SIG P320 Discharges?

[Brian Parrish]

Bruce Gray's final report stated that 4 individual deficiencies including incorrect parts, needed to be simultaneously present in order for a spontaneous discharge to occur.

(4 obvious deficiencies that, had they been present, would have been easily discernable in forensic examinations of pistols that allegedly failed, but were, in fact, not present.)

Again what I know please correct me, in every case but two after the event at the range or in the street, the responsible parties or command personnel grabbed the offending gun and made it safe thereby erasing the condition possibly. So in the summer of 2024 incident this was not done. That was the pistol which was carefully delivered in uncorrected condition to the FBI who found deficiencies in the mating surfaces of the sear. Similarly the Air Force carefully dismantled the gun which killed the airman and found defective parts and provided photos of how to check your gun.
….allegedly
…allegedly

 

[Brian Parrish]

I also was about to visit my local gun shop this morning. I too am very interested in their comments on the topic. I'm going to visit them Monday, and I'll post what they say.

Please do let us know and thanks!

 

[Oldsalt66]

Again what I know please correct me, in every case but two after the event at the range or in the street, the responsible parties or command personnel grabbed the offending gun and made it safe thereby erasing the condition possibly. So in the summer of 2024 incident this was not done. That was the pistol which was carefully delivered in uncorrected condition to the FBI who found deficiencies in the mating surfaces of the sear. Similarly the Air Force carefully dismantled the gun which killed the airman and found defective parts and provided photos of how to check your gun.
….allegedly
…allegedly

The responsible parties didn't replace the 4 defective/incorrect parts including the takedown lever etc. which would have been easily discernable in the pistols.

I can't recall the 4 parts that ALL need to be incorrect, but they've been identified earlier in the thread; and had they been present in any of the plaintiff's pistols, forensic detection would have been a cinch.

Still waiting for what the Air Force determines, as well as the exact nature and circumstances of the incident.

 

[Goony]

I hate wading into such a heated discussion, but I'd suggest that the Titanic can serve as an analogy for the present P320 mess. It took a confluence of very improbable events to expose fatal, hidden faults with the ship's engineering and operation.

Likewise with this pistol. Perhaps the probability of certain factors combining to result in an "uncommanded" spontaneous discharge is almost negligible, say, on the order of one in a million. The problem for SIG is that this number is nonzero, and thus must be addressed, and so far they've pretty much stonewalled.

Ian McCollum is pretty sharp in assessing the merits (or lack thereof) of firearms designs. He doesn't commit to if there's an identifiable flaw with the P320, but I think he's recently put this whole business into its proper perspective. At the moment, the reputation of the P320 is tarnished by the various reports. So the question has become whether this can be restored, or whether it festers and ends up by extension irreparably damaging the reputation of the manufacturer. He rightly points out that if hypothetically you're an armorer choosing a new sidearm with which to equip your agency, do you choose the P320 or any one of a number of other high quality polymer framed, striker fired service pistols to which no controversy (and potential liability) is attached? The taint that's come to be associated with the P320 and its military M17/18 variations (justified or not) now supersedes any purely technical considerations.

 

[Thaddeus Beauregard]

I believe the point the commenter was making is simply that the more public discourse and outrage, whether true or false, on every media platform that is currently trending, the more reasons it gives those who oppose the 2nd Amendment to attack our gun rights.

Every time some psychopath shoots a bunch of innocents with an AR-15, who immediately starts raging about gun control laws, red flag laws, and abolishing the 2nd Amendment?

Of course, we as the firearm community, should always be strict advocates for firearm safety. We should absolutely hold those responsible and accountable for supplying defective or dangerous products to consumers.

There appears to be ample evidence that something is causing a spontaneous discharge, and a "common denominator" is the Sig Sauer P320. What that "cause" is has yet to be unequivocally proven.

I wholeheartedly disagree with your first sentence, but wholeheartedly agree with your last three.

The anti-2A crowd will continue trying to attack our rights regardless of what we do or don't do, but the best thing we can do is to strive to be objective and speak the truth, so that we are the reasonable ones. If some person or corporation on "our side" is doing something wrong or cutting corners, we should speak out. Just because they make products we enjoy that relate to our 2A rights, gun companies don't always look out for our best interests. They are businesses who answer to stockholders and are in the end allied to no particular causes besides the cause of making money. They are often led by execs who don't give a crap what their company makes; they're just hired to be profitable. A gun company exec may one day lead PepsiCo, then move on to a firearms mfgr. There are several examples where the gun companies stabbed us in the back on gun legislative issues; Ruger, S&W, Springfield Armory, and Sig as examples. They are all subject to throwing us under the bus if it's expedient to do so for the almighty dollar or to save their azzes from litigation.

 

[LVSteve]

I must have blinked at some point today, maybe while out getting an early dinner. Can someone post a link to the FBI statement recanting their previous report.

 

[Kanewpadle]

I'll just leave this here.


More and more is being exposed. Sig and their fanboys can apologize later.

 

[Onomea]

Steve, earlier in this thread, I posted a Sig statement to the effect that when it and the FBI, under mutually agreed upon conditions, attempted to replicate the failures that the FBI firearms lab observed with the P320 testing for the MI state police, they were unable to do so. Sig concurrently released an email from the FBI to Sig so stating. I included the FBI email in my post.

It's back in there somewhere in the many pages of this thread. Maybe a week ago or so...

 

[RebCop]

There's no problem with the P320, it's political. Anyone can make anyone or anything look bad in the eye of the public. Pissed off people who didn't get their way and crying like little.... The gun cannot go off by itself, and with society the way it is now there seems to be more un-educated people with firearms today than ever before. Look around you next time you are at the range, take a minute and scope the people around you. I entered the Marine Corp using the issued .45 and saw accidental discharges with that firearm, we transitioned to the Beretta and again their were accidental discharges in other branches also. Proper training and discipline is all thats needed, not a lax attitude with a bullet in the chamber.

Going off in the holster is different as several officers have been injured that way. The AD's you talk about was not treating the gun with respect. The Sig is way past that.

 

[LVSteve]

Ah, now I remember, Sig pointed out that the slide cutaway compromised the spring retention and operation.

 

[RebCop]

Steve, earlier in this thread, I posted a Sig statement to the effect that when it and the FBI, under mutually agreed upon conditions, attempted to replicate the failures that the FBI firearms lab observed with the P320 testing for the MI state police, they were unable to do so. Sig concurrently released an email from the FBI to Sig so stating. I included the FBI email in my post.

It's back in there somewhere in the many pages of this thread. Maybe a week ago or so...

But was it the same type of failure we're seeing now? Or was it the drop safe test?

 

[Thaddeus Beauregard]

I'll just leave this here.


More and more is being exposed. Sig and their fanboys can apologize later.

Hard to argue with anything he said.

 

[Thaddeus Beauregard]

This my friends is bad design! This basically demonstrates that the striker safety is almost a useless feature in this gun AS DESIGNED, because there is a very narrow window for when it actually works for the intended role of blocking the striker.

Furthermore, in the event the striker foot were to slip off of the sear when excessive slide to FCU rail play is factored in, I believe the striker safety would be engaged already and thus the gun would fire. I have a P320 and I have studied this extensively. Those of you with a P320 can check this out yourselves. With the slide assy removed, press down on the sear with something like a punch and watch the striker safety lever next to the sear. Notice it rises upwards, meaning it is at least partially starting to disengage the striker safety. This is because the striker safety lever is coupled with the sear so that when the trigger bar moves forward, it moves both the sear and the striker safety lever simultaneously. THIS IS NOT THE CASE WITH ANY OTHER STRIKER FIRED PISTOL I'M AWARE OF that use the Glock style, plunger striker safety! On other striker fired pistols, the striker safety is actuated by a SEPARATE projection on the trigger bar that works independent of sear movement. It is NOT coupled with the sear as it is in the P320. If you don't believe me, check it out for yourselves with your own P320s. Press down on the sear and the striker safety lever rises even though the trigger isn't touched, meaning when the slide is assembled to the frame, it will at least partially, if not fully disengage the striker safety.

What this means is in the event the striker were to slip off of the sear, it HAS TO press the sear down to do so. If the striker safety lever (and thus the striker safety itself) is coupled with the sear and moves along with the sear, this means it is possible for the gun to fire without trigger activation, solely if the striker slips off the sear... and the only thing that is holding the sear into position is pressure from 2 springs. The only reason it wouldn't fire is that the striker safety hasn't quite moved enough... but it has been at least partially moved toward deactivation. The P320 doesn't have mechanical sear locking like a Glock, or a grip safety that arrests sear movement, anything like that. So basically, if the striker slips off the sear because the sear or striker or trigger fails to fully reset and you have movement in the slide - the gun can fire without the trigger being pulled.

This begs the question: under what circumstance(s) is the striker safety actually intended to work to provide the "last line of defense" against an uncommanded discharge?

 

[s&wchad]

I deleted a number of rude posts. I'm sure I didn't catch them all, but I'm not wading through 32 pages in a two month old thread.
Please note (from our rules):



We're done here...