Sig 320 vs Glock

[Mysteryman]

Found on sigtalk



Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

Anyone else find it odd that the 320 didn't have a trigger disconnect from the get go??

MM

[MountainRaven]

More parts means more points for failure and in my experience the more complex the firearm the more often it breaks. A plastic knife has the same parts as a steel one but we both know which one is more likely to fail. That's a result of the quality of materials not the design. All things being equal the tool/machine with more parts has a higher chance for failure than one with fewer parts.

The open top slide design is just stupid and serves no useful purpose. Offering more slide to grasp for working the action is far more valuable than the ability to easily single load the chamber...

MM

I'm believe the reason for the Beretta's open-top slide is to keep the P-38/P1 operating system while moving the front sight off of the barrel, thereby increasing consistency.

It should be noted that the P-38/P1 has half a slide and - as far as I'm aware - there have been no major complaints about its function in war or peace, military or civilian use from Paris to Moscow, Vadsø to Johannesburg.

[Gödel]

More parts means more points for failure and in my experience the more complex the firearm the more often it breaks. A plastic knife has the same parts as a steel one but we both know which one is more likely to fail. That's a result of the quality of materials not the design. All things being equal the tool/machine with more parts has a higher chance for failure than one with fewer parts.

The open top slide design is just stupid and serves no useful purpose. Offering more slide to grasp for working the action is far more valuable than the ability to easily single load the chamber...

MM

Yes, you've outlined your theories several times. They just don't hold any water in the real world. Glocks break trigger springs, as do Berettas. Only one of those will keep firing with a broken spring. Your idea is basically that a combination hammer and screwdriver is less likely to break than a screwdriver and a separate hammer. It just doesn't work that way.

The open slide is no more of a problem (and probably less) than the Glock's grip hole or the gap between the slide and dust cover.

But if you would like to detail your experience with both firearms, that could certainly be interesting.

[Gödel]

Anyone else find it odd that the 320 didn't have a trigger disconnect from the get go??

MM

Neither does a Glock. And, surprise, surprise, the P320 also has a case head failure problem from firing out of battery.

[montrala]

Anyone else find it odd that the 320 didn't have a trigger disconnect from the get go??

You are not alone i that. I was surprised by that. I was sure that every modern pistols from reputable manufacturers would use that at least to prevent out of battery discharge.

[dpadams6]

If one gun needed 30 parts to work and the other needed 60 parts to work. It seems, common sense would say the one with 30 parts, would statistically, have fewer break downs.

[Gödel]

If one gun needed 30 parts to work and the other needed 60 parts to work. It seems, common sense would say the one with 30 parts, would statistically, have fewer break downs.

And yet a 2 cylinder engine is not 3 times more reliable than a V6.


The most obvious gun example is how reliable spring loaded extractors are compared to the one piece 1911 extractor. Having two parts - one of each function - often works better than having one part do two different things.

[MegademiC]

Yes. All things equal, less parts is more reliable. Unfortunately, things are not equal, so it really doesn't mean anything.

Engineering, design, specs, qc/was all mean something. A pos with 5 parts is still a pos. My car is more reliable than most people's guns, but has more parts.

[Mysteryman]

I'm believe the reason for the Beretta's open-top slide is to keep the P-38/P1 operating system while moving the front sight off of the barrel, thereby increasing consistency.

It should be noted that the P-38/P1 has half a slide and - as far as I'm aware - there have been no major complaints about its function in war or peace, military or civilian use from Paris to Moscow, Vadsø to Johannesburg.

Pistols weren't used to the extent or skill level 70 years ago and complaints or user reviews were of no concern, so yes, you'd be hard pressed to find a negative trend about the Walther. Carried by officers as a show of rank more than a useful fighting tool does not validate the design. The Walther locking block design offers no advantage over the Browning tilt action, it simply increases parts count and overall dimensions.

Yes, you've outlined your theories several times. They just don't hold any water in the real world. Glocks break trigger springs, as do Berettas. Only one of those will keep firing with a broken spring. Your idea is basically that a combination hammer and screwdriver is less likely to break than a screwdriver and a separate hammer. It just doesn't work that way.

The open slide is no more of a problem (and probably less) than the Glock's grip hole or the gap between the slide and dust cover.

But if you would like to detail your experience with both firearms, that could certainly be interesting.

Neither does a Glock. And, surprise, surprise, the P320 also has a case head failure problem from firing out of battery.

Well my experience as an employee of a range with rentals saw the Beretta pistols going down far more often than anything else. That was due to parts breakage(the locking block) and not stoppages due to debris. When I do see a Beretta at match or class they're often the ones with stoppages as well. Can't say how well the owners maintained them so there is room for user error.

And Glocks do have a disconnect when the slide is out of battery and they will fire with a broken trigger return spring as I've done it.

And yet a 2 cylinder engine is not 3 times more reliable than a V6.


The most obvious gun example is how reliable spring loaded extractors are compared to the one piece 1911 extractor. Having two parts - one of each function - often works better than having one part do two different things.

No one said fewer parts means an exponential gain in reliability. Having fewer parts means the potential for failure is reduced. A shovel will outlast an excavator when used properly. One has a lot more parts and a lot higher chance of one of them(or more) failing. Your 1911 example simply illustrates a lesser quality design vs a better quality design. Better design and fewer parts is the sweet spot.

Yes. All things equal, less parts is more reliable. Unfortunately, things are not equal, so it really doesn't mean anything.

Engineering, design, specs, qc/was all mean something. A pos with 5 parts is still a pos. My car is more reliable than most people's guns, but has more parts.

Again, fewer parts means fewer failure points. A shit design is a shit design that is for sure..

MM

[MountainRaven]

Pistols weren't used to the extent or skill level 70 years ago and complaints or user reviews were of no concern, so yes, you'd be hard pressed to find a negative trend about the Walther. Carried by officers as a show of rank more than a useful fighting tool does not validate the design. The Walther locking block design offers no advantage over the Browning tilt action, it simply increases parts count and overall dimensions.

First:
Everybody in the Wehrmacht was supposed to be issued a pistol. Theory being that because pistols were generally a status item in other armies, that carrying a pistol would enhance individual morale. Further, Fallschirmjäger - paratroops - jumped with just a pistol. That pistol being all that they had to fight to the containers carrying their individual small arms (K98ks, MP40s, &c.), as well as crew-served weapons (MG34s, mortars, &c.).
The Germans also removed the magazine disconnect safety from Browning Hi-Powers produced by FN during the occupation of Belgium. In addition to the P38 having controls large enough to actually use - especially with heavy winter gloves - tends to suggest that the actual combat usage of handguns by the Wehrmacht was taken more seriously than in many other nations at the time.
After the war, the pistols were adopted by Norway, Sweden, Austria, and Germany (again). If they were pieces of shit, they wouldn't have been selected to replace the actually-really-good-but-expensive-to-manufacture P08 Luger, in the first place. Never mind being selected to replace the Lahti m/40, the m/1914 (M1911), and being selected to continue on in German and Austrian service instead of adopting GP35s, P210s, &c.

Second:
Pistols still are not used with any particular skill in general and are still largely relegated to status symbols.

Third:
I have yet to hear of any complaints about the Beretta in military use that wasn't linked to the pistol's size (none of the XM9 trials pistols were any better), bureaucratic ineptitude (contracts for shitty magazines), or penny-wise/dollar-foolish armorers (failing to properly maintain firearms at an armorer's level). I would be shocked if a Glock or P320 didn't generate the same level of heat if you fed them with shit magazines (like KCIs, for instance) and failed to replace worn springs at prescribed intervals.

Finally, I would advise you to peruse the 'Most Reliable Handguns' thread and marvel at the shear number of normally functioning Berettas forum-goers are reporting.