A local gun store just posted a video "debunking" the rumors that a 320 will fire. The guy held it about 2 feet off the ground, from the muzzle, and dropped it one time. Haha. What clowns.

quote:

Originally posted by toivo:

quote:

Originally posted by Zecpull:
Then there would be multiple FCU with matching serial numbers out there.
I could see them replacing the entire FCU if you send yours in.

Good point. It still would be easier and cheaper than shipping the whole pistol.

Not really, weight/size isn't the greatest cost determinant when shipping a handgun(frame), which is what the FCU is, the serialized part of the weapon. That vs probably 3-4 pieces/parts, which aren't considered a firearm.

quote:

Originally posted by jack89:
I'm wondering if the flat face trigger swap would resolve the problem. Anybody try that yet?

I wonder if the flat trigger really solves the problem, of if it just increases the amount of force required to discharge. And will a lighter trigger increase the risk from a muzzle down discharge?

quote:

Originally posted by jack89:
I was all set to buy a P320c this week, but now I see this. I predict that there's going to be an uptick in Glock sales, because that's where I'm likely to go.
I'm wondering if the flat face trigger swap would resolve the problem. Anybody try that yet?

Hell, I am hoping that by the weekend local gun stores are sitting on a bunch of used Sig P320s. Never really wanted one before but for the right price I'll buy almost any gun.

I seriously doubt I will be that lucky but that won't stop me from swinging by just to take a look at the used counters

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.c...pgrade-p320-pistols/

Looks like Sig admits that there is an issue.

They are offering voluntary trigger upgrades.

quote:

Originally posted by RX-79G:
So SIG is claiming that the M17 and future P320s have an upgrade that prevents the drop fires that they said 4 days ago couldn't happen?

I guess they've been busy figuring out the previously impossible drop fire weakness and are certain already what causes it.

Have you dismissed the Omaha Outdoors analysis of the relationship between drop firing and trigger mass? Today's TTAG article cites mass reduction in the trigger as one of the changes made to the M17.

For a trigger safety system partly built around balancing the mass in the trigger and trigger bar components, the OO observations about increasing trigger mass being related to increasing drop firing seems to make a lot of sense. By the same token, reducing the mass of the M17 trigger, for whatever reason, makes it seem reasonable that it might provide a ready-made solution to the problem.

Recoil Mag posted the fix and pictures

Revised striker, chassis, trigger, disconnector, and sear housing

Seems Sig held a briefing to cover this.

http://soldiersystems.net/2017...untary-p320-upgrade/

Hell, I am hoping that by the weekend local gun stores are sitting on a bunch of used Sig P320s. Never really wanted one before but for the right price I'll buy almost any gun.

I seriously doubt I will be that lucky but that won't stop me from swinging by just to take a look at the used counters [/QUOTE]

God, I hope the bottom falls out of the 320 market... I'll buy a couple more at a discounted price off an already well priced handgun. Sit those bitches on a shelf in the gun safe until a fix comes out... or just don't drop the damn thing, from 4', on a flat surface, at exactly the correct angle, on the second Tuesday in September, at exactly 1:05 p.m.

Seeing that the military contract guns are not affected, Sig must have known about the issue and failed to mention it.

I love, love, love my Sigs. That being said, I never was interested in the P320. Glocks just do it better. I doubt I would be interested in a hammer fired pistol made by Glock, because Sigs do it better.

quote:

Originally posted by ScopeX5:
Recoil Mag posted the fix and pictures

Revised striker, chassis, trigger, disconnector, and sear housing

A fake issue manufactured by glock fanboys indeed. How many examples of end user beta testing and disregard need to be brought to light for people to stop trusting SIG-USA?

i'll take them up on their offer

quote:

Originally posted by RX-79G:

quote:

Originally posted by gc70:

quote:

Originally posted by RX-79G:
So SIG is claiming that the M17 and future P320s have an upgrade that prevents the drop fires that they said 4 days ago couldn't happen?

I guess they've been busy figuring out the previously impossible drop fire weakness and are certain already what causes it.

Have you dismissed the Omaha Outdoors analysis of the relationship between drop firing and trigger mass? Today's TTAG article cites mass reduction in the trigger as one of the changes made to the M17.

For a trigger safety system partly built around balancing the mass in the trigger and trigger bar components, the OO observations about increasing trigger mass being related to increasing drop firing seems to make a lot of sense. By the same token, reducing the mass of the M17 trigger, for whatever reason, makes it seem reasonable that it might provide a ready-made solution to the problem.

Not at all. It is a likely factor in preventing this particular problem.

However, that isn't an explanation for why the gun drop fires, nor is it a conclusive demonstration of the gun's only safety weakness.

Like I already pointed out, if SIG doesn't know there is a problem, they are going to have to investigate to make sure there aren't other related problems. Everyone wrote off the trigger down drop as a hoax. Was it? Is the trigger the only component out of balance, or are other parts susceptible to moving under the right impact angle?

It is one thing to have a fairly conventional design that has a problem because that's easy to isolate. The P320 is by no means conventional. At all.

If you have some special knowledge of why the gun drop fires, please share it with the rest of us.

quote:

Originally posted by lordhamster:
Seems Sig held a briefing to cover this.

http://soldiersystems.net/2017...untary-p320-upgrade/

This just cements the fact that Sig knew about it, but acted as if nothing was up. Then when people come on here and Facebook, and call Sig directly they all get the same spill. That the gun has been bounced off all kinds of stuff, and has passed all the tests and whatever. But they still had a fix in the works.

So what SIG is really saying is that they had made several functionality "modifications" that were included in a "roll-up" of changes specifically for the MHS, which "just happen" to address this drop safety problem? AND the gun has to return to the mother-ship for the fix, sigh...

To say I'm pretty skeptical of that assertion is putting it mildly, but I believe that is where we're at.

quote:

Originally posted by wolffy88:

quote:

Originally posted by lordhamster:
Seems Sig held a briefing to cover this.

http://soldiersystems.net/2017...untary-p320-upgrade/

This just cements the fact that Sig knew about it, but acted as if nothing was up. Then when people come on here and Facebook, and call Sig directly they all get the same spill. That the gun has been bounced off all kinds of stuff, and has passed all the tests and whatever. But they still had a fix in the works.

Nah, it's all a sham. Jealous Glocker Trolls, fake videos, hit pieces, all of it.

In fact they made up that fake SIG briefing with a 'look alike' Ron Cohen and other SIG employees - filmed in the UK bunker were the Moon Landings were faked - as were the now infamous -30Deg drop films.

quote:

Originally posted by RHINOWSO:

quote:

Originally posted by wolffy88:

quote:

Originally posted by lordhamster:
Seems Sig held a briefing to cover this.

http://soldiersystems.net/2017...untary-p320-upgrade/

This just cements the fact that Sig knew about it, but acted as if nothing was up. Then when people come on here and Facebook, and call Sig directly they all get the same spill. That the gun has been bounced off all kinds of stuff, and has passed all the tests and whatever. But they still had a fix in the works.

Nah, it's all a sham. Jealous Glocker Trolls, fake videos, hit pieces, all of it.

In fact they made up that fake SIG briefing with a 'look alike' Ron Cohen and other SIG employees - filmed in the UK bunker were the Moon Landings were faked - as were the now infamous -30Deg drop films.

You know, this has really soured me to Sig, which I can tell you already are, Rhino.

This, coupled with the BS release dates, promises for accessories that never happen, shitty optics (just today a guy on FB posted that his Romeo cracked from a shell ejection!), and other QC issues, Sig is going down fast.

quote:

Originally posted by gc70:

quote:

Originally posted by WARPIG602:
Im curious as to what parts they will use to make it safe......and why not just use those parts to begin with? They seem to have all these parts/upgrades ready to go......its almsot like they ve known about this for a while and were working on a solution for a while behind the scenes.

Today's TTAG article contains a strong indication of why parts are readily available:

"Upgrades were engineered subsequently*, rolled into the M17s that are now shipping, and will appear as standard in commercial P320s in the future."

"For owners of current, commercial P320s, SIG is offering voluntary upgrades."

(* subsequent to the start of MHS testing)

So I wonder if Sig may have discovered some issues when testing the M17's prior to the start of the MHS trials that casued them to research "upgrades" or did Sig jsut build a stronger P320 for the trials from the get go?

quote:

Originally posted by WARPIG602:
So I wonder if Sig may have discovered some issues when testing the M17's prior to the start of the MHS trials that casued them to research "upgrades" or did Sig jsut build a stronger P320 for the trials from the get go?

I'm sure if you asked SIG, you'd get 10 different answers, from yes, to no, maybe, and everywhere in between.

This....

“Drop safe ... Those two words don’t exist together. No gun is drop safe. It’s a function of angle, height and surface.
If you build it completely drop safe, you legitimize mishandling. (WTF??? - me)
Inherently guns are not meant to be dropped, and are unsafe when dropped.” - Ron Cohen

Or this... ?

quote:

Originally posted by stoic-one:

quote:

Originally posted by toivo:

quote:

Originally posted by Zecpull:
Then there would be multiple FCU with matching serial numbers out there.
I could see them replacing the entire FCU if you send yours in.

Good point. It still would be easier and cheaper than shipping the whole pistol.

Not really, weight/size isn't the greatest cost determinant when shipping a handgun(frame), which is what the FCU is, the serialized part of the weapon. That vs probably 3-4 pieces/parts, which aren't considered a firearm.

Not sure what you mean. The FCU could be shipped in a padded envelope. It doesn't need an FFL because it's going from owner to manufacturer for service. As long as what comes back has the same serial number, everything should be legal.

I would imagine that if SIG is going to replace the trigger themselves, they'll want the whole pistol. That would be much larger and heavier than just the FCU.