Glock Talk banner
21 - 40 of 380 Posts

· Registered
Joined
·
5,674 Posts
The 1911............................................proven for over 107 years.
I think Sig was afraid of the Glock Gen 6 and 7 coming out next month and this summer...:supergrin:
 

· Registered
Joined
·
13,341 Posts
Seems to me the initial batch of G42s didn't exactly warm the hearts of Glock fans, either.
Me, I'm kind of a dinosaur. I mean, I just last year finally accepted the Mak as a decent, worthy pistol. What, 54 YEARS after its introduction? So, yeah, I can wait a year or so on the 365. :)
 

· Registered
Joined
·
6,861 Posts
Man...I don't know. I manage a team of product managers. If they rolled out product that had teething problems, they'd be looking for another job. Those issues cost companies significant revenue. The maximum failure rate I'll accept is 3%....and people are staking their life on the product we make.
If that’s true your product managers would never make it the gun or automotive industry. 3% failure rate is a wet dream in those industries. Sad but so.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
39,706 Posts
Man...I don't know. I manage a team of product managers. If they rolled out product that had teething problems, they'd be looking for another job. Those issues cost companies significant revenue. The maximum failure rate I'll accept is 3%....and people are staking their life on the product we make.
I'd be surprised if the maximum failure rate on the guns already produced was as high as 3%, but has SIG even released production numbers so far?

One of the things with guns is that the manufacturer can really only test using their people and good quality factory ammunition before they release a new gun into the wild. Then, an unsuspected manufacturing QC issue might come along and surprise everyone.

It's not uncommon to hear it said that gun companies have no actual control over some pretty critical influences, such as the shooter (knowledge, experience and the way the gun is used); the ammunition (QC, over/under-powered); the owner maintenance (cleaning, lubrication, products used, etc); and the environmental conditions (in which the gun is used).

This can make for a pretty big Venn Diagram of critical influences for a diminutive mechanical device that is expected, in normal conditions, to operate violently (being fired). Now, toss in any unexpected, and likely unrecognized (at the time), manufacturing or materials issues (whether involving gun maker or vendor parts/assemblies).

Did we mention that it's a really diminutive pistol, and smaller pistols are often observed to be less tolerant of all the major influences that may be at work (shooter, ammo, cleaning & lubrication, shooting conditions)?

Helluva time for the engineers to now realize they could revise or refine something regarding some aspect of the design specs, of their manufacturing, or something with any vendor supplied parts, too.

Another potential "ah hell" moment might be involved regarding the number of guns already produced. If they borrowed a page from S&W's recent way to bring a new little gun to market (Shield 9), they may have quietly produced many ten's of thousands of the new guns before even announcing them, so they could immediately pump them into the market place as soon as the official announcement was being made. Now, they've not only got to deal with any minor design revisions and/or manufacturing changes for new guns going to be being produced, but they may have a respectable number of already-produced/shipped guns that may end up having to be corrected to satisfy the first customers.

I've listened to at least a couple of gun companies discuss their experiences with ongoing revisions and refinements in this regard, in armorer classes, preparing armorers to be able to identify and resolve any issues that have been identified with earlier production guns, parts, assemblies, etc. Of course, they've also cleared up some rumors and allayed some concerns about publicly rumored "problems" that were eventually determined to involve an issue with a specific type/line of ammunition (which might've been an ammo spec or QC problem), or misapplication of some other product (solvents, lubes, etc), and even some subsequently identified owner modification or changes. Playing "catch up" can be hell.

Guess we'll see what this involves, but I'd be surprised if the company's engineers weren't able to quickly get on top of whatever they've identified that needs to be addressed, revised, etc. It wouldn't be surprising if the "PR" issue were to last longer than whatever actual issues were involved, in the first place. The public can be suspicious and touchy.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
3,836 Posts
The real question is will they recall all P365s sold? If they do will those buyers have confidence in the gun when they get it back? If recalled how many months till those guns are returned to the buyers? If I spent $550.00 for a gun I would want something returned rather quickly.
 

· Premium Member
Joined
·
5,917 Posts
Sig fixing the problems. Not really a bad thing.
I think some here don't realize how often manufacturing change orders happen on a plant floor. It is bad and costly, but it happens. I worked QC in manufacturing long ago (while in college), and the problems that arise when shifting from limited production to full scale are staggering. It is usually the accumulation of small things, but it is also usually easy to figure out which variable need to be honed in on. Then testing of components that need stringency are increased. Then things go smoothly.

If you don't think Glock stopped when they had to abandon all the G43 molds and fix that problem out of the gate, you are mistaken. The only thing that surprises me is that SIG is talking/leaking this information.

Given how many 365's seem to be working, I am confident SIG will sort it out. It seems to be a tolerance or material issue (peening/wear/tightness of fit). That is a really, really good problem to have!!! Added attention can resolve it.

I didn't get rid of my iPhone this last time (or the time before, or the time before) just because the new iOS had an issue and needed an update. A gun is something more directly tied to health and survival, but in testing it, they work or they don't.

If they fix it faster than the G42 or G43 (which took about a year for each!) that would be nice...
 

· Premium Member
Joined
·
5,917 Posts
The real question is will they recall all P365s sold? If they do will those buyers have confidence in the gun when they get it back? If recalled how many months till those guns are returned to the buyers? If I spent $550.00 for a gun I would want something returned rather quickly.
I think we can guarantee an upgrade over a "recall".
When SIG has had issues, if parts were changed, they seem to replace them without hassle.
The XDs full-auto recall or other major safety issues far outside of the norm are usually required to raise to the level of an actual recall. Even as a formal recall, they are completely optional...
 

· Registered
Joined
·
5,846 Posts
Sig needs to can all their engineers and get some of Gaston's boys over there to show em how it's done.
The amount of recalls, voluntary safety upgrades and discontinued models is ridiculous...
That's right..... they need one of Gaston's boys over there to show them how to "upgrade" their parts quietly.
 
21 - 40 of 380 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