SIG P320 Discharges?

[M14sRock]

Beretta won in court because the issued ammo in the tests by the SEALs was +p+ level power. They also broke 2 Sig 226 slides, but for some weird reason those never get mentioned. As soon as the slides broke the Army rushed out and proclaimed the M9 as junk and defamed Beretta when it turned out to be the fault of the government. At least 3 of the services have the M17/18 under review.

In fairness to Sig, in those tests, the slides that broke were rails coming off the slide. That was very common when hot ammo was used on the early P226s, and after very few rounds fired. I saw several broken P226 slide rails caused by Fiocchi Combat 123gr Truncated Cone ammo. I don't know of any P226 slides that broke and caused injuries, either in Military testing or on the Commercial market. The Beretta M9 slides broke right in front of the breech faces, allowing the back portions of the slides to fly back and whack the users in the face. There were some very senior NCOs who suffered life altering, and career ending wounds from being 'Beretta punched'. Imagine a razor sharp guardrail nut on the end of a piece of 550 cord being slammed into you face with a full swing. Ouch.

And the M9/92 Series of today are fantastic pistols.

 

[ggibson511960]

LEADING TEXT EDITED OUT FOR BREVITY

Say you had a 1911 with, say, a 2.5 lb trigger. And, say you put, using whatever device, 2.4 lbs of pressure on the trigger. And then, say you manipulated the slide.

Do you think the hammer would fall?

I think you understand my point, even if I have expressed it badly. Tell me how the situation with the P320 screw guy and the 1911 above are different?

(Not being argumentative — would truly like to understand.)

The hammer would definitely not fall. The hammer and sear pivot about pins securely mated to the metal frame. The sear is activated by a trigger bar working in the frame. The 1911 slide only pushes the disconnector to allow sear movement. I know from experience that a 1911 can double if sear engagement is too small as with a really crisp match trigger with no overtravel, but this happens due to violent impact and bounce when the slide/barrel/line assembly crashes back into battery. Gold Cups deploy an anti-bounce spring to prevent this, but they will occasionally double pop, at least mine will, definitely not a safe everyday carry piece, but it does have a nice safety lever that locks everything.

 

[Thaddeus Beauregard]

The hammer would definitely not fall. The hammer and sear pivot about pins securely mated to the metal frame. The sear is activated by a trigger bar working in the frame. The 1911 slide only pushes the disconnector to allow sear movement. I know from experience that a 1911 can double if sear engagement is too small as with a really crisp match trigger with no overtravel, but this happens due to violent impact and bounce when the slide/barrel/line assembly crashes back into battery. Gold Cups deploy an anti-bounce spring to prevent this, but they will occasionally double pop, at least mine will, definitely not a safe everyday carry piece, but it does have a nice safety lever that locks everything.

Exactly! In a 1911, the hammer and the trigger sear are both in the frame, so their positional relationship remains constant. Unlike a striker fired pistol where the striker is in the slide and the sear is in the frame, any play between slide and frame on a 1911 (and most higher end 1911s have very little to no slide to frame movement anyway) cannot change the amount of bearing surface on a cocked sear.

 

[GnarlsR2]

I posted this a while back in another forum and I still maintain this would be the only (yet absurd) way to recreate any of the alleged uncommanded discharges.

"My favorite is the argument that the uncommanded discharges can't be repeated. The only way to try and repeat one would be to have someone who experienced a P320 uncommanded discharge, using same gun, completely recreate every singe movement from the time they first possessed the subject P320, to include number of times bumping gun, each time in same exact position, same exact holstering/unholsterings, loading/unloadings, etc. It has to be all exactly duplicated movements for the same duration as initial possession of said P320 to uncommanded discharge.

Yes, I know it's absurd. So is the argument that there have been no recreations of the uncommanded discharges (likely caused by micro vibrations over use time of the gun which could only be recreated as above).

I do sincerely hope everyone that loves them (P320) enjoys them and never has an incident."

"The only way to try and repeat one would be to have someone who experienced a P320 uncommanded discharge, using same gun, completely recreate every singe movement from the time they first possessed the subject P320, to include number of times bumping gun, each time in same exact position, same exact holstering/unholsterings, loading/unloadings, etc. It has to be all exactly duplicated movements for the same duration as initial possession of said P320 to uncommanded discharge."

That is an interesting perspective, but not accurate.

The causes of the spontaneous discharges is simple physics. It's not some voodoo effect, supernatural manifestation, paranormal phenomenon, or quantum mechanics.

There is a scientific explanation….

"A scientific explanation is a description of how and why a phenomenon occurs, based on empirical evidence and logical reasoning, often involving testable hypotheses and models. It goes beyond simply stating a fact by providing a coherent account that can be verified through observation and experimentation. This explanation typically involves identifying cause-and-effect relationships and using scientific principles to connect evidence to a claim."

That's just my worthless opinion.

 

[Thaddeus Beauregard]

"The only way to try and repeat one would be to have someone who experienced a P320 uncommanded discharge, using same gun, completely recreate every singe movement from the time they first possessed the subject P320, to include number of times bumping gun, each time in same exact position, same exact holstering/unholsterings, loading/unloadings, etc. It has to be all exactly duplicated movements for the same duration as initial possession of said P320 to uncommanded discharge."

That is an interesting perspective, but not accurate.

The causes of the spontaneous discharges is simple physics. It's not some voodoo effect, supernatural manifestation, paranormal phenomenon, or quantum mechanics.

There is a scientific explanation….

"A scientific explanation is a description of how and why a phenomenon occurs, based on empirical evidence and logical reasoning, often involving testable hypotheses and models. It goes beyond simply stating a fact by providing a coherent account that can be verified through observation and experimentation. This explanation typically involves identifying cause-and-effect relationships and using scientific principles to connect evidence to a claim."

That's just my worthless opinion.

Maybe. But first of all, you're kind of missing Lab4Us's point, which was that there could be a lot of variables at play that led to any particular uncommanded discharge, so without benefit of knowing which among the factors that could have contributed, it's difficult to recreate. It may not be due to any single factor but a combination of factors. And maybe all of the P320s that have been subject to the uncommanded discharges are "technically" in perfect working order "as designed" but the design itself just sucks because it has a razor thin margin of safety. Even if that's the case - functioning correctly but very unforgiving - it's a defective product because of the severe consequences of failure.

 

[GnarlsR2]

Maybe. But you're assuming that the cause is always due to the same thing and always the culmination of the same condition(s), and that may not be valid. No one knows for sure, or if someone does, If it's bad parts out of spec, it ain't due to physics, it's due to just plain poor mechanical design.

Maybe. But first of all, you're kind of missing Lab4Us's point, which was that there could be a lot of variables at play that led to any particular uncommanded discharge, so without benefit of knowing which among the factors that could have contributed, it's difficult to recreate. It may not be due to any single factor but a combination of factors. And maybe all of the P320s that have been subject to the uncommanded discharges are "technically" in perfect working order "as designed" but the design itself just sucks because it has a razor thin margin of safety. Even if that's the case - functioning correctly but very unforgiving - it's a defective product because of the severe consequences of failure.

it's a defective product because of the severe consequences of failure.

Where is the proof that the P320 is "defective"?

 

[Thaddeus Beauregard]

it's a defective product because of the severe consequences of failure.

Where is the proof that the P320 is "defective"?

You conveniently left out the first part of that sentence. Context is everything. Notice I said "IF that's the case - functioning correctly but very unforgiving." It was an either/or argument. In other words, even if all P320s are working correctly as designed, if it requires extraordinary care above and beyond what competing pistols require to prevent an uncommanded discharge, then I think that in itself is a huge defect.

I don't know if it is defective, but the burden of proof isn't on me to prove or disprove a negative. The burden of proof is on Sig, who designed and built it. Since the current ADs involving holstered striker fired pistols is disproportionately and, it appears, exclusively involving Sig P320s, it would seem self evident that there is a problem of some sort. If not, then the evidence certainly makes it reasonable to be suspicious of it.

 

[DixieRanger]

Some learn safety the hard way. At 14 was sitting at base of tree squirrel hunting with my .410 laying muzzle down with barrel pointed down between my legs. Obviously not paying attention as it fired. Never forgot...keep yer finger out of trigger guard.

 

[TheInnovationGarage]

Outstanding videos (minus the fact the guy in the first video needs to learn how to express correct measurement terminology) and outstanding analysis by you! It sounds like you have a manufacturing background. I work in the CNC machining industry, so you're speaking my language. Your summary is spot on!

Thanks for the comments. Mechanical Engineer by university background and have spent 30+ years designing products across all industries that never existed before. I've spent ton's of time working with and in factories and appreciate your CNC background and all those folks that make stuff for a living.

 

[Neumann]

Can anyone explain to me why/how the P-320 is superior to the P-226?

Lighter, tighter, lower bore axis, cheaper to manufacture. On a personal note, I can shoot my M18 as accurately as any revolver SA, and I have enough experience on both, plus the P226, P220, and P229. BTW, my M18 has the latest SIG safety update.

 

[Equus]

Lighter, tighter, lower bore axis, cheaper to manufacture. On a personal note, I can shoot my M18 as accurately as any revolver SA, and I have enough experience on both, plus the P226, P220, and P229. BTW, my M18 has the latest SIG safety update.

The 320 is not superior to any of the older Sig products. Cheaper to make just makes it cheaper not superior. The 226/228/229 Sigs were exceptional handguns, the 320 is just flimsy junk and it's proving itself such.

 

[eclayton]

I posted this a while back in another forum and I still maintain this would be the only (yet absurd) way to recreate any of the alleged uncommanded discharges.

"My favorite is the argument that the uncommanded discharges can't be repeated. The only way to try and repeat one would be to have someone who experienced a P320 uncommanded discharge, using same gun, completely recreate every singe movement from the time they first possessed the subject P320, to include number of times bumping gun, each time in same exact position, same exact holstering/unholsterings, loading/unloadings, etc. It has to be all exactly duplicated movements for the same duration as initial possession of said P320 to uncommanded discharge.

Yes, I know it's absurd. So is the argument that there have been no recreations of the uncommanded discharges (likely caused by micro vibrations over use time of the gun which could only be recreated as above).

I do sincerely hope everyone that loves them (P320) enjoys them and never has an incident."

I've been waiting for someone to make that argument. You are right, the incidents have the look of a statistical outlier effect requiring a bewildering number of variables to come together just right to yield an unintended discharge. As such all the lab testing in the world won't reproduce it. The only way to see it is to build millions of units and put them in the field—with enough pistols and enough hours of holster time, the tiny statistical outliers begin to be seen. That such discharges happen is beyond dispute; they've been captured on video. That they are possible under any circumstances represents a flawed design. I can't imagine any police administrator willing to entertain all the mumbo jumbo engineering arguments telling him not to believe his own lying eyes. The military, on the other hand, I think is more likely to switch over to condition 3 carry and wait (and pray) for some technical fix before they overturn their whole supply chain and maintenance train to field a different pistol. Even the M9 is not an option anymore. When I retired last year it was already years since any M9 parts had been available, and we were retiring them one at a time as they broke.

 

[DRankin]

The military, on the other hand, I think is more likely to switch over to condition 3 carry and wait (and pray) for some technical fix before they overturn their whole supply chain and maintenance train to field a different pistol. Even the M9 is not an option anymore. When I retired last year it was already years since any M9 parts had been available, and we were retiring them one at a time as they broke.

Doesn't it always come down to convivence or dollars?

And maybe there is a healthy dose of pride in the equation.

How many injuries/deaths does it take to overcome such inertia?

 

[LVSteve]

The 320 is not superior to any of the older Sig products. Cheaper to make just makes it cheaper not superior. The 226/228/229 Sigs were exceptional handguns, the 320 is just flimsy junk and it's proving itself such.

In logistics speak, cheaper is superior. Welcome to the 21st century where budgets rule. The Reagan era of "just do it and we'll worry about the money later" is long gone.

 

[Onomea]

Lighter, tighter, lower bore axis, cheaper to manufacture. On a personal note, I can shoot my M18 as accurately as any revolver SA, and I have enough experience on both, plus the P226, P220, and P229. BTW, my M18 has the latest SIG safety update.

I have, as I said above, a P320 Carry (Wilson Combat modified, BTW, with manual safety added by Sig, so M18 config), and a P226 XCarry Legion SAO. (Hey, I like "Gucci guns," as friend Biku says South African contractors he worked with put it.)

I can say unequivocally that my 320, WC not withstanding, is not as tight as my 226. No where near. Sure the 320 is slightly lighter. It is a polymer frame. (Whether that is good or bad is a matter of opinion, of course.)

Lower bore axis? Really? Maybe. I have not compared directiy. Pretty close I think.

Cheaper to manufacture? Sure, I believe that.

I last shot the 320 at my range last Friday. Gonna shoot my new 226 there tomorrow. I'm curious to see if and how the shooting experience differs.

 

[Kanewpadle]

In the Sig owners manual,


In bold print. Is this something new? Or has it always been there?

Here too,

 

[RebCop]

it's a defective product because of the severe consequences of failure.

Where is the proof that the P320 is "defective"?

A dead Air Man.

 

[RebCop]

This guy "nails it".

Except the 320 only had the trigger pulled 1 mm. The Glock he took it back until almost firing.

 

[RebCop]

This may have been discussed somewhere else in this thread, but I would still like to clarify something... The military version of the P320, the M17/M18, has a thumb safety. Correct? How does this thumb safety work? How reliable is it in preventing the striker from hitting the primer of the loaded cartridge, no matter what? I wonder if the USAF man's pistol had it's thumb safety in the FIRE position when it was in his holster. Or was it set to SAFE? Have there been other verified cases of M17/M18 military pistols firing unexpectedly? I notice that the Army, Navy, and Marines have not stopped using them.

It only blocks the trigger and not the sear.

 

[CRT2]

You may want to wait until the investigation is completed before you jump to contusions.

And yes I know it is conclusions.