SIG Sauer: The Break Up. Updates.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Again, you didn't read. It went to SIG when Bruce Gray took it to SIG. They still said "no".
Click to expand...

I did read. And I noted that you did not send it directly to SIG. There was a third party involved. You and I differ on the expectation that a third party actually improved the situation.
 
Do you really think that given the photos they saw, the times they spoke to me, the emails I've sent, and everything else. That Bruce Gray would have less pull than me in getting the firearm situation taken care of? Especially after taking it over there himself. Where my SN is recorded and they are well aware of my situation. They saw it first hand and still declined.
 
Do you really think that given the photos they saw, the times they spoke to me, the emails I've sent, and everything else. That Bruce Gray would have less pull than me in getting the firearm situation taken care of? Especially after taking it over there himself. Where my SN is recorded and they are well aware of my situation. They saw it first hand and still declined.
Click to expand...

The simple answer: Yes

The more complex answer: Somewhere in the process your relationship with SIG became adversarial. You would point out it was their inability to see the pictures in e-mail and the request for you to send it in and pay the $55 inspection fee. They would say it was your declining to pay the $55 fee (correct me if I am wrong on that one). Yes I get the customer service reps on their end are supposed to be the professionals and prevent such an occurrence - it is literally what they are paid to do and is in the job title. I don't think SIG ever had any thought of repairing this at no charge and, in hindsight, the best outcome you could have hoped for was a reduced repair cost (or discount on replacement).

Any competent premium product provider understand that, even hidden in all the technical statements of why a product is "better", paying hundreds or thousands of dollars more for something than another similar product is an emotional decision. You have to work to keep your customers emotions positive in regards to your company. Truth be told even some non-premium companies understand this well.

Once Mr. Gray was involved and standing in front of them it is easy to take emotion out of it. While I am sure that Mr. Gray did what he could for you he simply lacks the emotional investment and lacks a great response to a SIG rep saying "hey its not under the terms of warranty". His only response is "well he is not going to like that." After all it is in Mr. Gray's interest to maintain a working relationship with SIG.

I get your annoyance. I get that you really expected SIG, a company that you had heralded and helped sell product, to really step up. Had they you would have likely put it in your memory bank and reported to us how SIG had gone beyond what they had to do. I don't think they ever intended to warranty this 100% but I wonder if, given a slightly different set of circumstances, they would have still done something.

Somewhere and somehow this has become a two possible outcome scenario: SIG stands up, warranties it fully, and you are pleased that they went above and beyond (well would have been pleased I don't know anymore) OR SIG does nothing and you are where you are now. There were, and possibly are, other possible outcomes. Perhaps you never expected them to cover it fully and they misconstrued the discussion.
 
There is another interesting thing. I once talked to a regional manager at a major European car company. He told me that he cared about the original purchaser and the resale of the vehicle when that owner sold it. After that he was of the opinion you had not purchased the car from them (you were not actually their customer) and it was not their problem past the strict written warranty (no Goodwill consideration for customers who had purchased used). While I was heavily concerned about the statement and it sticks with me he was not entirely wrong.

Perhaps SIG has adopted a similar philosophy. To me that would be a mistake as most gun owners that I know (especially those buying SIGs) will buy far more firearms than cars in a lifetime.

EDIT: We are sliding back towards the original discussion which was not the OPs intent. I'm not sure where it goes from here but at this point I don't see the avenue SIG has for approaching the situation again. Of course there is a lot of speculation on my part about what happened.
 
Last edited:
They didn't want to see it personally and never asked to. Their response to the photos they "did" or "didn't" get (we can never know the truth) was that it's a 6 year old gun and I'm not the 1st owner. They stuck with it.

I sent it to Gray.

I called them back after Gray told me what he found. (It's still with Bruce Gray)

They said to send it in then for $55. But there's nothing they can do. (See Above) & (It's still at Bruce Gray's)

I said he already saw it. (It's still with him.)

They said to sell it for parts and there's nothing they can do.

He said he was going over there anyways and offered to take it. I said yes.

He did.

Nothing happened. Answer didn't change.




Everyone needs to stop attempting to justify this factory defect as "ok" because it's not.


And attempting to poke holes in my story that has been repeated in 2 threads and over several comments already is getting a little redundant. I implore you: Read. Every. Single. Comment. I've written.
 
Now THAT'S interesting.

I wonder if the buyer has read this thread.
If sold out of GGI, I wonder what Mr G told him.
If sold by you, what did you tell him?

If fully informed, I wonder what the buyer intends.
 
I really do not understand why the OP has been attacked for telling his experience with a company like many have done on this forum before. I suspect if the company he was talking about were Taurus he would be lauded for giving another reason to hate an already hated on company. That said, I do not think that Sig should have to fix it. It may be their shoddy work that caused it, but that is the risk taken when buying a gun used. I admittedly did not read the first thread and this could have been covered there, but the person I would look at is the one it was bought from. Perhaps they may have noticed a really early sign of the issue and tried to dump it before it was so noticeable it effected the price.
 
Hey Smith, thank you for you unbiased support for me as a person. Even though we disagree on what SIG should do. I feel they should do something and I left that door open to them to decide what. I didn't expect absolutely nothing though.

Anyways, I cannot check with person I bought it from because I bought it off Shoot Straight. A chain of gun stores here in Florida.
 
Slide is out of spec. Frame is damaged.
Click to expand...

You're at least the second owner, right?

... For the lifetime of the original purchaser, SIG SAUER agrees to correct any defect in the firearm for the original purchaser ...
Click to expand...

... this limited warranty confers the right ... exclusively upon the original purchaser, which right is not transferable to any other person.
Click to expand...

Like it or not, if you're not the original purchaser, the company's response seems within accordance to their stated limited warranty. Buyer beware, as the saying goes.

Life's too short to get mired down in being so terribly dissatisfied with any particular firearm which may have a problem that can't be rectified.

Certainly not saying a supposed factory machining defect is "okay", but if you're not the original owner, and their limited warranty explicitly states it's not applicable & transferable to any subsequent owner, is it really worth getting so upset?

If the manufacturer recommends selling it for parts, it's a telling point. Consider their advice and move on.

In the greater picture, an occasional defect which slips by the QC process doesn't mean it's a common thing. Nor ought it to mean the rest of the products are to be avoided. Things like this happen in the real world of manufacturing.

You see enough firearms come through, you're probably going to see one with a manufacturing defect that escaped notice.

If you're the original owner, you can reasonably expect a specific limited warranty and customer service practices to help you.

You're the subsequent owner of what's now legally considered to be a "used" firearm, and the limited warranty specifically states it's not transferable to anyone other then the original owner?

Well, you can hope for the company to make an exception, but it's not like they're required to do so, right?

Move on. Don't invest any more emotional turmoil. Why subject yourself to it?
 
What i was looking for from Sig Sauer, was this is what we offer you.
It's a used Sig handgun you bought but it's damaged, no matter how it became damaged this is what we offer.
But Sig Sauer just offered nothing just said it is not covered by any type of Sig Sauer Warranty.
 
For the price, Sig's CS should be one of the best in the industry. If they are betting on the " Navy Seals use our guns" reputation to sustain them in a future market, good luck.
 
On the other hand, I have seen many Internet Reports of "good customer service" which amounted to a willingness to deliver a defective product combined with smooth talk to make you feel like they are doing you a favor to fix it.

I hope the new owner gets good service from the OP's dud.
 
So while I respect that you certainly have a right to your opinion on this matter, people that disagree with you also have a right to those opinions and to express those opinions. I haven't seen what I would call poking holes, more people trying to be clear. Some of the details here are split up among two threads and multiple comments on those threads. Could people read better? Sure, but this is an internet forum not a court case. Attention is what it is.

At this point you have your answer from SIG, and you know what your options are on the selling front. I'm not sure what more you can update us on. While I don't think you're beating this to death as was said above, at some point you have to move on.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Everything you said, goes without saying. Didn't think it needed saying lol...

I'm updating! If someone buys it, wants to attempt to fix it, run it till failure, shoot it, etc. I don't know.

Maybe I should put it for sale here? Auction style lol Start the bidding at $0.99 :D
 
Everything you said, goes without saying. Didn't think it needed saying lol...

I'm updating! If someone buys it, wants to attempt to fix it, run it till failure, shoot it, etc. I don't know.

Maybe I should put it for sale here? Auction style lol Start the bidding at $0.99
Click to expand...

One could not argue that those following the thread are not informed. I am curious as to what it is worth in current disclosed condition. I would like to see what it is worth myself.
 
Maybe a gunbroker auction? I can't imagine the amount of questions I'd be getting emailed with.. If it's not being accepted here, I don't want to imagine how it'd be on there. Maybe I should just weld it shut and keep it as a paperweight? :D
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top