Glock Talk banner

New Sig 365

9696 Views 62 Replies 44 Participants Last post by  Southswede
Well, Sig has released a new 365 that appears similar to the Glock 43, but holds 10+1 as standard capacity. You can see it on the Sig website, and it appears to be an interesting new pistol. As with most things Sig these days, time will tell, of course. . .
  • Like
Reactions: Lois
1 - 4 of 4 Posts

· Registered
Joined
·
676 Posts
Some thoughts: 1" thick, sig lites, 10 or 12+1 capacity, 1" thick!, less than 5" height in 12+1 config, 9mm, 1" thick!

The proprietary rail = FAIL, seriously Sig, WTF are you thinking with this? How hard is it to do 1913? This is just dumb and irritating.

DROP SAFE! (it better be) :deadhorse:

Very interesting.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
676 Posts
Perhaps the thinness of the gun dictated a non-conventional rail? Even though I use rail-mounted lights on some of my guns, for a tiny concealed gun, I don't feel I need a light. Once someone puts calipers to it, we shall see if the non-conventional rail was dictated by the gun's small dimensions or not.

As for the drop safe, from the article, they stated that "SIG developed an entirely new, enhanced drop test protocol for duty handguns. They dropped the P365, 574 times in 26 orientations as well as five drops at 6 feet on concrete. For those of you are wondering if this new test protocol is going to be retroactive to older pistol models, it isn’t. However, any new models will be subjected to this protocol during development.

Additionally, they’ve put over 40,000 rounds through a P365 with no frame cracks."

The author did have failures while shooting in the cold they attributed to lube, but that will be something to keep an eye on (when the gun was cleaned, it worked perfectly, but...).
That's definitely a possibility that they had to do the rail the way they did, due to the thickness of the frame. And I'm the same way as you, I really have no intention of carrying it with a light of any kind anyway. I always have an Olight in my pocket anyway just as part of my EDC. I just found it odd that they went proprietary with the rail on this gun, when the P320 subcompact has a 1913 also.

But yeah this is all great info, really appreciate you passing it along.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
676 Posts
You are only 6 months behind your understanding of Sig Sauer's progress and completely unaware of the difference between the P320 and P365.
Just to expand on your note. From the soldiersystems.net article:

Testing
Based on their experience with the P320, SIG developed an entirely new, enhanced drop test protocol for duty handguns. They dropped the P365, 574 times in 26 orientations as well as five drops at 6 feet on concrete.

For those of you are wondering if this new test protocol is going to be retroactive to older pistol models, it isn’t. However, any new models will be subjected to this protocol during development.



Additionally, they’ve put over 40,000 rounds through a P365 with no frame cracks.

http://soldiersystems.net/2018/01/08/introducing-the-sig-sauer-p365/

 

· Registered
Joined
·
676 Posts
I'm not really sure why folks are b*tchin about not having a standard rail. It's gonna be a good CCW option regardless of that feature. G26's and G42, and G43's don't have em either. I'm just glad they got rid of that BULBOUS slide lock lever on the side of the gun!! Sheeesh it was an eyesore. I hate the one on my P320.

I think Sig has a winner on their hands for the following reasons:
-Capacity to Size Ratio
-Optional Extended 12 round factory mags
-Stippled Grip
-OEM Night Sights
-Front and Rear Cocking Serations

As long at the QC issues have been resolved in regards to the drop safety issues. I think they'll sell a fair amount of them if priced right.
I don't like proprietary rails on ANY gun. But for a Sig gun, it's even more troubling. Anyone remember how long it took for Sig to get even a little quantity of P320 grip frames to the market? They were still very scarce even a year after the gun's release. Sig is HORRIBLE at getting products out to the masses.

This isn't necessarily a deal breaker for me, as I don't put accessories on my carry guns when I'm carrying them. But it's irritating they would put this kind of limiting factor on a new gun, when the accessory market is so good right now.
 
1 - 4 of 4 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.
Top