Quote of the Day: SIG SAUER P320 Sharknado!

“The odds of a P320 dropping at the exact angle requisite to induce a discharge might not be as long as a real sharknado occurring, but no one is spending time and effort to induce the latter for YouTube. We can at least be grateful for that.” – Mark Keefe in The Keefe Report: The SIG Sauer P320 “Sharknado” [via americanrifleman.org]

comments

  1. avatar TrueBornSonofLiberty says:

    Tell that to the cop with a hole in his leg. 1 event is too many. Sig HATES their customers.

    1. avatar Tim says:

      Think of the children!

    2. avatar REven says:

      Yea because all cops are honest, like the cop who shot himself and tried blaming Glock, just wanted a payday, or the cop who shot himself and said he was shot by someone else, caused a full scale manhunt and turned out he did it because he didn’t want to work, and this is in Los Angeles alone, now think if you did a search, how many more

    3. avatar jwtaylor says:

      shockingly accurate

    4. avatar Manse Jolly says:

      Spot on…

      btw….CZ rulez!

      Sig and everyone else sucks!

      🙂

      1. avatar Desert Dave says:

        ^^ X’s 1000!! ^^

      2. avatar 6 says:

        Cz is shit also . Smith & Wesson M&P America’s number one gun. All others should be deported. Just joking I’m not a gun snob I like a lot of guns but never did like Sig. And a lot of the cheaper brands. CZ Smith & Wesson Glock Kimber cult all good guns

  2. avatar MarkPA says:

    The SIG P320 issue is – I think – being overdone. I don’t – by any means – minimize the significance of what is being reported. Quite to the contrary. Instead, I think the case should draw our attention to the general problem of promoting drop-safety for all makes and models.

    Should we be trying to test-our-way to drop-safety? I.e., to attempt to design enough variations in the prescribed testing protocol to reduce the potential for a fire-on-drop to a low-enough level of probability?

    Alternatively, should we redirect our primary attention to designs that we can have confidence will preclude a fire-on-drop failure under any conceivable scenario? Then, use a testing protocol as a mere secondary confirmation.

    How much good does it do all of us to merely flog SIG for it’s failure on the P320? The best I can see is that it deters other manufactures from trying to cut corners on their designs. I doubt the efficacy of flogging as a mechanism of deterrence.

    1. avatar The Duke says:

      These nonsense ideas of moderated reactions have place on the internet!

      And as far as clogging is concerned, the beatings will continue until morale improves

    2. avatar Jeremy in AL says:

      I think that we should conclude that dropping loaded handguns is inherently dangerous. I think that your chances are just as high to have the trigger catch on something as it falls and injure someone. Not worth worrying about.

  3. avatar Ton E says:

    Besides the filing documents in the Connecticut case what do we know about it? The facts will come out in the case simply filing doesnt mean what the plantiff alleges is true.

    1. avatar DrewR55 says:

      I agree. On its surface the claim by the officer (through second and third hand accounts) seems rather dubious at best.

      I asked, in a previous thread last week, how exactly did this tactical response officer manage to drop his (drop leg) holstered sidearm? Why wasn’t the Safariland holster still clipped to his leg or had he taken the belt off and thrown the entire rig over his shoulder?

      1. avatar Ton E says:

        As far as SIG not commenting on that case most companies undergoing a lawsuit won’t comment on it while it’s ongoing. There has been a lot of bashing of the P320 since the MHS announcement and someone decided now is the time to report on a lawsuit filed back in January? It’s feeding hysteria.

        1. avatar Ton E says:

          Robert I understand that but one could also say the same if the filing happened just prior to the statue of limitations expiring especially with it happening when all the P320 news dropping around the same period of time.

      2. avatar Robert says:

        The lawsuit states that the firearm was fully holstered and fell to the ground from the side of his leg when it discharged.

        I’m calling shenanigan’s on the lawsuit after reading it and seeing its inconsistencies. I don’t expect we will see a news report when the lawsuit is thrown out.

        Also, the lawsuit was just filed on August 4. Among more of the plaintiff’s erroneous claims is the claim that the Dallas PD removed the weapon from the approved list on Aug 16, 12 days after the suit was filed.

        Dubious at best.

        1. avatar Ton E says:

          Waiting over 6 mths to file? That alone breeds more questions.

        2. avatar FedUp says:

          Ton E: Lawsuits aren’t normally filed at the drop of a hat. If it was filed the month it happened, I’d say the plaintiff was in a big hurry to cash in his jackpot.

          Most personal injury actions are filed a week before the statute of limitations expires, years after the event, so that all medial costs and permanent damages can be assessed before filing.

        3. avatar neiowa says:

          Plan A – Attempt to shake down the target with threat of lawsuit
          Plant B – When they tell you to FOAD sue them.

          Why not sue the holster mfg?

    2. avatar Shire-man says:

      I didn’t realize it was a CT cop.
      That brings the chances of shenanigans up roughly 1,000,000,001%.

    3. avatar Ian says:

      The Gun Collective said that he claimed he dropped it while he was loading things into the trunk of his cruiser. He said it fell while it was in its holster still, and discharged. I dont remember if they said it fell off of his belt or if it was not on his belt when it fell.

      1. avatar Robert says:

        The lawsuit claims it was secured in a Safariland 6360 holster and on his belt. This holster has a hood as well as a soft plastic thumb block. That thumb block would have buffered the impact of the -30% drop angle.

        Here’s the kicker: If he were to get money from Sig as a settlement, he will have to first pay back his department for the Worker’s Compensation claims. It’s called subrogation and insurance companies do it all the time.

    4. avatar jwtaylor says:

      Exactly. It says a lot to me that the case has been ongoing for more than 6 months and Sig chose not to settle. That leaves me to believe they didn’t believe it was an issue, or don’t believe the officer.
      When Glock got a wrongful death suit, they settled with a quickness, although I don’t think they should have.

      1. avatar FU Springfield Armory says:

        Sig is probably delaying the settlement of the lawsuit until it knows the entire scope of other claims for the same liability.

  4. avatar Down With Yoga Pants says:

    The frequently inherent OCD tendencies of gun enthusiasts have truly grabbed hold of this Sig P320 issue with extreme prejudice. This is just fascinating to watch from someone who doesn’t care otherwise.

    1. avatar Joatmon says:

      Same here. There is a 50 page thread on a forum that got heated a few days ago.
      I don’t have a dog in this hunt so I’m just sitting back and reading. Makes for an interesting read though.

    2. avatar Timmy! says:

      Down With Yoga Pants, this reply is off topic because I just had to comment on your nom de plume. I LOL’d. Thanks for being… well, just for being!

      1. Yoga pants? I’m down with that.

  5. avatar Ahil925 says:

    I am getting tired of people apologizing for Sig and/or claiming the mechanical failure of safety systems is perfectly fine. I get the idea that the 320 was “built to spec” regarding drop safety standards but I would much rather prefer Sig to have built to “proof”, much in the way firearms are tested with over charged _ammunition.

    Yes there are firearms that exist today that are not drop safe. Most of those are older designs that are still trucking along. There are also 100 year old designs that ARE robustly drop safe. It should be embarrassing for SIG that they designed a pistol that was only “good enough”.

    Would be neat if some one aggressively drop test a batch of “budget” service pistols like Caniks, Walther Creeds, _Remington Rp9s, etc and see how they fair.

    1. avatar Down With Yoga Pants says:

      Thanks for your articulate points. No one else has said anything similar since TTAG ran away with Omaha Outdoors stunt. Oh, the same exact points have been made hundreds of times since? Never mind. Carry on.

  6. avatar Gman says:

    As a MSF instructor, I always begin the classroom instruction with a discussion about riding safety. I ask “Do you believe it is possible to ride a motorcycle safely? Most agree yes.

    Then I point out that the general definition of safe is the absence of risk. Merriam-Webster definition is free from harm or risk. And under that mentality, is it really possible to ride a motorcycle free from harm or risk? Definitely not.

    So what are we actually talking about here? With any activity, we must analyze, understand, and minimize the risks. We, human beings, are part of the safety equation. Where am I going??? I would bet that I could figure out a way for any handgun to fire without pulling the trigger.

    That said, what is the actual likelihood of that event ever happening? When handling a firearm, WE must be part of the safety system. WE must understand the risks. Regardless of how safe (or drop safe) a firearm may actually be or I believe it is, I would ALWAYS assume that any firearm would fire if dropped and, well, take appropriate precautions to ensure I don’t drop it.

    I watched these “test drops” from approximately 6′. How does a handgun get to 6′ in the first place? Will it fire from 5′? 4′? It appears they are dropped while inverted being held by the trigger guard. Is that a “normal” way to hold a gun? Is that how it would “likely” ever be “dropped”?

    Bringing it all back to your comment, sure, manufacturers could make absolutely sure no firearm would ever fire under highly unlikely extreme duress. Don’t install a firing pin. Problem solved.

    Of course that’s the extreme, but the more devices betwixt you and bang, the more likely they are to impede that bang when you need it most. Many of us carry revolvers just for that reason. There is virtually nothing between the trigger and bang; very little to fail.

  7. avatar Independent George says:

    O’Keefe is full if crap, which is exactly as I’d expect from someone whose publication is based wholly on ad revenue from the manufacturers he covers.

    The -30 degree angle is not some arbitrary number nobody could have predicted; it is the most vertical that the gun can be oriented while still having the slide impact the ground directly instead of the beavertail. As it happens, the slide is heavier than the frame, so when you drop the gun muzzle-up, the slide will tend to rotate downards and impact before the frame.

    1. avatar Charles5 says:

      That’s not how physics work. The slide weight only matters if the gun is rotating as it begins the drop/fall. If the gun is dropped without rotation, the slide weight will not alter the impact angle.

      1. avatar ActionPhysicalMan says:

        That depends on how far you drop it (when in a fluid of some sort), no? 😉

        1. avatar strych9 says:

          Mmmm… Yes and no.

          Most of the time it shouldn’t matter but you might end up with some movement based on airflow around the gun if you drop it from high enough that it really picks up speed and starts closing in on terminal velocity.

          In theory, given enough distance to fall the gun will orient itself to a position of lesser air resistance since the drag on one part of the gun will be greater than on other parts.

          For drop testing that doesn’t much matter because dropping the gun off a tall building or out of an aircraft isn’t a reasonable testing procedure and by the time you drop the gun that far it will probably be going fast enough that in certain orientations it will fire because force of the impact will overcome the inertia, friction and whatever I’m forgetting of the mechanical parts.

  8. avatar Rusty Chains says:

    Sharknado, umm no, shark attack, yes! Millions of people go into the water and few actually ever get bitten, yet it does happen. Maybe someone could invent a doohickey to go on the back of a Sig slide like those stupid rings people put on the back of Glocks to make it easier to pull the slide back, only in this case it would have a big orange rubber bounce bumper for those times when you just can’t avoid dropping your Sig.

    Problem solved!

  9. avatar kap says:

    Drop safe issue probably instigated by Glock, so they could weasel their way into the contract!
    was a needed thing, like 1911’s needing stronger firing pin springs etc. a word to the wise!

  10. avatar TommyJay says:

    Did anyone see the video of the P320 repeatedly drop firing when dropped from about 4′ at a +115 deg angle? The slow motion showed the trigger moving substantially rearward.

    If 6′ 6″ tall man is firing a handgun and someone slams into him, so that he drops it, then that would be a drop from a height of about 5′ 7″. Hardly an extreme scenario.

    The ANSI/SAAMI tests are marginal at best. The DEA has a weird “Frisbee” test where the handgun must be thrown sideways at least 15 feet. The best test I’ve seen is the NATO handgun test. They use a large number of 1.5 m drops and a small number of 3 m drops. 1.5 m is just under 5 feet.

    1. avatar Charles5 says:

      I think I saw that video on Youtube as well. My brother is a really talented with video editing. He took one look at it and immediately concluded that it was edited. He carries M&P’s and doesn’t own a single SIG, so I don’t think he has a bias. You can see the muzzle flash before the trigger moves rearward.

  11. avatar The Gray Poseur says:

    We need to discuss this Sig issue much further.

    Also, I don’t think we have discussed the Springfield and RRA issue enough.

    1. avatar Klause Von Schmitto says:

      Hey, did you hear that the Army is looking to dump 5.56 for 7.62?

      1. avatar RMS1911 says:

        Back to a proper caliber suitable for warfare.

    2. avatar ActionPhysicalMan says:

      Yeah, why isn’t anybody talking about this stuff!

  12. avatar Freedom says:

    This is being blown out of proportion but what can you expect out of a generation that thinks
    tearing down statues is going to make history go away…

    1. avatar AZgunner says:

      Well said.

      While I do think the P320 was fairly deficient in the drop safety department (partly because of pretty lackluster SAAMI test guidelines) it’s not the news of the century requiring multiple articles per day.

      1. avatar Freedom says:

        Thank you.

        I agree with you that this issues is turning into a dead horse.
        There is plenty of other firearms worthy news out there and it would be
        nice if this site would spend some time presenting that news instead of droning
        on about this issue which is being corrected by the MFG.

  13. avatar CLarson says:

    SIG better hope it’s not like Sharknado. I think they are up to movie number 5 Or wait a minute… PRODUCT PLACEMENT OPPORTUNITY! The hero should throw his dual wielded SIG P320s and they should bounce around killing sharks!

    1. avatar The Gray Poseur says:

      Awesome video. Jamie Lee Curtis was played by Instagram Armor Taylor in the TTAG video version. Which leaves Jeremy as Schwarzenegger.

  14. The one time I dropped my Glock19, I dropped it at that angle. I know because the metal rear sights now have a ding. It was dropped on a tile floor.
    I had the pistol in a holster and tucked under my arm. I wasn’t wearing a belt to clip it to. I was carryin beach towels and plates. I reached to set a plate down forgetting my gun under my arm.
    Fucker’s drop safe fo sho.

  15. avatar Pickle Rick says:

    Does this mean I’ll be able to get a cheaper P320 now?

    1. avatar The Gray Poseur says:

      Unlikely. All this chatter and debate are free. Selling your P320 for less than market value isn’t.

  16. avatar TheOtherDavid says:

    Sig, shmig….I’m still stuck on the Sharknado reference.

    I’m picturing Hickok45 with a pair of Desert Eagles taking on a school of Great Whites.

    “Life is good…and so is sushi”

  17. avatar KSinIA says:

    I have a SIG and am completely comfortable about its safety. However, it’s a SP2022 like the ones sold to the French police. I figure if any gun is drop safe, it’s one issued to the French.

  18. avatar Martin B says:

    What debate I have seen thus far is between fanbois and their respective clan icons, which is spurious and fatuous at best. The real topic of conversation should be the tendencies of German companies to screw the pooch at the first sight of any moral dilemma. Viz VW and computer chips built to fudge emission results.

    The sequence of events shows that (a) SIG presented a redesigned, safer trigger system for the US Army XM17 trials, which they won; (b) In the meantime, sales of half a million P320s continued unabated with the original, hazardous trigger system. This situation only changed with the internet proving that P320s are not drop safe.

    This reminds me of the description of Heaven being a shared world government with the French attending to the catering, the Italians romance, the Germans in charge of industry, and the British policing the whole shebang.

    Conversely, Hell is shown as British cooking, Italians in charge of industry, German Police, and who cares what the French do?

    1. avatar Matt Richardson says:

      Hell is definitely British cooking… The rest is totally unnecessary.

  19. avatar Matt Richardson says:

    Only Sig I own is a 229 built from an 80% frame. Don’t really have a horse in this race…

    It IS interesting to watch this particular drama play out here on TTAG and I’m left to wonder who on the Sig team pissed Leghorn off. The last time TTAG went from knob polishing to cold-shoulder on a brand this quickly was when he got cut from FN’s shooting team.

  20. avatar tirod says:

    This all started with a false claim from the Dallas PD hitting the news cycle, then a video that spawned more. The first questions out of the gate were “Why did the Army accept an unsafe gun?”

    The reality is that the M17 trigger is a different unit, with manual safety. They didn’t accept an unsafe gun.

    Since then it’s been one wild accusation after another with very few online posters even attempting to explain what the NIJ standard is , how it was arrived at, what “drop safe” testing it, and how far it goes.

    The first point of drop testing is accepting human failure – that someone can and will mishandle a firearm and lose control of it. Lets take the case of the Colt Single Action Army – which is never carried with a round under the hammer. It’s a six shot but because the firearm has a highly reliable method if igniting the primer their owners know better than to trust themselves. It’s always carried with five and the hammer on an empty chamber.

    Nobody much complained about it a hundred years ago and few owners do now. The accept the vulnerability and carry it in a manner to prevent a negligent discharge. It IS a negligent discharge with the P320, too. YOU HAVE TO DROP IT.

    But nobody is willing to accept that humans can be incompetent now and again – just like those who holster a loaded gun and shoot themselves in the abdomen carrying appendix and taking a self defense class. Heh, I bet you thought I’d say “shoot themself in the leg.” Does it really make much difference when you are on the floor bleeding getting first aid from your fellow cops or a class instructor?

    You screwed up.

    What part of dropping a P320 and making it go off isn’t understood at this juncture? You have to screw up, first, and even then we have a record of only 4 of 500,000 so far which have gone off. We read of people dropping their guns out of holsters or off toilet paper dispensers or fingering the trigger watching TV or taking them apart to clean them? From the Army’s perspective, all those are training issues, a failure of the soldier to properly handle their weapon.

    Don’t screw up and the gun won’t fall out of your hand and hit the floor. Screw up and you do more pushups. Basic training conditioning, make the soldier PAY ATTENTION and it promotes both safety and healthy exercise.

    But, no, not in the dark recesses of the internet where video commandos conjure up new ways to make a gun go off to gain more hits for their video channel – which makes them MONEY. These are licensed engineers or certified safety wizards, they are just banging on guns cause they like to make noise and get recognition.

    We have reached that goal of anyone being able to express their opinion in a land of free speech, but we haven’t actually improved any of what is being said. And all this silliness is getting out of hand – I recently read a post online where a gun owner, who apparenty considered himself to be as competent as the paid staff at any gunmaker or the testers in the Army, chambering a snap cap and then a FULLY LOADED MAGAZINE into his gun to prove it could or couldn’t go off. We are just one step away from people shooting themselves over this. All to prove what again? That humans make mistakes and shoot themselves quite easily enough, they don’t even have to drop the gun?

    I get the sense that as usual, in America we don’t do anything until someone dies, so I guess we wait for some kickstarter project to take in donations when Joe the Internet Operator kills himself testing his guns to see they can’t go off.

    Almost nobody I know who owns a gun is qualified to do anything more than just shoot it. Drop testing it, beating on it with a hammer, whatever you can conjure up, your insurance provider will tell you that it’s inherently dangerous, and you shouldn’t be doing it. Goes double from your spouse – but do we wait for blood to flow before we stop, or keep on doubling down on dumbass?

    The people who started this won’t be held liable in civil or criminal court, your survivors are on their own. Drop testing and beating on guns is FAR more dangerous than simply carrying them and then going oops on the bedroom carpet.

    Now, who’s up for dropping a Colt SAA? Guns are dangerous, ya know, they can and will go off. Quit acting like you are being protected from yourself and understand that handling firearms means accepting risks and modifying your behavior in ways to reduce and mitigate them. Just like not being out in the wrong neighborhood after 2AM – nobody is going to tell you it was perfectly OK and in your rights to be there. They are, instead, going to question whether you are qualified to handle firearms at all, because that hole you poked in yourself indicates a complete lack of regard for your own safety.

    This is not a “hold my beer and watch this” moment, folks.

    1. avatar Hannibal says:

      “This all started with a false claim from the Dallas PD hitting the news cycle…”

      Interesting. It seems like quite a coincidence that such a “false claim” would happen and be followed quickly by numerous sources replicating the exact manner in which the event was supposed to have happened.

      Must be wizards or something.

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