Previous Post
Next Post

Online gun retailer Omaha Outdoors has halted all sales of the SIG SAUER P320 semi-automatic pistol based on the results of drop-testing they have conducted on the gun. Last week’s news of the Dallas Police Department suspension of P320’s from duty service prompted Omaha to conduct their own drop-testing on the P320 and their results were surprising, to say the least.

Omaha drop-tested four pistols of various sizes and calibers: a P320 TACOPS 9mm, a P320 X-Five 9mm and two P320 Compact .45’s. According to their description of the testing, three of the four pistols had also been torture tested to varying degrees prior to the drop tests.

Omaha found that when the pistols were dropped at a very specific angle — muzzle up, striking the back of the slide — the guns would discharge a significant percentage of the time.

As you can see in Andrew Touhy’s explanation of their findings above, one of the four guns they tested would not fire when dropped. Omaha Outdoors attributes the problem to trigger shoes of a particular weight installed in some models of the gun. According to Tuohy, lighter trigger shoes reduce or eliminate the problem.

Given these results, Omaha Outdoors has decided to suspend sales of all P320 models to the public.

We’ve been in contact with SIG SAUER regarding these results as well and they’ve been extremely helpful in evaluating what Omaha Outdoors claims to have found. However, given the prior torture testing that was conducted on at least some of the guns — which included launching at least one P320 some 50 feet in the air — both SIG and TTAG were concerned that Omaha’s results might not be fair or replicable.

As a result, we have conducted our own drop tests of the P320. Those results will follow soon .


Previous Post
Next Post


    • As SIG has told us directly, the P320 has passed ANSI/SAAMI testing many times with flying colors.

      From SAAMI:

      “With the firearm in the “Safe Carrying” condition, the firearm shall be capable of passing the below test criteria for drop testing from a height of four (4) feet (1.22 m) onto a 85±5 Durometer (Shore A) rubber mat, one (1) inch thick (2.54 cm), backed by concrete. The mat and concrete shall be large enough so that when the gun is dropped it will fall and come to rest without interference within the perimeter of the mat. The drop height shall be measured from the surface of the rubber mat to the center of gravity of the firearm. The center of gravity shall be determined to an accuracy of ± one (1) inch (2.54 cm) by any recognized method for finding the center of gravity of an irregular shaped object. The firearm shall be re-cocked and reset in the “Safe Carrying” condition after each drop or a separate firearm may be used for each drop. As an alternative to free dropping, other methods may be substituted if they provide equivalent impact characteristics.”

      SAAMI doesn’t seem to specify the angle of drop. Omaha’s tests were less formal. With no rubber mat.

      • Dan – As someone who has been involved in equipment testing for many decades, the test protocol you show is nearly useless for determining whether or not a firearm may discharge when dropped.

        For example, the objective of such a test should be under a ‘worst-case’ scenario, and dropping onto a rubber mat certainly doesn’t even come close.

        Secondly, the option to drop one firearm five times vs five firearms one time each implies there will be no cumulative effects from one drop to another. In what world is a firearm that should last a lifetime only going to be dropped once?

        Third, not specifying the angle or orientation of the firearm is also nonsensical in terms of representing a potential failure, because it implies there is no difference. In the legal world, that would rate an objection on the grounds of trying to introduce evidence not established in fact.

    • Our initial testing followed Cal DOJ guidelines for drop testing, and all guns passed this test. It was during the course of attempting to approximate portions of the ANSI test with its increased height that we discovered this angle would cause the weapons to fire.

      The perfectly parallel/perpendicular bore angles specified in Cal DOJ/ANSI/SAAMI/other drop tests sound great on paper, but they do not appear to cover all situations which might cause a weapon to fire nor do they allow for flexibility in terms of how different pistols interact differently with the ground based on their frame shapes, beavertails, centers of gravity, etc.

        • Which leads to the second point, which is that standard test protocols might be insufficient.

        • I agree with Sheepdog6. We should always test firearms to a lower safety standard. If we are going to be badass cowboys like Sheepdog,we need to accept a little extra danger in our lives, right?

        • There is a reason why ANSI sets safety standards and Omaha Outdoor sells guns and the guy getting sued by FireClean writes his opinion. I work in aviation safety. You have no idea the value of engineering expertise when combined with operational expertise. I highly doubt that OO or AT have the engineering resources to adequatly set or test safety standards.

        • How did we degenerate from nullias in verba to this kind of blinkered credulity? If the pistol passes ANSI testing, yet consistently fires when dropped in the manner shown, then the ANSI protocol is badly flawed.

          I own a P320 Compact, which I intend to keep, and I’m grateful that Omaha performed these tests and explained what they did. I’m very interested to hear Sig’s (re-)evaluation of the issue, and I’m confident they’ll set things right.

      • So no, this test doesn’t conform to accepted standards nor does it adhere to established procedures. Got it. Thanks.

        We’re other brands of pistol tested? Glocks perhaps? Did they fail?

        Was FireClean used as a lube?

        • My 1970 Mach 1 seatbelt doesn’t conform to NHTSA regulations. I have a 5 point restraint attached to the rollcage. So, it’s not as safe as the lap belt originally in that model? What should I do?

          Omaha Outdoor over tested. WTF are you so bent out of shape over? SIG stockholder?

        • WTF are you endorsing FAKE NEWS?

          WTF is “Omaha Outdoors” and what is their motivation to get themselves into the progtard news? You a PR shill?

        • That just means the safety standards are insufficient. For all we know, many guns might fail when dropped at the right angle on a surface other than rubber. That’s a bad thing. I’m pretty sure people use substances other than rubber to cover their floors and sidewalks.

        • BG, I remember a time when Dale Earnhardt wore his safety belt in a unapproved manner and suffered the consequences in an accident when it sheared against a sharp 90 degree corner. His trailer trash family almost sued Bill Simpson out of his livelihood. I simply pray you are never in an accident.

          Kiran, I’ll trust Omaha to sell guns, AT to tell me I’m my gun oil is just EVOO, and ANSI to determine safety standards and protocols for testing. Seems like a smart way to go through life.

        • So the fact that gun did discharge when dropped is completely irrelevant because you don’t like the testing. Ok got it.

      • let us not forget the Dallas p.d. was first to send up red flags…maybe in real life; not a test lab; that there was a problem for them to pull use of this firearm…it is a good point that testing of other firearms by outdoors may open a financial opportunity to open an independent lab for real life testing…seriously no mats around when I go to range.

        • According to most accounts, DPD wasn’t the first to throw up a red flag and didn’t have any problems with the gun. They had heard 3rd party accounts (basically, internet rumors) and, based solely on that, chose to temporarily suspend their approval of the P320 as an optional duty weapon choice for officers who didn’t want to carry the department-issued P226 and wanted to purchase something else instead. It was apparently a “until further notice, the P320 is removed from the list of approved alternative duty weapons” and it affected two officers. At this point, I’d guess they’ll be waiting on a lot more testing before adding the P320 back onto that list.

    • At least TTAG got one thing exactly right here. Order a couple more pistols and recreate the tests to see if they come up with the same results. TTAG could also design their own tests as a follow up to the original tests if there is something in the test protocol that is suspect. I would also like to see some other brands tested to the same protocols that the Sig pistols failed to see if there is a larger problem with the ANSI test protocols. I always assumed that “drop safe” meant the pistol could be dropped at any angle from any reasonable height (5 ft or less) on any surface and have it not discharge. I’m concerned from the research being shown here that there may be more of a possibility of any ANSI tested pistol discharging when dropped in the real world than what I previously believed.

      • “I always assumed that “drop safe” meant the pistol could be dropped at any angle from any reasonable height (5 ft or less) on any surface and have it not discharge.”

        That is a reasonable assumption. Like others I hadn’t realized that part of the definition of “drop safe” included specifying a rubber mat. Are we really going to consider a rubber mat the likely impact surface for a dropped pistol? Concrete or asphalt seem far more likely.

      • “I always assumed that “drop safe” meant the pistol could be dropped at any angle from any reasonable height (5 ft or less) on any surface and have it not discharge.”
        As I’ve said before, it is not economically feasible to perform tests as you think they should.
        There are 360 degrees in each rotational axis. There are 360 different rotational axes for each center of gravity (mag in/mag out, loaded vs partially loaded). (We won’t get into minutes and seconds)
        Then, there’s the surface the gun is dropped on. What about gravel? What about uneven sidewalk blocks? What about a sewer grate?
        If you expect this type of testing for each model, you must be prepared to pay for them. Even then, someone will come up with another failure mode.
        I’m not saying tests shouldn’t be done, I’m saying we must understand the resulting costs, and the fact that no amount of testing will make something idiot proof.

        • And I want to know if Omaha Outdoors ‘torture testing’ involved files or other tools. And by “other tools”, I mean to include the same media douche bag liberals who needed content that faked crash testing on GM “saddle” type fuel tanks on pickups; Alar (Daminozide) [coating on apples] scare; that POS (D) Senator attorney who made money on birth defect scares . . .

        • I was waiting for someone to call me out on this. It is not hard for engineers or gunsmiths who understand the design of a pistol to determine which drop angles would be the most likely to dislodge the sear or create the inertia vector on the trigger or whatever other parts that could cause a discharge. You don’t need to test every possible angle, just the ones most likely to cause a failure on that design. The drop portion of the testing that Omaha Outdoors devised did not seem particularly expensive nor time consuming. I would think it would take less than a day for a manufacturer to get comprehensive data on a pistol, which is not unreasonable considering the amount of time spent on research and development. And for TTAG to do some tests to get independent results, it wouldn’t take substantially more time than doing a comprehensive muzzle brake comparison, or silencer comparison or whatever. I’m sure manufacturers would be happy to donate samples to the largest independent gun related website out there, they have shown a willingness in the past to do so. If TTAG want to get to the truth of the matter (which is their usual stated goal), I would think this testing would generate enough interest and page views to increase ad revenue and make it financially worthwhile to them.

        • Yet rubber mats are still very unlikely surfaces for guns to be dropped on.

          Nearly everything they would be dropped on, for most people, is harder.

          Yes, we understand more thorough testing might be expensive or unfeasible. However some have undetaken aspects of it and gotten poor results.

    • I think I’ve seen enough here to convince me to get rid of all my polymer framed striker fired guns. Back to revolvers and 1911s it is.

      • It seems that these guns don’t have a trigger safety, à la Glock (and others).
        Would that have made a difference?
        Maybe you could take a Dremel to your safety?
        Oh, I will offer to take your unwanted guns off your hands; since they are unsafe junk, I will offer $5 each, plus shipping and transfer fees, of course. 🙂

      • There’s always the M9, of which no successive pistol has yet ‘beaten’ in DoD “testing”. Is the grip too big? “I’m sorry, we thought you asked for a gun” – Beretta. Stretch your damn fingers.

        • I think a great drop testing comparison would be between the 1911, Beretta 92, and the Sig P320, since they all have or will have been standard issue military pistols. Could include Glock and P226 if you wanted. For everyone who complains about the M9, I’d like to see if it holds up as well or better than the Sig in the Omaha Outdoors drop tests. I’d bet it would do well, but you really don’t know until you test it using the same test protocols.

      • “I think I’ve seen enough here to convince me to get rid of all my polymer framed striker fired guns. Back to revolvers and 1911s it is.”

        Better watch those 1911s! Many of the older ones are not drop safe. The Colt Series 80 came out in 1983 and was in fact drop safe. There were a few Colts made with the Swartz system before WWII that were drop safe but not many. Now most 1911s are drop safe with different types of blocking systems or in the case of high dollar guns a titanium firing pin.

        Nearly all modern designed revolvers are drop safe. I said most. There are still modern designs that are not drop safe when fully loaded such as the Freedom Arms Model 83. Everyone knows about the Colt SAA modern or antique not being drop safe but this was true of just about all revolvers until the 20th century. Iver Johnson came out with the first really drop safe revolver with the Safety Automatic in 1895. Other revolvers had to be loaded with the firing pin resting on an empty chamber to be completely drop safe. You can bet that most people back in that day did not only load 4 rounds in a S&W Model 3. How come they didn’t have ADs all the time? Because it doesn’t happen all that often even if the gun is dropped. It has to hit the ground just right just as the case is with the Sig P320.

        Still there is no reason for gun in this day and age not to be drop safe at any angle when dropped on a hard surface. Most people do not carry a rubber mat around to place on the ground before dropping their guns. I believe the fix for the Sig is an easy one.

        • “Nearly all modern designed revolvers are drop safe. I said most.”

          NAA Mini-revolvers (Originally a Freedom design) are not drop safe *if* the hammer is down and not in the safety notch between chambers.

          The question I have is, what other handguns are susceptible to this mode of failure, where the inertia of the trigger could result in a discharge if dropped?

          This leads me to believe Glocks may be inherently safer than non ‘captured’ triggers…

          • All sorts of autoloaders made before the 1980s. The Browning Hi-Power for instance. A writer for SWAT magazine by the name of Steve Malloy was killed when his Colt 1903 fell out and hit the garage floor discharging. If it is an autoloader made before 1983 I would cautious and assume it is not drop safe. There were some autoloader such as relatively few Colt 1911s that had the Swartz system are drop safe but they are rare.

            Most autoloaders can be “fixed” with a titanium firing pin or by doing what the US military did for decades, that is carry the gun with an empty chamber.

    • Were the Omaha Outdoors drop tests performed in accordance with the parameters of the ANSI/SAAMI Z299.5-2016 drop test specified in its Section 5?

      Does it really matter?? Doesn’t to me. Dropped at the right angle it will go off. I wouldn’t be surprised if a lot of striker fired pistols were the same. This is yet another reason why I love my DA/SA pistol with decocker and safety – DA on first shot.

  1. If the gun can fire when dropped, it’s a serious issue. It’s irrelevant whether the testing that caused it to fire conforms to some particular standard if the circumstances for the drop are conceivable in the real world.

    The ansi standard of dropping onto a rubber mat is ridiculous. How often is that likely to happen in the real world?

    That said, these tests may be skewed by the previous testing, so well just have to wait for more info.

    • Yeah, the part where they had previously “launched” one 50 feet in the air might invalidate the results of that particular gun. Also curious what height they dropped these from as some heights might also be more than you’d ever see in the real world.

      Of course the rubber mat is ridiculous, but I wonder how many other firearms would discharge if they were tested the same way without it. Perhaps it’s time for some updated testing on all of the popular models?

        • I hear tell that concrete, tile and marble are also materials sometimes used as ground coverings.

        • Yeah, sometimes dirt and concrete even get on the carpeting and rubber mats. Stuff’s everywhere. Someday it’ll likely bury us all.

        • Yes, from what I’m seeing in the comments here, I don’t think people understand what “Durometer 85 +/- 5 Shore A” rubber is.

          “Shore A” is a rubber “stiffness” scale, much like Rockwell C is a scale of metallic hardness. There are Rockwell scales, A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H and K. Almost no one in machining uses anything harder than the C scale – Rockwell C of 69 is the hardness of a carbide cutting tool.

          There’s a “Shore A” scale and a “Shore D” scale in common use, but ASTM specifies other scales – for what, I don’t know. D is harder than A.

          Shore A 85 plus/minus 5 is pretty doggone stiff rubber. 70 Shore A is about the “stiffness” of a truck tire. 100 I think is the top of the Shore A scale, but a 90 Shore A rubber has barely any “give” to it at all. I’ve seen 90 Shore A rubber on industrial roller wheels, used for moving heavy machines around a shop on casters.

          Let’s put it this way: If someone tripped you, and planted your face into a rubber mat, 1″ thick of 85 Shore A rubber… you’re not going to be too happy about it.

      • From what the video said, it sounds like the one tossed 50′ into the air did not fail.

        • So the fix is to toss your sig p320 50′ into the air first?

          (Just in case anybody’s detector is broken the preceding statement is sarcasm.

      • The gun that was launched into the air, was the one that didn’t fire when dropped, as per the tests.

      • The one they launched was the only one that didn’t fail their test, and they explain why at length. Please try to be even a little familiar with the subject matter before you chime in, you make yourself look like a complete fool.

      • You all should know by now that they used a rubber mat because they borrowed the pistols and had to return them unscratched!

      • “Perhaps it’s time for some updated testing on all of the popular models?”

        I bet California would just *love* to have an excuse to reduce the roster of ‘acceptable’ handguns with more stringent “safety testing”.

        Be careful what you wish for…

    • Someone told me once “My cat is so cool, he always lands on all four paws!” I said “You’re throwing him wrong…”

    • It’s not a bug, it’s a feature! In case you need to shoot every bad guy in the stairwell.

  2. If you’re launching the gun 50′ in the air how can that be considered a likely event in the real world. Wait a minute…ok I see how it could happen. Gun owner who doesn’t count as he fires while in a gun fight, thinks he’s out, fails to remember the gun slide locks to the rear when empty and decides to throw the gun at his opponent.

    • I’m pretty sure the one they launched 50 feet was the one that didn’t go off when dropped.

  3. So did you find the perfect angle that makes for a trigger pull due to inertia, or did you find the perfect angle to release the sear and bounce the firing pin/striker block out of the way?

    • They said that the weight of the trigger shoe was a determining factor in the drop failures.

      You can figure it out from there.

        • Maybe. However, I have seen videos of Glocks dropped from 10 stories and they did not fire. With the design of the Glock trigger I suspect you could never get them to fire from a drop of any height or in any direction/angle.

  4. If they have tested ALL of the other guns they sell to the same test and they passed, then they would be justified in their action. If they picked one gun and didn’t do the same thing with others, they are not being fair and objective in their testing and evaluation.

    • They listened to a concern and tested it…I feel that’s responsible on their part for not wanting to sell a defective firearm.

  5. The engineering argument for dropping on the 85 Shore ‘A’ rubber pad would be to extend the temporal duration of the pistol’s impact. This might be more likely to disengage a long travel, low mass sear release mechanism which would otherwise recover during a short duration event. And the longer duration would be more likely to defeat a trigger actuated firing pin block. The actual maximum energy of the pistol in the test event is the same, regardless of the pad.

    It may well be that drop tests should be performed both ways, on bare concrete and on a pad backed by concrete or metal. Angle of the pistol upon impact may also play a role here, depending upon its trigger linkage geometry.

    Wonder whether SAAMI considered these issues when they developed Z299.5-2016?

    • >>It may well be that drop tests should be performed both ways, on bare concrete and on a pad backed by concrete or metal.

      This. Makes me wonder why it was not that way from the start. It is not like crash-testing 20+ Lambos to simulate crashes not only with obstacles and vehicles, but with moose, cow, rhino and beer-stocked fridge outfitted with skateboard wheels.

      • Testing costs money.
        Testing parameters are not done to simulate each and every conceivable situation, but rather the more likely scenarios. otherwise, you couldn’t afford the product.
        Can you image the cost if autos were tested to each conceivable scenario? The same applies to guns. And breakfast cereals.
        And remember, statistically, far fewer are killed/injured by accidents involving guns than autos. (I don’t know about breakfast cereals)

        • Yeah, you’re right. It’s unreasonable for someone to expect testing to determine that a gun thrown into, say, a garbage compactor to never drop the hammer while it’s being crushed or for an poorly secured gun to not go off when it gets thrown during a high speed car crash into a wall. BUT, when your “drop safety test” passes guns that you cannot safely drop from a reasonable height, it means that you’re wasting the money you spend doing your “drop safety test.”

  6. I’d like to see how a glock, s&w, and xd would fare under this very particular type of testing. Maybe all these guns are not as drop safe as everyone claims.

    • I was told the tabbed safety is there to stop the trigger bar from moving on a drop, if true, then those pistols could be immune to how they dropped them in the video.

      • That’s partially what it’s there for, Glock website even says so.

        “The trigger safety is designed to protect against firing if the pistol is dropped or the trigger is subjected to lateral pressure.”

        S&Ws hinged trigger on the M&P is designed for the same reason.

        • I thought that hinged trigger was designed to pinch my finger and annoy gage bell<out of me?

          Oh well, Apex has a fix.

    • There are so many Glocks out there, carried every day by law enforcement, that if there was a drop safe issue we would certainly know about it by now.

  7. Interesting video for anyone capable of setting prejudice for, or against, this pistol aside.

  8. Obvious question: Does the M17 behave similarly?
    Slightly less obvious question: Is a drop required or will blows to the back of the pistol cause the same effect?

  9. Just a thought, using pistols that had been torture tested previously probably wasn’t the smartest move even if you admit that up front. It distracts from the main argument.

    So, he said that basically the inertia of the trigger is what’s causing this. It’s interesting to note that other manufacturers (Glock, Springfield, S&W to name a few) designed their triggers to prevent this (the little trigger safety on the Glock/XD, and the hinged trigger of the M&P)

    • Except, as they state in the video, one of the guns which failed was NOT torture tested previously. The one that passed was torture tested, so it’s not due to any failure of an internal part – it’s purely the inertia of the trigger.

      What I find really interesting is that the muzzle-up test is not part of standard drop testing procedures.

      • Oh I know, I’m just saying that it’s distracting. They beat up those guns, then used them in a completely separate test. I would have used brand new guns myself.

        I also find that interesting, I have never really looked into how those drop tests are conducted.

      • “The one that passed was torture tested, so it’s not due to any failure of an internal part – it’s purely the inertia of the trigger.”
        While probably true, that can’t be said with any certainty unless each part was tested to failure, which, of course, means the gun couldn’t subsequently be drop tested.

      • Barrel up is in the ANSI drop test spec. There are 6 different drop configurations that all have to succeed. You should go back an read section 5.3.

  10. thats why people like me still preach all metal guns. polymer framed guns are too prone to non-intentional slide jumps and this apparently. i would bet that all polys do this just like they all have slide jump if you hit the mag well too hard with the slide locked open, as in switching mags.

    • All this hoopla and testing this way and that way makes me wonder. Would a 1911 with one in the chamber, cocked and locked do the same. My bet is, being that the 1911 was divinely inspired, it would not.

      • You probably already know, but no. Both the grip safety and thumb safety would prevent what happened here from happening.

      • With series 70 model 1911 it would depend on the weight of the firing pin and the amount of force necessary for the primer in the test ammo.
        Series 80 have a firing ping stop that would eliminate this particular failure.

    • Tight or loose fit between slide rails and frame rails isn’t a feature exclusive to guns with polymer frames or metal frames. There are tons of metal-framed guns with excessive clearance between slide and frame rails that allow the slide to wobble on top of the frame to some degree and ‘bounce’ if you slam a mag in there, etc etc

  11. Did my own drop test, passed, I’m keeping my Sig 320, I think I’ll buy a second one, fake news, Omaha trying to get their name out

    • Except – and I say this as a Sig fanboy – Omaha Outdoors has video footage of their results.

      • Fake news isn’t something that’s not true, it’s just something the one using the label doesn’t like. No use arguing with ’em.

    • I did my own unconventional testing. Instead of dropping it, I just placed it in a Ransom Rest and smacked it several times with increasing force with a ball pein hammer. It didn’t discharge. I wonder if Sig will replace the slide under warranty? It’s a little dinged up now….

  12. Are we shilling for Sig? I thought TTAG let the chips fall? Why does one have to replicate the safety test? Perhaps Sig Sauer needs to work on QC…or not. I do shoot their ammo with no problem.

    • The source is somewhat obscure (at least I’ve never heard of them) so the skepticism level is appropriately high.

    • Absolutely not.
      How do I know?
      Glocks don’t have lanyard attaching points, therefore they aren’t needed.

      • Uh, they all have that hole in the back of the grip. You think that’s just there to hold grip plugs in?

  13. Me thinks the standard of drop testing needs to be updated to include a hard, bare surface, not just the rubber map, which seems asinine to me. Rubber will never match the hardness of marble, tile, or concrete, substances often used to coat floors and sidewalks.

      • This is why ANSI sets safety standards, Omaha Outdoor sells guns, and AT does whatever AT does when he isn’t getting sued by cooking oil purveyors. It isn’t willful ignorance, but I bet most people read rubber and thought that these guns were being dropped by ANSI on to fully inflated bounce houses.

  14. Omaha Outdoors is located in Houston, Texas. They are mail order only. Firearms are shipped to the FFL of your choice.

    That they were able to get one pistol to fire consistently, even though it had not been abused, indicates that Sig has a problem. They claimed that it took simultaneous contact with both slide and beavertail to fire the gun. I suspect that contact with either would be sufficient. If the problem really is inertia, I suspect it involves all parts of the firing mechanism parallel to the barrel. They would have to be lightened substantially or their return springs replaced with much heavier ones. A small change just means you have to drop the gun from a slightly greater height. Safeties like Glock’s trigger-within-a-trigger or S&W’s hinged trigger aren’t necessarily a guaranteed solution. If the safety moves soon enough, it will no longer block the main trigger. In contrast, guns with external safeties should be trustworthy since an impact that would disengage them is in the wrong direction to move the trigger mechanism.

    The standard drop test might have detected this problem had the gun been dropped muzzle up instead of muzzle down.

  15. A lot of pissy 320 owners on here complaining about the test cuz they don’t like the results. Could be a bum test. My only question is what was the height of the drop?

    • You saw the video.
      Given certain parameters (height of the person, height of surrounding furniture, known size of the gun, etc, drop height can be easily determined.
      Not by ME,, of course, but I’ve watched “Bones,” so I know it can be done.

      • No need to be precise, honestly. That question of the exact drop height is academic. The real question is “is the height reasonable for real world purposes?” and that seems like a pretty straightforward ‘yes’.

  16. striker fired guns usually have a light trigger pull, facilitating an unscheduled release on a drop fire test. install a heavier trigger pull weight and you have nullified some of the perceived advantages of a striker fired pistol!
    If this is a future Army pistol I would want it torture tested! boys and girls of the service can misuse , abuse , destroy and generally shred new equipment post Ricky tic! {in a heart beat] especially in training not too mention combat,
    Test the point of breaking, of course if it is unsafe the SIGS pocket Senator will put pressure on the Army to keep it.
    maybe it’s another SNAFU like the 250!

    • Army did all testing they needed to pass their qualifications, I’m very sure their more than satisfied with the misuse and the abuse they will encounter, no pocket senators here both are democrats both are anti 2nd amendment, one is a first term the other is a second term, some of these posts bring up good points, fake news, possibly Omaha getting some recognition, possibly first gen model, or is it Glock still crying, what ever the case maybe the military still got the winning pistol

      • maybe not

        The claim needs to verified one way or the other. We have all “assumed” that modern high quality guns are drop safe. That is exactly why we never attempt to catch a falling gun in that is know to be “less safe”.

  17. Hilarious! Most of you would flame Taurus for their Millennium Pro recall, even though those pistols also passed all of the same tests. I performed MY own drop tests on MY PT145, on concrete, with NO mat, from several heights and angles, as well as striking said pistol with a mallet from multiple angles and was unable to cause a discharge. Even so, it’s in the safe, no longer carried, just because of pending litigation. The SIG fanboys are gonna SIG…

  18. Is Omaha outdoor owned by glock the inventors of negligent discharges, Because their still crying over the huge loss with the military contract. Might it be, if true the pistols were the first generation, and if so the list is very long on first generation pistols of many brands with many different failures, pick a well known company and you might be surprised

    • Agree, I pick a well known company, Glock every first production pistol made gen1-5 have all failed, the latest gen 5 (17M) The Firearm Blog 08/19/2016, there was a huge recall

    • P320 fanboi detected.

      Negligent people are the inventors of negligent discharges and that has nothing to do with being drop safe. *Accidental* discharges on the other hand… looks like SIG has the patent on that.

  19. Seems like muzzle up would be a very common drop angle. Worse, that muzzle angle puts people in real danger. A drop height of 5+ feet is more than reasonable from a weaver or isosceles stance. I can’t imagine drop tedting doesn’t include these parameters. Shame on you ANSI.

  20. Eh, Would like to see they test this with other pistol as well to see comparison. Also, “They have tried using various ammunition”, in the video they guy is standing there waiting for the pistol to fire, Safety issue? What idiot is waiting for that pistol to go off in a random direction so a Bullet can shoot them? Think they opened a can they can’t close.

    • I’m sure they used blanks for their tests. The gun only needs to fire the cartridge in the chamber. It’s irrelevant whether the action cycles properly afterward.

    • When you’re doing tests like this, you use an inertial bullet puller, pull the bullet, dump the powder, and use a case with only a primer in it to put in the chamber.

      The issue in different varieties of ammo is the ductility of the primer cup, the seating of the primer, and how the ammo headspaces.

  21. This is why I will never own a Gun without a Trigger and Safety!
    I totally recommend getting a FNX-45!

  22. If you watch the video you can see 4 things.
    1- the P320 passed all drop tests that commercial guns need to pass.
    2.- These people did find a way to get the P320 to fire almost consistently by using a non-standard hight, 50ft, and a non-standard drop angle, on the Grip tail/back end of slide/muzzle up.
    3.- Even though they got the P320 to fire relatively consistently, it is a very very unlikely real world senario needed to make it fire.
    4- They fixed the problem by removing the thick Sig trigger with a thinner, lighter one. That’s it.

    • There is no “standard” drop angle in real life. But let a pistol with an empty chamber and full mag settle to its center of gravity with your finger through the trigger guard… You get THAT orientation.

      And where are you getting 50 feet from? That was like stomach height if you watch the video.

      • Standard meaning industry standard for testing. And I had a typo, not 50 yards but 5 yards.😀

  23. SIG P320, meet Caracal C, meet Ruger Mark IV etc. etc. etc.

    All too often, early adopters of new pistols are unwilling beta testers.

    • Yep. Unfortunate. I have the perception that these companies are pretty widely respected, too.

  24. The Colt 1911 was an item as to safe carry that if dropped it would discharged. See Gun Digest 26th edition 1972, Safety Pin. They went into looking at firing pin striking the primer because it was not locked down. It would have to be dropped “24 feet onto a concrete floor; however, something as hard as concrete is required to discharge the pistol. Landing on a soft or resilient surface, perhaps even a wooden floor, will not discharge the pistol.” “ it appears that if a loaded pistol fell approximately 24 feet and struck concrete roadway with the barrel pointed directly downward” the pistol would fire.

    What does this have to do with the Sig discussion, is that test standards have to be evaluated.
    24 feet onto only non-resilient surface, not very likely as I know it, to occur.
    Dropping 3 feet and pistol discharging, is something that calls for an in-depth review of testing protocols ant the pistols involved.
    I do own 1911 style (model 70’s). I do not own any Sig firearms, but would be proud to own any of these model but would have a trigger job performed to install the ‘tab trigger safety’ prior to use.

  25. The test standards are useless and irrelevant if you can reliably demonstrate failures, as these video results would seem to indicate. I don’t care about ‘minimum standards’, I care about real-world possibilities.
    I have never been in, nor do I plan to be in a head-on collision, but I understand it is possible. That is why I pay attention to crash tests. I have never dropped a gun, but I also understand it is possible.

  26. Maybe these cluck heads at Sig Sauer should have taken a little piece of the Glock that was only designed in 1983 and put a trigger tab safety on the pistols trigger. I absolutely can’t stand Sig Sauer and I’m very disappointed in the Army’s decision to purchase that piece of junk pistol. I mean come on let’s face it Gaston Glock figured this out back in 83 probably before that and these fellows thought that a pistol couldn’t be dropped in that form of an angle that’s about as safe as one of those $69 Chrome plated 32 you can buy down in the south side of town LOL.

  27. As I said in comments on the 8-4-17 article in which TTAG shared Sig’s “nothing to see here, move along” message, there was more to the story than Sig or Dallas PD were sharing.

    Now we know the reason for the Condition 3 disclaimer on page 25 of the P320 owners manual, Sig obviously knew their P320 would drop fire under certain circumstances.

    The most troubling aspect of this scandal is the deceptive attempt by Sig to suggest all manufacturers used common language similar to this very specific and unprecedented disclaimer found on page 25 of the P320 manual;

    “If dropped, the pistol may fire. Keep the chamber empty unless actually firing. ANY FIREARM MAY FIRE IF DROPPED!”

  28. None of my guns are drop safe. They all might get scratched or an optic broken. I would consider dropping my Korth on concrete to be a bit of a tragedy;-)

  29. What I find most interesting in all of this is generally in fiascos like this, somebody ends up being asked to fall on their own sword.

    So far in this PR crisis I’ve only seen a third party response to this from Bruce Gray and the official response from Sig signed by Ron Cohen himself. (lumping the DPD dept recall in with this as they both are semi related PR wise)

    Will be interesting to see if Ron gets the heave ho.

  30. I’m really surprised at the volume of comments so highly critical of the claim. We have a real problem when we see a firearm “going off” (which the community is usually quick to point out NEVER really happens) and the response by a significant fraction of people is “So? It didn’t go off in these laboratory conditions. Nothing to see here.” While I agree that it’s possible that Your Least Favorite Plastic Fantastic might also fail in the Omaha Outdoors test, that’s a far bigger indictment of drop test standards than it is an exoneration for the P320. I’d be really disappointed to learn that the reasonable understanding of a “drop safe” gun that I’ve been using is incorrect, but I’ll wait for more data before I am really concerned. Serious props to TTAG for jumping into testing. I don’t say that very often.

    • There’s a friggin video of it going off from a reasonable height drop and everyone is practically shouting fake news… When you say drop safe, I would expect it to be drop safe when the muzzle is practically pointing in the most dangerous direction possible when it hits the deck.

  31. I’m a Sig owner, with several including 226s from the X and Legion series. I have to say that video scares me. The P320 is supposed to be the rough and tumble crime and war fighting pistol. Simple momentum of the pistol causing a false trigger pull is terrible for any pistol, let alone an extreme conditions one that is likley to see extensive field use. I would bet a number of sharp moments backwards may cause an ND, like the pistol striking cover or concealment in the heat of action. Perhaps colliding with a balistic sheild, door frame, or vehicle opening while making dynamic movements will set it off. On top of that, Soldiers and officers sometimes get their weapons knocked out of their hands too, or lose them while climbing obstacles during pursuits All are opportunities for a drop on the rear of the slide.

    It seems to me that tab safety is a must on that gun, to keep the trigger pull acceptable, the DA/SA partially cocked system in place, and keep the gun safe.

  32. I’m a 50/50 Sig/Glock fan boy and was curious what if any bias Omaha Outdoor might hold for or against Sig. After reviewing everything at this link , it’s clear that OO conducted a fair and comphrensive drop test on multiple P320’s and that since OO has previously released very positive reviews of the P320 and has sold a considerable number of them, if any bias by Omaha Outdoors prior to this turd in the punch bowl drop test revelation would definitely be if favor of Sig.

    Sig knew full well the P320 could drop fire, their tacit admission in the disclaimer on page 25 of the P320 owners manual was there for a specific reason.

    Once again here’s what Sig printed on page 25;

    “If dropped, the pistol may fire. Keep the chamber empty unless actually firing. ANY FIREARM MAY FIRE IF DROPPED!”.

  33. This video makes me think ANSI needs to add this orientation into the standard test procedure.

    • Exactly. Since how a dropped pistol will land is not predictable, any way a pistol could possibly land is how the drop test should be conducted.

  34. So watching the slow motion parts after OO rep states that the trigger continues to move after the gun hits the ground, I do see the trigger continue moving after the gun stops and then rebounds BUT the movement is extremely short. So unless the guns have really short take up and sear release, I would have to disagree with the analysis that the trigger moving is the fault. Also to note is that the one discharge appears it could have been caused by throwing the gun down.

    That being said, I fully support that drop testing should NOT be done on a rubber mat (what was ANSI thinking?) and would love to see other guns (Glocks, M&Ps, etc) drop tested this same way to see if they also experience any discharges.

      • “The trigger tab mechanism is why Glock pistols won’t drop fire, can’t happen.”

        Can’t happen for trigger related firings, BUT that tab will not prevent drop fires if there are other issues like faulty sear, etc that could be design related.

        • No, can’t happen period, even if the other 2 of the triple redundant features in the Glock fire control assembly failed as they never have before, the trigger tab safety prevents the trigger moving reward allowing the trigger bar to deactivate the drop safety and firing pin safety mechanisms. Obviously you’re not familiar with the Glock “Safe Action” and why it can’t drop fire, Google it.

        • Whoa whoa there, I’m a Glock fan too but I think Seth was making a more general point.

          If the design allows the final firing pin block to be jiggled out of the way when dropped, the firing pin could engage the primer no matter how many other safeties are before that point in a firing cycle.

        • Well Eric you should be an even bigger Glock fan to know that Seth is mistaken, a Glock will not drop fire, won’t happen, can’t happen. As I said before, I’m a 50/50 Glock/Sig Fanboy and own G17, 22, 26, 31, & 33, as well as a P220, P226, P226 DAK & P239, but my go to pistol is the P226 DAK 9mm equipped with an E2 grip, short trigger, and smooth honed action that I carry because I shoot better with it on both qualification and training courses than any other pistol I’ve ever owned or been issued in the 37 yrs I’ve carried a gun. My P226 DAK can’t drop fire like that either. As a Sig fan I hope they get a handle on and remedy this mess PDQ, because it’s a really big deal for the pistol the company fortune is riding on to drop fire from 30 inches.

          • To Ted Unlis

            Quote———————Well Eric you should be an even bigger Glock fan to know that Seth is mistaken, a Glock will not drop fire, won’t happen, can’t happen. ——————quote——————

            WRONG. Glock went through 3 engineering modifications of its frame rails (carbide buttons). It was found that when the gun was dropped the trash plasticky frame would flex and the slide would fly off the gun and the gun would fire.

  35. There are two things a gun needs to do: fire when the trigger is pulled, and NOT fire when the trigger is not pulled. Everything else- accuracy, comfort, price, etc is secondary. If either of those two elements is broken, the gun is broken.

    I don’t care if the test in question didn’t match the specifications set out in national testing. The test is supposed to find faults in the gun, the gun is not supposed to find flaws in the test.

    The only excuse for a gun firing without the trigger being pulled is if it happens despite- not thanks to- the mechanical elements of the gun. So if the ammunition goes off due to heat being applied (i.e. a blowtorch or something ridiculous) to the firearm, that’s not the gun’s fault. If the shock of dropping at high speed sets off the round without the striker ever hitting the cartridge, alright, that’s not ideal but at least it’s not really the safety’s fault. We’ll see if that’s what happened here.

    But if that striker\hammer is allowed to fall on the cartridge when the trigger isn’t pulled, gun’s broken. We’ve had mechanisms to block such an event for decades.

    • The force of impact as the rear of the P320 slide and frame makes contact with surface the pistol is dropped on generates enough inertia to move the trigger assembly reward which is functionally identical to activating the trigger with a finger.

  36. Love the smell Sig Fanboy’s but hurt in the morning. Almost like napalm. This has almost overshadowed the news over the Army’s 7.62 decision.

  37. This is interesting test data, and I applaud Omaha Outdoors for putting some money and effort into testing instead of just being part of the Internet Chair Force.

    Since it seems that all these PD’s want to go (back) to 9×19, and they want a drop-safe, striker-fired pistol, and they’re a bunch of tax-fattened agencies, ready to spend the taxpayers dry… why play around with these modern cheez-whiz Teutonic contrivances?

    Let’s go back to a gun we know that works, is reliable, and has proven to be cop-proof (by how many of them we see in functional, working order in the use-LEO gun market). The S&W Model 10. The hammer block safety makes it drop-safe.

    There, I just solved another problem for law enforcement, free of charge.

      • Ted, ever hear of a “pissed-off taxpayer?”

        There was no problem solved by going to the Sig P320’s. What was Dallas PD running before this? A Sig P226, I think? What was the problem with that? They’ve seemed to be an OK sidearm, IMO.

        This constant churn of PD sidearms isn’t solving anything – except running up expenditures of tax monies. That’s it. None of it is making cops better shooters, or exercise more judgement, or increasing officer (or anyone else’s) safety.

        In the last 30-odd years, we’ve seen PD’s go from .38’s and .357’s, to Glock wunder-nines, then some to 10mm’s, some skipped the 10 and went to .40’s (aka “10mm Short”), then some to .357 Sigs, now, we’re seeing more and more PD’s go back to 9×19’s. Because – some complaint or other.

        OK, so I’m solving all the issues at once: Let’s go back to the .38 Special, in a modern revolver (which gives you the best of both a single action trigger pull and the NYPD 12lb trigger pull), mild recoil, ease of service, it’s drop-safe, made in the USA, etc etc. Again, I’m solving all your problems with firearms selection – for free! It’s the least I can do to help, what with the stuff I’ve witnessed watching cops on gun ranges for the last 30 years…

        • Stop digging DG that dotage is showing. Are you really that obstinate & hard headed to deny that in addition to Glock pistols having been proven over 3 decades as a simple, reliable, & durable duty weapons preferred by three quarters of all US LE agencies, Glock has dominated the competition year after year on price which translates fewer taxpayer dollars spent arming the LEO’s you seem to have so much contempt for. The agency price for a Glock 17 gen 4 with tritium sights @ 3 mags is in the $375 range or less depending the size of the order. The reason Sig developed the P320 was to compete with Glock on price after the P226 & P229 became too expensive to win LE contracts with even the most creatively written bid specs. Even if some LE agency out in left field was so inclined to take your asinine advice on arming LEO’s with obsolete 1930’s technology handguns, its obvious your haven’t kept up with the price of S&W or Ruger duty appropriate revolvers.

        • I’ve quite had my fill of cops claiming they know everything about weapons. I’ve been around enough of you stuffed shirts and pompous badges on gun ranges in the last 30 years to see how unsafe and arrogant cops are – you should cease worrying about the specifics of firearms designs or features, and worry more about cops’ own incompetence in handling guns. The single biggest danger to lots of cops is… themselves. Some cops I’ve witnessed on gun ranges could injure themselves with a popsicle stick – never mind a gun. Others should have their driving licenses pulled from them before they kill themselves or someone else. Somewhere, back in the late 1970’s, police departments decided they would drop their standards and start recruiting some really dim candidates. Today, recently, we see that a candidate was rushed through just because he fit the correct racial/religious profile – and he up and killed some woman because he was ‘startled’ – and quite nearly killed his own partner, too. No modern gun will make up for that sort of incompetence – ever, anywhere.

          Technology isn’t going to save cops from themselves. PD’s could improve their recruiting and training, but it seems that’s just too difficult and incomprehensible to them. So PD’s keep pouring taxpayer money down the rathole of technology, hoping that it will cover up fundamental failures in recruiting and training.

          Here’s a hint: It won’t.

  38. If this were a Taurus or HiPoint all the fanboys would be demanding a recall. Sig hasn’t done anything useful in many years and like Glock rests its reputation on the 220 series of pistols. Sig USA over charges for poorly made and backed guns.

  39. Here’s a prediction coming out of this, FWIW. You heard it here first.

    We can see with all the finger-pointing and useless sidearm-churning that law enforcement/tactikewl agencies and departments are doing, there’s going to be a federal standard established for sidearm acquisition. This will morph into a multi-state acquisition standard, and then pretty soon, you’ll see a national firearms testing lab established that will eventually morph into a proof house.

    That’s what is coming down the road, thanks to states like California and their legal requirements for guns sold in their state. No one is going to trust the pinheads in California’s state government to do the testing, so it will become a national issue.

    This will effectively stifle firearms design, just as it has in the EU, because once you have a “safe, proven” design, no one will want to come up with something new, because it will require more testing, more expense, more time to market.

  40. As I was saying a couple of days ago when we spoke of Ruger’s recall of their .newly modified 22 automatic pistol, Gun Manufactures today rush a gun to market without adequate testing so as to make a profit and if people get killed so what! Satisfying the greed monger stock holders takes priority over human life. Same with Sig. Greed rules the world.

    In the distant past when Gun Companies were family owned they had their pride and reputation to uphold and often tests guns for months and in some cases over a year or more to make sure they performed as they wanted them to perform.

    This is going to be a military pistol and considering the rough treatment they get, often from people who know little about firearms this gun did not cut the mustard but since its already been adopted the Military mind is not going to do reject it as that would cause loss of face. They will accept any half ass fix just as they did when the Beretta cracked its slides and the shrapnel flew back and badly injured people.

    I remember reading years and years ago when they drop tested the 1911 guns (brand new not worn out) and they did not go off despite being dropped from a considerable height. But that was back when they tested guns before marketing them.

    Without a safety blocking the sear what in the hell did they expect anyway. Another reason safety-less striker fired guns are an accident waiting to happen. I would imagine the military is even to damn dumb to demand a manual safety on the gun as well. Considering the fact that many recruits have never even handled a pistol in their lives that’s another accident waiting to happen as the trigger snagging on anything will set the gun off right now. How stupid can they be adopting a gun without a manual safety as it defies all logic and common sense. Not that a trigger safety would be any good in a drop test but a well designed grip safety that blocks the sear would work, just as many other ancient automatics have had for over 100 years. Too bad no one let the Neanderthals of the U.S. Military in on this secret.

    The Military needs:
    1. A hammer fired gun because the ignition system of hammer fired guns far surpasses any pre-loaded striker fired gun. As a matter of fact when the Germans ran tests between the two systems they had to modify the ignition tests for the striker fired guns because they all failed when compared to the hammer fired guns.

    2. A gun with a grip safety that blocks the sear

    3. A manual thumb safety that can stay on when you load or unload the chamber

    5.. A de-cocker lever or button as found on the H&K P30S

    6. A loaded chamber indicator that is extremely visible like the pop safety on the Beretta or the protruding pin as found on the Walther P38.

    7. A safe take down system that does not require you to pull the trigger to take the gun down and keeps your hands away from the front of the gun. Glocks don’t pass this test. Cheetah the Ape could have designed a better and safer system.

    If the Military wanted a cheap junk plastic framed gun then the H&K P30S would have fulfilled all of the above requirements except for the grip safety and the highly visible chamber loaded indicator. I do not count the swing out red painted extractor on this gun to be adequate but the gun could indeed be modified for a good pop up loaded chamber indicator and ditto for an add on grip safety, its not rocket science. And HK would have to prove that their MIM Cast parts all last at least 20,000 rounds

    All this shows you the people who adopt guns for the Military have so little knowledge of weapons they should have hired experts to come in and do the job of choosing a hand gun for them because now look at what they got, another boondoggle that put egg on their faces and another complete waste of taxpayers money on a gun that is not even safe to handle or use. What a joke.

    I hate to say it but if they had just bought new 1911 guns they would still have been way better off even if they had them chambered for the 9mm and not the .45 acp. At least they would have had a safer gun and a gun that works under rugged conditions.

    • OMG! Just when you think surely the ridiculously uninformed comments shared couldn’t possibly become any more embarrassing and cringe-worthy, CK delivers a manifesto.

      • To Ted in the head the Unlis-tener

        quote———————-OMG! Just when you think surely the ridiculously uninformed comments shared couldn’t possibly become any more embarrassing and cringe-worthy, CK delivers a manifesto.————-quote

        And since you have no manifesto of your own that pretty well sums up your level of expertise on the subject now doesn’t it. You walked right into that one genius.

  41. A good piece of advice I received from my parents…never buy a car in its first year of production. I was thinking about buying a P320 and decided to apply that advice to guns. Glad I did. Sig will get it worked out and maybe I’ll get one then.

  42. Okay, first off does this guy have really small hands or is this striker fired pistol really the same size as the S&W 500? Second, if they tested one straight out of the box and it dropped fired there is a serious problem. Rather you are a Sig fanboy or not, it is a problem. The good news is the video already made a couple suggestions that make big improvements. Can everyone stop screaming long enough to fix the problem before releasing thousands of these to our troops?

  43. I like SIGs a lot , I have some p-228s and 226. I would not want ANY gun to go off at ANY angle from ANY height when dropped. and in the military so guy drops his gun from a height from a helicopter at that certain angle and the gun goes off and kills another one of our soldiers …… I don’t care what torture test ( like the hard realities of combat for instance) such a situation is NOT acceptable under ANY condition . something needs to be fixed. our soldiers need the best equipment , that is safe for them and works right without any snaffoos.

  44. I’m sorry, I just don’t have the patients to read this many comments! I can only refer back to this sentence in the article: “Omaha Outdoors attributes the problem to trigger shoes of a particular weight installed in some models of the gun.”
    What in the Wide Wide World of Sports is a ‘trigger shoe’ doing on a DAO striker-fired pistol?! Did the FACTORY install these things on different models?! They weren’t even safe to install on DA REVOLVERS, fer crissake! If this is some kind of factory ‘accessory’ designed to make the gun EASIER to fire (I suspect that it was a 5.5~6.5lb trigger to start with), somebody needs to have their thumbs removed so they can’t do anything this stupid again.
    In case anybody missed basic physics, mass times velocity equals potential energy (shorthand, but you get the drift). If you make an object heavier, and move it at the same velocity, it will develop MORE potential energy. Here’s a news flash: If you add a 1-pound weight to an S&W Model 10 trigger with its standard 12.5~15lb trigger draw weight, absolutely drop-safe with the standard trigger, and then drop the gun, it JUST might fire!
    If this gun is drop-safe as it was tested in the Military model, then THAT’s the trigger to produce–not some set of variable triggers for different models.
    Gosh. . . GLOCKs don’t do this. Could it be that THEY figured out that One Trigger to Rule Them All was a GOOD idea, and that sticking in modified triggers with lower pull weights and heavier trigger bodies was. . . BAD for an EDC gun?!
    Stupid, stupid Glocks. We hates them because they are all the same. We thinks that we can engineer them better than those stupid, stupid Glock engineers, my Precious! We wants them modular, with extra parts and levers and dials and knobs, and color-tinted aluminium triggers and in different flavors! Evil, dirty Glocks!
    Who thinks Glock is stupid, now?
    Snort. . .

  45. OK, here is something I think no one has mentioned about the video. #1 Who in their right mind would (as shown in the video) drop a loaded firearm with their bare hands standing right behind the gun? #2 why didn’t the dropped guns ever try to cycle from the recoil of a cartridge that was supposedly of “several different manufacturers?” Looks to me like they were using blanks of some sort to me (hence no recoil or fear of dropping a loaded gun.)
    #3 Something smells fishy about this! If you doubt my suspicions, go back and look at the video again and watch it. Me thinks this is bias, probably by someone who is butt hurt about Sig for some reason. And just so you know, I don’t even own a single Sig firearm.

  46. SIG got the Army contract because they were THE LOWEST BIDDER! If you know anything about government procurement you geniuses would know that, jeez!

    • quote————————SIG got the Army contract because they were THE LOWEST BIDDER! If you know anything about government procurement you geniuses would know that, jeez!———————-quote—————-

      Yes you make a very good point, in the Hillbilly U.S. of Hey even contracts for street repairs go to the lowest hill jack incompetent outfit. By contrast in Germany road repair contracts go to the most professional outfit that guarantees its work for the longest period of years and price is secondary because over the long run the best repairs last the longest and cost the least amount. This is way over the head of Hillbilly mentality who always save a penny today so they can go bankrupt tomorrow.The U.S. just chose the cheapest plasticky piece of shit possible to get its budget approved for adopting it, whether it works are not is immaterial as soldiers are expendable. I am in no way being facetious.

      • That’s not exactly true. The Army has had a policy since WWII of “good enough ” for most (not all) procurements. Meaning it need not be the best but it needs to meet certain specs. Within those specs of course the cost is important as it shoul be.

        If the Army went entirely on cost they would have bought Hi Points or some other such gun. I think an important thing to remember is that because the Army adopts it doesn’t mean it’s the best. In fact the Army adopting something almost assures it is not the best. That is how it should be to protect taxpayers. Really would you want the Army buying the very best of everything when the best is not needed?

        • Well,the Crisco Kid seems to live in Germany, where you can’t even change the handlebars on your BMW without a lot of red tape.
          They seem to feel the government should spend their money freely with regulations and procurements that make them “better.”
          Understanding is good.


    The P320 is turning out to be one of the biggest successes for SIG in every conceivable market. It may yet benefit from an upgrade.

    (Photo: GunsAmerica)

    SIG Sauer is issuing a voluntary upgrade package for their popular line of P320 striker-fired service pistols to improve their reliability and safety. The P320 is one of the most prominent next-generation polymer pistols. The U.S. military just selected the P320 to replace the bulk of Beretta M9 pistols in service today.

    Recent testing shows that unfortunately, “dropping the P320 beyond U.S. standards for safety may cause an unintentional discharge.” This particular issue does not affect the M17, the P320 going into service with the Army and Air Force as a part of the Modular Handgun System (MHS) program.

    The SIG P320 is one of the pistols most tested to see service today. “The P320 meets U.S. standards for safety, including the American National Standards Institute (ANSI)/Sporting Arms Ammunition Manufacturing Institute (SAAMI), National Institute of Justice (NIJ) as well as rigorous testing protocols for global military and law enforcement agencies,” said SIG in a release.

    The P320 has been in use publicly and privately for years. It’s only been in recent tests where people have been able to produce conditions where the pistols may discharge when dropped.

    “As a result of input from law enforcement, government and military customers, SIG has developed a number of enhancements in function, reliability and overall safety including drop performance,” highlights the release. “SIG Sauer is offering these enhancements to its customers.”

    SIG will update their website on August 14 for P320 owners with all the details about the upgrade.

    See Also: Springfield Armory XD-S Recall: Update and Review

    “SIG Sauer is committed to our approach on innovation, optimization and performance, ensuring we produce the finest possible products,” said SIG CEO and president Ron Cohen. “Durability, reliability and safety, as well as end-user confidence in the SIG Sauer brand are the priorities of our team.”

    SIG maintains that even with this issue the P320 is the safest striker-fired pistol on the market. Of all of the accidental and negligent discharges, by far the most common is during disassembly. Most striker-fired pistols require the user to pull the trigger for cleaning and maintenance.

    The P320 employs a different kind of take-down system that disengages the trigger from the striker without pulling the trigger. That alone makes the gun safer to use, especially for military and departmental use.

    Still, the current problem with the P320 is clear. When dropped at just the right angle — or wrong, in this case — the trigger may have enough inertia to trip the striker without a human pulling it.

    Like many upgrades or recalls, the nature of this problem is not insignificant. If you are a P320 owner you should absolutely get in touch with SIG about their fix next Monday.

    SIG has not released details of their upgrade options. It could be as simple as a lightweight polymer trigger that doesn’t have the mass to fire when dropped.

    In any case it’s clear that SIG is getting behind this issue as quickly as possible.

  48. There is a new video out showing a guy hitting the back end of the slide of his Sig p320 with a plastic tipped hammer and it fires right off. Great job Sig in your rush for greed you are going to get a lot of people killed and severely injured for life until you are sued into forcing you to have a massive recall which I am sure you will fight every inch of the way.

Comments are closed.