SIG P320 Discharges?

[Onomea]

Good morning, everyone. It's an interesting discussion and I appreciate everyone's comments.

I've been thinking about the video with the guy with the wood screw who points out the play/slop between slide and frame, and shows how the P320 can discharge when the slide is manipulated while the trigger is held motionless by the wood screw just beyond the wall.



Two thoughts on this occurred to me overnight:

• I don't think this explains how in a very few cases — including the recent USAF tragedy — P320s with manual safeties, M17s and M18s, have had reported uncommanded discharges. The manual safety, when engaged, holds the trigger well back from the wall.

• Typically shooters praise a crisp trigger. "Breaks like a glass rod" being the highest praise. In this case, as shown in the wood screw video, the trigger is held by the screw just beyond the wall. At that point, slide manipulation, bumps to the slide, will discharge the weapon.

While one would never want anything other than finger pressure on the trigger to actuate firing, if one had, say, a 1911 held a tiny fraction of a mm beyond the wall by a trigger finger, and the slide was bumped, I think the gun would be likely to discharge, not because of the slide manipulation but because of the sensitivity of the finger and trigger mechanism to contact at that extremely delicate point.

Reflecting on the above, I've been wondering how far beyond the wall triggers can typically be held before they actuate a discharge.

----

Re the cerakoted frame question above, I don't think that would have anything to do with it as that would not affect the up and down movement between frame and slide.

 

[Rick H.]

Just a couple of thoughts here. Pertaining to the "do not lubricate" the striker assembly. What do they mean by this? Do they mean anywhere on the striker or just the engagement points? What if water gets into the striker? Water can act as a lubricant can it not? If a lubricated striker can work its way off its safety shelf, or ledge that is a HUGE concern and points to a design flaw in and of itself. How does anyone guarantee that oil does not migrate from other areas of the pistol to the striker shelf? This is a BIG red flag that proves Sig knows there is a problem with their striker system. No one, absolutely no one can guarantee oil doesn't get into the striker of their pistol, let alone something like water. Come on people, wake up!

I watched someone take a P320 apart and work the safety lever on the striker. The safety lever moved out of the way of the striker almost immediately upon trigger movement. This is important because the striker is free to move forward with almost no movement, or very little movement, of the safety lever. Why wouldn't you design this striker block to come away from the striker at the very end of trigger movement instead of at the very start of trigger movement. This makes no sense to me at all!!! This is one of the most unusual designs I have ever seen and I have seen a lot of designs at my age.

Lots of pro-Sig people like to flaunt the fact Sig has never been found to be a fault in any of the law suits against them and their P-320 pistol. While that may be true, there have been numerous reports of out of court settlements with non-disclosure agreements put in place. I find that to be the same as admitting guilt, in order to avoid unwanted publicity of a trial. It is also a way of hopefully saving a big dollar award after the trial. If Sig is such a stand up company why don't the publish a list of law suits they have had filed against them and the results of said law suits? And all out of court settlements should be included on this list.

Here is the kicker, the procurement of a firearm by a law enforcement or military organization is many times more complex and underhanded than we know. Some manufacturers have been known to "give" certain items to an agency that selects their firearm. In other words if I were the Anytown Police Department and I selected the Acme Firearms company's 9mm pistol for my department, as part of this purchase the Acme Firearms Company "gives" me any number of their rifles as a "gift" for making the purchase. Do you think for one moment that these "gifts" don't play into the purchase decision? Now suppose one of the handgun manufacturers trying to have their handgun selected by Anytown PD doesn't have a long gun in their product inventory, does that put them at a disadvantage in the selection process? I'll let you the reader be the judge of that, but I think it is a dirty sales tactic. It could potentially lead to the procurement of a less desirable item.

As I said before, this is all about money and Sig is no different than anyone else in this area. They are far too quick to suggest these "un-commanded" discharges are the fault of the user, or holster. Police officers and I suppose AF Security Police aren't weapons specialists, but they aren't stupid either. The P-7 pistol although beautifully made, was a poor design for law enforcement. Dare I say the P-320 is following the same route. Every time there is an "un-commanded" discharge of a P-320 it is another nail in the coffin for Sig. Dancing around the issue isn't helping anybody and puts more lives in jeopardy of injury or death. In my opinion no striker fired pistol should use a completely tensioned striker spring as a normal mode of carry. Partially tensioned would be acceptable as long as the striker cannot detonate a round from its at rest position. Perhaps that was why I liked the old Walther P-99 and Smith and Wesson P-99 that you could de-cock from a fully tensioned striker to partially tensioned at the push of a button on the slide. And lastly any firing pin block or striker block should not move completely out of the way until the very last movement of the trigger. Along ramble for sure, but I am done. I fear this issue will not go away or get better soon.

Rick H.

 

[DRankin]

Glock may be a paragon of safety and reliability today but they had early issues too.

I know for a fact that some police issued early Glocks discharged in the holsters. And Glock covered it up too, issuing a voluntary product upgrade when a full stop and recall was needed.

Maybe there is an old Portland Oregon cop out there in forum land that can back me up on this.

Anyway........

I think of hammer fired guns as mechanisms. By their nature they are simpler and inherently more safe.

Example: you can see a cocked hammer and an engaged safety on a 1911. That gives me a certain level of cautious comfort.

I have even more comfort with my double action revolvers knowing that the hammer has to completely cycle back and forth to fire the the gun.

Striker fired guns to me are more akin to contraptions.

By and large they are ready to fire without any visual indication of readiness (or lack thereof) and they rely of a series of springs, levers, cams and plungers to keep them from blindly, inadvertently discharging.

Add a highly flexible frame into that unholy mix and you can see where the trouble starts.

Bump an old fashioned mouse trap with you foot and see what happen next.

Striker fired handguns are here to solve the "problems" of hammer fired handguns.

I just don't see what problems they solve.

 

[Neumann]

The safest pistol I own is a SIG P220, SA/DA. Yet that pistol incurred an ND in Chicago, whereupon the CPD demanded modifications. Never underestimate the ingenuity of careless people.

 

[Onomea]

....Striker fired handguns are here to solve the "problems" of hammer fired handguns.

I just don't see what problems they solve.

I bet they are easier/cheaper to manufacture, so the attraction to both consumer and manufacturer is cost. That's my guess.

 

[Harv 24]

Glock may be a paragon of safety and reliability today but they had early issues too.

I know for a fact that some police issued early Glocks discharged in the holsters. And Glock covered it up too, issuing a voluntary product upgrade when a full stop and recall was needed.

Maybe there is an old Portland Oregon cop out there in forum land that can back me up on this.

Anyway........

I think of hammer fired guns as mechanisms. By their nature they are simpler and inherently more safe.

Example: you can see a cocked hammer and an engaged safety on a 1911. That gives me a certain level of cautious comfort.

I have even more comfort with my double action revolvers knowing that the hammer has to completely cycle back and forth to fire the the gun.

Striker fired guns to me are more akin to contraptions.

By and large they are ready to fire without any visual indication of readiness (or lack thereof) and they rely of a series of springs, levers, cams and plungers to keep them from blindly, inadvertently discharging.

Add a highly flexible frame into that unholy mix and you can see where the trouble starts.

Bump an old fashioned mouse trap with you foot and see what happen next.

Striker fired handguns are here to solve the "problems" of hammer fired handguns.

I just don't see what problems they solve.

Those issues were cops having there finger on the trigger during Holstering or using SERPA holster. Glocks have never "Gone off" by themselves.

You look at late 70 to early 80 pics and video's of Cops and .Mil. They all had there fingers on the triggers, because that was a byproduct of training with revolvers with 14 lb. double action trigger pulls.

SIGs issue is they have almost full tension on the striker, which gives them a lighter trigger pull. and the interaction has a part on the slide and a part on the frame, add in slide to frame slop and the fact the striker is at almost full compression....

And if all it takes is lubrication to set it off......


Bottom line is it was/is a poor design...and agencies and .Mil are slowly finding out. The Army never completed full testing and went for the the infamous "Lowest bid that meets the requirement"

And it bit them in the ass.

 

[Thaddeus Beauregard]

Well, I'm not sure how many Sig 320/M17-18 owners have bothered to read the manual included with every new firearm, but I would suspect the number would be few if any. If you refer to page 66 it says do not lubricate striker assembly. Lubricant on the striker could cause the striker to move on its own if jarred when oil is where it is not supposed to be. How many of the un-commanded discharges were caused by improper cleaning and lubrication?

First of all, the presence of oil, that is commonplace and not only accepted but recommended on every other firearm on the market, should not cause these problems. That statment in the manual is a boilerplate CYA measure so they can always fall back on that bs. Secondly, the problems with the gun thus far presented have nothing whatsoever to do with excessive lubrication or lack thereof; it is solely due to poor design and sloppy execution. Oil has no influence on parts being out of spec or using dumbass ridiculous design elements solely to be different and so you don't look like you're copying competitors. Third, if your gun is that sensitive to the presence of oil, something that is supposed to be a part of regular gun maintenance, then you have a sh!t design.

Sig was once a respected manufacturer of very high quality firearms, and now they have become a disgrace with their irresponsible, callous attitude towards the safety of their customers, their lack of proper engineering work, and their pizz poor QC. IMO, this P320 debaucle needs to send a permanent message that criminally substandard work, complete disregard for their paying customers, and arrogance will severely hurt their bottom line. People within that organization need to be fired if not held criminally liable for gross negligence.

And I was as big a Sig fan as ever existed prior to this.

 

[Thaddeus Beauregard]

That is NOT a legal way to get around a negligence claim. These are products intended for combat, they should be able to handle too much lube, too little lube or blood, sweat, dust and dirt to some extent.

To say too much lube will cause the gun to fire accidentally, is called an admission against interest, it is an admission of a flaw of design. That alone would let me nail any design engineer or product specialist in a trial.

On accidental discharges, the design requires a much higher standard of care, that say just how and when to lubricate for best function.

Thank you for pointing that out, it matters.

AbsoEffinLutely!!! Spot on!!!

 

[TAROMAN]

Never an issue with my M9 and my M9A3.
Big Army screwed the pooch on this one.

 

[Thaddeus Beauregard]

Two thoughts on this occurred to me overnight:

• I don't think this explains how in a very few cases — including the recent USAF tragedy — P320s with manual safeties, M17s and M18s, have had reported uncommanded discharges. The manual safety, when engaged, holds the trigger well back from the wall.

• Typically shooters praise a crisp trigger. "Breaks like a glass rod" being the highest praise. In this case, as shown in the wood screw video, the trigger is held by the screw just beyond the wall. At that point, slide manipulation, bumps to the slide, will discharge the weapon.

While one would never want anything other than finger pressure on the trigger to actuate firing, if one had, say, a 1911 held a tiny fraction of a mm beyond the wall by a trigger finger, and the slide was bumped, I think the gun would be likely to discharge, not because of the slide manipulation but because of the sensitivity of the finger and trigger mechanism to contact at that extremely delicate point.

Reflecting on the above, I've been wondering how far beyond the wall triggers can typically be held before they actuate a discharge.

----

Re the cerakoted frame question above, I don't think that would have anything to do with it as that would not affect the up and down movement between frame and slide.

Unless I'm misunderstanding which side of the wall you mean by "just beyond the wall," the screw didn't hold the trigger just beyond but instead just BEFORE the wall. The screw only removed the take up slack so the trigger was starting from the same condition every time and producing the same repeatable results. The screw barely moved the trigger from its rest position. The reason he did this was to illustrate how the possibility of slightly out of spec parts or part mounting true positions could render the gun in a dangerous condition. Also, if a LEO were to draw the pistol to aim it at a threat, place his finger on the trigger slightly, would it then fire uncommanded by the slightest jolt without pulling the trigger past the wall? Would it setup a dangerous condition where it might then fire upon reholsering, etc? The bottom line is a properly designed pistol to accepted industry standards should not be that sensitive and should never be accepted in the marketplace, and a responsible, moral company should take the lead in removing such a flawed design from the marketplace.

 

[DRankin]

Those issues were cops having there finger on the trigger during Holstering or using SERPA holster. Glocks have never "Gone off" by themselves.

Sorry, but in Portland in the late 80's or early 90's a Glock 17 went off in the holster during baton (PR 24) training when the baton hit the side of the holster on a back swing. No fingers involved.

There were other incidents too, but that is the one I had a personal connection to. Portland cops and Anchorage cops used the same (labor issues) law firm and the lawyers therein put pressure on Glock for remedies

If such things did not occur, why was Glock forced to redesign the part they call the cruciform and recommend they all be replaced?

Look it up.

As armorers we expedited the new parts asap and upgraded all the Glocks our guy and gals were carrying. The redesigned parts had a different color finish so that you could tell the difference.

Like Elmer Keith said.... Hell, I was there.

 

[Glenn R. McMannly]

Makes me almost want to buy an M9 again.

 

[tjg63]

The Masada is an Israeli clone of the Glock and they actually made it a little better. Good, solid, reliable pistols that will take a lot of abuse and poor environmental conditions.

My wife and I own Sig P320's. Her's is an X5 Legion and mine is an M18. We have quite a bit of interest in the subject of unintended discharges.
Some thoughts / questions:
1. Is there a location that lists the documented unintended discharges, circumstances and follow up investigations? Not just for Sig but other firearms also. The state trooper incident that was investigated by the FBI and the unfortunate death of one of our military personnel is under investigation. There is one other incident where Sig is being sued by the family of someone who was allegedly killed re-holstering their firearm but no details.
2. Re-holstering can be the most dangerous movement when using a firearm. No one ever won a competition or gun fight by being the fastest to re-holster. When I am with instructors I watch as they slowly and carefully re-holster their firearm and I follow. How many would admit that oops I hit the trigger, have the incorrect holster or were careless?
3. I think everything posted here about the P320 should be posted on the Sig website so that Sig fully understand the level of concern.

 

[Onomea]

Unless I'm misunderstanding which side of the wall you mean by "just beyond the wall," the screw didn't hold the trigger just beyond but instead just BEFORE the wall. The screw only removed the take up slack so the trigger was starting from the same condition every time and producing the same repeatable results. The screw barely moved the trigger from its rest position...

Start watching the video again at about 9:00 minutes in.

"...66.62 is the wall... the beginning of the actual trigger pull where we are moving parts.... 65.69, less than one mm..." and the gun fires
Take a look again from about 9:00 minutes into the video,

"66.62 is the wall, the start, the end of the pre-travel, the start of the actual trigger pull..."

He then puts the screw in, moving the trigger to 65.69.

"Let's see if we can get it off by just touching the slide..."

The striker actuates.



"How about that?! That measurement right there. I am not a math wizard but that is less than one millimeter... into the firing sequence and it just dropped the striker."



Maybe the difference between your statement and his is how one defines the wall, but that is how he defines it,

I would argue that the trigger pull begins with taking up the slack, or pre-travel.

----

tjg63: If you read through this thread you will see that most, if not all, of your questions and concerns are addressed herein.

 

[F224]

The question is not is but how soon will Sig have to buy back every one of them at MSRP? Might be a good time to snatch them up at pennies on the dollar.

 

[Outpost75]

I've never owned a striker gun. Are they generally as accurate as the depicted .38/44 S&W?

I have no clue of that. Won't own one. Am a dyed in the wool revolver guy here.

 

[Swood]

My problem with the video and the screw is that he continues to say that he was not touching the trigger, but the screw simulated him putting pressure on the trigger. ANd to top it off he began to place the pistol in a holster when it "went off" with the screw in place. Not a Sig fan and I have no idea how the Airman's pistol went off when holstered in a Safariland holster with a QLS.

 

[SS336]

I sold my 320 before the auto discharge issues came up. Dry firing felt like a toy gun. I simply didn’t like the gun. Got my $ back, because it’s a plastic fantastic gun. Just getting to like steel and wood more and more.

well I like those more too, but I’m still going to carry my P365XL. just glad that it has a different FCS than the P320.

 

[Puller]

Sorry, but in Portland in the late 80's or early 90's a Glock 17 went off in the holster during baton (PR 24) training when the baton hit the side of the holster on a back swing. No fingers involved.

There were other incidents too, but that is the one I had a personal connection to. Portland cops and Anchorage cops used the same (labor issues) law firm and the lawyers therein put pressure on Glock for remedies

If such things did not occur, why was Glock forced to redesign the part they call the cruciform and recommend they all be replaced?

Look it up.

As armorers we expedited the new parts asap and upgraded all the Glocks our guy and gals were carrying. The redesigned parts had a different color finish so that you could tell the difference.

Like Elmer Keith said.... Hell, I was there.

If true (and I'm not saying it's not) it sounds to me like a 40 year old problem that Glock fixed 40 years ago.

You know, kind of like how Smith & Wesson fixed the drop problem with S&W Victory revolvers when one was dropped on a flight deck and killed a sailor. Once the issue was identified S&W fixed it. That's what responsible companies do, kind of like Glock did.

 

[Thaddeus Beauregard]

Start watching the video again at about 9:00 minutes in.

"...66.62 is the wall... the beginning of the actual trigger pull where we are moving parts.... 65.69, less than one mm..." and the gun fires
Take a look again from about 9:00 minutes into the video,

"66.62 is the wall, the start, the end of the pre-travel, the start of the actual trigger pull..."

He then puts the screw in, moving the trigger to 65.69.

"Let's see if we can get it off by just touching the slide..."

The striker actuates.



"How about that?! That measurement right there. I am not a math wizard but that is less than one millimeter... into the firing sequence and it just dropped the striker."

View attachment 779720

Maybe the difference between your statement and his is how one defines the wall, but that is how he defines it,

I would argue that the trigger pull begins with taking up the slack, or pre-travel.

----

tjg63: If you read through this thread you will see that most, if not all, of your questions and concerns are addressed herein.

Roger that. I mistakenly thought that the screw was just removing the pretravel to the wall. Still, if the trigger hasn't been pulled to the sear break, a mechanically sound, well-designed handgun should never fire by jiggling the slide or creating vibration on the gun.