Dallas PD pulls the P320 from their Approved List.

[TunnelRat]

I'm betting actual drops rarely involve a pistol perfectly parallel to the ground

I don't disagree.

[JohnKSa]

I don't know about any angle...

While I think it's not possible to do an exhaustive drop test from every angle, someone who understands the design should be able to provide valuable insight into the drop testing methodology.

Frankly, muzzle down and muzzle up impacting on the slide are the two things I would try FIRST on any striker fired gun. I'm surprised that the P320 isn't drop safe. I'm dumbfounded that it turned out the failure mode was dropping the gun so that it hits on the rear of the slide. It's hard for me to imagine that wasn't one of the things that SIG tested first.

Then again, it's entirely possible that they did test that thoroughly in the initial design and just didn't realize that the change to the trigger was sufficient to change how the system reacts to inertia.

[TunnelRat]

Frankly, muzzle down and muzzle up impacting on the slide are the two things I would try FIRST on any striker fired gun. I'm surprised that the P320 isn't drop safe. I'm dumbfounded that it turned out the failure mode was dropping the gun so that it hits on the rear of the slide. It's hard for me to imagine that wasn't one of the things that SIG tested first.

So I think you're missing something. The P320 does pass if dropped perfectly muzzle up. This is because the beavertail absorbs some of the impact. The failure was when it was dropped at enough of an angle that the slide and the beavertail both impact at the same time (this is shown in the video). This is actually ~30 degrees off of muzzle up. No doubt it's perfectly feasible, but from what I'm reading the standard drop tests are only muzzle up and muzzle parallel to the floor. The standard drop tests don't cover any other angles.

[JoeSixpack]

Originally Posted by TunnelRat

but from what I'm reading the standard drop tests are only muzzle up and muzzle parallel to the floor. The standard drop tests don't cover any other angles.

That's the way I understood it as well, further more I understood it that the angle parrellel to the ground does not specify if it should land on the left or right side of the gun flat, or upside down (top of slide) or at some angle.

Just as long it passes any drop parallel seems to be good enough..

oh and that damn rubber mat.

It just seems like the test is too easy to pass.

[TunnelRat]

It just seems like the test is too easy to pass.

Certainly less rigorous than I personally assumed.

[JohnKSa]

So I think you're missing something. The P320 does pass if dropped perfectly muzzle up. This is because the beavertail absorbs some of the impact.

Well, you are correct that something is being missed.

"Frankly, muzzle down and muzzle up impacting on the slide are the two things I would try FIRST on any striker fired gun. I'm surprised that the P320 isn't drop safe. I'm dumbfounded that it turned out the failure mode was dropping the gun so that it hits on the rear of the slide."

The standard drop tests don't cover any other angles.

And that seems like a bad idea to me.

[TunnelRat]

No I read and understood your post. But in order for the slide to be impacted in a muzzle up drop the pistol has to be at an angle because of the beavertail. This is why the standard tests, which do include a muzzle up drop, don't show the problem. I think the slide actually does impact the ground in the standard tests, but it does so after the beaver tail has absorbed much of the impact. The trick is the slide being impacted at the moment the pistol contacts the ground, not just during the drop. That's what I was pointing out.

And that seems like a bad idea to me.

I don't think anyone is challenging that now.

[JohnKSa]

The trick is the slide being impacted at the moment the pistol contacts the ground, not just during the drop. That's what I was pointing out.

I understood that when I posted and I understood what you meant when you responded. I thought I was being very clear in my post, but apparently I was not.

No I read and understood your post.

Not the way I intended it to be understood.

I did not intend to imply "perfectly muzzle up" when I posted "dropping the gun so that it hits on the rear of the slide".

I did not intend to imply "muzzle up impacting on the beavertail" when I said "muzzle up impacting on the slide".

I think the slide actually does impact the ground in the standard tests...

It very likely does. I thought that when I said "hits on the rear of the slide" and "impacting on the slide" it would be clear that the slide was what was hitting/impacting first.

Sorry for the confusion.

[TunnelRat]

You certainly don't have to apologize. My goal was merely to clarify for anyone reading how the original muzzle up tests failed to show a discharge whereas this second test did. Until I watched the video I was a bit confused myself and the narration in the video helped a lot so I tried to do the same here. Sometimes I tend to beat the horse a bit in an effort to clarify things . Instead of saying "I think you missed something" I should have said "I think it's worth pointing out."


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[WVsig]

Originally Posted by gc70

Could you provide a link or other reference to what Bruce wrote.

I have shot Sigs for a long time and have had Gray Guns pistols in the past. I have shot with guys who were members of Team Sig at one time or another. Bruce is an honorable man of his word. I think that in this instance he is wrong but that does not change my opinion of the man. We all make mistakes. I do not believe there was any ill intention or cover up on his part. It would just not be consistent with every interaction I have ever had with him.

Here is what he said on the Sigforum:

posted August 01, 2017 01:16 AM

Originally posted by Grayguns:
Friends,

Nothing being discussed here appears to be based in fact from what my informed sources tell us. I can't go into details, but I can comment on some of what's been "reported".

I've personally drop-tested a bunch of P320's in various conditions and in excess of ANSI/SAAMI protocol, and cannot get them to fail.

The so-called P320 drop test video referenced by many is an outright fraud intended to damage SIG SAUER and the P320, in my opinion. I can perhaps replicate what it portrays, only by removing a bunch of springs and the striker lock first. I defy the makers of that video to come forth and prove they can make a stock P320 fire like that in my presence, under controlled conditions. They can't.

In any event I predict this decision by someone in DPD will not pan out to be objectively reasonable or justifiable, and will be reversed.

-Bruce

posted August 05, 2017 03:08 PM

Originally posted by Grayguns:
I am here to tell you that there is no safety issues with the P320.

There was no incident, ND, or failure of a P320 of any sort that prompted the memo by Lt. Williamson.

DPD does not have any in their inventory, has never tested it, has only a couple officers carrying it so far, and none have had any issues.

The memo was simply addressing some outdated legacy language that inexplicably made it's way into one of the P320 owner's manuals. In doing due diligence just as I would have, this was questioned, SIG responded to clarify, and it was over.

All reports and online discussions to follow trace back to an article published by gunmagwarehouse.com. There was a headline stating "SIG SAUER P320 Fails Drop Test." In the article, the author reports that an anonymous reliable source within DPD stated that a P320 ND'd during training, among other inflammatory implications that proved not to be true.

I reached out, speaking for myself and Grayguns Inc., to this author on Tuesday to offer factual, verifiable information or an interview, but was rebuffed. This erroneous story was then reposted and repeated widely.

I and others knew this entire thing was bull-CENSORED--CENSORED--CENSORED--CENSORED- from the start, but the author of this hyped up and apparently fabricated non-story from an "anonymous source" was not interested in hearing verifiable information, on the record.

And, for that record, there has never been a verified instance of any P320 firing when dropped out of the nearly 350,000 sold to date, much less a factory-spec pistol.

I have looked for such reports and followed up on everything I find, for three solud years. It hasn't happened.

The recent YouTube video pupirtibg to show a "P320 drop test" failure is an obvious fake.

I have personally bounced these puppies off of everything I can find. No go bang, ever.

This crap needs to be dismissed. The P320 is safe.

-Bruce

These were both before the most recent TTAG video was uploaded but IIRC after the Omaha Outdoors video. For me the TTAG video is much more damaging because it was a new out of the box gun. It has not been subjected to the same tests and abuse the Omaha Outdoors guns had.

After that I believe Bruce goes silent. Sig clearly knew about this prior to the announcement because the 3 upgrades that the pistols will receive are built into the M17 and the newly release X5. It is pure speculation but the CT officers lawsuit and then the DPD Internet chatter has prompted them to act sooner rather than later.

This is a CYA move to get ahead of any other possible ADs. The only question I have for Bruce Gray is how is custom P320 trigger is effected by the DEFECT, and it is clearly a DEFECT. I believe that is why he is now silent on the issue because he most likely is not 100% sure anymore.

TTAG for one reason or another has a direct line to Sig. They have been "chosen" to get exclusive info prior to other outlets or the general public. One instructor I know stated that when he shot with Team Sig TTAG would post Team Sig will be shooting at such and such event in the future before he was told he would be shooting at that future event. In the past much of the info they have put out on new product etc came from Sig directly before it went out to others.

I personally am disappointed once again by Sig and its "new" products. I waited a decent amount of time before I got my P320 in 45 ACP after being burned by a P250, watched the P238 go through beta testing by the consumer etc...

[TunnelRat]

FWIW Omaha Outdoors tested 4 P320s. Some of those had gone through their torture testing, but not all. One that had not was also able to discharge when dropped. I don't remember the exact numbers but I believe it states in the article and the video.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Independent George]

There were four guns, three of which were torture tested. The only one to pass had been torture tested before - the 'fresh' gun (not sure if it was NIB or just not tested) had failed.

I will bet anything that they're going to settle the CT case with an NDA, because I suspect that they are desperate to avoid discovery at this point.


Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

[Bartholomew Roberts]

So apparently the CT officer's accidental discharge happened on January 5, 2017. He filed suit on August 4, 2017. I'm having a hard time believing that SIG wasn't aware there had been reports of an accidental discharge involving the P320 when the DPD memo came out.

ETA:

Originally Posted by SIG Arms

Newington, NH (August 4, 2017) – In response to social media rumors questioning the safety of the P320 pistol, a variant of which was selected by the U.S. government as the U.S. Army’s Modular Handgun System (MHS), SIG SAUER, Inc. has full confidence in the reliability, durability and safety of its striker-fired handgun platform. There have been zero (0) reported drop-related P320 incidents in the U.S. commercial market, with hundreds of thousands of guns delivered to date.

Same day the CT officer files his lawsuit, they release that statement.

I can't imagine what would make them think slow-walking a recall for a defective trigger would be a good idea?

[TunnelRat]

^ thank you


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Independent George]

Once again, it's the coverup and not the crime.

I would not have faulted SIG for not catching a defect that passes an industry standard drop test. Had they offered a recall/upgrade when they discovered the problem, they would be fine.

Instead, they kept it buried until they got caught, then issued the typical corporate BS speak about a 'voluntary upgrade'.

Compare and contrast this behavior with Ruger issuing an immediate recall for an obscure issue with the Mark IV.


Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

[Aguila Blanca]

Originally Posted by Bartholomew Roberts

I don't know about any angle; but it seems like that particular angle is easy enough to achieve. As the TTAG guys pointed out, they didn't need a fixture to hold that angle, it just came natural.

I'm betting actual drops rarely involve a pistol perfectly parallel to the ground and honestly, I'm a bit more surprised that muzzle up with a slight tilt isn't part of the test routine.

After all, all the weight is in the mag, so it isn't like that drop is unrealistic or some bizarre anomaly.

Testing can reproduce any "particular" angle, but how do you know what angle (or angles) to reproduce? Once you start down that road, there is no end. The number of combinations and permutations is infinite. One gun might land at 30 degrees if dropped with a full magazine, but 25 (or 35) degrees if dropped with only a round in the chamber, and some other angle if dropped with the magazine half full.

A different pistol might fall at similar angles if dropped just right, but might go off if dropped at 15 degrees or at 45 degrees, but not if dropped at 30 degrees. It's impossible for any controlled testing to replicate how someone is going to drop a pistol. In the real world, I doubt that anyone accidentally drops a handgun by letting go of it with the barrel perfectly horizontal (or perfectly vertical). Dropping a gun by accident is a random event, and usually dynamic. The person knocks it off a table, or fumbles it when drawing or when re-holstering. It's more likely than not that in an accidental drop the gun isn't carefully positioned, static, and then released. The gun is probably moving when released, so it's impossible to replicate or reproduce all possible terminal angles and velocities.

It's a fool's errand to pretend that any testing protocol, no matter how thorough, can possibly anticipate ALL possible real world scenarios. It's better to train people not to drop guns.

[TunnelRat]

It's a fool's errand to pretend that any testing protocol, no matter how thorough, can possibly anticipate ALL possible real world scenarios. It's better to train people not to drop guns.

People generally don't drop loaded pistols intentionally nor do I believe we as a whole teach them that it is advisable to do so. But things happen, as you yourself pointed out. In all my years of driving I have never been in an accident where my airbag deployed. I also consider myself a safe driver. But in the event that accident does occur I would like to believe my airbag will indeed deploy.

[Bartholomew Roberts]

The gun is probably moving when released, so it's impossible to replicate or reproduce all possible terminal angles and velocities.

Somebody stated earlier a 1911 can discharge if it lands square on the muzzle. However, that rarely happens because all the weight is in the grip and a 1911 will tend to rotate aft if you try to drop it on its muzzle. Since that's true of just about every semi-auto pistol out there, it would seem certain angles are more probable than others - I mean people are getting 2 out of 3 discharges with no equipment used to maintain the angle, so it sure seems like the pistol has a center of gravity that lends itself to the angle causing the problem.

Maybe a few free form drops need to be included in design just to identify potential liabilities before you get sued.

[Independent George]

The pertinent fact here is not that it discharges on a 30 degree drop, as the fact that it discharges when the rear of the slide impacts directly instead of the beavertail.

That seems like deliberate obfuscation on Sig's part - no, it's not reasonable to do a drop test from every angle and height. It is reasonable to drop test directly onto the slide. I accept it's not industry standard, and that it's easy to miss the defect when you test based on those standards.

The bigger issue is that circumstantially, it appears Sig knew about the defect and corrected it in the M17 trial pistols, and were rolling out the changes to new pistols on the commercial market, but did not make it public until they were forced to.

Contrast that to Ruger recalling the Mark IV over an issue that requires three steps to replicate, and depends on using the safety improperly in the first place.

This is less about the merits of the pistol itself (which does seem quite good), but about the corporate culture at Sig. It's like the EoTech recall - a design defect is easily forgivable, but deliberately concealing it is not.


Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

[Aguila Blanca]

Originally Posted by TunnelRat

People generally don't drop loaded pistols intentionally nor do I believe we as a whole teach them that it is advisable to do so. But things happen, as you yourself pointed out. In all my years of driving I have never been in an accident where my airbag deployed. I also consider myself a safe driver. But in the event that accident does occur I would like to believe my airbag will indeed deploy.

As would I. But you sort of made my point. It sounds as though you may have been in accidents -- in an airbag-equipped vehicle -- where the airbag(s) didn't deploy. So have I. Isn't that pretty much akin to a dropped gun discharging even though it has a purported drop fire safety?

Nothing is 100 percent. (Including the preceding statement.)

[Aguila Blanca]

The bigger issue is that circumstantially, it appears Sig knew about the defect and corrected it in the M17 trial pistols, and were rolling out the changes to new pistols on the commercial market, but did not make it public until they were forced to.

Contrast that to Ruger recalling the Mark IV over an issue that requires three steps to replicate, and depends on using the safety improperly in the first place.

This is less about the merits of the pistol itself (which does seem quite good), but about the corporate culture at Sig. It's like the EoTech recall - a design defect is easily forgivable, but deliberately concealing it is not.

Agreed.

[TunnelRat]

Originally Posted by Aguila Blanca

As would I. But you sort of made my point. It sounds as though you may have been in accidents -- in an airbag-equipped vehicle -- where the airbag(s) didn't deploy. So have I. Isn't that pretty much akin to a dropped gun discharging even though it has a purported drop fire safety?

Nothing is 100 percent. (Including the preceding statement.)

Actually I've never been in an accident where the airbag would have deployed (the accident I was in impacted the wheel entirely). I don't consider a failing in that area to be a pass for the P320 drop safety not working, however. I believe, though frankly I'm not going to personally test, that there are other striker fired pistols on the market that would pass this test. If true then to me SIG owes it to its customers to deliver a product on par with the competition in this area.

My point with the previous comment was we can train people to try to not drop pistols, but drops will still happen (for that matter reaching for or attempting to grab a falling pistol has been seen in a number of stories to have terrible consequences). In that case having drop safeties is important. I'm fully aware that there is no completely drop safe pistol, but I do believe that this design can be improved, and according to SIG that is true given the redesigned parts in the M17. Being safe in your firearm handling and having good safety designs doesn't have to be mutually exclusive situation.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Bartholomew Roberts]

From TTAG: http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/201...ils-on-monday/

"SIG claims that recent feedback from government agencies evaluating the P320 inspired the enhanced trigger design. The changes were intended to improve trigger feel during the pull and reset. The result just happens to fix the drop safety issue, too. According to SIG, they intended to incorporate the changes in all P320 models — at a date the company didn’t specify."

I call shenanigans on SIG. I do not believe they were in the process of improving the trigger and then surprisingly this turned out to fix a problem that we know occurred as early as January 5, 2017. I also hate feeling like I'm being lied to by someone I am doing business with. Even worse is the "I'm being lied to and in an obseqious fashion that indicates this person thinks I'm exceedingly gullible."

[TunnelRat]

The sheer logistics of this "voluntary upgrade" will be nuts. Absolutely nuts. 500,000 pistols in the wild currently. For that matter, since it's voluntary I wonder if SIG will charge shipping to the factory? If they do, imagine the pissed off customers, so I can't imagine they'd have the gall to do that. In that case the cost of shipping both ways, the cost of time and labor for the repair as well as the parts, and all of this for tens of thousands, possibly hundreds of thousands, of pistols.

As for shenanigans, I called that back on post 113 https://thefiringline.com/forums/sho...&postcount=113.

[JoeSixpack]

It's cheaper then a lawsuit.
There will be a glut of guns at first but then it will trickle in to a manageable pace.

Some will probably never be fixed, Probably a ton of owners who have no idea this problem even exists.

I'd assume they'd pay shipping.. or at least they should, I'd be pissed if they didn't.

If the parts are drop in they might have the option of sending them out for self install.. I'd go that route for those comfortable.