Keep Shield or upgrade to Sig P365?

[tnhawk]

I have a 9 and a 45 Shield. They accomplish everything I need from a handgun, so I see no reason to replace them.

 

[mltndw3]

Shield or P365

The Shield was my second handgun and I loved it, my wife not so much because she couldn't rack it. That issue worked itself out after a few hundred rounds and she now loves it as well. I've bought many other handguns since and recently bought a P365 with a born date of 26 Mar 18. It is a wonderful gun and we both really like shooting it. We've had zero issues and don't personally know any of my range buddies or friends having the issues that have been reported. Only a couple of hundred rounds so far, but it is running like a top. Would I sell my Shield, no because we both like it and it has sentimental value as well. I am about to get rid of my 1911 though. Fun, but expensive to shoot, a pain to clean, too big for me to carry concealed, etc. I know many will think I'm crazy, but I just don't have as much love for the 1911 as I do the Shield, G19-4, S&W 642, P 229 and the P365.

 

[BE Mike]

The Shield was my second handgun and I loved it, my wife not so much because she couldn't rack it. That issue worked itself out after a few hundred rounds and she now loves it as well. I've bought many other handguns since and recently bought a P365 with a born date of 26 Mar 18. It is a wonderful gun and we both really like shooting it. We've had zero issues and don't personally know any of my range buddies or friends having the issues that have been reported. Only a couple of hundred rounds so far, but it is running like a top. Would I sell my Shield, no because we both like it and it has sentimental value as well. I am about to get rid of my 1911 though. Fun, but expensive to shoot, a pain to clean, too big for me to carry concealed, etc. I know many will think I'm crazy, but I just don't have as much love for the 1911 as I do the Shield, G19-4, S&W 642, P 229 and the P365.

You bring up a good point. After getting a Sig P320, I really hate cleaning my 1911's and even my S&W model 19 and other revolvers. Looks like the P 365 is as easy to disassemble and clean as the P 320.

 

[Amp]

I bought several plastic guns and they all shoot well.
For me, I still like a .38 or 3913 better for carry or home protection. The others shoot paper and plastic bottles for fun.

 

[mltndw3]

You bring up a good point. After getting a Sig P320, I really hate cleaning my 1911's and even my S&W model 19 and other revolvers. Looks like the P 365 is as easy to disassemble and clean as the P 320.

The 365 is easy to reassemble for sure. I have noticed a problem that others have brought up, and that is the difficulty taking the slide off for cleaning. It is a very tight fit and requires much more effort than any of my 9m's and 1911. Tight tolerance? Sweet gun but that is one attribute that I'd like changed.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

 

[jhnttrpp]

The 365 is easy to reassemble for sure. I have noticed a problem that others have brought up, and that is the difficulty taking the slide off for cleaning. It is a very tight fit and requires much more effort than any of my 9m's and 1911. Tight tolerance? Sweet gun but that is one attribute that I'd like changed.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

Don't you think it will loosen up a bit after some use. Then it will be just right.

 

[mltndw3]

Don't you think it will loosen up a bit after some use. Then it will be just right.

I'm not sure since it seems to be metal on metal but fingers crossed. It isn't a problem, just an annoyance. The Shield was very hard to rack when I first bought it (my wife couldn't do it), but it has loosened up nicely so maybe you're right.

 

[snowman.45]

I have a Glock 43 and a Shield 45. I've owned the Shield 9, as well. I got a chance to shoot a friend's P365. I only shot 20 rounds at 10 yards on a 2/3 size silhouette, but I made all head shots firing pretty fast. The gun felt good in my large-size hands and I didn't feel any lack of grip or control. This is subjective, and everyone will have their own sense about such things, but I like the P365. If it proves to be reliable and durable, I'll likely get one. I doubt I'll get rid of my G43 and I know I'll be keeping my Shield 45, but it's hard to turn down 10+ magazines in a package that small as an off-duty or retiree gun.

 

[dben002]

I have a Glock 43 and a Shield 45. I've owned the Shield 9, as well. I got a chance to shoot a friend's P365. I only shot 20 rounds at 10 yards on a 2/3 size silhouette, but I made all head shots firing pretty fast. The gun felt good in my large-size hands and I didn't feel any lack of grip or control. This is subjective, and everyone will have their own sense about such things, but I like the P365. If it proves to be reliable and durable, I'll likely get one. I doubt I'll get rid of my G43 and I know I'll be keeping my Shield 45, but it's hard to turn down 10+ magazines in a package that small as an off-duty or retiree gun.

It's good that it fit you and shot well....I have always loved the Shield's...9's & 45's....so I solved the 365 problem with my shield 9.....wish I could do the same with my Shield 45..

 

[jnichols2]

I just got a P365 today, haven't shot it yet.

That doesn't mean I'm going to sell my Shield.

I'm really hoping for the Shield M03 to have 10-12 rounds, and be a little easier to rack. Then I would probably trade my Shield M01 in for it.

 

[BE Mike]

One thing I find interesting is from all the reported "problems" with the Sig P365, they continue to be flying off the shelves. Either folks figure that Sig has addressed the "problems" or people are just so favorably impressed with the features of the P365 that they think that those features far outweigh any reported "problems". Of course, there is always a segment of the gun owning community that wants the latest and greatest regardless.

 

[Horn]

They're Different Pistols

Seems many are replacing their Shields with the P365 and i will say the 365 interests me and i will look at 1 if i ever see 1!

Anybody here got 1 yet or planning on getting 1?

I have two Shields, one with a Shield RMS sight. I'm in line at Quantico Tactical for the P365 (Looks like June) but I have no intention of selling either of my Shields. The P365 is a different pistol from the Shield. The overall size is different the P365 being
smaller. The slightly heavier and slightly larger Shield has enough heft and excellent ergos for fine shooting. I believe the heft will prove to give the Shield a continuing fine shoot ability.
I think the P365 will be a really fine shooter and will be the one
more suitable for T-shirt and shorts in my triple digit desert in
July and August.
I think as a duty BUG the P365 will win that one too.
My two Shields will stay as part of the family.
In our somewhat cool winters my P320 Compact serves as a fine__and comforting EDC with a light outer cover.
There will remain those times for each.
Stay safe
Poli Vejo

 

[Sheepdoggit]

Seems many are replacing their Shields with the P365 and i will say the 365 interests me and i will look at 1 if i ever see 1!

Anybody here got 1 yet or planning on getting 1?

I know I'm probably going to upset some people, but let me preface this by stating up front that:

One, I used to own a Shield a few years ago (the one without a manual safety, and I liked it a lot!),

Two, my EDC is a M&P Bodyguard 380 (full disclosure) and a Sig Sauer P229 Enhanced Elite in .357 SIG and 9mm (my favorite pistol of all time), and

Three, I've owned and carried at least 15 concealed carry firearms since 2005, and all but three of them were striker-fired handguns without a manual safety.

That said, I would not buy a SIG P365 anytime soon. In fact, I wouldn't buy one for years (and perhaps not at all if they don't make a change I believe should be made).

I personally believe a striker fired pistol (not merely a DAO), especially without a manual safety, should have a trigger safety based on what happened with the P320 last year.

There's a reason virtually every striker-fired pistol has a trigger safety. The ones that don't are typically actually either DAO (with a longer/heavier take up), or they have a manual safety.

For some reason that really, really pisses people off (after all, I am just giving an opinion).

After SIG denied there was a problem with the P320 last year, they finally admitted it, but they only started revealing some of the truth about the nature of the problem very gradually (again, in my opinion).

If I remember correctly, first, like I said, they denied it.

Then, whether directly or indirectly, we were told it only happened when the pistol was dropped from one particular angle (until we saw independent testing recreating the unintentional discharges occuring from more than one angle).

I think we were then told we would have an answer/solution the following Monday, and when we got it (I think it may have been late), we were essentially told that the UD was the result of an inertia problem because the physical trigger was too heavy (not the trigger pull, but the mass of the trigger itself).

It was quickly disseminated that it was an easy fix (a new lighter trigger) and that this only affected the regular P320's and not the XM17 Modular Handgun System competition version.

In other words, we were told that by replacing the trigger with a lighter one, there would not be enough inertia to move it if the P320 was hit, slammed or dropped disengaging the sear and the firing pin/striker safety (causing the round to go off).

I met with a SIG Sauer rep discussing a P229, and while I had his ear, I asked about the changes they made and he opened up both an original and a modified P320 to show me the changes that were made (which I highly respected him for taking the time to do). I don't remember all the changes, but they clearly went beyond the physical trigger. If I remember correctly, they also involved modifications of the trigger bar, the sear, and possibly the firing pin safety (but I honestly don't remember being only marginally interested at the time).

I then later read that the Army had some UD's with the XM17 pistol among other things (I believe that was reported in Army Times, but don't hold me to that. It could have been another publication).

Getting curious now, I started looking more into it. I used to have a government administration job, and part of my responsibility had to do with reviewing and preparing contracts, so I read the Army's original RFP verbatim (not too many people can say they've done that). I also read Glock's protest and the GAO's response to Glock's letter. I also then consulted the Army's SOP regarding "rough handling" testing for rifles, shotguns, and pistols (both ones from the 20th and 21st centuries).

I don't want to write a book here, but I'll say this. Glock was right to protest because the US Army did NOT complete the MANDATORY testing (nor did they have the right procedures in place in at least one particular aspect in my opinion).

Like I said, I read the contract verbatim (and no, I don't plan on doing that again), and in no way was either pistol exempt from completing testing procedures that "shall" be performed in evaluation (for example, extreme temperature testing). If anyone wants to read the RFP, look for the word shall which removes discretion (i.e. not doing the testing when appropriate). If anyone wants to debate the legal use of the word shall, go ahead and read the opinion in Marbury v. Madison (1803) and read Article III Section 2 paragraph 2 and make sure you undertand what Chief Justice John Marshall meant about "surplusage" language.

Anyway, I also did not find the usual testing procedures for drop testing (what the Army I believe calls "rough handling") which is basically the same for rifles, shotguns, and pistols.

I don't remember whether SIG said this, or someone merely said SIG sold this, or if someone made it up, but I had heard more than once that the drop testing procedure called for dropping the gun from only one angle (the idea being that the SOP likely wouldn't have uncovered the P320's problem). I heard this echoed throughout YouTube, but all of the SOPs I read called for dropping the pistol from multiple angles, and both the XM17 RFP and the SOP's were incredibly detailed about all testing requirements (again, I actually read the whole thing). If you don't believe me, look it up (Test Operations Procedure (TOP)
03-2-045A Small Arms - Hand and Shoulder Weapons and Machine Guns).

What I also learned by painstakingly reading the RFP was that this was a particular kind of bid where price wasn't to be the deciding factor. In other words, often government contracts require going with the lowest bidder, and we all heard how SIG came in for a cheaper price, so the assumption was that the testing was stopped prematurely and awarded to SIG based on price (even though there is NO provision for this in the RFP). Price was certainly a factor, but it was not to be the final word in making the decision. Contracts are also sometimes drawn this way when the ultimate goal isn't to save money on the particular contract itself. In this case, it was more important to get the best option for our troops (which I agree with).

So it appears SIG won without the Army completing the mandatory testing, but I also heard a lot of rumors about problems the Glock was having and that, even though it operated well enough (e.g. accuracy), in certain tests it didn't work as well as the SIG.

Much later, however, I started getting reports about how the opposite may have been true (that the SIG had some issues not previously mentioned). After all, there are quite a few YouTube videos showing how the gun jammed.

Then we found out about the P320's drop safety issue. After all, a police officer (in Connecticut?) had allegedly dropped his pistol in its holster and it still allegedly went off (I don't know if the case was settled). That's a pretty significant fail. YouTube then exploded with the videos I mentioned earlier.

In my opinion, I think awarding SIG the contract was a foregone conclusion (for whatever reasons people make deals above or below the table). I think when the unintentional discharge occurred, it created a huge problem beyond mere embarrassment because Glock had already complained that the mandatory testing hadn't been completed. Furthermore, they didn't seem to be applying the same drop testing procedures the Army always uses for handguns and other weapons (which might even mean they knew about the issue ahead of time and avoided the more stringent testing, but figured they'd take care of the problem later). After all, SIG used to have a version, and perhaps they still do, that has a trigger safety, yet it wasn't used in the "upgrade").

I think the US Army might have forced SIG's hand to both 1) make a "voluntary upgrade" in lieu of a mandatory recall, and 2) find a solution without using the trigger safety they have a design for.

Think about it. The Army gives the contract to SIG violating their own RFP, Glock takes it up with the Government Accountability Office who's clever BS response doesn't actually get to the bottom of Glock's concerns (about the incomplete testing), and then we get wind of a police officer suing SIG for the unintentional discharge. At that point there are denials until people from gun stores and others start posting YouTube videos showing that it does go off unintentionally (from a variety of angles). At that point, the first question on people's minds is, "How come the Army testing didn't uncover this?" followed by "Why was the drop testing less stringent than their normal protocols?" (after all, it would likely have caught this).

As you can see, the US Army and SIG were in a precarious situation with the P320's unintentional discharge problem, especially after a general told ArmyTimes that he thought the XM17 MHS competition was a waste of money and that he should have been allowed to just go to Cabela's with a credit card and work out a deal to buy a bunch of Glock 19's. After all, if you look at the price of the SIG Sauer pistols the Army bought (essentially including a ten year warranty), you'll notice that the true costs were not revealed at first. I don't remember the numbers, but it was reported that they went up dramatically many months later, and if you work it out, the cost of each pistol would have bought multiple P320 pistols which already come with a lifetime warranty. If it was a rifle, a soldier's primary weapon, I might think that was a wise decision, but I err with the general who wanted to buy off the shelf and safe the money. After all, Glock, and M&P's for that matter, are well proven designs.

So what do you do when you're faced with a major recall the Army should have caught during mandatory testing that was cut short (where they awarded a contract prematurely for a pistol that wasn't even drop safe)???

First, you don't ever call it a recall, and you don't make it mandatory. Instead, you call it a "voluntary upgrade." That makes people think the problem is not a problem at all but a preference.

Then you make sure that the fix isn't something glaring like a trigger safety which would elicit more questions about the testing SIG's XM17 design underwent during the competition.

See, I told you I'd piss some people off!!!

Others I think will understand the value of what I'm alluding to, and it's a problem with our government (cartel) generally.

I am not trying to bash SIG, I carry a SIG pistol, but I really think the US Army and SIG both screwed up, and I don't appreciate the way either entity handled the situation. I don't even own a Glock at the moment (though I've had five over the last 13 years I've been concealed carrying), but I think the contract should have gone to Glock. No question.

I'm also fairly sure Glock was well aware of the pattern that emerged (and that they know far more than I do). I also imagine some promises may have been made to be delivered sometime down the road to seem unrelated to keep Glock quiet. That is pure speculation on my part, but it's not without historical precedent). Perhaps some more agencies will be adopting Glock pistols down the road, for example (or we'll be paying more for the ones we already have).

Regardless of whether I'm right about the XM17/P320 situation, the P365 still lacks a trigger safety.

Perhaps they've changed the trigger bar/sear engagement geometry to truly rectify the problem, but remember this, building a striker-fired pistol without a trigger safety (and w/o a manual safety) was already a very uncommon practice when they introduced the P320 originally, so they would have already proven to themselves and others once already that they came up with a safe design, but it ended up taking a few years to find out they were marketing an unsafe pistol (again, my opinion).

How do we know it was rectified with the P365? I don't think for a minute that SIG new they were selling pistols that would fire when dropped, so I can only assume they were wrong the first time and that they may be wrong again since they didn't fix the problem with a trigger safety (or include one on the P365).

Instead, the trigger is lighter. Let's think about that for a second. There are at least two things involved with inertia, mass and velocity. We know when dealing with ammunition, velocity is squared because it will get you to a higher energy output quicker than increasing the mass of the bullet (i.e. E = m x v²). When you think about the lighter trigger in those terms, it would clearly take even more velocity to cause the problem we had in the P320. So what happens if the pistol is dropped from a very high place (higher than the four or five feet they usually test from)??? How about off the top of a building? Does the increase in velocity make up for the decrease in mass (so that another unintentional discharge occurs)?

I don't care too much that SIG made an unsafe pistol. It can happen. What's important is what we do to resolve our mistakes, and I just don't trust how they're handing themselves under current management. That's just my opinion. I don't have any inside information, this is just from my own observations about what's been going on over the last year.

All I know is that Glocks don't do that, and they've been proving themselves for over three decades. Yes, they've had problems with initial roll outs like everyone else, but people have dropped Glocks from planes and helicopters, and I don't know of one unintentionally discharging without something getting caught in the trigger guard (like a drawstring, finger, or tree stump or something).

That said, until there's more transparency about what actually happened and how we can know for sure the problem has been resolved, I will take a Smith & Wesson M&P Shield everyday—all the livelong day—over any SIG striker fired pistol without a trigger safety. I respect the P365's magazine design, it truly is a gamechanger in some ways, but I also imagine the Shield shoots better. You can also get MagGuts for it and bring the flush round to 8+1. In my opinion, that's good enough for a pistol of that size.

That's just my opinion, but it's not one I made without a lot of forethought. Please go easy on me, I didn't write this way-too-long-of-a-post to start a fight.

 

[jhnttrpp]

You have obviously put a lot of thought into this and I'll meet you out back behind the dumpster tonight. If I'm not there start without me I'll be along shortly.

I would personally be happier if the P365 had a manual safety. But that's just me and I'm not all that sophisticated.

Thanks for taking the time to share your thoughts.

 

[Protected One]

I had dinner last night with a friend who sold his glock 43 and bought the sig. He kept talking about the increased capacity.

While I'm sure the Sig is a very nice gun, I must confess I don't understand the logic of swapping a proven gun (shield or glock 43) for a new product....just to gain a couple of rounds.

If someone simply likes having the latest and greatest that's their right, but just say that - not "it's got 10+1".

 

[gwmac]

If I can place my first three rounds where they need to go, it really doesn't matter how many rounds are left in the mag.

 

[GTBL]

Sheepgoggit, that was a great read. I agree. I think the magazine design is a game changer, but a striker fired pistol without a manual safety or trigger safety is dangerous. Maybe not dangerous for "experienced" gun handlers, but the 365 is being sold to "New Shooters". This group will have many that lack discipline and handling skills, and will probably result in some cases of injury/death. Hopefully that is never the case, but there are an abundance of New Shooters getting into guns that IMO are just not mature enough to handle firearms. (See for yourself at your local gun range on a Saturday) Again, hopefully I am wrong about this. Hopefully SIG is working on a GEN 2 of the 365, and have an option of a manual safety or a trigger safety.

 

[Jeppo]

Hopefully SIG is working on a GEN 2 of the 365, and have an option of a manual safety or a trigger safety.

The other day, I noticed what appeared to be a crack in the polymer frame of my P365. On closer inspection, there is clearly the outline of what might someday become a notch for a thumb safety.

 

[BE Mike]

I'm sure that a few people here are looking forward to driverless cars. Nothing made by man is foolproof. IMHO a trigger safety, nor manual safety is indicated for the P 365, despite the long tiresome threads slamming Sig.

 

[Doug M.]

Sheepdoggit has laid out much of the same information I have been provided by people familiar with the P320 in both the military and LE settings. It is a deeply flawed pistol; the testing process was also flawed and is being probed, and both SIG and at least some of the Army personnel have forfeited their credibility. I also agree that the Army would have been better served with Gen 5 G19s and M&P 2.0s purchased COTS.

It is not unforeseeable that there will be a criminal investigation and prosecutions. It is amply foreseeable that even without that outcome, there will be officers forced to retire at grades below their current rank because they will be demoted to the last rank at which they successfully served.

There is at least one long discussion of this set of problems with SIG and the Army in the Secondary Weapons forum of Lightfighter. I personally know some of the people posting and involved and what their credentials are.