Sig P320 M17 safety or no?

[Lucky Derby]

If I were getting a M17 (I'm not) I would get the safety version. Only because that is what the Army is getting. That is the only reason I would get one.
That said, if I were getting one to actually use/shoot/carry, I would forgo the safety. No reason for one on this type of pistol.

 

[SharpDog]

Yes to the 320
No to the safety

 

[Jeff H]

I own a 320 M17. Yes it has the safety. No I don't use it.

Clicking it on and off takes effort. the detents are definitive and firm. You won't accidentally hit the safety like I have done more than once with a 1911 with my thumb under the safety. (yes, I learned to put my thumb over the safety, but you won't need to with the M17. You can keep you normal grip for striker fired pistols)

 

[.455_Hunter]

I am not a fan of the M17, but at least the Army Acquisition Corps ignored the striker zealots and required a true manual safety on the platform instead of the "my finger is my safety / the only safety I need is between my ears" jibberish. This is coming from the perspective of former Army Officer and mechanical engineer who has worked in military small arms.

 

[jmr40]

I understood the dislike of the "backwards" safety/decocker of the Beretta and similar pistols. But the 1911 style safety is as easy and natural to use as it gets. The Sig works just the same. I see no downside

 

[SwampWolf]

If I were buying one to be a collectors piece that represents what the military has chosen, I would go with the safety version.

If I were going to carry it, I would forgo the safety, but that's personal preference.

I (like most everyone else) have a Colt 1911 pistol, along with a Beretta 92. A SIG Model P320/M17 would complete my "collection" of US military auto pistol issuances but, being completely unacquainted with the SIG pistol, I'm wondering if the pistol can be carried "safely" with the safety "off" but in a double-action mode (like the Beretta Model 92 and "Third Generation" S&W pistols, for example)?

 

[AlexanderA]

I (like most everyone else) have a Colt 1911 pistol, along with a Beretta 92. A SIG Model P320/M17 would complete my "collection" of US military auto pistol issuances but, being completely unacquainted with the SIG pistol, I'm wondering if the pistol can be carried "safely" with the safety "off" but in a double-action mode (like the Beretta Model 92 and "Third Generation" S&W pistols, for example)?

With the Sig P320, there's no distinction between "double action mode" and "single action mode." All the trigger pulls are the same -- lighter than the Beretta double action mode but heavier than the Beretta single action mode. That's because the striker is partially, but not completely, cocked as the gun is loaded, and there's no way to decock it.

So, the short answer to your question is "yes." Actually, all the Sig P320's are made without manual safeties, except for the M17's and certain of the Compact models.

Incidentally, the manual safety blocks the trigger but not the striker. The slide assemblies are interchangeable between guns with, and without, the manual safety.

 

[RON in PA]

I have a 320/M17 with the safety. It does get in the way of the slide stop/release in my experience.

 

[ATLDave]

I have a 320/M17 with the safety. It does get in the way of the slide stop/release in my experience.

Sig's bizarre obsession with putting the slide release right where it gets in the way baffles me. When they get around to releasing the Sig P4XX series, the slide release is bound to be in the backstrap or maybe inside the front of the trigger guard.

 

[AlexanderA]

Sig's bizarre obsession with putting the slide release right where it gets in the way baffles me.

Also, it's kind of small. Compare the P320 slide release to that of the M1911, for instance.

 

[ATLDave]

Sig: "Well, we know we're sticking this control right where it's in the way... so we'll make it tiny to minimize the problems!"

 

[SwampWolf]

All the trigger pulls are the same -- lighter than the Beretta double action mode but heavier than the Beretta single action mode.

Thanks for the explanation. I'm not sure I want to carry a pistol with no safety if the trigger pull is much lighter than the da pull on a Beretta Model 92. Guess I'll have to try the trigger myself before I make up my mind but it seems likely I'll opt for having a safety.

 

[AlexanderA]

Thanks for the explanation. I'm not sure I want to carry a pistol with no safety if the trigger pull is much lighter than the da pull on a Beretta Model 92. Guess I'll have to try the trigger myself before I make up my mind but it seems likely I'll opt for having a safety.

I don't think the manual safety does any harm. It's nice to have that option. You can choose to use it, or not to use it.

A lot of Beretta 92FS owners are replacing their hammer springs with the lighter 92D hammer springs. (The 92D is the double-action only version, and has a lighter trigger pull than the DA pull on the 92FS.) This is certainly safe. The issue trigger pull on the 92FS is way heavier than necessary. Wilson Combat sells a lot of hammer springs for the Beretta in the 12-14 lb. range, which is even lighter than the 92D spring.

In actuality, the Sig P320 is perfectly safe without the manual safety. The Army just specified one out of an abundance of caution. I think it was a CYA situation combined with Army traditionalism.

 

[shoobe01]

Its not necessary, but a lot of shooters, myself included, find it gives extra leverage to the grip during recoil. Lots of "target grips" have "thumb rests" to do pretty much the same thing.

If you look for it, a lot of guns have one that is very subtle.

Look /really/ close at the factory Beretta92/M9 stocks.


This photo is great for it. That indent below the safety lever? Fits your thumb just perfectly. Stick it up there, and you have a 1911-style high grip. Not that the M9 is a hard-recoiling gun anyway, but do that and followup shots get even faster.

 

[Jeff H]

Sig: "Well, we know we're sticking this control right where it's in the way... so we'll make it tiny to minimize the problems!"

Really, you barely notice it if you don't intend to use it. You aren't hitting it by mistake. The detents are pretty deep and it is firmly locked into position. There is no issue finding the slide release either.

Since I picked up my M17 used and didn't have a choice about the safety, I'm overall pleased with it. It stays out of the way and I just ignore it. Same thing I always did with my Ruger SR9.

 

[ATLDave]

Really, you barely notice it if you don't intend to use it. You aren't hitting it by mistake. The detents are pretty deep and it is firmly locked into position. There is no issue finding the slide release either.

Since I picked up my M17 used and didn't have a choice about the safety, I'm overall pleased with it. It stays out of the way and I just ignore it. Same thing I always did with my Ruger SR9.

My comments are about the slide release, not the safety. The safety seems sensibly located. Sig's bizzare insistence on the placement of slide releases goes back a long time before the P320 family.

 

[jmr40]

That isn't a problem since I don't use the slide release.

 

[shoobe01]

Exactly. Sig, like most pistol makers, doesn't think that's a slide release. Their documentation always calls it a "Slide Catch Lever."

While the current manual also says you can push down on the slide catch lever, the main way has always been to pull back on the slide.

This also:

• Gives more distance for the slide to move, so is more likely to load reliably
• Is the same action you need to perform to initially load an empty gun, and to perform a stoppage drill; reduces the number of manipulations, likely to make stoppages take less time to clear as less in your mind to do, you won't be hitting the slide catch to no effect

It may very well be deliberate that the lever is not easy to release with the thumb.

 

[ATLDave]

[forehead smack]

The odd part about Sig's location of the slide release is that it is too easy to hit with either the strong-hand thumb or base of the weak-hand thumb, not that it is too difficult to interact with. It's in the way.

I won't even comment on the notion that it's bad to use slide releases (or whatever people want to call them) to release the slide.

 

[vba]

With the Sig P320, there's no distinction between "double action mode" and "single action mode." All the trigger pulls are the same -- lighter than the Beretta double action mode but heavier than the Beretta single action mode. That's because the striker is partially, but not completely, cocked as the gun is loaded, and there's no way to decock it.

I know this is late entry but for future reference the above should be corrected to not confuse future readers.

The Sig P320 is fully cocked when the slide is racked. It is not like Glock that is partially cocked. Therefore, the P320 is SAO like a Colt Series 80 with the thumb safety removed.

Due to this, I believe, the military got it right as a gun like this should have a safety.

https://www.americanrifleman.org/articles/2015/4/23/clarifying-double-action-only-dao/

 

[Jeb Stuart]

Exactly. Sig, like most pistol makers, doesn't think that's a slide release. Their documentation always calls it a "Slide Catch Lever."

While the current manual also says you can push down on the slide catch lever, the main way has always been to pull back on the slide.

This also:

• Gives more distance for the slide to move, so is more likely to load reliably
• Is the same action you need to perform to initially load an empty gun, and to perform a stoppage drill; reduces the number of manipulations, likely to make stoppages take less time to clear as less in your mind to do, you won't be hitting the slide catch to no effect

It may very well be deliberate that the lever is not easy to release with the thumb.

One of my favorite guns is the Beretta Nano which does not have a slide "Lock". Many do not like this, but personally wish more of my pistols did not have it. The new APX carry, which is a Nano upgrade does come with one. And for that reason I will not be getting a upgrade. I do not want one especially on a small carry gun like a Micro 9mm. Each to his own. Just my choice and preference.

 

[SharpDog]

Better solution here is not using the intrinsically-dangerous Serpa (or the also pretty cheaply made IMI/Fobus/Etc. Roto retention). Get a Safariland.

Thumb safety is personal preference for a personal gun otherwise. I'd try to handle or shoot one. If very used to the 1911, you may find the thumb position on the safety-free 320 to make your brain hurt.

I'm not sure which IMI holsters you are referring to. I have two types of IMI level 2 holsters. One is pictured below. There is no physical possibility that any of the moving parts (or any other part) can interfere with the trigger:

 

[shoobe01]

Your finger is a part. Pushing the release button can result in the finger pressure still being applied as the gun comes up (at least under stress). This can cause the trigger to be slapped immediately, and the gun fires unintentionally.

It has happened.