[ARCHIVED THREAD] - SIG “ The P320. It ends today.” (Page 117 of 142)
|
Quoted: Wonder what department policy was? Quoted: Quoted: Sorry if we covered this already. I haven't seen it here yet.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CF9c5-zxpnsLong story short: federal jury found the P320 is a defective design causing uncommanded discharges. But they ALSO held that the police officer that got shot in the scrotum, thigh and knee is entitled to no compensation, because he "voluntarily carried a gun he knew to be defective and dangerous." Wonder what department policy was? Don't know about that, but the agency had experienced three other UD's before this one. forewarned is foretold. |
|
Quoted: I finally went and took a look at my P320 and ran a couple tests. My one and only P320 is circa 2017. It went back to Sig for the voluntary upgrade. I took a look at trigger frame and slide behavior. One think to note is there was a fair amount of slide slop. But it doesn't rattle because the slide is being pushed upwards. Maybe by the sear on the striker leg. When I pull the trigger slowly, My slide moves downward as if the sear is pulling the striker tail down with it. The P320 slide rails are more like wings as they are just bent metal from the FCU. You could probably tweak the wings to get less slop but I dont care. I went ahead and performed the sear punch test. But I didnt do it like the video. I left everything together, racked slide and used a utility razor blade and slid the pointy end under the slide plate and cammed upwards. This repeatedly dropped the striker. I also had a pencil in the barrel (pointed up at 45deg) as I dropped the sear. It never caused the pencil to move. I did the test about 15 times. I also fired the gun with a pencil in the barrel normally. The pencil bounced every time. My striker safety definitely works at this point in time. So yes you can drop the sear with no input from the trigger as has been proven already. Also, As already mentioned, The sear has a long tail to it that makes me wonder why its there. It makes it real easy to actuate it Did the trigger move when you were putting the blade in and moving the sear? . |
Judge denies Sig Sauer's request to reverse a ban on P320 Judge denies Sig Sauer's request to reverse a ban on P320 A judge denied Sig Sauer's request to reverse a ban on its P320 handgun at a Washington training center. |
|
According to SIG Sauer, one-third of U.S. police use SIG firearms.[4] SOURCE: https://www.sigsauer.com/MilitaryFedGov/Overview.aspx Wow, that's alot of pistols that may need to be replaced sometime in the future. Sig's demise might be something that saves firearm manufacturing in the US |
|
Quoted: Page numbering bug bump. Dunno if we can slam the Massachusetts case too hard - our fine detective was carrying a striker fired pistol w/o a holster in his pants - ie, Mexican carry. I wouldn't do that w/ a Glock. This was a jury decision in a civil trial, not a judge or court ruling that would necessarily set legal precedence, but it sets up the question: if someone is using a P320 in whatever capacity (law enforcement, CCW, target shooting, whatever) and it spontaneously goes off, injuring or killing someone, is the person holding the gun (or the one who just set it down) responsible because they "voluntarily used a product they knew to be defective and dangerous?" If it is ultimately the user's fault, than sig is off the hook entirely and there's "nothing wrong" with designing a gun that can go off by itself. Sig's new motto can be, "you knew we were a scorpion when you met us." |
|
Quoted: It appears PSA Palmetto State Armory pulled all their P320s or sent them back or something. All are listed as Out of Stock except one FCU: https://palmettostatearmory.com/brands/sig-sauer/firearms/pistols/p320.html Davidsons, GT Dist, and now PSA, plus the IDPA ban. Sig probably needs to consider doing something here. And that something probably shouldn't be more arrogant and tone deaf social media postings. |
|
Quoted:  Well yeah, they're all going to disable the striker safety during pre-travel. That's how they're supposed to work. The P320's trigger does 2 things: disable the striker safety and lower the sear. It disables the striker safety during pre-travel, then lowers the sear during regular travel. That's why the 1mm test is so stupid: because he's pulling the trigger through the portion of travel where the striker safety is supposed to be disabled, then 1mm into the portion of travel where the striker is supposed to be lowered. You have to disable the striker safety before you lower the sear or the gun won't work, so literally all striker fired pistols with a striker safety work this way.Quoted: Quoted: Wyoming Gun Project Tested if All 3 of his P320s and found that all completely disable the safety as soon as the pre-travel is taken up. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dxj85puRDZwOnly 1 of his 3 would fire from moving the slide with some pre-travel taken out. But all 3 disable the safety completely as soon as the pre-travel is removed. Well yeah, they're all going to disable the striker safety during pre-travel. That's how they're supposed to work. The P320's trigger does 2 things: disable the striker safety and lower the sear. It disables the striker safety during pre-travel, then lowers the sear during regular travel. That's why the 1mm test is so stupid: because he's pulling the trigger through the portion of travel where the striker safety is supposed to be disabled, then 1mm into the portion of travel where the striker is supposed to be lowered. You have to disable the striker safety before you lower the sear or the gun won't work, so literally all striker fired pistols with a striker safety work this way.It’s just clickbait bullshit of him constantly acting surprised as he demonstrates the way striker fired pistols function. At this point I’m curious if he’s being funded by SIG to just come up with nonsense that distracts from the real issues. You know what he could have done instead of all that bloviating? Take the slide off, pull the trigger, and see when the lever lifts up for disengaging the striker block… but than only takes 30 seconds and doesn’t make good sensational clickbait. |
|
Quoted: Davidsons, GT Dist, and now PSA, plus the IDPA ban. Sig probably needs to consider doing something here. And that something probably shouldn't be more arrogant and tone deaf social media postings. Quoted: Quoted: It appears PSA Palmetto State Armory pulled all their P320s or sent them back or something. All are listed as Out of Stock except one FCU: https://palmettostatearmory.com/brands/sig-sauer/firearms/pistols/p320.html Davidsons, GT Dist, and now PSA, plus the IDPA ban. Sig probably needs to consider doing something here. And that something probably shouldn't be more arrogant and tone deaf social media postings. |
|
Quoted: This was a jury decision in a civil trial, not a judge or court ruling that would necessarily set legal precedence, but it sets up the question: if someone is using a P320 in whatever capacity (law enforcement, CCW, target shooting, whatever) and it spontaneously goes off, injuring or killing someone, is the person holding the gun (or the one who just set it down) responsible because they "voluntarily used a product they knew to be defective and dangerous?" If it is ultimately the user's fault, than sig is off the hook entirely and there's "nothing wrong" with designing a gun that can go off by itself. Sig's new motto can be, "you knew we were a scorpion when you met us." Quoted: Quoted: Page numbering bug bump. Dunno if we can slam the Massachusetts case too hard - our fine detective was carrying a striker fired pistol w/o a holster in his pants - ie, Mexican carry. I wouldn't do that w/ a Glock. This was a jury decision in a civil trial, not a judge or court ruling that would necessarily set legal precedence, but it sets up the question: if someone is using a P320 in whatever capacity (law enforcement, CCW, target shooting, whatever) and it spontaneously goes off, injuring or killing someone, is the person holding the gun (or the one who just set it down) responsible because they "voluntarily used a product they knew to be defective and dangerous?" If it is ultimately the user's fault, than sig is off the hook entirely and there's "nothing wrong" with designing a gun that can go off by itself. Sig's new motto can be, "you knew we were a scorpion when you met us." What if you work somewhere where you are required to carry a Sig & they won't let you use something else? Lots of LE agencies could be liable for issuing weapons they know are defective when/if someone is hurt or killed by one. |
|
Quoted: According to SIG Sauer, one-third of U.S. police use SIG firearms.[4] SOURCE: https://www.sigsauer.com/MilitaryFedGov/Overview.aspx Wow, that's alot of pistols that may need to be replaced sometime in the future. Sig's demise might be something that saves firearm manufacturing in the US I call BS on that claim of Sig. For the actual duty gun, Sig does not have 1/3 of the U.S. market by any stretch as of 2025. Maybe 10-15 years ago when alot of their legacy guns were still in wide use (P226 and P229). But those days are long gone. Now maybe they are looking at off-duty guns or something like that (i.e. alot of LE do carry personally owned P365's off-duty). Also the page you linked is no longer there. Attached File |
|
Quoted: Davidsons, GT Dist, and now PSA, plus the IDPA ban. Sig probably needs to consider doing something here. And that something probably shouldn't be more arrogant and tone deaf social media postings. Captain sir - We are sinking fast! Our loyal partners are jumping ship! Impossible! Inconceivable!! We are a Titanic force in the firearms industry. We are UNSINKABLE!!!  Bigger_Hammer 
|
|
Quoted: Captain sir - We are sinking fast! Our loyal partners are jumping ship! Impossible! Inconceivable!! We are a Titanic force in the firearms industry. We are UNSINKABLE!!! Bigger_Hammer They must be taking navigational advice from Amber Heard, cause it sure smells like they shit the bed. 
|
|
Quoted: What if you work somewhere where you are required to carry a Sig & they won't let you use something else? Lots of LE agencies could be liable for issuing weapons they know are defective when/if someone is hurt or killed by one. Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Page numbering bug bump. Dunno if we can slam the Massachusetts case too hard - our fine detective was carrying a striker fired pistol w/o a holster in his pants - ie, Mexican carry. I wouldn't do that w/ a Glock. This was a jury decision in a civil trial, not a judge or court ruling that would necessarily set legal precedence, but it sets up the question: if someone is using a P320 in whatever capacity (law enforcement, CCW, target shooting, whatever) and it spontaneously goes off, injuring or killing someone, is the person holding the gun (or the one who just set it down) responsible because they "voluntarily used a product they knew to be defective and dangerous?" If it is ultimately the user's fault, than sig is off the hook entirely and there's "nothing wrong" with designing a gun that can go off by itself. Sig's new motto can be, "you knew we were a scorpion when you met us." What if you work somewhere where you are required to carry a Sig & they won't let you use something else? Lots of LE agencies could be liable for issuing weapons they know are defective when/if someone is hurt or killed by one. To take it one step further, every lawful use of a P320 from this point forward can be potentially a criminal/civil nightmare for the government in all of it's forms. I foresee counsel lining up to ask whether the shoot was judicious or an accident, looking for wiggle room or a payout. |
|
Quoted: According to SIG Sauer, one-third of U.S. police use SIG firearms.[4] SOURCE: https://www.sigsauer.com/MilitaryFedGov/Overview.aspx Wow, that's alot of pistols that may need to be replaced sometime in the future. Sig's demise might be something that saves firearm manufacturing in the US Quite a few in that pool that doesn’t issue the P320 in one form or another or even there handguns. |
|
Quoted: I call BS on that claim of Sig. For the actual duty gun, Sig does not have 1/3 of the U.S. market by any stretch as of 2025. Maybe 10-15 years ago when alot of their legacy guns were still in wide use (P226 and P229). But those days are long gone. Now maybe they are looking at off-duty guns or something like that (i.e. alot of LE do carry personally owned P365's off-duty). Also the page you linked is no longer there. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/26697/Screenshot_2025-08-02_090134_jpg-3599005.JPG Quoted: Quoted: According to SIG Sauer, one-third of U.S. police use SIG firearms.[4] SOURCE: https://www.sigsauer.com/MilitaryFedGov/Overview.aspx Wow, that's alot of pistols that may need to be replaced sometime in the future. Sig's demise might be something that saves firearm manufacturing in the US I call BS on that claim of Sig. For the actual duty gun, Sig does not have 1/3 of the U.S. market by any stretch as of 2025. Maybe 10-15 years ago when alot of their legacy guns were still in wide use (P226 and P229). But those days are long gone. Now maybe they are looking at off-duty guns or something like that (i.e. alot of LE do carry personally owned P365's off-duty). Also the page you linked is no longer there. https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/26697/Screenshot_2025-08-02_090134_jpg-3599005.JPG I believe it. I'm pretty sure Sig is in 2nd place behind Glock for LE market share, and I think they have/had a distant lead on S&W. Companies like FN and HK have such a low share of that market, people forget they are there. In my area, a lot of the city police issue Sigs, and the county sheriff used to issue Sigs until very recently. They used P22Xs for a long time, briefly issued P320s, then flipped to G17s. I think the state issues G22s. I think Sig technically still has most of the Federal umbrella. They have everything under DoD, they have/had almost everything under DHS, and a lot of the other federal LE agencies outside of the FBI were also issuing Sigs of some flavor. The idea that Sig would have 33% of LE market share doesn't sound like even a little bit of a long shot. |
|
I could see SIG is scrambling to to design a milled FCU like the P365 and an upgraded slide. It will be released as the P320A1 upgrade kit. I can see the add worried about your aging P320? Act now as we offer a new upgraded kit to make your old P320 new and reliable again. SIG knows most people can't just take apart their P320 and offer this easy drop in upgrade for our valuable customers. Act now with a low introduction price of $379! |
|
Quoted: ...I think Sig technically still has most of the Federal umbrella. They have everything under DoD, they have/had almost everything under DHS, and a lot of the other federal LE agencies outside of the FBI were also issuing Sigs of some flavor... FBI, USSS, DHS issue Glocks. USSS dumped the P229 several years ago for Glock. |
|
Quoted: Sorry if we covered this already. I haven't seen it here yet. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CF9c5-zxpnsLong story short: federal jury found the P320 is a defective design causing uncommanded discharges. But they ALSO held that the police officer that got shot in the scrotum, thigh and knee is entitled to no compensation, because he "voluntarily carried a gun he knew to be defective and dangerous." |
|
Quoted: FBI, USSS, DHS issue Glocks. USSS dumped the P229 several years ago for Glock. Quoted: Quoted: ...I think Sig technically still has most of the Federal umbrella. They have everything under DoD, they have/had almost everything under DHS, and a lot of the other federal LE agencies outside of the FBI were also issuing Sigs of some flavor... FBI, USSS, DHS issue Glocks. USSS dumped the P229 several years ago for Glock. Funny enough, this whole p320 debacle really benefits Glock the most. So many agencies dumped their Glocks over recent years to get the p320. Now they’re all going back and repurchasing new Glocks again. Losing the army MHS trial to sig may be the best thing that’s happened to Glock lol |
|
Quoted: Well, that makes the decision to not carry or issue it a lot easier and should defend agencies, schools and ranges from Sig lawfare. Quoted: Quoted: Sorry if we covered this already. I haven't seen it here yet. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CF9c5-zxpnsLong story short: federal jury found the P320 is a defective design causing uncommanded discharges. But they ALSO held that the police officer that got shot in the scrotum, thigh and knee is entitled to no compensation, because he "voluntarily carried a gun he knew to be defective and dangerous." I think the big part that the jury finding leaves out is that he was carrying it IWB without a holster. The facts may have been a square peg for a round hole in terms of jury instructions. The jury didn’t have an option for “the gun is defective, but you carried it like a dumbass.” |
|
Quoted: To take it one step further, every lawful use of a P320 from this point forward can be potentially a criminal/civil nightmare for the government in all of it's forms. I foresee counsel lining up to ask whether the shoot was judicious or an accident, looking for wiggle room or a payout. Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Page numbering bug bump. Dunno if we can slam the Massachusetts case too hard - our fine detective was carrying a striker fired pistol w/o a holster in his pants - ie, Mexican carry. I wouldn't do that w/ a Glock. This was a jury decision in a civil trial, not a judge or court ruling that would necessarily set legal precedence, but it sets up the question: if someone is using a P320 in whatever capacity (law enforcement, CCW, target shooting, whatever) and it spontaneously goes off, injuring or killing someone, is the person holding the gun (or the one who just set it down) responsible because they "voluntarily used a product they knew to be defective and dangerous?" If it is ultimately the user's fault, than sig is off the hook entirely and there's "nothing wrong" with designing a gun that can go off by itself. Sig's new motto can be, "you knew we were a scorpion when you met us." What if you work somewhere where you are required to carry a Sig & they won't let you use something else? Lots of LE agencies could be liable for issuing weapons they know are defective when/if someone is hurt or killed by one. To take it one step further, every lawful use of a P320 from this point forward can be potentially a criminal/civil nightmare for the government in all of it's forms. I foresee counsel lining up to ask whether the shoot was judicious or an accident, looking for wiggle room or a payout. True. One should never underestimate the shyster factor. 
|
|
Sig Sauer must face ICE officer's lawsuit over accidental gun firing https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/sig-sauer-must-face-ice-officers-lawsuit-over-accidental-gun-firing-2025-08-01/ Aug 1 (Reuters) - A U.S. appeals court on Friday revived a lawsuit seeking to hold firearms maker Sig Sauer liable to an Immigration and Customs Enforcement officer who was injured when his P320 gun went off accidentally during a training drill. The 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia said a trial judge erred by dismissing Keith Slatowski's lawsuit after excluding testimony from two experts about whether the gun's design could cause injury. Jumpstart your morning with the latest legal news delivered straight to your inbox from The Daily Docket newsletter. Sign up here. Sig Sauer and its lawyer did not immediately respond to requests for comment. The company has faced several lawsuits over alleged unintentional P320 firings. Slatowski's gun discharged from within its holster after his hand hit the grip in September 2020 at a New Castle, Delaware firing range. A bullet went through his upper right hip and out his thigh. While unsure whether debris or the holster itself caused the trigger to depress, the former Marine said the lack of an external safety to prevent unexpected firings made his gun unsafe. Slatowski sought $10 million in damages. Writing for a three-judge appeals court panel, Circuit Judge Stephanos Bibas said the trial judge properly excluded testimony from the two experts about whether Slatowski's gun caused his injury, because they hadn't done testing. But the appeals court said testimony about possible design flaws should have been admitted. It returned the case to U.S. District Judge R. Barclay Surrick in Philadelphia for a possible trial. "The P320's design is technical and probably needs explaining," Bibas wrote. "From there, ... Slatowski must rely on his lay eyewitness testimony. It may not prove persuasive. But that is up to the jury, not the judge." Slatowski's wife is also a plaintiff. Their lawyer Robert Zimmerman said in an email: "Our clients are thankful for the opportunity to present their case to a jury." The case is Slatowski et al v Sig Sauer Inc, 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, No. 24-1639. |
| Purely out of curiosity, for my civil law practice attorney brethren, does the finding that the Sig P320 is defective by design raise any collateral estoppel issues for Sig facing future lawsuits from different plaintiffs? I am an attorney, but I only practiced criminal law before leaving active practice so I’m rusty on collateral estoppel and issue preclusion. |
|
Quoted: Did the trigger move when you were putting the blade in and moving the sear? . Quoted: Quoted: I finally went and took a look at my P320 and ran a couple tests. My one and only P320 is circa 2017. It went back to Sig for the voluntary upgrade. I took a look at trigger frame and slide behavior. One think to note is there was a fair amount of slide slop. But it doesn't rattle because the slide is being pushed upwards. Maybe by the sear on the striker leg. When I pull the trigger slowly, My slide moves downward as if the sear is pulling the striker tail down with it. The P320 slide rails are more like wings as they are just bent metal from the FCU. You could probably tweak the wings to get less slop but I dont care. I went ahead and performed the sear punch test. But I didnt do it like the video. I left everything together, racked slide and used a utility razor blade and slid the pointy end under the slide plate and cammed upwards. This repeatedly dropped the striker. I also had a pencil in the barrel (pointed up at 45deg) as I dropped the sear. It never caused the pencil to move. I did the test about 15 times. I also fired the gun with a pencil in the barrel normally. The pencil bounced every time. My striker safety definitely works at this point in time. So yes you can drop the sear with no input from the trigger as has been proven already. Also, As already mentioned, The sear has a long tail to it that makes me wonder why its there. It makes it real easy to actuate it Did the trigger move when you were putting the blade in and moving the sear? . I didn't look when I was doing the test so I went back and checked. Yes it does move. Not much before the sear drops and no where near as much as it takes to remove the takeup and engage the sear during a normal trigger pull. BUT, I can lever the blade deeper and the trigger will move much more. Also I noted before that when I pull the trigger, the slide pulls downward. This looks to be because the sear is pushing up on the slide via the striker leg. So I wedged the razor blade into the space between the slide and frame preventing the downward movement. Slide doesnt move. Sear drops as expected. I can actually watch the sear move downward and if I release the trigger before the break, the sear will move back into original position. It does not get hung up. |
|
Quoted: I think the big part that the jury finding leaves out is that he was carrying it IWB without a holster. The facts may have been a square peg for a round hole in terms of jury instructions. The jury didn’t have an option for “the gun is defective, but you carried it like a dumbass.” Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Sorry if we covered this already. I haven't seen it here yet. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CF9c5-zxpnsLong story short: federal jury found the P320 is a defective design causing uncommanded discharges. But they ALSO held that the police officer that got shot in the scrotum, thigh and knee is entitled to no compensation, because he "voluntarily carried a gun he knew to be defective and dangerous." I think the big part that the jury finding leaves out is that he was carrying it IWB without a holster. The facts may have been a square peg for a round hole in terms of jury instructions. The jury didn’t have an option for “the gun is defective, but you carried it like a dumbass.” Yes. The checked boxes are gonna destroy SIG, but it's bullshit he was Mexican Carrying w/o a manual safety or a heavy DA trigger. At the gun show today, when the 320 came up, there were several types: SIG defenders: "You don't believe all that internet bullshit about guns going off in holsters, do you?" Yes, yes, I do. Middle of the road: "Yeah, that's bad, or yeah, I have one, it sits in the safe now, I'm carrying X." Low information: "Yeah, don't drop it, the 320's not drop safe." This one surprised me. It's been drop safe for some time now, the fix to make it drop safe might be causing the current issues. |
|
Quoted: I didn't look when I was doing the test so I went back and checked. Yes it does move. Not much before the sear drops and no where near as much as it takes to remove the takeup and engage the sear during a normal trigger pull. BUT, I can lever the blade deeper and the trigger will move much more. Also I noted before that when I pull the trigger, the slide pulls downward. This looks to be because the sear is pushing up on the slide via the striker leg. So I wedged the razor blade into the space between the slide and frame preventing the downward movement. Slide doesnt move. Sear drops as expected. I can actually watch the sear move downward and if I release the trigger before the break, the sear will move back into original position. It does not get hung up. Moving the sear with the blade moves the trigger and striker safety goes to off.? Striker is released by depressing the sear with the blade and kaboom. fwiw, ymmv . |
|
Quoted: I didn't look when I was doing the test so I went back and checked. Yes it does move. Not much before the sear drops and no where near as much as it takes to remove the takeup and engage the sear during a normal trigger pull. BUT, I can lever the blade deeper and the trigger will move much more. Also I noted before that when I pull the trigger, the slide pulls downward. This looks to be because the sear is pushing up on the slide via the striker leg. So I wedged the razor blade into the space between the slide and frame preventing the downward movement. Slide doesnt move. Sear drops as expected. I can actually watch the sear move downward and if I release the trigger before the break, the sear will move back into original position. It does not get hung up. Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I finally went and took a look at my P320 and ran a couple tests. My one and only P320 is circa 2017. It went back to Sig for the voluntary upgrade. I took a look at trigger frame and slide behavior. One think to note is there was a fair amount of slide slop. But it doesn't rattle because the slide is being pushed upwards. Maybe by the sear on the striker leg. When I pull the trigger slowly, My slide moves downward as if the sear is pulling the striker tail down with it. The P320 slide rails are more like wings as they are just bent metal from the FCU. You could probably tweak the wings to get less slop but I dont care. I went ahead and performed the sear punch test. But I didnt do it like the video. I left everything together, racked slide and used a utility razor blade and slid the pointy end under the slide plate and cammed upwards. This repeatedly dropped the striker. I also had a pencil in the barrel (pointed up at 45deg) as I dropped the sear. It never caused the pencil to move. I did the test about 15 times. I also fired the gun with a pencil in the barrel normally. The pencil bounced every time. My striker safety definitely works at this point in time. So yes you can drop the sear with no input from the trigger as has been proven already. Also, As already mentioned, The sear has a long tail to it that makes me wonder why its there. It makes it real easy to actuate it Did the trigger move when you were putting the blade in and moving the sear? . I didn't look when I was doing the test so I went back and checked. Yes it does move. Not much before the sear drops and no where near as much as it takes to remove the takeup and engage the sear during a normal trigger pull. BUT, I can lever the blade deeper and the trigger will move much more. Also I noted before that when I pull the trigger, the slide pulls downward. This looks to be because the sear is pushing up on the slide via the striker leg. So I wedged the razor blade into the space between the slide and frame preventing the downward movement. Slide doesnt move. Sear drops as expected. I can actually watch the sear move downward and if I release the trigger before the break, the sear will move back into original position. It does not get hung up. I wonder why someone hasn't zip tied or safety wired their triggers to the front of the guard so they *physically cannot move* during the various tests in order to pacify the "but the trigger moved!" crew. Heck, if you have one you don't mind doing it to, drill a through-hole into the bottom of the trigger and through the front of the trigger guard and wire the darn thing where the trigger not only can't move backwards, nobody can speculate that the trigger slipped backwards. |
|
Quoted: Purely out of curiosity, for my civil law practice attorney brethren, does the finding that the Sig P320 is defective by design raise any collateral estoppel issues for Sig facing future lawsuits from different plaintiffs? I am an attorney, but I only practiced criminal law before leaving active practice so I’m rusty on collateral estoppel and issue preclusion. Not an attorney but I have to ask if the defective argument here was (1) the specific gun in question was known to be deficient and in need of warranty repair that was put off, (2) the manner in which it was carried is a necessary “part” of the safety of the design and thus Mexican-carry being what it is made it dangerous, or (3) in general the design is bad. I can’t imagine Sig would have knowingly made the third argument. |
|
Quoted: I wonder why someone hasn't zip tied or safety wired their triggers to the front of the guard so they *physically cannot move* during the various tests in order to pacify the "but the trigger moved!" crew. Heck, if you have one you don't mind doing it to, drill a through-hole into the bottom of the trigger and through the front of the trigger guard and wire the darn thing where the trigger not only can't move backwards, nobody can speculate that the trigger slipped backwards.  P320 - STRIKER SAFETY DISENGAGEMENT PARAMETERS This video shows the operation and measurements for disengaging the striker safety. Not big numbers. I wonder of wigglging the slide on some looser units could disengage the safety and allow the seer to release the striker without any manipulation of the trigger. . |
|
Quoted: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R0MpcFEXWhcThis video shows the operation and measurements for disengaging the striker safety. Not big numbers. I wonder of wigglging the slide on some looser units could disengage the safety and allow the seer to release the striker without any manipulation of the trigger. . Quoted: Quoted: I wonder why someone hasn't zip tied or safety wired their triggers to the front of the guard so they *physically cannot move* during the various tests in order to pacify the "but the trigger moved!" crew. Heck, if you have one you don't mind doing it to, drill a through-hole into the bottom of the trigger and through the front of the trigger guard and wire the darn thing where the trigger not only can't move backwards, nobody can speculate that the trigger slipped backwards. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R0MpcFEXWhcThis video shows the operation and measurements for disengaging the striker safety. Not big numbers. I wonder of wigglging the slide on some looser units could disengage the safety and allow the seer to release the striker without any manipulation of the trigger. . I mean for any and *all* of the tests. The whole impetus of this debacle was "can't fire without a trigger pull." Fine, wire the stinking trigger immobile. |
This guy is NOT a gunsmith and I do not suggest you do this yet. But interesting video where he says he fixed it with smashing the front FCU tabs with a vise. Then squeezing together with pliers. Could use the vise again too. SIG P 320 Going Of By Itself I FIXED IT FOR FREE If you are going to do this maybe measure the width of the tabs before with a mic to get them back to the correct width? |
|
Quoted: https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/14563/IMG_8704-3599608.png https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/14563/IMG_8703-3599609.png I don't want to ruin it. Read it yourself Those are the most fucked up jury questions regarding a case over Mexican Carry possible. |
|
Quoted: Seen it maybe ... ~4 times now. I mean for any and *all* of the tests. The whole impetus of this debacle was "can't fire without a trigger pull." Fine, wire the stinking trigger immobile. Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I wonder why someone hasn't zip tied or safety wired their triggers to the front of the guard so they *physically cannot move* during the various tests in order to pacify the "but the trigger moved!" crew. Heck, if you have one you don't mind doing it to, drill a through-hole into the bottom of the trigger and through the front of the trigger guard and wire the darn thing where the trigger not only can't move backwards, nobody can speculate that the trigger slipped backwards. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R0MpcFEXWhcThis video shows the operation and measurements for disengaging the striker safety. Not big numbers. I wonder of wigglging the slide on some looser units could disengage the safety and allow the seer to release the striker without any manipulation of the trigger. . I mean for any and *all* of the tests. The whole impetus of this debacle was "can't fire without a trigger pull." Fine, wire the stinking trigger immobile. On Mischief Machine's video, he has the manual safety engaged (locking trigger movement) and the agency arms tabbed trigger (also locking trigger movement). |
|
Quoted: This guy is NOT a gunsmith and I do not suggest you do this yet. But interesting video where he says he fixed it with smashing the front FCU tabs with a vise. Then squeezing together with pliers. Could use the vise again too. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nYAcL9FHRHsIf you are going to do this maybe measure the width of the tabs before with a mic to get them back to the correct width? I dont like the tab set up on the P320. I think they should have been continuous rails and they should have been bent in a die at a 90° angle. That would have tightened up the slide to FCU interface. ., |
|
Non-retarded people in the YouTube comments of all places Attached File |
 Ferris Bueller's Day Off - You're still here? It's Over. Go Home. Go. |
|
Quoted: I wonder why someone hasn't zip tied or safety wired their triggers to the front of the guard so they *physically cannot move* during the various tests in order to pacify the "but the trigger moved!" crew. Heck, if you have one you don't mind doing it to, drill a through-hole into the bottom of the trigger and through the front of the trigger guard and wire the darn thing where the trigger not only can't move backwards, nobody can speculate that the trigger slipped backwards. Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I finally went and took a look at my P320 and ran a couple tests. My one and only P320 is circa 2017. It went back to Sig for the voluntary upgrade. I took a look at trigger frame and slide behavior. One think to note is there was a fair amount of slide slop. But it doesn't rattle because the slide is being pushed upwards. Maybe by the sear on the striker leg. When I pull the trigger slowly, My slide moves downward as if the sear is pulling the striker tail down with it. The P320 slide rails are more like wings as they are just bent metal from the FCU. You could probably tweak the wings to get less slop but I dont care. I went ahead and performed the sear punch test. But I didnt do it like the video. I left everything together, racked slide and used a utility razor blade and slid the pointy end under the slide plate and cammed upwards. This repeatedly dropped the striker. I also had a pencil in the barrel (pointed up at 45deg) as I dropped the sear. It never caused the pencil to move. I did the test about 15 times. I also fired the gun with a pencil in the barrel normally. The pencil bounced every time. My striker safety definitely works at this point in time. So yes you can drop the sear with no input from the trigger as has been proven already. Also, As already mentioned, The sear has a long tail to it that makes me wonder why its there. It makes it real easy to actuate it Did the trigger move when you were putting the blade in and moving the sear? . I didn't look when I was doing the test so I went back and checked. Yes it does move. Not much before the sear drops and no where near as much as it takes to remove the takeup and engage the sear during a normal trigger pull. BUT, I can lever the blade deeper and the trigger will move much more. Also I noted before that when I pull the trigger, the slide pulls downward. This looks to be because the sear is pushing up on the slide via the striker leg. So I wedged the razor blade into the space between the slide and frame preventing the downward movement. Slide doesnt move. Sear drops as expected. I can actually watch the sear move downward and if I release the trigger before the break, the sear will move back into original position. It does not get hung up. I wonder why someone hasn't zip tied or safety wired their triggers to the front of the guard so they *physically cannot move* during the various tests in order to pacify the "but the trigger moved!" crew. Heck, if you have one you don't mind doing it to, drill a through-hole into the bottom of the trigger and through the front of the trigger guard and wire the darn thing where the trigger not only can't move backwards, nobody can speculate that the trigger slipped backwards. I don’t see what the point would be of “pacifying” that crew. If the sear moving on its own can move the trigger bar, then the trigger moves without anyone pulling it. If a P320 is in a holster, nothing is forcing the trigger forward, so simulating that accomplishes nothing. I can take mine, hold the trigger forward and then push the sear down. The sear can move independent of the trigger even if the trigger is forced forward. I’m not going to drill holes in stuff and make a clickbait video to prove something that proves nothing. |
|
IMHO The stacking of debris could only occur if the striker seer connection moved and gave space for the debris to get on the shelf and pile up under the striker leg. I think there is enough spring force to keep debris from working it's way into a pile. I dont think it's likely debris is the issue. . |
|
Quoted: How about suing distributors? Quoted: Quoted: Davidsons, GT Dist, and now PSA, plus the IDPA ban. Sig probably needs to consider doing something here. And that something probably shouldn't be more arrogant and tone deaf social media postings. How about suing distributors? There's a reason that Davidson's is out, but in general, I don't think distributors have enough exposure for that to be a huge threat. Sig is the big company with their name on the side of the gun. Companies like Cabelas and Academy are the big retailers with their name at the top of the receipts. Most consumers have no idea who companies like Davidson's, RSR, Lipseys, and Chattanooga are. |