Range Report: Sig P365

[Hypnogator]

Saturday I bought a new Sig P365 for evaluation as an EDC piece to replace my Springfield XDs .45. I got a "hot off the production line" 3rd generation model that had, in fact, been manufactured on June 7.

It's just slightly smaller than my XDs, but is considerably lighter and more comfortable to hold. Here is a comparison of the two:

Today, I cleaned it, applied a light coat of Slide Glide to the rails, and took it to the range. I fired a total of 62 rounds; one magazine of 115-gr Sig 365 JHPs

with the following results:

Next I fired the second 10-rd magazine with Sig 124-gr JHPs

with similar results

Then I fired a 12-round magazine of Winchester White Box 115-gr FMJs:

Finally, I loaded up the two 10-rounders and my last 10 rounds into the 12-rounder and fired on the last two targets (3 and 5).
The targets are nothing to brag about, but my old eyes aren't seeing the sights as sharply as they once did; however they would certainly have all been in or near center of body mass which is what a defensive pistol is all about. It will soon wear a green laser, as my XDs currently does. As may be seen from the targets, it shoots a bit low (all shots aimed at the center of the red oval).

Reliability: On the first shot, I felt a brief hesitation as the slide returned fully to battery (a ka-chunk) that was quick enough that it wouldn't have caused me to have to delay a second shot in a rapid fire string. After that, there were no issues whatsoever. The pistol performed perfectly.

Shootability: The recoil felt a bit lighter than my XDs .45 (duh) and was quite manageable, although the 124-gr loads were noticeably stiffer than the 115s (again, duh).

While policing up my brass, one of the range instructors picked up a couple for me, and remarked that the Sigs are still dragging the firing pin. He stated that he would never carry one for personal defense, because the firing pin might break in the middle of a gunfight. I did notice the firing pin drag on the primers, but would have thought nothing of it had he not mentioned it. I've seen similar drag marks on other autoloaders, but have never heard of firing pins breaking as a result. In any event, here are the heads of three of the rounds I fired:

I'm quite pleased with the little beast, and will begin using it as my edc, once I run a couple of hundred more rounds through it and mount a laser on it.

 

[Jeb Stuart]

Saturday I bought a new Sig P365 for evaluation as an EDC piece to replace my Springfield XDs .45. I got a "hot off the production line" 3rd generation model that had, in fact, been manufactured on June 7.
View attachment 794520
It's just slightly smaller than my XDs, but is considerably lighter and more comfortable to hold. Here is a comparison of the two:
View attachment 794521
Today, I cleaned it, applied a light coat of Slide Glide to the rails, and took it to the range. I fired a total of 62 rounds; one magazine of 115-gr Sig 365 JHPs
View attachment 794522
with the following results:
View attachment 794524
Next I fired the second 10-rd magazine with Sig 124-gr JHPs
View attachment 794526
with similar results
View attachment 794527
Then I fired a 12-round magazine of Winchester White Box 115-gr FMJs:
View attachment 794529
Finally, I loaded up the two 10-rounders and my last 10 rounds into the 12-rounder and fired on the last two targets (3 and 5).View attachment 794530 View attachment 794531
The targets are nothing to brag about, but my old eyes aren't seeing the sights as sharply as they once did; however they would certainly have all been in or near center of body mass which is what a defensive pistol is all about. It will soon wear a green laser, as my XDs currently does. As may be seen from the targets, it shoots a bit low (all shots aimed at the center of the red oval).

Reliability: On the first shot, I felt a brief hesitation as the slide returned fully to battery (a ka-chunk) that was quick enough that it wouldn't have caused me to have to delay a second shot in a rapid fire string. After that, there were no issues whatsoever. The pistol performed perfectly.

Shootability: The recoil felt a bit lighter than my XDs .45 (duh) and was quite manageable, although the 124-gr loads were noticeably stiffer than the 115s (again, duh).

While policing up my brass, one of the range instructors picked up a couple for me, and remarked that the Sigs are still dragging the firing pin. He stated that he would never carry one for personal defense, because the firing pin might break in the middle of a gunfight. I did notice the firing pin drag on the primers, but would have thought nothing of it had he not mentioned it. I've seen similar drag marks on other autoloaders, but have never heard of firing pins breaking as a result. In any event, here are the heads of three of the rounds I fired:
View attachment 794532
I'm quite pleased with the little beast, and will begin using it as my edc, once I run a couple of hundred more rounds through it and mount a laser on it.

Hypnogator, that you for the range report. Couple of questions please. How do you know it was Gen 3? Is that something Sig has informed about? Do you think it is possible the Slide Guide actually made the slide a tad slow as you mentioned on one round? From pictures of the SIG 365 and some of other comments about the what appears to be a narrow distance from the receiver to the Grip, did you notice that as a issue when shooting?
One note that I have observed is the frequent mention of the drag marks on shell casing. After reading so many post on this issue I started doing as much research as possible and it has become my opinion that it is actually a "NON-ISSUE". So it is my opinion that I would discount what your Instructor had to say. Personally, I view instructor quotes and comments with a grain of salt.
I have a feeling the low shots my just be because the gun might actually have less recoil than other guns in it's class. I am just guessing here, as I posted on another forum in detail of why this could occur. At the time, I was speaking about low recoil of my Nano. I think just shooting and becoming more familiar with the gun will correct this on it's own. And actually you have very nice groups for first time out.
I also liked your Picture of your XD. How do you like that gun?

Congratulations on ownership of a fine gun and thanks for taking the time to post.

*I have no interest in owning a Sig 365 simply because I am happy with my Present carry guns. However I do enjoy learning about different firearms and how they shoot. Most especially Pocketguns and Micro 9mm's, Therefore I have no dog in this hunt.

*note 2 In my research of the Drag Marks of the shell casing, I came across this from the Kahr manual.

 

[Hypnogator]

How do you know it was Gen 3? Is that something Sig has informed about? Do you think it is possible the Slide Guide actually made the slide a tad slow as you mentioned on one round? From pictures of the SIG 365 and some of other comments about the what appears to be a narrow distance from the receiver to the Grip, did you notice that as a issue when shooting?

The dealer told me you could recognize a Gen 3 pistol because it came in a grey box with rounded corners, not a black box with square corners. Don't know whether that's correct or not, but mine was certainly the latest generation, since it had been only a couple of weeks since it was manufactured, according to the sticker on the box. Yes, it's possible that the slide glide might have decreased the slide velocity enough to cause the initial hesitation when returning to battery. I used probably more than I should have, so that it would "wear in" the rails with firing. The receiver/grip distance wasn't an issue. Quite the contrary, the P365 has less muzzle flip than my XDs. It returned to target very quickly.

I agree that the firing pin drag is a non-issue. I've seen that "smear" on other pistols that have functioned well without problems. I've always been happy with my XDs, except for it's 6-round capacity. It looks like the P365 has achieved about the ultimate in size vs. capacity in a totally reliable weapon.

 

[Madcap_Magician]

I don't really get the primer drag issue. I have that issue on most of the semiauto guns I've owned that were not full-on 4-5" service pistols, including Glocks, S&Ws, and Springfield Armory, and it hasn't ever caused me any problems.

 

[340PD]

Great gun and nice targets.

 

[paulsj]

Saturday I bought a new Sig P365 for evaluation as an EDC piece to replace my Springfield XDs .45. I got a "hot off the production line" 3rd generation model that had, in fact, been manufactured on June 7.
View attachment 794520
It's just slightly smaller than my XDs, but is considerably lighter and more comfortable to hold. Here is a comparison of the two:
View attachment 794521
Today, I cleaned it, applied a light coat of Slide Glide to the rails, and took it to the range. I fired a total of 62 rounds; one magazine of 115-gr Sig 365 JHPs
View attachment 794522
with the following results:
View attachment 794524
Next I fired the second 10-rd magazine with Sig 124-gr JHPs
View attachment 794526
with similar results
View attachment 794527
Then I fired a 12-round magazine of Winchester White Box 115-gr FMJs:
View attachment 794529
Finally, I loaded up the two 10-rounders and my last 10 rounds into the 12-rounder and fired on the last two targets (3 and 5).View attachment 794530 View attachment 794531
The targets are nothing to brag about, but my old eyes aren't seeing the sights as sharply as they once did; however they would certainly have all been in or near center of body mass which is what a defensive pistol is all about. It will soon wear a green laser, as my XDs currently does. As may be seen from the targets, it shoots a bit low (all shots aimed at the center of the red oval).

Reliability: On the first shot, I felt a brief hesitation as the slide returned fully to battery (a ka-chunk) that was quick enough that it wouldn't have caused me to have to delay a second shot in a rapid fire string. After that, there were no issues whatsoever. The pistol performed perfectly.

Shootability: The recoil felt a bit lighter than my XDs .45 (duh) and was quite manageable, although the 124-gr loads were noticeably stiffer than the 115s (again, duh).

While policing up my brass, one of the range instructors picked up a couple for me, and remarked that the Sigs are still dragging the firing pin. He stated that he would never carry one for personal defense, because the firing pin might break in the middle of a gunfight. I did notice the firing pin drag on the primers, but would have thought nothing of it had he not mentioned it. I've seen similar drag marks on other autoloaders, but have never heard of firing pins breaking as a result. In any event, here are the heads of three of the rounds I fired:
View attachment 794532
I'm quite pleased with the little beast, and will begin using it as my edc, once I run a couple of hundred more rounds through it and mount a laser on it.

Sixty two rounds are plenty. I bought second hand Glock. The shop salesman fired two maganines worth of 124gr HST i brought in for testing. I pressed it into service after that. It sounds like you have nice well tested ccw.

 

[pblanc]

I don't really get the primer drag issue. I have that issue on most of the semiauto guns I've owned that were not full-on 4-5" service pistols, including Glocks, S&Ws, and Springfield Armory, and it hasn't ever caused me any problems.

The reason that it has become a concern with the P365 is that a significant number of these pistols have suffered broken striker tips.

While it is true that other striker-fired pistols of similar size also show evidence of striker drag on the primers of ejected cases, the striker drag does seem to be more extreme for the P365 than for most other similar pistols. I have seen comparison photos of ejected cases from P365 pistols and others that bear this out, although the degree of striker drag does seem to vary between different P365s.

I don't think anyone really cares what the primers of their ejected cases looks like, but the concern is that this striker drag is putting more lateral stress on the striker tip that can eventually lead to failure. Unfortunately, when striker breakage occurs it does so without warning and takes the pistol out of action. Several instances of broken primers have been reported in pistols that had successfully shot 500 rounds and one in a pistol that had shot approx. 1900 rounds.

 

[someguy2800]

I've seen a few reports of them breaking the striker tip off in the first magazine. It is a very real issue due to the design of the striker nose, though I imagine the percentage of failures is pretty small.

 

[VoodooMountain]

Those drag marks look deep enough where I would be a bit concerned. I dont recall seeing indentions like that on my shield, pps, or 26 but maybe they were lighter and I missed them.

I really want to like the 365 but I'll wait a while before purchasing.

 

[Jeb Stuart]

I heard the same crap about the Beretta Pico. On, it will break a striker. Hogwash, I stopped counting rounds out of one Pico I own at 2500 flawless round and that was quite a while ago. Well over 1,000 rounds through my second one. Of course I do not dry fire any gun, (and I have and I have many) without snap caps. The internet will as usual take a simple issue and make it a massive common problem
That said, I take every new gun I have and will shoot 2500 rounds of Mixed Ammo with different weights etc. to see how well it performs before I carry. My last gun I purchased was the Beretta Nano and I did just that. Later and just recently
I took the small 9mm I have been CCW for years and have shot thousands of rounds through to the range. I shot 100 rounds of mixed ammo through one gun and then 100 rounds of Ammo through the second gun. I then repeated the sequence and then took 25 rounds of Plus P ammo and shot through one gun and then 25 rounds through the next.
It was only then, did I feel I could give a fair honest evaluation of the two guns. And Yes, The Nano out performed the other gun. Most especially in handling and recoil control. muzzle flip overall mild. smooth shooting. In fact there was a significant difference.

I suggest anyone owning the New 365 to take their weapon they presently have and do the same. Especially important to fire at least 2500 rounds doing test in you CARRY GUN. I really do not care about a range review with a few hundred rounds as a complete review.

 

[Madcap_Magician]

The reason that it has become a concern with the P365 is that a significant number of these pistols have suffered broken striker tips.

While it is true that other striker-fired pistols of similar size also show evidence of striker drag on the primers of ejected cases, the striker drag does seem to be more extreme for the P365 than for most other similar pistols. I have seen comparison photos of ejected cases from P365 pistols and others that bear this out, although the degree of striker drag does seem to vary between different P365s.

I don't think anyone really cares what the primers of their ejected cases looks like, but the concern is that this striker drag is putting more lateral stress on the striker tip that can eventually lead to failure. Unfortunately, when striker breakage occurs it does so without warning and takes the pistol out of action. Several instances of broken primers have been reported in pistols that had successfully shot 500 rounds and one in a pistol that had shot approx. 1900 rounds.

I don't know if it's been 'a significant number of these pistols,' just that most of them exhibit primer drag and some of them are broken strikers.

 

[pblanc]

Well, on another forum a member started a thread with a link to a poll of P365 owners soliciting information about any reliability issues they had experienced. As of yesterday, a total of 178 P365 owners had responded.

A number of issues were documented including failures of slide lock on empty magazines (which can be user-induced, of course), other types of magazine issues or failures, excessive barrel peening, failures to return to battery, failures to extract and failures to eject. But the two most worrisome issues were deemed critical because they occurred without prior warning and sometimes after quite significant round counts, and these failures take the pistol out of service and no remedial action is available. The two critical failures were either a broken striker and either a broken or dislodged trigger bar spring resulting in a dead trigger.

Of the 178 who responded, 15 (8.43%) had suffered a broken striker and 9 a dead trigger (4.49%) for a "critical failure" rate of nearly 13% in that poll. In addition to those failures another 27 P365 owners had to send either their pistol back to SIG for repair of one of the issues mentioned earlier, or some other issue not included in the survey questions. So we are talking about 51 out of 178 (29%) P365 owners who participated in this survey sending their pistol back to SIG for repair. Another 6 owners had to send one or more magazines back to SIG.

Twenty one of the respondents were concerned enough about the striker breakage issue that they replaced their original striker with a forged steel aftermarket striker that costs $100. For those who suffered a broken striker, eight failed after round counts of 300 or greater and one after 1900 rounds. Of the dead trigger failures, three occurred after 450-500 rounds. In addition, we know from the Military Arms Channel video review of the P365 that appears on youtube, that Tim's trigger went dead after nearly 900 rounds. That failure is not included in the above mentioned poll results.

It has been documented that one P365 owner has had two broken strikers in the same pistol and another had the "dead trigger" occur twice in the same pistol. Both these pistols had been returned to SIG for repair after the initial failure, and experienced the exact same failure after the "repair".

Now, if we took these poll results at face value, I think most would consider a 29% chance of having to return the pistol to SIG for some type of repair, and a 13% incidence of critical failures to be more than "significant". I find it disconcerting that two pistols were returned to SIG for a critical failure, and even after SIG knew about the issue, they were apparently unable to correct it.

Now the obvious caveat is that the P365 owners who participated in that poll might not be a representative sample of all P365 owners, which is of course possible. Some have said that pistol owners who have had problems are more likely to be drawn to forums to seek advice, and are more likely to participate in such a poll than those who have not. That may be, but in my experience, that particular forum is populated by far more "rabid" SIG fans than there are SIG skeptics. So you can draw whatever conclusions you like from this info, or ignore it completely. But the poll would have had to have a very severe selection bias toward owners of problem pistols to make the critical failure rate acceptable in my eyes.

 

[someguy2800]

Well, on another forum a member started a thread with a link to a poll of P365 owners soliciting information about any reliability issues they had experienced. As of yesterday, a total of 178 P365 owners had responded.

A number of issues were documented including failures of slide lock on empty magazines (which can be user-induced, of course), other types of magazine issues or failures, excessive barrel peening, failures to return to battery, failures to extract and failures to eject. But the two most worrisome issues were deemed critical because they occurred without prior warning and sometimes after quite significant round counts, and these failures take the pistol out of service and no remedial action is available. The two critical failures were either a broken striker and either a broken or dislodged trigger bar spring resulting in a dead trigger.

Of the 178 who responded, 15 (8.43%) had suffered a broken striker and 9 a dead trigger (4.49%) for a "critical failure" rate of nearly 13% in that poll. In addition to those failures another 27 P365 owners had to send either their pistol back to SIG for repair of one of the issues mentioned earlier, or some other issue not included in the survey questions. So we are talking about 51 out of 178 (29%) P365 owners who participated in this survey sending their pistol back to SIG for repair. Another 6 owners had to send one or more magazines back to SIG.

Twenty one of the respondents were concerned enough about the striker breakage issue that they replaced their original striker with a forged steel aftermarket striker that costs $100. For those who suffered a broken striker, eight failed after round counts of 300 or greater and one after 1900 rounds. Of the dead trigger failures, three occurred after 450-500 rounds. In addition, we know from the Military Arms Channel video review of the P365 that appears on youtube, that Tim's trigger went dead after nearly 900 rounds. That failure is not included in the above mentioned poll results.

It has been documented that one P365 owner has had two broken strikers in the same pistol and another had the "dead trigger" occur twice in the same pistol. Both these pistols had been returned to SIG for repair after the initial failure, and experienced the exact same failure after the "repair".

Now, if we took these poll results at face value, I think most would consider a 29% chance of having to return the pistol to SIG for some type of repair, and a 13% incidence of critical failures to be more than "significant". I find it disconcerting that two pistols were returned to SIG for a critical failure, and even after SIG knew about the issue, they were apparently unable to correct it.

Now the obvious caveat is that the P365 owners who participated in that poll might not be a representative sample of all P365 owners, which is of course possible. Some have said that pistol owners who have had problems are more likely to be drawn to forums to seek advice, and are more likely to participate in such a poll than those who have not. That may be, but in my experience, that particular forum is populated by far more "rabid" SIG fans than there are SIG skeptics. So you can draw whatever conclusions you like from this info, or ignore it completely. But the poll would have had to have a very severe selection bias toward owners of problem pistols to make the critical failure rate acceptable in my eyes.

That is interesting information. I think only a relatively small percentage of owners are active on gun forums, probably only 5% or so, so I'm sure the actual failure rate in total is not that high, although the majority of these pistols sold will never have 100 rounds through them. Last year I bought an SP101 revolver with 5 rounds down the tube. The previous owner bought it, shot one cylinder through it to test function, carried it for 6 months, and bought something different.

So I'm not really interested in what percentage total of a gun has problems. I want to know how many have made it to 2000 rounds without a breakage.

 

[Jeb Stuart]

What Generation was this? Is this the very first run/ batch? Percentages of people that buy after market steel strikers should not even be in the Poll. I buy them with no concern at all for other guns. I just prefer them. That figure is not conducive to just one brand or model.
Please run the poll again and specific what batch you are referring to. Also what is the average of first run problems for all manufactures? How is someone to know if this is a high number or low number? I could for instance simple log on to the Ruger forum and count how many posters have reported problems with just one model that has recently come out. I can tell you right now, I could find more than you are reporting with just one recent gun in particular.
Also, how many of the first run guns did Sig actually correct? That should have been posted as well. How many of these owners did not expect a first run issue? How many expected there would be? What percentage were expected on first run gun?

You really need to do a study to include all manufacturers of first run guns. You also need to then do a follow up each three months or even a month. Personally I am not sure they are even high numbers. Actually it sounds or appears very low.

 

[someguy2800]

What Generation was this? Is this the very first run/ batch? Percentages of people that buy after market steel strikers should not even be in the Poll. I buy them with no concern at all for other guns. I just prefer them. That figure is not conducive to just one brand or model.
Please run the poll again and specific what batch you are referring to. Also what is the average of first run problems for all manufactures? How is someone to know if this is a high number or low number? I could for instance simple log on to the Ruger forum and count how many posters have reported problems with just one model that has recently come out. I can tell you right now, I could find more than you are reporting with just one recent gun in particular.
Also, how many of the first run guns did Sig actually correct? That should have been posted as well. How many of these owners did not expect a first run issue? How many expected there would be? What percentage were expected on first run gun?

You really need to do a study to include all manufacturers of first run guns. You also need to then do a follow up each three months or even a month. Personally I am not sure they are even high numbers. Actually it sounds or appears very low.

Sounds like you should do your own study.

 

[Walkalong]

Do you think it is possible the Slide Guide actually made the slide a tad slow as you mentioned on one round?

The slide was very tight on my P-365 when it was new. That loosened up soon, but if all of them are like that, it may cause a bit of sluggishness at first, dunno.

 

[pblanc]

The poll I referred to is not mine. I did not set it up, nor did I monitor it. The individual who did so put a considerable amount of work into it, and in my opinion, deserves thanks for doing so. The poll is actually ongoing and the individual who set it up continues to update the results every couple of days. But the number of responders has dropped off so it may pretty well have run its course by now.

The poll is open to all SIG P365 owners. Those who responded to it have pistols that were manufactured anywhere from January of this year to June so it includes several "generations". I would not be inclined to apply the term "generations" to the P365 since SIG has made many "rolling changes" during the introduction of this pistol, and continues to do so. As for how many guns, first run or otherwise, SIG has "corrected", all that can be said is that 51 of 178 respondents found a need to return their pistol to SIG for some type of problem. Two of the pistols that were returned for critical failures that were returned to SIG could hardly be considered to have been "corrected" since the suffered the exact same failure after the "repair".

I own 5 SIGs so I am hardly a SIG basher. I have been interested in the P365 since its introduction so I have been following the owner experience pretty closely since then. Some of the early issues seem to be reported infrequently recently so perhaps these were corrected. These included sights that moved or fell off, which seems to have been fixed by SIG installing X ray sights on the pistols, and severe barrel peening and extraction/ejection failures, which seems to have been improved by a complete redesign of the recoil spring assembly.

As for the broken striker issue, SIG has apparently "fessed up" that a large batch of pistols produced from February through April of this year had MIM strikers that were manufactured in India that may have been out of spec predisposing to failure. But they have not widely disseminated this information nor issued a recall on those pistols nor even a "voluntary upgrade". Some have noticed some difference in how the tails of the trigger bar springs are being trimmed on more recently manufactured pistols. But in the poll mentioned, two pistols produced in the second half of May suffered critical failures, one a broken striker and one a dead trigger, so I am not convinced that SIG has yet corrected these issues completely.

 

[VoodooMountain]

I heard the same crap about the Beretta Pico. On, it will break a striker. Hogwash, I stopped counting rounds out of one Pico I own at 2500 flawless round and that was quite a while ago. Well over 1,000 rounds through my second one. Of course I do not dry fire any gun, (and I have and I have many) without snap caps. The internet will as usual take a simple issue and make it a massive common problem
That said, I take every new gun I have and will shoot 2500 rounds of Mixed Ammo with different weights etc. to see how well it performs before I carry. My last gun I purchased was the Beretta Nano and I did just that. Later and just recently
I took the small 9mm I have been CCW for years and have shot thousands of rounds through to the range. I shot 100 rounds of mixed ammo through one gun and then 100 rounds of Ammo through the second gun. I then repeated the sequence and then took 25 rounds of Plus P ammo and shot through one gun and then 25 rounds through the next.
It was only then, did I feel I could give a fair honest evaluation of the two guns. And Yes, The Nano out performed the other gun. Most especially in handling and recoil control. muzzle flip overall mild. smooth shooting. In fact there was a significant difference.

I suggest anyone owning the New 365 to take their weapon they presently have and do the same. Especially important to fire at least 2500 rounds doing test in you CARRY GUN. I really do not care about a range review with a few hundred rounds as a complete review.

Most new designs and many revamps have issues including sig, glock, sw, ruger, etc.

Nobody is immune to human error, pressure to beat the competition to the market, and to cut costs.

And for what its worth the only nano I've ever seen at the range had the rear sight fall off after a few rounds. Guy at the gun counter of the range mentioned he has seen it often.

Point being that not everything on the internet is hype. Glock still has issues and yet still has deniers too for whatever reason.

 

[Jeb Stuart]

Most new designs and many revamps have issues including sig, glock, sw, ruger, etc.

Nobody is immune to human error, pressure to beat the competition to the market, and to cut costs.

And for what its worth the only nano I've ever seen at the range had the rear sight fall off after a few rounds. Guy at the gun counter of the range mentioned he has seen it often.

Point being that not everything on the internet is hype. Glock still has issues and yet still has deniers too for whatever reason.

Give me a break, So you saw a sight fall off? A new Gun? Seriously? Seeing as how they are "removable", it is only common sense to check the sights before shooting and arrival of the gun and "lock tight" them accordingly after zero'd. I have "checked sights" all my life on pistols, rifles etc upon arrival. Most removal pistol sights are not locked tight at the factory. I am surprised you do not know this. Shipping etc can loosen these very tiny set screws. But this is a classic example of the nonsense that goes on with the Internet. I had a sight come of a Ruger LC9S, so what? Point being there is so much crappy hype on the internet. And this is just another example.

Maybe shooters should get with reality. You can hype anything and a whole lot of Newbies that want to make themselves out to be know it all's will quickly point at any flaw.

Speaking of polls. I remember the night before the Election of Trump and Hillary. Some polls had Hillary winning with 300 electoral votes. Lol, great poll.

 

[VoodooMountain]

Give me a break, So you saw a sight fall off? A new Gun? Seriously? Seeing as how they are "removable", it is only common sense to check the sights before shooting and arrival of the gun and "lock tight" them accordingly after zero'd. I have "checked sights" all my life on pistols, rifles etc upon arrival. Most removal pistol sights are not locked tight at the factory. I am surprised you do not know this. Shipping etc can loosen these very tiny set screws. But this is a classic example of the nonsense that goes on with the Internet. I had a sight come of a Ruger LC9S, so what? Point being there is so much crappy hype on the internet. And this is just another example.

Maybe shooters should get with reality. You can hype anything and a whole lot of Newbies that want to make themselves out to be know it all's will quickly point at any flaw.

Speaking of polls. I remember the night before the Election of Trump and Hillary. Some polls had Hillary winning with 300 electoral votes. Lol, great poll.

Opinion here of course but you sound like you are a bit angry?

Also opinion but sights shouldn't fall off new guns and I dont check them when new in the same way I dont check lug nuts on a new car. Vital component taken for granted.

Also havent had any sights fall of any gun new or used either.

But let's not totally derail the thread and get it closed.

 

[Jeb Stuart]

Opinion here of course but you sound like you are a bit angry?

Also opinion but sights shouldn't fall off new guns and I dont check them when new in the same way I dont check lug nuts on a new car. Vital component taken for granted.

Also havent had any sights fall of any gun new or used either.

But let's not totally derail the thread and get it closed.

Lol,So what now, you are going to start bashing Beretta because you saw a sight come off? My God, this is exactly what I have been talking about. And Your comparison to lug nuts to diminutive set screws is so far over the top it is downright ridiculous.
And I would just by common sense think that a previous owner of a used gun did in fact lock tight his sights down unless he was a fool. . Yes, post like yours is exactly what does make me angry. And if you believe that that sights on a new gun do not need to be checked before going to the range then I really question how much experience you have in this sport.

 

[VoodooMountain]

Wasnt bashing beretta and it was a new gun. Gun clerk even made mention he had seen this happen with that model on other occasions.

Out of the dozens of firearms I have purchased I have never had that happen.

Sights shouldn't fall off a new pistol. Period. End of discussion in my book but that's my opinion.

Can we get back on topic?
I'm done responding to your over the top responses.

This is The High Road for a reason.

 

[scaatylobo]

Saturday I bought a new Sig P365 for evaluation as an EDC piece to replace my Springfield XDs .45. I got a "hot off the production line" 3rd generation model that had, in fact, been manufactured on June 7.
View attachment 794520
It's just slightly smaller than my XDs, but is considerably lighter and more comfortable to hold. Here is a comparison of the two:
View attachment 794521
Today, I cleaned it, applied a light coat of Slide Glide to the rails, and took it to the range. I fired a total of 62 rounds; one magazine of 115-gr Sig 365 JHPs
View attachment 794522
with the following results:
View attachment 794524
Next I fired the second 10-rd magazine with Sig 124-gr JHPs
View attachment 794526
with similar results
View attachment 794527
Then I fired a 12-round magazine of Winchester White Box 115-gr FMJs:
View attachment 794529
Finally, I loaded up the two 10-rounders and my last 10 rounds into the 12-rounder and fired on the last two targets (3 and 5).View attachment 794530 View attachment 794531
The targets are nothing to brag about, but my old eyes aren't seeing the sights as sharply as they once did; however they would certainly have all been in or near center of body mass which is what a defensive pistol is all about. It will soon wear a green laser, as my XDs currently does. As may be seen from the targets, it shoots a bit low (all shots aimed at the center of the red oval).

Reliability: On the first shot, I felt a brief hesitation as the slide returned fully to battery (a ka-chunk) that was quick enough that it wouldn't have caused me to have to delay a second shot in a rapid fire string. After that, there were no issues whatsoever. The pistol performed perfectly.

Shootability: The recoil felt a bit lighter than my XDs .45 (duh) and was quite manageable, although the 124-gr loads were noticeably stiffer than the 115s (again, duh).

While policing up my brass, one of the range instructors picked up a couple for me, and remarked that the Sigs are still dragging the firing pin. He stated that he would never carry one for personal defense, because the firing pin might break in the middle of a gunfight. I did notice the firing pin drag on the primers, but would have thought nothing of it had he not mentioned it. I've seen similar drag marks on other autoloaders, but have never heard of firing pins breaking as a result. In any event, here are the heads of three of the rounds I fired:
View attachment 794532
I'm quite pleased with the little beast, and will begin using it as my edc, once I run a couple of hundred more rounds through it and mount a laser on it.

Sorry but I did not see where you stated the distance from targets ?.

My results with my P365 at 9 yards has been at least a bit better and I was firing rather fast to see how they grouped.

And I have so far tried about 15 different loads,including remanufactured and all of the top S/D brands.

 

[Jeb Stuart]

The slide was very tight on my P-365 when it was new. That loosened up soon, but if all of them are like that, it may cause a bit of sluggishness at first, dunno.

I believe the slide is most likely tight on all quality guns. I personally will take a magazine and load it full capacity and let the springs "Set" for a few days. I will also lock the recoil spring back and let set. Then work the slide over and over while watching TV. When I take to the range, I will only load up the mag minus one round and let the mags just get broken in.
I do not know if there is any scientific reasoning to this, All I can say is that I have not had a problem with any of my Newer guns in years. Especially high quality guns with tight tolerances.

 

[Hypnogator]

Sorry but I did not see where you stated the distance from targets ?.

Sorry. Seven yds. Due to the range lighting was having trouble focusing on the sights, with my replacement lenses. Good and sharp at the target, not so much on the sights. Another reason to equip the pistol with a laser.