LVSteve
Member
This Sig thing reminds me how Mercedes managed to walk away from the repeated failures of their 7-speed transmission in the 2000s. Never understood how a jury found in their favor.
Banned Firearm
- Thread starter Kinman
- Start date
- Joined
- May 20, 2025
- Messages
- 208
- Reaction score
- 410
Gunsite has also banned the P320 at their facility. CEO Ken Campbell explains why. He also cites a colleague who had the P320 do an uncommanded discharge, explaining it starting at 10:30
In this video, the P320 was holstered, both of the officer's hands were occupied by lifting a suspect's legs, and no one touched the trigger. How did that happen?
Since these incidents are never planned or expected, it's going to be difficult to show conclusive video proof supporting either side of this issue. Also, the vast majority of P320s haven't had any issues, but that doesn't mean the failure rate is zero. Everyone is dealing with a sample size of one. When someone says they've never had any issues with their P320, I completely believe them, but that doesn't mean there isn't an vulnerability in the design and/or production of the parts.
As an engineer, I see some design choices in the P320 FCU that are concerning, chief among them the fact that there are no "hard stop" mechanical features/mechanisms that ensures the sear rises to full engagement height when reset like there is in designs like Glock, Walther PDP, Springfield XD, S&W M&P, etc. The P320 sear resets into sear engagement height only by spring pressure from underneath. If anything like grit or crossed springs impedes the springs from returning the sear to full reset position or impedes movement of the sear itself, this combined with slide to rail slop movement creates incomplete sear engagement with the striker to the point further slide movement can cause the striker to slip off the sear. Also, the striker block safety is a terrible design. Instead of the tried and true, simple coil spring and plunger design that all other striker pistols use, the P320 uses a more complex, boomerang shaped lever that is reset by a torsion spring, where the legs of the torsion spring or the torsion spring coil being in proper position is extra critical. The striker safety lever is also more subject to being peened over time, which is much less likely with a thicker, round plunger design that is mechanically much more positive and simple in competing pistols. Combine all this with a very short trigger travel with minimal takeup, and the design is on the razor's edge of safety margin. I've heard the P320 in Cond 1 carry compared to carrying a 1911 cocked but not locked, and that's a pretty good comparison.
The Sig P365 was designed after the P320. If the P320 had a well-designed fire control and safety system, then why didn't Sig incorporate its design elements into the P365? That would have certainly made P365 development much easier. Why does the P365 have the more standard Glock style striker safety block rather than the P320 design? And why are there no claims of unintended discharges while in holsters with Sig's own P365 (or other competing striker pistols for that matter), despite the fact the P365 is one of the best selling striker pistols out there? If these are all cases of human negligence, then why have all of these negligent people overwhelmingly chosen the P320 and not other striker pistols?
Again, most P320s are likely just fine and will never present a problem, but still, I believe it to be a flawed design with vulnerabilities... and I own one.
At this point if Sig were to recall them and make design changes, this would be a tacit admission of fault, and their legal team likely advised them not to do anything but double down on the assertion it is perfectly safe. To do otherwise would invite more lawsuits using the "see, Sign acknowledges the design is faulty" argument.
In this video, the P320 was holstered, both of the officer's hands were occupied by lifting a suspect's legs, and no one touched the trigger. How did that happen?
Since these incidents are never planned or expected, it's going to be difficult to show conclusive video proof supporting either side of this issue. Also, the vast majority of P320s haven't had any issues, but that doesn't mean the failure rate is zero. Everyone is dealing with a sample size of one. When someone says they've never had any issues with their P320, I completely believe them, but that doesn't mean there isn't an vulnerability in the design and/or production of the parts.
As an engineer, I see some design choices in the P320 FCU that are concerning, chief among them the fact that there are no "hard stop" mechanical features/mechanisms that ensures the sear rises to full engagement height when reset like there is in designs like Glock, Walther PDP, Springfield XD, S&W M&P, etc. The P320 sear resets into sear engagement height only by spring pressure from underneath. If anything like grit or crossed springs impedes the springs from returning the sear to full reset position or impedes movement of the sear itself, this combined with slide to rail slop movement creates incomplete sear engagement with the striker to the point further slide movement can cause the striker to slip off the sear. Also, the striker block safety is a terrible design. Instead of the tried and true, simple coil spring and plunger design that all other striker pistols use, the P320 uses a more complex, boomerang shaped lever that is reset by a torsion spring, where the legs of the torsion spring or the torsion spring coil being in proper position is extra critical. The striker safety lever is also more subject to being peened over time, which is much less likely with a thicker, round plunger design that is mechanically much more positive and simple in competing pistols. Combine all this with a very short trigger travel with minimal takeup, and the design is on the razor's edge of safety margin. I've heard the P320 in Cond 1 carry compared to carrying a 1911 cocked but not locked, and that's a pretty good comparison.
The Sig P365 was designed after the P320. If the P320 had a well-designed fire control and safety system, then why didn't Sig incorporate its design elements into the P365? That would have certainly made P365 development much easier. Why does the P365 have the more standard Glock style striker safety block rather than the P320 design? And why are there no claims of unintended discharges while in holsters with Sig's own P365 (or other competing striker pistols for that matter), despite the fact the P365 is one of the best selling striker pistols out there? If these are all cases of human negligence, then why have all of these negligent people overwhelmingly chosen the P320 and not other striker pistols?
Again, most P320s are likely just fine and will never present a problem, but still, I believe it to be a flawed design with vulnerabilities... and I own one.
At this point if Sig were to recall them and make design changes, this would be a tacit admission of fault, and their legal team likely advised them not to do anything but double down on the assertion it is perfectly safe. To do otherwise would invite more lawsuits using the "see, Sign acknowledges the design is faulty" argument.
Last edited:
"If anything like grit or crossed springs impedes the springs from returning the sear to full reset position or impedes movement of the sear itself, this combined with slide to rail slop movement creates incomplete sear engagement with the striker to the point further slide movement can cause the striker to slip off the sear."
Why has this hypothetical condition NOT been duplicated in a laboratory full of firearm "engineers"?
Why has this hypothetical condition NOT been duplicated in a laboratory full of firearm "engineers"?
I understand your stance, but don't take it personal.
I've shot many a match with active, fulltime LE. Well over 75-80% can't shoot for crap. Didn't matter the gun: rifle, pistol or shottie. They just weren't "gun guys", which really wasn't their fault.
I've several cop friends & when they're honest, they tell me the same thing. Cops look at their sidearm as just another tool, not a MY FIREARM.
I won't hijack the thread by mentioning the large number of female cops with a ND, often wounding another LE. Youtube has plenty of those if you want.
We all use generalizations to some extent or another. I won't delve into them as I don't want ANOTHER time-out............
I've learned to let stuff slide in here, just shake my head or sometimes curse a bit. I promise, it's not worth the stress.
My .o2
- Joined
- May 20, 2025
- Messages
- 208
- Reaction score
- 410
Please cite for me where and when this consortium of firearm engineers have gathered for the purpose of duplicating alleged P320 failure incidents. One of the reasons no one has set out to try to duplicate P320 failure modes could very well be the fact that Sig is very litigious against people questioning the sanctity of the P320."If anything like grit or crossed springs impedes the springs from returning the sear to full reset position or impedes movement of the sear itself, this combined with slide to rail slop movement creates incomplete sear engagement with the striker to the point further slide movement can cause the striker to slip off the sear."
Why has this hypothetical condition NOT been duplicated in a laboratory full of firearm "engineers"?
Look man, no one knows exactly what is happening with the P320. I'm not claiming I have the answers either. I'm just telling you that for anyone with moderate mechanical savvy who has worked on the P320 and understands its function, it raises questions about some of its design choices. There will be those who disagree, but if you compare it to other striker pistols, there are safeguards in place for the vulnerabilities mentioned in the competing pistols. This doesn't mean any given P320 is destined to fail, only that there are better mechanical designs out there. The P320 was not a "blank sheet of paper" striker pistol design during its development; it was a striker fired modification of the hammer fired P250. It has had a number of "under the table," running design changes from its original design beyond the change to the lower mass trigger, such as the addition of a trigger bar disconnect and 3 different design changes to the sear. The touted "secondary sear" on the new sear design has never been shown to actually work by the way.
Regardless, the simple fact remains that there are no claims of any other striker pistol firing while inside holsters presently. This phenomenon is solely confined to the P320. If each of these 100+ and counting cases of NDs are all incidents of human error, then statistically speaking, why are all of them involving P320s and no other striker fired pistols? Why are there no careless people carrying other brands and models of striker pistols? Where there's smoke, there's usually fire.
- Joined
- May 20, 2025
- Messages
- 208
- Reaction score
- 410
Why does the Sig P365 (introduced in 2017) not have the same FCU design characteristics as the P320 (introduced in 2014)?
It's almost as if Sig recognized design flaws and decided against repeating them in a later striker pistol design. It's important to recognize that, in the P320 design, if for any reason the striker foot slips over the sear due to incomplete sear engagement, the striker foot WILL push the sear down. It has to in order to override it. This action also deactivates the striker safety, which is the "last line of defense" against a UD.
It's almost as if Sig recognized design flaws and decided against repeating them in a later striker pistol design. It's important to recognize that, in the P320 design, if for any reason the striker foot slips over the sear due to incomplete sear engagement, the striker foot WILL push the sear down. It has to in order to override it. This action also deactivates the striker safety, which is the "last line of defense" against a UD.
Last edited:
LVSteve
Member
There are indeed LEOs who are definitely "gun people", I used to bowl with one in the early 2000s. However, his full, unbiased opinion on the skills of the majority of his colleagues cannot be repeated here.
Why is a screw stuck into the trigger?
Thank you Bill
- Joined
- May 20, 2025
- Messages
- 208
- Reaction score
- 410
He did that to remove initial trigger takeup to demonstrate how short the trigger travel has to go from rest position to put the gun into a marginal sear engagement position. The common comment about the allegations that the gun is going off while in holsters has been that something in the holster must be putting pressure on the trigger, so he was showing how little pressure and movement of the trigger it takes. With competing striker pistols, doing the same would not drop the sear enough that slide movement can fire the pistol. It was attempting to demonstrate what could happen if any debris caused the sear to not fully reset or if something in the holster was pressing against the side of the trigger in conjunction with the holster jiggling the front of the slide. It also shows how if parts are very slightly out of spec, it can create a potentially dangerous condition. There have been similar tests done on other striker pistols and in all of them you can move the trigger close to or slightly beyond the wall and eventually make them fire without fully depressing the trigger in the same way as the P320. However, the difference with the P320 is how short the trigger has to travel before being put into this condition. In other words, the P320 trigger has very little takeup, and that's a bit of a risky thing when it has no trigger dingus preventing an AD from a holster putting slight side pressure on the trigger in conjunction with a striker safety that disengages very early in the trigger takeup travel.
Well thought out posts, @Thaddeus Beauregard. There are mounds of misinformation, conjecture and guessing flying about regarding the P320. I appreciate reasoned posts on the subject from an engineer's point of view. Confession: I'm one too, albeit an electrical engineer.
bigggbbruce
Member
My local outdoor range had a notice that Sig P320s were banned.
Then there was a notice ban was removed.
Now no notice can be found.
Carry on.
Then there was a notice ban was removed.
Now no notice can be found.
Carry on.
- Joined
- May 20, 2025
- Messages
- 208
- Reaction score
- 410
The other thing that the Wyoming Gun Project guy was demonstrating is how much looseness/play there is in at least his sample P320's slide to rail fit, and that too is a dangerous thing when you consider that the sear, trigger, and trigger bar are in the frame and the striker foot that engages the sear is in the slide. So, excessive up and down slide movement then changes the relationship between those parts and the amount of sear engagement you have. If the side of the sear notch has a rough spot on it, it could catch the corner of the striker foot and prevent full sear engagement. Or, if any debris entering the rear of the slide slows down sear reset or prevents the sear from rising fully into reset position, same thing. If the slide moves up and down from holster pressure or from normal handling, you can then run out of sear engagement on the striker. The striker then slips off the sear and... boom. Is that what is happening with these reported cases of the gun firing while in holsters? Who knows? But, it is a mechanically plausible explanation. Competing striker pistols have mechanical stops in place that prevent the sear from being able to be depressed at all unless the trigger bar is moved to the rear. The P320 has no such safeguard. Designs like Glock are double action, so the sear has to partially compress the striker spring before it can reach the position of tripping the sear.
"Look man, no one knows exactly what is happening with the P320."
We agree on that.
I believe I understand what your commentary is saying. Your point of view from an engineer is understandable. Your concerns and passion are obvious.
90% of my professional career was highly connected to engineers, scientists, doctors, and mostly multi-degreed academics. I know the mindsets. Some of those relationships become friendships. Some of them were brilliant, and a few just had irrational views of reality.
One particular scientist told me that the concern of running out of oil is misunderstood. He said "We will run out of water in about 50 years". That was in 1994. We ARE running out of water.
My point of view is different. I'm a scientist. As a scientist I am always looking for "discovery". I ask questions, develop hypotheses, analyze the data, and attempt to set up testing to verify a hypothesis. I'm looking for evidence and data that can be tested. I'm not looking at re-engineering the P320.
So far there is a phenomenon happening with the P320. There are hundreds of reported observations and a few videos.
Has anyone been able create a condition where the updated P320 can be observed to fire a round without the trigger being pulled. Will there be a "discovery" to explain the number of spontaneous discharges?
The more this debacle festers in public view, the more it will negatively impact the rights and laws of firearm ownership.
Has ANY of the raging public opinions, forum debates, YouTube videos, lawsuits, or bans, stopped the "uncommanded discharges"?
EDIT: I removed the offending quotes. I will use quote marks more judicially and with greater sensitivity.
Last edited:
- Joined
- May 20, 2025
- Messages
- 208
- Reaction score
- 410
But here's the deal... while we mention what hasn't been proven, the other thing that also hasn't been proven is that any of these cases were absolutely, positively caused by human negligence. I don't care for the whole idea that discussing the obvious "elephant in the room" somehow gives more ammunition to those people who want to strip us of our 2A rights. We as consumers have a right to demand that manufacturers do their due diligence and produce products that are exceptionally well engineered. The only way they have an incentive to do so is by consumer demand, by customers voting with their wallets.
Sig has done some morally questionable things in the past, or more precisely, its CEO Ron Cohen did. Just do an internet search on his role in falsifying documentation that a shipment of guns from the Sig Sauer division in Germany was being shipped to the US, but instead, he illegally shipped the guns to Columbia in violation of German law, knowing that Sig Sauer - Germany would not ship to Columbia. He was subsequently arrested and sent to prison when he arrived in Germany.
Sig has repeatedly let its customers be beta testers on both design changes to the P320 and P365. All of these issues started when Ron Cohen arrived at Sig. Cohen was previously the CEO of Kimber and Kimber's quality took a serious nosedive under Cohen's leadership because of his tendency to cut corners and get parts made by the lowest bidder. Many of the P320's parts are currently made by suppliers in India for cost reduction, which complicates QC.
And I'm an engineer, not an "engineer" with quotation marks. I have been a manufacturing engineer and proud of my profession for 25+ years. There's a lot of stuff I don't understand in this world, but when it comes to manufacturing things, I do know what I'm talking about. This isn't bragging, it's simply what I do for a living.
But thank you for understanding that I am not trying to argue with you, I am merely talking about the topic at hand and in order to do so, the particular design features of the gun are kind of unavoidable if one wishes to try to explore why these incidents could be happening.
Last edited:
hdfinder47
Member
After reviewing the "screw" video, we are going to ban all P320's with a screw jammed into the trigger mechanism from our outdoor range. This ban may be expanded to all firearms with such screw intrusion. (BTW, that particular gun was previously owned by someone who had modified the sights and frame color - do ya' think he/she may have made more "improvements" to that particular gun??. "Researcher" should have started with a factory fresh gun, IMO.) I'm not saying there is no issue, just not sure THAT video proves it.
VinnieL59
Member
I also have to disagree with the original post. I think someone has been watching too many TV shows with bumbling cops. I Prior to retirement, I served 28 years in law enforcement. Yes there were a few cops who had problems hitting a "bear-sized" Silhoute target. Then there were those smaller statue officers who had to carry the largest firearm they could find. Some cops do feel they are now carrying a pistol with say 16 rounds of ammo they have to eventually hit the target if forced to shoot someone. Us oldtimers who began with 6 shot .38 and ,357 mag revolvers knew we would only need 1-2 rounds to put a target down. Even though I have been retired for 17 years, I still regularly shoot and qualify annually by firing the prescribed state course.
- Joined
- May 20, 2025
- Messages
- 208
- Reaction score
- 410
OK, how about this guy then?
He claims he only took up the overtravel to the wall, not bring the trigger past the wall. What about the footage within that video showing P320s firing in holsters without the officers touching the gun?
While the comment about banning P320's with screws jammed in the trigger from your range is a clever, funny statement, the point of that is to show how little movement of the trigger can create the scenario shown. No properly engineered pistol should ever be able to fire from other external factors without the trigger pulled to full travel or very close to it. This also shows that there is a very narrow window where the striker block safety could ever serve its intended function as a failsafe. The one important thing that Wyoming Gun Project brought up in his video is, what if an officer put his finger on a P320 trigger when a perp poses a threat, but then the incident de-escalates and he reholsters the pistol? If the trigger doesn't completely reset for whatever reason like debris entering and the holster creates back and forth slide movement simply from the officer walking around, could it cause an unintended discharge? I think the gun's design makes this a legit concern.
Your desire and determined push to promote the truth about the immorality of CEO, the use of cheap and possibly defective parts in a firearm, and the possible failed design, is a 2-edge sword.
YES… the positive impact…. the ongoing debacle and the outcome will likely make other firearm manufacturers take notice of the results and hopefully change their business practices, engineering designs, parts sourcing, testing, and customer service. Of course stop the death and injuries.
YES… the negative impact of this will, as history has clearly shown, give the anti-2A gun-haters ammunition to continue their moronic cause to destroy our right to defend ourselves.
I'm a big fan of the 1st Amendment, but I'm a bigger fan of the 2nd Amendment.
The 2nd Amendment protects the 1st Amendment.
Some of my best friends are engineers.
Perhaps you could be like a Roger Boisjoly.
The NASA engineer who discovered the fault in the Challenger space shuttle's rocket boosters and warned against the launch was Roger Boisjoly. Boisjoly was a Morton Thiokol engineer who, along with other engineers, warned NASA that cold temperatures would cause O-rings to fail, leading to the fatal launch on January 28, 1986.
Similar threads
