Sig QC and small parts quality

[seang]

I have read a lot lately about Sig's QC going down hill and the "lesser" quality small parts they are using now. What small parts changes have been made that one would need to be concerned with? I know I read about the take down levers having broken off, any other small parts changes?

As far as the poor QC, is the problem more along the lines of guns getting through that shouldn't?

[SkiDevil]

Haven't heard of any quality control issues regarding Sig Classic series pistols.

I have noted that changes have been made to some models in the recent past to enhance "Durability" for use with +P and +P+ ammunition, according to SigSauer [Stainless steel slide vs. stamped/ rolled slide and increase/ enhancement to receiver for more strength and durability). I personally have owned four Sigs: 220 and 226. My current carry/ duty gun is Sig 226 (9 MM). I have placed over 5,000 rounds through this pistol with zero malfunctions. These pistols chambered in 9 MM and .357 Sig seem to be the most feed reliable I have encountered.

As with any firearm or mechanical device problems can occur. I spoke with Sig LE Factory rep. and I was told that classic series have garnered a reputation for reliability and continue to sell very well to all sectors of the firearms consumer market because this of reputation for reliability.

Best friend is a range master/ training officer for large Southern California agency. Sig 220/ 226 pistols in .45 and 9 MM compromise a large percentage of issued sidearm/s (others are mix of Glock and 1911s). He has noted minimal problems with pistols during Quarterly qualifications. The most typical problem is the lack of sufficient lubrication to the rails/ slide interior surfaces. Sig Classic pistols are not designed to run dry (He also mentioned the 1911 pistols [all brands] constantly require work/ replacement of magazines, extractors, etc. due to feeding problems/ malfunctions).

I was reading earlier about HK P7 on forum. I personally believe that the Sig Classic series are superior for self-defense/ combat. I owned a P7M8 for several years and shot it extensively. I have also used the P7M13 and P7M10 as well. I have noted far fewer problems with my SIG pistols than any other brand and I have owned most of the major brands.

My first Sig pistol was a P220 in .45 ACP and I shot and carried that pistol for approx. 4 years. I fired over 25,000 rounds of full-power duty ammo through that gun and it was extremely reliable. The rare times it malfunctioned was when I purchased a case of questionable reloads for a low price. After discarding reloads, no more problems. I left Sig and started using a Glock 17, but later switched back. 10 years later, I will only use a Sig. Purchased a second 226 Navy with light rail last year. No Quality control problems.

SkiDevil

[ToddG]

IWhat small parts changes have been made that one would need to be concerned with?

The problem is that unless you work there and know exactly what's going into a gun today, you've got no way to tell. In recent history they've changed the source for the trigger, the takedown lever, some barrels, the trigger bar (Mass State Police made the headlines when a new-vendor trigger bar failed to work properly in brand new DAK pistols), recoil spring (a change to the P229 40/357 recoil spring years back caused nationwide problems). I know one agency that just recently had a slew of problems with extractors on P229's which might suggest those have been outsourced. Ditto another agency that has had hammers deforming due to poor heat treat.

BTW, it's a mistake to believe this is a SIG-only issue. Companies change vendors and parts sources all the time.

As far as the poor QC, is the problem more along the lines of guns getting through that shouldn't?

My info is about a year and a half out of date, but as of when I left SIG they had stopped test-firing commercial (non-LE, non-mil) guns completely.

When I started there, the company had one QC policy for all guns regardless of expected customer. That meant I could confidently take a pistol packaged for sale to Big Joe's Pistol Emporium, add another magazine to the box, and send it to the FBI without any worry.

By the time I left, there were at least three formal QC levels:

1. Commercial guns, which didn't include any test firing.
2. normal LE, which either did or didn't include test firing at various points in the timeline.
3. ICE, because guns going to ICE are required by contract to undergo specific quality control steps including live fire testing.

I know for a fact that some other LE agencies were given the "ICE QC" status, but whether that's continued to this day or not I couldn't say.

There is nothing unusual about applying different QC protocols to LE guns versus commercial guns, though. A number of other companies do the same thing.

[four]

I guess there's no way to get a maintenance kit from germany is there?
springs, pins, and screws are dangerous if they're for a gun.

[ToddG]

Actually, the idea that the "German" stuff is better probably won't play out much longer. The same guy who made all the big changes to SIG in the US has now been put in charge of the entire international conglomerate. It's reasonable to expect that the same cost-savings measures instituted in US-made guns will soon apply to German-made guns, as well.

The other, more hopeful, possibility is now that one guy controls both factories, it will be possible to provide genuine Sauer-made parts to the U.S. at a price competitive with the Indonesian, Israeli, etc. foreign-made parts being used now.

[seang]

Thank for the responses.

[SkiDevil]

Yes thanks Todd. I stand Corrected.

That's one of the great things about life. You learn something everyday. I still find these statements difficult to believe, but if anyone would know what is going on inside of a company or "Business" then it would certainly be its employees.

I will still say that my limited experience with SigSauer products has been positive and I trust my life to my 226. I suppose that like anything else in life, problems will arise. I do not doubt what you say, but if quality control has tanked with SIG it will eventually see the light of day on a grand scale in my humble opinion.

I know HK has been having problems the last few years with their USP and its seems to be widely known. Lets hope that the folks at SigSauer wise-up and cease the 'Bottom-line' thinking when it comes to their products.

Regards,
SkiDevil

[gtmtnbiker98]

For the above stated reasons is why I am buying HK, now.

[DacoRoman]

There is nothing unusual about applying different QC protocols to LE guns versus commercial guns, though. A number of other companies do the same thing.

Do you know if HK, Glock, and S&W do this? I'm curious which companies, if you don't mind spilling the beans

[DocGKR]

SkiDevil--Don't know where you have been, but much like the .40 Glock problems, the Sig QC issues of the last couple of years have seen the "light of day on a grand scale"... no one in my circles would trust a new OOB Sig right now.