[boilergonzo]

It looks intriguing to me. I will absolutely take a look at one. I like the fact it is smaller than guns like the G43 and S&W Shield.

Comparing the sizes from soldiersystems, it looks promising for 10+1 capacity (12+1 with the extension!):

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


My SIG938 has been great, and for the size, I have been very, very happy with it. The G43, XDs, and others didn't cause me to consider them, because they were quite a bit larger guns than the 938, with the same capacity. I don't value that. But this one adds capacity, and I will check it out. It may or may not be good, but I am interested in seeing it!

 

[boilergonzo]

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.

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...).

 

[boilergonzo]

That's a great carry size if they aren't playing fast and loose with the 1" width number. It probably splits the difference between the G43 and the G26, but maintains G26 capacity.

I don't have any facts on the new P365, but for my prior SIG's, the width spec has always included the slide release, etc. (max width, not the narrower measurement of the slide width only).

For example, my P938 is spec'd at 1.1", but the actual slide width (by my caliper) is 0.89". My other SIG's follow the same pattern, so my hope is that they did not play fast and loose with the 1" width number, and it is the true max width (including controls) with a thinner slide.

We shall see, but I am guessing it is a legit 1" total width, with the slide being slightly slimmer. A G43 at 1.02" width with an actual slide width of 0.87 would be my guess of what to expect.

We shall see!

 

[boilergonzo]

It’s a G26. We’re choking on gnats and swallowing camels with some of these stats.

It’s like saying the G43 pocket carries better then the G26 when the dimensions aren’t the same and most people who can pocket carry the 43 discover they can the 26.

If you like Sigs. Get one. Unfortunately I got into shooting when options were limited and it takes a lot for me to ditch all my Glock brand Glock stuff.

I can slip a small gun like a P938 in my pocket, for some pockets a G43 will fit, but a G26 is not a good pocket carry in any of my pants (unless wearing cargo shorts with cavernous pockets!).

The size is a huge differentiater for me. A G26 is a wide chunk of metal. It is a continuum. The G26 is a fine gun, but if -super-small carry is the goal, it is not the best option. Most who value small carry would choose the G43. Most who value rounds and "real gun" size would gravitate to a G26, G19, etc. Some, like me, value super easy carry, and are thankful for all the new options in the last few years.