New Jersey State Police Suing Sig

Discussion in 'Handguns: Autoloaders' started by Winkman822, May 18, 2017.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Winkman822

    Winkman822 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2011
    Messages:
    801
    Location:
    Delaware
  2. usp9

    usp9 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2005
    Messages:
    3,934
    Location:
    Bowling Green, Va
    Wow. Not the expected outcome concerning one of Sig's premier models. Maybe N.J.S.P. will go back to HK. Worked well for them for 18 years.
     
  3. ArchAngelCD

    ArchAngelCD Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2006
    Messages:
    26,248
    Location:
    Northeast PA, USA
    That is quite surprising from a company like Sig. Something seriously bad happened to the QC at their plant. Once one agency has such serious problems others will be adverts to trying their product.
     
  4. RecoilRob

    RecoilRob Member

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2003
    Messages:
    2,009
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    The way I read it....the problem is more with the ammo than the guns. Someone mentioned that the practice ammo was steel cased...and sometimes that stuff just doesn't work so well. Biggest problem IMHO is that Sig didn't call out the ammo straight from the get-go...if that is actually the cause of the failures to extract. Likely they didn't want to offend the Customer so they tried changing things on their end to make the guns work, but I've had some steel cased ammo (Brown Bear) that was just crap and no gun would reliably extract it.

    A couple in the cabinet have extractors so large and powerful that they'd rip about half the rim off on the ones that didn't want to come out...so definately in my case the ammo is defective. I'll wager right here that the primary problem is the cheap practice ammo...then throw in Recruit Training of people of all shapes and sizes who have never fired a pistol before (limp wristing)...and it's no surprise that they're having issues.
     
  5. Chuck R.

    Chuck R. Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2005
    Messages:
    3,382
    Location:
    Leavenworth, KS

    Did you read the actual complaint??

    http://14544-presscdn-0-64.pagely.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/New-Jersey-State-Police-Sig-Sauer-Complaint.pdf

    It states the malfunctions occurred with both practice and duty ammo, it also states that they occurred during annual qualifications in addition to the academy class. It also goes on to state the malfunctions happened with 2 different models of 229. Check out paragraphs 11 and 17.

    I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss this as limp wristing and bad ammo.

    Chuck
     
    Mitlov likes this.
  6. RecoilRob

    RecoilRob Member

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2003
    Messages:
    2,009
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    OK...read through your link, and it doesn't say WHAT ammo was used...just 'practice' and 'duty'. Then I spent a few minutes looking on the web for the duty ammo they use...unable to find a positive ID. Can you help me out with that?

    The complaint also mentions that a certain pistol can work just fine..then suddenly FTE, which to me would be pointing to ammo problems. Especially with them going to 'low bidder' and the rumors about steel cases has me wondering what the heck they were actually using that was causing the problems.
    Sig has egg on their face big time here....and if ammo truly was the cause, they should have said it straight away rather than trying different part changes to 'fix' the problem. But until we hear for certain what brand and types of ammo were in use...I remain skeptical that the pistol design or manufacture is at fault.
     
  7. 45_auto

    45_auto Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2011
    Messages:
    2,168
    Location:
    Southern Louisiana
    Congratulations! You are undoubtedly the most loyal fanboy of all the Glock, Sig, HK, etc, etc owners that I have ever seen!

    Since Sig seems incapable of isolating the problem using such astute analysis as you have demonstrated, perhaps you could offer them your services on a commission basis?

    From the article:

    So first Sig said it was the extractor pins, then Sig said it was the factory mold, then Sig said it was the barrel coating, then Sig said it was extractor springs, then Sig said it was extractor springs again so Sig tried springs from a different model, then Sig gunsmiths "red lined" 20% of the guns inspected for being "egregiously noncompliant with Sig specs", then Sig again said it was the barrel causing the problem, and in all this time Sig never suspected the ammo could be the problem?

    I salute you sir!
     
  8. JR24

    JR24 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2011
    Messages:
    4,582
    Location:
    Upper Midwest
    If the issue IS the Sigs then why aren't the many other departmenrs that run Sig 229s also have such issues? I know of two LEO who carried and swore by their 229s.

    I recall that NJ PD can't use JHP (IIRC, correct me if I'm mistaken) so wpndering exacly what they use is a valid speculation, considering similar guns running fine for other LEO.

    The only other consistent variable would ve NJ PD training, but I suspect that's not the problem.
     
    Plan2Live likes this.
  9. danez71

    danez71 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    5,311
    Location:
    CA,AZ,CA,TX
    It would have been cheaper for Sig to have just replaced all of them at no charge.
     
  10. dh1633pm
    • Contributing Member

    dh1633pm Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2009
    Messages:
    3,191
    Location:
    Central New York
    I just say, sucks to be them. I mean my brother in law has one of those fancy Sig 229's. Eats anything and everything. But to have 20% of pistols inspected as not meeting standards. That is indefensible for something that is needed for self defense. Hence, it sucks to be Sig.
     
  11. Winkman822

    Winkman822 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2011
    Messages:
    801
    Location:
    Delaware
    I'm not sure, but it certainly sounds like QC took a turn for the worse in this instance. That said, I still trust my personal Sigs (2 P226's, a P229, and a P245), but I don't know if I'd add another to my collection until we get a better idea of what the actual problem was in this instance.

    On an unrelated note, the city police where I live and our State police are both using P229 DAK's and all of the officers and troopers that I've had a chance to chat with about their duty pistols are quite pleased with them.
     
  12. Tirod

    Tirod Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2008
    Messages:
    5,128
    Location:
    SW MO
    I see a lot of undefined terms being used with no numbers to go with them, plus a complete lack of description about the ammo used.

    It wouldn't be tolerated in a discussion trying to solve FTE's of a member's gun. I've seen OP's get multiple PM's and then his friend contacted to wrest the information from them. Yet here we take a main stream media article which sources an antigun source which explains the PLAINTIFF's view only about a lawsuit. No actual on site testimony or discussion from officers on the scene. And we are talking about New Jersey, which is notoriously anti gun.

    There isn't enough information of a factual basis to make any conclusion on either side. Whatsoever. It's basically opinion by all parties. And it's interesting that the result was to buy Glock. Was the legal process followed? No idea.

    SIG just won the contract for the new M17 and M19, I don't see them as an inept bunch of clowns who can't figure it out. And it was just the last batch of guns, not the entire contract giving problems. So why jump on the band wagon and blame SIG when we have NJ, the Trace, and some lawyers who represent the opposite viewpoint? They should be considered suspect on the face of it. And a point of law we often forget, innocent until proven guilty.

    Let's give this some time where real information can be unearthed. Do we need another gun boycott like SA/RRA or is that the real agenda, stir up discontent where none exists? WE LIVE IN A POLITICAL ENVIRONMENT AND THE OPPOSITION DIDN'T GO AWAY AFTER THE ELECTION.

    Let's not forget the recent announcement by the loser to start her War of Resistance.
     
  13. usp9

    usp9 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2005
    Messages:
    3,934
    Location:
    Bowling Green, Va
    Tirod, what are you taking about? Sig acknowledged there was a problem with the guns. Sig then stated they could not deliver the solution they offered. Has nothing to do with ammo, politicians or anti 2nd amendment clowns. Simple facts here just being ignored in favor of pure conjecture.
     
    Shipwreck likes this.
  14. Acera

    Acera Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2007
    Messages:
    3,169
    Location:
    Free State of Texas
    Just like when someone questions Glocks, the white knights come riding out to defend the honor of their chosen corporate brand. [​IMG]


    Sig, just like every other company can put out a less than ideal product. It does not matter if my buddies, cousin knows a guy at work that never, ever has a problem with his.


    .
     
    Chuck R. and Shipwreck like this.
  15. RecoilRob

    RecoilRob Member

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2003
    Messages:
    2,009
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    This reminds me of a Lemon Law case back when I worked at a Chevy dealership. The Corvette in question DID have a minor flaw, but the 'technician' assigned to the car totally botched the diagnosis and actually created three or four other problems while ineptly trying to fix the original concern. GM ended up buying that one back...but I know I could have fixed it in less than an hour and made the customer (and GM) happy, but was rebuffed at my offer.

    I suspect something similar going on with the NJSP. Initial complaint was not diagnosed properly for whatever reason, then pride/stubborness/ignorance or combinations thereof led them down the path they ended up taking. ALL the 'problem guns' were replaced with new versions of a slightly different model...and THESE had problems too! Come on....wouldn't YOU be thinking that there must be something wrong with your ammo if you kept getting guns that wouldn't work right...when everyone else in the world seems to be having no problems with them? There is more to this story as we've been saying...just hope the truth comes out down the road.
     
  16. usp9

    usp9 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2005
    Messages:
    3,934
    Location:
    Bowling Green, Va
    Are Sig's top of the line duty pistols known to be ammo sensitive? I'm a HK fanboy, so I don't follow Sig too much. From what I've read it seems as much a small component problem, (who provides springs, pins, small parts, etc. to Sig), and the inability to service or produce a number of guns in a hurry that are to Sig's own specs.
     
  17. sirgilligan

    sirgilligan Member

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2010
    Messages:
    895
    I would love to see someone post this on the Sig Forum. :) :rofl::cool::confused::what::neener:
     
  18. RecoilRob

    RecoilRob Member

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2003
    Messages:
    2,009
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    http://sigforum.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/320601935/m/9210024424/p/4

    They're talking about it...and are also wondering about the ammo situation.....especially seeing as that particular information seems to be difficult to find.?
     
    sirgilligan likes this.
  19. GRIZ22

    GRIZ22 Member

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2006
    Messages:
    5,881
    The problem is not the ammo! All that is speculation. They don't use steel case ammo.

    NJSP uses Speer 124 gr Gold Dot for duty and Speer Lawman FMJ for training/practice. I spoke with a Trooper friend and he said he never had any issues with his Sig but has seen many failure to extract with other guys.

    NJSP has been issued Glock 19s. They work fine with the same ammo that was used in the Sig.

    It's a gun not an ammo problem.
     
    bob40caliber likes this.
  20. 9mmepiphany

    9mmepiphany Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2002
    Messages:
    24,145
    Location:
    northern california
    Not sure why you'd wonder at the reaction...Sig Forum has blasted many problem SIGs over the years

    BTW: We don't do forum wars on this site
     
    sirgilligan likes this.
  21. RecoilRob

    RecoilRob Member

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2003
    Messages:
    2,009
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    It just makes me wonder if a pistol fires reliably for several hundred rounds...then has a FTE...then goes on to fire another few hundred rounds without fail, what would cause such a thing? If the extractor IS defective, wouldn't you expect it to fail to work more often? Or...could it be the odd wonky round gets in the mix?

    The ammo being used in the Glocks is NOT the same ammo that was failing in the SIGs!! Same brand and type...OK. But the rounds that failed in the SIGs went into a bucket or were fired...so the ammo being used now in the Glocks is very likely from a different lot by now.

    There is so much more to this story that we haven't been told...kind of makes me really wonder what the cases that failed to extract looked like. And all the cases that DID extract successfully...were they on the edge of not coming out? Could there have been magazine issues at play? I'm not sure on my 228 if it'll eject properly without a mag but nothing was said in the articles about this possibility.

    For sure...the people from SIG who were assigned the task of trouble-shooting the problems didn't do a good job of it. Might have actually been something very simple to correct, but once you've changed a bunch of things trying to find the problem the customer no doubt has lost faith in you. Don't feel bad SIG!!:) S&W ran into the exact same problem with NJSP back when they bought their guns. Extraction and ejection problems. Wonder why?
     
  22. Zerodefect

    Zerodefect Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2009
    Messages:
    5,806
    Location:
    Yakutsk, Sakha Republic
    Sig has been the new Kimber for over a decade now. Hate to say I told them so, but.......

    [Popcorn.]
     
  23. Walt Sherrill

    Walt Sherrill Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2003
    Messages:
    5,666
    Location:
    Winston-Salem, NC
    The NC Highway Patrol, several years back, had problems with S&W M&Ps running .357 SIG. After many trips to NC by S&W technicians and experts, including guns taken back for further testing, etc., S&W was unable to resolve the problem or (at the time) explain (to the customer) what was going on. (I've since read that it had to do with the sear block -- but that's anecdotal, and not an official description of the cause.) The .357 SIG round was soon from all S&W's based on the same basic design. That round may come bac with the new M&P2 design (if the problem was identified and corrected, but the .357 SIG round still isn't shown with the new M&P2 on the web site.

    My only reason for mentioning the S&W fiasco is that the problems may be related to how a particular type of ammo affects a typel of weapon may be different than how it affect other versions of the same basic design. The problems aren't always easily diagnosed or resolved. The NCHP switched from the M&Ps and moved to SIG P229s (still using .357 SIG)' there have been no problems in the years since..

    As Tirod says above (response #12), we simply don't know enough about the problems NJ police experienced with the SIG P229 model/version used there -- a more-expensive, upgraded one than the P229 used by the NCHP, which have been trouble-free -- to make sweeping generalizations about the firm OR the whole P229 line. If there is a problem, it might be limited to a specific model and the particular type/load of ammo being used. Hopefully we'll learn what's going on.
     
    Last edited: May 20, 2017
  24. GRIZ22

    GRIZ22 Member

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2006
    Messages:
    5,881
    I find it amusing the Sig fans who blame everyone and everything...but Sig.

    Yes, the ammo being used now may not be from the same lot as some used that failed in the Sigs. I'm also pretty sure that all the Sig failures occurred with different lots of ammo. I haven't heard of any lots of Speer ammo that were junk either. I've been there with as an instructor while millions of rounds of Speer ammo has gone downrange with no ammo issues. However, I also believe Speer might make a bad lot of ammo someday.

    You've also brought up NJSP had issues with extraction and ejection when testing S&Ws. Uh...maybe there was a problem with them too. You also seem to be alleging NJSP has some extraction and ejection conspiracy going on.

    NJSP had problems with the guns, they gave Sig ample opportunity to fix it, and it isn't fixed. Yes, Sig as any manufacturer, is capable of putting out a defective product at times. It doesn't mean all Sigs are junk. Even if you don't live in NJ I'm sure there were some Federal dollars involved in buying these guns. As a taxpayer one should (for a change) praise the NJAG. They're refusing to accept a defective product and seek compensation. Wouldn't you do the same thing if you bought a defective product the manufacturer couldn't fix?

    My guess is Sig will probably settle this out of court. It's already too much in the public eye and they don't need a court decision showing they made a defective product.
     
  25. Acera

    Acera Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2007
    Messages:
    3,169
    Location:
    Free State of Texas
    Probably correct. They don't want to derail all the lemming police department purchases that invariably come from a military contract.

    Their PR department will have it's job cut out. But it is not a impossible job. Just look at how the Glock has kept the 17M recall relatively quiet. Those Glock fanbois are pretty rabid when it comes to their brand loyalty, so with help from their Sig counterparts it is possible to put this behind them.


    .
     
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