Sig P365 - Force Required to Manually Chamber: Polished Extractor vs Unpolished

[SharpDog]

In other words, you are going to assume that they did not.
First of all, it's perfectly safe to "manually chamber" a round in any autopistol I know of. What you're talking about is direct chamber loading.

You already know the answer. Beretta says it's safe in their guns while other manufacturers (SIG in specific) say it's not safe in their guns. I'll tell you what. Email Beretta and ask them to tell you about their testing that they did to determine it's safe. If they don't answer you, then you will have to assume they didn't test it and can't really say it's safe. That's the same approach you used for SIG so it must be right. I'm not sure what you'll do at that point--I guess you'll just have to assume whatever you want and stop pretending that it has anything to do with reality or logic.I can't tell if you're trying to be funny or if it's just happening. Nearly every thread you have started has been a list of useless things you are doing just because you want to.
Modifying a pistol that already works so it will work.
Modifying a pistol that is already reliable so it will be reliable.
Modifying a pistol so you can more easily perform a non-recommended procedure that is never necessary in the first place.Useless. You can eliminate the possibility without direct chamber loading by just not rechambering ammo repeatedly. I've been using and carrying autopistols for decades and have never had to discard a round due to setback.Useless for two reasons.

1. The manufacturer and others have already told you it's a bad idea so you don't need to find out for yourself.
2. You're testing a procedure that is never necessary. A person could use an autopistol every day of their life and never have to direct chamber load a round even once.Are you really saying that the ONLY way you ever chamber a round in your pistol is by direct chamber loading? When you reload at the range, or practice self-defense reloads, you never chamber the first round from the mag by dropping the mag? If you do ever chamber the first round from the mag by just dropping the slide, then you are loading your pistol at least two different ways and, according to you, "creating the potential for problems" which would make your comment hypocritical. If you really are ONLY loading your pistol by direct chamber loading regardless of the circumstances, well, then I don't know what to say other than we're back to comedy time, I guess.No that's nonsense, you don't need to do that to make a VW Beetle reliable UNLESS you mistreat it. Excellent example, by the way. You are correct about one thing--if you mistreat something, then you may find you need to modify it in order to make it hold up to being mistreated. Or you could just not mistreat it in which case the modifications are--useless.

I shoot about 100 rounds a week from my set of p365SLs that are my range queens and I have an identical set that are my EDCs. Maybe once a year I'll switch them around. I have been shooting pistols for five decades and have never directly chambered a round. None of my p365s or p365XLs has had a malfunction (nor have any of my p22Xs). I totally agree with @JohnKSa that this all seems unnecessary. It is interesting reading but I'm not gonna mess with what ain't broke. I also have not had a problem with Loctite

 

[Alllen Bundy]

I also have not had a problem with Loctite

And just how do you know that the Loctite set up properly and achieved it's full strength?

Try Loctiting a stainless steel nut and bolt together with Loctite 242 (The common Blue Loctite) and see how well you can get it to cure. After you discover how poorly Loctite 242 works on stainless steel try Loctite 243 and you will have a very quick cure. Loctite would not make the primer or a special version of Loctite to work on stainless steel and aluminum if people didn't have problems with it.

Rival Arms didn't seem to think they had a problem with their RSA for the Sig P365. But I was able to unscrew it WITH MY FINGERS and they used high strength red Loctite!
I applied medium strength blue Loctite 242 on a stainless steel nut and bolt and let it set overnight. I was able to unscrew it with my fingers the next day. I bought a tube of medium strength blue Loctite 243 and used it on my Rival Arms stainless steeL RSA and it locked it up solid in a short amount of time. The high strength red Loctite is not necessary.

Most people have no idea when they have had a Loctite failure because they never test their work. They are simply lucky that the bolt did not unscrew.

The best way to keep nuts and bolts from coming loose is good design that does NOT use a bolt for a locating device or put the bolt in a single shear load. But as bolts are often used in single sheer mode or are used for locating devices instead of dowel pins, Loctite comes to the rescue.

 

[CNobbe]

You may consider it useless, but you have blind faith in the product and I do not. The "Finishing" work that I have performed has objectively and measurably improved the performance and margin of reliability. There is so much friction from the stripper rail on a new P365 that some people cannot even rack the slide over a magazine loaded to capacity. Whereas even loaded to capacity, it is relatively easy to rack my slide and there is no gritty feeling like the Sig had out of the box, because I polished the stripper rail like Sig should have done.

Blind faith?? How long, exactly, have you owned a 365? How many rounds through it? I have one from the first batch released that hasn't malfunctioned yet, now over 7k rounds down the pipe over nearly four years.

Until yours reaches that round count, you can't go claiming you've improved anything when other unaltered 365s have more rounds through them than yours.

As for racking the slide over a loaded mag, "racking" is a poor method in that situation. The well established method for those with strength issues or smaller guns is holding the slide in the weak hand, and by pushing the grip forward with the strong hand. It is significantly easier to chamber a round that way rather than trying to pull a small and narrow slide with a strong recoil spring over a loaded magazine.

 

[Alllen Bundy]

Blind faith?? How long, exactly, have you owned a 365? How many rounds through it? I have one from the first batch released that hasn't malfunctioned yet, now over 7k rounds down the pipe over nearly four years.

7,000 rounds fired in ideal conditions at he gun range doesn't tell you much about reliability. Shooting your gun at the range will only reveal some problems if you are lucky. As an example, electronic devices are not tested for reliability at 72°F room temperature. They are tortured at temperatures of 140°F or more and also as subzero temperatures and sometimes cycled between hot and freezing temperatures repeatedly, and also in extremely humid conditions. They are vibrated, and run at very low barometric pressures chambers. They are physically shocked and also shock tested with tens of thousands of volts of electricity.

How many rounds did you need to fire before the slide would fully return to battery and fully chamber a round no matter how slowly the slide move forward? It's a safe bet that it did NOT do that right out of the box.

Until yours reaches that round count, you can't go claiming you've improved anything when other unaltered 365s have more rounds through them than yours.

I can say with certainty that the slide on my P365 would NOT chamber a round and return to battery right out of the box UNLESS the slide was released quickly. There was so much resistance that the recoil spring could NOT pull the slide into battery by itself. It required the inertia of the slide to slam it into battery.

As for racking the slide over a loaded mag, "racking" is a poor method in that situation. The well established method for those with strength issues or smaller guns is holding the slide in the weak hand, and by pushing the grip forward with the strong hand. It is significantly easier to chamber a round that way rather than trying to pull a small and narrow slide with a strong recoil spring over a loaded magazine.

I don't care what method a person uses to retract the slide. My P365 and others were VERY difficult to retract the side over a magazine loaded to capacity. This was due to the stripper rail being so rough that it put deep scratches into the stripper rail and NOT because of the method used to retract the slide. Polishing the stripper rail solved the problem IMMEDIATELY! The fact that this excessive friction existed meant that under adverse conditions the slide might not cycle properly when the pistol is fired. Whereas with this impediment to rearward motion of the slide removed it is far more likely to cycle under adverse conditions.

I can say with absolute certainty that My P365 will performs more reliably under adverse conditions than it did right out of the box. Ride the slow as slowly as you can and it will still chamber a round and return to battery. That is proof positive.

Besides reducing friction and looking pretty, polishing also reduces stress risers from which a crack could form causing a stress fatigue failure. Polishing parts makes them more reliable. This is why I polished the guide rod of my Rival Arms RSA. They had only turned the guide rod on a lathe and you could feel the lathe cutting grooves with your fingernail. It was full of stress risers. And I was able to unscrew it WITH MY FINGERS! Someone also reported that their Rival Arms RSA came apart while shooting it on the range. Guide rods have been known to crack.

I polished the guide rod to remove the stress risers and make the slide easier to retract. I then used the correct Loctite. The Rival Arms RSA was a FAILURE when I had received it. Now you CANNOT unscrew it with your fingers. The guide rod is very smooth and no longer impedes reward motion of the slide. It's already more reliable.

 

[CNobbe]

7,000 rounds fired in ideal conditions at he gun range doesn't tell you much about reliability. Shooting your gun at the range will only reveal some problems if you are lucky.

.

How do you know what the conditions were? I shoot on my property, whether it's 0* or a hundred, my 365s work fine.

Where is your 365 test in adverse conditions? Maybe you’ll convince us we should clean up the internals of our guns. Go drop it in some mud or sand and show us.

And you still haven’t told us how many rounds you’ve fired through yours…
https://www.maxonshooters.com/blog/sig-sauer-p365-gun-review-100000-round-torture-test

I can say with certainty that the slide on my P365 would NOT chamber a round and return to battery right out of the box UNLESS the slide was released quickly. There was so much resistance that the recoil spring could NOT pull the slide into battery by itself. It required the inertia of the slide to slam it into battery.

It clearly states in the manual to not ride the slide as it may cause a problem- failure to feed. If I ride the slide with my other small guns (tried this with a colt pocketlite 380). Guess what? Fails to feed.

 

[JohnKSa]

I've had two flywheels come loose so I always add 4 extra dowel pins that are also drilled deeper than stock and then use a reamer to match ream the crankshaft and flywheel to make a slight interference fit. The stock dowels in the crankshaft do NOT have an interference fit. It's a common enough problem that they have been making drill jigs to add the dowels to the crankshaft and flywheel since the early 1970's, as well as making higher strength gland nuts to be able to withstand torquing to double the factory recommended torque spec. There is also a problem with the wavy spring washers that VW uses on their rocker arm shafts. Replacing the wavy washers with carefully clearanced flat washers eliminates the reliability problem and allows higher RPM use before valve float occurs. It's time consuming but more reliable.

Sure, they made those kits, but not to solve an issue with stock engines--those are for people who wanted to build engines that make more HP than stock. Your comments about valve float and flywheels coming loose tell me all I need to know about what you think is "normal usage". You don't get valve float or loose flywheels unless you mistreat those engines. They provide reliability and longevity when used as intended--for economical transportation. That's how they were able to sell millions of them. They aren't a good option for people who think that it's reasonable to push them until the valves float or the flywheels come loose.

I asked Sig point blank if they tested manually chambering of their P365 and they refused to say. So I have to assume that they did not do the testing...

Ridiculous. You don't have to assume that at all. You could assume that they don't feel the need to provide that kind of information upon request or that they didn't like the tone of your email and felt that the exchange would be unproductive.

I call it manual chambering.

Yeah, I get that. You can call it whatever you want, obviously, but manually chambering a round is a much more general term that also includes things like slingshotting the slide. Direct chamber loading is the term used to describe what you are doing--which is only one specific way to manually chamber a round.

Actually, I would NOT trust them.

But you would quote them when it suits your purpose? Ok. So really what it comes down to is that you only believe what you want to, pretty much independent of anything else.

You may consider it useless, but you have blind faith in the product and I do not.

Non-sequitur. A person doesn't have to have blind faith in a product to realize that If a gun is working, and you do a bunch of mods to it to make it work, that's not especially productive.

What you don't know is that I do mods to my own guns sometimes, for various reasons. I'm not saying that you shouldn't modify your guns. What I was pointing out is the glaring disparity between your claims that you don't like to do useless things as an argument for your own homegrown procedure for chambering a round to prevent a condition that never needs to be an issue at all while at the same time espousing all kinds of mods even though you haven't demonstrated that any of those mods are actually necessary.

You need to try to have a little more consistency--and think a little more about what you're actually saying.

So it works MEASURABLY BETTER.

How many fewer malfunctions are you getting now than you got before? If the gun works, it works. If it's reliable, it's reliable. It's one thing to say that the gun is exhibiting reliability problems or won't work and here are the necessary remedies, it's another to say that all of these things are NECESSARY even though the gun is no more MEASURABLY reliable now than it was before.

Again, you should feel free to do what you want with your gun within the bounds of safety. Just be consistent. If you're going to argue for some homegrown technique to deal with a problem that never has to be a problem in the first place by saying that you do it because you don't like to do useless things then you shouldn't, at the same time, admit that you do like to do useless things--like repeatedly direct-chamber loading a pistol hundreds of times.

But the Sig P365 is NOT perfectly reliable right out of the box. I can show you photos of the Sig recoil spring coiled over itself and jamming with only about 200 rounds through it. I think I've heard of 6 cases of this problem so far. Right out of the box the P365 doesn't reliably chamber a round. You must be sure to release the slide quickly so the momentum can help push the slide into battery. There is so much extra resistance that the recoil spring is often not capable of pulling the slide back into battery by itself. There are plenty of people reporting return to battery failures with their P365s.

Allen, you're smarter than that. Of course there are P365 pistols out there that have problems. Of course those pistols need to be worked on. That's the nature of manufactured items. Not all of them are perfect. The fact that there are P365 pistols out there that don't work right is a very good reason to work on those pistols that don't work right--it isn't justification for doing the same repair work on every P365 out there. The bottom line is that repairing a pistol that already works is useless. If you want to do it--go for it. But don't do it while at the same time claiming you don't like to do useless things.

You must be sure to release the slide quickly so the momentum can help push the slide into battery.

This is, in fact, the proper method for manually chambering a round in an autopistol. Pull the slide back all the way and release it quickly. Doing anything else is doing it wrong and can be expected to cause problems. For a guy who likes to quote manuals, I'm surprised that you didn't already know this:

From the SIG P365 manual:
P4 Do not ride the slide forward.
P21 Do not ride the slide forward. Failure to properly complete step 6-b may induce a stoppage.

Maybe time spent doing these mods and arguing about how they are necessary would be better spent learning to use the pistol properly?

So polishing a part now qualifies as a modification???

Just for fun I searched on modify and the definition that came up started out: "make partial or minor changes..." Yes, polishing a part is making "partial or minor changes".

But that requires that YOU do NOT make any human errors.

Ridiculous. It only requires that you not make repeated errors. I don't claim to be infallible, but I have managed to shoot tens of thousands of rounds through autopistols over many decades in addition to carrying them for self-defense--without ever having to discard a round due to setback.

Or you can eliminate the possibility entirely by manually chambering a round.

You as much as admitted that you do chamber rounds using other methods which means that even using your own argument you don't eliminate the possibility entirely--but more importantly the admission means that you now have multiple ways to chamber a round--something you say is problematic.

After I insert a magazine I ALWAY release the slide quickly to maintain the muscle memory, even though under normal circumstances I can ease the slide on my P365X and it will ALWAYS return to battery because of the internal polishing that I have performed

So sometimes you finagle the slide closed to prevent setback, but other times you release the slide quickly--I believe that means you do it at least two different ways after telling someone else that could cause problems. Remember this:

You have two different ways that you release the slide after inserting a magazine. That is a potential for problems.

Manufacturers frequently lie and people sometimes die because of it. Sig has NOT been transparent. This gives me reasonable cause to DISTRUST Sig. I didn't drink the Sig Kool-Aid and I'm not part of the Sig cult.

1. The fact that manufacturers lie is not evidence that SIG lied to you.
2. I think that the part about people dying is meant to be comedic since the idea that direct chamber loading (or not direct chamber loading) could lead to death is ludicrous, so I'll just skip over that.
3. SIG doesn't have to tell you all about their testing procedures or give you their data. The fact that they don't means absolutely nothing. As in absolutely zero. It not only does not give you reasonable cause to distrust SIG, the claim that it does suggests a nebulous grasp on reality or logic or both.
4. I don't know what point you think you're making with your comment about cults or Kool-Aid, but if any of that is supposed to apply to me, I guess this is where I let you in on the secret that I do not now, nor have I ever owned a SIG product.

It is if you want to eliminate the possibility of chambering a round from the magazine more than once.

You can't write fiction and then expect everyone to pretend it's reality. There's no need to avoid ever chambering a round more than once. Good quality self-defense ammunition is made to tolerate being chambered more than once--just not over and over.

I really don't understand why you are so bent out of shape about polishing internal parts...

I'm not. I've polished internal parts on some of my own pistols. But I don't go around telling people that it's necessary to prevent problems when it's really just something that I wanted to do.

The problem is that you seem to be unable to admit that you like modifying things and because of that you modify things even when it's not necessary. You feel like you must justify each of your modifications by proving that there's some problem that needs solving even when there really isn't. So you have to invent reasons why it's necessary to do your modifications...

Untrustworthy/untransparent manufacturers! Polish!
I read about a P365 malfunctioning! Replace parts!
Setback! Don't listen to the manufacturer--change the gun!
Human error exists! Modify!
Don't be a cultist--Koolaid Drinker! Follow my teachings instead--here's the procedure--don't question it!
I didn't read the manual! Polish some more!

Now do you see?

 

[JDGray]

And just how do you know that the Loctite set up properly and achieved it's full strength?

Try Loctiting a stainless steel nut and bolt together with Loctite 242 (The common Blue Loctite) and see how well you can get it to cure. After you discover how poorly Loctite 242 works on stainless steel try Loctite 243 and you will have a very quick cure. Loctite would not make the primer or a special version of Loctite to work on stainless steel and aluminum if people didn't have problems with it.

Rival Arms didn't seem to think they had a problem with their RSA for the Sig P365. But I was able to unscrew it WITH MY FINGERS and they used high strength red Loctite!
I applied medium strength blue Loctite 242 on a stainless steel nut and bolt and let it set overnight. I was able to unscrew it with my fingers the next day. I bought a tube of medium strength blue Loctite 243 and used it on my Rival Arms stainless steeL RSA and it locked it up solid in a short amount of time. The high strength red Loctite is not necessary.

Most people have no idea when they have had a Loctite failure because they never test their work. They are simply lucky that the bolt did not unscrew.

The best way to keep nuts and bolts from coming loose is good design that does NOT use a bolt for a locating device or put the bolt in a single shear load. But as bolts are often used in single sheer mode or are used for locating devices instead of dowel pins, Loctite comes to the rescue.

I do torture test on it of course, using my torque wrenches that I torture tested, how else? I don't trust anything, must get back to testing...

 

[CNobbe]

Sure, they made those kits, but not to solve an issue with stock engines--those are for people who wanted to build engines that make more HP than stock. Your comments about valve float and flywheels coming loose tell me all I need to know about what you think is "normal usage". You don't get valve float or loose flywheels unless you mistreat those engines. They provide reliability and longevity when used as intended--for economical transportation. That's how they were able to sell millions of them. They aren't a good option for people who think that it's reasonable to push them until the valves float or the flywheels come loose.Ridiculous. You don't have to assume that at all. You could assume that they don't feel the need to provide that kind of information upon request or that they didn't like the tone of your email and felt that the exchange would be unproductive.Yeah, I get that. You can call it whatever you want, obviously, but manually chambering a round is a much more general term that also includes things like slingshotting the slide. Direct chamber loading is the term used to describe what you are doing--which is only one specific way to manually chamber a round. But you would quote them when it suits your purpose? Ok. So really what it comes down to is that you only believe what you want to, pretty much independent of anything else.Non-sequitur. A person doesn't have to have blind faith in a product to realize that If a gun is working, and you do a bunch of mods to it to make it work, that's not especially productive.

What you don't know is that I do mods to my own guns sometimes, for various reasons. I'm not saying that you shouldn't modify your guns. What I was pointing out is the glaring disparity between your claims that you don't like to do useless things as an argument for your own homegrown procedure for chambering a round to prevent a condition that never needs to be an issue at all while at the same time espousing all kinds of mods even though you haven't demonstrated that any of those mods are actually necessary.

You need to try to have a little more consistency--and think a little more about what you're actually saying.How many fewer malfunctions are you getting now than you got before? If the gun works, it works. If it's reliable, it's reliable. It's one thing to say that the gun is exhibiting reliability problems or won't work and here are the necessary remedies, it's another to say that all of these things are NECESSARY even though the gun is no more MEASURABLY reliable now than it was before.

Again, you should feel free to do what you want with your gun within the bounds of safety. Just be consistent. If you're going to argue for some homegrown technique to deal with a problem that never has to be a problem in the first place by saying that you do it because you don't like to do useless things then you shouldn't, at the same time, admit that you do like to do useless things--like repeatedly direct-chamber loading a pistol hundreds of times. Allen, you're smarter than that. Of course there are P365 pistols out there that have problems. Of course those pistols need to be worked on. That's the nature of manufactured items. Not all of them are perfect. The fact that there are P365 pistols out there that don't work right is a very good reason to work on those pistols that don't work right--it isn't justification for doing the same repair work on every P365 out there. The bottom line is that repairing a pistol that already works is useless. If you want to do it--go for it. But don't do it while at the same time claiming you don't like to do useless things.This is, in fact, the proper method for manually chambering a round in an autopistol. Pull the slide back all the way and release it quickly. Doing anything else is doing it wrong and can be expected to cause problems. For a guy who likes to quote manuals, I'm surprised that you didn't already know this:

From the SIG P365 manual:
P4 Do not ride the slide forward.
P21 Do not ride the slide forward. Failure to properly complete step 6-b may induce a stoppage.

Maybe time spent doing these mods and arguing about how they are necessary would be better spent learning to use the pistol properly?Just for fun I searched on modify and the definition that came up started out: "make partial or minor changes..." Yes, polishing a part is making "partial or minor changes". Ridiculous. It only requires that you not make repeated errors. I don't claim to be infallible, but I have managed to shoot tens of thousands of rounds through autopistols over many decades in addition to carrying them for self-defense--without ever having to discard a round due to setback.You as much as admitted that you do chamber rounds using other methods which means that even using your own argument you don't eliminate the possibility entirely--but more importantly the admission means that you now have multiple ways to chamber a round--something you say is problematic.So sometimes you finagle the slide closed to prevent setback, but other times you release the slide quickly--I believe that means you do it at least two different ways after telling someone else that could cause problems. Remember this: 1. The fact that manufacturers lie is not evidence that SIG lied to you.
2. I think that the part about people dying is meant to be comedic since the idea that direct chamber loading (or not direct chamber loading) could lead to death is ludicrous, so I'll just skip over that.
3. SIG doesn't have to tell you all about their testing procedures or give you their data. The fact that they don't means absolutely nothing. As in absolutely zero. It not only does not give you reasonable cause to distrust SIG, the claim that it does suggests a nebulous grasp on reality or logic or both.
4. I don't know what point you think you're making with your comment about cults or Kool-Aid, but if any of that is supposed to apply to me, I guess this is where I let you in on the secret that I do not now, nor have I ever owned a SIG product. You can't write fiction and then expect everyone to pretend it's reality. There's no need to avoid ever chambering a round more than once. Good quality self-defense ammunition is made to tolerate being chambered more than once--just not over and over.I'm not. I've polished internal parts on some of my own pistols. But I don't go around telling people that it's necessary to prevent problems when it's really just something that I wanted to do.

The problem is that you seem to be unable to admit that you like modifying things and because of that you modify things even when it's not necessary. You feel like you must justify each of your modifications by proving that there's some problem that needs solving even when there really isn't. So you have to invent reasons why it's necessary to do your modifications...

Untrustworthy/untransparent manufacturers! Polish!
I read about a P365 malfunctioning! Replace parts!
Setback! Don't listen to the manufacturer--change the gun!
Human error exists! Modify!
Don't be a cultist--Koolaid Drinker! Follow my teachings instead--here's the procedure--don't question it!
I didn't read the manual! Polish some more!

Now do you see?

Next he’ll try to tell us why he doesn’t trust the Glock 19.

 

[Homerboy]

Good Lord. This guy is a joke. "How have you tested it? Have you dragged it through the mud and then dumped your blood and a few chunks of your skin into the open slide, simulating a fall down a cliff after a bear attack? Have you? HAVE YOU??!!. Well, until you have, it's not considered reliable! And make sure the mud is 70% dirt and 30% creek water. NOT river water! The river water has a different chemical composition! I'll bet you Sig only used a 40% water mixture, and anybody who is ANYBODY in the tactical mall ninja world knows that 40% water creates too thin a mud."

 

[bdickens]

Maybe if you mean not driving like a granny is mistreating it

Black and White thinking. It is perfectly well possible to drive sensibly without "driving like a granny." As a matter of fact, it is possible to engage in an actually rather "dynamic" driving style without abusing the car.

So it works MEASURABLY BETTER.

Measured how? By what objective criteria? Surely with your extensive UL testing experience you could document your methodology.

I can say with certainty that the slide on my P365 would NOT chamber a round and return to battery right out of the box UNLESS the slide was released quickly.

"Operating as designed."

 

[JDGray]

Good Lord. This guy is a joke. "How have you tested it? Have you dragged it through the mud and then dumped your blood and a few chunks of your skin into the open slide, simulating a fall down a cliff after a bear attack? Have you? HAVE YOU??!!. Well, until you have, it's not considered reliable! And make sure the mud is 70% dirt and 30% creek water. NOT river water! The river water has a different chemical composition! I'll bet you Sig only used a 40% water mixture, and anybody who is ANYBODY in the tactical mall ninja world knows that 40% water creates too thin a mud."

Thanks for clearing this up about the dirt/water ratios. The slurry makes a great metal polish!

 

[SharpDog]

And just how do you know that the Loctite set up properly and achieved it's full strength?

Try Loctiting a stainless steel nut and bolt together with Loctite 242 (The common Blue Loctite) and see how well you can get it to cure. After you discover how poorly Loctite 242 works on stainless steel try Loctite 243 and you will have a very quick cure. Loctite would not make the primer or a special version of Loctite to work on stainless steel and aluminum if people didn't have problems with it.

Rival Arms didn't seem to think they had a problem with their RSA for the Sig P365. But I was able to unscrew it WITH MY FINGERS and they used high strength red Loctite!
I applied medium strength blue Loctite 242 on a stainless steel nut and bolt and let it set overnight. I was able to unscrew it with my fingers the next day. I bought a tube of medium strength blue Loctite 243 and used it on my Rival Arms stainless steeL RSA and it locked it up solid in a short amount of time. The high strength red Loctite is not necessary.

Most people have no idea when they have had a Loctite failure because they never test their work. They are simply lucky that the bolt did not unscrew.

The best way to keep nuts and bolts from coming loose is good design that does NOT use a bolt for a locating device or put the bolt in a single shear load. But as bolts are often used in single sheer mode or are used for locating devices instead of dowel pins, Loctite comes to the rescue.

Well I have used loctitie in automotive applications like roof racks and they have held together for decades. I have also used it in well over a hundred other gear applications and nothing has come loose. That meets my criteria (ie. my goals I set out for when using it).

 

[Sovblocgunfan]

“I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and besides, the pig likes it.”

—George Bernard Shaw

 

[Alllen Bundy]

Direct chamber loading is the term used to describe what you are doing--which is only one specific way to manually chamber a round. ...........You can call it whatever you want, obviously, but manually chambering a round is a much more general term that also includes things like slingshotting the slide.

Actually, the ONLY way that I know of to manually chamber a round is to insert the round into the firing chamber through the ejector port.

Racking the slide is NOT a manual chambering operation! Moving the slide AUTOMATICALLY chambers the round from the magazine FOR you. You may be manually moving the slide, rather than moving the slide by firing, but it is the PISTOL that is AUTOMATICALLY chambering a round FOR you when the slide cycles.

If you are using the term "manual chambering" to describe chambering a cartridge from the magazine by cycling the slide by hand, you are factually incorrect.

Direct chambering is even a bit nebulous. Direct from where? The magazine? It seems like a VERY direct path to go from the top of the magazine into the firing chamber. The cartridge doesn't go anywhere else from the magazine except DIRECTLY into the firing chamber.

So don't get too hung up if someone does not use your illogical jargon.

You are starting to sound like bicycle geeks that get upset when I refer to the front sprockets on a bicycle as "sprockets" instead of "Chain Rings" (In the USA) or "Chain Wheels" (In other parts of the world). And likewise, they want to refer to the rear sprockets as cogs or cog-set, freewheels, and cassettes. FYI, cogs were traditionally the teeth on the sprocket. Some bicycle geeks don't even know what a sprocket is and I've had to explain to them that "chain rings," chain wheels","cogs", "cog-sets", "freewheels", and "cassettes" are merely bicycle jargon meaning "sprockets" and that cogs are the teeth on the sprockets.

 

[Alllen Bundy]

Remember this: ......The fact that manufacturers lie is not evidence that SIG lied to you.

But Sig has NOT told me the truth! Sig has made bold statements that manually chambering can damage the P365 extractor. Yet when asked directly whether or not they had performed ANY manual chambering testing whatsoever, they REFUSED to say and did NOT back up their bold claims.

Sig appears to be using their 5th amendment right NOT to incriminate themselves. Why would I EVER trust someone making a bold statement and REFUSING to provide evidence to back it up? That would be FAITH based trust. Sorry, but I'm not a member of the Sig Church, even though I use one of their products.

I've made some bold statements. But I've also done the testing and measurements and, unlike Sig, I have shared the results of my testing. I will have more test results after my next trip to the gun range.

......SIG doesn't have to tell you all about their testing procedures or give you their data. The fact that they don't means absolutely nothing. As in absolutely zero. It not only does not give you reasonable cause to distrust SIG, the claim that it does suggests a nebulous grasp on reality or logic or both.

That kind of behaviour is treating their customers poorly. But the fact that Sig is NOT transparent and will not even say if they have done certain testing is reason enough NOT to trust them. What are they trying to hide? Why would they NOT be PROUD to show you their testing???

Part of a company operating under ISO 9000 series quality standards requires the company to document their test procedures and be subject to audits. The last ISO-900O company that I worked for nearly always had customers that wanted to see our documentation to make sure that our products would be reliable. We were more than happy to show them our documentation and show them how good our operation really was. We were a Deming based company and reliability was important to us. I was responsible for maintaining the ISO standards in our engineering lab, and my lab NEVER failed an ISO audit, BECAUSE I WAS PROACTIVE!

...SIG doesn't have to tell you all about their testing procedures or give you their data.

That would depend. If Sig got sued they may be required to provide all of that information in discovery.

But if Sig is unwilling to provide any proof of testing, WHY SHOULD I TRUST THEM? That is all the cause I need to distrust Sig or anyone else.

 

[Alllen Bundy]

As Benjamin Franklin said: "An ounce of prevention is better than a pound of cure".

JohnKSa,

You really ought to start thinking in a more proactive manner. That helps you to detect potential problems before they become actual serious problems that could have deadly consequences. If you operate reactively you cannot prevent the problem from happening, and the problem usually happens at the worst possible moment.

If you are only target shooting, gun malfunctions don't matter very much, unless the gun explodes in your face. If you lose a shooting competition because of a malfunction, no big deal.

However, self defense is considerably more serious. If your gun malfunctions you, or whomever you are trying to protect, may end up dead. I'd rather give myself every possible advantage and eliminate any potential problems.

I'm not sure why some people seem to be so bent out of shape that I'm recommending the polishing of internal parts that actually make the P365X pistol operate more smoothly.

Nobody has yet pointed out ANYTHING that I have done that has actually reduced the reliability and/or performance of my P365X. None of the polishing will reduce the performance and/or reliability of the pistol, and most of it will in fact improve performance and/or reliability under real life adverse conditions. The best that you can seem to muster is to claim that I have wasted my time because the polishing and modifications were unnecessary. I beg to differ. I'm trying to squeeze out every last ounce of performance and reliability from my P365X.

By proactively polishing parts that contact other parts, you eliminate potential metal contamination of the lubrication that would inevitably occur from rough metal parts grinding against each other.

While the pistol is disassembled for polishing, it also allows for a thorough cleaning and re-lubrication of the parts with a superior grade of synthetic lubricant that is NOT degraded by cleaning agents as those used in a CLP, and is also rated for lubrication down to -90°F. Here in Minneapolis the temperature has dropped as low as -36°F and we have had subzero weather for more than a month and a half straight. I remember one week where the temperature dropped below -30°F for 4 days straight. I would NOT want to take a chance of using a petroleum lubricant in my pistol that could become thick enough to prevent my pistol from operating correctly. I use synthetic lubricants EVERYWHERE in my automobiles and also in my bicycle, as I both drive and ride in subzero weather.

Polishing parts removes potential stress risers from which stress cracks could occur. Polishing is a WELL recognized TEXTBOOK method of IMPROVING reliability!!!

Polishing also makes it much easier to inspect for stress cracks.

Polishing the contact points of the parts also reduces friction and that reduction in friction allows a pistol to operate more reliably in adverse conditions. A pistol will be able to tolerate more contamination before a malfunction occurs. It also allows for more human error before a pistol malfunctions.

How can you possibly believe that polishing does NOT improve reliability?

You may not like the idea of manually chambering a cartridge. However, if you have a failure to feed and chamber a round, manual chambering may be your only option in a self defense situation. You will need to reload after every shot, but at least you can still shoot.

Polishing the leading edge of the extractor claw substantially reduces the force necessary to manually chamber a cartridge, reduces the stress on the extractor claw while manually chambering a cartridge, reduces the chance of a stress crack from forming that could cause a stress fatigue failure of the extractor claw, makes it easier to inspect for stress cracks, and not just for manual chambering, but also reduces the chance of a stress crack from forming the during normal extraction of a shell case. How does polishing NOT make your firearm more reliable?

...it's another to say that all of these things are NECESSARY even though the gun is no more MEASURABLY reliable now than it was before. ......The bottom line is that repairing a pistol that already works is useless.

The FAA would disagree with you. Preventative maintenance is important and so is eliminating deficiencies that could become serious problems under adverse conditions. Being proactive could help you discover problems that could prevent a P365 from firing.

How many fewer malfunctions are you getting now than you got before?

Right out of the box my P365 would NEVER chamber a round and return to battery when the slide was released slowly. I think that you will find that most new P365s will exhibit this problem right out of the box. That is a 100% malfunction! After polishing parts, no matter how I slowly release the slide it ALWAYS chambers the round and the slide returns to battery.

I reduced the potential of a malfunction caused by human error and/or contamination. You can infer the reliability improvement by the friction reduction. That is a HUGE reliability improvement.

Now I'm sure that you will say that I didn't release the slide properly. But in fact that is just a pathetic EXCUSE for a poorly finished pistol. How is it NOT a good thing for your pistol to be insensitive as to how the slide is released so that it will chamber a round EVERY time, and not just when you release the slide in a particular manner?

For a guy who likes to quote manuals, I'm surprised that you didn't already know this: From the SIG P365 manual: P4 Do not ride the slide forward. P21 Do not ride the slide forward. Failure to properly complete step 6-b may induce a stoppage.

I'm well aware of what Sig has stated in their manual. But this is ultimately a cop out for Sig leaving rough surfaces that may cause a failure to chamber a round and return to battery.

But even NEW Sig P365s have also had problems AFTER firing and failing to return to battery. Excess friction in three areas is one cause of the problem. Polishing these areas greatly reduces the friction and that reduces the chances of an RTB problem from ever happening.

Before I polished the stripper rail it was very difficult to retract the slide over a magazine loaded to capacity. My hand could have easily slipped off of the slide resulting in a malfunction. This also appears to be a common problem and some people cannot even retract the slide over a magazine loaded to capacity.

But I suspect that many people, or perhaps most people, that carry +1 have never even tried to retract the slide over a magazine loaded to capacity and have no idea of how difficult it may be with a new P365. There is rarely a need to do this UNLESS your first round FAILS to fire. Then you have a VERY SERIOUS need to retract the slide to chamber a new round! Your life may depend upon it.

After polishing the stripper rail, AND installing the MagGuts +2 kit in my P365X, it is MUCH easier to retract the slide over a magazine loaded to capacity, thereby reducing the chance of the slide slipping out of my hand. The pistol will also be less susceptible to the effects of accidentally riding the slide with your thumb while it cycles after being fired. My P365X is less susceptible to human error and contamination than a brand new Sig P365 right out of the box. That seems like an important and measurable reliability improvement to me.

The trigger linkage is made from a piece of stamped sheet steel. The stamping leaves a burr on the edge of the steel that Sig never bothers to remove. That burred edge of the trigger linkage is what contacts the sear and creates the gritty feel of the trigger. Polishing the burrs off of the trigger linkage makes the trigger pull VERY smoothly, yet still retains a 7.0 lb trigger pull, which you would want for a conceal carry gun. You would rather have a gritty trigger pull like it comes out of the box? Who cares about a gritty feeling trigger, right? Making the trigger pull smoothly is a waste of my time, right?

Another issue is that while a P365 may fire and appear to be working correctly, when removing the P365 FCU from the grip module, parts can sometimes fall off. Normally there is spring pressure on all of the loose parts in the FCU that prevents those parts from falling off. I can vigorously shake the FCU from my P365X and no parts will fall off.

However, if the sear spring tang is too short, or if the sear spring tang is installed incorrectly, the spring pressure on some parts is missing and parts could fall off of the FCU when it is outside of the grip module. This is not a guess, as people have reported this problem with their P365s when they were changing their grip modules. That is reason enough to remove the FCU from the grip module to make sure that the parts are held together correctly. You don't want parts falling off if you ever need to remove the FCU from the grip module in the field.

Light firing pin strikes on the primer are also a known Sig P365 reliability problem. You need to check your pistol to make sure that you don't have this issue. This light primer strike problem can be fixed by replacing the one piece striker spring retainer with the two piece spring retainer, or you can sand one face of the one piece spring retainer to achieve adequate penetration of the firing pin into the primer.

Another known problem is that the recoil spring can coil over itself and jam the slide. Replacing the round wire recoil spring with a flat wire recoil spring prevents the recoil spring from coiling over upon itself and jamming. The elimination of this possibility of a malfunction seems like an important reliability improvement to me.

The ISMI recoil spring (Used in the Rival Arms RSA) is heat treated and stress relieved AFTER forming the spring, which is the method considered to produce the most reliable springs. The Sig recoil spring has been reputed to NOT being heat treated and stress relieved AFTER forming. The ISMI recoil spring is rated for double the life of a Sig recoil spring. It seems like switching to the ISMI recoil spring improves reliability in two different ways.

Polishing the guide rod of the Rival Arms RSA not only allows it to operate more smoothly and more quietly, but eliminating the lathe turning marks reduces the chance of a stress fatigue crack from forming and makes it easier to inspect for stress cracks. Yet another reliability improvement.

Rival Arms also screwed up because they did NOT use the required primer, the threadlocker did NOT properly set up, and I was able to unscrew it with my fingers! If I was NOT proactive in checking these things I could have had a failure in a self defense situation. Using the correct Loctite cured the problem. This seems like another reliability improvement to me.

Not to mention that Sig MANGLED the coiled spring pin holding the extractor in my P365 so badly that it was NOT able to be driven to the correct depth into the slide at the factory. THAT is a quality problem and potentially a reliability problem. But I'd rather not take any chances, so I removed the mangled coiled spring pin and installed a new coiled spring pin to the correct depth WITHOUT mangling it!

Every bit of friction that I eliminate reduces the possibility of a malfunction under adverse conditions. THAT makes it more reliable and I HAVE MEASURED the reduction in friction that the polishing has achieved. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that friction reduction is measurable and it results in a reliability improvement.

A person doesn't have to have blind faith in a product to realize that If a gun is working, and you do a bunch of mods to it to make it work, that's not especially productive. ............If the gun works, it works. If it's reliable, it's reliable.

Functioning under ideal conditions is NOT the same as functioning in less than ideal real world conditions. 10,000 rounds fired without a malfunction at 72°F at a gun range doesn't mean that it will be reliable at -36°F, or if you drop your pistol in the mud, or if you accidentally ride the slide with your thumb.

Just for fun I searched on modify and the definition that came up started out: "make partial or minor changes..." Yes, polishing a part is making "partial or minor changes".

Doing a bit of polishing that would eventually happen by natural wear is hardly a modification. Just shooting your gun eventually polishes some parts. So are you saying that shooting your gun is a modification to your gun???

I do "finishing" work to make my P365X MORE reliable under ALL conditions! Polishing is hardly what classifies as a modification. Polishing improves the intended function of the gun's parts and greatly reduces the break in period WITHOUT metal debris contaminating the pistol, as well as reducing the chance of stress cracks from forming, and it also make it easier to identify stress cracks when they do occur BEFORE the part fails completely. Part of preventative maintenance is inspection of the parts in your firearm.

As far as ACTUAL modifications are concerned:

Extending magazine the release button allows me to actuate the magazine release WITHOUT needing to rotate the pistol in my hand and THAT greatly reduces the chance of dropping the pistol during a self defense situation. I'd call that a reliability improvement. However, it may not be of benefit to someone with short thumbs, as they may still need to rotate the pistol in order to reach the extended magazine release button. YMMV

Smoothing out the mold seams on the trigger guard, reshaping the bottom of the grip module, and reshaping the leading edge of the magazine floorplates do not affect reliability, but it does help the grip module to better fit into my hand, and that can't hurt. It's no different than having your clothing tailored to fit you perfectly.

The web between my thumb and forefinger would sometimes hang up on the sharp corners of the beavertail during a draw. Other people have reported the same issue. Slightly radiusing the sharp corners of the beavertail greatly reduces the chance of the web between my thumb and forefinger from hanging up on the beavertail during a draw as it now just glides over the beavertail. That is also an IMPORTANT reliability improvement.

Weighting the grip module noticeably improves the balance when the magazine is low on ammo, so there is more consistency from loaded to unloaded, which is more likely to improve my accuracy than not.

Perhaps the only modification that could pose a reliability issue is the tungsten weight that I glued into the grip module. If the glue failed and the weight came loose it might possibly cause the magazine to jam. Not very likely to jam, but still a remote possibility. But my testing of the 2-part urethane glue that I used has indicated that is extremely unlikely to happen, especially considering how difficult it was to remove the lead weight that I had previously glued into my grip module with urethane glue.

Many people prefer NOT to use the tires that came stock on their new car and replace them with higher performance tires. It's no different than a pistol.

Some people are satisfied with "as is" out of the box performance. I'm not. If I can make my P365X perform better than new right out of the box, with a bit of elbow grease, I'm willing to expend the effort. My life depends upon it.

 

[Alllen Bundy]

....I do not now, nor have I ever owned a SIG product.

Whereas, I have disassembled my P365, analyzed how it operates, and looked for potential problems.

I measured the force required to:

Overcome the friction opposing the rearward motion of the slide caused by the cartridges pressing against the slide.
Overcome the friction caused by the disconnector against the slide.
Overcome the spring force of the disconnector on the slide to move disconnector past the the detent at battery position.
Overcome the friction caused by the sear moving over the striker.
Overcome the friction to chamber a cartridge with a Sig 12 rd magazine.
Overcome the friction to chamber a cartridge with a MagGuts +2 modified Sig 12 rd magazine.
Overcome the friction to chamber a cartridge when the breech face is dirty.
Overcome the friction and spring force to manually chamber a cartridge.
Insert a Sig 12 rd magazine loaded to capacity when new.
Insert a Sig 12 rd magazine loaded to capacity after 500 magazine spring cyclings.
Insert a Sig 12 rd magazine loaded to capacity after 500 magazine spring cyclings and sitting loaded for 7 months.
Insert a Sig 12 rd magazine loaded to 1 round when new.
Insert a Sig 12 rd magazine loaded to 1 round after 500 magazine spring cyclings.
Insert a Sig 12 rd magazine loaded to 1 round after 500 magazine spring cyclings and sitting loaded for 7 months.
Insert a +2 MagGuts modified Sig 12 rd magazine loaded to capacity when new.
Insert a +2 MagGuts modified Sig 12 rd Magazine loaded to capacity after 500 magazine spring cyclings.
Insert a +2 MagGuts modified Sig 12 rd magazine loaded to capacity after 500 magazine spring cyclings and sitting loaded for 7 months.
Insert a +2 MagGuts modified Sig 12 rd magazine loaded to 1 round when new.
Insert a +2 MagGuts modified Sig 12 rd magazine loaded to 1 round after 500 magazine spring cyclings.
Insert a +2 MagGuts modified Sig 12 rd magazine loaded to 1 round after 500 magazine spring cyclings and sitting loaded for 7 months.
Overcome the recoil spring spring force at full slide retraction.
Pull the trigger and release the sear.

After polishing parts I repeated all of these measurements again.

It's probably fair to say that I have a better understanding of how the Sig P365 functions than most people do, and probably you as well.

 

[Alllen Bundy]

Whether or not bullet setback is an important issue is a matter of much debate on the internet.

But I'd rather err on the side of caution and assume that bullet setback IS an issue that should be avoided.

I see your process of chambering the first round from the magazine in order to carry +1 as DEPENDENT upon a human NOT screwing up.

My process of manually chambering the 1st round to carry +1 completely eliminates one possible human error.

I see a change from YOUR procedure to be COMPLETELY necessary for reliability. Good process is how you prevent errors from happening. THAT is how it works in the world of manufacturing. Eliminate the potential for human errors and you improve product quality and reliability.

At worst, my process for manually chambering a round will just eliminate a step the loading process and make less work for me.

What I was pointing out is the glaring disparity between your claims that you don't like to do useless things as an argument for your own homegrown procedure for chambering a round to prevent a condition that never needs to be an issue at all while at the same time espousing all kinds of mods even though you haven't demonstrated that any of those mods are actually necessary.

The glaring disparity is between my opinion as to what I consider necessary and your opinion of what you consider useless.

If you follow all of the instructions that I have given, you will have a P365 that operates more smoothly and is more likely to operate under adverse conditions than a stock Sig P365 right out of the box. I've given plenty of logical explanations of why that is, as well as sharing my test results. More test results to follow.

...admit that you do like to do useless things--like repeatedly direct-chamber loading a pistol hundreds of times.

1,830 times actually. And that was NECESSARY for me to prove that the extractor was reliable enough to manually chamber cartridges, contrary to the prevailing UNSUBSTANTIATED opinions. Let's see the testing that you have performed on a P365. Or any testing data by Sig for that matter. Or even a CLAIM by Sig that they actually DID test manual chambering of the P365. I was unable to find any actual test data, so I did the testing myself.

So sometimes you finagle the slide closed to prevent setback, but other times you release the slide quickly--I believe that means you do it at least two different ways after telling someone else that could cause problems.

You don't seem to be paying attention.

Whenever I am about to manually chamber a round, I retract the slide and lock it, switch the manual safety on, manually chamber a round, ease the slide closed and then press the rear of the extractor to pivot the extractor outward far enough for the cartridge to pass by and return the slide to battery. I only do so when there is no magazine inserted.

Whenever I insert a loaded magazine, when the slide is closed, I do nothing else because I have previously manually chambered the first round.

Whenever I insert a loaded magazine when the slide is locked back, I always release the slide quickly.

It's an error free process that I repeat the same way every time. Never a setback issue to be concerned about and manage, or a change in routine to disrupt muscle memory.

Mine is a process less prone to human error than yours.

 

[Alllen Bundy]

The problem is that you seem to be unable to admit that you like modifying things....

Now THAT is a strawman if I ever heard one. I enjoy designing, building, testing, repairing, and improving things. In fact I made a career doing just that and corporations and customers paid me money to do it.

...because of that you modify things even when it's not necessary.

I'm proactive and I see problems before most other people do.

Example: I e-mailed the VP of engineering and 4 managers to inform them that the power setup in the company's screen room would allow someone to ACCIDENTALLY connect AC to a DC input power supply, and I submitted my plan to correct the problem. I was promptly ignored. 2 months later on a Friday morning, just as I had PREDICTED in writing, someone accidentally connected AC to an expensive prototype DC input power supply and it physically EXPLODED, creating a costly delay in development of the power supply, and also damaged a $10,000 Line Impedance Stabilization Network. Then they were suddenly all too happy to authorize me to rewire the screen room to prevent the problem from ever accidentally happening again. And they paid me overtime to rewire it over the weekend so that it was ready to go by Monday morning.

Example: I also convinced the company to spend $100,000 to replace every single soldering iron station in the factory and in the engineering lab because the soldering stations were not ESD safe and could damage sensitive electronic components. I got the process started just in time as Cisco (They make the routers and equipment that this very post is being sent through), one of our largest customers, was auditing our company. Cisco saw some of the old soldering iron stations and became VERY concerned. Fortunately, we were able to tell them that we were in the process of replacing all of the old soldering irons with ESD safe soldering iron stations, showed them the ESD safe soldering stations that we had purchased, that satisfied them, and we did NOT lose our contracts with them!

Example: I've been cat sitting for a friend over the last few days. I noticed that one of her kitchen cabinet doors looked wonky. Sure enough all of the cabinet door hinges and knobs were loose. I grabbed my trusty 6-way screwdriver that is always in my bicycle bag and started tightening the loose screws. I got to the last cabinet and noticed that one of the cabinet shelves was rocking because there were only 3 shelf clips installed and they were the incorrect type that were NOT retained in place by the shelves and could fall out at any time. The shelf had 6 heavy glass baking dishes on it that could have come crashing down at any moment. I bought the correct shelf clips that are retained by the shelves at the hardware store and replaced them. Problem averted. And now all of the cabinet doors look straight and plumb instead of looking like a Dr. Seuss kitchen.

 

[Alllen Bundy]

A Cautionary Tale:

I was just out of electronics school in 1980 and had been working a new job for 3 months, when the company put me in charge of production of one of their Laser Velocimeter products. In today's money it was an $85,000 system. I oversaw the assembly line, did the testing, troubleshooting, repair, and finally the calibration of the signal processor. But the low range on the signal processor was never very accurate. I had to hand select integrated circuits to make the processor barely meet specification, if that. I was told that it had always been this way.

One day I received a customer unit for repair. I tracked the problem down to a logic voltage level at the input to one stage being incorrect. Yet all of the components were working properly within their specifications. So I pulled out the data books and application notes from the semiconductor manufacturer. (Texas Instruments if I remember correctly.) The circuit used a TTL to ECL logic level converter that consisted of 3 resistors.

We were using the resistor values called out in the application note, but the convertor was NOT translating the logic voltage levels correctly. So I did my own calculations. Even using 1% tolerance resistors, worst case variations in the resistance of the resistors would cause the logic voltage levels to be INCORRECT and cause a malfunction of the circuit. We were using 5% tolerance resistors, exacerbating the problem even worse.

The resistor values specified in the manufacturer's application notes WERE INCORRECT! I recalculated the correct values that would allow the circuit to work properly with 5% tolerance resistors. The problem was solved and I no longer needed to hand select the integrated circuits to meet accuracy specifications, thereby saving a considerable amount of production time.

The moral of the story is that you CANNOT trust everything that you read, even if comes from the manufacturer!!!

 

[Demi-human]

I’ve never needed that many words to convince someone I was right, or not crazy.
Glad you enjoy your pistol…

 

[JohnKSa]

Actually, the ONLY way that I know of to manually chamber a round is to insert the round into the firing chamber through the ejector port.

What you know or don't know doesn't change reality.

Racking the slide is NOT a manual chambering operation!

The chamber can be loaded manually or the gun can do it automatically as it returns to battery from recoil. If the gun didn't chamber the round "automatically" then it was chambered manually.

If you are using the term "manual chambering" to describe chambering a cartridge from the magazine by cycling the slide by hand, you are factually incorrect.

Manual and automatic have meanings and you can't redefine them on a whim.

Direct chambering is even a bit nebulous.

Direct chamber loading is loading the chamber directly. Hard to be any clearer than that and there's not even any need to provide any additional amplification or clarification. Do you know what "nebulous" means?

But Sig has NOT told me the truth! Sig has made bold statements that manually chambering can damage the P365 extractor.

Do you know the definition of "can" and how if differs from that of the word "will"? If you do not, why do you bother engaging in arguments using words? If you do know the difference, then no further explanation is required.

Sig appears to be using their 5th amendment right NOT to incriminate themselves.

Since they are not on trial, except perhaps in some alternate version of reality, that statement is meaningless.

Part of a company operating under ISO 9000 series quality standards requires the company to document their test procedures and be subject to audits.

They don't have to provide that documentation to you, and the fact that they didn't is not, even by any stretch of a healthy imagination, evidence of any sort of attempt to deceive or conceal on their part.

If Sig got sued they may be required to provide all of that information in discovery.

It's possible. But an email is not a lawsuit or a court order.

'm not sure why some people seem to be so bent out of shape that I'm recommending the polishing of internal parts...

Already asked and answered. That's not the point, and not even an impressive volume of verbiage is going to conceal that fact. You are making claims that you can not support, you are contradicting yourself, and when called on it, you respond as if you believe that producing enough words and anecdotes will make you right, even if the content is irrelevant or nonsensical.

The FAA would disagree with you.

The FAA? Seriously? This isn't about preventive/proactive aircraft maintenance--which, by the way is very carefully defined by the manufacturer, not made up by someone in their spare time and then posted on the internet.

This is about you making claims that the modifications you propose are necessary and that they provide measurable improvement in function and reliability while being unable to support those claims because the gun already worked as it should have and was reliable out of the box.

All this misdirection and obfuscative verbiage about ISO certifications, alternate/personal definitions, federal regulatory organizations, electronics, handyman experience, Constitutional rights, etc. is not helping your case or making you seem more credible.

Right out of the box my P365 would NEVER chamber a round and return to battery when the slide was released slowly.

That's improper operation of your pistol--that's improper operation of any autopistol. Have you listed all the other ways your pistol won't work when you operate it improperly? Have you developed modifications you recommend for all of those "problems"?

But in fact that is just a pathetic EXCUSE for a poorly finished pistol.

In fact, it is the truth, and SIG is, to say the least, not the sole source of information that confirms it

But this is ultimately a cop out for Sig leaving rough surfaces that may cause a failure to chamber a round and return to battery.

You do realize that saying something over and over doesn't make it any more true, right?

But even NEW Sig P365s have also had problems AFTER firing and failing to return to battery.

Deja vu...

Allen, you're smarter than that. Of course there are P365 pistols out there that have problems. Of course those pistols need to be worked on. ... The fact that there are P365 pistols out there that don't work right is a very good reason to work on those pistols that don't work right--it isn't justification for doing the same repair work on every P365 out there. The bottom line is that repairing a pistol that already works is useless. If you want to do it--go for it. But don't do it while at the same time claiming you don't like to do useless things.

Are you trying to convince me that I'm giving you too much credit in the opening sentence of that quote?

Doing a bit of polishing that would eventually happen by natural wear is hardly a modification.

Do you realize how many of your arguments depend on redefining common words? Why do you think that is?

And that was NECESSARY for me to prove that the extractor was reliable enough to manually chamber cartridges...

It wasn't necessary in the least and you know it. At least you do if you understand the definition of "necessary".

The idea that the only way to prove reliability is to abuse the pistol (per the manufacturer's definition) is ludicrous.

1.) Whenever I am about to manually chamber a round, I retract the slide and lock it, switch the manual safety on, manually chamber a round, ease the slide closed and then press the rear of the extractor to pivot the extractor outward far enough for the cartridge to pass by and return the slide to battery. I only do so when there is no magazine inserted.
...
2.)Whenever I insert a loaded magazine when the slide is locked back, I always release the slide quickly.

I count two different ways you load your gun. You do remember claiming that doing something two different ways could cause problems, right?

So what you apparently meant was two different ways if they are the ways you recommend is fine, but two different ways if they are any other way than the way you do it can cause problems.

Now THAT is a strawman if I ever heard one. I enjoy designing, building, testing, repairing, and improving things. In fact I made a career doing just that and corporations and customers paid me money to do it.

A strawman is when someone mischaracterizes something and then attacks the mischaracterization. Based on your second sentence in that quote, clearly you do enjoy modifying ("repairing"/"improving") things which means that what I said was not a mischaracterization and therefore not a strawman.

I'm proactive and I see problems before most other people do.

Example: I e-mailed the VP of engineering ...now all of the cabinet doors look straight and plumb instead of looking like a Dr. Seuss kitchen.
...
A Cautionary Tale:

I was just out of electronics school in 1980 and had been working a new job for 3 months, when the company ...
The resistor values specified in the manufacturer's application notes WERE INCORRECT! I

The moral of the story is that you CANNOT trust everything that you read, even if comes from the manufacturer!!!

That's great. Good stories and it sounds like you are quite competent in your field.
1. None of that speaks to the necessity of the modifications you are advocating.
2. None of that corrects your incorrect terminology or validates your attempts to redefine common words.
3. None of that means that SIG is lying to you or that they are wrong. You can't prove that a specific person is lying or is wrong by telling stories about how other people have lied or have been wrong. That's just not how it works.

 

[Homerboy]

Jeez. Seems like a lot of work. I load my guns and shoot them. They always work. I clean them really well after, because it enjoy maintaining my belongings and want them to keep working. In 30 years of shooting dozens of different firearms I’ve owned, I can recall one failure to extract. It was on a Beretta Cougar. Taking things apart and polishing them just seems stupid. If he wants to do that to his own property, then fine with me. It’s the coming on here and representing himself as an expert and the rest of us idiots, thst is annoying.

Sig spent millions developing their products, millions making them, and millions selling them. I’ll take their word over his.

 

[drobs]

Bullet setback is caused by those folks that have to clear their carry pistol every single day for some insane reason. You know how you drastically reduce bullet setback? Stop clearing your carry gun everyday.

Stop finger banging your carry gun. Load and chamber it, top off the magazine, re-insert the topped off magazine, holster it, done.
When you come home at night, take off the holstered pistol and store it - loaded and holstered. The following morning put on your holstered pistol.

That's it.

Only time you should clearing your carry gun is when you go to the range.

 

[Homerboy]

Bullet setback is caused by those folks that have to clear their carry pistol every single day for some insane reason. You know how you drastically reduce bullet setback? Stop clearing your carry gun everyday.

Stop finger banging your carry gun. Load and chamber it, top off the magazine, re-insert the topped off magazine, holster it, done.
When you come home at night, take off the holstered pistol and store it - loaded and holstered. The following morning put on your holstered pistol.

That's it.

Only time you should clearing your carry gun is when you go to the range.

That's a ridiculous comment. People have their own reasons for doing things. I've been carrying for 30 years and to this day, I am still not totally comfortable with a loaded and ready to fire weapon being out of my direct control, even if it's in a safe. I "finger-banged" my Glock 19 nearly every day for 10 years. Never noticed any issues. The ammo was recycled every 6 months at qualification.