Would you carry Sig 320 with 4 1/2 lb trigger?

[JohnKSa]

Not quite accurate. Sig recommended to NOT allow the slide to slam closed over the shell case rim.

What I said is 100% accurate. You are stating that it's safe to do something with a SIG firearm. SIG says that doing it can cause parts breakage and is unacceptable.

As such Sig has ZERO credibility!

As I said, you've made it clear what you believe, but others have the right to make their own decision.

If I presented my test data in a courtroom and SIg REFUSED to provide any data, who do you think the judge or jury would believe?

SIG isn't obligated to share their data with you, and, given how you asked them, it's not surprising that they cut off communications at that point.

However, your hypothetical courtroom does make one good point--in it, people would get to decide for themselves and would get to do so knowing that what you say contradicts the manufacturer, as opposed to you making a blanket statement with no hint that it's in direct opposition to what the manufacturer recommends.

Therefore, if you want to make your claim here, you are certainly free to do so, but you must qualify it by noting that you are stating your own opinion/conclusion and that it conflicts with the manufacturer's explicit statement that it is unacceptable in any SIG semi-automatic firearm and can cause parts breakage.

 

[Kleanbore]

Sig FLATLY REFUSED to even say whether or not they actually did ANY testing whatsoever on manually chambering the P365.

Hoe mny manufacureres do mke such information public?

If I presented my test data in a courtroom and SIg REFUSED to provide any data, who do you think the judge or jury would believe?

What is it that makes you think that your data would be admitted?

 

[Rule3]

Would you rather I do it for them and post 25 different links? Didn't realize you were in charge of the internet today.

At least he didn't say "Google is your friend"

For the OP if you do not feel confident or have worries then don't carry any firearm with to light a trigger pull, I know I don't.
I do not like safety's for a carry gun so I go with a heavier trigger pull or DA/SA

 

[Alllen Bundy]

Hoe mny manufacureres do mke such information public?
What is it that makes you think that your data would be admitted?

Because I have already testified in court as an expert witness. I've worked in product development which required me to not only troubleshoot new designs but also perform performance testing as well as UL safety testing. I was responsible for maintaining ISO-9000 certification in my lab. I've calibrated test equipment as well as being the calibration coordinator for the company. I've held an FCC broadcast engineers license since 1977.

 

[JohnKSa]

Then you know that none of those would qualify you as an expert witness in the fields of firearms design or mechanical engineering.

But again, you are free to state your opinion/conclusion as long as you make it clear that it contradicts the manufacturer's claims and recommendations. This shouldn't be a problem since, ostensibly, your goal is to inform people. And it gives you another opportunity to rehash your story about how you know more about SIG's firearms than they do. Win, win.

 

[Alllen Bundy]

Therefore, if you want to make your claim here, you are certainly free to do so, but you must qualify it by noting that you are stating your own opinion/conclusion and that it conflicts with the manufacturer's explicit statement that it is unacceptable in any SIG semi-automatic firearm and can cause parts breakage.

I have NO responsibility to quote Sig. I told people what kind of testing that I have done. They can take that as reasonable or not.

My RECOMMENDED method of manually chambering is to EASE the slide closed, then press the extractor inward to pivot the claw outward. There is no way that will ever break the extractor.

Whether or not Sig liked the way I asked them is irrelevant. Sig made a claim that they were UNWILLING TO BACK UP! As the saying goes, Put up or Shut Up! Sig did NOT put up. If Sig actually did perform any testing on manually chambering, they would be INCREDIBLY stupid for not saying they did. Sig lost any credibility they had. Not to mention that from a product liability standpoint, whether Sig disclaims it or not, manual chambering is something that some people are likely to do. That being the case, it it is possible for someone to do it it had better be safe as an absolute minimum. Otherwise design the product so that it cannot be manually chambered.

Example. A manufacturer can say "Don't put your fingers in the holes of a product." But if a child does and gets their finger chopped off or if they are electrocuted, as a manufacturer you would be in deep doo doo.

 

[Kleanbore]

Because I have already testified in court as an expert witness. I've worked in product development which required me to not only troubleshoot new designs but also perform performance testing as well as UL safety testing. I was responsible for maintaining ISO-9000 certification in my lab. I've calibrated test equipment as well as being the calibration coordinator for the company. I've held an FCC broadcast engineers license since 1977.

None of that would make your conclusions or the data on which you based them admissible--AND Sig's attorneys would have to stipulate that they consider your expertise acceptable. Thhe, it would be up to the judge as gatekeeper.

Sig made a claim that they were UNWILLING TO BACK UP!

Why should they?

...manual chambering is something that some people are likely to do. That being the case, it it is possible for someone to do it it had better be safe as an absolute minimum. Otherwise design the product so that it cannot be manually chambered.

There are other manufacturers that recommend against manual chambering but do not make it impossible.

 

[tarosean]

That looks like rather damning evidence.

Yet we can find video evidence of other popular pistols doing the same.
Is it a wide spread issue? I dont think so, otherwize we would see more examples.

 

[Alllen Bundy]

Then you know that none of those would qualify you as an expert witness in the fields of firearms design or mechanical engineering.

At this point as Sig has refused to state if they have even performed any testing on manual chambering mine is the only available test data. And it showed that the extractor could handle the most extreme method of manual chambering once per day for 5 years. Sig has NOT refuted ANYTHING that I have stated with any kind of evidence. I am the most credible by default. I don't need to know anything about firearms design or mechanical engineering. I performed the actual testing.

And it gives you another opportunity to rehash your story about how you know more about SIG's firearms than they do.

I never stated that. But my P365 performs objectively better than it did right out of the box. i haven't performed any extreme modifications. I have polished rough surfaces, performed some minor grip module and magazine floorplate reshaping. The only thing that I have done that is even close to extreme was to cut the manual trigger safety lever off the the right side of my P365, which as no effect on the performance of the trigger safety. I did beat Wilson to the punch when I weighted my grip module.

 

[zdc1775]

While my preferred carry gun right now is a Hellcat Pro in a T1C Agis Elite, I can and do carry my 320 X-Carry which has a trigger that consistently measures at 4 lb 6 oz in the same model holster.

 

[Alllen Bundy]

None of that would make your conclusions or the data on which you based them admissible-

Nobody needs to consider my conclusions. The test data speaks for itself.

 

[Kleanbore]

Nobody needs to consider my conclusions. The test data speaks for itself

As you undoubtedly know, it is the testimony of the expert witness as it concerns the data that count. Lay persons on a jury would not be expected to draw conclusions from raw technical data.

 

[Alllen Bundy]

I have found people on the internet that made UNSUBSTANTIATED CLAIMS that manual chambering could break the extractor. To the best of my knowledge I am the only person that has provided ANY actual test data on manual chambering the P365. And I have looked. SIg REFUSED to even say whether or not they performed ANY testing, so SIg's claims that manual chambering could break the extractor are also UNSUBSTANTIATED. Until such time as SIg actually provides ANY test data to show that manually chambering the P365 can cause the extractor to break, Sig's claim has ZERO credibility! I won't take Sig at their word anymore than I take the government at it's word.

There have also been very few reports of any kind of extractor breakage with the new extractor design. That begs the question of why Sig even needed to redesign the P365 extractor. One person reported nearly 20,000 rounds fired before the extractor broke. Another person had the extractor break when using steel cased ammo. I don't think that the steel shellcase was the issue per se, but instead I believe that the shellcase jammed in the firing chamber, which caused severe stress on the extractor claw which was likely the cause of the extractor breakage.

SIg released the P320 when it had drop firing problems. There was ZERO excuse for that!

Sig sold P365s with defective firing pins. That means that they had some serious quality control issues.

Sig also sold the P365 with defective return spring assemblies where the return spring would coil over itself and jam with as little as 200 rounds fired. That is a quality control and/or design problem.

Sig sold P365s with a stripper rail that was so rough that it made it very difficult for some people to rack the slide over a magazine loaded to capacity and man person reported that they were unable to retract the slide over a magazine loaded to capacity.

Why should ANYONE takes Sig's word for anything?

I provided actual test data that showed the extractor did NOT break after 1,830 cyclings. How many cyclings must the extractor endure before it's considered safe to manually chamber by allowing the slide to slam closed? I asked that question before and nobody seemed to be able to come up with an answer. It shouldn't be that difficult. I can reinstall the extractor that I used for the testing and continue to cycle it.

What is a reasonable lifespan for the P365 extractor under normal use?

I'm willing to bet that the extractor is far more likely to break if a shellcase gets stuck in the firing chamber than from allowing the slide to slam the extractor over a shellcase rim.

I challenge ANYONE to prove that a new extractor will break because of releasing the slide and allowing the extractor to slam over the shellcase rim a reasonable number of times.

FYI, allowing the slide to slam the extractor over a shellcase rim will cause less stress to the slide than from normal firing. The extractor moving over the shellcase rim will slow down the slide more before it returns to battery than normal cycling while firing. I've measured the resistance and the slide chambering a round causes less resistance than the resistance that the extractor causes.

 

[Kleanbore]

SIg REFUSED to even say whether or not they performed ANY testing, so SIg's claims that manual chambering could break the extractor are also UNSUBSTANTIATED.

One does not follow from the other. We do not know what they know.

SIg released the P320 when it had drop firing problems. There was ZERO excuse for that!

I agree.

 

[9mmepiphany]

I think 4 pages is plenty for this topic and this thread has drifted far afield from the OP...I had hoped it wouldn't, but I know it was wishful thinking