Sig P320 - Carry, Range Only, or Sell

[DocHawk]

On 7/30/2025 at 7:22 PM, Garufa said:

 Because P330’s literally go off without Goober’s booger hook on the trigger or otherwise jacking around.  As reported, the guns at idle, with no intervention or a hand on them, just sometimes spontaneously fire.

I have not seen evidence confirming this on the current design in any testing, and I've been looking - very actively. This was absolutely true of the original commercial design with the "adverse trigger."

There have been multiple reports, now, claiming to damningly confirm "it goes off on its own!" I carefully review every one I find with an open mind. In every case, they seem to be conducted and consumed by people lacking critical thinking skills - including the flawed initial FBI report (the FBI admitted to flawed testing and released a subsequent report). Every single test resulting in "repeatable" uncommanded discharges involved sticking something in front of the trigger, to move the trigger rearward, prior do doing some manipulation or other to the weapon to induce a discharge.

Please, fellow gunners and instructors, who will be the first to raise their hand and die on the hill of, "Yes, I tell my shooters that if they press the trigger to the rear and the gun goes off, well, that's the gun's fault."

Edited 19 hours ago by DocHawk

[deerslayer]

33 minutes ago, DocHawk said:

I have not seen evidence confirming this on the current design in any testing, and I've been looking - very actively. This was absolutely true of the original commercial design with the "adverse trigger."

There have been multiple reports, now, claiming to damningly confirm "it goes off on its own!" I carefully review every one I find with an open mind. In every case, they seem to be conducted and consumed by people lacking critical thinking skills - including the flawed initial FBI report (the FBI admitted to flawed testing and released a subsequent report). Every single test resulting in "repeatable" uncommanded discharges involved sticking something in front of the trigger, to move the trigger rearward, prior do doing some manipulation or other to the weapon to induce a discharge.

Please, fellow gunners and instructors, who will be the first to raise their hand and die on the hill of, "Yes, I tell my shooters that if they press the trigger to the rear and the gun goes off, well, that's the gun's fault."

I agree that wedging a screw against the trigger is a head scratcher at first, but when it is used to demonstrate that a gun prematurely goes off less than 1mm into its normal 4-5mm of trigger movement after the slack is taken up (like in the WGP video), that is irrefutable evidence that the gun is problematic.  

Edited 19 hours ago by deerslayer

[DocHawk]

On 7/27/2025 at 8:46 AM, deerslayer said:

Even the biggest shills have to admit this is a not how "safe" guns work.  

Would you be willing to back up your statement by replicating the video you're basing it on with your own gun? Please drive a screw into the frame gap in front of the trigger on your gun of choice, drive the screw into the trigger to press it backwards to the break point, point the gun at your brain, and then rattle/knock/pull/press the crap out of that gun, to prove your point.

Please don't. That's not how "safe" shooters work.

Edited 19 hours ago by DocHawk

[DocHawk]

18 minutes ago, deerslayer said:

I agree that wedging a screw against the trigger is a head scratcher at first, but when it is used to demonstrate that a gun prematurely goes off less than 1mm into its normal 4-5mm of trigger movement after the slack is taken up (like in the WGP video), that is irrefutable evidence that the gun is problematic.  

And to me, a professional gunsmith and firearms engineer who has contributed to or conducted the design and manufacture of several firearms (and repaired countless more through manufacturing new parts to unpublished specs), I draw the exact opposite conclusion. Discharge through intentional (screw) movement of the trigger to (or past) the break point, which is exactly the point at which all mechanical safeties have been disengaged, is exactly the design intent and function of a trigger. That's what triggers do.

Every single one of these videos that I've reviewed (and I review every one I come across, as asinine as they are, because I want someone to prove it) ends up playing out exactly like this, to my professional eyes and ears: "Look, by intentionally defeating the safeties through trigger travel exactly as the design is intended, then while at the break point using mechanical stresses and shocks to wiggle over the edge of the break, I can get the depressed trigger to do exactly what it is designed to do! FREAKING UNBELIEVABLE, I'M AN INTERNET STAR!"

I do like a good P320 bashing meme, though. 

Edited 19 hours ago by DocHawk

[deerslayer]

7 minutes ago, DocHawk said:

Would you be willing to back up your statement by replicating the video you're basing it on with your own gun? Please drive a screw into the frame gap in front of the trigger on your gun of choice, drive the screw into the trigger to press it backwards, point the gun at your brain, and then rattle/knock/pull/press the crap out of that gun, to prove your point.

Please don't. That's not how "safe" shooters work.

No, I don’t point guns at my head, but I am confident that my guns would not do what WGP’s 320 did.  But I don’t own any 320s. 

[deerslayer]

3 minutes ago, DocHawk said:

And to me, a professional gunsmith and firearms engineer who has contributed to or conducted the design and manufacture of several firearms (and repaired countless more through manufacturing new parts to unpublished specs), I draw the exact opposite conclusion. Discharge through intentional (screw) movement of the trigger to (or past) the break point, which is exactly the point at which all mechanical safeties have been disengaged, is exactly the design intent and function of a trigger. That's what triggers do.

Every single one of these videos that I've reviewed (and I review every one I come across, as asinine as they are, because I want someone to prove it) ends up playing out exactly like this, to my professional eyes and ears: "Look, by intentionally defeating the safeties through trigger travel exactly as the design is intended, then while at the break point using mechanical stresses and shocks to wiggle over the edge of the break, I can get the depressed trigger to do exactly what it is designed to do! FREAKING UNBELIEVABLE, I'M AN INTERNET STAR!"

I do like a good P320 bashing meme, though. 

That’s interesting - the “break point” on a 320 is 4-5mm after the slack is removed, but touch the slide and it’s suddenly <1mm.  Where exactly is the “break point” and shouldn’t it be consistent?

[DocHawk]

1 minute ago, deerslayer said:

No, I don’t point guns at my head, [...]

Good, at least in this part, you're getting my point. We don't point guns at our head, because we expect the unexpected might happen. We also don't depress triggers to the break point, then induce multiple mechanical stresses, and blame the gun when it discharges. Two basic tenets of firearms safety, yes?

Regarding the second half of your response, I am not confident that I could trust a pre-loaded, at-the-trigger-break handgun of any type not to go off under rattle/shear/shock/torque and other stresses. I have experience with the design and function of many hundreds of different handguns, and unlike you, I wouldn't trust a single one of them to be "safe" in that condition.

[deerslayer]

Just now, DocHawk said:

Good, at least in this part, you're getting my point. We don't point guns at our head, because we expect the unexpected might happen. We also don't depress triggers to the break point, then induce multiple mechanical stresses, and blame the gun when it discharges. Two basic tenets of firearms safety, yes?

Regarding the second half of your response, I am not confident that I could trust a pre-loaded, at-the-trigger-break handgun of any type not to go off under rattle/shear/shock/torque and other stresses. I have experience with the design and function of many hundreds of different handguns, and unlike you, I wouldn't trust a single one of them to be "safe" in that condition.

WGP was not at the “break point.”

[Sleep profit]

Have a question I have a 320 X 5 Legion  does it have the same issues internals as the regular 320 thanks 

[ck1 actual]

4 minutes ago, Sleep profit said:

Have a question I have a 320 X 5 Legion  does it have the same issues internals as the regular 320 thanks 

All 320's are the same internals.  If you wanted to switch internals you'd need to go to 226 or 229 legions. 

[DocHawk]

1 minute ago, deerslayer said:

That’s interesting - the “break point” on a 320 is 4-5mm after the slack is removed, but touch the slide and it’s suddenly <1mm.  Where exactly is the “break point” and shouldn’t it be consistent?

The design of the P320 separates the sear leg of the striker in the slide from the sear housed in the FCU ("frame"). The dog ears that function as frame rails hold the two components together, and due to the modularity of the design, significant tolerance exists between the two. Manipulating that gap, within mechanical tolerance, can change the break point, but nothing will happen unless the mechanical safeties have been disengaged by pressing the trigger, first.

Have you ever held a P320 and dry fired or done a reset drill/test? Some are quite solid, while others exhibit a 3-4 degree shift in POA as the slide tips upwards from the positive (safe) sear angle acting on the striker leg. Not exactly 1911-grade tolerance! That is the slop you're leaning into when you depress the trigger and then manipulate the gap.

If you are looking to be a match shooter and find that POA shift / point of break tolerance unacceptable, that's a valid decision. But it isn't going off without first disengaging the safeties, and it isn't coming off the sear without first taking up the slack.

[Sleep profit]

Ok thanks I will keep as a range toy for now until this shakes out thanks again 

[ck1 actual]

Just now, Sleep profit said:

Ok thanks I will keep as a range toy for now until this shakes out thanks again 

I forgot the 365xl also has a legion option. The FCU on the 365 is different than the 320.  

[DocHawk]

21 minutes ago, deerslayer said:

WGP was not at the “break point.”

So are you dismissing my position by saying it was only at the slack takeup point? By this qualification, are you now saying that you advocate shooters taking up the slack in their triggers, and then if the gun goes off while they run/jump/summersault/grapple, it's the gun's fault? My position stands.

Edit: Good debate, deerslayer. I think what's important is that we are all committed to gun safety, and staying on top of the latest information available in our hobby/profession/passion. I'm glad people are paying attention; apathy is the real killer of all things.

Edited 18 hours ago by DocHawk

[deerslayer]

3 minutes ago, DocHawk said:

So are you dismissing my position by saying it was only at the slack takeup point? By this qualification, are you now saying that you advocate shooters taking up the slack in their triggers, and then if the gun goes off while they run/jump/summersault/grapple, it's the gun's fault? My position stands.

I am not a professional gunsmith with hundreds of designs under my belt, but even I understand that a safely functioning gun fires at a point when A. all safeties are disengaged and B. the sear or striker is released AND that this should NEVER vary by 3-4mm on any competently designed gun, but that is exactly what happened in WGP’s test.  

As for doing gymnastics with your finger on the trigger, you are asking for trouble whether the gun is safe or not.  

[Alleycat72]

Lol

There's like 5 or 6 ways the 320 can fail and fire. But...But you can't touch the slide. LOL

 

[DocHawk]

40 minutes ago, Alleycat72 said:

Lol

There's like 5 or 6 ways the 320 can fail and fire. But...But you can't touch the slide. LOL

 

That's the bandwagon line, yes - it's cool to be anti-Sig now, and advertising the opinion above is the latest form of virtue signalling in the gun community. No proof is required to be deemed cool, just having the right opinion.

Please detail the 4 or 5 ways you allege the current P320 can fail under real-world conditions, objectively and with evidence, so we can debate their merits for the benefit of us all.

[Alleycat72]

27 minutes ago, DocHawk said:

That's the bandwagon line, yes - it's cool to be anti-Sig now, and advertising the opinion above is the latest form of virtue signalling in the gun community. No proof is required to be deemed cool, just having the right opinion.

Please detail the 4 or 5 ways you allege the current P320 can fail under real-world conditions, objectively and with evidence, so we can debate their merits for the benefit of us all.

I carry carry a Sig 365x macro. Having brand loyalty to the point it kills people is absolutely retarded. Sig is known for Bata testing it's gun on customers. The biggest issue is the cover up. The 356 is great once you fix the sights. I also drive a Jeep, a Toyota, and a Ford. Everyone can mess up and put out a bad product. Covering it up and denying it makes is criminal in my mind. You can't accidentally kill someone with a 320 because you know it has a problem. You are just as liable as Sig. You guys are just in denial. 

 

[Alleycat72]

Also fun how the Sig cross videos have disappeared. You know the bolt gun that fired without pulling the trigger. Kinda like Remington. 

[DocHawk]

16 minutes ago, Alleycat72 said:

I carry carry a Sig 365x macro. Having brand loyalty to the point it kills people is absolutely retarded. Sig is known for Bata testing it's gun on customers. The biggest issue is the cover up. The 356 is great once you fix the sights. I also drive a Jeep, a Toyota, and a Ford. Everyone can mess up and put out a bad product. Covering it up and denying it makes is criminal in my mind. You can't accidentally kill someone with a 320 because you know it has a problem. You are just as liable as Sig. You guys are just in denial. 

Alleycat72, you exist without equal in this thread as the least objective, least factual, most emotionally inflammatory poster. Amusingly, you point the finger at others and accuse them of being irrational. Case in point right here: when asked to objectively explain your concerns, you sidestep informed debate and flame on about brand loyalty, personal liability, and those who disagree with you being in denial. You even flat out admit you're just influenced by emotion:

Q: "Please detail the 4 or 5 ways you allege the current P320 can fail"
Alleycat: "The biggest issue is the cover up."

Thank you, that's everything I need to know about your opinion.  Parroting the viral videos that are significantly lacking in critical thinking and metacognition is way past logical fallacy; it's simply invalid reasoning.

(PS: I think Sig is inexcusably terrible for the way they handled the coverup, as I've previously stated in my post at the bottom of page 5. I'm no Sig apologist. I'm talking objective engineering about a soulless product.)

Edited 16 hours ago by DocHawk

[deerslayer]

Here is another video of a guy prepping the trigger with a screw, except he claims he stops AT THE WALL (AKA before any safeties are disengaged) as opposed to pulling past it like others.  I agree with him that this failure doesn’t really explain the USAF death, but it is another example of 320s doing stuff they ain’t supposed to do.  At this point, only a shill or a know-it-all writes off all these accidents as NDs.  

 

 

Edited 16 hours ago by deerslayer

[Alleycat72]

1 hour ago, DocHawk said:

Alleycat72, you exist without equal in this thread as the least objective, least factual, most emotionally inflammatory poster. Amusingly, you point the finger at others and accuse them of being irrational. Case in point right here: when asked to objectively explain your concerns, you sidestep informed debate and flame on about brand loyalty, personal liability, and those who disagree with you being in denial. You even flat out admit you're just influenced by emotion:

Q: "Please detail the 4 or 5 ways you allege the current P320 can fail"
Alleycat: "The biggest issue is the cover up."

Thank you, that's everything I need to know about your opinion.  Parroting the viral videos that are significantly lacking in critical thinking and metacognition is way past logical fallacy; it's simply invalid reasoning.

(PS: I think Sig is inexcusably terrible for the way they handled the coverup, as I've previously stated in my post at the bottom of page 5. I'm no Sig apologist. I'm talking objective engineering about a soulless product.)

Emotionally? Lol I don't care if you want to put the lives of your family and yourself in danger. I think the need to know what you're exposing them to. 

Have you seen the multiple videos of guns going bang in the holster?

Put it in a holster = bang.

Letting it sit in a holster = bang.

Twisting in a holster = bang. 

Sitting the gun down in a holster = bang. 

Have keys = bang. Sig words 

Touching the slide = bang 

Standing and talking to someone = bang.

Not  assembling the gun correctly = bang. 

Fu"king harsh language = bang. 

 Sig = it's the costumers fault. 

Sorry your employers suck.

Forgot dropping it. LOL

 

 

Edited 15 hours ago by Alleycat72

[Sleep profit]

I have never seen so many Sigs of every flavor in the classified here for sale A lot of people bailing out    Sig as a company could be in financial ruin  Is this issue in other Sig guns or just the 320 

Edited 15 hours ago by Sleep profit

[deerslayer]

5 minutes ago, Sleep profit said:

I have never seen so many Sigs of every flavor in the classified here for sale A lot of people bailing out Sig as a company could be in financial ruin  Is this issue in other Sig guns or just the 320 

Just the 320, which is curious.  If all these accidents are just negligent bozos, why aren’t we seeing a lot of accidents with 365s, which have been some of the hottest selling guns in the past few years and are probably carried in pockets and waistbands more frequently than 320s? 

[Sleep profit]

1 minute ago, deerslayer said:

Just the 320, which is curious.  If all these accidents are just negligent bozos, why aren’t we seeing a lot of accidents with 365s, which have been some of the hottest selling guns in the past few years and are probably carried in pockets and waistbands more frequently than 320s? 

Are they different internals ?