Sphinx Sub-Compact warning... Maybe too tight.

Didn't need to use a tool. When the set screws were released, the sight was free to move.

That is a lot easier than trying to use a sight-pusher (I have one) at the range...
 
That is a lot easier than trying to use a sight-pusher (I have one) at the range...
Click to expand...

I've got MGW sight pushers that I bring to the range all the time and are a breeze. Personal preference I guess.
 
With most sight pushers you've got to field strip the gun and remove the barrel, then install the slide in the mechanism. Then you move the sight, reassemble the gun, test it. Repeat as needed.

With set screws you just adjust the set screws, move the sight, and then tighten things down and test it. Repeat as needed. Lot simpler.

I have this one (from Brownells). It was a lot cheaper 8-9 years ago :( :

p_694000001_1.jpg
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the update TunnelRat, congrats on the new SDP, and good shooting! :cool:

Stuff like that happens to most of us (minor damage to back strap). I agree that it makes sense to have the pin recessed a bit like on HK and Walther.

Looks like it will be a great shooter for you once you get the sights adjusted to be centered in the rear and good luck with that though Walt's suggestions certainly look helpful as would an Allen key wrench that you can apply more torque with.

I typically break in my new pistols with Speer Lawman 115GR or Winchester Ranger NATO.

I hope to be trying out the SDP fairly soon.
 
Last edited:
With most sight pushers you've got to field strip the gun and remove the barrel, then install the slide in the mechanism. Then you move the sight, reassemble the gun, test it. Repeat as needed.

With set screws you just adjust the set screws, move the sight, and then tighten things down and test it. Repeat as needed. Lot simpler.
Click to expand...

I really don't want to argue about what I consider a personal preference, but hey let's go for it...

Well currently I need to heat up the slide to loosen the loctite as you said. Given that I don't own a heat gun (and my wife's hair dryer isn't too good) and I don't have an extension cord that will reach from my clubhouse down to the firing line I will have to loosen it at home after buying the heat gun, bring it there, and see where the sights are printing on paper there. If what you're saying is true and the sight is free to move in the rear sight then my OCD will also kick in because it will be up to my Mk 1 hands, which we've already established aren't too steady, to move the sight by the increment I want. Then I can either leave it without loctite when I get the sights where I want them or I have to loosen them back up and reapply loctite without moving the sights. Or I could apply a little loctite each time I adjust. That's not overly fun to do at the range either.

On the sight tool I have fine threads working on my side to allow pretty minute changes and the tool is far more stable than me. I use the slide specific tools and if I'm just drifting the rear sight I don't even need to remove the barrel and recoil spring, just pull the slide off the frame, slide into into the tool, tighten it down, and move the sight. I did it yesterday at the range with my Glock 19. Took me maybe 1 minute. With set screws I also have the joy of making sure I don't lose my rather tiny 1.5 mm hex wrench (which is black inside my black range bag) or God forbid the darn set screws fall and bounce somewhere because my range is outdoors and with my eyesight I might as well give up. I'll make sure I bring some Ziploc bags (product placement for you ;)) to prevent that.

I will agree that set screws and loctite are a dramatically cheaper alternative to using sight tools, but I do have legitimate reasons (see above) why I prefer sight tools. It's not just an aversion to change or a desire to be contrarian. And the above are just my own reasons and likely don't apply to the more well adjusted people of this world.
 
Last edited:
I typically break in my new pistols with Speer Lawman 115GR or Winchester Ranger NATO.

I hope to be trying out the SDP fairly soon.
Click to expand...

I think you'll really enjoy it. I'm curious to see what you think. Again, 115 gr Fiocchi was dramatically softer through the SDP than the P-01. And even after $200 in parts from Cajun Gun Works and an afternoon of swearing when I let the slave pin fall out of the sear cage the P-01 still doesn't have as nice a trigger as the SDP, though the CGW parts get it much better. I will say I think the SDP uses a much stiffer trigger return spring than the P-01 because I can't get the SA pull quite as light. I would suggest that kit from CGW for the Sphinx though. It's well worth the little money (note: I did not replace the lifter arm spring because I didn't want to go through the hassle, the hammer spring and firing pin block spring make enough of a difference for me and the lighter firing pin spring seems to prevent light strikes quite well).

http://cajungunworks.com/sphinx.html
 
Last edited:
100 more rounds through the Sphinx sub-compact today and once again it was flawless. The gun really shoots well. It is as accurate as some compacts I have shot. It really handles 9mm rounds with ease with not a lot of recoil. I love the feel in the hand and the fact you are packing in 13 rounds in the same space that you get 8 in say a Sig P239.

I will keep updating as I keep shooting. Now I need to find some new leather.
 
Well I am glad they got it resolved for you WVsig but your experiences, and the many others I have read about having problems with the SDP subcompact, has kept from even considering one - at least for now. Maybe some day in the future when it is apparent that a problem no longer exists with current production.

Thanks for explaining what the fix was also. Other Sphinx fans had been explaining the problem as that they are built to such high standards and are so tight they just need break in time with the right ammo . Well that turned out to be wrong and it gets very expensive testing out with premium SD ammo. This is being marketed as the SDP - self defense pistol and IMO should be good to go out of the box with a wide variety of popular SD ammo.

I still might get a Sphinx Compact SDP and have heard/read of very few issues with the Compact and a lot of impressive reports.
Click to expand...

If I could do it over again I would wait on the Sub compact. It is simply too tight and the tolerances stacked to make a defective pistol on too many occasions. I have criticized other manufacturers, Sig comes to mind, for allowing the buying public to "beta" test their products. At this point I would say I am disappointed that there are defective guns in the distributor chain but will say that it seems like Sphinx is fixing any issues that arise quickly and without cost to the consumer.

I will also add that my customer service rep was a young lady named Krystle and she took excellent care of me. I could not have asked for better communication or response. Both email and phone were used during my RMA process.

I thought these were ultra high quality guns? They can't run the same ammo my Glock, Smith, CZ or browning can run?
Click to expand...

These are high quality guns the triggers and the quality of the parts demonstrate that. What you do have IMHO is a barrel which is a bit tight in its dimensions so that some 9mm rounds depending on OAL do not chamber. CZs have had this issue in the past. It is a characteristic of many CZs and CZ clones IMHO.

With the other tighter tolerances stacking in a tight gun you get problems. This again is my layman's opinion. I believe the slide stop is a point of stacking. Every single Sub-compact that has been returned has had this part replaced. Some like mine had barrels replaced as well. I think that these are still high quality guns and have triggers right out of the box that are as smooth as guns worked over by people like Bruce Gray, CZ customs and CGWs. They have high quality parts but have some teething issues with the sub-compact. So buyers should take note.
 
100 more rounds through the Sphinx sub-compact today and once again it was flawless. The gun really shoots well. It is as accurate as some compacts I have shot. It really handles 9mm rounds with ease with not a lot of recoil. I love the feel in the hand and the fact you are packing in 13 rounds in the same space that you get 8 in say a Sig P239.

I will keep updating as I keep shooting. Now I need to find some new leather.
Click to expand...

Good to hear. :cool:
 
Wow, these are blocky guns. They look like a Glock with a hammer. I remember the old Sphinx pistols and they were much more shapely. I guess we can see where they saved money in getting the cost down.
 
DanTSX said:
Wow, these are blocky guns. They look like a Glock with a hammer. I remember the old Sphinx pistols and they were much more shapely. I guess we can see where they saved money in getting the cost down.
Click to expand...

I've owned both -- have an SDP and owned two of the 2000-series Sphinx guns. (Couldn't afford the 3000 series made at the time -- and can't afford one, now.)

All of them shoot/shot very well, and I find the SDP a much more serviceable weapon. Because the SDP I have has an alloy frame with a polymer grip, it's a much more "carryable" weapon than comparable steel-framed weapons (like the CZ-75 Compact [I've had several] -- but recoil seems no different. All steel and alloy-framed/alloy-gripped models are coming.

Like you, I see a DIFFERENCE in appearance, but that is arguably a cosmetic difference, and not apparently connected in any way with cost savings. In hand or in holster, the new Sphinx guns are great. The don't feel blocky -- they feel much like a CZ, but maybe better. The out-of-the-box trigger is heavy but smooth as silk, and breaks much like a 1911. The trigger is easily lightened with spring changes. (Changing the mainspring [hammer spring] is surprisingly quick and easy...

The fact Sphinx designed a two-part frame may or may not be a cost-saving feature... but that frame does offer flexibility not possible with other guns. The older Sphinx guns which were available only with hi-gloss stainless frames were a little bit of a pain to keep looking nice, as the stainless finish showed every little trivial scratch -- like dust on a mirror. The new Sphinx stainless has a matte finish and should be much easier to maintain (with a little green abrasive pad -- but it'll still be HEAVY! (Thanks, but no thanks.)

If looks drive your shooting choices, then another gun may be better for you.
 
Last edited:
I like Glocks. Looks don't mean much. But the prior Sphinx guns were definitely more finished and befitting of their name.


This is like S&W just gave up and started copying ruger.
 
Looking for your frame of reference. If you have shot the older ones I have to then ask have you shot the new one. They are not built to the same level but they are certainly well made when compared to other guns in their price point. I would say that they are 90% of the older guns with some basic material changes but the quality of the barrel and the trigger are extremely close. They are also a lot cheaper than the older Sphinx pistols. It will be interesting to see
what the production guns look like and how they compare to the older guns. Again I think that the current guns are 90% of the older guns IMHO. YMMV
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top