Joined
·
1,090 Posts
Why I sold my 320.Compared to both the G19 and the APX the 320 felt very cheap to me.
Why I sold my 320.Compared to both the G19 and the APX the 320 felt very cheap to me.
Glad that title was sarcasm. I thought you had lost your mind.:whistling:
Glad their "testing" was so thorough...
https://sofrep.com/98976/dod-evaluation-says-armys-new-sig-sauer-p320-service-pistol-riddled-issues/
I’ve had a gun do that before. It ejected the spent case, a live round, and chambered the third round.How does a pistol eject a live round without manually cycling the slide? Do the rounds pop out of the magazine as the slide ejects the spent cartridge? Does this leave the pistol with an empty chamber or does it manage to pick up another round and chamber it?
That makes two of us...Glad my Sigs are all metal and older models....
:rofl:Glad that title was sarcasm. I thought you had lost your mind.
Hopefully they consider something else...My son is on committee that's looking to buy 2500 pistols and another 2500 BUGs from same maker. The SIG 320 is being considered and the front runner last time I talked to him.
Well, they went one icon in the 1911 to another in the M9. Then they follow it up with this?Never should have left the 1911, just modernized it.
I looked at a brand new one at a gun store, thing had scrapes and gouges all over the frame. I have a G19 I've been carrying for 4-5 years and has no such wear. I felt the same about the 320, not impressed. Then again I feel like I'm the only one to think the shield feels cheap too.Compared to both the G19 and the APX the 320 felt very cheap to me.
I can’t put my finger on anything in particular, I am not a polymer connoisseur but it was a feeling distinct enough to make me sell my red dot 320 after one range trip, loosing some money on it without regrets.
Am not that surprised that it’s developing some issues. Truth be told so did the Beretta in the early stages but then they went for a long smooth sail. I just hope that our troops get the pistol they deserve in the end.
Yeah well, they got the Sig on the super duper cheap...It is too bad they did not follow what the Ministry of Defense in the UK did 5 years ago...
https://www.military.com/dodbuzz/2013/02/07/mod-adopts-glock-takes-stand-on-side-arms
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...Armed-Forces-get-new-Glock-17-9mm-pistol.html
You're not.Then again I feel like I'm the only one to think the shield feels cheap too.
Sure seems like it Gino :dunno:The Beretta M9a3 would have been a good choice.
So Sig got tired of the consumer being the R&D, and has migrated the R&D to the military.
Yep....they shoulda went with Glock.What a POS this thing is.
Many civilian arms will never see 500 rounds fired.I find it odd that there are tens of thousands of P320 pistols being used by civilian shooters and yet there's no uproar over live rounds being ejected from those pistols. Did SIG supply Uncle Sam with a bad batch of magazines, or is the XM1152 ammo defective, or what?
If the civilian pistols work fine and the military ones don't, then the basic design should be sound and the problems fixable.