Previous Post
Next Post

Teaser photos of the B&T USW-320 have been circulating around the interwebs for a few months now. We should have covered it but sometimes these things slip through the cracks. Basically it’s a stripped polymer pistol frame that accepts SIG P320 parts.

The best part of the design: the serialized part in the modular design P320 is the fire control group housing. That means you can buy a P320 and enjoy it while you wait for your federal From 1 permission slip to come in. You can also move the fire control group hosing between different weapons and have only one serialized part.

B&T should be releasing the frame and stock soon. In fact some websites are already taking pre-orders. For specs on the frame check out the B&T website. Here are B&T’s specs:

Delivery The scope of delivery consits only of the lower frame with integrated folding stock but without any attached or built in parts.
Width 43 mm (1.7 inches)
Weight 188 g (6.6 oz) Lower with folding stock
Stock Length of Pull 360 mm (14.2 inches)
NAR Rails 1
Magazines P320 magazines, 17 round and larger
Handling Ambidextrous
Shoulder stock Foldable
Remarks Available from April 2018 on

The frame sells for a penny under $300 and is available in your choice of black and tactical peanut butter.

Based on B&T’s track record for design and build quality, this could end up being an excellent,affordable SBR platform. No, it doesn’t take GLOCK mags and you can’t get a version with a brace. See the comment section for the obligatory drop safety jokes.

Previous Post
Next Post


  1. Ummmm… not to be a grammar pig but it’s “slipped through the cracks.” Otherwise an excellent idea. Might be considering that.

  2. Could it not have been produced with a “brace” instead of a “stock” and still retain classification as a pistol when installed? Just curious!

  3. “See the comment section for the obligatory drop safety jokes.”

    Way to get out ahead of an issue, TTAG.

    In all seriousness, I don’t see this being very popular in the civilian word at least until someone gets a compatible brace approved by the ATF. Considering this is compatible, however, with the military’s new standard-issue sidearm…I bet at least a couple double-super-secret squads are drooling over this at the moment

  4. One more nit to pick–it’s not a “stripped frame.” According to SIG, it’s a “grip module.” The frame is part of the Fire Control Unit, the serialized part that is the firearm.

  5. SBR’s suck. Can’t conceal, can’t cross state lines. As a “rifle” it has a magazine capacity restriction for open carry (in VA). This thing is crying out for a legal, minimalist, tiny arm brace/hook.

  6. I think it’s awesome, for the sole reason that it can be holster carried without much additional bulk over a standard pistol. Using a brace is going to make the entire piece larger at the muzzle when folded, which negates much of the point of the design… I’m all for having a brace option, but this seems arguably worth getting a $200 stamp for.

    That being said, if you’re going to need a stamp anyways, and you’re replacing the entire grip/rail of the gun, I would hope they will eventually offer a model with an integrated light and fold-down VFG since that’s OK on a SBR, but not permitted on a pistol/braced pistol.

  7. Neat AF, hoping for a review. Not too pricey either. With the P320 being available in .45 ACP I would drool over a 460 Rowland conversion with this setup.

  8. I wonder how drop safe is the TTAG staff. I propose we commence testing, …, what they already act as is they had been dropped 2 meters unto concrete head first? That explains a lot. Yes, I am a fan of drop testing contributors (from at least 2 meters, head first, I’ll give you the exact angle) to TTAG articles for as long as they do not drop old irrelevant issues.

  9. I don’t know if it’s just me or if everybody else
    encountering issues with your website. It appears as if some
    of the text on your content are running off the screen. Can someone else please provide feedback and let me know if this is happening to them too?
    This could be a issue with my internet browser because I’ve had this happen previously.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here