Why isn't the SIG P938 California Compliant?

Status
Not open for further replies.
D

Dreaming100Straight

New member
Why is the Sig P938 not California Compliant, but one version of the nearly identical P238 is on the California Roster? As near as I can see, the only difference is that the 938 is 9mm luger and the 238 is .380 (luger short). This is really confusing, since the Sig Web doesn't list any p238 as Cal Compliant, but the state of california lists to versions as being California models.
 
Dreaming100Straight said:
Why is he Sig P938 not California Compliant, but one version of the nearly identical P238 is on the California Roster?...
Click to expand...
To get on the roster the manufacturer must submit three exemplars a a particular model for testing (together with a basket of money). The only model that gets onto the roster is the model that was submitted for testing and which passed.

If a manufacturer changes a model, the new version won't be on the roster unless that model is submitted. If roster requirements have changed, the new version might not qualify to be submitted for testing.

A manufacturer might also choose not to submit a particular model for testing if it doesn't believe that the potential market for the model justifies the expense of submitting it for testing. That's a pure business decision.

A model which has been superseded by a new version can remain on the roster as long as the manufacturer is willing to pay the annual renewal fee.
 
I believe that something as simple as a change in finish is enough for California to declare it a different model and need testing.
 
marine6680 said:
I believe that something as simple as a change in finish is enough for California to declare it a different model and need testing.
Click to expand...
Not exactly. There is s streamlined submission process for a model mechanically identical to a model on the roster but with a different finish. One exemplar must be submitted, but testing isn't required.
 
Another problem with getting a semi auto handgun put on the roster is micro stamping. All semi auto guns added to the roster now are required to micro stamp. None of manufacturers have guns that do this so no new autos are getting added to the roster.
 
My guess:

CA is the least carry-friendly state in the West (except for HI). It is may-issue for concealed carry, and in some counties I hear it's almost impossible to obtain such a license. The 938, like the 238, is made to be concealed. If the 238 is not selling well in CA due to permitting restraints, SIG may have decided not to invest in the cost of getting the 938 tested.

If you want the real story, e-mail SIG.
 
A bunch of posts which made no meaningful contribution to the discussion have been deleted and the OP effectively has the answer to his question.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top