Dallas PD finds Sig 320 unfit for duty

Defensive carry handguns.
User avatar
hkguy
Posts: 640
Joined: Sun Nov 30, 2014 9:51 pm

Re: Dallas PD finds Sig 320 unfit for duty

Postby hkguy » Mon Aug 14, 2017 6:13 am

Nathan wrote:
With the Sig however, drop the gun 100 times in that same angle and you will get 100 discharges. I cannot see how you can equate this with mechanical failure?


youtube has already proved you wrong numerous time on this point.
NRA Member and Certified NRA RSO
IDPA & USPSA Member
Michigan Gun Owner Member

User avatar
Nathan
Site Admin
Posts: 2096
Joined: Wed Nov 26, 2014 8:51 pm
Location: Billings, MT
Contact:

Re: Dallas PD finds Sig 320 unfit for duty

Postby Nathan » Mon Aug 14, 2017 7:12 am

hkguy wrote:youtube has already proved you wrong numerous time on this point.

I guess you missed this?



Sig-fan videos where they drop it at an angle outside the known discharge angle do nothing to minimize the threat of the known discharge drop angle. Sig spends a lot of money advertising in the magazine video linked above. I seriously doubt they are trying to slander Sig.

Direct question, do you believe the design is fine as is, do you believe the fix is adequate, or do you believe they should implement a FPS? Direct answer, please.
Nathan in Image

NRA Certified Instructor in Pistol, Rifle, Shotgun, Personal Protection Inside the Home and Personal Protection Outside the Home.
Image

User avatar
hkguy
Posts: 640
Joined: Sun Nov 30, 2014 9:51 pm

Re: Dallas PD finds Sig 320 unfit for duty

Postby hkguy » Mon Aug 14, 2017 10:49 pm

Nathan wrote:
hkguy wrote:youtube has already proved you wrong numerous time on this point.

I guess you missed this?




if you look back a few posts, you will see i linked the video.

you will see in this video that your statement of 100% failure rate is debunked. you can find more of others doing drop tests that do not return 100% failure rate as well. you of all people should know the dangers of using blanket statements like that.




Nathan wrote:Sig-fan videos where they drop it at an angle outside the known discharge angle do nothing to minimize the threat of the known discharge drop angle. Sig spends a lot of money advertising in the magazine video linked above. I seriously doubt they are trying to slander Sig.

Direct question, do you believe the design is fine as is, do you believe the fix is adequate, or do you believe they should implement a FPS? Direct answer, please.


I dont think a FPS in conjunction with the factory trigger would resolve the issue, it might mitigate the failure rate but i doubt it would eliminate it. as you well know from the video that has been cited by myself and others you will see enough rearward trigger movement to disengage the sear which would also deactivate a FPS.

reducing the weight of the trigger as suggested by the gentleman from omaha outdoors seems like a potential fix to the problem should it pass standard industry testing as well as testing from now known causes of failure. is it the best solution, not right now. between sig and aftermarket parts manufactures, a suitable solution will be found.

this is the one i have the most confidence in. Oomaha outdoors also note that sig has a working standard trigger with a tabbed trigger safety akin to the glock trigger tab (the 4 min mark to save you time) which would also be a sufficient solution provided it passes the same testing protocol outlined above.

i have doubts that SIG will redesign the p320 and have it include a FPS, the solution will probably involve additional protections being added to the trigger/trigger shoe. who knows, maybe im wrong and sig will come out with a p320 2.0 and offer a buy back/exchange of first gen p320's.

as i stated eariler, the pistol as it is meets and passes all mandated drop safety protocols.
here is SIG's official position.
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2017/0 ... e-program/


i guess at this juncture, nothing more can be said. its been a fine pistol since it was released. The solution SIG will ultimate select and implement will adequately address the problem and we can go back to bitching about what pistol is best, what truck is best, and the stupid shit people do.
NRA Member and Certified NRA RSO
IDPA & USPSA Member
Michigan Gun Owner Member

User avatar
Nathan
Site Admin
Posts: 2096
Joined: Wed Nov 26, 2014 8:51 pm
Location: Billings, MT
Contact:

Re: Dallas PD finds Sig 320 unfit for duty

Postby Nathan » Tue Aug 15, 2017 7:36 am

hkguy wrote:you will see in this video that your statement of 100% failure rate is debunked.

So where is the line? Is 95% failure rate acceptable? Is a simple majority enough to remove concern? It's still close enough to 100% that this magazine, who accepts advertiser dollars from Sig, would produce a video to essentially take back their approval of the design from their previous review they did on the gun. This is an inexcusable failure that I would expect to slip past QC at Taurus, not Sig.


you can find more of others doing drop tests that do not return 100% failure rate as well. you of all people should know the dangers of using blanket statements like that.

The failure is a combination of two factors: angle and height. Change the angle a little bit or change the height (to minimize inertia) and the failure won't happen. This doesn't prove there isn't a failure and it certainly doesn't take the failure out of the unacceptable range.


I dont think a FPS in conjunction with the factory trigger would resolve the issue, it might mitigate the failure rate but i doubt it would eliminate it. as you well know from the video that has been cited by myself and others you will see enough rearward trigger movement to disengage the sear which would also deactivate a FPS.

This in and of itself is the problem. The trigger pulls itself from the inertia of the drop. The FPS would add additional mechanical leverage required to discharge. In addition, look at the Glock trigger. Not only must the trigger move rearward, but the trigger safety must also be rotated before the trigger can be pulled rearward.
...this only shows me that in 1982, Glock was decades ahead of it's time for perceiving such a need.


reducing the weight of the trigger as suggested by the gentleman from omaha outdoors seems like a potential fix to the problem should it pass standard industry testing as well as testing from now known causes of failure. is it the best solution, not right now. between sig and aftermarket parts manufactures, a suitable solution will be found.

I think it's a bullshit fix. They won't do upgrades now and then add an FPS or trigger safety again later unless it really hurts their sales which I doubt due to the military contract.


Oomaha outdoors also note that sig has a working standard trigger with a tabbed trigger safety akin to the glock trigger tab

Yes, this would also be a real fix.

I'm not questioning the quality of the gun; I'm only crying foul on this bullshit issue that should be addressed with a real solution after which all is forgiven.
Nathan in Image

NRA Certified Instructor in Pistol, Rifle, Shotgun, Personal Protection Inside the Home and Personal Protection Outside the Home.
Image

User avatar
hkguy
Posts: 640
Joined: Sun Nov 30, 2014 9:51 pm

Re: Dallas PD finds Sig 320 unfit for duty

Postby hkguy » Tue Aug 15, 2017 10:40 am

Nathan wrote:
hkguy wrote:you will see in this video that your statement of 100% failure rate is debunked.

So where is the line? Is 95% failure rate acceptable? Is a simple majority enough to remove concern? It's still close enough to 100% that this magazine, who accepts advertiser dollars from Sig, would produce a video to essentially take back their approval of the design from their previous review they did on the gun. This is an inexcusable failure that I would expect to slip past QC at Taurus, not Sig.


you made the blanket failure rate statement, it was easy to debunk. you and i both know the line is as close to zero as possible. until a week ago, this was not an issue for a pistol that has enjoyed good sales and aftermarket support. its unfortunate, but sig is not going to re-machine and re-finish slides of pre-existhing P320's. it does not make sense from a cost perspective. it would literally bring the company to a grinding halt to employ that fix. it would be cheaper for them to retrofit pre-existing models with a new trigger with a tab and design/produce a new model.


you can find more of others doing drop tests that do not return 100% failure rate as well. you of all people should know the dangers of using blanket statements like that.

The failure is a combination of two factors: angle and height. Change the angle a little bit or change the height (to minimize inertia) and the failure won't happen. This doesn't prove there isn't a failure and it certainly doesn't take the failure out of the unacceptable range.


i did not claim the failure rate to be acceptable. just stated you were wrong for making a blanket statement.


I dont think a FPS in conjunction with the factory trigger would resolve the issue, it might mitigate the failure rate but i doubt it would eliminate it. as you well know from the video that has been cited by myself and others you will see enough rearward trigger movement to disengage the sear which would also deactivate a FPS.

This in and of itself is the problem. The trigger pulls itself from the inertia of the drop. The FPS would add additional mechanical leverage required to discharge. In addition, look at the Glock trigger. Not only must the trigger move rearward, but the trigger safety must also be rotated before the trigger can be pulled rearward.
...this only shows me that in 1982, Glock was decades ahead of it's time for perceiving such a need.


perhaps, but there is enough force generated through inertia, most FPS plunger springs are very weak. perhaps that would be enough to counteract the inertia generated from the drop, maybe not. a significant weight reduction (30% or more) of the actual trigger was needed to virtually eliminate the uncommanded discharges when dropped.


reducing the weight of the trigger as suggested by the gentleman from omaha outdoors seems like a potential fix to the problem should it pass standard industry testing as well as testing from now known causes of failure. is it the best solution, not right now. between sig and aftermarket parts manufactures, a suitable solution will be found.

I think it's a bullshit fix. They won't do upgrades now and then add an FPS or trigger safety again later unless it really hurts their sales which I doubt due to the military contract.


its hard to say. SIG certainly is not going to be able to re-design and manufacture 500,000 upgraded replacement pistols within the next 6 months to address the problem to satisfaction of the public. everyone wants a quick fix so they can have and use their pistol. imagine if glock took two years to address the extraction issue the gen 4 models had when they were first released. My money is on seeing version 2.0 be announced sometime within the next 12-24 months. hell it took Remington nearly two years to address the issues with the R9.


Oomaha outdoors also note that sig has a working standard trigger with a tabbed trigger safety akin to the glock trigger tab

Yes, this would also be a real fix.

I'm not questioning the quality of the gun; I'm only crying foul on this bullshit issue that should be addressed with a real solution after which all is forgiven.


see my previous comment.
NRA Member and Certified NRA RSO
IDPA & USPSA Member
Michigan Gun Owner Member

User avatar
Nathan
Site Admin
Posts: 2096
Joined: Wed Nov 26, 2014 8:51 pm
Location: Billings, MT
Contact:

Re: Dallas PD finds Sig 320 unfit for duty

Postby Nathan » Tue Aug 15, 2017 12:59 pm

hkguy wrote:i did not claim the failure rate to be acceptable. just stated you were wrong for making a blanket statement.

The discharge rate is high enough; I rounded up. Regardless, its simply unacceptable that it would happen one time in a hundred, much less ninety six times in a hundred. Moving forward:


perhaps, but there is enough force generated through inertia, most FPS plunger springs are very weak. perhaps that would be enough to counteract the inertia generated from the drop, maybe not.

Could be; I just don't see the inertia of a trigger being enough to overcome it. How many milligrams does a trigger weigh? If removing 30% of it resolves the issue statistically, then I'm pretty confident that a FPS would work. Either way, the Glock trigger safety would eliminate the issue entirely. This just takes me back to Glock being ahead of their time. I just think making the trigger lighter is a bullshit resolution.

Is the issue being over-hyped? Yes. Would it stop me from buying one if I was in the market? No. I would delay purchase until the issue was fully resolved, but it wouldn't keep me from buying one.
Nathan in Image

NRA Certified Instructor in Pistol, Rifle, Shotgun, Personal Protection Inside the Home and Personal Protection Outside the Home.
Image

User avatar
Nathan
Site Admin
Posts: 2096
Joined: Wed Nov 26, 2014 8:51 pm
Location: Billings, MT
Contact:

Re: Dallas PD finds Sig 320 unfit for duty

Postby Nathan » Fri Aug 18, 2017 10:06 am

Nathan in Image

NRA Certified Instructor in Pistol, Rifle, Shotgun, Personal Protection Inside the Home and Personal Protection Outside the Home.
Image

User avatar
Tim
Posts: 7
Joined: Sun Nov 30, 2014 10:50 pm

Re: Dallas PD finds Sig 320 unfit for duty

Postby Tim » Thu Aug 24, 2017 12:10 pm

According to my calculation, if it now fires from 4' off the ground, the same momentum would be achieved at 8.4' off the ground with a 30% reduction in mass. So don't climb any tall ladders or trees!


Return to “Carry Guns”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest