Big Dave in WNC
Member
Regarding the unintended discharges (and to continue on my last post):
We THANKFULLY didn't have any of those but we began hearing about them firing when dropped, and going off unintentionally. We heard of them on news outlets, word of mouth, and I think one agency may have even sent a PIN message (teletype) about them.
I-like everyone else-kind of assumed that these were actually NEGLIGENT discharges...i.e. booger picker inside the trigger guard when it should not have been. But the stories did continue to appear-MUCH higher than with any other brand to include Glock. I recall one female officer had hers in her PURSE and it went off. After a while I began to believe there WAS merit to the suggestion there was a design flaw.
In my admittedly not all-knowing understanding-the Glock system striker rests in a "halfway" position and requires the trigger pull to draw the striker the rest of the way back and then release it, whereas the P320 system is in a "fully cocked" position, and the trigger only RELEASES the striker (much closer to a traditional DA/SA autoloader in SA with the hammer cocked and a trigger pull only releases it's grasp on the sear notch.) I know from my time with the P320 and being an armorer on it that the trigger is EXCEPTIONAL...that's a MAJOR selling point! But I think equating it with a Glock striker gun is NOT RIGHT-it should be viewed as a COCKED P226. There is almost no perceptible takeup and a crisp and light trigger pull.
Also, SIG offered the "voluntary upgrade" where they realized that without the trigger dingus the trigger had enough mass to move through the sear if it fell on the back of the slide, and should have made that a recall but they didn't and now they are committed in stone to denying it's an issue. Heck there are videos on YT of people dropping them and they discharge, in trying to recreate other unintended discharges.
There are LOTS of complaints of this resulting in unintentional discharges (35+ I would guess). I'm sure one or two might be actually NEGLIGENT discharges, but I think the vast majority are valid.
I'm a poster on one other forum but scan many other gun forums. It seems like lots of people doubt this or claim they ALL are NDs. Many while correctly pointing out that most cops aren't gun saavy, take it further and suggest they are all careless lying cops that report this, and the non-LE folks are likewise careless and lying and therefore it's all "misinformation" because of SIG envy and brand jealousy.
I think on the forums it's because of a formula based on "I LOVE SIG", "I hate cops and any chance to insult or demean them I'm going to" and "I personally haven't experienced this". You can often spot the different categories of posters-the "SIG Fan Till Death", the "Cop Hater", the "I love my P320 so everyone else can kiss it". the "I am remaining open minded" guy (rare), and the "There's too many of these to NOT be a 'thing' " posters. It's NOT as bad here as another forum I'm on, but go back and you'll see...
There is one video that involves officers dealing with a subject that came into their PD lobby in the NE. It looks like they have arrested him and he is refusing to move (?) so the officer in question reaches down to either search him or pick his legs up to carry him (?) and his holstered P320 discharges. No one is hurt but everyone is now AWAKE! SIG reviewed this and released their rebuttal and findings, stating in an unequivocal tone that the gun was NOT SECURE in the holster, and therefore IN WAY SIG's problem. It was 100% a holster issue. They even released captured "stills" from the video showing the ALS hood on his duty holster was down, and they were adamant that this was the cause-not the P320 (even thought this was like the 30th report of this issue.)
Well sorry to tell them but they are wrong. Almost every LEO I have talked with agree that the "hood" to the holster they CLAIM was down and they point to with an arrow in their rebuttal still pictures is a CAT Tourniquet (specifically the white tab that you are supposed to mark the time of application on) in an 1110 Gear (or similar) tourniquet holder than mounts to the front of the duty holster:
RIGID TQ Case(R) Holster Mount - 1110Gear.com
So yes...I personally believe very strongly that this is an issue that hopefully will get corrected. Still...like a defense attorney in closing remarks after judge and jury have heard damning and overwhelming evidence, I hear some people saying they move for a dismissal as "there is no evidence and it has never been recreated."
We THANKFULLY didn't have any of those but we began hearing about them firing when dropped, and going off unintentionally. We heard of them on news outlets, word of mouth, and I think one agency may have even sent a PIN message (teletype) about them.
I-like everyone else-kind of assumed that these were actually NEGLIGENT discharges...i.e. booger picker inside the trigger guard when it should not have been. But the stories did continue to appear-MUCH higher than with any other brand to include Glock. I recall one female officer had hers in her PURSE and it went off. After a while I began to believe there WAS merit to the suggestion there was a design flaw.
In my admittedly not all-knowing understanding-the Glock system striker rests in a "halfway" position and requires the trigger pull to draw the striker the rest of the way back and then release it, whereas the P320 system is in a "fully cocked" position, and the trigger only RELEASES the striker (much closer to a traditional DA/SA autoloader in SA with the hammer cocked and a trigger pull only releases it's grasp on the sear notch.) I know from my time with the P320 and being an armorer on it that the trigger is EXCEPTIONAL...that's a MAJOR selling point! But I think equating it with a Glock striker gun is NOT RIGHT-it should be viewed as a COCKED P226. There is almost no perceptible takeup and a crisp and light trigger pull.
Also, SIG offered the "voluntary upgrade" where they realized that without the trigger dingus the trigger had enough mass to move through the sear if it fell on the back of the slide, and should have made that a recall but they didn't and now they are committed in stone to denying it's an issue. Heck there are videos on YT of people dropping them and they discharge, in trying to recreate other unintended discharges.
There are LOTS of complaints of this resulting in unintentional discharges (35+ I would guess). I'm sure one or two might be actually NEGLIGENT discharges, but I think the vast majority are valid.
I'm a poster on one other forum but scan many other gun forums. It seems like lots of people doubt this or claim they ALL are NDs. Many while correctly pointing out that most cops aren't gun saavy, take it further and suggest they are all careless lying cops that report this, and the non-LE folks are likewise careless and lying and therefore it's all "misinformation" because of SIG envy and brand jealousy.
I think on the forums it's because of a formula based on "I LOVE SIG", "I hate cops and any chance to insult or demean them I'm going to" and "I personally haven't experienced this". You can often spot the different categories of posters-the "SIG Fan Till Death", the "Cop Hater", the "I love my P320 so everyone else can kiss it". the "I am remaining open minded" guy (rare), and the "There's too many of these to NOT be a 'thing' " posters. It's NOT as bad here as another forum I'm on, but go back and you'll see...
There is one video that involves officers dealing with a subject that came into their PD lobby in the NE. It looks like they have arrested him and he is refusing to move (?) so the officer in question reaches down to either search him or pick his legs up to carry him (?) and his holstered P320 discharges. No one is hurt but everyone is now AWAKE! SIG reviewed this and released their rebuttal and findings, stating in an unequivocal tone that the gun was NOT SECURE in the holster, and therefore IN WAY SIG's problem. It was 100% a holster issue. They even released captured "stills" from the video showing the ALS hood on his duty holster was down, and they were adamant that this was the cause-not the P320 (even thought this was like the 30th report of this issue.)
Well sorry to tell them but they are wrong. Almost every LEO I have talked with agree that the "hood" to the holster they CLAIM was down and they point to with an arrow in their rebuttal still pictures is a CAT Tourniquet (specifically the white tab that you are supposed to mark the time of application on) in an 1110 Gear (or similar) tourniquet holder than mounts to the front of the duty holster:
RIGID TQ Case(R) Holster Mount - 1110Gear.com
So yes...I personally believe very strongly that this is an issue that hopefully will get corrected. Still...like a defense attorney in closing remarks after judge and jury have heard damning and overwhelming evidence, I hear some people saying they move for a dismissal as "there is no evidence and it has never been recreated."
