I love my P365’s and P226’s.

But I never found a 320 or M17/M18 that I liked, and I’m glad.

There’s something wrong with that design. And Sig, as a company, has screwed up.

 

I had one for a few months. I believe it was the legion x5. It had an upgraded trigger, tungsten infused lower, and upgraded sights. Those were all good. The rest of the gun was meh. It had some issues so I sold it.

I would never buy another sig product after they blamed the community for that disaster.

Finally got a cz and I’m happy.

 

I have a Sig 230, same #s , way better gun

v

 

My local gunshop has one for sale on consignment, with a sold as is, no warranty statement. I think anyone would be crazy to buy that pistol. I don’t own any Sigs, and never will.

 

I recently purchased a 320C that appears to be NIB unfired, I "may" use it at the range but will not consider using it as a carry gun or even leave it loaded between range uses...

Price was CHEAP...think I know why now...

 

I have a 320 X5. I rarely shoot it. I just got one because I wanted a 320 after Sig won the military contract. I already had a surplus 1911 and a Beretta 92 so I wanted to complete the trio.

It is fine for a range gun. I had a holster custom made for it, but in light of all of the "issues" surrounding I will probably never carry it loaded. Whether or not it could be a problem is just not a risk that I am willing to take when I am betting my life and freedom.

I think that the X5s are probably good to go because they have the flat face lighter trigger shoe that is less susceptible to movement if dropped but why take that chance.

I thought about trading it off years ago when these stories first started to surface but Sig had just released the new tungsten infused X5 and mine was all polymer. Between that and the developing reputation, no gun store would offer any kind of money for it.

So for now, and probably the rest of the time I own it, it is relegated to the back of the safe. Maybe at some time Sig will recall them, or swap them out with something else.

Sig, if you are monitoring this thread, I will gladly trade for a 210, 220, 226 or one of your new 2011s.

That being said, I don't think they are a bad company, I just think they get their marketing ahead of their R&D and engineering at times. They have brought a lot of innovative firearms to market with their modular designs and 1½ stack magazines.

I have a 365XL and 938 that I carry frequently. I bought them after they had been on the market a few years so the gremlins had been worked out.

I also have a 220 in 45 and another in 10mm. I think their older pre-Ron Cohen leadership designs are still great. Hopefully he doesn't do the same thing to Sig as he did to Kimber.

 

Sig's polymer pistols do nothing for me. Love the 226/229, will always keep those.

 

The reported death of the Airman has really put this issue on the front burner once again and rightfully so. I am a Sig user, but only their P-210's, nothing else. I have followed the P-320 issue a bit more closely than others because my kid carries one in his LEO job. I was never given the opportunity of carrying a Sig of any model when I was still an active LEO, only S&W's, Ruger's and Glocks.

A quick internet search reveals there have been 100 + reported "un-commanded" discharges of Sig P320/M-18 style pistols with something like 80 reported injuries and now at least one death. This is nothing to casually blow off as many LEO's and military people are required to carry these pistols. A slightly closer examination reveals that an unknown number of military users have been reduced in rank and pay and a result of having an un-commanded discharge and some may have been discharged from service. The military has an uncanny way of blaming the end user for any unintentional firearm discharge. I can think of no greater mistake than to find someone guilty of something they didn't do which is apparently what is taking place.

Before I retired I was a firearms instructor and armorer for my department so I have a vested interest in these matters, if nothing else out of curiosity. When my son was issued his Sig P-320 his relatively large department switched from Glocks to the Sig. He brought the pistol over to my place and showed it to me and asked my opinion of it. I am not a fan of polymer pistols as a rule, but I do own a few Glocks for EDC use, so the Sig didn't overly impress me save for the trigger function. It seemed light. Too light from a law enforcement standpoint. We gaged the trigger on his pistol and while the trigger required something over 4.5 pounds of trigger pull effort something just didn't seem right to me with it. It felt much lighter. After a while it dawned on me what may have contributed to the odd trigger pull feeling of his P-320. The striker is pre-tensioned in this pistol while most others have an "at rest" striker spring. Some use a partially tensioned striker spring. Pulling the trigger on most other striker fired pistols loads the striker spring up to point of release. Not so with the P-320 it is staged to fire all the time. My initial reaction after examining his P-320 was this trigger is going to cause problems for law enforcement use and at the time I never gave any thought to military use. Little did I know back then what was going to happen.

My son was an ardent supporter of the P-320 when his department made the switch from Glocks several years ago and he didn't understand my concerns about this pistol. He has also become a firearms instructor and armorer for his department on the P-320 platform. While I understood his enthusiasm for this pistol he had a wake-up call when the City of Milwaukee had some "un-commanded" discharges with their issued P-320's and they quickly switched back to Glocks. The feeling in the City was they just could not trust the Sigs and trust in a firearm is all important for a cop. My kids agency has taken the stance that nothing has happened with their P-320's so nothing to worry about. Well now we reportedly have a deceased Airman killed by a Sig P-320/M-18 pistol. Isn't that something to ponder? What if this had been a child that was killed? Many have blamed the holster in these situations, but it is not the fault of the holster, not by any stretch of the imagination.

I try not to worry about my son because I fully aware that almost anything can happen to a police officer or deputy sheriff at any time, but I never thought I had to worry about his own duty pistol injuring or killing him. This issue demands real attention immediately. If it takes Congressional action so be it. From what I read the Air Force has taken all M-18 Modular Weapon System handguns out of service and has those that must carry a sidearm use their M-4's in place of the M-18. This was the correct decision, but it does complicate life for those that have to carry a long gun now. Sig needs to quit fighting these issues and come up with a solution to the problem quickly before another life is lost needlessly.

For the record I am not a Sig hater. I own several Sig P-210's and think they are arguably one of the most reliable and accurate semi-auto pistols on the market bar none. I do hate anything that is unreliable and not trustworthy and the Sig P-320/M-18 certainly fits that description. Unless it is shown the deceased airman did something wrong with his service pistol his situation demands IMMEDIATE investigation and corrective action. His family deserved better.

Rick H.

 

I like mine as a range toy, but I don’t think I’d ever carry it. I’ve thought about selling it a time or two. I doubt I’d get much for it now, though. 😆 I believe the root of the problem is as mentioned above…a pre-tensioned striker. That, combined with the fact that the striker is in the slide, while the sear mechanism is in the frame creates the opportunity for an un-commanded discharge if there is excessive play between the slide and frame. The scenario as I imagine it is body movement that twists or pushes/pulls on the holster is transmitted to the pistol, causing a sloppy slide to move enough to allow the sear to disengage the striker and BOOM!

 

I own several of the P series guns in 9mm and .45, use them as training exemplars.... I own a Cross rifle as well and it's been excellent. However, Sig is not a company I will ever do business with going forward. The Shenanigans around their Military contracts, their repeated and varied product recalls, the obvious issue and tone deaf response on the 320 issue are enough for me.

I've shot Glocks since 1989, they work..... After the magazine ban went away in 2004 that's all I've carried other than a Beretta 92 or Hi Power from time to time for "fun". Never saw the supposed "advantage" in anything else.

 

Still have one of the original issue pistols I purchased in 2015. I shot IDPA throughout the southeast for seven years. Love it.

 

I always carry mine with an empty chamber under the hammer and never use the half cock notch as a safety. Oh, wait! Wrong forum.

I have an X5 that is a range gun. I don't really use it all that much and it will never be carried. It is a nice gun, shoots any kind of ammo I put in it and is as accurate as it can be. The problem with Sig is that they did a poor job getting ahead of a problem, perceived or otherwise. As for me, I'm not sure what to think about the gun itself. I wonder how much Sig is using poor gun handling to hide behind. When police started transitioning to pistols from revolvers and Glock started to take over the market, there were a lot of un intentional discharges. The difference was that Glock, the master salesman, was able to convince the market that it was a training issue and that changed the doctrine. Sig just keeps denying that there's a problem. The investment is too big so I think that at some point, someone at Sig will step up. They will design a solution and recall 320's for the fix, just like Ruger did with the old three screw single actions. The gun and YouTube scribes will embrace it and everyone will move forward. In the mean time, it might be a good time to pick one up at bargain basement prices. Just don't carry it loaded!

 

I have a collection of nice hand guns, so I don't need to carry all of them with a round chambered. Some of my older Western revolvers are traditionally carried with the hammer resting on an empty chamber. I just treat the Sig P320 the same way, and never worry about accidental discharges.

We have a upgraded one and a conversion kit. One has the factory red dot. It has several different sized grips, including another with the factory green laser grip. My family and I only use it on our land. We never carry it with a round in the chamber, unless it's in use and pointed down range.

 

I have a 320 X5 and admittedly, it only has about 500 rounds down the pipe. My experience has been range use only, but I have not had a single issue with it. In fact, it shoots very well and fits my ape hands well. It will never be a carry piece, as the issues are firmly embedded in my mind, but it is far from being an abomination in my personal opinion.

 

I just noticed on the Wilson Combat website they are deeply discounting their P320-based pistols.

 

I got rid of mine last year. I didn't like the gun but with all I see about it I am glad I did.

 

Thank you (??!?) for all the replies. I had been thinking I wanted one of these, but reading about these un-commanded discharges made me wonder if the gun really did have problems or if the military armorers were somehow screwing it up. It sounds like everyone has had problems with it. Now, I am thinking I might not want one.

 

I don’t know about “everyone.” It sounds like it is 100 out of thousands. I bet there have been as many Glock incidents.

 

I have to wonder where some of the comments about Glock really come from? The ONLY problem we had with Glocks when I was still employed by my old department and worked as an armorer, was with the disassembly of them. The fact that one had to pull the trigger in order to field strip the pistol led to a couple of unwanted discharges. These were the fault of the operator as they failed to clear the chamber of a live round. Read that last sentence again!! Never did we experience a Glock in our inventory that failed to fire, or that went off by itself as long as one followed the basic safety rules pertaining to a Glock or any firearm for that matter.....clear the weapon of live ammo before disassembly...end of story. Some of those officers that did have an unintentional discharge of their sidearm tried to blame the pistol, which is somewhat normal in these situations, but close examination and investigation showed there was no problem with the involved pistols, only the users.

This is NOT the case with the Sig P-320 unfortunately. These pistols clearly have design issues that are problematic and have been NOT been adequately addressed by Sig. Not to my satisfaction anyway. I understand even Gunsite Academy has put the P-320 on their list of banned pistols. I suspect it takes alot to get put on that list. Many other ranges and training facilities are following suit and banning the use of P-320 pistols now that an Airman was killed with one in a holster, on a table. Sig needs to step up on this before they are forced to. This whole sad saga has been going on far too long.

Rick H.

 

If Glock would just put a thumb safety on their pistols the incidence of NDs would probably plummet. I have never heard of an issue with M&P striker fired pistols with thumb safetys. That’s what I carry.

 

The Sig 320 does not have a striker/Firing Pin block where the trigger movement pushes the block out of the way for the striker to move forward. The pre cocked striker and striker block spring seem to be the root cause of the firing without pulling the trigger. Whether it is a manufacturing tolerance issue or poor quality control there are to many cases where the pistol is bumped and fires without pulling the trigger.


In a Military or Law Enforcement weapon that is issued the operator is required to be competent with their weapon. The 1911 had incidents where the weapon could fire because of being dropped because of the firing pin design. Unlikely but it still happened. Same for poor handling where a user removed the magazine and pulled the trigger with a round in the chamber.

Military & LE are representative of society and there are going to be unintended consequences. There have been enough Sig M17/18 P-320 incidents there is obviously a design/manufacturing issue. Sig corporate just doesn’t want o admit it for obvious reasons. The US Military should’ve more thoroughly tested the Sig as initially proposed but skipped before adoption.

I hate it for all those involved because regardless it brings into question the users ability and integrity.

 

The Sig 320 does not have a striker/Firing Pin block where the trigger movement pushes the block out of the way for the striker to move forward.

Yes it does.

 

I was trying to imply Sig has used a complex striker block with finely machined & fitted parts compared to most other firing pin or striker blocks currently used in pistols on the market. As an example on a Glock there are fewer parts interacting with the striker block. The trigger bar when pulled pushes the firing pin block up against the coil spring to clear the striker to move. Simple and reliable.

In my opinion the Sig pistols can work but is a solution to get a lighter feeling trigger striker release but requires more parts and complexity with critical tolerances. I suspect Sig‘s quality control and inspection of parts without testing assembled pistols failed to catch pistols with flaws permitting the pistol to fire when the trigger was not pulled.


When the initial M17/M18 were delivered to the military they would fire when dropped. This defect should’ve have been discovered during testing by Sig or the military. This whole debacle is unfortunate but now brings into question the whole acquisition, testing and bidding process. I have first hand experience with government and policy decisions. My Agencies could get the best equipment money could buy if it had the cheapest bid.

 

I like mine when I’m not bleeding from using it.🫣

 

There are just too many excellent, reliable, and proven alternatives for me to waste a moment thinking about buying a questionable P320.

I do like old Sigs, got a whole pile of them- 220, 225, 239, 226, 230.

They should've just called it a day with the hammer-fired P250 (from which the 320 was developed). Probably the best DAO pistol ever made, with a fantastic trigger, good ergos...and perfectly safe.
Never stopped kicking myself for selling my 250 to my buddy. He loves it and won't sell it back, lol.

But nooooooo....the DoD just HAD to have a striker gun.

 

There have been a number of claims of the P320 firing autonomously and uncommanded. What is missing is someone explaining why with data and proof of reproducing the event. What I know from my N of 1 is that the striker on my P320 M17 will not move forward enough for the firing pin to clear the breech face without pushing the striker block up and out of the way. You can take your slide off and try it on your pistol and you will see. If the striker block does not work on your pistol, perhaps some are flawed and that might be the root of the problem. That, and we all know “that guy” that would remove the striker block claiming a lighter and improved trigger pull. I wouldn’t discount that theory either, but I would like to see hard evidence and repeatable results. They call that science.

 

There have been a number of claims of the P320 firing autonomously and uncommanded. What is missing is someone explaining why with data and proof of reproducing the event.

I don't believe that's the case. The FBI’s Ballistic Research Facility conducted an investigation and reported an unattended discharge that occurred during its tests. The gun was secured in a vise and two Sig-trained gunsmiths were deliberately manipulating a loose fitting striker safety release spring they had noticed. They dry fired it when the safety malfunctioned. Then they loaded it with a primed cartridge and the safety spring release allowed it to fire, confirming it was a repeatable malfunction:

“The striker safety lock spring is used to hold the striker safety lock in a downward position until acted upon by the captive safety lever. The striker safety lock is intended to prevent the striker from moving forward in the event sear engagement (primary or secondary) is lost. It was observed that the spring was not fully seated on its post,” the report notes. “It was also observed that the striker safety lock spring was only captured at the top of the striker housing.”

“Additionally, during dry-fire manipulation it was observed the trigger could be partially pressed to the rear and the slide manipulated by hand causing the striker to fall completely,” the report adds. “This was then tested using a primed case and the striker did in fact fire the primed case, indicating the striker safety lock was disabled based on the partial trigger press."

Once again, I love mine, and just don't need to carry one with a round chambered in the first place.

 

After our yesterday’s pistol match our pistol club’s administrative crew was discussing the SIG 320 issue. Some nearby range facilities have recently banned the Sig 320. Our range facility will be discussing the matter at the next board meeting. Also we’re wondering if USPSA and IPSC and PCSL will ban this particular firearm from their events. We’ll follow whatever related requirements are imposed as it affects our facility and hosted events.

 

This guy has probably fired a P320 more than anyone else on the planet. I wonder if he has had any uncommanded discharges?

An NRA Shooting Sports Journal | Max Michel And The SIG Sauer P320MAX

In October, Max Michel will be going for a sixth consecutive USPSA Carry Optics Championship with his signature SIG P320MAX pistol.

www.ssusa.org