SigP320

[TunnelRat]

So my earlier impression was correct with at least these "samples"

This is a fair point. If the pistols you have give those readings I can't really discredit that. I would point out the notable difference you can get in trigger weight readings depending on where on the trigger face you place the gauge for the Glock (I find the P320 flat faced trigger easier to get consistent readings with). However your point is the relative difference between the pistols, I get that.

Compared to the Glock, the P320 trigger is lighter, has a shorter travel arc, and doesn't have a trigger safety that offers enhanced protection against snagging the trigger and creating an unintentional discharge.

I suppose one can make the case that both are "safe enough," but it is plainly untrue that they are "equally safe," that is, offer the same level of safety. They do not.

When it comes to drawing a conclusion I still don't think you can ignore the manufacturer listed trigger weights (what you said about samples is true as my own experimentation came to the opposite conclusion regarding trigger weight). There's also the notion that 3-4 mm is a significant difference in the amount of trigger travel (did you ever test if the trigger could be pulled from the side?). Is it? It might be, but I'm not sure how much that would come into play in terms of something snagging the trigger while holstering. While I get what you and John are saying regards to the tab (I actually do think it's a plus for the Glock), your claim that it will prevent unintended discharges is sort of at odds with the example you brought up where the negligent discharge still happened with a Glock.

On a theoretical level I would probably agree with you in terms of safety, but on a practical level I am not sure I would. If caution and diligence are exercised it should really be a moot point. I get that this explanation is overplayed in general and there's the counter that all humans are fallible, but in regards to holsters or objects in holsters snagging triggers user proficiency is really likely more relevant than the trigger design itself, nor is it a hard behavior to learn. I, loads of members here, and countless more people in the real world haven't had a negligent discharge while holstering.

I would be really interested in a series of tests though in regards to the trigger tab. You wouldn't need live ammo either, just to see if the striker is released (should be both audible as well as the trigger will be dead).

 

[JohnKSa]

On a theoretical level I would probably agree with you in terms of safety were what you said generally true, but on a practical level I am not sure I would.

I tend to agree. In my opinion, relying on a few millimeters of trigger travel and a pound or two of additional pull weight to provide additional safety isn't a practical solution even if there's a theoretical difference

Louis Awerbuck made the following comment in the January 2012 issue of SWAT Magazine in his Training & Tactics Column.

"The reasoning behind these theories is that it takes much more trigger pressure to unintentionally discharge the weapon because of the longer trigger stroke and poundage.

The fallacies of this theory are... If you screw up with your finger on the trigger when it should be positioned elsewhere, the weapon will fire, irrespective of the trigger pull weight."​

But what about trigger snags? For one thing they are a very uncommon cause of unintentional discharges. For another, there are ways to prevent them without trigger safeties--a holster that covers the trigger is critical for this general class of firearm. But if a person still feels that trigger snags are still a major concern, for whatever reason, then that person might be better served by sticking to guns that are so equipped. Fortunately in this day and age, the selection of firearms that are available is truly impressive.

 

[JJNA]

your claim that it will prevent unintended discharges is sort of at odds with the example you brought up where the negligent discharge still happened with a Glock.

Again, stop making up a straw man. I never stated that the Glock trigger safety would "prevent unintended discharges..." merely that it provides an enhanced level of protection against unintended protrusions into trigger guard compared to plain triggers (holding all other variables constant, I should add).

Just how much enhanced is a debatable point, which I never argued.

No safety ever prevents anything. Safeties, in my mind, are redundancies of error-toleration that are there "just in case." I have never believed in anything ever being completely safe (shooting is a "dangerous" activity to begin with...).

In the case of my police officer acquaintance, he is actually a rather accomplished firearms trainer. That particular instance I relayed is the only unintentional discharge he has ever had in his life (and probably the last). It was a confluence of a lot of unusual circumstances. I don't want to go into detail, but some of the factors that contributed were 1) unusual fatigue level due to unfortunate series of circumstances, 2) quite bad weather that necessitated a jacket change (into a new one that he had never worn before; he normally draw-tests every piece of kit) and the jacket had small metal bars/tabs tied to cords at the bottom with which he was unfamiliar, and 3) extremely stressful series of events beforehand.

Now, people can Monday morning-quarterback and parrot all kinds of unsolicited basic information about proper holstering, but just as "fatigue can make cowards of us all," unusual and stressful circumstances can reduce even the best trained to less than perfect.

He is A LOT more vigilant about re-holstering since the incident, and so am I.

But this episode has no bearing on whether or not Glock and Sig P320 has the same level of error-toleration regarding trigger snags. Although one can debate about how much less, my simple experiments show that the Sig P320 has even lower error-toleration regarding this issue than the Glock does. Maybe the difference is marginal and "theoretical" and may not make much difference in real life, but it's there.

I still don't think you can ignore the manufacturer listed trigger weights

Glock claims the Glock 42 has 5.5 lbs. of trigger pull weight on its website (identical to all other "regular" Glocks). Plainly inaccurate with mine and yours. I know quite a few folks who bought Glock 42 with me, and not one has a trigger pull weight close to 5.5 lbs. Perhaps there are some with that weight out there, but they don't seem common. On this score, at least Sig is honest enough to state a range of 5.5-7.5 lbs.

 

[JJNA]

For another, there are ways to prevent them without trigger safeties--a holster that covers the trigger is critical for this general class of firearm.

Does anyone seriously use a holster that does not cover the trigger?

But if a person still feels that trigger snags are still a major concern, for whatever reason, then that person might be better served by sticking to guns that are so equipped. Fortunately in this day and age, the selection of firearms that are available is truly impressive.

Indeed!

When I first started shooting decades ago, I shot lots of DA/SA "Wonder Nines." Then I became obsessed with SAO guns with safeties (1911's, Browning Hi Powers, etc.). Then I exclusively carried and shot Glocks, H&K USPs, and Kahrs. These days, I shoot and carry double action revolvers (I've acquired some vintage S&Ws from 20-50 years ago; and also have customized Ruger SP101s and GP100s). I've become very traditionalist in my older age. Now, nothing beats a well-tuned double action revolver trigger for me.

 

[TunnelRat]

Again, stop making up a straw man. I never stated that the Glock trigger safety would "prevent unintended discharges..." merely that it provides an enhanced level of protection against unintended protrusions into trigger guard compared to plain triggers (holding all other variables constant, I should add).

Fair enough, I suppose I overstated. The doubt regarding the ability to "provide an enhanced level of protection against unintended protrusions into trigger guard compared to plain triggers (holding all other variables constant, I should add)" still remains.

Now, people can Monday morning-quarterback and parrot all kinds of unsolicited basic information about proper holstering, but just as "fatigue can make cowards of us all," unusual and stressful circumstances can reduce even the best trained to less than perfect.

It's not really Monday morning quarterback and I don't know why it bothers you that I felt it relevant to give safety advice to prevent a type of accident that obviously was something you were thinking about. You seem to take it as a personal affront . My point is you're worrying about a mechanical device preventing something that from your own example is mostly a result of the user. Your friend was less than perfect. I get it and I'm not trying to nor do I think I have insulted him. The trigger tab didn't prevent the discharge. That's my point.

Although one can debate about how much less, my simple experiments show that the Sig P320 has even lower error-toleration regarding this issue than the Glock does.

I'm sure you'll consider me either obtuse or just annoying, but I can't really agree that your experiment shows anything definitively. It shows the trigger travel to be less (of questionable importance), the weights may or may not be less depending on the pistols, and one doesn't have a tab that may help to prevent negligent discharges but we haven't really tested that specifically besides some observations in regards to the trigger gauge and there's the example you know of that shows the tab to not have made a difference. As I said above I do think doing some tests specifically in regards to the tab would be interesting.

Glock claims the Glock 42 has 5.5 lbs. of trigger pull weight on its website (identical to all other "regular" Glocks). Plainly inaccurate with mine and yours. I know quite a few folks who bought Glock 42 with me, and not one has a trigger pull weight close to 5.5 lbs. Perhaps there are some with that weight out there, but they don't seem common. On this score, at least Sig is honest enough to state a range of 5.5-7.5 lbs.

I don't own a 42, though I have had others report the same heavier trigger in regards to that model. Still, that one model (and add the 43 in for good measure) is a relatively small sampling of their whole line. The two 19s I have right now and the 26 all come in at 5.5 lb. The 19s I owned in the past were the same. I do agree that a range is probably more appropriate.

Edit: I wanted to add that I do think your argument is certainly worthy of discussion and brings up some points that I know other shooters also wonder about, including myself.

 

[JohnKSa]

Does anyone seriously use a holster that does not cover the trigger?

Believe it or not, some people don't use holsters at all--even with this type of firearm.

 

[TunnelRat]

The Versacarry comes to mind. I feel like that thing is a lawyer's dream.

 

[JJNA]

Believe it or not, some people don't use holsters at all--even with this type of firearm.

That is YIKES as far as I am concerned. Heck, I don't even use Yaqui slide-type holsters. They just seem, well, too "naked" for my tastes.

 

[gc70]

Double action revolvers have much heavier double action trigger pull weights and travel distance, and, in my view, are much more error-tolerant (but not error-proof) than striker-fired pistols with substantially lower trigger pull weights and shorter arcs.

I do not doubt that some guns are more error-tolerant than others, but I do question whether that error-tolerance makes much practical difference in the more common ND situations.

One type of ND involves a deliberate trigger pull to release a hammer or striker in the (mistaken) belief that there is no round in the chamber. Differences in trigger travel and weight are irrelevant in such a situation, because the user's intent is to pull the trigger to release. A manual safety does not even help in such a situation; the user will disengage the safety to allow the trigger to be pulled.

Another type of ND involves having a finger or object on the trigger and an action -such as holstering a gun- that presses the finger or object against the trigger. In such a situation, the user is focused on the action -holstering- and overlooks the errant finger or object on the trigger. If the action is slow and deliberate, the user has a chance to detect the problem and stop before a ND with all but the lightest and shortest of triggers. If the action is quick and vigorous, I question whether commonly-encountered differences in trigger travel and weight have a significant impact on the user's ability to detect the problem and react quickly enough to avoid a ND.

While I could go on with other examples, my point is that the most common types of NDs involve both an intentional action and an error condition. And the intentional action is often such that a user will not detect a problem through trigger movement or pressure before it is too late to stop a ND.

 

[Slimjim9]

Does anyone seriously use a holster that does not cover the trigger?

Believe it or not, some people don't use holsters at all--even with this type of firearm.

I'm with JJNA on this one. just because you can doesn't mean you should. IMO, anyone who seriously cares about safety will use a holster that covers the trigger - or at least one of these:
http://www.defensiveconcealment.com/defensive-concealment-trigger-thingy/

I wouldn't feel real good about using my LCR without a pocket holster.

 

[JJNA]

I did buy a Sig P320 variant. I've been playing P320/250 Lego since because I have several P250 frames and magazines.

My particular model has about 6.5 lbs. of trigger pull weight. The trigger travel distance is VERY short, which contributes the feeling of the trigger pull weight being lighter than is the case in actuality.

I am NOT going to carry this gun (the trigger pull distance is just too short - shorter than some SAO guns I have), but it is just as ergonomic as the P250 is (good), and has a more shootable trigger than the P250 (though I really love the smoothness and the controllability of the P250 DAO trigger). However, one thing I really dislike about my P320 is the rather pronounced vertical slide "jump" when the trigger is pressed. I know some striker-fired guns display this phenomenon (on my Glocks, it is imperceptible), but the jump on this one is quite noticeable.

All in all, an interesting gun to "play with" and a fine range gun for me.

 

[BILLG]

I have been carrying a P 320 for 6 months now ,have shot it in several IDPA matches using a vest,shot it in several USPSA matches,have practiced drawing and reholstering several hundred times using several different concealment garments,and guess what no trigger snags!The P320 makes a great ccw pistol.
Training to reholster properly is important as training to draw.

 

[JohnKSa]

However, one thing I really dislike about my P320 is the rather pronounced vertical slide "jump" when the trigger is pressed. I know some striker-fired guns display this phenomenon (on my Glocks, it is imperceptible), but the jump on this one is quite noticeable.

I noticed that on one that I handled. I did not care for that "feature" at all.

 

[Lexspeed]

I've read this thread with great interest. For a noob like me there is some informative dialog on striker fire gun safety, and particularly the 320. Thank you for the education.

I looked intensely at the 320 9mm and was impressed. But, I ended up with an HK P30S 9mm, due to the marvelous fit for my hand, however, most notably for the decocker and manual safety. I just felt safer with those features: for the right or wrong reasons.

 

[pblanc]

Excuse my ignorance, but in what way does this "vertical slide jump" on the P320 manifest itself?

I assume this is an upward movement of the muzzle end of the slide when the trigger is depressed, yes, no?

If so, does this occur when dry firing or only with the discharge of live ammo?

I am sitting here with a newly acquired P320 full-size .45 cal and I can not see any hint of vertical slide movement while dry firing. There is, however, a fair bit of vertical play in the slide to frame fit at the muzzle end of the slide. The forward end of the slide can be depressed about a half millimeter or so against the frame (or grip module).

I have not yet fired this pistol, but I have shot a full-sized P320 .40 cal in the recent past and do not recall any vertical slide movement.

 

[JohnKSa]

I assume this is an upward movement of the muzzle end of the slide when the trigger is depressed, yes, no?

The entire slide/barrel assembly appears to move upward a small but easily detectable amount when the trigger is pulled.

When dry-firing, the jump can be seen when viewing the gun from the normal firing angle since, of course, the rear sight jumps with the slide.

If so, does this occur when dry firing or only with the discharge of live ammo?

It is not difficult to detect with the eye while dry-firing.

It would be very difficult to detect such a motion during actual firing without high-speed photography. As such, I have no evidence to prove it happens during live firing but no reasonable explanation or theory for why it would not if it is evident during dryfire.

I am sitting here with a newly acquired P320 full-size .45 cal and I can not see any hint of vertical slide movement while dry firing.

I have handled two, both in 9mm. It was quite obvious on one of the pistols but I do not recall noticing it on the other.

 

[pblanc]

Thanks for the answer. It does not happen when dry firing my P320F 45.

As I mentioned, there is vertical play in the slide to frame (grip module) fit, but at rest, the slide is at the upper limit of this play and does not move higher when dry fired.

 

[JohnKSa]

Interesting. That suggests that there's enough manufacturing variance that some guns do it and others don't. I guess a person could look for one that doesn't exhibit the characteristic, but this is a pistol that is supposed to be completely modular. So if you buy another slide for the gun later, the new combination may have the issue.

Why does it even matter?

Typically striker fired guns have some sort of "sear engagement" between a frame mounted component and a slide mounted striker. If there's significant play between the slide and frame, that play affects the amount of sear engagement.

That means the manufacturer must account for the change in sear engagement by increasing the sear engagement sufficiently that the play can't eliminate the sear engagement and fire the pistol. That generally means a trigger that isn't as good as it could be. The SIG P320 trigger is about as good as it gets for a striker-fired pistol, so that complaint doesn't seem to be valid in this case. SIG may have managed to make "not as good as it could be" still amazingly good.

The other possibility is that the play isn't properly accounted for and the gun may fire if something jars the slide upward to the maximum amount of play.

Just to be clear, I'm not saying, or even suggesting, that the SIG P320 is dangerous. I really don't think that's the case. I just don't like to see significant vertical play between the slide and frame in a striker-fired pistol and I really don't like to see the slide moving when the gun is dry-fired.

 

[gc70]

The entire slide/barrel assembly appears to move upward a small but easily detectable amount when the trigger is pulled.

Does the movement occur before, when, or after the striker is released?

If it occurs before the striker is released, is the movement incremental as the trigger is pulled or sudden at some point in the trigger movement?

 

[JohnKSa]

It appeared to me that the slide jumped at the moment that the striker released.

It's possible that there was some movement before that point but it's been several months and I wasn't really looking for movement before the striker release. I'm working from memory and I didn't really get a chance to do a detailed examination.

I asked permission to dryfire the gun at a shop and noted the slide jump because I was looking at the rear sight and it, of course, moved with the slide. I dryfired it again to make sure I hadn't been seeing things, but I didn't feel comfortable dryfiring the gun over and over to analyze the situation in detail.

Since then, I've poked around a little and have found a few other reports of vertical play in the P320 slide as well of reports of the slide moving during the trigger pull and/or at striker release.