Posted: 7/9/2025 2:29:39 PM EDT
|
So we all know that the primary "conclusion" of the FBI report is: "However, testing did indicate with movements representing those common to a law enforcement officer it is possible to render the Striker Safety Lock inoperable and ineffective at preventing the striker from impacting a chambered round if complete sear engagement is lost." Where "movements..." are defined in the report as: "The weapon was pressed together and pulled apart (at the slide and frame)." (Per the report these manipulations were done while the weapon was holstered.) and "the sear was (then) released from the primary notch." I'm assuming this was done using a punch tool as previously described in the report. For crying out loud, this report is hopelessly incomplete. It does not identify any root cause(s), nor does it explain how any of this could happen. 1. In normal service, how does the sear get released without manipulating the trigger? People do not walk around poking their 320's in the ass with tools  2. While movement between the frame and slide is certainly going to happen all the time in normal service, how does this work to inactivate the Striker Safety Lock? For f*ck's sake, why did you stop the investigation at that point, FBI?  I've got no skin in this game. There's exactly one Sig pistol in the house, a P365 that belongs to my wife. But as an engineer and a pilot, in both cases expecting rigorous and complete investigations, the partial job that the FBI did is just bugging the crap out of me. Therefore, rather than post this is GD, I'm posting it here with the hope that perhaps some of you Sig armorer types might weigh in on how the two holes in the Swiss cheese could a) appear and b) line up. |
|
Originally Posted By aa777888-2: So we all know that the primary "conclusion" of the FBI report is: "However, testing did indicate with movements representing those common to a law enforcement officer it is possible to render the Striker Safety Lock inoperable and ineffective at preventing the striker from impacting a chambered round if complete sear engagement is lost." Where "movements..." are defined in the report as: "The weapon was pressed together and pulled apart (at the slide and frame)." (Per the report these manipulations were done while the weapon was holstered.) and "the sear was (then) released from the primary notch." I'm assuming this was done using a punch tool as previously described in the report. For crying out loud, this report is hopelessly incomplete. It does not identify any root cause(s), nor does it explain how any of this could happen. 1. In normal service, how does the sear get released without manipulating the trigger? People do not walk around poking their 320's in the ass with tools 2. While movement between the frame and slide is certainly going to happen all the time in normal service, how does this work to inactivate the Striker Safety Lock? For f*ck's sake, why did you stop the investigation at that point, FBI? I've got no skin in this game. There's exactly one Sig pistol in the house, a P365 that belongs to my wife. But as an engineer and a pilot, in both cases expecting rigorous and complete investigations, the partial job that the FBI did is just bugging the crap out of me. Therefore, rather than post this is GD, I'm posting it here with the hope that perhaps some of you Sig armorer types might weigh in on how the two holes in the Swiss cheese could a) appear and b) line up. No answer, but thanks for the Swiss Cheese theory as quoted above. Interesting read. |
"Life is Hard, its Harder if You're Stupid" - John Wayne
|
Originally Posted By laxman09: No answer, but thanks for the Swiss Cheese theory as quoted above. Interesting read. The model works extremely well for firearms. There are a lot of slices of cheese to navigate before something goes bang. Consider the layers/slices: Mindset Training Experience Currency (recent experience) Holster Trigger guard Trigger pull weight Trigger pull distance All the other shit in the fire control system, as described in the FBI report |
|
Originally Posted By aa777888-2: So we all know that the primary "conclusion" of the FBI report is: "However, testing did indicate with movements representing those common to a law enforcement officer it is possible to render the Striker Safety Lock inoperable and ineffective at preventing the striker from impacting a chambered round if complete sear engagement is lost." Where "movements..." are defined in the report as: "The weapon was pressed together and pulled apart (at the slide and frame)." (Per the report these manipulations were done while the weapon was holstered.) and "the sear was (then) released from the primary notch." I'm assuming this was done using a punch tool as previously described in the report. For crying out loud, this report is hopelessly incomplete. It does not identify any root cause(s), nor does it explain how any of this could happen. 1. In normal service, how does the sear get released without manipulating the trigger? People do not walk around poking their 320's in the ass with tools 2. While movement between the frame and slide is certainly going to happen all the time in normal service, how does this work to inactivate the Striker Safety Lock? For f*ck's sake, why did you stop the investigation at that point, FBI? I've got no skin in this game. There's exactly one Sig pistol in the house, a P365 that belongs to my wife. But as an engineer and a pilot, in both cases expecting rigorous and complete investigations, the partial job that the FBI did is just bugging the crap out of me. Therefore, rather than post this is GD, I'm posting it here with the hope that perhaps some of you Sig armorer types might weigh in on how the two holes in the Swiss cheese could a) appear and b) line up. You and I read very different reports. To claim it's incomplete or inconclusive is pretty incredible mental gymnastics.
|
Joined:
May 2025
Posts:
4
EE: 0% (0)
PA, USA
|
Originally Posted By bigfatOTMs: You and I read very different reports. To claim it's incomplete or inconclusive is pretty incredible mental gymnastics. I'm willing to accept that criticism IF you can tell me where in the report it explains how the sear came off the notch during the original incident, and how normal movement of the weapon causes the striker safety lock to fail. Again, I'm no Sig fan-boy. But I am a shameless, hard-core, engineer. I want a definitive root cause, and the FBI report does not deliver one. Hell, the most plausible explanation right now is that the FBI f'd up, as explained at the end of the video below.  Attempting to reproduce the FBI's Aug. 2024 P320 Sear Movement Test |
|
Originally Posted By Franklin_18103: Empirical testing can prove a problem with a gun model, but it can't disprove a problem. And that's OK. Indeed, it's a completely valid and scientifically correct approach. But ONLY if the testing identifies an unambiguous root cause. The FBI testing does not do that. It only proposes that normal movement of the slide relative to the frame causes the striker safety lock to not function. It certainly does not provide ANY reason why the sear slipped off of the notch in the original incident. It seems critical for the FBI (or anyone) to do something to further research the issue it to achieve a definitive answer. Like relieve the slide and frame further to create a window by which it can be seen what is happening to the striker safety lock during the aforementioned movement. Or, if messing with the slide & frame would compromise the experiment, do the same observation by means of fluoroscopic examination (X-ray video). And even if they do find the root cause of the striker safety lock problem, it still doesn't answer how the sear was magically released. |
|
Originally Posted By aa777888-2: And that's OK. Indeed, it's a completely valid and scientifically correct approach. But ONLY if the testing identifies an unambiguous root cause. The FBI testing does not do that. It only proposes that normal movement of the slide relative to the frame causes the striker safety lock to not function. It certainly does not provide ANY reason why the sear slipped off of the notch in the original incident. It seems critical for the FBI (or anyone) to do something to further research the issue it to achieve a definitive answer. Like relieve the slide and frame further to create a window by which it can be seen what is happening to the striker safety lock during the aforementioned movement. Or, if messing with the slide & frame would compromise the experiment, do the same observation by means of fluoroscopic examination (X-ray video). And even if they do find the root cause of the striker safety lock problem, it still doesn't answer how the sear was magically released. Originally Posted By aa777888-2: Originally Posted By Franklin_18103: Empirical testing can prove a problem with a gun model, but it can't disprove a problem. And that's OK. Indeed, it's a completely valid and scientifically correct approach. But ONLY if the testing identifies an unambiguous root cause. The FBI testing does not do that. It only proposes that normal movement of the slide relative to the frame causes the striker safety lock to not function. It certainly does not provide ANY reason why the sear slipped off of the notch in the original incident. It seems critical for the FBI (or anyone) to do something to further research the issue it to achieve a definitive answer. Like relieve the slide and frame further to create a window by which it can be seen what is happening to the striker safety lock during the aforementioned movement. Or, if messing with the slide & frame would compromise the experiment, do the same observation by means of fluoroscopic examination (X-ray video). And even if they do find the root cause of the striker safety lock problem, it still doesn't answer how the sear was magically released. We already know the striker can end up held by a false sear if you don't follow SIG's reassembly instructions. |
I sell firearms produced by the finest child labor in the world, be it Filipino, Muslim, Mormon, Arizonan, or Texan.
|
Originally Posted By aa777888-2: And that's OK. Indeed, it's a completely valid and scientifically correct approach. But ONLY if the testing identifies an unambiguous root cause. The FBI testing does not do that. It only proposes that normal movement of the slide relative to the frame causes the striker safety lock to not function. It certainly does not provide ANY reason why the sear slipped off of the notch in the original incident. It seems critical for the FBI (or anyone) to do something to further research the issue it to achieve a definitive answer. Like relieve the slide and frame further to create a window by which it can be seen what is happening to the striker safety lock during the aforementioned movement. Or, if messing with the slide & frame would compromise the experiment, do the same observation by means of fluoroscopic examination (X-ray video). And even if they do find the root cause of the striker safety lock problem, it still doesn't answer how the sear was magically released. Originally Posted By aa777888-2: Originally Posted By Franklin_18103: Empirical testing can prove a problem with a gun model, but it can't disprove a problem. And that's OK. Indeed, it's a completely valid and scientifically correct approach. But ONLY if the testing identifies an unambiguous root cause. The FBI testing does not do that. It only proposes that normal movement of the slide relative to the frame causes the striker safety lock to not function. It certainly does not provide ANY reason why the sear slipped off of the notch in the original incident. It seems critical for the FBI (or anyone) to do something to further research the issue it to achieve a definitive answer. Like relieve the slide and frame further to create a window by which it can be seen what is happening to the striker safety lock during the aforementioned movement. Or, if messing with the slide & frame would compromise the experiment, do the same observation by means of fluoroscopic examination (X-ray video). And even if they do find the root cause of the striker safety lock problem, it still doesn't answer how the sear was magically released. The truth matters little. The feast is whats important |
|
Originally Posted By backbencher: We already know the striker can end up held by a false sear if you don't follow SIG's reassembly instructions. This was the last thing I saw. Necessary tolerances for the frame and FCU in conjunction with disassembling it like a Glock from that one guys video. Basically if you push back the slide before disassembly like a Glock it messes everything up I believe. He even proved it by showing the trigger pull was drastically reduced for the first shot by doing so. Couldn’t find the video again. |
|
Originally Posted By aa777888-2: And that's OK. Indeed, it's a completely valid and scientifically correct approach. But ONLY if the testing identifies an unambiguous root cause. The FBI testing does not do that. It only proposes that normal movement of the slide relative to the frame causes the striker safety lock to not function. It certainly does not provide ANY reason why the sear slipped off of the notch in the original incident. It seems critical for the FBI (or anyone) to do something to further research the issue it to achieve a definitive answer. Like relieve the slide and frame further to create a window by which it can be seen what is happening to the striker safety lock during the aforementioned movement. Or, if messing with the slide & frame would compromise the experiment, do the same observation by means of fluoroscopic examination (X-ray video). And even if they do find the root cause of the striker safety lock problem, it still doesn't answer how the sear was magically released. Sig can figure out the root cause/solution on their dime, why should the public figure it out for them? |
|
The report thoroughly identifies a massive issue with a major safety feature of a firearm that has a well documented problem of firing spontaneously in a holster, often times with video evidence. So far (prior issues of drop safe omitted): Sig says there is no problem. Unless there is video of it going off it doesn’t exist. Unless the officers arms are crossed in the video I don’t believe it. Okay but the video is inconclusive about the root cause. It is okay because Sig says the holster was marked for a P226 instead of P320 Sig says it is fine because the Holster was has a large hole in it for a weapon light.(still don’t understand how we moved on from this one. A weapon light is a non negotiable today) Okay so it can spontaneously fire if reassembled with incorrect parts that aren’t clearly marked but sig says this isn’t a problem. Okay the sear can sometimes fail during reassembly but it is okay because there are other safeties. Okay so the biggest safety feature of the pistol commonly fails under circumstances encounter in everyday use but Sig says it is fine because slipping off the sear is a “low probability event.”(notice that they didn’t claim impossible) >>>>>>WE ARE HERE<<<<<< This is all fine because I have hope. We can continue to keep our eyes closed to this issue or we can demand better. |
|
Originally Posted By call_me_ski: Originally Posted By call_me_ski:  The report thoroughly identifies a massive issue with a major safety feature of a firearm that has a well documented problem of firing spontaneously in a holster, often times with video evidence.  ). It identifies a potential massive issue. Is it damning, hell yes! Does it beg for additional analysis and investigation, hell yes! It may be damn close to conclusive, but it is not, by itself, conclusive.So far (prior issues of drop safe omitted): Sig says there is no problem. Unless there is video of it going off it doesn’t exist. Unless the officers arms are crossed in the video I don’t believe it. Okay but the video is inconclusive about the root cause. It is okay because Sig says the holster was marked for a P226 instead of P320 Sig says it is fine because the Holster was has a large hole in it for a weapon light.(still don’t understand how we moved on from this one. A weapon light is a non negotiable today) debunked that cause in this particular case. They reported plenty of space between the trigger and the internal surface of the holster.Okay so it can spontaneously fire if reassembled with incorrect parts that aren’t clearly marked but sig says this isn’t a problem. Okay the sear can sometimes fail during reassembly but it is okay because there are other safeties. Okay so the biggest safety feature of the pistol commonly fails under circumstances encounter in everyday use but Sig says it is fine because slipping off the sear is a “low probability event.”(notice that they didn’t claim impossible) >>>>>>WE ARE HERE<<<<<< We can continue to keep our eyes closed to this issue or we can demand better. By asking this question, I am doing what you propose, which is to "demand better"  |
Meowdy!
Joined:
Jul 2024
Posts:
298
EE: 0% (0)
GA, USA
|
Originally Posted By aa777888-2: And even if they do find the root cause of the striker safety lock problem, it still doesn't answer how the sear was magically released. Dated video below pre the new revelations about take down levers, etc., but at around the 6:10 mark of this video, from an armorer I believe, he goes through the differences between the Glock and P320 firing pin blocks including a verifiable instance where the block on the P320 is regularly defeated. I have never owned a P320 but do have several P365s (and Glocks) and am glad they have the plunger style. I am also a "In God We Trust, everybody else bring data" kinda of guy -- and while there are issues on P320, the math on this still doesn't add up for me completely either. Maybe that's because so much of this is driven by the internet, lawyers, unions, and more it feels disproportionate. Sig punching back didn't help either -- at least at this stage -- time will tell. Also, the P320 is in ~20 different countries Law Enforcement & Militaries and no issues (I could find). Why only Americans? Hope it gets cleared up for the industry and karma does its thing.  Glock vs. Sig P320: The Ultimate Internal Safety Showdown! |
|
Originally Posted By aa777888-2: So we all know that the primary "conclusion" of the FBI report is: For crying out loud, this report is hopelessly incomplete. It does not identify any root cause(s), nor does it explain how any of this could happen. This post is a classic example of moving the goalposts. You can not accept the report unless it also explains why. The intent of the report was not to solve Sig's problem for them, rather explain what occurred when the officer's pistol went off in the holster. |
|
Originally Posted By LoneMouser: Dated video below pre the new revelations about take down levers, etc., but at around the 6:10 mark of this video, from an armorer I believe, he goes through the differences between the Glock and P320 firing pin blocks including a verifiable instance where the block on the P320 is regularly defeated. I have never owned a P320 but do have several P365s (and Glocks) and am glad they have the plunger style. I am also a "In God We Trust, everybody else bring data" kinda of guy -- and while there are issues on P320, the math on this still doesn't add up for me completely either. Maybe that's because so much of this is driven by the internet, lawyers, unions, and more it feels disproportionate. Sig punching back didn't help either -- at least at this stage -- time will tell. Also, the P320 is in ~20 different countries Law Enforcement & Militaries and no issues (I could find). Why only Americans? Hope it gets cleared up for the industry and karma does its thing.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dLm23zJGSL0Excellent video, thank you! |
|
Originally Posted By ngc1300: This post is a classic example of moving the goalposts. You can not accept the report unless it also explains why. The intent of the report was not to solve Sig's problem for them, rather explain what occurred when the officer's pistol went off in the holster. IMHO, the intent of the report was to determine the root cause for the event. It does not do that. It doesn't even explain what happened internally in the pistol to cause it to fire. The best anyone can say about the report is that it strongly suggests there may be a problem with the design of the Striker Safety Lock. AFAIK, nobody has been able to replicate that problem, yet. More importantly, they still had to use a tool to cheat the sear. Bottom line: the only value of the report is that it provides another area of investigation to pursue related to the Striker Safety Lock. |
|
Originally Posted By John-in-austin: Don't really care. Any risk management or legal dept that is OK with their people carrying Sig 230's is a pack of morons at this point. It's no longer about a physical fault, it's lawsuit bait now. This. True, at this point if any agency still carry’s one they are lead by morons. Way too much smoke and small fires. Move on. If you like it yourself, do whatever you want. To those that say “but mine has never gone off” … nobody cares and you will not sway opinions. SIG shot themself in the foot with the 320 and may not recover |
“You either know and understand history or you trust the government. You can’t do both”
|
Originally Posted By John-in-austin: Don't really care. Any risk management or legal dept that is OK with their people carrying Sig 320's is a pack of morons at this point. It's no longer about a physical fault, it's lawsuit bait now. Agreed. |
|
Originally Posted By tawaggs: Agreed. What’s shocking is that the PDs are allowed any trade in value at all. Any FFL that is buying a load of p(aperweight)320s to resell to the public that were dumped because the PD determined they weren’t safe enough to issue to their officers is…well…(insert your choice of adjectives here). They are hot potatoes, and unfortunately, I have a couple. Originally Posted By tawaggs: Originally Posted By John-in-austin: Don't really care. Any risk management or legal dept that is OK with their people carrying Sig 320's is a pack of morons at this point. It's no longer about a physical fault, it's lawsuit bait now. Agreed. What’s shocking is that the PDs are allowed any trade in value at all. Any FFL that is buying a load of p(aperweight)320s to resell to the public that were dumped because the PD determined they weren’t safe enough to issue to their officers is…well…(insert your choice of adjectives here). They are hot potatoes, and unfortunately, I have a couple. This is where I am at unfortunately (thankfully, I've only got one). I'm also seeing more and more going for sale private party in my area at steep discounts. I don't think I'll sell mine, but its currently at 'range toy only' status until more info comes out. |
"Always consider the possibility that you may be wrong. Especially when you are absolutely certain you are right."
| I have no dog in the fight. I liked the P250 years back as I prefer hammer fired over striker any day. But I am not in the norn now a days. I have always found the P320 interesting, but SIG priced it out of anything I cared about long before covid and inflation shit all over prices. I just always assumed the issue was probably because of tolerance stacking because SIG loves its MIM parts and messed up somewhere in the chain. Are their any in the P320? |
|
Originally Posted By MDStroup: I have no dog in the fight. I liked the P250 years back as I prefer hammer fired over striker any day. But I am not in the norn now a days. I have always found the P320 interesting, but SIG priced it out of anything I cared about long before covid and inflation shit all over prices. I just always assumed the issue was probably because of tolerance stacking because SIG loves its MIM parts and messed up somewhere in the chain. Are their any in the P320? Yes, the 320 is a MIM zone. MIM itself is not a bad thing, but like anything there is a time and place for it. All parts have a minimum and a maximum dimension and are suppose to play well together if they are within those limits. The 320 suffers from an overly complex operating system injected with a combination of springs, MIM & stamped parts big and small all with questionable QC and revisions. It’s biggest problem is it is produced by a company (SIG USA) that has the worlds biggest douchebag leadership imaginable with a company policy of “admit nothing, deny everything and make counter accusations” for any problem. SIG knows this is a liability problem; hence the wall of passing blame. It will be interesting to see what holds for other SIG projects like the M17/18 in Mil use and the M7/250 system pending adoption due to bleed over from this issue. |
“You either know and understand history or you trust the government. You can’t do both”
| My favorite online gun dealer is (trying) to sell some on their GunBroker page. They have over 40 up right now. All sorts of different versions including the versions with the closed emitter optic. They used to have maybe one or two used ones, but these all look to be new. I don't know if they are from canceled agency orders or just dropping their stock. |
|
Originally Posted By aa777888-2: I've got no skin in this game. There's exactly one Sig pistol in the house, a P365 that belongs to my wife. But as an engineer and a pilot, in both cases expecting rigorous and complete investigations, the partial job that the FBI did is just bugging the crap out of me. Therefore, rather than post this is GD, I'm posting it here with the hope that perhaps some of you Sig armorer types might weigh in on how the two holes in the Swiss cheese could a) appear and b) line up. Unfortunately for the American shooting community, you are correct. Gay though SIG is, shit-brained as their response has been, and damning though the accusations may sound, nobody has proven causality under replicable, real-world conditions and stitched theory to evidence that's testable, replicable, and measurable across a random sample. All incident data to date (<150 IIRC) fits well within the noise and extremes of a 3,000,000 sample population. Other pistols don't demonstrate the same incident pattern, but those other pistols aren't subject to the same combination of popularity and scrutiny. It's also irrelevant. Both the muh Glock internet shooting hive mind and the drooling SIG Lyfe types already sealed themselves within their mental bunkers. Evidence and analysis won't convince anybody, it'll just confirm prior judgments and/or be ignored. Just as trans people are terminally humorless, gun people seem excessively predisposed to pareidolia. The P320's fate rests on SIG's response to perception, not fact. That's precisely why they lashed out—nobody can prove their guilt, but they can't definitively prove their innocence. |
|
Did anyone catch this in the report? I found it interesting and kinda dumfounded they didn't pursue this any further. The BRF also noted damage to the trigger guard, but the report says it is unclear if that is in any way related to the July incident. Given that the MSP officer had been holding keys in his hand at the time, the FBI’s evaluation included testing that showed that it was possible to have pulled the trigger on the pistol in the holster using the blade of a key. “During this test it was observed that the keys caused an abrasion on the trigger guard near the area of the abrasion seen on the weapon when it arrived,” BRF’s report says, but does not draw any further conclusions from that. The FBI also determined that it was possible to make contact with the trigger with a finger while the pistol was in the holster, but that “due to the excessive force necessary, it is an improbable event.” |
|
Originally Posted By AGR556: Did anyone catch this in the report? I found it interesting and kinda dumfounded they didn't pursue this any further. The BRF also noted damage to the trigger guard, but the report says it is unclear if that is in any way related to the July incident. Given that the MSP officer had been holding keys in his hand at the time, the FBI’s evaluation included testing that showed that it was possible to have pulled the trigger on the pistol in the holster using the blade of a key. “During this test it was observed that the keys caused an abrasion on the trigger guard near the area of the abrasion seen on the weapon when it arrived,” BRF’s report says, but does not draw any further conclusions from that. The FBI also determined that it was possible to make contact with the trigger with a finger while the pistol was in the holster, but that “due to the excessive force necessary, it is an improbable event.” Given there were witnesses in the squad bay when the 320 fired in the holster, and it was noted in the report that the officer had his hands full at the time, it's not very surprising they didn't pursue it. It arrived in a sealed evidence bag, with the fired case still in the chamber, with the retention hood locked in place. This is your criss-cross applesauce moment. You're grasping at keys. |
I sell firearms produced by the finest child labor in the world, be it Filipino, Muslim, Mormon, Arizonan, or Texan.
|
Originally Posted By Danus_ex: Unfortunately for the American shooting community, you are correct. Gay though SIG is, shit-brained as their response has been, and damning though the accusations may sound, nobody has proven causality under replicable, real-world conditions and stitched theory to evidence that's testable, replicable, and measurable across a random sample. All incident data to date (<150 IIRC) fits well within the noise and extremes of a 3,000,000 sample population. Other pistols don't demonstrate the same incident pattern, but those other pistols aren't subject to the same combination of popularity and scrutiny. Leaving aside the proven (dirt builds up, striker safety lock sticks and fails dangerous) and the not-proven (wiggling slide and frame makes the striker safety lock fail dangerous), I am still stumped as to how the striker falls off the sear in the first place. Everybody is happy to poke their P320s in the ass with a tool, and then poke Sig in the eye with the results, how is this problem happening in the real world? |
|
Originally Posted By aa777888-2: In some ways it reminds me of the Glock "kaboom" panic from earlier in the century. As you say, take a very large population of very popular pistols, mix in some sketchy ammo and random chance, and then there will be failure rate that, while still negligible, becomes noticeable. Leaving aside the proven (dirt builds up, striker safety lock sticks and fails dangerous) and the not-proven (wiggling slide and frame makes the striker safety lock fail dangerous), I am still stumped as to how the striker falls off the sear in the first place. Everybody is happy to poke their P320s in the ass with a tool, and then poke Sig in the eye with the results, how is this problem happening in the real world? Originally Posted By aa777888-2: Originally Posted By Danus_ex:nnUnfortunately for the American shooting community, you are correct. Gay though SIG is, shit-brained as their response has been, and damning though the accusations may sound, nobody has proven causality under replicable, real-world conditions and stitched theory to evidence that's testable, replicable, and measurable across a random sample. All incident data to date (<150 IIRC) fits well within the noise and extremes of a 3,000,000 sample population. Other pistols don't demonstrate the same incident pattern, but those other pistols aren't subject to the same combination of popularity and scrutiny. In some ways it reminds me of the Glock "kaboom" panic from earlier in the century. As you say, take a very large population of very popular pistols, mix in some sketchy ammo and random chance, and then there will be failure rate that, while still negligible, becomes noticeable. Leaving aside the proven (dirt builds up, striker safety lock sticks and fails dangerous) and the not-proven (wiggling slide and frame makes the striker safety lock fail dangerous), I am still stumped as to how the striker falls off the sear in the first place. Everybody is happy to poke their P320s in the ass with a tool, and then poke Sig in the eye with the results, how is this problem happening in the real world? Did you miss how you can reassemble a 320 not in accordance w/ the manual and have the striker held by a false sear? |
I sell firearms produced by the finest child labor in the world, be it Filipino, Muslim, Mormon, Arizonan, or Texan.
|
Originally Posted By backbencher: Did you miss how you can reassemble a 320 not in accordance w/ the manual and have the striker held by a false sear? IMHO, while that is not optimum, fail-safe, engineering, it has nothing to do with this issue, but is merely a symptom of a desperate search for the truth. Put the wrong parts in the gun, or assemble it wrong, and it fails to either work or be safe, is on whoever did that. Another good Glock analogy: while having to pull the trigger to disassemble the pistol is not optimum, fail-safe, engineering, it's not Glock's fault if some dummy still has a round in the chamber when they do that. Accidentally put some 5.56 in your .300BO? Whose fault is that? If you want to tell me that Sig shipped brand new pistols what were assembled with incompatible parts, that would certainly be an issue. Regardless, this was not a factor with the pistol that was the subject of the FBI report. So the mystery of how the striker can slip off the sear all by itself in a properly assembled and maintained gun has not yet been answered. |
|
Originally Posted By DavidY: My favorite online gun dealer is (trying) to sell some on their GunBroker page. They have over 40 up right now. All sorts of different versions including the versions with the closed emitter optic. They used to have maybe one or two used ones, but these all look to be new. I don't know if they are from canceled agency orders or just dropping their stock. Dropping stock. My favorite gun shop did it too. Their GB site is suddenly all new 320's in just about every flavor. |
|
Originally Posted By John-in-austin: Dropping stock. My favorite gun shop did it too. Their GB site is suddenly all new 320's in just about every flavor. I ridded myself of any 320 a few years ago and have no dog in the fight anymore. Finding out what is wrong or not wrong is not my job; it is SIGs but they are in “admit nothing, deny everything and make counter accusations” mode and refuse to acknowledge a problem/potential problem even could exist. The only thing the CEO of SIG (Ron Cohen)(guy who fucked up Kimber too) understands is $$. Either buy his junk or sell his junk…whichever. Nobody on this site is going to be swayed by defending this gun at this point. WTF someone would still defend a gun, that deep inside you know there is that chance it could discharge and kill you is beyond me. |
“You either know and understand history or you trust the government. You can’t do both”
|
I have the feeling this FE Warren incident where the airman just died when his or her M18 went off is going to change the dynamic for Sig....I have no dog in the hunt, also sold mine a few years ago. https://www.warren.af.mil/News/Releases/Article/4251188/90th-missile-wing-confirms-on-base-airman-fatality/ |
|
All, I appreciate the restraint shown in this tech forum in that this thread has not turned into a GD-style nightmare. TWZ has published a very interesting report of follow up testing by the FBI in concert with Sig. https://www.twz.com/land/army-making-no-changes-to-its-sig-p320-derived-pistols-after-concerning-fbi-report The key part of the article is: Sig Sauer claims that it engaged with the FBI in relation to the August 2024 report and its findings, and that subsequent testing was conducted that contradicts the initial results. “The test conducted by the FBI-BRF was made aware to Sig Sauer when it was submitted to the Michigan State Police,” Jason St. John, senior director of strategic products for the company’s Defense Strategies Group, told TWZ. “Sig Sauer expressed concerns with the FBI’s initial report about how some of the tests were conducted.” “Specifically, Sig explained that forcing the sear downward with a punch was moving the trigger bar forward and, as a result, the trigger to the rear since the sear is in constant contact with the trigger bar,” he continued. “Sig expressed that this was not a proper representation of the striker slipping off of the sear’s primary notch from a parallel/grip-down drop. Sig also noted that the FBI’s concern of the striker safety spring movement on the striker assembly post after getting hit with a hammer was unwarranted due to the viewing window that was cut into the slide that sacrificed the sidewall support of the striker safety spring.” “After the initial report was submitted, Sig Sauer and its engineers worked in cooperation with the FBI and Michigan State Police to design a fixture that all agreed would create a more controlled testing protocol for striker/sear slippage,” St. John added. “Using that fixture, the FBI forced the sear off of the primary notch 565 times with 19EA different striker assemblies with zero indents on the primer (no fires).” TWZ has reached out to the FBI for more details about the results of this additional testing. Sig’s St. John also told us that the company has no plans to take further actions regarding the P320 based on the initial BRF report on the MSP incident last year. “Sig Sauer continues to have full faith in the P320,” he said. “Due to the FBI manually manipulating the P320 sear improperly, Sig Sauer refutes the initial results.” Attached File IMHO, poking 320's in the ass is clearly not a good and valid test method. It proves nothing.ETA: I tried to find a primary source for the Sig statements above, but could not. Hence we are at the mercy of TWZ's reporting accuracy. |
|
Originally Posted By aa777888-2: All, I appreciate the restraint shown in this tech forum in that this thread has not turned into a GD-style nightmare. TWZ has published a very interesting report of follow up testing by the FBI in concert with Sig. https://www.twz.com/land/army-making-no-changes-to-its-sig-p320-derived-pistols-after-concerning-fbi-report The key part of the article is: Sig Sauer claims that it engaged with the FBI in relation to the August 2024 report and its findings, and that subsequent testing was conducted that contradicts the initial results. “The test conducted by the FBI-BRF was made aware to Sig Sauer when it was submitted to the Michigan State Police,” Jason St. John, senior director of strategic products for the company’s Defense Strategies Group, told TWZ. “Sig Sauer expressed concerns with the FBI’s initial report about how some of the tests were conducted.” “Specifically, Sig explained that forcing the sear downward with a punch was moving the trigger bar forward and, as a result, the trigger to the rear since the sear is in constant contact with the trigger bar,” he continued. “Sig expressed that this was not a proper representation of the striker slipping off of the sear’s primary notch from a parallel/grip-down drop. Sig also noted that the FBI’s concern of the striker safety spring movement on the striker assembly post after getting hit with a hammer was unwarranted due to the viewing window that was cut into the slide that sacrificed the sidewall support of the striker safety spring.” “After the initial report was submitted, Sig Sauer and its engineers worked in cooperation with the FBI and Michigan State Police to design a fixture that all agreed would create a more controlled testing protocol for striker/sear slippage,” St. John added. “Using that fixture, the FBI forced the sear off of the primary notch 565 times with 19EA different striker assemblies with zero indents on the primer (no fires).” TWZ has reached out to the FBI for more details about the results of this additional testing. Sig’s St. John also told us that the company has no plans to take further actions regarding the P320 based on the initial BRF report on the MSP incident last year. “Sig Sauer continues to have full faith in the P320,” he said. “Due to the FBI manually manipulating the P320 sear improperly, Sig Sauer refutes the initial results.” https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/16697/p320-test-fixture_jpeg-3592655.JPG IMHO, poking 320's in the ass is clearly not a good and valid test method. It proves nothing.ETA: I tried to find a primary source for the Sig statements above, but could not. Hence we are at the mercy of TWZ's reporting accuracy. All that and yet another one in question just days after the article was written, this time a death resulted. I expect nothing less from the Army (who lead the charge to adopt the M17/18) after sending billions to Sig. Lets just see if things change now. |
“You either know and understand history or you trust the government. You can’t do both”
 Sig vs the Air Force |
I sell firearms produced by the finest child labor in the world, be it Filipino, Muslim, Mormon, Arizonan, or Texan.
Joined:
Nov 2022
Posts:
3146
EE: 100% (4)
SC, USA
|
The Sig P320 and variants is so messed up they can't figure out what's happening, except for multiple surfaces disengaging under mild torsional forces, and being easily reassembled just barely incorrectly, so that it looks normal, but causes unwanted strikes by the striker. So there's parts failures, and there's human error, but human error that every other company designed a way to prevent. The sooner Sig buys all these guns back and discontinues it, the better off they will be. And the sooner Sig fires Cohen, the better they will be. He's a pariah. Every company he's been involved with had major issues resulting from his leadership. I wouldn't let him design a firecracker. But, yeah, Sig can and does make some decent guns, just not anything great anymore. All of the great Sigs are Cold War Sigs. |
|
It would be great if we can keep this topic on a technical track. What testing was done, what it proved or didn't prove, etc. If we start talking about Sig the company, or what some agency or military group is doing, this will just turn into the dup of the GD thread. |
|
The deaths/injuries are immediate. The root cause (and potential corrective action) can take months/years to uncover, especially when there is a conflict of interest for the accused (aka Sig). I don't need to wait for the reason why it happened to know I don't want to be around a 320. I am just glad I never bought one. Swiss cheese model, never seen that before. Looks like way to show statistical probability and the very ends of the bell curve. Definitely happens with tolerance stack-ups. The probability of every part being at adverse tolerance in the wrong direction? Slim... but not zero. It's up to the engineer(s)/company to make sure that if that happens, everything will still function as it should. Sig must've missed the memo. |
|
I keep reading about SIGs and it reminds me of when Glocks came out. How many people shot themselves with those? I also remember after the Army adopted the Beretta all I heard about was the slide failures killing the shooter. I own samples of all the pistols mentioned and no, I've never had any of them discharge on their own. I've never seen slides come apart, or any of the other failures people were claiming. I have seen people pull the trigger on a Glock and low and behold it went bang. And damn if they didn't throw the thing down and swear it went off on its own. I'm not saying shit don't happen, nor am I saying anyone here making an argument is wrong. I'm just saying when humans interact with inanimate objects, shit happens. I remember in Camp Speicher the rules were when you rolled in the front gate, everyone had to download their weapons, point the thing into a barrel and PULL THE TRIGGER so the hammer would be down. Go ahead, guess how many ADs I saw. Every. Single. Day. Conversely at Marine bases they carried weapons hot on the base and guess how many ADs I saw there? Is there an issue with the SIG? IDK. I don't trust the word of the FBI on the color of the sky so I don't care about their report. Nor would I trust SIGs report. Nor the Army. It's the independent testing group that doesn't have an interest in the case, and MAYBE I'll believe them. In the meantime, I'm going to keep shooting all my "inherently dangerous" Beretta, Glock and SIG and continue safe weapons handling practices. Hopefully none of my guns will shoot me when I'm not looking. |
|
Originally Posted By spydercomonkey: I think an interesting angle is that the P365 - striker, no trigger dingus, modular, sig, sold in the millions as well, likely carried in shittier holsters - is not reporting these same issues. Striker block is superior in the P365 than the P320. P365 is more common, similar to Glock and other designs. The P320… not as much. |