I just got an email from a group I shoot with. The IDPA has just banned SIG P-320 pistols from competitions sanctioned by IDPA. This is NOT intended to be a further dump on SIG. It is just an FYI.
IDPA has just banned Sig P320 pistols from competition
- Thread starter robertrwalsh
- Start date
Register to hide this ad
Seems the P320 is circling the drain on it's way down.
The Sig 320 is certainly dead froma consumer confidence perspective.
There have been some very good explanations of the problem, why it's unlikely to repeat on a specific pistol (and thus not replicate under forensic examination) etc, and I understand Sig's legal/liability strategy as it applies to individual cases by denying there is an issue and like Glock, pointing the finger at the user and trigger intrusion.
But the fact is being able to avoid liability in individual cases, and not admitting there was a problem doesn't work well in the long term when there is a design flaw, no matter how rare an un commanded discharge occurs.
With various police departments and now the IDPA banning it, the jury of public opinion has now clearly rendered a verdict, and right or wrong the Sig 320 is no longer commercially viable for Sig.
It's going to be interesting watching how Sig handles this beyond just discontinuing the model. They have already hurt the brand. No recall, fix or replacement will further hurt it, and it's likely to erode confidence and sales of their other models when there are so many other choices in the market.
There have been some very good explanations of the problem, why it's unlikely to repeat on a specific pistol (and thus not replicate under forensic examination) etc, and I understand Sig's legal/liability strategy as it applies to individual cases by denying there is an issue and like Glock, pointing the finger at the user and trigger intrusion.
But the fact is being able to avoid liability in individual cases, and not admitting there was a problem doesn't work well in the long term when there is a design flaw, no matter how rare an un commanded discharge occurs.
With various police departments and now the IDPA banning it, the jury of public opinion has now clearly rendered a verdict, and right or wrong the Sig 320 is no longer commercially viable for Sig.
It's going to be interesting watching how Sig handles this beyond just discontinuing the model. They have already hurt the brand. No recall, fix or replacement will further hurt it, and it's likely to erode confidence and sales of their other models when there are so many other choices in the market.
Lance Boyle
Member
- Joined
- Jul 15, 2012
- Messages
- 197
- Reaction score
- 194
Even without a defect of design or manufacturing I thought they made the trigger too light and too short stroke for a duty gun. A duty gun needs a bit more resistance to firing for general safety due to handling while under stress, possible in a physical fight at the same time and a host of other complications. One reason why the revolver hung on so long in police holsters next to say the 1911 pistol, that long trigger stroke was a pretty good safety requiring a conscious and deliberate action.
That trigger was set for a gamer gun in my mind. I have no idea about its design flaws beyond the choice of pull weight and stroke length. It does seem like there is enough smoke that there is probably a fire somewhere.
That trigger was set for a gamer gun in my mind. I have no idea about its design flaws beyond the choice of pull weight and stroke length. It does seem like there is enough smoke that there is probably a fire somewhere.
I hope this isn't too stupid a question. Was the 320c included in this decision?
I always like a link in a post like this, say to the IDPA announcement. That's because I'm lazy and don't want to search, and I'm from the Missouri part of North Carolina. 
If you mean the P320 Compact or P320 Carry, yes.
P320s are all based on the same FCU, fire control unit.
The concern is that the FCU, the striker and its safety mechanisms, may have a fundamental design flaw that allows in some circumstances the striker to release and ignite the cartridge when the trigger is not pulled.
Sig says absolutely not.
But, there are a lot of unintentional firings associated with the P320, enough so that a number of police departments, trainers, etc., have suspended use, or banned the use, of the platform.
44wheelman
Member
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2006
- Messages
- 1,708
- Reaction score
- 995
several programs/clubs/agencies...have banned. Whether there is or isn't an issue, doesn't matter now. There is a perceived problem.
What can Sig do about it...not much. New model to replace it...distance itself, deny, deny, deny... What a PR/legal nightmare.
Oh, just bought another P228.
What can Sig do about it...not much. New model to replace it...distance itself, deny, deny, deny... What a PR/legal nightmare.
Oh, just bought another P228.
I wonder if this reaction affects my P320 X5 Legion ( no thumb safety)? I use this excellent pistol for USPSA Limited and Action Steel.
I would assume it covers all P320s, regardless of model designation since they all use the same FCU design.
Yes, all variants.
That said, USPSA sent out an email saying that they didn't necessarily ban them, but it was up to the individual range rules and match directors.
They should ban those Remington 700s as well.
They have to given that some individual ranges are banning the P320. USPSA can't set it up to where a browned off competitor with a P320 gets upset at the range for a ban, claiming it's "against the USPSA rules".
Similar threads
