View Single Post
 
Old 01-17-2015, 01:59 AM
TexasDog TexasDog is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Fort Worth, Texas
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Liked 5 Times in 3 Posts
Default

Why resurrect a 5 year old thread? Well, I wanted to provide my personal testimony. I promise that I have read ALL of the previous postings on this thread, before going thru a pile of paper/receipts to find the timeline for my testimony.

I read a couple of statements saying that Glock parts do not fit in a Sigma. Well, at least one does.

I own a SW40F. Serial PAC2XXX. Trijicon sights were stamped '94.
The Gunbroker seller said it was a LEO trade-in, but there are no stamps/markings and it was shipped in a S&W paper box with homemade labels over whatever was originally in that box (Sigmas had the new plastic cases), I'm not certain. It did have wear on the slide & was shipped with 5 magazines. Definitely used.

In March 2011, I attended a show over at Will Rogers Center in Fort Worth-over by the Kimball. A gunsmith named TR Graham "the glocksmith" sold me what he calls a Match Grade Slide Lock.

This part, on page 24-25 of the owner's manual is part #10 - barrel stop.

He took time to compare it with a Glock 22 that he had at his table. He took measurements....I wish I remembered more of what he said, but the fact that he quickly fieldstripped both without looking down/away from me while he was talking had me distracted. He told me there was no warranty for me as this part was not designed/tested for this application. I agreed.

I can safely say that since then, I've taken it out every 3 months, running one/two 50 or 100 round box of Winchester USA and have had NO issues. Not one single problem. His part works. I have no objective way of knowing if its really an improvement, as I never switch back to the original part, and I think "more practice" is the biggest improvement I can make.

I've been hesitant to change rod/springs or make recommended adjustments, as I do not wish to undermine it's reliability. But I might, as I am curious and stupid about leaving things alone.

So I'd say the reasons are: 1) cost. I found a clipping from an old Cheaper than Dirt ad listing trade-ins: Sigma $219, Glock 22 $389, S&W 5906 $369, Beretta 92FS $399, S&W M&P $379. Not sure the date, but the other side of the page says "Romo needs to learn more from his teammates..." and he'd had 81 career starts. $150 savings is significant.

2) supported barrel -Buffalo Bore states: " The issue of Glock pistols not having a fully supported chamber is with the 40 S&W cartridge only, not 45 acp, 10mm, 9mm or 380 auto. While Glocks chambers are not fully supported in any of those calibers, only the 40 S&W brass is weak enough in the web for it to be a safety issue".

And, the only part on the gun that S&W actually made - (S&W Handguns '95, page 24 "Only the barrel is made at Springfield. Every other part is supplied by a vendor who won the contract, sometimes over S&W, on the basis of quality, cost, and delivery.....the assembly line is "U" shaped with a conveyor system that takes the guns to two assemblers, into a self-contained test range, and out for shipping. Four people run the show. They are assisted by some pretty clever machinery such as the one that assembles the striker. The assembly process is completely automated by a machine designed and built by S&W and turns what would be a fiendishly difficult manual task into a piece of cake"). Who made the rest of this?

As others mentioned, 3) the carbon steel magazines are very good. The 14 rd V/VE mags work and offer a cleaner fit. The downside is that there appear to be NO aftermarket magazines available. Nor are there any aftermarket barrels. And no one thinks you're cool.

The lawsuit?
Ironic, as S&W says in a 1995 brochure: "....the product of this effort is a series of pistols so innovative they resulted in 12 patent applications."

"The S&W Sigma pistols contain several safety features including a trigger safety designed to prevent the pistol from firing in the event that the pistol is dropped. Only when the trigger is fully depressed, and an internal safety striker safety plunger is lifted, can the pistol be fired. The internal safety is designed for immediate firing access, a vital feature to the professional who relies on the sure support of a sidearm. A patent is pending for this unique assembly".

Unique? Hmmm. seems there were two different opinions about that!

If anyone has or can point me to the actual court documents or how to determine if any of these "12 pending patents" were actually approved, I am very interested in reading them. Other than S&W literature, I've had no luck finding actual articles, etc. on the first generation Sigmas.

Thanks in advance for your assistance.
Reply With Quote