[ARCHIVED THREAD] - SIG “ The P320. It ends today.” (Page 109 of 142)
|
Quoted: No. I was just absolutely shocked that GD and the errornet jumped to conclusions before an investigation even happened. I'm sure the pockets lined by clicks are still fist pumping. Quoted: Quoted: Did you clap and do a bunch of fist pumps? No. I was just absolutely shocked that GD and the errornet jumped to conclusions before an investigation even happened. I'm sure the pockets lined by clicks are still fist pumping. You're literally celebrating a DM from an anonymous guy named "tucsonjawn" on an unnamed social media platform. lol |
| People will readily assume that if someone gets shot by a gun that goes off on it's own, it's the fault of someone at Sig, even though it could still be the fault of someone who doesn't work for that felon who ran Kimber into the ground and put shoddy Indian MIM parts into his poorly designed guns without any quality control so he could save a few pennies. |
|
Quoted: You're literally celebrating a DM from an anonymous guy named "tucsonjawn" on an unnamed social media platform. lol Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Did you clap and do a bunch of fist pumps? No. I was just absolutely shocked that GD and the errornet jumped to conclusions before an investigation even happened. I'm sure the pockets lined by clicks are still fist pumping. You're literally celebrating a DM from an anonymous guy named "tucsonjawn" on an unnamed social media platform. lol Yes, I am celebrating.... hard! JFC this place. |
|
Quoted: Doesn't seem to be working, though. Also, it's more about slide-to-FCU slop. Never mind the grip module. It's the slide-to-FCU slop that needs to be cordoned. Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: One thing that befuddles me with the FCU and the abundant slide to frame up/down play (slop) - While the FCU incorporates slide rails, it is only the upper rails and no provision for lower guide rails. Instead, I guess the grip module is left to (very poorly) perform that task. You could argue that Glock doesn't use lower guide rails either and it also relies on the frame to perform that task, the immediate response could be we're not discussing Glock randomly popping off and Glock didn't design their their handguns around a removable FCU, either. Doesn't seem to be working, though. Also, it's more about slide-to-FCU slop. Never mind the grip module. It's the slide-to-FCU slop that needs to be cordoned. On Glocks they use 1.5mm (16g) sheet steel for the frame rails and they cut the slide rails to about 1.6mm. There some variance allowed there, but I don't know what it is. Assuming it's about .003", that leaves you with anywhere from about .035" to .045" play between the frame and slide. As long as the sear engagement at rest is more than that, it's good to go. I only have one P320, I'd have to measure to be sure but I think they also use 16g for the FCU. If they're sometimes substituting 18g or 19g, that could cause issues. It's more likely that they're not holding their slides to tight tolerances, especially if they're farming it out to various machine shops. One shop could be cutting to .063 +/- .003", the other is cutting to .075 +/- .005 and Sig isn't doing the needed QC to catch the bad parts. Or if they're doing all slides in house it could be different machines. |
|
1- I am still shocked that nobody can truly make this ND happen in a lab. With the exact guns, holsters, ammo...this should be easy to replicate. 2. My bet is MIM parts...they just aren't built to be as precise and durable in small parts with sharp edges or under repeated impact. Sig loves MIM. MIM will be the death of Sig. |
|
Quoted: Emphasis mine: So now we're back to doing this again: This is exactly why I covered why it matters: I don't know why it is so hard to understand that multiple compounding factors are at play, and slide/frame fit being able to cause the sear to walk is only one issue. If one issue alone is not enough to cause an uncommanded discharge, but several issues in combination are, it's pretty obvious that one issue in isolation doesn't explain the whole problem. And writing that issue off as being irrelevant because it isn't 100% responsible is a failure of very simple reasoning. Quoted: Emphasis mine: Quoted: You can’t wiggle a P320 slide if everything is operating normally with the trigger not pulled and make it fire. So now we're back to doing this again: Quoted: These failures are an IQ test: Can you combine issues A, B, C, and D and have a failure? Some of you get hung up on "well other guns have issue C so this isn't just a Sig problem! Checkmate!"  This is exactly why I covered why it matters: Quoted: Because there is some element of randomness to the sear engagement after every cycle of the slide. If you had a cutaway gun under high speed video, I firmly believe you would see evidence of this. The sear is left "floating" on the sear springs after the trigger disconnects when the slide moves to the rear. It is free to bounce up and down under the forces of recoil and cycling (including when the slide bottoms out at full travel, slide strikes the back of the cartridge case to begin feeding, when the nose of the bullet strikes the feed ramp, and when the bullet frees itself from the feed lips.) All of those forces can induce small accelerations in the overall system which will cause anything free-floating to move around a bit. I have actually watched a good deal of high speed video of pistols operating, and you'd be surprised what you see going on. If things can move, they do. The magazine bounces around in the frame. The round bounces around after it's struck by the slide. The slide release bounces around. It is chaotic. Now how Sig (and other manufactures, S&W for instance) solve for this is with negative sear angle. If the sear catches the striker at all, the negative sear angle forces the sear and striker to come to full engagement, ----> IF <----- the negative sear angle can overcome friction. That's a very big IF in the case of the P320. The surfaces need to be free of burrs and other defects. I don't know why it is so hard to understand that multiple compounding factors are at play, and slide/frame fit being able to cause the sear to walk is only one issue. If one issue alone is not enough to cause an uncommanded discharge, but several issues in combination are, it's pretty obvious that one issue in isolation doesn't explain the whole problem. And writing that issue off as being irrelevant because it isn't 100% responsible is a failure of very simple reasoning. Negative sear angle would be a step in the right direction direction imho . |
|
Quoted: 1- I am still shocked that nobody can truly make this ND happen in a lab. With the exact guns, holsters, ammo...this should be easy to replicate. 2. My bet is MIM parts...they just aren't built to be as precise and durable in small parts with sharp edges or under repeated impact. Sig loves MIM. MIM will be the death of Sig. There is speculation on the way some of the parts work where the condition can exist for the gun to fire on it's own and in the process prevent the event from occurring again. |
|
Quoted: If this does end up being the case, will it change your mind at all? Quoted: Quoted: You're literally celebrating a DM from an anonymous guy named "tucsonjawn" on an unnamed social media platform. lol If this does end up being the case, will it change your mind at all? About the USAF? Yes.  About the P320? No. There are way too many incidents outside of this one and too many established design issues with the gun itself. |
|
Quoted: I don't think anyone is referring to any portion of the grip module when talking about the rails. The frame rails are part of the FCU and that's what everyone is referring to. Not only does the thickness of the rails seem to vary, Sig doesn't seem to be keeping the frame rails a consistent distance from whatever datum point they use, likely the sear pin hole. On Glocks they use 1.5mm (16g) sheet steel for the frame rails and they cut the slide rails to about 1.6mm. There some variance allowed there, but I don't know what it is. Assuming it's about .003", that leaves you with anywhere from about .035" to .045" play between the frame and slide. As long as the sear engagement at rest is more than that, it's good to go. I only have one P320, I'd have to measure to be sure but I think they also use 16g for the FCU. If they're sometimes substituting 18g or 19g, that could cause issues. It's more likely that they're not holding their slides to tight tolerances, especially if they're farming it out to various machine shops. One shop could be cutting to .063 +/- .003", the other is cutting to .075 +/- .005 and Sig isn't doing the needed QC to catch the bad parts. Or if they're doing all slides in house it could be different machines. Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: One thing that befuddles me with the FCU and the abundant slide to frame up/down play (slop) - While the FCU incorporates slide rails, it is only the upper rails and no provision for lower guide rails. Instead, I guess the grip module is left to (very poorly) perform that task. You could argue that Glock doesn't use lower guide rails either and it also relies on the frame to perform that task, the immediate response could be we're not discussing Glock randomly popping off and Glock didn't design their their handguns around a removable FCU, either. Doesn't seem to be working, though. Also, it's more about slide-to-FCU slop. Never mind the grip module. It's the slide-to-FCU slop that needs to be cordoned. On Glocks they use 1.5mm (16g) sheet steel for the frame rails and they cut the slide rails to about 1.6mm. There some variance allowed there, but I don't know what it is. Assuming it's about .003", that leaves you with anywhere from about .035" to .045" play between the frame and slide. As long as the sear engagement at rest is more than that, it's good to go. I only have one P320, I'd have to measure to be sure but I think they also use 16g for the FCU. If they're sometimes substituting 18g or 19g, that could cause issues. It's more likely that they're not holding their slides to tight tolerances, especially if they're farming it out to various machine shops. One shop could be cutting to .063 +/- .003", the other is cutting to .075 +/- .005 and Sig isn't doing the needed QC to catch the bad parts. Or if they're doing all slides in house it could be different machines. I think I understand what you’re saying about the frame rails but I think you’re missing the point I’m trying to make. They incorporate the slide rails in the FCU, yes but those are only to ensure slide-to-grip module tolerance. What I am trying to convey (probably rather poorly) is that it’s just an upper set or half-channel of the rails. They should incorporate a lower set of rails into the FCU as well to make a full, integral channel thereby removing any reliance on the grip module to provide any role as a guide. It’s the slide to (removable) FCU I’m thinking of. I’d think slop between the two is more of a concern than slide to frame. |
|
Quoted: 1- I am still shocked that nobody can truly make this ND happen in a lab. With the exact guns, holsters, ammo...this should be easy to replicate. 2. My bet is MIM parts...they just aren't built to be as precise and durable in small parts with sharp edges or under repeated impact. Sig loves MIM. MIM will be the death of Sig. Earlier, someone put forward the theory that some tiny foreign object, like a brass shaving or a grain of sand, is getting caught between the sear and striker pretensioning the trigger and is subsequently lost when the gun fires. Is that still a possibility? |
|
Quoted: I think I understand what you’re saying about the frame rails but I think you’re missing the point I’m trying to make. They incorporate the slide rails in the FCU, yes but those are only to ensure slide-to-grip module tolerance. What I am trying to convey (probably rather poorly) is that it’s just an upper set or half-channel of the rails. They should incorporate a lower set of rails into the FCU as well to make a full, integral channel thereby removing any reliance on the grip module to provide any role as a guide. It’s the slide to (removable) FCU I’m thinking of. I’d think slop between the two is more of a concern than slide to frame. Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: One thing that befuddles me with the FCU and the abundant slide to frame up/down play (slop) - While the FCU incorporates slide rails, it is only the upper rails and no provision for lower guide rails. Instead, I guess the grip module is left to (very poorly) perform that task. You could argue that Glock doesn't use lower guide rails either and it also relies on the frame to perform that task, the immediate response could be we're not discussing Glock randomly popping off and Glock didn't design their their handguns around a removable FCU, either. Doesn't seem to be working, though. Also, it's more about slide-to-FCU slop. Never mind the grip module. It's the slide-to-FCU slop that needs to be cordoned. On Glocks they use 1.5mm (16g) sheet steel for the frame rails and they cut the slide rails to about 1.6mm. There some variance allowed there, but I don't know what it is. Assuming it's about .003", that leaves you with anywhere from about .035" to .045" play between the frame and slide. As long as the sear engagement at rest is more than that, it's good to go. I only have one P320, I'd have to measure to be sure but I think they also use 16g for the FCU. If they're sometimes substituting 18g or 19g, that could cause issues. It's more likely that they're not holding their slides to tight tolerances, especially if they're farming it out to various machine shops. One shop could be cutting to .063 +/- .003", the other is cutting to .075 +/- .005 and Sig isn't doing the needed QC to catch the bad parts. Or if they're doing all slides in house it could be different machines. I think I understand what you’re saying about the frame rails but I think you’re missing the point I’m trying to make. They incorporate the slide rails in the FCU, yes but those are only to ensure slide-to-grip module tolerance. What I am trying to convey (probably rather poorly) is that it’s just an upper set or half-channel of the rails. They should incorporate a lower set of rails into the FCU as well to make a full, integral channel thereby removing any reliance on the grip module to provide any role as a guide. It’s the slide to (removable) FCU I’m thinking of. I’d think slop between the two is more of a concern than slide to frame. The FCU sits in grooves in the slide. The slide is retained in the Y direction by these grooves. . |
|
Quoted: 10 days later they renew the P320 contract. That's all I'm saying. Quoted: 10 days later they renew the P320 contract. That's all I'm saying. It’s not a “P320 contract,” it’s a Sig contract. They issue other Sig firearms including P365s. The P320s are being phased out for Glock. |
|
Quoted: I think the implication is that you're also jumping to conclusions, this time based on a random screenshot from whoknowswhere. Quoted: Quoted: Yes, I am celebrating.... hard! JFC this place. I think the implication is that you're also jumping to conclusions, this time based on a random screenshot from whoknowswhere. No. I will wait for investigation to conclude and go from there. |
Valhalla VFT - Sig Sauer Goes Full Tim Kennedy With CRINGE Response to 320 Drama Sig Sauer Goes Full Tim Kennedy With CRINGE Response to 320 Drama |
|
Quoted: I think I understand what you're saying about the frame rails but I think you're missing the point I'm trying to make. They incorporate the slide rails in the FCU, yes but those are only to ensure slide-to-grip module tolerance. What I am trying to convey (probably rather poorly) is that it's just an upper set or half-channel of the rails. They should incorporate a lower set of rails into the FCU as well to make a full, integral channel thereby removing any reliance on the grip module to provide any role as a guide. It's the slide to (removable) FCU I'm thinking of. I'd think slop between the two is more of a concern than slide to frame. |
|
Wow. lol |
|
Quoted: It’s not a “P320 contract,” it’s a Sig contract. They issue other Sig firearms including P365s. The P320s are being phased out for Glock. Quoted: Quoted: 10 days later they renew the P320 contract. That's all I'm saying. It’s not a “P320 contract,” it’s a Sig contract. They issue other Sig firearms including P365s. The P320s are being phased out for Glock. Any claims using contracts to justify an agency's continued confidence in Sig should be examined very critically. In their email yesterday Sig claimed that the Michigan State Police are "issuing the 320 with confidence" after the FBI study couldn't replicate the UD. By my understanding, MSP is in the middle of a multi-year contract with Sig, and was already under the contract (having already taken delivery of the guns, had the guns repaired due to a dead trigger issue, and then issued the guns) when their incident occurred. If they're under contract they can't NOT issue the guns, unless they can PROVE something that would negate the contract. So for Sig to say that MSP's continued use of the gun is an indicator of confidence is misleading at best. I would assume the same applies to ICE. Without knowing the details of the contract, including when it was negotiated, when its effective, what their other choices were, and who was involved in the decision making process, I no longer consider an agency using a particular firearm an indicator of ANYTHING. |
|
Quoted: They aren't relying on the grip module at all. The grooves cut into the slide form the slide rails, those are cut to a certain depth. The frame rails on the FCU are a certain thickness. The fit of those two together is what prevents or allows vertical movement. Sig apparently has a pretty sloppy fit on some guns allowing excessive vertical movement. Quoted: Quoted: I think I understand what you're saying about the frame rails but I think you're missing the point I'm trying to make. They incorporate the slide rails in the FCU, yes but those are only to ensure slide-to-grip module tolerance. What I am trying to convey (probably rather poorly) is that it's just an upper set or half-channel of the rails. They should incorporate a lower set of rails into the FCU as well to make a full, integral channel thereby removing any reliance on the grip module to provide any role as a guide. It's the slide to (removable) FCU I'm thinking of. I'd think slop between the two is more of a concern than slide to frame. So the slide’s channels are *machined too loose in tolerance? ETA: If in that case, a bottom set incorporated into the FCU would be beneficial. ETAx2: For whatever reason (poor QC or “design”), those channels in the slides are too loose. |
|
Quoted: Any claims using contracts to justify an agency's continued confidence in Sig should be examined very critically. In their email yesterday Sig claimed that the Michigan State Police are "issuing the 320 with confidence" after the FBI study couldn't replicate the UD. By my understanding, MSP is in the middle of a multi-year contract with Sig, and was already under the contract (having already taken delivery of the guns, had the guns repaired due to a dead trigger issue, and then issued the guns) when their incident occurred. If they're under contract they can't NOT issue the guns, unless they can PROVE something that would negate the contract. So for Sig to say that MSP's continued use of the gun is an indicator of confidence is misleading at best. I would assume the same applies to ICE. Without knowing the details of the contract, including when it was negotiated, when its effective, what their other choices were, and who was involved in the decision making process, I no longer consider an agency using a particular firearm an indicator of ANYTHING. Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: 10 days later they renew the P320 contract. That's all I'm saying. It’s not a “P320 contract,” it’s a Sig contract. They issue other Sig firearms including P365s. The P320s are being phased out for Glock. Any claims using contracts to justify an agency's continued confidence in Sig should be examined very critically. In their email yesterday Sig claimed that the Michigan State Police are "issuing the 320 with confidence" after the FBI study couldn't replicate the UD. By my understanding, MSP is in the middle of a multi-year contract with Sig, and was already under the contract (having already taken delivery of the guns, had the guns repaired due to a dead trigger issue, and then issued the guns) when their incident occurred. If they're under contract they can't NOT issue the guns, unless they can PROVE something that would negate the contract. So for Sig to say that MSP's continued use of the gun is an indicator of confidence is misleading at best. I would assume the same applies to ICE. Without knowing the details of the contract, including when it was negotiated, when its effective, what their other choices were, and who was involved in the decision making process, I no longer consider an agency using a particular firearm an indicator of ANYTHING. They might be obligated to purchase them, but they're not obligated to issue them out to LEOs. They can sit in a locked connex box somewhere and rust while the agency goes about procuring and issuing a new pistol. |
|
Quoted: 1- I am still shocked that nobody can truly make this ND happen in a lab. With the exact guns, holsters, ammo...this should be easy to replicate. 2. My bet is MIM parts...they just aren't built to be as precise and durable in small parts with sharp edges or under repeated impact. Sig loves MIM. MIM will be the death of Sig. Correction: good, properly treated and QC'ed MIM is fine. Crazy shaped critically toleranced MIM parts made to fit a wonky design, manufactured with questionable quality, is not fine. |
|
They're just not in stock right now, because they're so popular!
|
|
Quoted: I have heard this too from reliable sources. Also -- https://soldiersystems.net/2025/07/29/ice-renews-p320-contract-through-july-2027/ ICE renewed their contract with SIG and the P320 last week. The whole ICE thing was fake hype shit, wonder how much of this actually is? If you follow the link to the approved gun in that story, the gun is covered in blue goo. Even if they are shipped to distributors like that, you'd think they'd clean it off for the photo. Also that story doesn't say how old it is, but the copyright shows 2009-2021, so that might be 4 years old.  
|
|
Quoted: So the slide's channels are *machined too loose in tolerance? Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I think I understand what you're saying about the frame rails but I think you're missing the point I'm trying to make. They incorporate the slide rails in the FCU, yes but those are only to ensure slide-to-grip module tolerance. What I am trying to convey (probably rather poorly) is that it's just an upper set or half-channel of the rails. They should incorporate a lower set of rails into the FCU as well to make a full, integral channel thereby removing any reliance on the grip module to provide any role as a guide. It's the slide to (removable) FCU I'm thinking of. I'd think slop between the two is more of a concern than slide to frame. So the slide's channels are *machined too loose in tolerance? |
|
Quoted: Yes, or they're using various thickness of sheet metal for the FCU, or both. And that's just perception. I don't have empirical data to back it up. It could just be the way the 320 works. There's no vertical pressure on the 320 until the striker block lever rotates up and pushes she striker block out of the way. But it would certainly seem that at least some 320s have a really sloppy FCU to slide fit. Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I think I understand what you're saying about the frame rails but I think you're missing the point I'm trying to make. They incorporate the slide rails in the FCU, yes but those are only to ensure slide-to-grip module tolerance. What I am trying to convey (probably rather poorly) is that it's just an upper set or half-channel of the rails. They should incorporate a lower set of rails into the FCU as well to make a full, integral channel thereby removing any reliance on the grip module to provide any role as a guide. It's the slide to (removable) FCU I'm thinking of. I'd think slop between the two is more of a concern than slide to frame. So the slide's channels are *machined too loose in tolerance? Sure there is, the cartridge stack in the magazine is always pushing the slide up. Assuming the sear bottoms out with its rear shelf against the striker tail, the sear spring would be constantly tensioning the slide via the sear and striker, as well, although not as forcefully as the magazine spring, of course. |
|
Quoted: They might be obligated to purchase them, but they're not obligated to issue them out to LEOs. They can sit in a locked connex box somewhere and rust while the agency goes about procuring and issuing a new pistol. Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: 10 days later they renew the P320 contract. That's all I'm saying. It’s not a “P320 contract,” it’s a Sig contract. They issue other Sig firearms including P365s. The P320s are being phased out for Glock. Any claims using contracts to justify an agency's continued confidence in Sig should be examined very critically. In their email yesterday Sig claimed that the Michigan State Police are "issuing the 320 with confidence" after the FBI study couldn't replicate the UD. By my understanding, MSP is in the middle of a multi-year contract with Sig, and was already under the contract (having already taken delivery of the guns, had the guns repaired due to a dead trigger issue, and then issued the guns) when their incident occurred. If they're under contract they can't NOT issue the guns, unless they can PROVE something that would negate the contract. So for Sig to say that MSP's continued use of the gun is an indicator of confidence is misleading at best. I would assume the same applies to ICE. Without knowing the details of the contract, including when it was negotiated, when its effective, what their other choices were, and who was involved in the decision making process, I no longer consider an agency using a particular firearm an indicator of ANYTHING. They might be obligated to purchase them, but they're not obligated to issue them out to LEOs. They can sit in a locked connex box somewhere and rust while the agency goes about procuring and issuing a new pistol. Again, you're assuming you know the terms of the contract. The contract may stipulate that the officers CAN NOT use any other weapon during the time of the contract. If they already transitioned to the new sig, their old guns are gone anyway - the state isn't going to hold onto them. So they most likely can't buy different guns, or anything to support the old guns even if they still had some, as long as the new contract is in effect. A 10-person department could probably find and fund a work-around. A 2000-person department is a different animal. That many guns (and holsters, and lights, and magazines) is a major expenditure that would require legislative funding. That's not something they can just do in the middle of a budget year. Plus it would almost definitely violate the contract with Sig, which would ALSO result in huge loss of taxpayer money. Even if MSP really wanted to dump the contract, pay the penalty for voiding it and buy new guns, they'd never get enough legislative support to do it. The rest of the state government would never let them. Imagine signing a contract with a builder to build your house. It's 2/3 done and the builder has done a lousy job. Not quite bad enough to violate the terms of your contract, but bad enough that you would never recommend him to anyone else. Then he starts using the fact that you're having him build your house as "evidence" that he does a good job. "Look! LV1976 is so confident in our work that he's having us put in the driveway and paint the interior for him next week! And we just finished up his drywall today!" Meanwhile, they're seeking an injunction to make sure you can't say anything bad about the builder. |
|
Quoted: I found out the local store of a big box outdoor retailer, part of a chain that is likely the largest seller of firearms in the country, sold a total of two P320/M17/M18s between July 1st-29th. One new, one used. My LGS sells around 2,000 guns a year with a heavy bias towards handguns. They've sold one P320 since It Ended. They have two new and one used in stock, and they just sit. |
|
Quoted: Again, you're assuming you know the terms of the contract. The contract may stipulate that the officers CAN NOT use any other weapon during the time of the contract. If they already transitioned to the new sig, their old guns are gone anyway - the state isn't going to hold onto them. So they most likely can't buy different guns, or anything to support the old guns even if they still had some, as long as the new contract is in effect. A 10-person department could probably find and fund a work-around. A 2000-person department is a different animal. That many guns (and holsters, and lights, and magazines) is a major expenditure that would require legislative funding. That's not something they can just do in the middle of a budget year. Plus it would almost definitely violate the contract with Sig, which would ALSO result in huge loss of taxpayer money. Even if MSP really wanted to dump the contract, pay the penalty for voiding it and buy new guns, they'd never get enough legislative support to do it. The rest of the state government would never let them. Imagine signing a contract with a builder to build your house. It's 2/3 done and the builder has done a lousy job. Not quite bad enough to violate the terms of your contract, but bad enough that you would never recommend him to anyone else. Then he starts using the fact that you're having him build your house as "evidence" that he does a good job. "Look! LV1976 is so confident in our work that he's having us put in the driveway and paint the interior for him next week! And we just finished up his drywall today!" Meanwhile, they're seeking an injunction to make sure you can't say anything bad about the builder. MSP can buy and issue other guns if they want to. |
|
Quoted: Again, you're assuming you know the terms of the contract. The contract may stipulate that the officers CAN NOT use any other weapon during the time of the contract. If they already transitioned to the new sig, their old guns are gone anyway - the state isn't going to hold onto them. So they most likely can't buy different guns, or anything to support the old guns even if they still had some, as long as the new contract is in effect. A 10-person department could probably find and fund a work-around. A 2000-person department is a different animal. That many guns (and holsters, and lights, and magazines) is a major expenditure that would require legislative funding. That's not something they can just do in the middle of a budget year. Plus it would almost definitely violate the contract with Sig, which would ALSO result in huge loss of taxpayer money. Even if MSP really wanted to dump the contract, pay the penalty for voiding it and buy new guns, they'd never get enough legislative support to do it. The rest of the state government would never let them. Imagine signing a contract with a builder to build your house. It's 2/3 done and the builder has done a lousy job. Not quite bad enough to violate the terms of your contract, but bad enough that you would never recommend him to anyone else. Then he starts using the fact that you're having him build your house as "evidence" that he does a good job. "Look! LV1976 is so confident in our work that he's having us put in the driveway and paint the interior for him next week! And we just finished up his drywall today!" Meanwhile, they're seeking an injunction to make sure you can't say anything bad about the builder. Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: 10 days later they renew the P320 contract. That's all I'm saying. It’s not a “P320 contract,” it’s a Sig contract. They issue other Sig firearms including P365s. The P320s are being phased out for Glock. Any claims using contracts to justify an agency's continued confidence in Sig should be examined very critically. In their email yesterday Sig claimed that the Michigan State Police are "issuing the 320 with confidence" after the FBI study couldn't replicate the UD. By my understanding, MSP is in the middle of a multi-year contract with Sig, and was already under the contract (having already taken delivery of the guns, had the guns repaired due to a dead trigger issue, and then issued the guns) when their incident occurred. If they're under contract they can't NOT issue the guns, unless they can PROVE something that would negate the contract. So for Sig to say that MSP's continued use of the gun is an indicator of confidence is misleading at best. I would assume the same applies to ICE. Without knowing the details of the contract, including when it was negotiated, when its effective, what their other choices were, and who was involved in the decision making process, I no longer consider an agency using a particular firearm an indicator of ANYTHING. They might be obligated to purchase them, but they're not obligated to issue them out to LEOs. They can sit in a locked connex box somewhere and rust while the agency goes about procuring and issuing a new pistol. Again, you're assuming you know the terms of the contract. The contract may stipulate that the officers CAN NOT use any other weapon during the time of the contract. If they already transitioned to the new sig, their old guns are gone anyway - the state isn't going to hold onto them. So they most likely can't buy different guns, or anything to support the old guns even if they still had some, as long as the new contract is in effect. A 10-person department could probably find and fund a work-around. A 2000-person department is a different animal. That many guns (and holsters, and lights, and magazines) is a major expenditure that would require legislative funding. That's not something they can just do in the middle of a budget year. Plus it would almost definitely violate the contract with Sig, which would ALSO result in huge loss of taxpayer money. Even if MSP really wanted to dump the contract, pay the penalty for voiding it and buy new guns, they'd never get enough legislative support to do it. The rest of the state government would never let them. Imagine signing a contract with a builder to build your house. It's 2/3 done and the builder has done a lousy job. Not quite bad enough to violate the terms of your contract, but bad enough that you would never recommend him to anyone else. Then he starts using the fact that you're having him build your house as "evidence" that he does a good job. "Look! LV1976 is so confident in our work that he's having us put in the driveway and paint the interior for him next week! And we just finished up his drywall today!" Meanwhile, they're seeking an injunction to make sure you can't say anything bad about the builder. I was talking about the ICE contract. They can just buy Glocks off the CBP contract. |
|
Quoted: Yes, or they're using various thickness of sheet metal for the FCU, or both. And that's just perception. I don't have empirical data to back it up. It could just be the way the 320 works. There's no vertical pressure on the 320 until the striker block lever rotates up and pushes she striker block out of the way. But it would certainly seem that at least some 320s have a really sloppy FCU to slide fit. Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I think I understand what you're saying about the frame rails but I think you're missing the point I'm trying to make. They incorporate the slide rails in the FCU, yes but those are only to ensure slide-to-grip module tolerance. What I am trying to convey (probably rather poorly) is that it's just an upper set or half-channel of the rails. They should incorporate a lower set of rails into the FCU as well to make a full, integral channel thereby removing any reliance on the grip module to provide any role as a guide. It's the slide to (removable) FCU I'm thinking of. I'd think slop between the two is more of a concern than slide to frame. So the slide's channels are *machined too loose in tolerance? There's all kinds of vertical pressure (and inertia) when it's in a duty holster. And that pressure constantly changes. |
|
Oh. 
|
|
You got me! I laughed! |
|
I remember watching a video of completing a 80% P320 chassis. The frame rails are completed by pounding the rail tab over 90deg in the jig. I haven't looked at my FCU since I detail stripped it to retrofit a manual safety. But I believe it's the same. The frame rails are bent over. It's possible some arent bent enough. That might increase the slide to FCU distance. But it would also minutely increase the rail thickness. I had to remove a little material on my P80 rails as they were slightly misaligned and needed to be trued up to the plane of the slide. |
 Dear Sig Sauer: Talk To Us Before It's Too Late |
|
You're gonna latch onto this asshole? Really? Attached File Attached File Go to his page and see what pops on the suggested for you, due to the associations with his account. |
|
That's good. |
|
Quoted: Seriously, which investigation? FBI? Air Force? Gray Guns? Sig? Who's investigation will you consider conclusive? A lot of UD's are going to happen in the meantime. The investigation that says sig is the best and can do no wrong. Such is life for people that make brands their whole personality. |
|
Quoted: Seriously, which investigation? FBI? Air Force? Gray Guns? Sig? Who's investigation will you consider conclusive? A lot of UD's are going to happen in the meantime. Quoted: Quoted: No. I will wait for investigation to conclude and go from there. Seriously, which investigation? FBI? Air Force? Gray Guns? Sig? Who's investigation will you consider conclusive? A lot of UD's are going to happen in the meantime. In the case of prior investigations and court cases, they haven't ever been enough. Unless they've painted Sig in a positive light. |
|
Quoted: There's all kinds of vertical pressure (and inertia) when it's in a duty holster. And that pressure constantly changes. |
|
Quoted: Right, but I was meaning internal forces inherent to the operation of the gun. Being knocked around in the holster is clearly a contributing factor in several of the UDs we've seen reports on. Quoted: Quoted: There's all kinds of vertical pressure (and inertia) when it's in a duty holster. And that pressure constantly changes. Attached File |