Dallas PD pulls the P320 from their Approved List.

I wonder when SIG received the demand letter or were served? I'm guessing they were aware they had a problem when JohnKSa made his first post.
Click to expand...

To me the timing of all of this is what gets interesting. Finding out when they knew they had a problem is something I'd like to know, but likely never will. The existence of the parts already to fix this issue and slated for use in the M17 has me thinking this issue was known for longer than the past month. I wonder if one reason they didn't go public was they have to produce the parts for the fix and making sure they had what they needed for the M17 was the first priority.
 
“Drop safe,” Cohen explained, “Those two words don’t exist together. No gun is drop safe. It’s a function of angle, height and surface. If you build it completely drop safe, you legitimize mishandling. Inherently guns are not meant to be dropped, and are unsafe when dropped.”
Click to expand...
Mr. Cohen is correct. There is probably no gun that is 100 percent drop-safe. For many years, it was almost universally accepted that a 1911 could not fire if dropped on its muzzle. There is still a description of tests purporting to "prove" this floating around the Internet. But then a few years ago two gentlemen named Walt Kuleck and Drake Oldham ran their own tests, and they found that 1911s (with no firing pin block) WILL fire when dropped on the muzzle -- and not necessarily from all that great a height. And they have posted videos of their testing.

So for anyone to state flat-out that any particular gun "can't" fire when dropped is, IMHO, rather foolish. One might argue that if SIG knew this was an issue early enough to have changed the trigger design on the military M17, they should have made the change on the commercial pistol as well. On the other hand, look how long it took Remington to even acknowledge the issue with their infamous trigger problem. SIG's response time is light years ahead of Remington's.
 
I think it's completely fair to point out that no firearm is completely drop proof. I also think that the current drop tests only testing a perfectly parallel or perfectly parallel drop with the ground is probably too simplistic. Again, how many different angles do you have to cover though? They pointed out the sheer number of combinations in that article from Soldier Systems. Still I think even SIG recognizes that the current failure potential with the P320 warrants fixing and they are doing so.
 
I disagree about legitimizing mishandling.

The gun should be drop safe within reason.. assuming no parts are damaged or broken.

I don't expect the gun to take super human abuse.. after all eventually the gun just breaks apart if, say I throw it off a building.

But I'd say anything less then being safe dropped from 6ft at any angle is not drop safe, and not onto some damn rubber mate.. I rarely remember to bring one with me. :rolleyes:
 
I don't know about any angle; but it seems like that particular angle is easy enough to achieve. As the TTAG guys pointed out, they didn't need a fixture to hold that angle, it just came natural.

I'm betting actual drops rarely involve a pistol perfectly parallel to the ground and honestly, I'm a bit more surprised that muzzle up with a slight tilt isn't part of the test routine.

After all, all the weight is in the mag, so it isn't like that drop is unrealistic or some bizarre anomaly.
 
I don't know about any angle...
Click to expand...
While I think it's not possible to do an exhaustive drop test from every angle, someone who understands the design should be able to provide valuable insight into the drop testing methodology.

Frankly, muzzle down and muzzle up impacting on the slide are the two things I would try FIRST on any striker fired gun. I'm surprised that the P320 isn't drop safe. I'm dumbfounded that it turned out the failure mode was dropping the gun so that it hits on the rear of the slide. It's hard for me to imagine that wasn't one of the things that SIG tested first.

Then again, it's entirely possible that they did test that thoroughly in the initial design and just didn't realize that the change to the trigger was sufficient to change how the system reacts to inertia.
 
Frankly, muzzle down and muzzle up impacting on the slide are the two things I would try FIRST on any striker fired gun. I'm surprised that the P320 isn't drop safe. I'm dumbfounded that it turned out the failure mode was dropping the gun so that it hits on the rear of the slide. It's hard for me to imagine that wasn't one of the things that SIG tested first.
Click to expand...

So I think you're missing something. The P320 does pass if dropped perfectly muzzle up. This is because the beavertail absorbs some of the impact. The failure was when it was dropped at enough of an angle that the slide and the beavertail both impact at the same time (this is shown in the video). This is actually ~30 degrees off of muzzle up. No doubt it's perfectly feasible, but from what I'm reading the standard drop tests are only muzzle up and muzzle parallel to the floor. The standard drop tests don't cover any other angles.
 
TunnelRat said:
but from what I'm reading the standard drop tests are only muzzle up and muzzle parallel to the floor. The standard drop tests don't cover any other angles.
Click to expand...
That's the way I understood it as well, further more I understood it that the angle parrellel to the ground does not specify if it should land on the left or right side of the gun flat, or upside down (top of slide) or at some angle.

Just as long it passes any drop parallel seems to be good enough..

oh and that damn rubber mat.

It just seems like the test is too easy to pass.
 
So I think you're missing something. The P320 does pass if dropped perfectly muzzle up. This is because the beavertail absorbs some of the impact.
Click to expand...
Well, you are correct that something is being missed. :D

"Frankly, muzzle down and muzzle up impacting on the slide are the two things I would try FIRST on any striker fired gun. I'm surprised that the P320 isn't drop safe. I'm dumbfounded that it turned out the failure mode was dropping the gun so that it hits on the rear of the slide."
The standard drop tests don't cover any other angles.
Click to expand...
And that seems like a bad idea to me.
 
No I read and understood your post. But in order for the slide to be impacted in a muzzle up drop the pistol has to be at an angle because of the beavertail. This is why the standard tests, which do include a muzzle up drop, don't show the problem. I think the slide actually does impact the ground in the standard tests, but it does so after the beaver tail has absorbed much of the impact. The trick is the slide being impacted at the moment the pistol contacts the ground, not just during the drop. That's what I was pointing out.



And that seems like a bad idea to me.
Click to expand...



I don't think anyone is challenging that now.
 
Last edited:
The trick is the slide being impacted at the moment the pistol contacts the ground, not just during the drop. That's what I was pointing out.
Click to expand...
I understood that when I posted and I understood what you meant when you responded. I thought I was being very clear in my post, but apparently I was not.
No I read and understood your post.
Click to expand...
Not the way I intended it to be understood.

I did not intend to imply "perfectly muzzle up" when I posted "dropping the gun so that it hits on the rear of the slide".

I did not intend to imply "muzzle up impacting on the beavertail" when I said "muzzle up impacting on the slide".
I think the slide actually does impact the ground in the standard tests...
Click to expand...
It very likely does. I thought that when I said "hits on the rear of the slide" and "impacting on the slide" it would be clear that the slide was what was hitting/impacting first.

Sorry for the confusion.
 
You certainly don't have to apologize. My goal was merely to clarify for anyone reading how the original muzzle up tests failed to show a discharge whereas this second test did. Until I watched the video I was a bit confused myself and the narration in the video helped a lot so I tried to do the same here. Sometimes I tend to beat the horse a bit in an effort to clarify things [emoji5]. Instead of saying "I think you missed something" I should have said "I think it's worth pointing out."


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
gc70 said:
Could you provide a link or other reference to what Bruce wrote.
Click to expand...
I have shot Sigs for a long time and have had Gray Guns pistols in the past. I have shot with guys who were members of Team Sig at one time or another. Bruce is an honorable man of his word. I think that in this instance he is wrong but that does not change my opinion of the man. We all make mistakes. I do not believe there was any ill intention or cover up on his part. It would just not be consistent with every interaction I have ever had with him.

Here is what he said on the Sigforum:

posted August 01, 2017 01:16 AM

Originally posted by Grayguns:
Friends,

Nothing being discussed here appears to be based in fact from what my informed sources tell us. I can't go into details, but I can comment on some of what's been "reported".

I've personally drop-tested a bunch of P320's in various conditions and in excess of ANSI/SAAMI protocol, and cannot get them to fail.

The so-called P320 drop test video referenced by many is an outright fraud intended to damage SIG SAUER and the P320, in my opinion. I can perhaps replicate what it portrays, only by removing a bunch of springs and the striker lock first. I defy the makers of that video to come forth and prove they can make a stock P320 fire like that in my presence, under controlled conditions. They can't.

In any event I predict this decision by someone in DPD will not pan out to be objectively reasonable or justifiable, and will be reversed.

-Bruce
Click to expand...

posted August 05, 2017 03:08 PM

Originally posted by Grayguns:
I am here to tell you that there is no safety issues with the P320.

There was no incident, ND, or failure of a P320 of any sort that prompted the memo by Lt. Williamson.

DPD does not have any in their inventory, has never tested it, has only a couple officers carrying it so far, and none have had any issues.

The memo was simply addressing some outdated legacy language that inexplicably made it's way into one of the P320 owner's manuals. In doing due diligence just as I would have, this was questioned, SIG responded to clarify, and it was over.

All reports and online discussions to follow trace back to an article published by gunmagwarehouse.com. There was a headline stating "SIG SAUER P320 Fails Drop Test." In the article, the author reports that an anonymous reliable source within DPD stated that a P320 ND'd during training, among other inflammatory implications that proved not to be true.

I reached out, speaking for myself and Grayguns Inc., to this author on Tuesday to offer factual, verifiable information or an interview, but was rebuffed. This erroneous story was then reposted and repeated widely.

I and others knew this entire thing was bull-CENSORED--CENSORED--CENSORED--CENSORED- from the start, but the author of this hyped up and apparently fabricated non-story from an "anonymous source" was not interested in hearing verifiable information, on the record.

And, for that record, there has never been a verified instance of any P320 firing when dropped out of the nearly 350,000 sold to date, much less a factory-spec pistol.

I have looked for such reports and followed up on everything I find, for three solud years. It hasn't happened.

The recent YouTube video pupirtibg to show a "P320 drop test" failure is an obvious fake.

I have personally bounced these puppies off of everything I can find. No go bang, ever.

This crap needs to be dismissed. The P320 is safe.

-Bruce
Click to expand...

These were both before the most recent TTAG video was uploaded but IIRC after the Omaha Outdoors video. For me the TTAG video is much more damaging because it was a new out of the box gun. It has not been subjected to the same tests and abuse the Omaha Outdoors guns had.

After that I believe Bruce goes silent. Sig clearly knew about this prior to the announcement because the 3 upgrades that the pistols will receive are built into the M17 and the newly release X5. It is pure speculation but the CT officers lawsuit and then the DPD Internet chatter has prompted them to act sooner rather than later.

This is a CYA move to get ahead of any other possible ADs. The only question I have for Bruce Gray is how is custom P320 trigger is effected by the DEFECT, and it is clearly a DEFECT. I believe that is why he is now silent on the issue because he most likely is not 100% sure anymore.

TTAG for one reason or another has a direct line to Sig. They have been "chosen" to get exclusive info prior to other outlets or the general public. One instructor I know stated that when he shot with Team Sig TTAG would post Team Sig will be shooting at such and such event in the future before he was told he would be shooting at that future event. In the past much of the info they have put out on new product etc came from Sig directly before it went out to others.

I personally am disappointed once again by Sig and its "new" products. I waited a decent amount of time before I got my P320 in 45 ACP after being burned by a P250, watched the P238 go through beta testing by the consumer etc...
 
FWIW Omaha Outdoors tested 4 P320s. Some of those had gone through their torture testing, but not all. One that had not was also able to discharge when dropped. I don't remember the exact numbers but I believe it states in the article and the video.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
There were four guns, three of which were torture tested. The only one to pass had been torture tested before - the 'fresh' gun (not sure if it was NIB or just not tested) had failed.

I will bet anything that they're going to settle the CT case with an NDA, because I suspect that they are desperate to avoid discovery at this point.


Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk
 
So apparently the CT officer's accidental discharge happened on January 5, 2017. He filed suit on August 4, 2017. I'm having a hard time believing that SIG wasn't aware there had been reports of an accidental discharge involving the P320 when the DPD memo came out.

ETA:
SIG Arms said:
Newington, NH (August 4, 2017) – In response to social media rumors questioning the safety of the P320 pistol, a variant of which was selected by the U.S. government as the U.S. Army’s Modular Handgun System (MHS), SIG SAUER, Inc. has full confidence in the reliability, durability and safety of its striker-fired handgun platform. There have been zero (0) reported drop-related P320 incidents in the U.S. commercial market, with hundreds of thousands of guns delivered to date.
Click to expand...

Same day the CT officer files his lawsuit, they release that statement.

I can't imagine what would make them think slow-walking a recall for a defective trigger would be a good idea?
 
Once again, it's the coverup and not the crime.

I would not have faulted SIG for not catching a defect that passes an industry standard drop test. Had they offered a recall/upgrade when they discovered the problem, they would be fine.

Instead, they kept it buried until they got caught, then issued the typical corporate BS speak about a 'voluntary upgrade'.

Compare and contrast this behavior with Ruger issuing an immediate recall for an obscure issue with the Mark IV.


Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top