Sig's "voluntary upgrade program" sig p320 drop fire

That case with the officer hasn't been settled yet. Maybe it was the P320, but there are plenty of officers that have hurt gen selves through negligence. If it ends up being the pistol's fault by all means best SIG over the head with the case, I just think use it as an example is premature.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
The point is that on the same day the suit was filed in Connecticut court (which means SIG likely received a demand letter before that), they are telling consumers there had been zero reports of such a failure.

And the complaint alleges that the pistol was in a specific Safariland holster when it discharged after being dropped, which narrows it down quite a bit.

I'm not saying SIG is at fault in that case, though the facts alleged look very grim for them; but to turn around and tell consumers on the same day the suit is filed there were zero reports? That incident happened on January 5, 2017. For us to believe the zero reports story, we have to believe that neither the officer nor the department contacted SIG to say "Hey, your pistol just went off after being dropped in a secured holster!" until the very day of their announcement and that this was simply unfortunate timing for SIG.

The other alternative is SIG knew about the report and either didn't classify it as a drop-related incident (which seems difficult to accept based on the complaint) or decided that LE and military sales were not the "commercial market" and so they could make that statement with a straight face and reassure their consumers even though there had been report(s?) of drop-related failures concerning the same model of pistol being sold on the "commercial market."

That second approach is not the way I'd wish to be treated as a consumer and even if technically correct, would be quite upsetting to me. Not to mention the way they underbussed DPD in that deal.
 
Last edited:
Again I am not defending SIG, but no I don't personally consider an non-settled lawsuit a "report". In that case there are reports of practically everything. Maybe the word "report" should have been chosen differently.
 
And the complaint alleges that the pistol was in a specific Safariland holster when it discharged after being dropped, which narrows it down quite a bit.
Click to expand...

It was allegedly caught on camera as well.

The other alternative is SIG knew about the report and either didn't classify it as a drop-related incident (which seems difficult to accept based on the complaint) or decided that LE and military sales were not the "commercial market" and so they could make that statement with a straight face and reassure their consumers even though there had been report(s?) of drop-related failures concerning the same model of pistol being sold on the "commercial market."
Click to expand...

This is so obviously the case here, that I wonder if people like it when manufacturers lie to them.

It is amazing how quickly Sig became aware of the issue, tested the design, found the issue, came up with a fix, manufactured the new parts, tested the new design, and offered a "voluntary recall". What did it take? About a day?

Also amazing that Sig knew immediately that the M17 was not effected.

Also, the post about halfway down the page here seems to indicate that a "civilian" in the "commercial market" did report a drop fire directly to Sig.

http://sigforum.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/430601935/m/8930050824/p/61

So even with their clever wording, to include the "commercial market", I believe they still lied to us.

Again I am not defending SIG, but no I don't personally consider an non-settled lawsuit a "report". In that case there are reports of practically everything. Maybe the word "report" should have been chosen differently.
Click to expand...

Do you not believe that the officer and/or police department reported the issue to Sig?

Look about halfway down the page here to see the quote below:

https://www.sigsauer.com/products/firearms/pistols/p320/

Safety without compromise.

Safety isn’t negotiable. The P320 maximizes peace of mind with a robust safety system. Never again will you need to pull the trigger to disassemble your pistol. And, while available as an option, you won’t need a tabbed trigger safety for your gun to be drop safe.
Click to expand...

Another lie, that would seem to indicate that Sig knew why other manufacturers put that tab on the trigger, which goes back to due diligence with their testing protocols.

Also, the tabbed trigger was never available, so if you wanted to, I guess you could count this as another lie.

It doesn't get any more obvious than this. What more do you guys need?
 
Last edited:
Sig's "voluntary upgrade program" sig p320 drop fire

Need for what exactly? To know that SIG took the corporate excuse way out of the situation? Heck I knew that long before you posted about it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Need for what exactly? To know that SIG took the corporate excuse way out of the situation? Heck I knew that long before you posted about it.
Click to expand...

In other words, they lied. They lied to us. I don't like being lied to by corporations who don't care whether or not I carry a pistol on my waist that is inherently unsafe, to the point that it can get me or anyone else in range killed, only because it falls two and a half feet.

I will say that I'm curious if you still are uncertain whether or not they did their due diligence in regards to testing the design? You mentioned this in this thread, before I posted.
 
From that post:

However, I am not convinced I can say SIG didn't do their due diligence as I haven't seen evidence that other manufacturers do include these angled drops in their standard tests.
Click to expand...

They stated that the pistol was drop safe, when it wasn't.

They didn't include a drop safety on the trigger which would have prevented this issue. Every other comparable design from every other manufacturer has a drop safety on the trigger, even though it is not required to pass the "industry standard".

I'll go back to my previous question. Without being confrontational, and just out of curiosity, what more do you need, to come to the conclusion that they didn't do their due diligence?
 
It was drop safe with regards to the standard tests. It passe those without the tabbed trigger. Is that a technicality? I could see that, but I haven't seen evidence that when that pistol came out they knew it would fire when dropped at an angle.

They didn't include a tabbed safety, to my knowledge, because the belief was that the P320's forward moving trigger bar as opposed to the typical rearward moving trigger would mitigate the momentum imparted to the trigger on a fall and the forces would cancel each other to the point where the pistol wouldn't fire. Obviously that didn't hold to be true.

Without being confrontational
Click to expand...

In my opinion you are being confrontational at this point. I'm entitled to an opinion, as are you. I'm not SIG's lawyer and it's not my responsibility to defend them to you personally. I've been pretty clear as to my views on this thread. Let it go.
 
They didn't include a tabbed safety, to my knowledge, because the belief was that the P320's forward moving trigger bar as opposed to the typical rearward moving trigger would mitigate the momentum imparted to the trigger on a fall and the forces would cancel each other to the point where the pistol wouldn't fire. Obviously that didn't hold to be true.
Click to expand...

Well then we have a big difference of opinion on this one. If they decided to change the design of the drop safety, then they should have tested it thoroughly. I'm not a firearm designer, and I knew that the only reason the tabbed triggers were put on pistols were to prevent discharges from a muzzle up drop. The Sig P320 discharges from a muzzle up drop after they chose to not put the tabbed trigger in there. If they chose to change the design, I would have expected them to test it in the angles that we are talking about here.

In my opinion you are being confrontational at this point. I'm entitled to an opinion, as are you. I'm not SIG's lawyer and it's not my responsibility to defend them to you personally. I've been pretty clear as to my views on this thread. Let it go.
Click to expand...

Very well. I guess I'll have to with you at this point.

I am displeased with the amount of effort people (and not necessarily you TunnelRat) seem to put forth in regards to what I would call, defending Sig. Sig should have known better is my main argument, and then how they handled it after the fact is what took my issue with them over the edge. How anyone could defend Sig or their practices at this point is beyond me. They seemingly were, and still are, more than willing to allow half a million pistols that have been proven to fire from a drop of as little as two and a half feet, to stay "on the street" in the hands of people who would be less likely to turn them in if they heard that it was a "voluntary upgrade" rather than a full blown recall.

I've seen people drop pistols right in front of me.
 
They tested it at the angles that are part of the industry standard. No more, no less. The angles at which the system fails are not part of the industry standard test. They didn't change the original design. The no tab trigger was their original design. The tabbed trigger was supposed to be an additional option that never materialized. The trigger itself, meaning the physical part that your finger touches, has also changed since the pistol started and I wonder if that change in mass over time has made this an issue that wasn't at first. That's complete conjecture on my part.

You're obviously upset about this. I'm not saying it's wrong to be upset. But again, it's not my job to defend SIG. I express a viewpoint and you can agree or disagree as you see fit. At some point a difference in opinion is just that, a difference, and it may not be rectified. That you're displeased with the community is unfortunate, but again differences happen and I am not the person answerable for all your disagreements.

I agree that it's a safety issue, I never said otherwise and in multiple threads here and elsewhere have called them on it. If you feel very strongly you could consider a lawsuit. At the very least don't buy any of their products going forward.
 
You're obviously upset about this.
Click to expand...

Not exactly upset, but displeased if nothing else, and by "this", I mean the people who still show Sig support or are willing to brush this under the rug even after it is obvious what they did here.

Most people who own firearms aren't enthusiasts who register to gun forums. I hope the next time someone drops a pistol in front of me, at a class or at a range, that it isn't a P320 that someone chose to not "voluntarily upgrade".
 
I'm not "brushing anything under a rug".

Again, consider a lawsuit then. This is not me being facetious. Frankly going around the internet and talking about it really won't change anything and the people you're likely discussing it with are those that are already aware. It's certainly your right, I'm just saying the only thing that will have any effect is something that affects their bottom line.
 
I'm not "brushing anything under a rug".
Click to expand...

I didn't say you were.

Do you disagree that others seem to want to make this out to be not a big deal?

Again, consider a lawsuit then.
Click to expand...

What exactly would I sue them for? I didn't get shot by one of their pistols, and hopefully never will.

Frankly going around the internet and talking about it really won't change anything and the people you're likely discussing it with are those that are already aware.
Click to expand...

This is a discussion forum. The same statement could be said about any post in any thread here.

It is you who is being confrontational now.
 
Last edited:
Do you disagree that others seem to want to make this out to be not a big deal?
Click to expand...

To a point I do. I think there are fanboys that are in complete denial, but I don't think it's the majority. The gun "media" has covered this story pretty well, as they should, and I feel hasn't given SIG too much slack. Like anything there will always be those that refuse to believe their brand of choice did something wrong.

What exactly would I sue them for? I didn't get shot by one of their pistols, and hopefully never will.
Click to expand...

Negligence seems to be the claim that could be made from your statements.

Like you I'm not trying to be confrontational. I'm just stating the obvious, which I imagine is how you feel as well.
 
Last edited:
TunnelRat said:
Again I am not defending SIG, but no I don't personally consider an non-settled lawsuit a "report". In that case there are reports of practically everything. Maybe the word "report" should have been chosen differently.
Click to expand...

You don't considered a police department contacting SIG and telling them a P320 discharged IN THE HOLSTER after being dropped a "report of a drop-related incident?" What, then, would you consider a "report" sufficient for your strange definition of the word?
 
There have been a number of officer-involved negligent firearm-related incidents in my area. So just because that is claimed I do not immediately believe it. If you want to consider it a report sure, but again we get into what is meant by a report. If a report is someone calling SIG and claiming a defective product resulted in injury then I imagine there are reports for everything. Maybe SIG means a court decided case against them. I'm sure some lawyer at SIG could explain. But if you want to say SIG misrepresented the situation then I can see that.
 
did Sig not do drop testing before pushing this model out the door?
Click to expand...

Apparently not as much as others.

If the others only followed the "industry standard", then none of them would have a drop safety on the trigger. The fact that they do seems to indicate that they knew the pistols would fire if dropped in a muzzle up position. I have to believe they found this out due to testing, common knowledge, or both. Both of which seem to be lacking at Sig.
 
Apparently not as much as others.
Click to expand...
I have to believe they found this out due to testing, common knowledge, or both
Click to expand...

But you don't know that to be true. I have no idea if Glock added the tab because of testing or not. I do know that SIG's design is not the same as Glock's. Maybe Glock did do this because of additional drop testing, or maybe they just did it to be safer. Either way it's a good thing they did, it's just not something that I think we can trace directly to more drop testing.

I'd also point out that the supposed fix to this problem that will come when this recall starts (taking quite some time now), which has been tested and doesn't have the same problem, does not include a trigger tab at all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top