Quantcast

My thoughts on the Armys pick of the SIG 320

Discussion in 'Handguns: Autoloaders' started by george burns, Jan 25, 2017.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. george burns

    george burns Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2014
    Messages:
    1,841
    I was taken back at first when I heard this, but after thinking about it for a while it made sense.
    First the average new recruit doesn't know much about guns. they need a simple gun that parts can be changed easily on, "like the 1911 originally was", remenber, you could take any gun and put the parts from any other gun in it and it would work, "or at least should".
    So fast forwrd now, does the average guy need a super accurate expensive to replace gun, or a gun that if he broke any part of the frame, would cost $40.00 retail , and "who knows what to the army, "5-15 dollars", so the entire gun should never have to be replaced all together. Only the parts that break or wear out.
    Now this is not going to make the gun extremly accurate, simply because if you rub metal against Poly, a few dozen times, the tolorences will change a few thousanths of an inch. But the gun should still remain accurate enough for a man to hit a target the size of another man. I am sure that after 5-10 years most of these guns will have seen many parts replaced if not the entire gun. It alo lets them issue different size guns to various men doing different tasks, like a sub-compact for a smaller framed person or investigator or a larger frame for a combat soldier. The other guns submitted were not able to accompish this, unless they submiitted guns we haven't seen "which is probably so". But overall it was the most economical way to go, not the best gun the best gun for their purpose.
    I Just read they are paying $207 per gun from the firearm blog, if correct, we know why they got the contract. I don't think Glock is going to sell their guns, spare parts and mags that cheap. Probably a $50 dollar per gun diference. If someone can look at the purchase order for the Glocks the Seals an spec- ops guys just bought we could know for certain, I would think it's public record.
     
    Last edited: Jan 25, 2017
  2. Ohio Gun Guy

    Ohio Gun Guy Member

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2008
    Messages:
    2,472
    Location:
    Central Ohio
    The Sig 320 is the Sig model that allows the internal trigger group (Numbered) part to be removed - correct?

    It's really a pistol with the similar concept as the AR platform has become, Modular....
     
  3. george burns

    george burns Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2014
    Messages:
    1,841
    Yes the firing group is serialized
     
  4. 1KPerDay

    1KPerDay Member

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2006
    Messages:
    16,832
    Location:
    Happy Valley, UT
    The parts that matter in accuracy are metal on metal. The P320 is accurate. Replacing the plastic lower frame isn't going to affect accuracy.
     
    sgtstryker, gripper and BILLG like this.
  5. pblanc

    pblanc Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2014
    Messages:
    691
    There is no metal rubbing on poly in the P320. The fire control unit, which has a stainless steel frame, locks solidly into the grip module. The steel slide cycles on 4 steel tabs which are part of the frame of the FCU. The slide does not cycle on metal tabs set into plastic unlike some other pistols I know.

    And yes, the SIG P320 is quite accurate.
     
    gripper, bearcreek and BILLG like this.
  6. amd6547

    amd6547 Member

    Joined:
    May 27, 2006
    Messages:
    2,066
    Location:
    North Coast of OHIO
    I'm a Glock 17 guy and have no experience with the P320 and no intention of changing...but I wish the military good luck with their new pistol. I hope they give the troops good, modern combat pistol training.

    I also hope President Trump signs the release of the retired M9's to the CMP.
     
    chardin, ROCK6 and Seven High like this.
  7. george burns

    george burns Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2014
    Messages:
    1,841
    That explains the $40.00 cost of a frame, so it's really just a shell?
     
  8. sigarms228

    sigarms228 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2011
    Messages:
    1,098
    Location:
    Illinois
    Before too long we might be seeing third party poly frames for the P320 from companies like Magpul. I like the grip on the P320 but would not mind it having a PPQ/P30 grip type option with the subtle finger grooves.
     
    Stringfellow likes this.
  9. Walkalong

    Walkalong Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2006
    Messages:
    62,321
    Location:
    Alabama
    Now there's a thought.
     
  10. Walkalong

    Walkalong Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2006
    Messages:
    62,321
    Location:
    Alabama
    That would be good for folks like me who think the grip is a tad large. (Short fingers)
     
  11. herrwalther

    herrwalther Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2013
    Messages:
    5,541
    I believe having the 320 will reduce cost in the long run. The modularity of the firearm would allow repairs to be done very cheaply compared to repairing and refitting the M9. A unit with the funds and getting ready to deploy will find nearly any reason to "deadline" a weapon they don't want to bring overseas. I saw a whole rack (about 25) M9s be deadlined for what civilians would call minor cosmetic damage such as broken laynard loops, missing grip panel screws etc.

    There are 4 different grip sizes as far as I can tell. Full size, compact, carry, and subcompact. The first 3 are probably what the Army picked up, as there isn't much need for concealability of a service pistol. Maybe one of the other grip sizes would fit your hand better?
     
  12. Mainsail

    Mainsail Member

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2005
    Messages:
    3,148
    Location:
    Washington
    The M9 was being bought for under $200 a copy originally.
     
  13. entropy

    entropy Member

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2004
    Messages:
    9,773
    Location:
    G_d's Country, WI
    I think it's a smart choice; while they're at it, they could go back to the .45, or at least go up to the .40.
     
  14. sgt127

    sgt127 Member

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2003
    Messages:
    1,386
    It's a good gun. They should work well. The only problem I see is somebody getting a part number wrong on a requisition and getting a pallet of short magazines for the large frame guns the unit is issued.

    I almost think there are too many choices in the Sig. For a dedicated gun nut (like most of us) no problem.
     
    BLU likes this.
  15. entropy

    entropy Member

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2004
    Messages:
    9,773
    Location:
    G_d's Country, WI
    You must have been in Supply!:rofl:
     
    BLU and sgt127 like this.
  16. herrwalther

    herrwalther Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2013
    Messages:
    5,541
    One report I read is the Army is ordering caliber change parts to support 9mm, .40, .45, and interestingly 357Sig. A conflicting report was for 9mm, .40, and 357 Sig since the 45 P320 uses a different grip module for the longer round and magazine.
     
  17. 0ne3

    0ne3 Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2014
    Messages:
    129
    Was there really anything wrong with the old tryed and true 1911.
     
    Ibmikey likes this.
  18. JohnBiltz

    JohnBiltz Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2010
    Messages:
    1,788
    Location:
    Phoenix, AZ
    I shot one that I had to aim 2 feet left to hit the target. You could rotate your hand from 3 to 9 o'clock and back and listen to them rattle. They were so worn it was embarrassing to have people carrying them.

    Someone will then say get new ones. Think about having a unit armorer having to hand fit replacement parts.
     
  19. george burns

    george burns Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2014
    Messages:
    1,841
    I am afraid those old Berettas have seen better days, I saw in another forum that most of them are half silver from abuse.
    Unless they give them away, you will end up replacing half the parts, andd on that gun you still will have plenty to wear out unless you replace the entire firing mech and safetys and refinish the bent and scratched parts, unless you want a truck gun.In which case they better be under 200 dollars.
     
  20. Varminterror

    Varminterror Member

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2016
    Messages:
    8,100
    1) Cost up front

    2) Repair costs

    That's more than enough reason before you talk at all about the design itself.
     
    bearcreek likes this.
  21. Old Dog

    Old Dog Member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2004
    Messages:
    6,744
    Location:
    Staying away from CHAZ, er CHOP
    Geez, are you kidding? By the time my unit sent out its 1911s (in about 1992), I don't believe there had been a new 1911 provided to any branch of the U.S. military since the mid or late 1950s. Our pistols were all hard-use and pretty clapped-out.

    Those of you desiring to get an old 1911 through CMP must not remember the state of our pistols by the time the M9 transition came about ...
     
  22. 9mmepiphany

    9mmepiphany Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2002
    Messages:
    22,617
    Location:
    northern california
    Just for accuracy's sake, those refer to the size of the guns....slide length and grip height. The Carry is the Compact slide on a Full Size grip

    The grip modules (what you usually call the frame) of the different sized guns each come in 3 sizes: Small, Medium, and Large
     
  23. jmr40

    jmr40 Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2007
    Messages:
    13,369
    Location:
    Georgia
    Yes. There were far better options by the 1930's.
     
  24. Jim Watson

    Jim Watson Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    27,011
    I read somewhere that the P320 will cost us $206 each.

    I am not sure about this "modularity" stuff. If it supports easy repair, great. But I have this picture of troops taking their guns further apart than field stripping and wondering how to get them back together.
     
    Ibmikey likes this.
  25. entropy

    entropy Member

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2004
    Messages:
    9,773
    Location:
    G_d's Country, WI
    That's been a problem through the ages. Take it to the Unit Armorer......

    $206? That's a bargain! I'd buy a SIG 320 for $206 all day long.

    The Unit Armorers probably didn't have to hand fit parts back in 1911, why would they now? I admit, at the and of their service life, a lot of them were looser and sloppier than they probably were in 1911. I tightened up the ones in my Arms Room as much as I could and still retain reliable function. (Besides the BN Staff's issue weapons, they were used for the BN Pistol team.)

    I remember it very well. I still want one.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice