I was cruising my LGS yesterday looking at various pistols, and one of my buddies who works there said, "this is what you need." It was a used P320 compact in .357 Sig. I have a number of pistols chambered in this caliber, including a P250. Since it was a used gun, my friend let me test fire it, and I was absolutely amazed at how this gun mitigates the recoil of this somewhat snappy round. The gun has a great trigger in my estimation, and is very ergonomic. It's going home with me tomorrow.
SigP320
- Thread starter cmdc
- Start date
- Status
railroader
New member
Nice. I have a 320 compact in 9mm and handles recoil very well too. Now I'm thinking I need some Dawson sights on it. 
Here is the thing I don't understand about the SIG P320. Yes, the trigger is great, but is it safe for carry?
The P320 trigger I tried recently seemed to have lower pull weight and shorter travel distance than the trigger on one of my Browning Hi Powers (which has a lightly customized trigger with about 6 lbs. pull weight)! And the BHP is a single action-only pistol that is carried cocked-and-locked!
To me, carrying the P320 would be akin to carrying a BHP with a lighter, shorter trigger pull with no safety on.
Originally when pistols like Glock and Kahr came out, the rationale seemed to be that the manual of arms was akin to that of a very slick double action revolver. Ok, fine enough (I actually think that the SIG P250 fits that bill very well - its trigger feels like a VERY smoothed out double action revolver trigger). But now we are getting striker-fired guns like SIG P320 that no longer even makes a pretense of replicating the double action revolver manual arms. These guns are basically single action only guns with no safety!
The P320 trigger I tried recently seemed to have lower pull weight and shorter travel distance than the trigger on one of my Browning Hi Powers (which has a lightly customized trigger with about 6 lbs. pull weight)! And the BHP is a single action-only pistol that is carried cocked-and-locked!
To me, carrying the P320 would be akin to carrying a BHP with a lighter, shorter trigger pull with no safety on.
Originally when pistols like Glock and Kahr came out, the rationale seemed to be that the manual of arms was akin to that of a very slick double action revolver. Ok, fine enough (I actually think that the SIG P250 fits that bill very well - its trigger feels like a VERY smoothed out double action revolver trigger). But now we are getting striker-fired guns like SIG P320 that no longer even makes a pretense of replicating the double action revolver manual arms. These guns are basically single action only guns with no safety!
That's an option for whomever wants it. I used to carry unchambered just because that's how the Army taught me to do it. I later began carrying chambered, but recently had a fouling issue while re-holstering with the Sig p320c which has me considering going back to carrying unchambered.
When Sig launched the 320 they promised a frame-mounted saftey option and a .45cal X-Change kit. I'm interested in both but have yet to see either.
Last edited:
The lack of the 45 exchange kit has been beat to death. It ain't coming. Get over it.Blackbook said:
I hadn't heard about the safety option but I wouldn't be holding your breath for that either. They seem to be selling all they can make of the other and I think most people wanting striker don't want the external safety.
I'm still contemplating a 45 compact as it seems to be a great option for 45, perhaps comparable only to the Glock 30 in terms of price and "features" (and unequaled in the modularity aspect), and I don't care about exchanging to 9/40/357 anyway.
marine6680
New member
They have a 45 version... But compilation in the design means no converting a 9mm into a 45... 45 to 9mm is likely possible.
The trigger pull on my 320 was around 7lb out of the box, and others I have tried are similar. It feels lighter than that when pull the trigger though.
Even though the trigger pull is shorter than a revolver... The pull is much longer than a SA.
While most modern SA pistols are drop safe, and safe from ND should the hammer fall without a trigger pull, and carry of a modern SA with the safety off is probably safe in regards to the actual carry part. (holstering and drawing are outside that statement) Modern striker pistols have advantages that improves safety over such a scenario.
Most hammer SA pistols could have a hammer fall and no bang, as there is no safety to prevent the sear from tripping, only a safety to prevent the firing pin from hitting the primer.
Many strikers are designed in a way to not allow the striker to slip from the sear in the first place. In a Glock for instance, it is physically impossible for the trigger bar to move down away from the striker when the trigger is at rest, and for a portion on the pull.
It basically boils down to very different action types and designs. So for the most part, a striker is just as safe as any other pistol, to carry.
Holstering the pistol is another matter, and there is a bit more risk there if you do not pay due attention to the act.
The trigger pull on my 320 was around 7lb out of the box, and others I have tried are similar. It feels lighter than that when pull the trigger though.
Even though the trigger pull is shorter than a revolver... The pull is much longer than a SA.
While most modern SA pistols are drop safe, and safe from ND should the hammer fall without a trigger pull, and carry of a modern SA with the safety off is probably safe in regards to the actual carry part. (holstering and drawing are outside that statement) Modern striker pistols have advantages that improves safety over such a scenario.
Most hammer SA pistols could have a hammer fall and no bang, as there is no safety to prevent the sear from tripping, only a safety to prevent the firing pin from hitting the primer.
Many strikers are designed in a way to not allow the striker to slip from the sear in the first place. In a Glock for instance, it is physically impossible for the trigger bar to move down away from the striker when the trigger is at rest, and for a portion on the pull.
It basically boils down to very different action types and designs. So for the most part, a striker is just as safe as any other pistol, to carry.
Holstering the pistol is another matter, and there is a bit more risk there if you do not pay due attention to the act.
Last edited:
Independent George
New member
I imagine the safety version is coming for no other reason than the fact that it expands their reach into the LE market; I believe there quite a few local departments have regs on the books which require a manual safety.
I personally won't carry a striker with that kind of short trigger for the reasons stated above, but plenty of people have done so safely for decades. Coopers rules 2 and 3 (confusingly synonomous with NRA rules 1 and 2) and an internal FPB pretty much cover safe handling issues associated with it.
It comes down to individual choice. DA requires extra training to shoot accurately, SA requires extra training to always disengage the safety, strikers require extra training to safely handle - in the end, it's still generally the handler that is the primary point of failure, not the gun. It's not my place to judge as long as you're carrying safely (and the same holds true the other way around, too).
I personally won't carry a striker with that kind of short trigger for the reasons stated above, but plenty of people have done so safely for decades. Coopers rules 2 and 3 (confusingly synonomous with NRA rules 1 and 2) and an internal FPB pretty much cover safe handling issues associated with it.
It comes down to individual choice. DA requires extra training to shoot accurately, SA requires extra training to always disengage the safety, strikers require extra training to safely handle - in the end, it's still generally the handler that is the primary point of failure, not the gun. It's not my place to judge as long as you're carrying safely (and the same holds true the other way around, too).
Really, 'cuz I haven't seen anything on it. I've only even owned a Sig for 2 months.
News to me.
Take your aditude to someone who gives a crap.
Blackbook: Oops I see I left my smiley off the first post. Wasn't trying to be a jerk. Really. My apologies. 
You might be interested in joining sigforum.com and or sigtalk.com. There has been a lot of talk and angst about the lack of the 45 exchange kit, when Sig knew about it, how badly they strung everybody along about it, etc. Some folks are really ticked off about it, some just shrug their shoulders. At any rate there do appear to be real physical, technical issues why they were not able to make it work and it does not appear likely at this point for 9/40/357/45 to be interchangeable in the P320 platform
You might be interested in joining sigforum.com and or sigtalk.com. There has been a lot of talk and angst about the lack of the 45 exchange kit, when Sig knew about it, how badly they strung everybody along about it, etc. Some folks are really ticked off about it, some just shrug their shoulders. At any rate there do appear to be real physical, technical issues why they were not able to make it work and it does not appear likely at this point for 9/40/357/45 to be interchangeable in the P320 platform
rt11002003
New member
I've been tempted by by the new HK VP9 and the SIG p320, but haven't swallowed the hook, yet. I carry with one in the chamber, my two favorite carry guns are the HK p7m8 and the Kimber SOLO, both 9mm.
The p7 doesn't use a safety; the gun isn't cocked until the squeeze handle is pressed. One can squeeze the handle, followed by squeezing the trigger, very similar to DA, about the same response time. Keeping the squeeze handle back keeps the gun cocked, similar to a SA. Release the handle and the gun is safe, again. Two drawbacks, they are expensive and heavy.
The SOLO has a safety and the longest trigger pull I've ever encountered. Should I get clumsy with handling the SOLO and disengage the safety, it's pretty unlikely I'd pull that trigger by accident. Granted it's a slow process.
The size and weight of the gun are pluses. They're expensive and require 147 gr ammo.
Both are highly accurate with manageable recoil for a quick second shot if needed.
Could the p320, or the VP9 do as well, all around? Don't know.
The p7 doesn't use a safety; the gun isn't cocked until the squeeze handle is pressed. One can squeeze the handle, followed by squeezing the trigger, very similar to DA, about the same response time. Keeping the squeeze handle back keeps the gun cocked, similar to a SA. Release the handle and the gun is safe, again. Two drawbacks, they are expensive and heavy.
The SOLO has a safety and the longest trigger pull I've ever encountered. Should I get clumsy with handling the SOLO and disengage the safety, it's pretty unlikely I'd pull that trigger by accident. Granted it's a slow process.
The size and weight of the gun are pluses. They're expensive and require 147 gr ammo.
Both are highly accurate with manageable recoil for a quick second shot if needed.
Could the p320, or the VP9 do as well, all around? Don't know.
When I questioned earlier whether P320 were safe for carry, I meant the possibility of unintentional discharge during re-holstering or in any other circumstance in which there may be an accidental protrusion of something into the trigger guard. Considering how light, and more saliently, how short the trigger travel is, I think with a gun such as P320, the margin of error is rather small.
Again, how many of you would carry/holster a single action-only pistol with the safety off? Or a DA/SA gun with the hammer cocked?
I think Glocks and M&Ps are at the outer edge of the supposed duplication of the double action revolver manual of arms, but P320 is well beyond that line. It's basically a single action, no safety semi-auto pistol.
Again, how many of you would carry/holster a single action-only pistol with the safety off? Or a DA/SA gun with the hammer cocked?
I think Glocks and M&Ps are at the outer edge of the supposed duplication of the double action revolver manual of arms, but P320 is well beyond that line. It's basically a single action, no safety semi-auto pistol.
LockedBreech
New member
If I'm not mistaken, M&P and XD, like the 320, use fully tensioned strikers, and the trigger weight on the 320 is around 5.5 pounds.
In other words, it's absolutely as safe as the M&P / XD and arguably as safe as the Glock minus the 2% of the striker that is partially tensioned.
Edit: Actually, per Sig's own website the 320 is partially tensioned. So identical manual of arms to Glock. Not sure what the safety concern is.
Source: http://www.sigsauer.com/CatalogProductList/pistols-p320.aspx
"With a partially pretensioned striker (emphasis added), the P320 has a short, crisp trigger pull with a quick, pronounced reset right out-of-the-box."
In other words, it's absolutely as safe as the M&P / XD and arguably as safe as the Glock minus the 2% of the striker that is partially tensioned.
Edit: Actually, per Sig's own website the 320 is partially tensioned. So identical manual of arms to Glock. Not sure what the safety concern is.
Source: http://www.sigsauer.com/CatalogProductList/pistols-p320.aspx
"With a partially pretensioned striker (emphasis added), the P320 has a short, crisp trigger pull with a quick, pronounced reset right out-of-the-box."
LockedBreech
New member
I don't own an XD, but I own an M&P and two Glocks, and the trigger travel on both is fairly short. I think they're probably pretty much equivalent. Of course I haven't pulled a 320 trigger myself, so who knows.
They're all fine if you mind trigger discipline, I've never had an ND, knock on wood.
They're all fine if you mind trigger discipline, I've never had an ND, knock on wood.
Fouling is a concern for every gun.
- Status