I watched both videos (face mask dude pegged my douchebag meter to max but I pressed on) and now believe that the sear needs to be fully locked prior to trigger actuation in order for the gun to be much safer. What has been somewhat less covered is at what point does ordinary wear begin to affect sear/striker engagement? My 320 might be perfectly safe at 100 rounds. Is it equally safe at 1000 rounds? 3000? Are the parts involved MIM? tool steel? Made and fully inspected by Sig in house? Then of course, we debate the quality issue of MIM parts over tool steel and this debate has gone for years. I want to know that my 20 year old 320 with 5K round count is at least safely durable as it was when new. Not "wear proof" but safe! And given the issues with the 320, has Sig stepped up its quality control and inspections of the gun? Still, lots of unanswered questions for me and Sigs statement is not acceptable to me.

quote:

Originally posted by YooperSigs:
I watched both videos (face mask dude pegged my douchebag meter to max but I pressed on) and now believe that the sear needs to be fully locked prior to trigger actuation in order for the gun to be much safer..

Which is exactly what Sig did with the P365 with the manual safety. Again, I can’t help but think some engineer caught that. But, the P320 ship was steaming on, full throttle at that point and, nobody wanted to bring that up.

This just gets more and more disappointing for Sig. Knowing that both solutions- namely the trigger tab safety and a sear-stopping manual safety- have already existed for quite some time....

quote:

Originally posted by kkina:
This just gets more and more disappointing for Sig. Knowing that both solutions- namely the trigger tab safety and a sear-stopping manual safety- have already existed for quite some time....

To me, the part that is more disappointing is that they refuse to admit the possibility that something could actually be going on mechanically with the P320. From the various clues I’ve been able to piece together, I feel like the issue of “stacking tolerances” is a very real possibility and it’s the only technical explanation I’ve heard that makes sense.

At the end of the day, as a private consumer, the manner in which SIG has handled this whole thing leaves a bad taste in my mouth and just erodes the trust that I used to have with their products. This latest PR blast just reinforces all the bad vibes.

I’m not quite ready to firesale my P365’s but they are not doing much to instill any trust.

Joey Russo's video is far, far better than the masked guy's video. Russo sticks to the technical argument and has much better articulation. However, the pictures in the technical section of the masked guy's video are still an excellent addition to this discussion IMO, even if the rest of the video is garbage. One place where I do agree with the masked guy is that P320's action design does look like one of its missions was just to be different from Glock. For example, I've always considered the Walther P99 to be the pinnacle of an innovative striker-fired action design, but it still uses the same proven "plunger"-style striker block safety as a Glock.

For those that asked if this "unstable" (bouncing on a spring) sear design is inherent to all striker-fired pistols, the answer is no. For example, Glock's original safe-action design does not have this sear design (I realize I'm sounding like the Glock shill now). However, it appears that many fully-cocked striker-fired actions (including Glock's own Performance Trigger) do have this sear design (or a similar one). I didn't realize it until recently, but the grip safety of the Springfield XD actually blocks the sear for this very reason (I have a newfound respect for the thoughtfulness of its design).

I have two P320 pistols. One was for duty use but not anymore. I will only use them as range guns not for carry or on duty use until Sig fixes the design. A safety that locks the sear and trigger would go a long way to get it back on track.

Their statement/tantrum sure did not help the situation. Guess it is the hill that company will die on.

quote:

Originally posted by cwm1150:
A safety that locks the sear and trigger would go a long way to get it back on track.

If I'm going to have to have a manual safety then I might as well have it on a pistol with a good trigger.

That eliminates the entire striker-fired genre, IMO.

quote:

Originally posted by ensigmatic:

a pistol with a good trigger.

That eliminates the entire striker-fired genre, IMO.

P7

Have all the instances been in holsters while being carried? Have there been any documented instances of them firing with an aftermarket grip module?

Sig is defending this pistol to the end.

https://x.com/sigsauerinc/status/1900273258328424653

Wow they really seem to be trying to head something off they see coming down the pike. Like I said above this all just feels so desperate.

Hmmm... the 320 has been on the market for 11 years now. Aging guns beginning to wear and possible tolerance stacking may all start being factors in more unintentional (uncommanded) discharges and Sig may be seeing something coming....

My negative opinion of SIG Sauer Inc. stems not only from their untrustworthy “profit at the expense of all else” style (JMHO), but also because the name used to be known precisely for putting the concrete things (like reliability and overall quality) above profit. SIG Sauer Inc. has been abusing a name that used to have a faultless reputation. Now it’s coming back to bite them and I don’t feel bad for them one bit. They should have known better. However, I hope they win as frequently as possible during these suits because the worst part of this is that SIG is getting its comeuppance in ways that could be of detriment to the entire industry. Also, despite my negative opinions about SIG, I still believe that a large amount of these unintentional discharges are user error.

“Mr. Berrios voluntarily dismissed his action against SIG SAUER admitting in court filed documents that his P320 pistol has no defects and does not discharge without a trigger pull.”

That seems strangely worded. After all this time, he just up and says “My bad…it wasn’t the guns fault…”

^I find this development a little strange as well. Even avoiding conspiracy theorizing, how does he know the gun has no defects? Is he an armorer? And even then...as already mentioned, stacking tolerances can be tricky to diagnose.

The followup media release puts to rest the theory that the initial release was due to miscommunication or misinterpretation of intended message.

It seems to me perhaps that SIG-Sauer is simply fed-up with being assailed constantly on the questions surrounding the safety of the P320 and the non-stop lawsuits and they have arrived at the realization that it doesn't matter what they say, because the reaction will be further derision, skepticism, and lawsuits.

There may very well be some sophisticated legal strategy behind the outburst, or they may very well be anticipating some massive assault, but I don't think so. I think they feel since people are not listening to them, they're going to respond in kind.

I do not own a P320, nor a P365. I own a stable-full of classic SIG-Sauer pistols and a vintage P210. I am not defending SIG-Sauer and I am not condemning SIG-Sauer. I have consistently maintained that a Glock-style trigger safety on the P320 would have allowed SIG-Sauer to avoid much grief.

Frankly, I don't expect anyone, within this forum or without, to care what I think about the matter, but this is a SIG discussion forum and I man the tiller. Beyond that, I have no dog in this fight.

Having said all of that, I share the astonishment of many members and readers of this forum at this recent development but we should be careful to not blow it out of proportion. The important thing is a definitive answer to the claims against SIG-Sauer and the P320 and wouldn't it be grand to have that answer reveal itself?

The last thing I will say is that given the litigious nature of our society and how our court system is structured, you can bet your bottom dollar that some of these lawsuits against SIG-Sauer are fantasy calculated to earn a quick buck.

Well said.

I've been all over You Tube as of late watching numerous videos by Sig Mechanic as he goes step by step through how the different safety features work. I'm convinced that if the gun is in spec, you aren't going to have any issues.

That being said I've also seen some of the plaintif's filings where they've had their pistols mic'd out by an engineer, and some of the critical dimensions of parts in the FCG aren't to spec. When Sig started using third world MIM manufacturers as part of Ron Cohen's bean cutting bonanza, I was concerned something like this was going to happen based on what Cohen did to Kimber when he was there.

Also, in Sig's defence I've also read up on the AD's the military has been having. They are heavily redacted, but in most of them there are either repeated attempts at holstering, or other documented mishandelings of the pistol.

I personally shoot with a group once a month, and there are about 10 guys running some type of P320. Between all the P320's in that group we've gone through about 60k rounds in the last two years, and one shooter has a documented 85k rounds through a specific gun. Two of the pistols are in their pre upgrade configuration. We've yet to have an unintended discharge.

quote:

Originally posted by Balzé Halzé:
Sig is defending this pistol to the end.

https://x.com/sigsauerinc/status/1900273258328424653

I am sure a police officer in Puerto Rico has a legal team like sig sauer has on retainer,him giving up does not prove the P320 in his case was safe and functional. He just could not afford to proceed further I suspect. Would love to see the forensic exam of his pistol that he sued over.

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

Yikes.

https://x.com/WarPath2pt0/status/1900671706064118170

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Balzé Halzé,