Legit AD on a Holstered SIG 320 on video

[Route 45]

Again you still haven't shown your work...
Have you applied for either of those jobs at Sig Sauer?

Apparently, they aren't looking for dinguses.

 

[bwframe]

Top of page one, a bit ago...

 

[92FSTech]

I've already said, it needs a trigger dingus. Reason being is it's possible for a trigger to pull its self due to inertia alone, which is why the trigger dingus is prevalent.

The incredible hesitation to do so gives me pause to ever consider a sig product.

Yet no-one has been able to demonstrate an upgraded P320 actuating the trigger under inertia alone. Pre-upgrade, for sure...but I have yet to see it done successfully with an upgraded model, and you know many have tried. I assume it could still be done, but the amount of force necessary to do it with the lighter components would be extreme.

The trigger dingus makes for an undesirable trigger feel. I understand why they exist, but if I can opt to not have one and still achieve the same practical level of safety, I'd prefer that route every time. I don't care for striker-fired triggers as a general rule, but Sig's dingus-less design is the best feeling of the genre, IMO.

Also, as previously mentioned in this thread...the P365. It doesn't have a dingus, either. If the lack of a dingus is really the cause of the problem, why aren't we hearing of similar issues with that gun?

 

[Tombs]

Yet no-one has been able to demonstrate an upgraded P320 actuating the trigger under inertia alone. Pre-upgrade, for sure...but I have yet to see it done successfully with an upgraded model, and you know many have tried. I assume it could still be done, but the amount of force necessary to do it with the lighter components would be extreme.

The trigger dingus makes for an undesirable trigger feel. I understand why they exist, but if I can opt to not have one and still achieve the same practical level of safety, I'd prefer that route every time. I don't care for striker-fired triggers as a general rule, but Sig's dingus-less design is the best feeling of the genre, IMO.

Also, as previously mentioned in this thread...the P365. It doesn't have a dingus, either. If the lack of a dingus is really the cause of the problem, why aren't we hearing of similar issues with that gun?

I get that people may like the feel, I mean hell people love 1911s. And in theory a 1911 could be completely safe without a safety.

The issue is inviting murphy's law over millions of different firearms, over a small improvement in trigger shoe comfort. I'd venture to guess the lack of issues with the P365 is because it's not military and PD issued, unless I'm missing something.

I think the point I'm making is going over people's heads because they're not thinking in terms of millions of guns with stacking tolerances, different holsters, different training, and differing levels of abuse. Taking the risk of eliminating a part that serves a pretty important function that the market has come to accept, is a completely unnecessary risk to me, at least without a manual safety.

I also think some guns on the market have managed to make the dingus unintrusive enough to not be noticeable. On the S&W 5.7 I picked up the dingus is wide enough that I don't really notice it on the pad of my finger while shooting.

 

[Glock6a]

Glocks it is.

 

[ditcherman]

I'd venture to guess the lack of issues with the P365 is because it's not military and PD issued, unless I'm missing something.

hmmmm you may be on to something here….

 

[Creedmoor]

I get that people may like the feel, I mean hell people love 1911s. And in theory a 1911 could be completely safe without a safety.

The issue is inviting murphy's law over millions of different firearms, over a small improvement in trigger shoe comfort. I'd venture to guess the lack of issues with the P365 is because it's not military and PD issued, unless I'm missing something.

I think the point I'm making is going over people's heads because they're not thinking in terms of millions of guns with stacking tolerances, different holsters, different training, and differing levels of abuse. Taking the risk of eliminating a part that serves a pretty important function that the market has come to accept, is a completely unnecessary risk to me, at least without a manual safety.

I also think some guns on the market have managed to make the dingus unintrusive enough to not be noticeable. On the S&W 5.7 I picked up the dingus is wide enough that I don't really notice it on the pad of my finger while shooting.

With Stacking Tolerance, Do you believe that Manufactures Quality Controls Gage's and measuring tools aren't also checked for being in "Spec"
You know that ISO thing.

 

[Tombs]

With Stacking Tolerance, Do you believe that Manufactures Quality Controls Gage's and measuring tools aren't also checked for being in "Spec"
You know that ISO thing.

Keltec does the ISO thing. It doesn't mean a whole lot, because in reality tools wear and things slip under the radar, otherwise customer service wouldn't be necessary.

 

[Creedmoor]

Keltec does the ISO thing. It doesn't mean a whole lot, because in reality tools wear and things slip under the radar, otherwise customer service wouldn't be necessary.

A question, do you or have you worked in modern manufacturing?

 

[Route 45]

Top of page one, a bit ago...

Don't suppose you saw that there are 6 P320s for sale in the first two pages, but 8 Glocks for sale in the same 2 pages.

Must be the kabooms.

Keep scratching your head.

 

[Gabriel]

Keltec does the ISO thing. It doesn't mean a whole lot, because in reality tools wear and things slip under the radar, otherwise customer service wouldn't be necessary.

Keltec > Sig Sauer

 

[Tombs]

A question, do you or have you worked in modern manufacturing?

You seem to be really interested in trying to require some pieces of paper to state the obvious.

I'd recommend not wrapping up your entire identity and ego in a brand.

 

[92FSTech]

I'd venture to guess the lack of issues with the P365 is because it's not military and PD issued, unless I'm missing something.

I know of at least 4 agencies locally including my own, and the Indiana State Police, who issue the P365 as a backup weapon. I'm sure the list is far more extensive than that. There are a lot of them out there in PD use.

The contrast in perception between the design safety of the P320 vs the P365, and the lack of any concrete, repeatable explanation for how the P320 is supposedly discharging on its own is what makes me very suspicious that the issue is more lawyer/media hype than actual fact. The guns are fundamentally the same (not exactly the same, but they operate on the same mechanical principles and have similar built-in safety features), and I'm sure that there have been plenty of NDs with both. Yet the 320 has a reputation in the media for shooting people on its own, while the 365 does not.

Between the drop-safety recall and the military contracts, the P320 is low hanging fruit for the ambulance chasers. Most of the cases I've read tend to focus on the history of the design and the drop-safety issue in trying to convince either the court or the reader that the P320 has a history of being unsafe, but they lack an understanding of the changes to the upgraded design, or any sort of technical explanation as to how the gun did (or could) discharge without the trigger being pulled in the particular case that they're addressing. If they actually understood anything about the mechanical similarities between the two platforms, we'd probably be hearing stuff in the media about every ND with a 365, too, but we don't because they don't, and 320 is an easy target.

The point has been made in this thread that Sig has a vested interest in covering up any issues with the gun. I'd agree with that. But the lawyers and the media have a vested interest in smearing it (lawsuits, selling articles, etc.). The catch-22 is that lawyers and reporters don't know jack crap about how the gun actually works, and nobody is going to trust Sig when they say there's no problem with the gun. So until some independent, knowledgeable source can prove that the gun is firing without any trigger input, and demonstrate the mechanical reason why, there's not a factual basis to operate from to say that the gun is shooting people on its own.

 

[two70]

Keltec > Sig Sauer

Keltec > Sig >>>>>> Glock > Hi-Point







We're talking about innovation right?

 

[Creedmoor]

You seem to be really interested in trying to require some pieces of paper to state the obvious.

I'd recommend not wrapping up your entire identity and ego in a brand.

Haters Gonna Hate.

 

[Route 45]

I know of at least 4 agencies locally including my own, and the Indiana State Police, who issue the P365 as a backup weapon. I'm sure the list is far more extensive than that. There are a lot of them out there in PD use.

The contrast in perception between the design safety of the P320 vs the P365, and the lack of any concrete, repeatable explanation for how the P320 is supposedly discharging on its own is what makes me very suspicious that the issue is more lawyer/media hype than actual fact. The guns are fundamentally the same (not exactly the same, but they operate on the same mechanical principles and have similar built-in safety features), and I'm sure that there have been plenty of NDs with both. Yet the 320 has a reputation in the media for shooting people on its own, while the 365 does not.

Between the drop-safety recall and the military contracts, the P320 is low hanging fruit for the ambulance chasers. Most of the cases I've read tend to focus on the history of the design and the drop-safety issue in trying to convince either the court or the reader that the P320 has a history of being unsafe, but they lack an understanding of the changes to the upgraded design, or any sort of technical explanation as to how the gun did (or could) discharge without the trigger being pulled in the particular case that they're addressing. If they actually understood anything about the mechanical similarities between the two platforms, we'd probably be hearing stuff in the media about every ND with a 365, too, but we don't because they don't, and 320 is an easy target.

The point has been made in this thread that Sig has a vested interest in covering up any issues with the gun. I'd agree with that. But the lawyers and the media have a vested interest in smearing it (lawsuits, selling articles, etc.). The catch-22 is that lawyers and reporters don't know jack crap about how the gun actually works, and nobody is going to trust Sig when they say there's no problem with the gun. So until some independent, knowledgeable source can prove that the gun is firing without any trigger input, and demonstrate the mechanical reason why, there's not a factual basis to operate from to say that the gun is shooting people on its own.

Nuh-uh. Hurr-durr Sig go boom.

 

[cedartop]

I know of at least 4 agencies locally including my own, and the Indiana State Police, who issue the P365 as a backup weapon. I'm sure the list is far more extensive than that. There are a lot of them out there in PD use.

The contrast in perception between the design safety of the P320 vs the P365, and the lack of any concrete, repeatable explanation for how the P320 is supposedly discharging on its own is what makes me very suspicious that the issue is more lawyer/media hype than actual fact. The guns are fundamentally the same (not exactly the same, but they operate on the same mechanical principles and have similar built-in safety features), and I'm sure that there have been plenty of NDs with both. Yet the 320 has a reputation in the media for shooting people on its own, while the 365 does not.

Between the drop-safety recall and the military contracts, the P320 is low hanging fruit for the ambulance chasers. Most of the cases I've read tend to focus on the history of the design and the drop-safety issue in trying to convince either the court or the reader that the P320 has a history of being unsafe, but they lack an understanding of the changes to the upgraded design, or any sort of technical explanation as to how the gun did (or could) discharge without the trigger being pulled in the particular case that they're addressing. If they actually understood anything about the mechanical similarities between the two platforms, we'd probably be hearing stuff in the media about every ND with a 365, too, but we don't because they don't, and 320 is an easy target.

The point has been made in this thread that Sig has a vested interest in covering up any issues with the gun. I'd agree with that. But the lawyers and the media have a vested interest in smearing it (lawsuits, selling articles, etc.). The catch-22 is that lawyers and reporters don't know jack crap about how the gun actually works, and nobody is going to trust Sig when they say there's no problem with the gun. So until some independent, knowledgeable source can prove that the gun is firing without any trigger input, and demonstrate the mechanical reason why, there's not a factual basis to operate from to say that the gun is shooting people on its own.

Absolutely nothing against you, but I am going with the guys who say the 365 differences are enough to make them inherently safer than the 320. Mostly because I really like my 365XL and what you say doesn't make me feel better about the 320, but worse about the 365.

 

[Tombs]

I know of at least 4 agencies locally including my own, and the Indiana State Police, who issue the P365 as a backup weapon. I'm sure the list is far more extensive than that. There are a lot of them out there in PD use.

The contrast in perception between the design safety of the P320 vs the P365, and the lack of any concrete, repeatable explanation for how the P320 is supposedly discharging on its own is what makes me very suspicious that the issue is more lawyer/media hype than actual fact. The guns are fundamentally the same (not exactly the same, but they operate on the same mechanical principles and have similar built-in safety features), and I'm sure that there have been plenty of NDs with both. Yet the 320 has a reputation in the media for shooting people on its own, while the 365 does not.

Between the drop-safety recall and the military contracts, the P320 is low hanging fruit for the ambulance chasers. Most of the cases I've read tend to focus on the history of the design and the drop-safety issue in trying to convince either the court or the reader that the P320 has a history of being unsafe, but they lack an understanding of the changes to the upgraded design, or any sort of technical explanation as to how the gun did (or could) discharge without the trigger being pulled in the particular case that they're addressing. If they actually understood anything about the mechanical similarities between the two platforms, we'd probably be hearing stuff in the media about every ND with a 365, too, but we don't because they don't, and 320 is an easy target.

The point has been made in this thread that Sig has a vested interest in covering up any issues with the gun. I'd agree with that. But the lawyers and the media have a vested interest in smearing it (lawsuits, selling articles, etc.). The catch-22 is that lawyers and reporters don't know jack crap about how the gun actually works, and nobody is going to trust Sig when they say there's no problem with the gun. So until some independent, knowledgeable source can prove that the gun is firing without any trigger input, and demonstrate the mechanical reason why, there's not a factual basis to operate from to say that the gun is shooting people on its own.

It could also be considerably less mass in the fire control group, further reducing likelihood of this issue.

Considering I don't have either of these to tinker with, I really can't say for sure.

 

[DadSmith]

I know of at least 4 agencies locally including my own, and the Indiana State Police, who issue the P365 as a backup weapon. I'm sure the list is far more extensive than that. There are a lot of them out there in PD use.

The contrast in perception between the design safety of the P320 vs the P365, and the lack of any concrete, repeatable explanation for how the P320 is supposedly discharging on its own is what makes me very suspicious that the issue is more lawyer/media hype than actual fact. The guns are fundamentally the same (not exactly the same, but they operate on the same mechanical principles and have similar built-in safety features), and I'm sure that there have been plenty of NDs with both. Yet the 320 has a reputation in the media for shooting people on its own, while the 365 does not.

Between the drop-safety recall and the military contracts, the P320 is low hanging fruit for the ambulance chasers. Most of the cases I've read tend to focus on the history of the design and the drop-safety issue in trying to convince either the court or the reader that the P320 has a history of being unsafe, but they lack an understanding of the changes to the upgraded design, or any sort of technical explanation as to how the gun did (or could) discharge without the trigger being pulled in the particular case that they're addressing. If they actually understood anything about the mechanical similarities between the two platforms, we'd probably be hearing stuff in the media about every ND with a 365, too, but we don't because they don't, and 320 is an easy target.

The point has been made in this thread that Sig has a vested interest in covering up any issues with the gun. I'd agree with that. But the lawyers and the media have a vested interest in smearing it (lawsuits, selling articles, etc.). The catch-22 is that lawyers and reporters don't know jack crap about how the gun actually works, and nobody is going to trust Sig when they say there's no problem with the gun. So until some independent, knowledgeable source can prove that the gun is firing without any trigger input, and demonstrate the mechanical reason why, there's not a factual basis to operate from to say that the gun is shooting people on its own.

Is there a way that companies can make those bringing a lawsuit against them end up paying their cost when they lose? Such as lawyer fees, court fees etc?
Or are they just out hundreds of thousands to millions for what I'll call frivolous lawsuits to defend themselves.

 

[ECS686]

Is there a way that companies can make those bringing a lawsuit against them end up paying their cost when they lose? Such as lawyer fees, court fees etc?
Or are they just out hundreds of thousands to millions for what I'll call frivolous lawsuits to defend themselves.

I’d seriously doubt it. However even if that was a possibility in these cases if Sig said shut up and take this $$ to anyone that could be a mark against them if it was allowed to be shown to a jury.

(I’m not sure if Sig ever did just hypothetical)