B92SD (2168 rounds)
320 (626 rounds)
So far so good. Neither the B92SD
nor the 320 has had a single malfunction. Both digest any ammunition, 115, 124, 147, brass, steel, aluminum, Gold dots, HST, etc. Totally trust worthy guns. For the last 400 or so rounds I haven't cleaned the Sig 320 more out of laziness than anything else.
Notes on the 320.
1. The weird Trigger double click is gone both while shooting and in dry firing. I guess it was some sort of burr in the action. I have read that some have trigger slap but mine does not.
2. At first the slide release was VERY tight. This slowed me down on reloads vs the B92. But it has loosed up and this is no longer an issue.
3. The 320 has very good recoil characteristics. However, it is easier to track the front sight on the B92 during Bills and El Prez. However, over 5 shot averaged groups the difference in split times is only .012 in favor of the B92 so you aren't talking about much (over an average of 6 bill drill's each the B92 won by .012 also which was wild) . The splits are more uneven in the 320--with some being a good deal faster than the others compared to the Beretta's nearly perfect cadence.
4. I have attempted to limp wrist the 320 into a malfunction. I can't do it so far, even with very light loaded Blazer brass. I can do this fairly easily with the world standard G19
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LAuHst-j6eI. Of course, this is just one small test, but so far so good. And the B92 easily passes this test as well.
So far I see why the Army went with the 320 if there examples are like mine. Shoots straight, shoots fast, ejects brass predictably, and isn't grip sensitive. I still prefer the Beretta, but I don't have to lug these things across battlefields.
Bookmarks