Dallas PD pulls the P320 from their Approved List.

[Brownstone322]

Actually you can, Inspect it before completing the paperwork with your FFL and taking ownership.

Do this no matter if the gun is new or used, If it's not as advertised the time to send it back is before you do the paperwork.

This makes perfectly good sense. But, again, I'm still gonna need a reference of some sort from SIG to know that this particular 320 (new or used) is on the "good" list. I'm hoping for a simple look-up interface on their web site (or somewhere we can get to).

 

[gc70]

In the past, some companies put a mark on the frame when a gun had been fixed under a recall.

 

[Brownstone322]

The fire control module is the serialized part. They can't just send you a new one.

The more I thought about this, the more bureaucratic I thought it sounded. From a practical standpoint, it'd be immensely easier for SIG to swap out mass-produced fire-control modules than to modify them one at a time. That makes no sense at all. Besides, what if the issue (for a conventional pistol) was a cracked frame? That can't be repaired, and it's the serialized part.

It turns out that Federal law allows a manufacturer to return a "replacement firearm of the same kind and type" to a non-licensed person [18 USC § 922(a)(2)(A)].

Unless and until I find out otherwise, I'm assuming that's what SIG is gonna do.

 

[TunnelRat]

Unless and until I find out otherwise, I'm assuming that's what SIG is gonna do.

They're not. They're not going to ship you a new serialized FCU without getting the old ones first. Since the FCU is treated like a firearm, it has to be shipped as such. Given that's the case it's really of no benefit to them to just do the FCUs. I know they can issue you a new serial number, but manufacturers do that when there is no other option. That isn't the case here. It still requires additional work with the ATF they wouldn't have to do for just a fix.

 

[Aguila Blanca]

Information available at this time (which, of course, is subject to confirmation by SIG on Monday) is that the corrective repair requires machining of both the slide and the receiver. So they can't just mail every owner a new fire control module.

 

[Brownstone322]

No one said they're simply gonna drop one in the mail; I am aware you're gonna have to send them the gun. But no one actually said they're actually gonna "fix" the fire-control units either. It'd make a lot more manufacturing sense to swap that part out (like a motherboard) than to actually repair it, even though it's the only regulated part.

This is an important distinction, because if they use new FCUs, then they can simply say, "any serial number higher than 'XXXXXXXX' is new-generation drop-safe," and that (the easy ability to verify what's "good" and what's not) is the only part I care about. (Oh, but it'd also mean faster turnaround for those who are affected, which is a good thing too.)

 

[TunnelRat]

I disagree with the notion that it would make more sense.

Also, see Aquila's comments. What's been said so far indicates they are going to repair existing pistols, nothing has indicated replacement of FCUs.

Oh, but it'd also mean faster turnaround for those who are affected, which is a good thing too.

I don't think this is true. As opposed to manufacturing just the small parts they'd now have to manufacture the new FCU bodies as well.

 

[Bartholomew Roberts]

Some interesting information on the new upgrade:
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2017/08/jeremy-s/drop-testing-upgraded-sig-p320/

They describe the modifications as "three commercial P320s with the reduced-mass trigger, sear, and striker plus the new sear cage and trigger disconnect had been installed."

Interesting quote here:

Nine drops right on the money, zero discharges. Additionally, zero striker releases. In TTAG’s testing and, from the data SIG showed us, in their testing, there were incidents where the striker slipped off the sear but the striker block safety was still in place and, therefore, the gun did not fire. With the upgrade parts, the incidents of striker release were significantly reduced.

So, it appears that in at least some cases previously, the striker was slipping off the sear but being stopped by the striker block. And in some cases the striker block wasn't stopping it. It sounds like trigger mass plays a role; but isn't the whole story.

 

[Spats McGee]

. . . .It sounds like trigger mass plays a role; but isn't the whole story.

This doesn't just fill me with confidence in the P320.

 

[Aguila Blanca]

Ain't nuthin' perfect.

How many years did we consider the 1911 to be safe, even carried in Condition 1? Colt started selling 1911s on the commercial market in 1911 or 1912. The Swarz firing pin safety mechanism wasn't introduced until the 1930s, it wasn'r ever used on all models, and it was dropped at the start of WW2 and never reintroduced.

The Series 80 firing pin safety system was introduced in the early 1980s, 70 years after the 1911 first went on sale, and even now the Series 80 system isn't used on all Colt models, and many makers of 1911s don't use it at all. For years there was an Internet article that purported to "prove" that a 1911 would not fire when dropped in its muzzle. That was accepted as gospel and cited by many people (including me), until a few years ago when Walt Kuleck and Drake Oldham performed their series of drop tests and showed that a 1911 WILL fire when dropped on its muzzle. Walt's testing convinced me to only carry 1911s with a Series 80 firing pin block.

But even that only addresses a muzzle drop. The 1911 trigger has mass. I wonder what would happen if a 1911 were dropped at the same (or similar) angle as the P320?

To me, what this situation demonstrates is that it's impossible (in practical terms) to test guns for every conceivable drop attitude. Am I going to take out a 1911 and start dropping it at different angles? Heck, no. Nor am I going to stop carrying and sell all my 1911s because of the remote, mathematical possibility that there may be some combination of angle and orientation under which even a 1911 with the Series 80 firing pin block might drop fire. I'm going to continue to carry 1911s, and I'm going to continue to do my best not to drop my firearms.

I don't have any quibble with the fact that SIG tested the P320 to the industry standard and stopped at that point. Testing costs money, and no company is in business to waste money. (Well, with the possible exception of Tesla.) If I have any issues with SIG, it's with the fact that they seem to have become aware of this as a problem early enough to have changed the design of the pistol they submitted to the military, yet they did NOT immediately change the pistols in commercial production or immediately issue a recall. They kept quiet until someone let the cat out of the bag, and now they've been caught with their fingers in the cookie jar.

That, to me, does not speak well of SIG. Not the fact that the issue arose, but the way they approach (not) addressing it.

 

[TunnelRat]

what this situation demonstrates is that it's impossible (in practical terms) to test guns for every conceivable drop attitude.

Certainly a completely exhaustive test would be extreme. However adding at least some kind of angle component to a test that doesn't include any would be a drastic improvement.

I'm going to continue to do my best not to drop my firearms.

This isn't so much directed at you, but I feel like this is a strawman argument. I don't know anyone that has advocated dropping pistols or not being careful with pistols. This event literally changes nothing for me in how I handle my P320 because my goal was always to not drop it. That doesn't mean this design can't be improved and signs so far are that it has been. If your point is this should remind us to be careful okay then.

Testing costs money, and no company is in business to waste money.

Recalls cost money too. I also think the word "waste" is a bit misplaced here.

 

[Independent George]

I think it's a little disingenuous to say that it only discharges at a 30 degree angle; it makes it sound like the 30 degrees was an arbitrary angle that couldn't have been forseen as something worth testing.

The reason the 30 degree angle matters for the 320 is that this is the most vertical angle available where the back of the slide is impacted directly. This is is the angle which maximizes force backwards on the trigger when the slide is struck. The problem with the testing protocols is that it was written to be generalized for all pistols, so they went with 'standard' angles (90 degrees, and then 45 degrees for the MHS trials) rather than intentionally try to cause a discharge. This also indicates the gun was also never dropped directly onto the slide at 90 degrees - something else I would have assumed was a standard test protocol, but evidently isn't.

I was initially inclined to give Sig a pass for not catching the defect when it passed the standard tests, but now I'm rethinking that. The people most qualified to figure out how to 'break' a gun are the people who designed it. If you're going to develop a novel firing mechanism, then it is absolutely your responsibility to try and break it rather than relying on standard tests. That's the thing with new designs - the failure points are very likely to be different from those on older designs.

Last, there is Sig's weaseling about with regard to both the Dallas PD, and the 'voluntary upgrade'. They CT officer was injured in January, and they evidently fixed the trigger in the MHS trials - yet when DPD contacted them, they insisted they were overreacting to standard boilerplate in the manual. Had Omaha Outdoors not posted that video, would Sig have ever even acknowledged the problem?

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

 

[reynolds357]

Weird thing. When I went to Police Academy, they told us to not drop our weapons. One female officer dropped hers and as a result failed firearms training and the Academy.

 

[TunnelRat]

No one is saying you should drop your weapons. Improving this design and good weapons handling are not mutually exclusive. You're pushing that strawman hard.

 

[Independent George]

When I was 16, I was taught not to get into head-on collisions. I'd still like my seatbelts and airbags to work.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

 

[Bartholomew Roberts]

Last, there is Sig's weaseling about with regard to both the Dallas PD, and the 'voluntary upgrade'. They CT officer was injured in January, and they evidently fixed the trigger in the MHS trials - yet when DPD contacted them, they insisted they were overreacting to standard boilerplate in the manual. Had Omaha Outdoors not posted that video, would Sig have ever even acknowledged the problem?

The thing that irks me about that is here in Texas, the lawyer would have to make a demand on SIG before he could sue under a tort claim (basically, he'd have to give SIG a chance to make it right before filing a lawsuit). I don't know Connecticut law; but on the same day that lawsuit got filed, SIG issued a press release stating there "There have been zero (0) reported drop-related P320 incidents in the U.S. commercial market." So, to me, it seems highly probable SIG received a demand letter advising them of the officer's drop-related injury and his belief it was due to a defect in the P320 before that press release or DPD memo came out.

So, SIG was either 1) completely unaware of a lawsuit being filed that same day; 2) aware of the lawsuit but weasel-worded the "U.S. commercial market" aspect; or 3) flat out lied.

 

[Aguila Blanca]

So, SIG was either 1) completely unaware of a lawsuit being filed that same day; 2) aware of the lawsuit but weasel-worded the "U.S. commercial market" aspect; or 3) flat out lied.

I wondered about that, too. My take was (and still is, until I see something to convince me otherwise) that SIG was weasel-wording, and pretending that firearms sold to police departments are somehow not in the "commercial" market.

 

[JohnKSa]

Weird thing. When I went to Police Academy, they told us to not drop our weapons. One female officer dropped hers and as a result failed firearms training and the Academy.

Let's take it on faith, for the sake of argument, that you learned your lesson in the Academy and there is no possibility of your EVER dropping a firearm. So this topic is not a concern for you, right?

Wrong.

This is still literally a matter of life and death, even for you. If the person shooting next to you at the range drops their firearm and it discharges with the muzzle pointing at you, all the training you received at the Academy won't help you a bit.

The people most qualified to figure out how to 'break' a gun are the people who designed it. If you're going to develop a novel firing mechanism, then it is absolutely your responsibility to try and break it rather than relying on standard tests. That's the thing with new designs - the failure points are very likely to be different from those on older designs.

This is a very important point.

Yes, testing to industry standards is great, but the testing itself is not the point. The point is to insure that the gun is safe in situations reasonably likely to be encountered in real life. Any designer worth his/her salt should have a good idea of what kinds of things are mostly likely to compromise the design and those things, in addition to the industry standard tests, should be tested in development and on the final production items.

 

[Tomac]

My son owns a SIG P320 Compact 9mm w/the APEX flat trigger.
After reading some of these threads about the P320 going off when dropped, I decided to test it myself on his.

I loaded up a 15rd mag w/14rds of 124gr FMJ topped off w/a snap cap. Chambered a separate snap cap before seating the loaded mag.
As suggested, I held the P320 hanging by the trigger guard w/the rear of the slide a measured 4' off the carpeted floor.

It required 17 careful attempts to get 10 solid hits on the rear of the slide as seen in the various posted videos.
Trigger was checked and reset after every attempt.
End result: At no time did the trigger move enough to drop the striker, it still required a full pull of the trigger to do so.

This could be due to using a Compact, or the APEX flat trigger, both or ???

I do not claim this was scientific testing, but thought I would post the result for those who might be interested.

Tomac

 

[TunnelRat]

Actually what you just did was test the Apex trigger, which is really good info. My guess is the reduced weight of the Apex kit also alleviated the issue. Good news for Apex. I do wonder if after the recall if their trigger will still work.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk