I have found people on the internet that made UNSUBSTANTIATED CLAIMS that manual chambering could break the extractor. To the best of my knowledge I am the only person that has provided ANY actual test data on manual chambering the P365. And I have looked. SIg REFUSED to even say whether or not they performed ANY testing, so SIg's claims that manual chambering could break the extractor are also UNSUBSTANTIATED. Until such time as SIg actually provides ANY test data to show that manually chambering the P365 can cause the extractor to break, Sig's claim has ZERO credibility! I won't take Sig at their word anymore than I take the government at it's word.
There have also been very few reports of any kind of extractor breakage with the new extractor design. That begs the question of why Sig even needed to redesign the P365 extractor. One person reported nearly 20,000 rounds fired before the extractor broke. Another person had the extractor break when using steel cased ammo. I don't think that the steel shellcase was the issue per se, but instead I believe that the shellcase jammed in the firing chamber, which caused severe stress on the extractor claw which was likely the cause of the extractor breakage.
SIg released the P320 when it had drop firing problems. There was ZERO excuse for that!
Sig sold P365s with defective firing pins. That means that they had some serious quality control issues.
Sig also sold the P365 with defective return spring assemblies where the return spring would coil over itself and jam with as little as 200 rounds fired. That is a quality control and/or design problem.
Sig sold P365s with a stripper rail that was so rough that it made it very difficult for some people to rack the slide over a magazine loaded to capacity and man person reported that they were unable to retract the slide over a magazine loaded to capacity.
Why should ANYONE takes Sig's word for anything?
I provided actual test data that showed the extractor did NOT break after 1,830 cyclings. How many cyclings must the extractor endure before it's considered safe to manually chamber by allowing the slide to slam closed? I asked that question before and nobody seemed to be able to come up with an answer. It shouldn't be that difficult. I can reinstall the extractor that I used for the testing and continue to cycle it.
What is a reasonable lifespan for the P365 extractor under normal use?
I'm willing to bet that the extractor is far more likely to break if a shellcase gets stuck in the firing chamber than from allowing the slide to slam the extractor over a shellcase rim.
I challenge ANYONE to prove that a new extractor will break because of releasing the slide and allowing the extractor to slam over the shellcase rim a reasonable number of times.
FYI, allowing the slide to slam the extractor over a shellcase rim will cause less stress to the slide than from normal firing. The extractor moving over the shellcase rim will slow down the slide more before it returns to battery than normal cycling while firing. I've measured the resistance and the slide chambering a round causes less resistance than the resistance that the extractor causes.