SIG SAUER Stops Production of P320, ‘Voluntary Upgrade’ Details on Monday

SIG SAUER has stopped production of their P320 pistol. Responding to “drop safety” issues, the New Hampshire gunmaker has halted production of one of the company’s most popular handguns until they can include the new “enhanced” trigger in all new P320 models. SIG wouldn’t provide a date for restarting production.

During yesterday’s visit to SIG HQ, the company recognized the issue with the -30 degree hard surface drop discharges brought to light in the Omaha Outdoors and TTAG videos. They drop-tested P320s in the prescribed manner and reproduced the worrying results at their Exeter, NH manufacturing plant.

SIG then swapped the commercial P320 trigger for their new enhanced trigger, combining a lighter trigger shoe with a new disconnect. Performing the same -30 hard surface drop test with the upgraded pistols — “more than 200 times” — SIG’s engineers didn’t experience a single discharge.

SIG invited TTAG and other members of the firearms media to watch the tests, using three P320 pistols equipped with the enhanced trigger. All three pistols were dropped multiple times on the back of the slide, striking a concrete pad. None fired. All remained in working order, demonstrated by an intentional trigger pull after each drop.

In high-resolution slow-motion video provided by SIG, we watched the original commercial trigger move when the gun was dropped at a -30 degree angle. The trigger didn’t move a great deal — but it was enough to release the striker and discharge the firearm. In a slo-mo video of a P320 equipped with the enhanced trigger, the trigger shoe still moves slightly — but to a much smaller degree than the current trigger. Enough to prevent an unintentional discharge.

SIG claims that recent feedback from government agencies evaluating the P320 inspired the enhanced trigger design. The changes were intended to improve trigger feel during the pull and reset. The result just happens to fix the drop safety issue, too. According to SIG, they intended to incorporate the changes in all P320 models — at a date the company didn’t specify.

We expect this process to move forward quickly. SIG SAUER’s rapid manufacturing model enables engineering-to-production changes on the fly. Also ensuring a speedy changeover: SIG has already installed the enhanced trigger in some 50 M17s delivered to the 101st Airborne Division.

It isn’t known if the US Army intends to do any additional drop testing beyond their current standard protocols, given that the enhanced trigger pistols have already been delivered to the Screaming EaglesIt would be easy to visually determine if these pistols are so equipped. The most obvious identifier: the enhanced trigger’s striker has several cuts that diminish its mass.

For the commercial market, SIG SAUER has decided not to recall the roughly 500,000 P320 pistols already in customers hands. Instead, they’re offering a “voluntary upgrade” to the enhanced trigger. The company will announce full details of the offer on Monday.

SIG insists that the “voluntary upgrade” isn’t a recall by another name. They point out that the P320 has passed multiple safety tests by a variety of reputable organizations, including the U.S. Army and state governments. Judged only by these standards, the current P320 is “drop safe”.

That’s a claim that may be addressed in a court of law.

Meanwhile, tens of thousands of P320s will soon be rolling back into the company’s New Hampshire production facility, once the upgrade details are announced. Customers opting for the upgrade will have to send in their complete gun; both the frame and slide have to be modified.

That’s an enormous logistical challenge. Given the number of P320’s already in the wild, SIG’s “voluntary upgrade” will be an extremely expensive endeavor — even if SIG decides to charge consumers a fee for the service. And there’s no way [yet] to estimate the amount of time customers will be without their firearms. Or the damage done to the SIG brand.

That said, everyone we met on the ground at SIG SAUER was taking the drop-safe issue extremely seriously, publicly and passionately declaring their desire to make this right for consumers. Watch this space.

comments

  1. avatar raz-0 says:

    Any insight as to if the frame modifications means the chassis or the grip module? Or both?

    1. avatar Jeremy S. says:

      Everything. Grip module gets modified to make room for the disconnect, chassis gets some new internals, slide is modified for the disconnect.

      Should be mentioned that of all these parts, the reduced-mass trigger in and of itself solves this particular drop safety vulnerability.

  2. avatar former water walker says:

    I doubt I’ll ever buy a Sig(other than ammo) but their quick response looks very good to me.
    Kudos…interesting difference between them and certain Illinois gun manufacturers who shucked and jived after TTAG exposed them. I’m here for the long run…

    1. avatar O2HeN2 says:

      The “quick response” is because they knew of the problem, were working the problem and weren’t telling anyone about the problem. This smells of timetable that was moved up only because someone made it public before Sig was ready to announce an “enhancement”.

      O2

      1. avatar Arc says:

        This right here.

        Several big names raised a stink about it and called them out. They had to answer or lose face. Otherwise, this would probably be swept under the rug.

  3. avatar JPD says:

    Before all the Glock fan boys go on a rant about how wonderful and perfect the Glock is….let me remind you of 1992, by Glock, who called it an “upgrade”. After reports of unintentional discharges. Under similar circumstances to the P320.

    https://web.archive.org/web/20080604164428/http://www.thegunzone.com:80/glock/upgrade-faq.html

    1. avatar Justin says:

      Neat history lesson. It’s 2017 and I trust my Glock.

      1. avatar Moose_Bear says:

        Glocks are awesome. I think he just meant that this kind of issue isn’t unheard of in great pistols.

      2. avatar anonymoose says:

        Did you trust the Gen4s in 2011? Do you even trust the Gen4s now? And if you’re still obsessed with the Gen3, then it’s time for an intervention, because you’ve obviously become part of the Glock Cult (or you’re stuck in California- not sure which is worse).

        1. avatar Mark Ridgway says:

          BEING STUCK IN MEXIFORNIA IS INDEED THE WORST!

    2. avatar Curtis in IL says:

      Enough with the “fanboy” garbage. Even lovers of Gaston’s plastic wonder know they aren’t “perfect.”

      We’re blessed to have access to high quality guns produced by many companies. Sig Sauer and Glock are among them. Even Hi-Point knows we don’t tolerate unreliable or unsafe guns, and the industry generally does a great job of meeting our expectations.

      Sig appears to be dealing with this situation in a forthright manner. Good on them. They will get this resolved. This, too, shall pass.

      1. avatar Eric in Oregon says:

        Hear, hear. The only people who feel the need to bring up Glocks in these articles are the actual fanboys (of SIG in this case) who are butthurt that there’s a flaw in something they’re way too invested in.

        1. avatar IN Dave says:

          Amen to these^^^^

    3. avatar Steve says:

      Did Glock owners had to return their glocks on their own dime?

  4. avatar i1uluz says:

    Send P320 in, wait wait wait wait, weeks, months, year to have it sent back? Maybe it’s time just offer a free replacement pistol, then refurb the older ones and sell them as CPO to recover the cost. The fact that the slide has to be milled is a concern, I replaced the sights on mine with night sights. I see a good chance that parts could be mixed up during the “fix”. This is happening at the same time they are ramping up to supply the federal contracts, just adds to the chance of slow turn around and returning the original parts after being fixed.

    1. avatar Ebby123 says:

      Where does it say anything about milling the slide?

      1. avatar Moose_Bear says:

        I recall the original Soldier Systems article saying they’d need to modify the slide and frame to update it. I hope an option to just get a new slide is possible. With the exception of talon grips my 320 is stock so it’d be ok by me.

        1. avatar Jeff says:

          Scuttlebutt is they are just replacing the striker and FCU components. I think a lot of the concerns are folks making too many assumptions based upon vague language in stories.

          If you’ve added aftermarket components then those will not be reinstalled. Your gun will come back with only the factory enhanced trigger system installed in it Your non-factory parts will come back to you in a bag with a gentle warning notice that they are third party components that Sig will take no responsibility for if you reinstall them yourself. Modify your handgun from factory spec and you are on you own liability wise…as it always has been.

          We’ll see for sure on Monday, till then don’t go putting too much stock in anything you read that doesn’t come from Sig….including my comments.

      2. avatar jwtaylor says:

        In yesterday’s meeting with Sig, they made it clear that in order to complete the enhancement the slide itself would also have to be modified.

  5. avatar Justin says:

    Neat history lesson. It’s 2017 and I trust my Glock.

  6. avatar Moose_Bear says:

    If they don’t charge all is forgiven. If they charge us to fix it the P320 and XM17’s reputation goes down the tube, deserved or no. Just look at the M9 and early M16…

  7. avatar Shire-man says:

    If Toyota offered to replace the guts of a 2012 Taco with the guts of a 2017 Taco because the 2012 guts were faulty I’d be pretty thrilled.

    I can feel the same way about my p320. It’s not my EDC and It’s not like I don’t have other guns to shoot while I wait.

    I wish everything I owned was faulty and would be replaced free of charge every few years.

    1. avatar HP says:

      I own a 2016 Taco, you’d rather keep the guts from the 2012, believe me. The new 6 speed transmission on these things is god awful.

  8. avatar Moose_Bear says:

    If the don’t charge all is forgiven. If they do charge they’re reputation will go the way of the M9 and early M16. Just my $0.02

    1. avatar tsbhoa.p.jr says:

      how ’bout if they charge two cents?

  9. avatar The Gray Poseur says:

    Where’s all the body armor at the Sig drop testing?

    1. avatar Joe R. says:

      That would indicate that they believed that there was a chance it would fire.

      All gave some, some gave all. For PR, someone had to take one for the Team.

    2. avatar Kendahl says:

      No need for body armor if the cartridge in the chamber has no powder or bullet, just a primer. That’s entirely sufficient for a drop test.

      1. avatar Joe R. says:

        If the weight is commensurate.

      2. avatar Curtis in IL says:

        Kendahl,

        In order to get the joke, you had to be here yesterday.

  10. avatar Ed says:

    Beta testing on the public over and over by any other brand and people would be loosing their collective shit, but its Sig, so it seems the public is used to it.

    1. avatar jwtaylor says:

      How is this “beta testing”? They’ve sold half a million of them. The gun has been out for 3 years now. At that point it’s at best, product improvement, and at worst,the fix for potential safety issue that came to light years and hundreds of thousands of shipped models later. But it is in no way beta testing.

      As far as that safety issue, it should be noted that in half a million guns, Sig says that as of Monday they had 4 reported instances of a accidental discharges, including the video TTAG made. Not all of those reported discharges have been confirmed. That’s a few zeros in front of that decimal point when you are calculating probability there.

      1. avatar Ed says:

        You’re right. Its worse than beta testing. Selling a half million defective pistols to the public is irresponsible business practices at best. TTAG bought a random off the shelf P320 and had it malfunction, but we are supposed to believe that there has only been four confirmed malfunctions? Give me a break. I’d bet my Beretta that Sig has known about this being a problem since the cop in CT. had his discharge and injury. TFB has a vid posted of one of their personal P320s discharging from a mallet tap.
        If part of the fix is milling the frame, then there is a design flaw that made it past all their engineers, yet they would prefer to call the solution a “upgrade”. How is that acceptable? Worse than that, we all know its not the first time this company has done this exact same thing. Somehow, the military model got a different trigger system though and the slide properly milled? Bullshit. Sig tried to push out a “good enough” sub-standard first gen, already having plans to modify all production models, military and civilian. That is their story and it STINKS.

  11. avatar GS650G says:

    Lawyer drops a 320 in a courtroom and it goes off on the 2nd or 3rd drop and their claim of being drop safe goes out the window.
    They better rethink their position on this.

    1. avatar Cliff H says:

      Lawyer does that in court he better be able to prove that the Sig wasn’t modified and that it was still not drop safe after Sig did the upgrade. If he can prove that someone was injured by dropping the gun BEFORE the news of the issue became public, then he may have a case. If Sig notifies owners of the issue by any reasonable means and someone is injured after that point I think the case will be a hard sell.

      If you have been notified that a product has safety issues and you continue to use anyway it then I believe the onus is on you if you are injured, not the manufacturer who has offered to correct the problem.

      Now if you send in your pistol for the upgrade and while it is in the custody of Sig you are injured in a situation where the presence of the pistol could have/should have saved you, that might be an interesting case to follow.

    2. avatar Sian says:

      whether something is certified drop safe or not hinges on passing a specific set of tests, which the sig did.

      Given the failure, the drop safety protocol should be updated.

      1. avatar Norincojay says:

        Agreed, the protocol needs to be changed.

    3. avatar Ralph says:

      “Lawyer drops a 320 in a courtroom”

      Dude, you’ve been watching too many TV shows and movies.

      1. avatar TexTed says:

        Yeah, why would you have to do that, when the lawyer could just play the TTAG video in the courtroom? Or point them to this article, where Sig themselves verified and demonstrated that the pistol WILL fire when dropped? Seems there’s no need to go dropping pistols in courtrooms, all the evidence is already available.

  12. avatar Vincent says:

    It is official Sig U.S.A. is now to be treated with the same suspicion as Remington for all of their products. In Glock we trust.

    1. avatar Joe R. says:

      . . . to fetch enough at the pawn shop to buy a dependable police-remand Beretta 92 or 96.

      What’s that Beyoncé song? “If you like it then you better put a hammer on it”?

      The marginal drop-safe issues mean that the 320 is only just a little better than a GLOCK instead of a sh_t ton.

      1. avatar Curtis Barrow says:

        “If you like it then you better put a hammer on it”?

        Heh. Love it! {!-{P

  13. avatar The Gray Poseur says:

    Are we officially boycotting Sig?

    1. avatar strych9 says:

      At this point I can’t keep track of every company I’m supposed to boycott.

      1. avatar MIichael L McCollum says:

        Just remember the dems want to have you boycott (transcott) everything they do not approve of…….

    2. avatar Joe R. says:

      No, GLOCK.

      It’s complicated.

    3. avatar Curtis in IL says:

      I’ll probably go at least a week without buying anything Sig Sauer.

      That’ll show em!

      1. avatar Joe R. says:

        Stay strong man. : )

  14. avatar Andrew Lias says:

    My questions are actually:

    1)Does this have any implications for aftermarket parts mfgs or other gun mfgs? I mean, think about people adding a tacticool trigger shoe to their gun.

    2)If this is a defect in the testing procedures (which it seems to be) will other makers be discovered who have models with this issue not just Sig?

  15. avatar PeterK says:

    That is good to hear. This does assuage much of my annoyance.

  16. avatar RogUinta says:

    For the love of Pete, why don’t they just put a dingus on the trigger like everybody else? They could probably do that without forcing customers to send in anything other than the chassis. That striker assembly looks like a mousetrap on steroids.

    Frankly, I am not a striker-fired pistol fan. I won’t (and don’t) carry one. The triggers universally suck compared to a DA/SA or SAO trigger.

    SIG should have fixed the damned P250 without making it a striker-fired gun, or taken their P2022 design and attempted to make THAT modular. But I guess they’re reaping what they’ve sown…

  17. avatar michael says:

    if you are wrapping your identity in a product, seek help!

  18. avatar TexTed says:

    “By these standards, SIG says, the current P320 is drop safe.”

    That is insane. Having demonstrated how it most certainly is not “drop safe”, having verified for themselves that every 320 they’ve sold will in fact fire if dropped, they then weasel behind lawyer words to claim that it IS “drop safe”?

    What The Hell? What universe are they living in?

    I mean this in the kindest possible way: go to hell, Sig. When you pull your head out of your ass and realize that your pistol IS CURRENTLY A DANGER TO EVERYONE WHO OWNS IT, regardless of what BS “test” it passed, and you recall them so that nobody else gets injured LIKE AN OFFICER ALREADY HAS, then we’ll start to talk about whether it’s actually “drop safe.”

    For them to claim, after all this, that it’s still drop safe? Flabbergasting.

    1. avatar Jeff says:

      Calm down, take a breath. It’s called lawyer approved language.

      Technically what Sig said is correct even if we all roll our eyes at it. BTW such language and recall/upgrade procedures are nothing new. Even Gxxxk has taken similar approaches and wording towards past safety issues with more than a few of their models. Really nothing new here even if some would like to paint it otherwise.

      Hell half the folks complaining about this probably aren’t even carrying with a round in the chamber LOL. That said, I wouldn’t be overly comfortable with non-upgraded P320s in an area with a hard surface and lots of gun handling going on.

      Do the current drop safety testing standards need some revisions? I think the obvious answer to that is yes.

    2. avatar jwtaylor says:

      Ted, those aren’t Sig’s words, and I’ve re-edited the post to say that. That’s multiple state governments, federal agencies, and the US Army’s words as well as the words of multiple industry and safety groups. “Drop Safe” is a term of art, a stamp, or a checked box, nothing more.

      As far as Sig’s pistols being a danger to everyone that carries them, that’s just ridiculous. I want you to go back and think of the other guns that would be considered “drop safe” if we extended the standards. The M4 would fail from all of about 15 inches off the ground. The 1911 is the same way. I’ve carried a not “drop safe” series 70 1911 for many years of my life, as have hundreds of thousands of people. It doesn’t mean the guns are a danger to everyone that owns them.

      I had claim on that P320 in our test. I want it back. If it came back the exact same way as it left, I’d feel fine carrying it.

      1. avatar TexTed says:

        I see what you’re saying. I still have a really queasy feeling about it. Their approach feels all too much like “I was just following orders!” They know that it’s a potential danger, and they’re actively choosing an approach that avoids notifying their customers about it, hiding behind “but… but… according to the protocol, it’s safe, even if we see with our own eyes that it isn’t!”

        Sig: “It passed all drop safety tests.”
        Policeman: I dropped it, it was in a holster for crying out loud, and it still managed to shoot me.
        Sig: “It passed the safety test, so we’ll keep selling it to people.”
        Dallas PD: “Oh hell no. Get those things away from our officers.”
        Sig: “Well, we are unaware of any COMMERCIAL clients being affected by it. Sure, we know that our pistol dropped and shot an officer, but we’re going to sweep that under the rug and keep selling it to end customers. After all, it passed the “drop safe” test.”
        Policeman: “I’m suing you.”
        OO: “This damn thing fires if you drop it!”
        Sig: “No it doesn’t. Except that policeman who’s currently suing us, but he’s not a COMMERCIAL client”.
        TTAG: “This damn thing fires if you drop it!”
        Sig: “We know. We knew about it when that officer was shot. Hell, we’ve recreated the situation in our own labs. But it’s drop safe because it passed the test. We’re not going to recall these obviously unsafe pistols because … well, that would cost us money. So we’ll offer a “voluntary upgrade.”
        Ted: These things are dangerous!
        JWT: “But they passed the drop safe test. I’d carry it.”

        What’s the difference between a “voluntary upgrade” and a recall? In a recall, you have to take efforts to notify the customer. In a “voluntary upgrade”, you kind of hope and pray that the customer doesn’t read TTAG, so you don’t have to fix the pistol that you know is inherently not “drop safe”, leaving the innocent, well-meaning customer with a danger that he doesn’t even know he has, until he (like the officer) accidentally drops it.

        Eh, what do I care, I’m done with Sig, got rid of the one I had, so — y’all do whatever you want. I just think it’s outlandishly irresponsible for them to KNOW about a problem, DEMONSTRATE the problem, ACKNOWLEDGE the problem, fly in a bunch of journalists to SHOW them the problem, and then to say “but we won’t recall them.”

    3. avatar Sam I Am says:

      I fully agree. Unless a firearm has been tested for drop safety at each of 46 million possible impact points, the gun cannot be considered “safe”, at all.

      1. avatar Joe R. says:

        I cannot readily locate any reference, but I was told that during (near the end of) the M9 testing the Beretta rep called for an impromptu test that was not called out as part of the testing parameters.

        Supposedly, the Beretta rep challenged the other Manufacturer’s reps to drop their weapons out of a helicopter at 100′ and then test fire their weapons.

        [Again supposedly] There were no takers (including Sig Sauer) but Beretta did the demo anyway. (The story I heard was that the gun was loaded) [I don’t recall the surface type on to which it was dropped but] Beretta Rep then put the weapon through some type of firing test after, and the weapon was able to cycle during that test.

        That’s the only kind of drop test I would care about.

  19. avatar tsbhoa.p.jr says:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZpPp9y6fVk0

    “while the sun is out make hay…”

  20. avatar HRF14185 says:

    As a SIG owner, I’m very disappointed they allowed a faulty gun to leave the factory floor. Even worse, the secrecy behind the problem and the proposed fix.

    Granted, I never thought the 320 was worth a dime, but nevertheless, I don’t wish for anyone to get hurt. I’m glad they decided to make it right, after been publicly humiliated, but I don’t know if I would buy another SIG weapon system ever again.

    1. avatar jwtaylor says:

      What was the secrecy behind the problem? Everything I’ve seen from them so far has been extremely transparent.

    2. avatar Joe R. says:

      HOW IS THE GUN ‘FAULTY’?

      It works as advertised when used properly. Sig Sauer would have to be clairvoyant to know all of the different ways that someone might intentionally or accidentally carry/store/abuse their products in order to protect against what-may-come.

      Don’t drop your damn weapons. If you do, EXPECT THAT THE DAMN THING IS GOING TO GO OFF, or you’re just asking for trouble.

  21. avatar Norincojay says:

    Comparing GLOCK that has one type of action to Sig is apples to oranges. GLOCK just produces the same gun in different sizes with practically no innovation. Sig on the other hand produces a ton of different products with different actions. They innovate new ideas with new actions. When you are an innovator some designs have bugs that need to workout. I don’t own a P320, but with its modular design it is truly innovative. I’m not going to fault a company that pushes itself. As long as they make the right corrections when needed. Which appears to be the case here. At least nothing like Remington with both their 700 and R51.

    1. avatar HRF14185 says:

      I guess it explains why Glock is the most used weapon system in the world. Keep it simple sounds good to me.

      SIG has been dropping the ball as of late with some substandard weapons systems. The Army didn’t go with the 320 because it was the best, but the lowest bidder. That’s government procurement 101.

      1. avatar jwtaylor says:

        The most used handgun around the world is, and by far, the Beretta 92 series.

        1. avatar Joe R. says:

          ^ this.

          And the coolest way to carry it is in a Shoulder Holster people. I’ve been posting that for years. Go back and look.

          : D

        2. avatar Joe R. says:

          All the GLOCK crazies should just go to an indoor range where you can rent both a 9MM GLOCK and an XDm. Shoot both and let me know which one you like better. But if you compare the XDm (full size) to a Beretta 92 you would shoot it just as well (although, the XDm has a 20 round capacity and that is nice).

          Stack a Beretta 92 up against a P226, you won’t find enough of a coin-flip difference in them for a shooting preference or once you weigh out the features.

          There’s some new-fangled “options” on the Sig P320 but that’s more of just a way to please every hand than to make a better operating or shooting weapon than the Beretta 92 / M9.

        3. avatar Joe R. says:

          Saddam Hussein once murdered his whole Olympic swim team with a Beretta 92 for their poor performance. Iraqi’s were scared of the M9.

          That’s good enough for me.

        4. avatar jwtaylor says:

          Joe R., that is the most reasonable and logical test of a pistol I’ve ever heard. I’m not even sure if I’m kidding.

  22. avatar Evan says:

    Seems to me that Sig is handling this a lot better than Glock did with their whole NYPD fiasco in the early nineties, or the unsupported chamber thing, or even the Gen 4 teething problems “hot brass to the face is PERFECTION!”.

    1. avatar HRF14185 says:

      Do they have a choice? They were humiliated and exposed publicly for their shenanigan, they couldn’t ignore it.

      1. avatar Evan says:

        Well they could’ve followed Glock’s, Remington’s, Colt’s, etc. example and simply insist it’s fine until legal action in the form of a class action lawsuit finally gets the ball rolling…

  23. avatar Monte says:

    Has anyone ever specified if this problem also affects the P320 with a Safety?

  24. avatar Aaron Ping says:

    I own a P320. I carry it daily, with a round in the chamber. I will likely send it back to get the modification. I appreciate they’re going to fix this. I shot multiple firearms before purchasing the Sig. I for one do not like the trigger dingus. I am thinking of picking up a Springfield Xd. No matter what you think, it’s not taking a class action suit that is still being drawn out. I also own a PT145, that if the suit every gets settled will get sent back as well.

  25. avatar Steve Day says:

    The Glock fanboys really make me laugh…

    How quickly they’ve forgotten the dozens of Glock .40SW Kabooms, the many Gen4 problems and the 17M slides falling off the gun! LOL – the slides fell off!

    The fact is, every new generation of gun has it’s teething problems, especially when the design is modular and plug-and-play with different frames/slides/calibers – there is so much more to go wrong in a product with such complex engineering.

    The G-boys are scrambling to comment on this post, not with anything productive or of value to the discussion, but just because they lost the M17/M18 contract.

    Soooo much Glock-worshipper butthurt!
    I don’t think they’ll ever get over it. 🤣

  26. avatar IN Dave says:

    “feedback from government agencies evaluating the P320 inspired the enhanced trigger design.”

    Translation-fix the problems or your government contracts could fall in the shredder.

  27. avatar BigKahuna says:

    “…even if Sig charges a fee for the service…” HUH??? Got to be kidding.

  28. avatar Edward Morvant says:

    I own a p320 and a p250. If sig thinks I bought a weapon to let it sit in their factory or pay them to fix their problem, they’re out of their mind. I walked away from Remington for a trigger issue and now I walk away from sig.

    1. avatar CV76 says:

      Same here. Done with Sig. I armed each member of my family with these flawed hunks of scrap metal. Back to Glock.

      1. avatar Jazzy says:

        i find your statement stretches the limits of credility.

        Que up the next Glock fanboy acting like a whining teenage liberal with chronic butthurtitis. LOL

  29. avatar Grumpyoldretiredcop says:

    Good on SIG for their apparent transparency, although working in the industry, I can’t help but wonder if this was a known but ignored flaw in the P320 system. Nonetheless, I’ll most likely send my 320s (three of them) in as none is my EDC and for competition I can turn back to a 1911, CZ, VP9 or (gasp!) even a Glock. No big deal there. The only deal breaker is if SIG tries charging for this “upgrade”, then all bets are off and there’ll be three more 320s on the sales block.

  30. avatar Texas Harbinger says:

    On just about every firearm forum that discusses the current P320 situation (probably every one in existence) I constantly read about issues that Glock has had, problems with Sig, Remingtons are a disaster, so forth and so on. However, I have not read anything negative (as of yet) regarding H&K or CZ. I know that neither one of them probably has the large government contracts that Sig or Glock has but for an EDC weapon are H&Ks and CZs pretty reliable and safe, or have there been issues with them that I’m just not aware of? Also, I have a 20 year old Sig P226 DA/SA and I’m going to assume since it was manufactured that long ago the various problems that Sig has experienced in recent years regarding manufacturing defects and other issue might not reach back that far, and that particular model would still be OK as an EDC? Thanks in advance for your feedback and advice.

    1. avatar Mike H in WA says:

      My brother is a sales rep for CZ, so I’ve gotten a little time on the P-07/09. If not for my Sig Fanboy-ism, I would probably be carrying a P-07 or P -10.

      In fact, if the factory takes forever to “upgrade” (seriously, whoever is in charge of PR at Sig needs to be fired…) my P320, leaving me handgun-less, I may have him get me a P-10

      1. avatar Jan says:

        Get an Apex trigger for your P320, and you don’t need to mess with the factory upgrade wait and see time table! That’s BS, and Sig is dumber than crap not realising this issue long ago! Screw them I’ll get another glock or maybe that CZ for my next gun! At least they aren’t seondon amendment betrayers like springfield armory, at least not yet and time will tell. But this is a big issue that is not even QC related, but design related!! We all know Sig has really bad barrel and extractor QC issues lately. And yes Glock also has been having issues recently with some of their guns!

  31. avatar Dan says:

    Good for Sig to respond fast to the safety issue. And we can continue to mock Sig until the issue gets fixed. So all fanboys can have their cake and eat it too.

  32. avatar borg says:

    How cheap will these go for used due to this defect? If I like the price I may buy it since I can carry it unchambered.

  33. avatar Jeff says:

    I’m still trying to figure out why everyone is dropping their guns? I was taught from a young age how to handle a firearm. I have a real problem with cops or whomever can’t hold onto their firearm. Maybe better training is in order. Just saying.

    1. avatar Greg says:

      Well, in law enforcement sometimes you end up having to do weapon retention while fighting a suspect. While fighting over that weapon it could be dropped. Seriously to act like it can’t happen other than negligently is naive.

  34. avatar country says:

    Everyone should be made aware that the TTAG video was nothing more than higher office GLOCK personnel doing what ever play they can at this point cause they butt hurt over losing the military contract. Well played GLOCK,Well Played!!

  35. avatar arminius says:

    One thing I haven’t seen the answer to is references to sending the “whole gun” back to Sig would involve what, exactly, for people who have conversion kits, which represents a significant portion of P320 owners? I have a .40 with a 9mm kit, so I guess we send everything in?

  36. avatar Greg says:

    My only issue with all of this is they knew something was wrong. They had to have. Otherwise why does the manual specifically state, “Warning: Dropped Pistol – If dropped the pistol may fire. Keep the chamber empty unless actually firing.” ANY FIREARM MAY FIRE IF DROPPED.

    Really? Yet they claim the gun is safe and passes drop tests and won’t fire. And now that it is being exposed they won’t do a recall?

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email