Sig Sauer: The Taurus of the North

5257 Views 54 Replies 24 Participants Last post by mwj999, Feb 19, 2018

bapak2ja

Discussion Starter · Feb 1, 2018

It seems Sig is having the same problems that having the same problems as Taurus.

"The Pentagon recently released a report that shows testing of the M17 and M18 handguns exposed a number of significant and persistent deficiencies, including firing accidentally if a shooter dropped the gun, ejecting live ammunition, and low reliability with traditional "ball" cartridges with bullets enclosed inside a full metal jacket."

Army's New Pistols Often Eject Live Rounds and Don't Work Well With Regular Bullets - The Drive

I was hoping that the Army would do a better job of arming our troops.

Reactions: 2

1 - 20 of 55 Posts

mawguy

· #2 · Feb 1, 2018

I have been searching the internet for all weapons adopted by the US military that were perfect when they were first adopted. Not having any luck finding any. Hmmmm.

I bought the civilian version which is the P320. The gun has been flawless. I was undecided about sending it in for the voluntary upgrade, but went ahead with it. It's only been gone for a week. Interesting thing about the "drop-fire" problem is that it only happens when it is dropped in a very specific way, and lands on its butt in a very specific way. The engineers have fixed that so its good to go.

I guess each of us gets to decide where we think truth is in this world.

Reactions: 5

GhostHorse

· #3 · Feb 1, 2018

Low reliability with FMJ is kind of surprising.

Reactions: 5

paulky_2000

· #4 · Feb 1, 2018

I went with the SP2022....

....Hammer-fired is always better.

Reactions: 5

Divebum

· #5 · Feb 1, 2018

bapak2ja said:
It seems Sig is having the same problems that having the same problems as Taurus.

"The Pentagon recently released a report that shows testing of the M17 and M18 handguns exposed a number of significant and persistent deficiencies, including firing accidentally if a shooter dropped the gun, ejecting live ammunition, and low reliability with traditional "ball" cartridges with bullets enclosed inside a full metal jacket."

Army's New Pistols Often Eject Live Rounds and Don't Work Well With Regular Bullets - The Drive

I was hoping that the Army would do a better job of arming our troops.

Reading a number of articles on this decision, it would appear that politics (again) was put ahead of protecting the troops. I don't have enough experience with the guns mentioned in the article/s to surmise which would be the correct choice. However, I will say that most of the guys I know who carried the Baretta were pretty happy with the gun, but felt the round itself sucked. Personally, I would opt for the .45 1911 hammer slammer. But then that was my sidearm in SEA, and even though I could have chosen to carry whatever I wanted (disclaimer: against Navy policy), I stuck with the 1911. Good gun, good round. But hey, I'm an old guy and hate change.

Reactions: 5

mingaa

· #6 · Feb 1, 2018

This article has been aggregated and rewritten into a number of web sources. The drop fire issue was immediately addressed by Sig. it sounds as if the gun must be dropped at a very specific angle and literally thrown to the ground at that angle to fire. I’m guessing that a LOT of guns currently on the market could be made to fire if tested/treated similarly. This gun has been subjected to VERY high scrutiny.

The process of ejecting a spent case and a live round - and NOT causing a malfunction is thinly addressed. If it happens it is in itself a malfunction but I’m having trouble understanding how that is even technically possible. The fact that this article then adds a video about a Glock FTE and how to clear it calls the double eject further into question. How is that relevant? The Sig (according to the “article”) did not have an FTE as the live round ejected. Credibility shrinks.

Full disclosure: I’ve got the civilian version of the p320 9mm produces after the drop fire ‘fix’. It runs flawlessly. I plan to compete with the gun and it will be in my Carry rotation group as well.

I saw saw it on the interweb so it MIGHT be true OR - it might be a mix of info from a variety of sources (including bloggers with strong agendas) dressed up and presented as ‘news’.

* mingaa has stepped off the soap box

See less See more

Reactions: 5

Cariwine

· #7 · Feb 1, 2018

Did you send it in for the trigger upgrade?

mingaa said:
This article has been aggregated and rewritten into a number of web sources. The drop fire issue was immediately addressed by Sig. it sounds as if the gun must be dropped at a very specific angle and literally thrown to the ground at that angle to fire. I’m guessing that a LOT of guns currently on the market could be made to fire if tested/treated similarly. This gun has been subjected to VERY high scrutiny.

The process of ejecting a spent case and a live round - and NOT causing a malfunction is thinly addressed. If it happens it is in itself a malfunction but I’m having trouble understanding how that is even technically possible. The fact that this article then adds a video about a Glock FTE and how to clear it calls the double eject further into question. How is that relevant? The Sig (according to the “article”) did not have an FTE as the live round ejected. Credibility shrinks.

Full disclosure: I’ve got the civilian version of the p320 9mm produces after the drop fire ‘fix’. It runs flawlessly. I plan to compete with the gun and it will be in my Carry rotation group as well.

I saw saw it on the interweb so it MIGHT be true OR - it might be a mix of info from a variety of sources (including bloggers with strong agendas) dressed up and presented as ‘news’.

* mingaa has stepped off the soap box

Reactions: 2

Rickenbacher39

· #8 · Feb 1, 2018

I find it interesting that even when another firearm manufacturer
has a problem with one of their firearms we can can sneak
a bash against Taurus in there.

Reactions: 5

Echo40

· #9 · Feb 1, 2018

I honestly feel like the US Army only switched away from the Beretta M9 because they felt like it was time for a change. There was nothing wrong with the 92 platform and Beretta addressed each and every one of the US Army's requirements for a new sidearm with the M9A3, yet they switched away anyway regardless of the fact that it would have made far more sense to stick with the M9 since it was familiar, proven reliable, and just plain worked.

Perhaps now the US Army will learn to heed the old saying; "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." And just drop the SIG P320 in favor of the Beretta M9A3 rather than trying to ride out the storm with a firearm which clearly isn't as reliable as the M9A1 it replaced.

Reactions: 1

FreeInAZ

· #10 · Feb 1, 2018 (Edited)

Well as someone mentioned earlier the SP2022 has been in use by the US Army tank Corp for several years now with no reported issues. I think this was in part due to that groups due diligence.
* And for once we got the French to do all the heavy lifting * for us...Yes the French! They have Millions of rounds down range and have been using it (over 14 years) in their National police force and other French LE forces. Placing a huge order of 250,000 pistols in 2003.

These are excellent pistols and I really shouldn't be talking them up, as I want the price to remain reasonable. I recently purchased my second NEW SP2022 9mm it featured: a factory suppressor ready threaded barrel, factory night sights, removable backstraps, a Blackend Stainless steel slide, two mags and a hard lockable case...

MY cost out the door $449!

P.S. complete new part kits (all springs etc...) can be found online often for $40.

17 round mec gar mags run around $28 - $30 range.

SIG got the SP2022 right in my experience.

See less See more

Reactions: 4

mingaa

· #11 · Feb 1, 2018 (Edited)

Cariwine said:
Did you send it in for the trigger upgrade?

No. Still thinking about it. Info here:

https://www.sigsauer.com/support/p320-voluntary-upgrade/

The lead in:
Is my P320 safe in its current configuration?

Yes. The P320 meets and exceeds all US safety standards. However, mechanical safeties are designed to augment, not replace safe handling practices. Careless and improper handling of any firearm can result in an unintentional discharge.
What is the P320 Voluntary Upgrade Program?

SIG SAUER is offering a voluntary program for P320 pistols.

This will include an alternate design that reduces the physical weight of the trigger, sear, and striker while additionally adding a mechanical disconnector...

4-6 weeks. They pay 2 way shipping. (Their words)

See less See more

Reactions: 3

Cariwine

· #12 · Feb 1, 2018

mingaa said:
No. Still thinking about it. Info here:

https://www.sigsauer.com/support/p320-voluntary-upgrade/

The lead in:
Is my P320 safe in its current configuration?

Yes. The P320 meets and exceeds all US safety standards. However, mechanical safeties are designed to augment, not replace safe handling practices. Careless and improper handling of any firearm can result in an unintentional discharge.
What is the P320 Voluntary Upgrade Program?

SIG SAUER is offering a voluntary program for P320 pistols. This will include an alternate design that reduces the physical weight of the trigger, sear, and striker while additionally adding a mechanical disconnector...

4-6 weeks. They pay 2 way shipping.

I sent mine in. They put a smaller trigger in it. Feels weird at first but just as accurate. It doesn't take 4-6 weeks either. Seems like it was 10 days and that included FedEx and weekends.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

Reactions: 2

kmw1954

· #13 · Feb 2, 2018

My brother recently purchased an SP2022 in 40S&W and he's liking it. I haven't shot it enough yet to form an opinion other than it wasn't unpleasant to shoot.

Reactions: 1

mingaa

· #14 · Feb 2, 2018

Cariwine said:
I sent mine in. They put a smaller trigger in it. Feels weird at first but just as accurate. It doesn't take 4-6 weeks either. Seems like it was 10 days and that included FedEx and weekends.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

Thanks - that’s great to know. It shoots so well now I was waffeling on making a change.

Reactions: 1

jimb1972

· #15 · Feb 2, 2018

There might be some wisdom in the Armys decision to change platforms, as weapons reach very high round counts they may begin to see more fatigue related failures which tend to be rather catastrophic and sudden. With more women in combat the grip of the M9 and long trigger reach could also be problematic.

Reactions: 1

Zen Ape

· #16 · Feb 2, 2018

Tuco_Ramírez said:
I honestly feel like the US Army only switched away from the Beretta M9 because they felt like it was time for a change. There was nothing wrong with the 92 platform and Beretta addressed each and every one of the US Army's requirements for a new sidearm with the M9A3, yet they switched away anyway regardless of the fact that it would have made far more sense to stick with the M9 since it was familiar, proven reliable, and just plain worked.

Perhaps now the US Army will learn to heed the old saying; "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." And just drop the SIG P320 in favor of the Beretta M9A3 rather than trying to ride out the storm with a firearm which clearly isn't as reliable as the M9A1 it replaced.

Very rarely has a government contract been given with the first and foremost thought being what was best for the troops or best for the bottom line. It's far more often than not politics and greed that drive those decisions. Sometimes you even have to spend money you've been allotted just so that the bean counters and higher up brass don't start to think that you don't need as much.

Reactions: 4

Bellows1

· #17 · Feb 2, 2018

This sounds more like a magazine issue, than a gun issue... Actually, the story was so poorly written, it's hard to say what the issue may be.

The dates in the article were before any guns were issued to troops, it doesn't say if the problem still exists, or if it has already been addressed.

Conspiracy theories about any Army selection being political, has been on going since the beginning of time. The same was said about the Beretta M-9, I'm sure S&W complained about the selection of Colt back in 11.

Glock guys need to get over the fact that they lost, well, they didn't lose, they didn't submit a handgun that met the very basic requirements of being modular. Every company was given time to develop a modular handgun. Sig (320), Beretta (APX), Ruger (American) all made a modular gun, although I don't think Ruger or Beretta submitted their guns.
The Glock is a simple design, it may be the best handgun design ever... It's not modular. It could be, it should be.

The 320 is a excellent handgun, Sig will get any problems the gun may have figured out.

See less See more

Reactions: 2

Cariwine

· #18 · Feb 2, 2018

As to the Taurus of the north comment, Sig jumped out in front and handled this problem without being sued. If Taurus had been proactive when they found out about any issues, they wouldn't be in the bind they are in.

Reactions: 3

mingaa

· #19 · Feb 2, 2018

Bellows1 said:
This sounds more like a magazine issue, than a gun issue... Actually, the story was so poorly written, it's hard to say what the issue may be.

The dates in the article were before any guns were issued to troops, it doesn't say if the problem still exists, or if it has already been addressed.

Conspiracy theories about any Army selection being political, has been on going since the beginning of time. The same was said about the Beretta M-9, I'm sure S&W complained about the selection of Colt back in 11.

Glock guys need to get over the fact that they lost, well, they didn't lose, they didn't submit a handgun that met the very basic requirements of being modular. Every company was given time to develop a modular handgun. Sig (320), Beretta (APX), Ruger (American) all made a modular gun, although I don't think Ruger or Beretta submitted their guns.
The Glock is a simple design, it may be the best handgun design ever... It's not modular. It could be, it should be.

The 320 is a excellent handgun, Sig will get any problems the gun may have figured out.

AND the Glock gun proposed is now in their lineup - on the market and selling well. Competition is a good market stimulator.

Reactions: 2

mongochicago

· #20 · Feb 2, 2018

Perhaps now the US Army will learn to heed the old saying; "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." And just drop the SIG P320 in favor of the Beretta M9A3 rather than trying to ride out the storm with a firearm which clearly isn't as reliable as the M9A1 it replaced.[/QUOTE]

I agree ---- they never should have changed from the 1911. But since they did they should have gone with Sig in the first place. I've taken armorer courses in both and the Sig was far more of a simpler design than Beretta. Also, Beretta had a major problem when our department permitted them as a sidearm for our members. The bolt block was cracking.

1 - 20 of 55 Posts

This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.