Alllen Bundy
Member
I just received a new P365XL with the new slide where the rear sight is inserted into a dovetail grove in the slide itself instead of being mounted on a removable plate like the older versions.
It felt funny the first time that I racked it in the gun shop. After solvent cleaning the return spring assembly the problem was obvious. SIg lathe turned the guide rod but did NOT polish out the lathe turning marks!!! You can hear the noise that the lathe turning marks make and you can also feel the extra resistance as you rack the slide. It's cringeworthy!
It's just like the Rival Arms guide rod that I previously wrote about:
Recoil Spring Assemblies, Sig vs Rival Arms/ISMI for P365/X/SAS
https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...sig-vs-rival-arms-ismi-for-p365-x-sas.892594/
I plan to disassemble the RSA and polish the guide rod. Yes, it will remove the oxide coating, but the spring rubbing against the guide rod WILL wear off the oxide coating anyway. I'll depend upon the lube to keep the guide rod from rusting
Also, the end of the spring at one end of the guide rod was NOT cut cleanly and is instead bent and digging into the guide rod end. I'm sure that the end screw is Locitied in place and will need heat to remove the end screw.
As with my P365, I am only going to use the stock recoil spring at the range. I am going to buy a Rival Arms stainless steel RSA with a more reliable ISMI recoil spring, polish the stainless steel guide rod and reassemble it, and use that for carry only.
The flat trigger FEELS HORRIBLE! You can feel it erratically grabbing and chattering as you pull the trigger. I'm not going to try to "break it in". I will just polish the trigger linkage contact points as before. My P365 with it's curved trigger is smooth as can be.
I did measure and the curved trigger does indeed have more room to fit a gloved finger inside the trigger guard than with the flat trigger.
I haven't removed the triggers to compare them yet, but from the photos that I have seen the upper part of the trigger appears to be identical and it's only the lower part of the trigger that is either flat or curved. I'm going to make a prediction that if I pull both triggers at the very tip, the required trigger pull force will be nearly identical. I believe that the main difference between the triggers is that the flat trigger allows you to pull further out on the trigger thereby creating more leverage. The curved trigger moves your finger closer to the middle and you will have less leverage to pull the trigger. I'll do some before polishing trigger pull force measurements as well as after polishing measurements. Polishing the P365 trigger linkage contact points didn't appear to affect the required trigger pull force at all. It just made the trigger pull more smoothly.
As I expected, the stripper rail is rough and needs to be polished. I'll be measuring the racking force required before and after the polishing, so this time I'll have some real measured numbers instead of a subjective "it's easier to rack after polishing". It turns out that a guy at the gun shop carries a P365X and he also polished the stripper rail in his P365X.
Likewise, the breech face, the left adjacent wall to the breech face, and the underside of the extractor claw need polishing to make it easier for the slide to return to battery. FYI, polishing the breech face also makes it easier to clean.
It also appears that the striker assembly only uses one spring and does NOT have the return spring, previously used, that pulls the striker backward and moves the firing pin behind the breech face. It doesn't make much sense to me that they removed this return spring. It would appear that they are mostly depending upon inertia from the firing pin bouncing off of the primer to move the striker backward. If anyone knows why Sig eliminated this return spring, please share your information with us.
I have heard claims that Sig changed the recess inside the grip module, but I haven't seen any internal differences between the P365 grip module that I got in October 2020, or in the two XL grip modules that I bought, or in the grip module that came on my new P365XL. Maybe it was pre-2020 grip modules that were different. As before, I'll be gluing in 2 oz of pure tungsten welding electrodes inside the rear of the grip module to improve the balance when the magazine is low on ammo.
For better or worse, the disconnector now appears to have a black Nitron finish, Previously it was bare stainless steel. I'll take some friction measurements between the two styles of disconnectors.
The sear also appears to have a black Nitron finish, whereas before it was bare metal.
Other than the flat trigger, the rest of the FCU appears to be the same.
The three 12 rd magazines that came with the Tac Pac are made in USA and look identical to my older magazines. However, the lettering and numbering is stamped a little bit more deeply.
On the plus side, Sig has improved the trigger guard retention system significantly. The original P365 Tac Pac holster was so bad that with the retention set at maximum, inverting the holster and giving it a very light shake would allow the pistol to drop out of the holster. My P365 fell out of the Sig holster when the holster was horizontal. I had to add an external spring to the old style holster to increase the retention significantly.
Of course they had to make the holster 1/2" longer to accommodate the longer P365XL slide. But they substantially increased the height of the lip that goes over the trigger guard to retain the pistol inside the holster. The trigger guard retention can be set significantly higher now. It would appear that I'm not the only person that had issues with the original P365 Tac Pac holster.
It felt funny the first time that I racked it in the gun shop. After solvent cleaning the return spring assembly the problem was obvious. SIg lathe turned the guide rod but did NOT polish out the lathe turning marks!!! You can hear the noise that the lathe turning marks make and you can also feel the extra resistance as you rack the slide. It's cringeworthy!
It's just like the Rival Arms guide rod that I previously wrote about:
Recoil Spring Assemblies, Sig vs Rival Arms/ISMI for P365/X/SAS
https://www.thehighroad.org/index.p...sig-vs-rival-arms-ismi-for-p365-x-sas.892594/
I plan to disassemble the RSA and polish the guide rod. Yes, it will remove the oxide coating, but the spring rubbing against the guide rod WILL wear off the oxide coating anyway. I'll depend upon the lube to keep the guide rod from rusting
Also, the end of the spring at one end of the guide rod was NOT cut cleanly and is instead bent and digging into the guide rod end. I'm sure that the end screw is Locitied in place and will need heat to remove the end screw.
As with my P365, I am only going to use the stock recoil spring at the range. I am going to buy a Rival Arms stainless steel RSA with a more reliable ISMI recoil spring, polish the stainless steel guide rod and reassemble it, and use that for carry only.
The flat trigger FEELS HORRIBLE! You can feel it erratically grabbing and chattering as you pull the trigger. I'm not going to try to "break it in". I will just polish the trigger linkage contact points as before. My P365 with it's curved trigger is smooth as can be.
I did measure and the curved trigger does indeed have more room to fit a gloved finger inside the trigger guard than with the flat trigger.
I haven't removed the triggers to compare them yet, but from the photos that I have seen the upper part of the trigger appears to be identical and it's only the lower part of the trigger that is either flat or curved. I'm going to make a prediction that if I pull both triggers at the very tip, the required trigger pull force will be nearly identical. I believe that the main difference between the triggers is that the flat trigger allows you to pull further out on the trigger thereby creating more leverage. The curved trigger moves your finger closer to the middle and you will have less leverage to pull the trigger. I'll do some before polishing trigger pull force measurements as well as after polishing measurements. Polishing the P365 trigger linkage contact points didn't appear to affect the required trigger pull force at all. It just made the trigger pull more smoothly.
As I expected, the stripper rail is rough and needs to be polished. I'll be measuring the racking force required before and after the polishing, so this time I'll have some real measured numbers instead of a subjective "it's easier to rack after polishing". It turns out that a guy at the gun shop carries a P365X and he also polished the stripper rail in his P365X.
Likewise, the breech face, the left adjacent wall to the breech face, and the underside of the extractor claw need polishing to make it easier for the slide to return to battery. FYI, polishing the breech face also makes it easier to clean.
It also appears that the striker assembly only uses one spring and does NOT have the return spring, previously used, that pulls the striker backward and moves the firing pin behind the breech face. It doesn't make much sense to me that they removed this return spring. It would appear that they are mostly depending upon inertia from the firing pin bouncing off of the primer to move the striker backward. If anyone knows why Sig eliminated this return spring, please share your information with us.
I have heard claims that Sig changed the recess inside the grip module, but I haven't seen any internal differences between the P365 grip module that I got in October 2020, or in the two XL grip modules that I bought, or in the grip module that came on my new P365XL. Maybe it was pre-2020 grip modules that were different. As before, I'll be gluing in 2 oz of pure tungsten welding electrodes inside the rear of the grip module to improve the balance when the magazine is low on ammo.
For better or worse, the disconnector now appears to have a black Nitron finish, Previously it was bare stainless steel. I'll take some friction measurements between the two styles of disconnectors.
The sear also appears to have a black Nitron finish, whereas before it was bare metal.
Other than the flat trigger, the rest of the FCU appears to be the same.
The three 12 rd magazines that came with the Tac Pac are made in USA and look identical to my older magazines. However, the lettering and numbering is stamped a little bit more deeply.
On the plus side, Sig has improved the trigger guard retention system significantly. The original P365 Tac Pac holster was so bad that with the retention set at maximum, inverting the holster and giving it a very light shake would allow the pistol to drop out of the holster. My P365 fell out of the Sig holster when the holster was horizontal. I had to add an external spring to the old style holster to increase the retention significantly.
Of course they had to make the holster 1/2" longer to accommodate the longer P365XL slide. But they substantially increased the height of the lip that goes over the trigger guard to retain the pistol inside the holster. The trigger guard retention can be set significantly higher now. It would appear that I'm not the only person that had issues with the original P365 Tac Pac holster.
Last edited: