worth eliminating. As a seller trying to pitch these guns I couldn't be more glad. As a 320 owner I'm equally pleased to have it go bu-bye. So-called 'good' triggers just shouldn't do shit like that.