The P320: your gun handling skills are the problem

Status
Not open for further replies.
The OP in this thread is so lacking in high road etiquette any response I could muster would also be inappropriate.

If seatbelts, drop safeties, and hard hats are for the careless then I guess the lack thereof must be for the foolish.
 
Tirod, there are many reasons a gun might be dropped that have nothing to do with gun handling skills or negligence on the part of the carrier. The handgun we are talking is supposed to be a fighting handgun which makes it more susceptible to being dropped at one time or another.

I can't believe the number of people who are still defending SIG even after the truth is out. SIG also screwed up with the NJ State Police trying to fix the gun on the cheap instead of the right way.

The fact is SIG, Beretta, Colt, Glock, S&W, and every other manufacturer has screwed up at one time or another. When the screw up involves a safety issue that's important for the factory to acknowledge and correct immediately.
 
I think most issues related to handgun drop safety have been well covered in this thread, but I do want to make one point that I always make when I explain to people why drop safety is important. When a handgun is dropped hard, that does not necessarily mean that it was separated from its owner. The owner could take a very hard fall from some height with the handgun holstered or in hand. No one ever plans to take a bad fall, but these things do happen, especially when the s*** hits the fan.

If I have a handgun on my person, I want to have total confidence that if I take a bad fall and land on the gun, or am hit by a car, or if someone with an aluminum bat hits me right in the holster, that these situations will not be made infinitely worse by having the pistol discharge. There are many handguns available that meet this standard, and this is the minimum standard that I set for my equipment.
 
Last edited:
Don't worry Sig fans, here's a just released photo of the Sig 320 returned from the factory with modifications after the drop safe voluntary recall, it should be just fine. :rofl:

glock4.png
 
While some may argue this not being a big deal or hysteria or whatever else you wanna call it, I would sure hate to be at the range with the inexperienced gun handler in the stall next to me shooting a p320 and they suddenly have a case of the dropsies that day. People don't want to drop their $500-$1000 phones either but that happens a lot to. News flash folks, "PEOPLE DROP THINGS". Over my 14 years carrying I've dropped 2 guns, both glocks and 1 broke the front sight and neither fired. I love my p320, but to demonized the operator for sigs flaw is absolutely ridiculous
 
burk said:
Don't worry Sig fans, here's a just released photo of the Sig 320 returned from the factory with modifications after the drop safe voluntary recall, it should be just fine. :rofl:
Click to expand...

How soon we forget that these were plagued with problems when they were first released..
 
Now, if I understand well...

- SIG submitted the 320 to mandated drop tests, designed by the genii in charge of government thingies like that
- The 320 passed the tests
- It so happens that if dropped in a way not covered in the tests, the 320 with a certain type of trigger fires.
- The public at large and SIG have been made aware of that
- SIG is replacing the triggers for free, immediately

So, what's the hullabaloo about? Some get their knickers in a knot because of the language used by SIG in the aftermath? In a lawsuit-friendly environment as the US are, you don't go around apologizing. You hire a darn good lawyer, and he writes a statement in terms that won't be pounced upon by bottom feeders.

Sorry, but all the whining looks a bit snowflaky, seen from here.
 
Kano383 said:
Now, if I understand well...

- SIG submitted the 320 to mandated drop tests, designed by the genii in charge of government thingies like that
- The 320 passed the tests
- It so happens that if dropped in a way not covered in the tests, the 320 with a certain type of trigger fires.
- The public at large and SIG have been made aware of that
- SIG is replacing the triggers for free, immediately

So, what's the hullabaloo about? Some get their knickers in a knot because of the language used by SIG in the aftermath? In a lawsuit-friendly environment as the US are, you don't go around apologizing. You hire a darn good lawyer, and he writes a statement in terms that won't be pounced upon by bottom feeders.

Sorry, but all the whining looks a bit snowflaky, seen from here.
Click to expand...

Wrong and no snowflake here but calling folks names makes you feel superior? Maybe you want to defend remington next?
 
Kano383 said:
Now, if I understand well...

- SIG submitted the 320 to mandated drop tests, designed by the genii in charge of government thingies like that
- The 320 passed the tests
- It so happens that if dropped in a way not covered in the tests, the 320 with a certain type of trigger fires.
- The public at large and SIG have been made aware of that
- SIG is replacing the triggers for free, immediately

So, what's the hullabaloo about? Some get their knickers in a knot because of the language used by SIG in the aftermath? In a lawsuit-friendly environment as the US are, you don't go around apologizing. You hire a darn good lawyer, and he writes a statement in terms that won't be pounced upon by bottom feeders.

Sorry, but all the whining looks a bit snowflaky, seen from here.
Click to expand...

I don't have a problem with a company circling the wagons to stave off lawsuits. I run a small business, and we have had to make business decision settlements in cases where we were not at fault. However, the cost of going to court and potential damage to PR outweighed the dollar amount. I don't think SIG is out of line in a business sense to make CYA statements.

I think the issue that most have with SIG's statements have been from their CEO. He basically states that if they made the gun any safer, it would encourage unsafe gun handling practices. If I purchase a gun that I have been told is safe to carry with a loaded chamber, one that I can stake my life upon, I think it's reasonable to make sure that a tap to the back of the gun won't cause the gun to fire. My Ruger revolver with a transfer bar won't fire if I hit it in such a way, the old obsolete 92fs won't fire if hit in such a way, my 1911 made in the Philippines most likely fire in such a way, and a Glock allegedly won't fire under the same circumstances.

I think the most fair statement SIG could have made would have been a simple one that wasn't lacquered up and dripping with legal speak. As another poster has said, if they simply stated, "The p320 was designed in accordance to a specified drop test requirement. It fully passed said test. However, we understand the concerns of our LEO and civilian customers and are working diligently in order to find a way to alleviate those concerns. The p320 platform is a safe pistol that has passed all of the rigorous mandates of the US military trials. We are proud to be the chosen sidearm of our brave men and women going into harm's way. However, we faithfully wish to convey the same sense of safety and trust within out civilian and LEO markets. We will be releasing a full report with any necessary repair/replacement protocol in short order. We appreciate your business and your patience as we rectify this issue."

Its to the point, still drips with a bit of company pride, and promises a response.
 
I didn't buy a Sig P320 because the Beretta APX felt better in my hand. If I had liked the Sig more, I would have bought it.
We know that we all make mistakes, some more then others, or some are just willing to tell others about there mistakes. :thumbup:
What I have found funny about this topic is that you can find several videos of people dropping Sig P320s showing you that they will fire when dropped. You have to ask yourself. HOW DUMB ARE SOME OF THESE PEOPLE MAKING THESE VIDEOS? What were they thinking? You just see a video of a P320 being dropped and it goes off. So you go buy a new P320 or get your out of the safe and video yourself doping it. Then you post it on YouTube. :confused:
 
Tirod said:
As the ongoing hysteria of the "issue" with the P320 is debated over the internet, lets not forget that one significant thing needs to happen to get the gun to discharge: you, the operator of that mechanism, have to fumble it, badly, and make it happen.

It's being ignored in all the debate: what we have here is a major safety issue that is gun owner induced. For all those who choose to put aside their P320's because they no longer trust it, I support your decision. In fact, it's not going far enough. Lock up ALL your guns, because if you are worried about dropping a P320, then the real issue and what is being admitted is that you will drop guns at all.

So, put down the gun safe key, back away from the cabinet, and leave the room. That way nobody will get hurt.

It's been debated for a long time the 1911 will fire if dropped on the hammer. And it seems to be a recurring problem that Glock owners will shoot themselves in the leg by the misfortunate insertion of their trigger finger inside the guard, especially when holstering. Given the larger issues at hand, I'm not worried about SIG's. I worry about gun owners, who have demonstrated an enormous capability to goof up any safety device and shoot themselves or others around them.

Negligent discharges are the bane of gun ownership, what should we expect if we mishandle a gun? It can and will go off, is what you should be thinking, and it should be handled with that in mind. Not "it's safe and can't go off." That is a lie - demonstrated over and over, regardless of gun type or hype - they are NOT safe and can go off.

Carry guns are constantly discussed on forums and their reliability is often the topic, if we are so focused on making sure they will shoot when we use them, then be assured, if you mishandle it and it can go off, it's entirely due to your efforts to have one that will. If you want a gun that can't possibly discharge, ever, no matter how you abuse it, then don't expect it to fire reliably when you need it to. There is a range of options in between those two extremes - think about how far you need to go one way or the other.

But no matter what, if you make an error in the first place, then own it. Dropping the gun at all is the real fault. It's operator negligence, just the same as driving off the road and hitting a tree.
Click to expand...

I own a small business, and like all businesses we occasionally drop the ball. Our response is to correct our error, acknowledge to our customer that we made the error and explain what was done to correct it. When taking that approach, customers are pretty forgiving. Telling our customers that our mistake was somehow their fault is incomprehensible and a recipe for disaster for our business. They're not idiots, would see through that line of nonsense and would send their business to one of our competitors. Sig came out with a great product that needs to be corrected. They need to simply acknowledge the error, fix the guns and move on.
 
armoredman said:
If they had just said, "We never drop tested it that way, not industry standard, but now that we know about it we will fix it immediately"
Click to expand...

Actually, they DID say that. The fix was already in the works, and the M17 has the redesigned parts included under the contract as a modification at no charge.

They never DID drop test it exactly that way because the drop test protocols required by .Gov and the industry didn't include it - so, I have to ask, when it passes those, is it "drop safe" IAW a written standard?

Yes it is.

The drop safe testing is defective. SIG passed it. They even went a step further, found a very rare combination of events that so far are documented in 4 - four - of 500,000 guns, incorporated it for free under the government contract, and were in the process of making new parts and shutting down production to make a recall when this all blew up in the media.

I smell Glock. When you deal with a competitor who takes contract buyers to strip joints to seal the deal I have no illusions of them playing fair when it comes down to striking first on the media front after just losing a multimillion dollar contract. They got wind of it, took a page from the DNC playbook and adopted the philosophy "Never let a crisis go to waste."

Even if they didn't - too many are doing the usual, reading the scripted Breaking News! and taking the lead item hook, line, and sinker. Same kind of pollyanna world view as accepting that Bill Clinton and Loretta Lynch only talked about grandchildren on the airport tarmac.

Who benefits from breaking this to the public prematurely? SIG was moving to do an open admission, but NOOOOoooo, it's to someone else's profit to take it out of their hands and bludgeon their sales. The #1 comment I've been reading in threads - this one too - is to put the gun away because "I can't trust it." Well, that includes the P938, now. What other SIG owners will blame the gun but not themselves?

If YOU drop the gun, YOU are the problem. Redundant safeties are a nice to have item, how many of you carry a gun with NO safeties? In the pocket pistol class, the SIG P320 was head and shoulders above the average pocket sized gun with safeties - yet nobody is counting them up and worrying over them being a problem,

The hysterics are even ignoring that Ruger did exactly the same - less than a dozen reports of ND's and they decided that the design - which by all accounts passed industry drop safe testing - had to come back for a recall. Notwithstanding that the owners reports included they fumbled them -

My question is who is next? Because we have started a witch hunt over what gun is next in the drop safe campaign to smear gun makers. I can tell you that will be pushed and funded as far as possible now that we have given them a good reason to do it - so the anti gun banners are now lining up to see YOUR favorite gun exhibits a failure in one of the 46 million ways you can throw or hammer on it.

Overreaction to this has now opened a Pandora's box of new ammo for them, and as usual, we have only ourselves to blame.
 
Tirod, modern handguns are generally fairly drop-proof, particularly when it comes to the dangerous muzzle-up discharge. As they should be. Since Sig offered these guns for sale to the general public, it's not sufficient to say that they passed a particular drop test specified by one or more purchasing agencies. They weren't selling just to those agencies.

And the gun-o-sphere's reaction to this should give us pride. Rather than falling into tribalism where we defend a manufacturer we are prone to like, the community is calling for prompt remedial action. Holding ourselves to account is the best way to avoid justifying outsiders "doing it for us." Nothing screams "market failure needing regulatory intervention" like defective designs that don't get corrected by market forces. Here, the market is working. The customers are demanding that the product be fixed. And it will be. Even if Sig hasn't yet made completely clear that it will be on Sig's dime, it will be. Because the market is going to drive that outcome.

This should make us feel good.

NOTE: I own one Sig product (a rifle). I own zero Glock products. I would say that my chances of eventually owning a fixed P320 (most likely a DoD-type model with the thumb safety, which I like on all my semi-autos) is decent. My chance of owning a Glock is zero... I have no interest in them whatsoever. I'm not emotionally invested in this one way or another.
 
The difference is that Ruger said "there's a problem and we know about it and we're going to fix it" whereas Sig said "There is no problem, ignore the man behind the curtain" and then a few days later "oops, you got us, and actually we've known for 8 months and never told you, but we'll fix it right away"

That kind of sleazy move is bad enough but on top of that we have the fan club coming out and saying that it's actually not even an issue at all because REAL OPERATORS don't drop their guns in the first place, and implying that safety is an antigunner plot, it doesn't look good for Sig or their customers.
 
What I have found funny about this topic is that you can find several videos of people dropping Sig P320s showing you that they will fire when dropped. You have to ask yourself. HOW DUMB ARE SOME OF THESE PEOPLE MAKING THESE VIDEOS? What were they thinking? You just see a video of a P320 being dropped and it goes off. So you go buy a new P320 or get your out of the safe and video yourself doping it. Then you post it on YouTube.
Click to expand...

Sadly this is the world we live in with sensational headlines for those that never read beyond the headline, combined with an obsession for relevance and a lust for an audience. The majority of these losers couldn't design a paper bag but they sure can drop a loaded pistol. Take a look at the article by Popular Mechanics...

http://www.popularmechanics.com/military/weapons/a27683/p320-m17-drop-test-roblem/

"For its part, Sig notes that it has sold 500,000 P320s since their introduction in 2014, with only four reported negligent discharges by law enforcement. After the Omaha Outdoors and TTAG articles came out, Sig Sauer quickly issued a "voluntary upgrade" notice for civilian owners of the P320 that introduces a trigger that requires less weight to pull. In Tuohy's video, he noted that of the several 320s he tested the only handgun that would not go off if dropped was the one with the lighter trigger pull. Interestingly, M17 pistols destined for military use reportedly already have this new, improved, lighter trigger."

Really, is this what Tuohy found? PM put effort into their sensational headline but didn't bother to watch the video or attempt to understand the concept of inertia.

This specific drop test that the P320 was subjected to is not part of the required test protocol, even in CA, so how long before that changes? This really is sensationalism at its worst given that only one person has suffered from this despite more than 500,000 sold. As consumers we should be embracing this sort of thing with the realization that this product and other similar products will improve as a result. We should feel good that SIG employs lots of Americans and we should want the best for SIG and their products. For some though this is just another way for them to feel superior in their choice of firearm. I understand competition from a manufacturers point of view but the idea that a consumer wants a manufacturer to fail reveals a special kind of ignorance.

From where I sit SIG doesn't have a big problem. No one has lost their lives, only one person has been injured so far, a fix to pass this specific drop test has already been identified and the P320 will be even better than it was. This could have been much worse.
 
Last edited:
Tirod said:
Actually, they DID say that. The fix was already in the works, and the M17 has the redesigned parts included under the contract as a modification at no charge.

They never DID drop test it exactly that way because the drop test protocols required by .Gov and the industry didn't include it - so, I have to ask, when it passes those, is it "drop safe" IAW a written standard?

Yes it is.

The drop safe testing is defective. SIG passed it. They even went a step further, found a very rare combination of events that so far are documented in 4 - four - of 500,000 guns, incorporated it for free under the government contract, and were in the process of making new parts and shutting down production to make a recall when this all blew up in the media.

I smell Glock. When you deal with a competitor who takes contract buyers to strip joints to seal the deal I have no illusions of them playing fair when it comes down to striking first on the media front after just losing a multimillion dollar contract. They got wind of it, took a page from the DNC playbook and adopted the philosophy "Never let a crisis go to waste."

Even if they didn't - too many are doing the usual, reading the scripted Breaking News! and taking the lead item hook, line, and sinker. Same kind of pollyanna world view as accepting that Bill Clinton and Loretta Lynch only talked about grandchildren on the airport tarmac.

Who benefits from breaking this to the public prematurely? SIG was moving to do an open admission, but NOOOOoooo, it's to someone else's profit to take it out of their hands and bludgeon their sales. The #1 comment I've been reading in threads - this one too - is to put the gun away because "I can't trust it." Well, that includes the P938, now. What other SIG owners will blame the gun but not themselves?

If YOU drop the gun, YOU are the problem. Redundant safeties are a nice to have item, how many of you carry a gun with NO safeties? In the pocket pistol class, the SIG P320 was head and shoulders above the average pocket sized gun with safeties - yet nobody is counting them up and worrying over them being a problem,

The hysterics are even ignoring that Ruger did exactly the same - less than a dozen reports of ND's and they decided that the design - which by all accounts passed industry drop safe testing - had to come back for a recall. Notwithstanding that the owners reports included they fumbled them -

My question is who is next? Because we have started a witch hunt over what gun is next in the drop safe campaign to smear gun makers. I can tell you that will be pushed and funded as far as possible now that we have given them a good reason to do it - so the anti gun banners are now lining up to see YOUR favorite gun exhibits a failure in one of the 46 million ways you can throw or hammer on it.

Overreaction to this has now opened a Pandora's box of new ammo for them, and as usual, we have only ourselves to blame.
Click to expand...

I spoke with their customer service twice this week. On Monday their rep insisted there was no problem citing all the drop tests it passed, the number of guns they've sold, claiming there have been no AD's due to drops (apparently not true) and that he was a Sig armorer and guaranteed me that there was no problem. On Tuesday when I spoke to them it was a completely different story, informing me of the voluntary upgrade. I own 3 P320's (a 45 Compact, 357 SIG Carry and a RX Carry) as well as a P220, P226, P229 and P938. While I do own Glocks, the Sigs have replaced my Glocks as my primary carry pieces. I'm hardly a Glock fanboy, and when my P320's are fixed the RX will again be my primary carry piece.

I've carried guns for years as a LEO and for the past 3 years, since Illinois passed concealed carry. In all those years I dropped a gun once. It happens, and your standard that people can never drop a gun is completely unreasonable. By that standard Takeda should not be responsible for their defective airbags, and anyone who's ever been in a car accident or may ever be in one should walk or take a bus. This is not an unreasonable standard Sig is being held up to. People make mistakes, and manufacturers of products factor in those mistakes when designing their products, including us dropping a gun. We're not talking about 46 million ways to throw a gun or using it as a hammer. We're talking about dropping it from waist to shoulder height.

In regards to Glock being behind this, who knows. If you come across documentation of this, let us know, but if the gun didn't fail this drop test whatever Glock did or didn't do wouldn't matter.
 
burk said:
Don't worry Sig fans, here's a just released photo of the Sig 320 returned from the factory with modifications after the drop safe voluntary recall, it should be just fine. :rofl:
Click to expand...

It's funny that you chose a picture of a Gen 4... since we all know how well that product roll out went for Glock.

I spent a lot of time last night dropping my P320 in the manner in the video, from above my head. Not once did it release the striker. So, at least my gun doesn't do it. That said, I still switched back to my M&P until this is cleared up. No way no how am I giving a lawyer the "So, you carried gun known to be unsafe" opening.
 
To the original poster, even if a responsible person never ever had a butterfingers moment in their entire life (and I question that), butterfingers moments aren't the only reason guns can be dropped.

What if you're in a car accident and your firearm comes out of its holster in the impact and strikes the dashboard or the like?

What if you're in a physical altercation and the gun is dropped in the course of that altercation? This is a self-defense firearm, and self-defense situations are not everything-goes-as-planned range days.
 
Sig has acknowledged the problem and will announce the details of how they will address it in a few days.
Perhaps they could and should have acted sooner.
It seems they are now taking the high road.
I'm glad they are doing the right thing rather than blaming their customers, Glock owners or Gaston himself.
 
  • Like
Reactions: vba
There are a number of misstatements in some of the above posts as well as in the Popular Mechanics article cited above.

Although it does seem that the P320 must be dropped in a specific way (muzzle up so that beaver tail and back of slide strike simultaneously) it does not require "a certain type of trigger" to result in a drop fire. Drop fires occur with the stock P320 trigger. Informal testing has shown that triggers with more physical mass than the stock trigger, such as the Grayguns PELT trigger, will make the P320 even more prone to drop fire.

Secondly, the "voluntary upgrade, safety enhancement" offered by SIG will not just involve swapping the trigger. It will also require a new sear and striker assembly, altered sear geometry within the frame of the FCU, and a trigger disconnect safety that prevents out of battery fire.

Third, SIG has not announced they will offer this "safety enhancement" for free. SIG officials have been quoted as saying they have not yet determined who will pay for the "voluntary upgrade". If SIG does pay for it, it remains to be seen if they will cover the two-way overnight shipping, which can be expensive.

Fourth, the Popular Mechanics article is incorrect in saying that the modification "introduces a trigger that requires less weight to pull". The new trigger is physically lighter, i.e, has less mass. It has been speculated that the trigger pull weight will not be materially affected. It is also said that the "double click" phenomenon, well-known to many P320 owners, will be eliminated.

The Popular Mechanics also states that there had been four accidental discharges with P320s by law enforcement. What Tom Taylor, Executive Vice-President for Commerical Sales for SIG was quoted as saying is that he was aware of three AD incidents in LE channels and one additional AD in the commercial market, although the last had not been "formally reported to SIG" (which suggests that the other three definitely had been formally reported to SIG), and that all of these had occurred in the last year.

How many accidental discharges resulting from dropped pistols is acceptable is I suppose open to individual opinion. But consider a popular roller coaster ride that had seen a half-million riders since opening in 2014. If four people had been thrown out of it in the last year, do you think it would still be in operation? Even if only one of the four had been seriously injured.
 
Last edited:
Monday Aug 14th is supposed to be the official announcement of how they plan to address the issue.

I just got one, it was made in July 2017 according to the label on the box, I hope they've been quietly working in the fix with recent production, but probably not. I got mine as a range gun (full size) so it doesn't spend much time with a loaded chamber and is firmly in my hand when a round is chambered, but I will send it in for repair if required, and be royally PO'd if they don't pay the shipping!

If the fix eliminates the "double click" mine doesn't have it :(
 
Probably posted somewhere else...but I see an 800 pound gorilla in the room. Maybe several:

Steyr lawsuit against Sig for patent infringements (maybe sour grapes)

Shortcuts in the military test protocols in favor of Sig (Chris Bartocci)

Glock joining in the litigation alleging the above

Sig taking a hit and potentially losing the military contract

Customer base losing confidence in the P320 line (like the P250?)


Any or all of the above are possible in today's litigious (as noted elsewhere)

M
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

P
  • Locked
"Voluntary trigger upgrade" for P320 offered by SIG Sauer
Replies
3
Views
582
pblanc
P
TomJ
  • Locked
P320 Drop Test Failures?
2 3
Replies
59
Views
3K
Gary A
G
Michael A Ferber
  • Locked
Saga of the Sig Sauer P320
2
Replies
33
Views
2K
9mmepiphany
9mmepiphany
<*(((><
  • Locked
P320 Discharged in Transit Policeman’s Holster
2
Replies
42
Views
3K
ArchAngelCD
ArchAngelCD
USBP379
  • Locked
P320 X-Series
Replies
8
Views
885
9mmepiphany
9mmepiphany
Back
Top