[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Summary report of Sig failures ** Armorer gets repeatable AD pg8 ** (Page 5 of 8)
|
Quoted: I’ve already posted why I disagree. You Glock fanboys either cherry pick one thing I write or make up things I didn’t say or don’t fully read what I write and misquote me. Show me actual proof that a design issue exists. You can’t. All you can do is speculate. That’s it. What you are calling proof isn’t proof of anything. It’s circumstantial at best. The reason I brought up Glock is because Glock suffered the same exact claims about them as Sig is suffering now about the P320. When the dust settled it was all hysteria. Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: So difference of opinion is trolling...... A difference of opinion hasn't been your argument. You keep trying to tie "Glock leg" and other Glock negligent discharges with the current 320 issue. Dude, that laughable and you even acknowledged that when you wrote "The only changes Glock ever made was to offer heavier triggers for people who refused to adapt." Thats a training issue, not a product defect. The Glock issues were a user training issue. The Sig P320 issue is a design issue. If you disagree, then explain why you disagree. Simply posting BUT, BUT, BUT TRIBALISM! isn't a difference of opinion, but attempting to gaslight the problem. I’ve already posted why I disagree. You Glock fanboys either cherry pick one thing I write or make up things I didn’t say or don’t fully read what I write and misquote me. Show me actual proof that a design issue exists. You can’t. All you can do is speculate. That’s it. What you are calling proof isn’t proof of anything. It’s circumstantial at best. The reason I brought up Glock is because Glock suffered the same exact claims about them as Sig is suffering now about the P320. When the dust settled it was all hysteria. The striker safety doesn't work 100%. The striker released in SIG's own in-house testing multiple times. Which, again, you alluded to it somehow not being a controlled environment and that something else could have gotten into the chamber where the pistol was at and pulled the trigger. You wanna address why SIG's own testing wouldn't be considered a controlled environment? |
|
Quoted: I’ve already posted why I disagree. You Glock fanboys either cherry pick one thing I write or make up things I didn’t say or don’t fully read what I write and misquote me. Show me actual proof that a design issue exists. You can’t. All you can do is speculate. That’s it. What you are calling proof isn’t proof of anything. It’s circumstantial at best. The reason I brought up Glock is because Glock suffered the same exact claims about them as Sig is suffering now about the P320. When the dust settled it was all hysteria. Ok, let me address your own comprehension problem: you keep bringing up Glock, then calling us tribal fanfoys when we point out that Glock isn’t relevant, and telling us that someone can like more than one gun. So, how did you determine that we’re Glock fanboys or tribally anti-SIG? Hint: I like guns with hammers. |
|
More liability reduction from Sig. A user on another forum found another change in language for the newest manual which redefines "abuse" to the gun to include dropping it or the gun impacting another object. Per the manual, prior to using it, the user should have the gun inspected by a Sig qualified armorer/gunsmith if the gun experiences any of the above "abuse". So if we are taking this literally, basically any LEO that is involved in a use of force should have the gun re-inspected professionally prior to going back on duty. Attached File |
|
As someone who purchased 2 M18x back in January, I’ve been following this story. Admittedly it seems a little disconcerting, seems Sig made the issue worse with “it ends today”, but I have yet to see any hard evidence that Sigs are just going off on their own (minus the drop safe issues of early pistols). Does anyone actually have any hard evidence of P320s going off on their own? I saw a video of a copy with a holstered P320 go off, but my understanding is the gun was out of the holster prior to it going off and there was debris in the holster. I saw a video of a cop who blamed the P320 for going off on its own getting out of the vehicle, but comment section identified a single frame on bodycam footage where the finger was indeed on the trigger. My own non expert impression is that Sig having a relatively light trigger pull, no safety dingus and relatively wide face of trigger compared to the trigger guard makes it a bit easier to ND a P320 than say a Glock with a slightly heavier pull, thinner trigger, trigger dingus and longer trigger pull. I think that is why these events seem to happen more frequently with the P320. |
|
And Smith and Wesson, glad you included them. Quoted: Yeah, back in the 90s if you wanted a reliable "service pistol" or "compact pistol" you basically had your choice of Beretta, Glock, H&K, or SIG. S&W was probably number 5, but they had a much worse reputation than the pistols actually deserved and there were some S&W 3rd Gen duds. Everything else was either straight out bad, or wasn't reliably good enough to buy and just know it was going to run. How SIG has fallen since. |
|
Quoted: As someone who purchased 2 M18x back in January, I’ve been following this story. Admittedly it seems a little disconcerting, seems Sig made the issue worse with “it ends today”, but I have yet to see any hard evidence that Sigs are just going off on their own (minus the drop safe issues of early pistols). Does anyone actually have any hard evidence of P320s going off on their own? I saw a video of a copy with a holstered P320 go off, but my understanding is the gun was out of the holster prior to it going off and there was debris in the holster. I saw a video of a cop who blamed the P320 for going off on its own getting out of the vehicle, but comment section identified a single frame on bodycam footage where the finger was indeed on the trigger. My own non expert impression is that Sig having a relatively light trigger pull, no safety dingus and relatively wide face of trigger compared to the trigger guard makes it a bit easier to ND a P320 than say a Glock with a slightly heavier pull, thinner trigger, trigger dingus and longer trigger pull. I think that is why these events seem to happen more frequently with the P320. Flashman's compiled all the data here: https://www.ar15.com/forbubuRSj-_YK_sRSj-_YK_sums/General/buRSj-_YK_sSIG-The-P320-It-ends-today-/5-2782910/?page=54#i113174948 Two short relevant videos for ya:  SIG P320 Uncommanded Discharge on Video  Testing two P320's for Uncommanded Discharge: One PASS, one FAIL You can do the punch test on your own pistols. Post the results. |
|
Quoted: As someone who purchased 2 M18x back in January, I’ve been following this story. Admittedly it seems a little disconcerting, seems Sig made the issue worse with “it ends today”, but I have yet to see any hard evidence that Sigs are just going off on their own.... Then you haven't been paying attention. |
|
I haven't had time to look through this yet, but Sig put this up on their website. P320truth.com |
|
Quoted: I haven't had time to look through this yet, but Sig put this up on their website. P320truth.com 
|
|
Quoted: All things considered, I am even more convinced that there is nothing wrong with them. |
|
Quoted: All of the negative talk has made me rethink my thoughts about the P320. All things considered, I am even more convinced that there is nothing wrong with them. That said, I went out and bought a new P320 XFIVE SXG Tuesday morning.  Please perform the punch test and report the results. |
|
Quoted: I've yet to meet a 320 fan who thinks the punch test is worth a shit. Attached File |
|
Quoted: I've yet to meet a 320 fan who thinks the punch test is worth a shit. Quoted: Quoted: Please perform the punch test and report the results. I've yet to meet a 320 fan who thinks the punch test is worth a shit. Kind of a truism - if you're a P320 fanatic, why would you even test? To test is to admit there might be a failure. And if there was a demonstrated failure of the striker block and you've been carrying a cocked & unlocked pistol pointing at your knee or nuts for months, can you still be a P320 fanatic? |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I haven't had time to look through this yet, but Sig put this up on their website. P320truth.com Well Sig is wrong about the 320 not being able to fire unless you pull the trigger. Apparently you can partially disassemble the pistol and use a scientific instrument called a long pokey thing and get the sear to drop on some examples. This scientific test was conducted in a state of an art lab and was recorded by scientist unknown to me but his findings has turned the gun world....ah hem I mean arfcom upside down. This highly controlled experiment has proven beyond any doubt whatsoever the 320 has a design flaw. This scientific finding is so solid that DoD, every LEA and every court room in America should preserve and use the video as evidence against Sig. Any day now the P320 will be dropped from production and redesigned based on this highly scientific and credible test that has been deemed the holy grail of tests by arfcom GD, YT and all certified basement dwellers. I was issued one for 8 years, I've seen them get banged around and dropped so hard the optics shattered and at no time did any of these fire. But I'm supposed to discount my experience because some guy took the gun apart and started poking and probing around with what he refers to as a long pokey thing and got something to happen....yeah okay.... |
|
Quoted: Well Sig is wrong about the 320 not being able to fire unless you pull the trigger. Apparently you can partially disassemble the pistol and use a scientific instrument called a long pokey thing and get the sear to drop on some examples. This scientific test was conducted in a state of an art lab and was recorded by scientist unknown to me but his findings has turned the gun world....ah hem I mean arfcom upside down. This highly controlled experiment has proven beyond any doubt whatsoever the 320 has a design flaw. This scientific finding is so solid that DoD, every LEA and every court room in America should preserve and use the video as evidence against Sig. Any day now the P320 will be dropped from production and redesigned based on this highly scientific and credible test that has been deemed the holy grail of tests by arfcom GD, YT and all certified basement dwellers. I was issued one for 8 years, I've seen them get banged around and dropped so hard the optics shattered and at no time did any of these fire. But I'm supposed to discount my experience because some guy took the gun apart and started poking and probing around with what he refers to as a long pokey thing and got something to happen....yeah okay.... So you did the test? Be honest? |
|
Quoted: Well Sig is wrong about the 320 not being able to fire unless you pull the trigger. Apparently you can partially disassemble the pistol and use a scientific instrument called a long pokey thing and get the sear to drop on some examples. This scientific test was conducted in a state of an art lab and was recorded by scientist unknown to me but his findings has turned the gun world....ah hem I mean arfcom upside down. This highly controlled experiment has proven beyond any doubt whatsoever the 320 has a design flaw. This scientific finding is so solid that DoD, every LEA and every court room in America should preserve and use the video as evidence against Sig. Any day now the P320 will be dropped from production and redesigned based on this highly scientific and credible test that has been deemed the holy grail of tests by arfcom GD, YT and all certified basement dwellers. I was issued one for 8 years, I've seen them get banged around and dropped so hard the optics shattered and at no time did any of these fire. But I'm supposed to discount my experience because some guy took the gun apart and started poking and probing around with what he refers to as a long pokey thing and got something to happen....yeah okay.... You own a 320 so it must be safe, right? The ownership effect |
|
Quoted: Well Sig is wrong about the 320 not being able to fire unless you pull the trigger. Apparently you can partially disassemble the pistol and use a scientific instrument called a long pokey thing and get the sear to drop on some examples. This scientific test was conducted in a state of an art lab and was recorded by scientist unknown to me but his findings has turned the gun world....ah hem I mean arfcom upside down. This highly controlled experiment has proven beyond any doubt whatsoever the 320 has a design flaw. This scientific finding is so solid that DoD, every LEA and every court room in America should preserve and use the video as evidence against Sig. Any day now the P320 will be dropped from production and redesigned based on this highly scientific and credible test that has been deemed the holy grail of tests by arfcom GD, YT and all certified basement dwellers. I was issued one for 8 years, I've seen them get banged around and dropped so hard the optics shattered and at no time did any of these fire. But I'm supposed to discount my experience because some guy took the gun apart and started poking and probing around with what he refers to as a long pokey thing and got something to happen....yeah okay.... “It’s not done in a lab”. Dude, you’re pushing something out of the way to see if something that’s supposed to stop something from moving actually works. And as it happens, it’s not always working as expected. This isn’t some highly complicated task to perform or comprehend. Sig’s vibration test, that was done “in Sig’s lab” also demonstrated this, but you willingly ignore that too. Regardless, you don’t need Elon Musk locked in Area 51 for a month to accomplish this task  . |
 Sig Sauer P320 Concerns and Jumping to Conclusions |
|
Well shit, had we known you were DJs troll account, this would all have made a lot more sense. |
|
AMEN Brother! |
|
Eh, they have a point. A very trust worthy guy from a very trustworthy community has posted a video about a gun from a company that openly sponsors them. We all need to blindly trust them since there is no way they would ever say anything for a payout. I mean for fucks sake, one of them trusts the gun so much, he puts it on his fridge. |
|
https://www.ar15.com/forums/general/New-sig-320-uncommanded-discharge/5-2792484/?page=2&anc=bottom#i113368159 Quoted: Since I was summoned. I have a selection of P320’s and tried it with the thinnest punch I have. Only two P320’s were able to be accessed the rest are buried in the safe. One is SBRd it is one of the non safety Custom FCU modules. The other is an M18 with safety. I installed a laser cartridge. If the firing pin hits the cartridge it fires a laser. On the fcu SBR the punch thing was done 5 times. Laser activated 5 times. On the M18. I tried it 5 times with the safety on. And 5 times with the safety off. Laser fired 5 times with safety off. It did not fire with the same test and the safety on. The safety is impacting how it works. I will be playing with the other guns when I get more time. |
|
The stick goes in the back. Nacho used a laser cartridge and both of his striker blocks had failures. |
|
Come on do the test. What do you have to lose? @MK318 |
|
Quoted: Come on do the test. What do you have to lose? @MK318 Quoted: Come on do the test. What do you have to lose? @MK318 Because it’s not a “test” you guys keep calling it a test to attempt to add legitimacy to a guy poking around a partially disassembled P320 with a punch while haphazardly filming in his poorly lit basement. A test has a defined set of parameters with a clearly defined achievable or unachievable result. What some guy on YouTube is doing isn’t a test. He can’t even get repeatable results with his supposedly broken P320. Calling that a test is just desperation by some of you to hold up something, anything, as evidence instead of just speculation and assumption. Three quarters of the people in this thread, probably more have never even handled a P320. You are just seeking validation for not buying a pistol you probably were never going to buy in the first place because you can’t afford to own more than one brand. Which is why we have so much brand tribalism here. It’s why in the other thread about the Ruger RXM you have the Glock fanatics beside themselves when someone suggested that another company might have innovated and made a better “Glock”. They have so much invested in a singular brand that it is their entire identity. Suggesting that another brand might be better is an insult to them. It is sad to watch. It is sad to watch grown men crying because some people aren’t chopping their P320s in half over internet induced hysteria. I feel I own a big enough sample size of 320s almost all of which have modified triggers, often shorter breaks like my Apex Tactical triggers which reduce the take up almost completely. I shoot and own enough P320s that if there was some sort of design flaw, it would have reared up by now and I’d have a first hand account. This is the problem. It’s not a sexy and drama filled as a billion dollar company engaging in questionable ethics and cover ups so it has to be something internal. It must be. Attached File Attached File |
| Like it or not 320's are going off uncommanded. The "test" shows that the safety doesn't always catch the sear if it is released without input to the trigger. The inconsistency of the safety is concerning. It should catch the sear regardless of how it is released if the trigger isn't pressed. |
|
Quoted: Because it’s not a “test” you guys keep calling it a test to attempt to add legitimacy to a guy poking around a partially disassembled P320 with a punch while haphazardly filming in his poorly lit basement. A test has a defined set of parameters with a clearly defined achievable or unachievable result. What some guy on YouTube is doing isn’t a test. He can’t even get repeatable results with his supposedly broken P320. Calling that a test is just desperation by some of you to hold up something, anything, as evidence instead of just speculation and assumption. Three quarters of the people in this thread, probably more have never even handled a P320. You are just seeking validation for not buying a pistol you probably were never going to buy in the first place because you can’t afford to own more than one brand. Which is why we have so much brand tribalism here. It’s why in the other thread about the Ruger RXM you have the Glock fanatics beside themselves when someone suggested that another company might have innovated and made a better “Glock”. They have so much invested in a singular brand that it is their entire identity. Suggesting that another brand might be better is an insult to them. It is sad to watch. It is sad to watch grown men crying because some people aren’t chopping their P320s in half over internet induced hysteria. I feel I own a big enough sample size of 320s almost all of which have modified triggers, often shorter breaks like my Apex Tactical triggers which reduce the take up almost completely. I shoot and own enough P320s that if there was some sort of design flaw, it would have reared up by now and I’d have a first hand account. This is the problem. It’s not a sexy and drama filled as a billion dollar company engaging in questionable ethics and cover ups so it has to be something internal. It must be. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/557335/IMG_2133_jpeg-3532014.JPGhttps://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/557335/IMG_2131_jpeg-3532015.JPG Attached File |
|
Quoted: Like it or not 320's are going off uncommanded. The "test" shows that the safety doesn't always catch the sear if it is released without input to the trigger. The inconsistency of the safety is concerning. It should catch the sear regardless of how it is released if the trigger isn't pressed. I don’t dislike it or like it, it simply isn’t a test. It’s some dude in a basement using a punch to poke around in a partially disassembled pistol until something happens for clicks. Good for him for seeing an opportunity to jump on a hot topic and drive up his viewership numbers. |
|
Quoted: I don't dislike it or like it, it simply isn't a test. It's some dude in a basement using a punch to poke around in a partially disassembled pistol until something happens for clicks. Good for him for seeing an opportunity to jump on a hot topic and drive up his viewership numbers. |
|
Quoted: It's no different than you presenting a cause that has no basis in fact. Your cause involves input to the trigger which is not happening in the cases of 320's discharging uncommanded. The "test" demonstrates a more plausible cause than your biased one much like Sig's own vibration test does. At least somebody is trying to figure it out instead of ignoring the problem. Thank goodness the M17 has a thumb safety. Quoted: Quoted: I don't dislike it or like it, it simply isn't a test. It's some dude in a basement using a punch to poke around in a partially disassembled pistol until something happens for clicks. Good for him for seeing an opportunity to jump on a hot topic and drive up his viewership numbers. I am not ignoring anything. It’s strange to me that if someone isn’t running around with their hair on fire over these claims that they are ignoring them. I am simply observing and waiting for actual evidence that an issue exists. If that happens I will take the necessary actions to ensure my pistols are as safe as they can be under normal use. Just like I do with my 70 series 1911s that are not drop safe or some shotguns I own that are not drop safe, or like I do when I appendix carry my P365s, P320s, Glocks, or Walthers. Complacency kills. This is why am never in a hurry to holster. |
|
Quoted: It's no different than you presenting a cause that has no basis in fact. Your cause involves input to the trigger which is not happening in the cases of 320's discharging uncommanded. The "test" demonstrates a more plausible cause than your biased one much like Sig's own vibration test does. At least somebody is trying to figure it out instead of ignoring the problem. Thank goodness the M17 has a thumb safety. Attached File |
|
Quoted: Because it’s not a “test” you guys keep calling it a test to attempt to add legitimacy to a guy poking around a partially disassembled P320 with a punch while haphazardly filming in his poorly lit basement. A test has a defined set of parameters with a clearly defined achievable or unachievable result. What some guy on YouTube is doing isn’t a test. Thank you. What so many skip right over is when this "test" is done, you bypass a secondary safety notch on the sear designed to catch the striker "if" the first one fails. While the striker block does have a delicate spring, it is going to have to hold less force coming from the secondary notch instead of the first. Here is a question I have.....how many have taken the striker out of their P320, had the striker safety spring come out of position, not know it and put the gun back together unknowingly with the striker safety spring out of place. Some of the armorers schools I have been to teach you to look for tool marks indicating someone (not an armorer) has taken the gun apart when most police dept policies strictly prohibit working on or adding extras to your duty gun. Enough they train you to look for it. I know its far out there to think someone would piddle with a gun making things better, faster, lighter springs, etc using a random YouTube video on assembly and disassembly. |
|
Quoted: Thank you. What so many skip right over is when this "test" is done, you bypass a secondary safety notch on the sear designed to catch the striker "if" the first one fails. While the striker block does have a delicate spring, it is going to have to hold less force coming from the secondary notch instead of the first. Here is a question I have.....how many have taken the striker out of their P320, had the striker safety spring come out of position, not know it and put the gun back together unknowingly with the striker safety spring out of place. Some of the armorers schools I have been to teach you to look for tool marks indicating someone (not an armorer) has taken the gun apart when most police dept policies strictly prohibit working on or adding extras to your duty gun. Enough they train you to look for it. I know its far out there to think someone would piddle with a gun making things better, faster, lighter springs, etc using a random YouTube video on assembly and disassembly. Honestly, that's not the issue. When this issue first came up, I was 100% team Sig on this one, you can probably pull up my old posts and see for yourself. I owned a handful of these things (I think 5 at one time, with a few FCU's laying around, oh, and carried one on duty...), and literally thought there was no way for this to occur. The odds of multiple things failing at once to cause a discharge was out of the realm of comprehension to me. At that point, nobody had any documentation, or even a method to see if the striker safety was working. Then the results of the Sig vibration test are released. Then someone took the barrel and recoil assembly out of the pistol, held it in the position it would be in while firing, and manually manipulated the sear to push it out of the way. Short of doing this on an assembled firearm with a primed case, it's the easiest and most logical way to have all of the parts of the firearm put together in the position they need to be where one can see if the striker protrudes from the breech face. Nobody has yet to explain why this simple test is flawed or otherwise introduces a different element that might explain why the striker slips past the safety that wouldn't occur if the firearm were completely assembled. I agree that it doesn't prove that the guns *will* fire, but it does indicate that a safety isn't working as expected, which could absolutely cause the gun to fire if there is a sears/secondary sear failure. @Nachodip The issue is simply that something like a striker safety needs to work 100% of the time. Sig chose a drastically different way to set up this safety than virtually every other striker fired gun out there, including their own P365. I wonder why they didn't stick with it for their other platforms. Once I set aside my brand loyalty (lets face it, it happens....as is very evident still with plenty of posters in this thread), I realized there were plenty of other platforms out there with more proven designs that perform equal to or better than the P320. The P320 is the very definition of a mediocre firearm, and I say that after fully adopting the platform and exclusively shooting it for about 2 years. Simply put, the gun isn't good enough to accept the risk. At this point, everyone should be able to agree that there is at least one design flaw. The P320 absolutely should have a trigger safety tab. |
|
Quoted: Honestly, that's not the issue. At this point, everyone should be able to agree that there is at least one design flaw. The P320 absolutely should have a trigger safety tab. You guys keep saying it has nothing to do with trigger movement that is it’s a sear issue, if it’s a sear issue why does it need a dingus on the trigger? Same can be said about the safety. The safety on the M17/M18s have nothing to do with blocking the sear, it blocks trigger movement. If this issue exists the way some of you claim then a manual safety doesn’t matter and that brings me to my next point, if it is the sear engagement and the safety doesn’t matter then where are the military issues? The military found the drop firing issue in testing but a weak sear spring /out of spec sear was skipped over? Hundreds of thousands of P320s are in use all over the world yet it only seems to be a problem with police officers and weekend warriors in competition/training while hurrying in and out of the holster. |
|
Quoted: You guys keep saying it has nothing to do with trigger movement that is it’s a sear issue, if it’s a sear issue why does it need a dingus on the trigger? Same can be said about the safety. The safety on the M17/M18s have nothing to do with blocking the sear, it blocks trigger movement. If this issue exists the way some of you claim then a manual safety doesn’t matter and that brings me to my next point, if it is the sear engagement and the safety doesn’t matter then where are the military issues? The military found the drop firing issue in testing but a weak sear spring /out of spec sear was skipped over? Hundreds of thousands of P320s are in use all over the world yet it only seems to be a problem with police officers and weekend warriors in competition/training while hurrying in and out of the holster. I don’t see anyone definitively stating what the issue is. All I’m reading is acknowledgement that the design has at least one major issue, and that is the striker safety not working 100% of the time. In and of itself, doesn’t explain the issue. However, in conjunction with a vibration test showing an alarming number of primer strikes, there’s obviously something else going on. What that is, I don’t know. But any issues like this to me are simply unacceptable. Also, there have been numerous reports of issues with military models. You have just chosen to ignore them or write them off as holster issues. I freely admit I do not know what the issue is causing this is, however two separate tests have indeed shown issues with the design not working as expected. To me, that’s enough to cause concern. Obviously for you, it’s not. Sear movement, trigger movement, holster issue, whatever it is, whatever combination it may be….a trigger safety on a fully cocked striker with a sub 5 lbs press would have been a common sense addition. Which is probably why every other reputable duty striker platform has one. |
|
Quoted: More liability reduction from Sig. A user on another forum found another change in language for the newest manual which redefines "abuse" to the gun to include dropping it or the gun impacting another object. Per the manual, prior to using it, the user should have the gun inspected by a Sig qualified armorer/gunsmith if the gun experiences any of the above "abuse". So if we are taking this literally, basically any LEO that is involved in a use of force should have the gun re-inspected professionally prior to going back on duty. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/85215/1000004939_jpg-3529440.JPG |
|
Quoted: Because it’s not a “test” you guys keep calling it a test to attempt to add legitimacy to a guy poking around a partially disassembled P320 with a punch while haphazardly filming in his poorly lit basement. Quoted: Because it’s not a “test” you guys keep calling it a test to attempt to add legitimacy to a guy poking around a partially disassembled P320 with a punch while haphazardly filming in his poorly lit basement. So please explain how releasing the striker from the sear wtihout the trigger being pulled with the gun as assmbled as it can be when you do it is not a test. Show your homework, in a way that indicates you are pursuing the truth of the situation, and not something else. How is releasing the striker from the sear to (without pulling the trigger) *not* a test? https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/test Meaning of test in English A1 a way of discovering, by questions or practical activities, what someone knows, or what someone or something can do or is like: The class are doing/having a spelling test today. She had to take/do an aptitude test before she got the job. B1 ... an act of using something to find out if it is working correctly or how effective it is: The new missiles are currently undergoing tests. B2 a situation that shows how good something is: Driving on that icy road was a real test of my skill. Quoted: A test has a defined set of parameters with a clearly defined achievable or unachievable result. What some guy on YouTube is doing isn’t a test. He can’t even get repeatable results with his supposedly broken P320. Disconnect the cocked striker from the sear without pulling the trigger. <---- there. Parameters. "see if the striker safety works" <---- there, a clearly defined and achievable or uncheviable result. He got repeatable results with his broken 320. I don't know why you're saying he didn't. Quoted: Calling that a test is just desperation by some of you to hold up something, anything, as evidence instead of just speculation and assumption. Three quarters of the people in this thread, probably more have never even handled a P320. You are just seeking validation for not buying a pistol you probably were never going to buy in the first place because you can’t afford to own more than one brand. Which is why we have so much brand tribalism here. It’s why in the other thread about the Ruger RXM you have the Glock fanatics beside themselves when someone suggested that another company might have innovated and made a better “Glock”. They have so much invested in a singular brand that it is their entire identity. Suggesting that another brand might be better is an insult to them. Assumptions don't count. Assumptions aren't even things you can form opinions from without committing errors in thinking. ------------------- Truth doesn't requires assumptions and other fallacies to defend it. Truth stands on it's own and inspires the one defending it to act like it really is true. |