Sig 320 safety issues

[jesuvuah]

Why do you need a manual safety? If the gun left the holster it's because you intend to shoot. Why would you want a mechanical lever/device preventing you from firing when you've decided you need to? Manual safeties on pistols are for people who lack the confidence, knowledge, or experience to operate a firearm safely.



Outdated, overweight dinosaur. That also has a passive safety, so the manual safety is moot.



Why discuss a disassembly method you don't subscribe to and wouldn't recommend? Stories about CS are here say, and have no bearing on this discussion.

Adding complexity with separate manual of arms is not a smart idea.



Watch the video put out by SIG. They completely redesigned the fire control group to include a second striker notch on the sear.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u9vIY2EoJwE&t=253s


Nothing "supposed" here. READ THE DEPOSITION, there are many cases of 320's going off UNCOMMANDED in a holster. In a holster eliminates the possibility of human interference. There is also a statement by a SIG certified armorer discussing the near zero contact area between the striker and the sear. The design is garbage and single action striker fired guns are a dumb idea.



Again, READ THE DEPOSITION, plenty of cases of private folks having UNCOMMANDED discharges. As for the female officer and the purse, stop speculating on the condition in which the pistol was carried. If she in fact tossed her pistol loose in the purse, she deserved what she got.



If you're into oversized, overweight, shitty DA/SA triggers then yeah, a 226 is a pretty good gun.

I will agree with you that in general, I think a fully tensioned striker is a bad design, that is unless it has a manual safety, or at the very least a trigger safety.

I also have the confidence, the training, and the skill to run pistols with or without a safety, single action and double action pistols, even old and outdated heavy guns, and tiny light guns.

Soli Deo Gloria

[Martin248]

Why do you need a manual safety? If the gun left the holster it's because you intend to shoot. Why would you want a mechanical lever/device preventing you from firing when you've decided you need to? Manual safeties on pistols are for people who lack the confidence, knowledge, or experience to operate a firearm safely.

Maybe you lack the training to use a gun with a safety effectively, so you do what's right for you. If you learn to use one properly muscle memory will flick the safety off when you raise the gun.

In the case of a p320 that lacks a trigger dingus the firing pin block is moved in the pretravel of the trigger, which is very light. At that point you have a tensioned striker with a clear path to the primer and the only thing stopping it if the sear. Better hope the alignment of the slide to the FCU is fully in spec at that point.

With a Glock there are additional safeties not present on the p320, like the trigger dingus, and the striker not being fully tensioned. With a hammer fired gun you can keep your thumb on the hammer and feel if it's moving as you reholster.

Watch the video put out by SIG. They completely redesigned the fire control group to include a second striker notch on the sear.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u9vIY2EoJwE&t=253s

That second notch is a trigger bar disconnect that improved the feeling of the trigger reset and has absolutely nothing to do with safety.

The only modification SIG made that improved safety was reducing the weight of the trigger by a third so that it wouldn't travel under inertia. They also maybe made the safety block disconnector more tightly coupled to the trigger so it can't rise under its own inertia.

I do believe in those "uncommanded discharges" that there's going to turn out to have been movement of the trigger. The question I have is whether it's a full trigger pull or just the pretravel to the "wall" moving the striker block out of the way contributing to some kind of mechanical failure where the striker then slips off the sear.

The gap between the striker and sear in the p320 depends on both your slide and fcu being in spec, if that gap widens the tensioned striker can slip. If that striker block has somehow been moved, either by inertia, or a partial trigger pull--boom

[pag23]

Maybe you lack the training to use a gun with a safety effectively, so you do what's right for you. If you learn to use one properly muscle memory will flick the safety off when you raise the gun.

In the case of a p320 that lacks a trigger dingus the firing pin block is moved in the pretravel of the trigger, which is very light. At that point you have a tensioned striker with a clear path to the primer and the only thing stopping it if the sear. Better hope the alignment of the slide to the FCU is fully in spec at that point.

With a Glock there are additional safeties not present on the p320, like the trigger dingus, and the striker not being fully tensioned. With a hammer fired gun you can keep your thumb on the hammer and feel if it's moving as you reholster.



That second notch is a trigger bar disconnect that improved the feeling of the trigger reset and has absolutely nothing to do with safety.

The only modification SIG made that improved safety was reducing the weight of the trigger by a third so that it wouldn't travel under inertia. They also maybe made the safety block disconnector more tightly coupled to the trigger so it can't rise under its own inertia.

I do believe in those "uncommanded discharges" that there's going to turn out to have been movement of the trigger. The question I have is whether it's a full trigger pull or just the pretravel to the "wall" moving the striker block out of the way contributing to some kind of mechanical failure where the striker then slips off the sear.

The gap between the striker and sear in the p320 depends on both your slide and fcu being in spec, if that gap widens the tensioned striker can slip. If that striker block has somehow been moved, either by inertia, or a partial trigger pull--boom

I noticed a slight difference in trigger pull from an older P320 with the upgrade done last year, the one I just got from this forum (RX mode) and my X Compact.... The older one seems to be just a hair lighter pull right before it hits the wall. The other two seen to have just a bit more tension.

The older Sig has the upgraded lighter curved trigger. The other 2 have the flat trigger. Wonder if the curved trigger is hooking on something on these AD or ND cases.

[Ron3]

Dont S&W M&P's / 2.0's have a single-action trigger?

I've had a couple and like them.

They have the hinged trigger safety and an optional manual safety of course.

I haven't heard anything about them firing when they shouldn't.

How are they different from a P320? Better trigger design? Better firing pin disconnector? More rigid FCG chassis?

[dwhitehorne]

I recall the M&P went throught four different striker designs before they found one that wouldn't break prematurely. Then they replaced many magazines for rusting issues. Don't forget the 9mm's that wouldn't hold a group past 15 yards. Glock has had decades of guns just "going off" before cleaning them.

I think the biggest difference in the M&P and P320 is the amount of trigger travel before the sear releases. In my opinon officers have negligant discharges. Handling firearms everyday can make one complacent. Since Sig had a "safety upgrade" and there are hundreds of thousands of P320's in holsters it is easy to blame the gun when you pop a round in the floor. I reviewed 4 or 5 negligent discharges and had the paperwork on 30 years of them in my last job. I don't remember one of them where the trigger wasn't moved to cause the gun to fire. The last one was in front of the lock boxes in the courthouse. Quite embarrasing but the classic response was I don't know what happened the gun just went off when I put it in the holster. David

[Martin248]

Lawyer created a video purporting to show how the "uncommanded discharges" can happen. However the video depicts a pre upgrade sear that doesn't have the second striker catch and doesn't explain why it wouldn't then capture the striker if it did slip off the sear and get past the striker safety.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=2Kykja...ature=youtu.be

[dwhitehorne]

Lots of speculation in that video with the idea of vibration causing the striker to slip and the safety to slip with the striker asssembly rotating all at the same time. A color coded animation looks real good in a courtroom when you are going up against the company with large military contract money. I don't see anyone suing Canik who had the same impact related firing issues.

We received our initial batch of 250 P320 Carry models in September of 2015. Our motor unit runs year round and carried the P320's for about two years before Sig replaced them with new 320's. An officer doesn't get much more vibration than riding on a Harley from DC to Camp David. The only P320's I saw fire unintentionally were negligant discharges.

Not many remember the complaints in 2014/15 about trigger slap. Sig welded up the back of the original trigger to stop the harmonics causing the trigger sting. That added weight to the trigger is what I remember caused the trigger to move when dropped and landing on the back of the beaver tail. From the videos Sig showed me the safeties all worked but the hard impact caused the trigger to move enough to release the striker. That is why Sig lightened the striker assembly, thinned the trigger, added the disconnector and the extra shelf on the sear ledge because they were failing the military 8 foot drop test.

A better video the lawyer could come up with is have a P320 in a holster attached to an oscillating motor (like a paint shaker) that fires in the holster. I imagine we won't see that video. David

[Martin248]

I agree, I can't see how they fire without trigger movement. My p320's have manual safeties.

Still interesting to see what their theory is, and notably SIG implemented a striker block for the p365 like everyone else, instead of this unique detent solution in the p320.

[Mysteryman]

Maybe you lack the training to use a gun with a safety effectively, so you do what's right for you. If you learn to use one properly muscle memory will flick the safety off when you raise the gun.

In the case of a p320 that lacks a trigger dingus the firing pin block is moved in the pretravel of the trigger, which is very light. At that point you have a tensioned striker with a clear path to the primer and the only thing stopping it if the sear. Better hope the alignment of the slide to the FCU is fully in spec at that point.

With a Glock there are additional safeties not present on the p320, like the trigger dingus, and the striker not being fully tensioned. With a hammer fired gun you can keep your thumb on the hammer and feel if it's moving as you reholster.



That second notch is a trigger bar disconnect that improved the feeling of the trigger reset and has absolutely nothing to do with safety.

The only modification SIG made that improved safety was reducing the weight of the trigger by a third so that it wouldn't travel under inertia. They also maybe made the safety block disconnector more tightly coupled to the trigger so it can't rise under its own inertia.

I do believe in those "uncommanded discharges" that there's going to turn out to have been movement of the trigger. The question I have is whether it's a full trigger pull or just the pretravel to the "wall" moving the striker block out of the way contributing to some kind of mechanical failure where the striker then slips off the sear.

The gap between the striker and sear in the p320 depends on both your slide and fcu being in spec, if that gap widens the tensioned striker can slip. If that striker block has somehow been moved, either by inertia, or a partial trigger pull--boom

No lack of training on my end. The point being made is that manual safeties are a stupid idea that is unnecessary on a properly designed striker fired or even a double action hammer fired gun. Yes, practice goes a long way to reducing your chances of forgetting to disengage the safety. With that being said, if your pistol didn't have a manual safety, then failing to disengage(or re engage) it is impossible. Why people choose to make their life more complicated by adding steps is beyond me.

The SIG mods included the modification you mentioned for the striker. The guns are unsafe. The uncommanded firing problem has been well documented, and no hands/humans were involved for many of the cases(witnesses to the fact etc). The shocking report was from the officer who is a SIG armorer who identified near zero surface contact between the sear and striker.

As for the holstering mantra. Yeah, a hammer fired gun gives plenty of feedback while holstering with the thumb on the back of the hammer/slide. The rub here is that holstering isn't a speed based operation, and having a peak at your holster isn't a crime. More to the point, one must sanitize their wardrobe of toggles, strings or any other dangly bits before use when carrying.

I agree, I can't see how they fire without trigger movement. My p320's have manual safeties.

Still interesting to see what their theory is, and notably SIG implemented a striker block for the p365 like everyone else, instead of this unique detent solution in the p320.

Not all 320's have a manual safety.

[Martin248]

Notably the military issue p320's do have a manual safety and there aren't any reports I've seen of the military pistols firing on their own.

That tells me that the issue is resolved by a trigger safety, and most likely that issue was inadvertent manipulation of the trigger.