Looking at the design of the P320, I don't see why building one in 10mm Auto is impracticable. I'm not sure the grip frame would be larger than a Compact Large grip frame.

If SIG were to make the P320 in 10mm Auto, I wouldn't care about damaging the space-time continuum, tearing Superman's cape, changing the axial tilt of the planet, causing global warming, and yea, even piles of dead kittens would not stop me from buying one. Or two.

All kinds of things are possible from an engineering perspective. Maybe they're waiting to see how the Springfield Armory version does?

I think its possible. But in a different pistol. Same striker fired action but built for the 10mm.
P330? And optic ready.
If Glock and SA can do it, so can Sig.
I thinks its a question of them selling enough of the gun justify production.

As with all things commercial, they probably don't think it will make money. I wonder if the basic design would stand up to 10mm, or would they need a new grip frame or fire control module design?

quote:

Why no P320 in 10mm Auto?

SIG enjoys making a profit.

you guys should check out some of the new models that will be announced for the Shot Show.
wink wink

"wink wink"? What are we, a bunch of Girl Scouts smoking a joint in the back yard and making S'Mores over daddy's barbeque grill?

Spill it, man!

I heard from a guy that knows a chic who's brother went to college with some dude who may know someone who thinks they may have heard some things.
That's all I know man.
But Shot Show could be very interesting for the people involved with this thread.
Now back to my s'mores.

Wet cool. I would be a buyer of a 10mm 320 for sure.

Why would I want a P320 in 10mm Auto? I already have one chambered for 10mm Lite, and according to some … ahem, “authorities,” there is no difference in ballistics performance among handgun cartridges. 32 S&W, 9mm, 45 ACP, 10mm, 44 Magnum: Alla time same, same, GI.
(Sounds pretty silly when spelled out that way, don’t it? )

Seriously, I must admit that I was tempted by the 10mm P220 and might have succumbed if it had been readily available in a standard utility version. A P320, though, and assuming not pimped out for bull’s-eye or other competition shooting, would definitely grab my attention. If the cartridge chambering is available in other plastic guns, why not the P320?

Added:
And in case anyone at SIG needs convincing that others share my preference for such a gun, here is a poll that I conducted here in January 2015 and which was prompted by the hubbub about the 10mm Auto cartridge at the time. The poll results follow the below introduction.

=====================================

If you are a current owner of an autoloading pistol chambered for 10mm Auto, this question is for you. If you do not presently own such a pistol, please don’t respond to the poll, but I welcome all comments. I also welcome descriptions of the 10mm pistols you own.
(The poll does not refer to revolvers.)

What was the one primary purpose for the gun that you had in mind when you acquired the pistol? If you were thinking of more than one intended use, please select the answer that best describes the purpose that was most important to you then. If you no longer use the firearm for the primary reason that you got it in the first place, please think back to your intentions at that time.

Definitions:
“Collection” means that owning the gun is more important than actually shooting it even if you shoot it on occasion.
“Formal competition” refers to things like bull’s-eye, 3-gun, IDPA, IPSC, USPSA, etc.
“Hunting (backup)” means that the pistol would be carried for the purpose of finishing off a wounded animal, or even using it to take an animal if one’s primary firearm was out of commission. It does not, however, refer to carrying the gun while hunting for the purpose of self-defense against aggressive animals (or humans).
“Hunting (primary firearm)” refers to using the gun as one’s primary firearm for killing game.
“Range use” refers to informal shooting, plinking, etc., and does not include the various formal competition sports mentioned above.
“Self-defense, animals” refers to carrying the gun for defensive purposes against aggressive or otherwise dangerous animals, even in a backup role.
“Self-defense, carry” refers to carrying the gun for defensive purposes against aggressive humans. “Carry” may be open, concealed, or law enforcement use, and as a primary or backup weapon.
“Self-defense, home” refers to relying on the pistol as a primary or backup defensive “house gun,” but not carrying it away from home.

Breakdown of responses from 128 affirmative replies (not including the “I don’t own a 10mm” lot). Percentages are rounded to nearest whole value:

Collection: 8, 6%
Formal competition: 2, 2%
Hunting (backup firearm): 10, 8%
Hunting (primary firearm): 2, 2%
Range use (informal shooting): 29, 23%
Self-defense, animals: 43, 34%
Self-defense, carry: 22, 17%
Self-defense, home: 6, 5%
Other: 6, 5%

Note that the backup gun during hunting and self-defense against animals or routine carry categories totaled 75 responses, or 59% of the total. Some people might want tricked-out guns for those purposes, but others of us would prefer a solid, durable model with rugged sights that can be seen in the dark, but without the unnecessary bulk of things like magazine funnels.

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

It would be a great idea and SIG, being 10mm-friendly, is probably already working on it.

ETA:
And if we yammer enough about a P320 10mm, maybe SIG will take notice ?

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

If Sig comes out with a P320 in 10mm, it'll be the gun that gets me into the 10mm. I've been interested in the cartridge for years, but have yet to find it offered in a platform that checks all my boxes. The P320 would do that.

The real question is...would it be compatible with the 9mm/40/.357 FCU and grip modules, or would it use the ones from the .45ACP....or it's own entirely? If the first option, that would be awesome!

I don't think it would be able to use the 9mm FCU. The 45 would be feasible.

It was a few months ago when one of our esteemed members was able to say that the 10mm P220 was outselling the 45 P220. So...

I would be very interested in a P320 10mm! Since we are contemplating Sig producing this pistol, what do you think a MSRP might be? 750-800.00$ ??

Code me obtuse or obsolescent if you like, but my mind tells me 10mm would be terribly hard on a polymer grip frame.

If Glock and Springfield Armory can do it, why not SIG?

quote:

Originally posted by HayesGreener:
Code me obtuse or obsolescent if you like, but my mind tells me 10mm would be terribly hard on a polymer grip frame.

That’s obviously a good question. I am not familiar at all with the Springfield Armory, but as most of us know, Glock and SIG developed significantly different ways of supporting the slide. Are metal rails molded into the polymer frame of the Glock more suited to absorbing the force of the slide movement, or is the metal frame/FCU of the SIG that directs the slide recoil force through the takedown lever to the plastic grip module stronger? It appears to me that the Glock design spreads the recoil forces through the rails throughout a larger area than the SIG design does. But perhaps that wouldn’t make any difference.

What amazes me is that nobody in the aftermarket has figured out how to use the P320 FCU in lots of custom applications (10mm, carbine etc.).

quote:

Originally posted by sigfreund:

quote:

Originally posted by HayesGreener:
Code me obtuse or obsolescent if you like, but my mind tells me 10mm would be terribly hard on a polymer grip frame.

That’s obviously a good question. I am not familiar at all with the Springfield Armory, but as most of us know, Glock and SIG developed significantly different ways of supporting the slide. Are metal rails molded into the polymer frame of the Glock more suited to absorbing the force of the slide movement, or is the metal frame/FCU of the SIG that directs the slide recoil force through the takedown lever to the plastic grip module stronger? It appears to me that the Glock design spreads the recoil forces through the rails throughout a larger area than the SIG design does. But perhaps that wouldn’t make any difference.

That really depends on the recoil springi assembly, doesn't it?

quote:

Originally posted by sns3guppy:
That really depends on the recoil springi assembly, doesn't it?

The recoil spring and weight of the slide obviously have a lot to do with moderating the effects on the frame/grip module. That’s evidently why the P226 and P229 have different recoil springs and slides for guns chambered for 9mm versus 357/40, but there are limits on both. The slide cannot be too heavy and the recoil spring cannot be too powerful (stiff) before potential users decide that the gun is too heavy or too difficult to operate and decide, “Not for me.”

And the slide and recoil spring assembly aren’t the only thing that affect how a gun can handle heavy recoil and fast slide movement. That is why Bruce Gray specified that only P220s with steel frames could be converted to 10mm, and why factory 10mm 220s have steel frames as well. The differences in their frames/grip modules is why I question whether a 10mm 320 would be practicable.