Jump to content
Brian Enos's Forums... Maku mozo!

P320 Voluntary Upgrade, Will you do it?


Sig0431

Recommended Posts

53 minutes ago, Sig0431 said:

 

@cheby Your post on this topic thus far have been negative in nature and not focused on the topic "P320 Voluntary Upgrade, Will you do it?" From what I can tell you do not own a P320 or a Sig in general. You shoot CZ after having moved from shooting glocks (which could be the root cause of your continued negative posting, I heard it is a common side affect of glock owners). I myself own Glocks and Sig's so I assure you that it is possible to respect all brands of weapons and help support the community instead of causing negativity, you just have to try really really hard. haha all kidding aside....

 

While this is a free country and I can not stop you from posting in this topic, in the future I please ask that you refrain from posting and if you feel the uncontrollable desire to bash Sig, you start your own thread. If all else fails and you find that you continue to have unlimited free time with nothing better to do may I suggest the following to occupy your time:

 

- Dry fire drills

- Reloading ammo

- Cleaning your CZ

- Live fire drills

 

If you can not tell, I am joking with you in most of this and trying to keep this light hearted, please allow us current or potential Sig P320 owners to remain on topic.

 

This is intellectually dishonest. I am providing the arguments backed up  by facts, logic, and evidence. You are responding based on your feelings and  attacking me personally. Sorry about your feelings, but this issue impacts safety for all of us regardless of what pistol we are currently shooting . 

Edited by cheby
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 235
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

21 minutes ago, cheby said:

This is intellectually dishonest. I am providing the arguments backed up  by facts, logic, and evidence. You are responding based on your feelings and  attacking me personally. Sorry about your feelings, but this issue impacts safety for all of us regardless of what pistol we are currently shooting . 

 

Once again... This post is "P320 Voluntary Upgrade, Will you do it?", if you would like to start a different post more focused on your agenda please do so but this post is for us to discuss if we will have the upgrade done.

 

And as for attacking you, I am sorry you feel that way. I tried to prevent it by saying "If you can not tell, I am joking with you in most of this and trying to keep this light hearted". I will refrain from using humor and attempts to keep posts light hearted in the future if said posts are in response to something you posted.  

 

As for your statement "I am providing the arguments backed up  by facts, logic, and evidence" your most recent link you provided starts off with "The following is the opinion of the author, and his alone". A writers Opinion is not Fact or evidence. But I digress and will continue to focus on the TOPIC, of this post and look forward to your "P320 speculation" post that you are welcome to start at anytime and share your views.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Tokarev said:

From reading a couple threads here and on a couple other boards I think this should be accurate:

SIG P320 is not exactly the same as the XM17. Some posts suggest that the two guns are identical or only differ in some corrosion finishes or because the 17 has a manual safety. But it sounds like there are some internal parts differences.

The DPD memo/suspension came about based on outdated language in an owner's manual and not due to any actual event. This was clarified by SIG and was the initial official statement that started all the fun.

Omaha Outdoors conducts their own testing by dropping a variety of pistols from a variety of angles and finds the "sweet spot" that has continued all the fun. They make a YouTube video and make it public just a few days after the SIG official statement. The SIG statement was not a result of the OO YouTube video but rather a result of the DPD memo.

Internet explodes with accusations and speculation. Some is probably correct but most is probably not.

SIG announces that they're going to initiate a voluntary upgrade program (that'll probably morph into a recall) but provides no real info on the program. Nobody knows who's going to be expected to pay shipping, what parts will be used (modified trigger with tab safety? M17 revamped internal parts? Something else?) so speculation continues. Anger builds over lack of info.

Bruce Gray is denounced as a hack and a shill but says he's still working with SIG to figure out a way to make and sell his parts in a way that is compatible with whatever SIG plans to do. Apex is also working to figure out the aftermarket trigger stuff.

Everyone is basically in limbo until Monday when SIG is expected to be releasing The Plan.

So that's pretty much a rundown of what I've read on three different boards and probably five or six threads. And it seems to me we can boil the people posting down into three groups. There are those who don't like the 320 for several reasons and are happy to see all these problems because the Army passed on the Glock. Then there are those who probably don't own a 320 but are acting outraged and offended by SIG and all the confusion surrounding everything to include SIG's confusion on handling the situation. These guys don't own a 320 but are outraged regardless. The last group is 320 owners who just want to know WTF is going on and get their guns updated and fixed without hassle.

Oh. And somewhere along the way a police officer in CT drops his gun while it was in a holster and takes a bullet to the knee. The officer may have tried to catch the gun or it may have landed in the sweet spot. We just don't know at this point.

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk
 

 

Great post. I appreciate you taking the time to put that together.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would like to remind everyone posting in this topic of a few forum rules.

First and foremost, these...

 

Posting Guidelines

Attitude
Please be polite. Or if not polite, at least respectful.
No bickering. Regardless of the subject matter.
Antagonistic, offensive, or quarrelsome tones are not acceptable.
No trolling. No alternate accounts.

 

Secondly, these...

 

 

Brian's Forums is not the place to resolve customer service issues or disputes you may have with a manufacturer, dealer, gunsmith, or individual.

 

Let's keep this discussion on topic, which is about the voluntary recall, amd if you will do it. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well then I'll get back on track and say I'll participate as long as SIG picks up the bill. Maybe I'll participate if I have to pay shipping to SIG but not if I have to pay for shipping and parts.

Then again what choice do we have? Keep the gun original and take a hit on resale value or send it back. Even if the gun is not as deadly dangerous as most of these videos indicate the damage is already done.

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/10/2017 at 0:51 PM, Sig0431 said:

Does anyone think or know if the USPSA may temporarily ban the P320 due to this drop issue?

 

I am new to USPSA and I am not well versed in the rules but I do believe that USPSA required that all safeties are functional. Thumb safeties, firing pin block safeties (that are in fact are parts of a drop safety mechanisms). SIG has just admitted that existing drop safety mechanism on their P320 guns is not functional under a specific set of circumstances. It doesn't matter whether their guns passed ANSI or what have you. What matters is that 320 can fire and allegedly have fired if dropped. If a manufacturer admits to the fact that their drop safety is not fully functional, I cannot understand how USPSA can allow these guns to be used until upgraded and, subsequently, I don't understand how anyone who wants to shoot them in USPSA can avoid sending them for an upgrade.

Edited by YVK
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, YVK said:

 

I am new to USPSA and I am not well versed in the rules but I do believe that USPSA required that all safeties are functional. Thumb safeties, firing pin block safeties (that are in fact are parts of a drop safety mechanisms). SIG has just admitted that existing drop safety mechanism on their P320 guns is not functional under a specific set of circumstances. It doesn't matter whether their guns passed ANSI or what have you. What matters is that 320 can fire and allegedly have fired if dropped. If a manufacturer admits to the fact that their drop safety is not fully functional, I cannot understand how USPSA can allow these guns to be used until upgraded and, subsequently, I don't understand how anyone who wants to shoot them in USPSA can avoid sending them for an upgrade.

The primary use of that rule is to keep shooters from deactivating or removing safeties

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do believe that. However, the untended consequences of rule's wording are such that there are no apparent granted exceptions that I can recognize. If competitor removed a firing pin block and is caught, he/she will be penalized. If a competitor received a 1911/2011 from a builder and the thumb safety doesn't work, same thing even if it is not his/her fault that the safety is not functional. In this case, the unfortunate P320 users are in possession of guns that have, according to a public announcement from the manufacturer, "a vulnerability to -30 degrees negative" drop. Current drop safeties are not functional to a full known extent. Manufacturer is about to offer a fix. I honestly don't see how both USPSA and P320 owners have much of the choice here.

Edited by YVK
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The drop safety aspects as designed in the P320 are functional and have allowed it to pass all of the standard industry drop tests. 

Thus vulnerability with an obscure drop angle does not equate to the drop safety being disabled (what the USPSA rules are looking for).

There are plenty of guns that show up to USPSA matched that would absolutely fail extreme drop tests. 

The safety of the weapon is still the Shooter's responsibility. 

I spoke with my Area Director and his take was that the P320 is not coming off of the Production gun list and he believes that local MDs don't have standing to turn it away from local matches. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm more interested in hearing how the "enhanced trigger" performs. Then I'll decide. Most likely, I'll do it -- eventually. I suspect the turnaround time, at least initially, will be measured in months, not days or even weeks. Don't care about resale value at all, except I will jump on any used 320s I see at a good price. I hear they are starting to show up in the used gun cases already. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, alma said:

The drop safety aspects as designed in the P320 are functional and have allowed it to pass all of the standard industry drop tests. 

Thus vulnerability with an obscure drop angle does not equate to the drop safety being disabled (what the USPSA rules are looking for).

There are plenty of guns that show up to USPSA matched that would absolutely fail extreme drop tests. 

The safety of the weapon is still the Shooter's responsibility. 

I spoke with my Area Director and his take was that the P320 is not coming off of the Production gun list and he believes that local MDs don't have standing to turn it away from local matches. 

 

Does it really matter if it passed safety tests when the manufacturer has publicly admitted that their gun can fire when dropped and is about to offer the safety upgrade? I tend to think it still runs contrary to the rule. I freely admit that I don't understand the verbiage of rules. However, there's also a spirit of the rules. Gun can fire if dropped, and the obscure angle cannot be guaranteed to be avoided in the USPSA match. If not the rules, then liabilities?

 

I don't get an argument of other guns not being drop safe. This may be true. For all we care, Glocks, VP9s, and PPQs might explode from -30 drops. However, this is neither a public knowledge nor was it acknowledged by their manufacturers nor upgrades are planned. No gun that enters a match is known a priori as not safe to drop at any obscure angle in its stock form. Except for the P320. I truly believe that once SIG has acknowledged it and is offering the upgrade, however statistically unlikely the problem is, there's really no other way around but to send guns for an upgrade. 

 

Edited by YVK
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, YVK said:

 

Does it really matter if it passed safety tests when the manufacturer has publicly admitted that their gun can fire when dropped and is about to offer the safety upgrade? I tend to think it still runs contrary to the rule. I freely admit that I don't understand the verbiage of rules. However, there's also a spirit of the rules. Gun can fire if dropped, and the obscure angle cannot be guaranteed to be avoided in the USPSA match. If not the rules, then liabilities?

 

I don't get an argument of other guns not being drop safe. This may be true. For all we care, Glocks, VP9s, and PPQs might explode from -30 drops. However, this is neither a public knowledge nor was it acknowledged by their manufacturers nor upgrades are planned. No gun that enters a match is known a priori as not safe to drop at any obscure angle in its stock form. Except for the P320. I truly believe that once SIG has acknowledged it and is offering the upgrade, however statistically unlikely the problem is, there's really no other way around but to send guns for an upgrade. 

 

This is not a USPSA issue. So, let's say I have a 320 and do not send it in. If there is no obvious appearance difference how will anybody know it's not upgraded? RO's going to have a hammer on a lanyard to test it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd like to think that it is within the USPSA rights and responsibilities to act on available information with an utmost care for members safety first. If manufacturer says gun can fire if dropped, and not in an abstract way like a warning in a booklet but as in a proven fact, USPSA must say something.  

 

I think you're touching on how enforceable the upgrade compliance might be. I think that it would depend on what the upgrade is. If a new lightened trigger is visible or has a tab, it is easy. If the upgrade is not readily identifiable, then we have a problem. 

Edited by YVK
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, YVK said:

I'd like to think that it is within the USPSA rights and responsibilities to act on available information with an utmost care for members safety first. If manufacturer says gun can fire if dropped, and not in an abstract way like a warning in a booklet but as in a proven fact, USPSA must say something.  

 

I think you're touching on how enforceable the upgrade compliance might be. I think that it would depend on what the upgrade is. If a new lightened trigger is visible or has a tab, it is easy. If the upgrade is not readily identifiable, then we have a problem. 

It's a voluntary "upgrade" if this was a mandatory recall your thinking would be more in line with reality.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, YVK said:

I'd like to think that it is within the USPSA rights and responsibilities to act on available information with an utmost care for members safety first. If manufacturer says gun can fire if dropped, and not in an abstract way like a warning in a booklet but as in a proven fact, USPSA must say something.  

 

I think you're touching on how enforceable the upgrade compliance might be. I think that it would depend on what the upgrade is. If a new lightened trigger is visible or has a tab, it is easy. If the upgrade is not readily identifiable, then we have a problem. 

 

What about all the USPSA shooters with aftermarket parts to make the triggers lighter? I wouldn't want to drop test any race gun with a lightened trigger :unsure:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, kneelingatlas said:

 

What about all the USPSA shooters with aftermarket parts to make the triggers lighter? I wouldn't want to drop test any race gun with a lightened trigger :unsure:

I already mentioned this earlier. No gun is known to be drop unsafe a priori, whatever you and I suspect. If gun is modded to an unsafe state, it is on the user. The unique situation here is that SIG admitted drop vulnerability on stock pistols, is going to offer a fix that would be extended to some 500,000 pistols, and is implementing pistol replacement programs for the police departments that field a 320.

 

As far as "recall" vs "upgrade", yes, sure, SIG can choose whatever words they wish. That doesn't change the content or extent of a problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I already mentioned this earlier. No gun is known to be drop unsafe a priori, whatever you and I suspect. If gun is modded to an unsafe state, it is on the user. The unique situation here is that SIG admitted drop vulnerability on stock pistols, is going to offer a fix that would be extended to some 500,000 pistols, and is implementing pistol replacement programs for the police departments that field a 320.
 
As far as "recall" vs "upgrade", yes, sure, SIG can choose whatever words they wish. That doesn't change the content or extent of a problem.
So, again, why would someone NOT participate?

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, YVK said:

I already mentioned this earlier. No gun is known to be drop unsafe a priori, whatever you and I suspect. If gun is modded to an unsafe state, it is on the user. The unique situation here is that SIG admitted drop vulnerability on stock pistols, is going to offer a fix that would be extended to some 500,000 pistols, and is implementing pistol replacement programs for the police departments that field a 320.

 

As far as "recall" vs "upgrade", yes, sure, SIG can choose whatever words they wish. That doesn't change the content or extent of a problem.

it does change both the content and extent actually.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For me it's more "when" than "if." The main consideration is time. It could take months to get the gun back. I will wait and see what the final plan from Sig is. I suspect the turnaround time will be measured in months not days. 

 

I am am hearing that used 320s are showing up from timid owners selling off. If I can pick up a few spares for a good price I might participate sooner. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe the P320 to be safe enough for competition. The X5, even more so. 

That said there is no rule in USPSA that says that guns must be drop safe (beyond specific standards or within). 

The rules for Production and CO only state that you cannot disable factory safeties as is common in Limited, Open and etc. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Garmil said:

it does change both the content and extent actually.

 

In a legal sense, yes, which is why SIG is using it. From this point on, the responsibility is with the owners and SIG is not required to fix every gun. SIG is hedging their bets on gun passing the ANSI etc standards and they may be absolutely correct in doing that. Or they may be found negligent if they knew about the vulnerability and didn't react in a due time. We have no knowledge of this and it is outside the scope of this discussion. What's not changed is that any (definition of extent) stock p320 can be presumed unsafe when dropped at that specific angle (definition of content).

 

Alma, you're absolutely right, drop safety is not required, functional drop safeties are. I do take it as those safeties are presumed to be the surrogates for a gun being drop safe since, as Sarge has pointed out, actual safety testing is not feasible. To me when manufacturer says that boom may happen and has happened when stock 320 dropped, and manufacturer is offering a fix to all affected pistols (regardless of words used), the surrogate requirements become superfluous. 

 

Tokarev, I don't know why someone wouldn't. I think it would be unethical not to.

Edited by YVK
Link to comment
Share on other sites




 
I am am hearing that used 320s are showing up from timid owners selling off.


I keep hearing that too but haven't noticed a spike in listings on the couple boards I frequent.



Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...