My P320 Failed Without Even Dropping It | OK, One More Test ….

With all the information coming to light where the P320 failed when dropped, It got me thinking. What if you could replicate the failure with a sharp blow on the back of the slide? I talked to some people that have conducted professional drop tests and was told that sometimes a hammer or mallet is used for the testing.

I grabbed my well used Brownells 1″ gunsmith hammer and loaded a primed case into the chamber, then smacked it on the back of the slide. Sure, it isn’t super scientific, but it does show that the pistol will fail on command.

I find it rather hard to believe that Sig didn’t know that there was an issue and had parts and a trigger ready to go that remedies the issue.

I personally believe based on some statements from within Sig that were made off-record and not publishable as a result that Sig was aware of the potential failure since at least January when Officer Sheperis was injured after his P320 discharged inside a holster when dropped.

This is uncool and I have serious reservations about the P320 as a result of the insistence that nothing was wrong with the pistol. Had they taken an approach similar to Ruger’s with the Mark IV recall, I would have had a lot more respect for the company. It is my own personal opinion, not TFB’s, that Sig should conduct an EoTech style buyback of any P320 owners that would like to take advantage of said offer. That MIGHT go a long way towards rebuilding my trust in the brand.

Check out the quick video and tell me that you would feel comfortable carrying a pistol that is capable of failing in such a manner. Heck, even a moderately weighty object falls off a shelf and impacts the back of your gun while it is in the holster and you might have a new hole in you.



Patrick R

Patrick is a Senior Writer for The Firearm Blog and TFBTV Host. He is a verified gun nerd. With a lifelong passion for shooting, he has a love for all types of firearms, especially overly modified plastic handguns, precision rifles, and AR based things. You can follow Patrick on Instagram @tfbpatrick, Facebook, or contact him by email at TFBpatrick@gmail.com.

The above post is my opinion and does not reflect the views of any company or organization.


Advertisement

  • ORCON

    So is this going to be all we hear about for the foreseeable future? If every glock fan makes a video about this will the MHS decision be over-turned, is that the point? I don’t even own a Sig but sheesh. Beat a dead horse much?

    • ragnar_d

      I think a good bit of this, intentional or not, is blowback to Sig going all Baghdad Bob and saying that there is no problem when there was one. The ECR to the Army sticks out as knowing they had a problem and pushing it through the gov’t guns first while working it in to the production guns over the course of time.

      And if this were any other company (Taurus, Glock, etc.) the gun blogs would be blowing up with examples of faulty guns.

      • Kinetics

        Except the gov guns passed DoD drop testing. The ECR for the MHS, according to Sig, gives a smoother trigger pull. Existing info points to no issues with the M17/18, and the fact that they aren’t adding the disconnect to the MHS but are offering it for the commercial upgrade/send in program seems to support that.

        • Independent George

          If the defect is not present in the MHS, then I wonder whether this means they knew about it and corrected it for the Army trials, but did not inform anyone else of it.

          • Kinetics

            According to Soldier Systems, the MHS pistols that passed mil drop testing were equipped with the commercial P320 trigger.

        • Stuki Moi

          And VW diesels past the EPA test……

          All passing such narrow and pre specified tests demonstrate, is that the company submitting a product has spend some time gaming the test.

          I, and plenty of others better positioned than me, have been trying to get the EPA to allow competitors to submit scenarios where the product fails.

          Translated to this situation, instead of some simplistic, narrow test that the submitter knows, to the most specific of details, exactly how will be performed, let Glock (and Smith and Ruger and FN and the rest…) put their engineers to the task of finding their competitors’ weak points. And let Sig do the same wrt the others. Then, you’re much more likely to get a true picture of a product’s strengths and weaknesses. And can make a decision based on that. The P320 may still have “won”, but you’d have much more confidence that you were aware of it’s weaknesses than you are now, when all you really know is that Sig did the best at gaming a test suite, and/or outspent the others on hookers and blow.

          • Seamus Bradley

            HOOKERS AND BLOW GOES A LONG WAY!!!!

        • Rob

          Was the drop angle that caused problems part of the methodology of the MHS phase 2 testing?

          • They never got to phase 2 testing. Contract awarded no more testing.

          • Mark Are Reynolds Ⓥ

            What was wrong with the SIG ammo issue? OR doesn’t that count as being as important?

          • Well, the Phase 2 testing was supposed to be on production run pistols, so no. Phase 2 testing can only be done once they have a random sample of production pistols (from contract award) to test.

            But, no, that drop angle was not part of ANY test plan I am aware of.

        • Tom Currie

          The P320 is not an M17/M18.

          The MHS Candidate passed the government drop tests — and the gun that Omaha Outdoors tested also passed as being drop safe when tested in accordance with the procedures for the government test.

          NO test covers all possible conditions. And the government tests have very specific procedures to ensure that those tests are performed exactly the same way for every test. The P320 and the Sig MHS (aka M17/M18) passes the government tests. If you watch the Omaha Outdoors video, they explain the difference between the government tests and what they did.

          Perhaps the government should add another test (or several other tests) to their handgun testing procedures — but even if they do, that still won’t cover every possible way to drop a pistol.

          • Kinetics

            I never said that a P320 was a M17/18. However, it is important to note that the MHS that was tested by the DoD actually did have the commercial P320 trigger in it.

            I was replying to a comment that was alleging a link between Sig’s MHS ECR and the drop testing failure with my opinion based off of the most up-to-date info that is currently available on Soldier Systems.

            Absolutely, no test is entirely conclusive and this whole debacle really only shows that building handguns without some sort of external safety such as a trigger safety or “traditional” manual safety is stupid.

    • Martin frank

      No but you might be beating a dead GI with a dropped sig with melted frame rails.

      • ORCON

        That doesn’t make any sense.

    • Patrick R. – Senior Writer

      Coverage like this is what results in a defect being fixed rather than buried. To think that Sig developed a fox in 24 hours is laughable, they HAD to have known there was a problem with the guns.

      • ORCON

        Yeah but the fix is on the way, right? I agree, shame on Sig for for their “technically not-incorrect” statement and whatnot but I get the impression that much of this being used as agitprop in response to the MHS debacle.

        • Independent George

          But what if it’s justifiably used against the MHS?

          The pertinent question now is whether SIG already knew of the defect, and if so, for how long? If the defect is not in the M17, does that mean they corrected it for the handgun trials, but decided not to issue a recall to the thousands of guns already in circulation?

          • ORCON

            Those are all fair questions and making that case would have made a good and substantive article. But instead we have a video of Patrick smacking a pistol with a hammer. A pistol with, at this point, a WELL DOCUMENTED uncontrolled discharge issue. Tomorrow he’ll be hitting it with a brick.

          • Independent George

            No, smacking it with a hammer demonstrates a different defect.

            The drop test showed that the inertia of the trigger was enough to release the sear and fire the gun. That was proven by replacing it with the lighter X trigger, resulting in the gun not discharging.

            Hitting it with the hammer shows that the firing pin can be released even without depressing the trigger. That is a separate and distinct mechanical issue.

          • ORCON

            From a physics standpoint it is quite literally the same thing. Dropping the pistol, the slide and frame stop relative to the trigger while the trigger keeps moving relative to the slide and frame. Hitting the pistol, the slide and frame move relative to the trigger while the trigger stays put relative to the slide and frame. Literally the same thing.

        • Patrick R. – Senior Writer

          According to Sig, the “fix” is already done. Wouldn’t that indicate that they might have known about he issue for a while? Without coverage like this, I feel that the safety issue won’t get the proper attention.

          • Seamus Bradley

            That said, say on the flip side Sig comes out and says their gun is unsafe, then they say they have no immediate fix, no answers timeline of when it will be fixed, only the warning saying just don’t use the gun and be patient while we work on it?

            Perhaps that would have been the right solution but I am sure we can all imagine the internet firestorm that would have created.

            Not to mention the firestorm in the board room when their stock price and potential MHS bid gets torpedoed.

            What ever happened to integrity?

    • DonDrapersAcidTrip

      Literally every time the new glock’s are brought up somebody brings up them flying apart while dry firing, and they will until the end of time, so yeah

      • burningwar

        Yup. There are Glock fans out there, but the #RESISTGLOCK crowd is always, without exception, more annoying and much whinier.

        • A.WChuck

          No. No, they are both EQUALLY annoying.

  • Harry’s Holsters

    I’ll have to try this test on mine. This does scare me from carrying it. I also have heard reports of the Sig firing when pressing down on the slide. This is a report from a very early sig p320. It seems there are generational changes internally and I wonder if this is a problem with a certain generation of changes.

  • Holdfast_II

    Obviously this is seriously not good – but I also have to question the methodology here.

    It took, what – four whacks to make it fire? It’s quite possible that the effect of those whacks was at least somewhat cumulative – and I doubt most people will drop the same gun 4 times in a row in the exact same manner.

    • Scott Wagner

      Given that other guns while dropping (in the original OO/Vuurwapen video) on the first go, there does seem to be some variability. I personally don’t want a gun that will fire with any number of hammer blows to the back (especially given that it doesn’t look like he’s really hitting it that hard)

    • Patrick R. – Senior Writer

      I just didn’t hit it in the right place. I have two other takes where my dog barked or my wife squealed when the primer went off where it took as few as one hit and as many as 3 to get the pistol to fail.

    • bgav

      How about the gun falling and tumbling down an incline, striking the ground multiple times?

    • BeGe1

      Well, we’ve also got multiple drop tests with it happening repeatedly. This is only another log on the fire.

  • hami

    I hate to play the devils advocate but I would like to see you smack other striker fired handguns in the rear with the hammer.

    I couldn’t pass judgment until I saw how other handguns fared.

    • glennbartley

      So, if a product is defective and potentially dangerous due to the defect – you would not pass judgment on it or the company that made it unless you checked other companies’ products first to see if they had the same defect or not – is that what you in essence just said? If so, what if other companies’ similar products had the same defect? It would not make it any less of a defect in the first company’s product – it would just mean it is a more common problem than believed. SIG needs to fix the problem, in fact a recall might be a very good option before someone is injured or killed.

    • Zapped 02

      This is not a comparison test, this is a defect issue and that is a big difference.
      Nobody drove into the back of other cars to test them when ford pinto were blowing up from rear end impacts.

      • William Elliott

        no, they tested it in a lab with the equivalent of a big hammer after people burned to death and they wanted to see why…

    • BeGe1

      Nearly all modern pistols will take SIGNIFICANTLY more abuse than that without firing. “Drop-safe” engineering has been around a long time.

      In fact I have a P-64 from the 70’s that I’ve personally took an actual metal hammer to and beat the crap out of much harder than those wussy mallet blows. Not even so much as a mark on the primer resulted.

      • hami

        Now that sounds like the video I want to see. I’m curious to see how other firearms react to a test like this. Especially modern firearms that are thought to be safe.

        Hopefully you didn’t wail away on your p-64 without filming it…

        • jcitizen

          Filming cost big bucks back then, whether it was super 8 or VHS – either way it was very prohibitive.

  • ChrisRaish

    Was the trigger pulled to the rear after you got it to fire (like it was in the drop test)?

    • Patrick R. – Senior Writer

      No. It was still forward. If you watch frame by frame the trigger appears to not move at all.

  • 201am

    I’d be interested to see the same thing done with a Glock or M&P.

    • I’ll bet you a steak dinner you couldn’t replicate it. The Glock and S&W both have firing pin block safeties. As any striker fired gun should.

      • mandaloin

        This isn’t a firing pin block issue. This is the trigger being pulled by its own weight and inertia. Watch the Omaha Outdoors video to see for yourself.

        • BryanS

          Glock also has a trigger safety that prevents this with a separate spring tension, although i suppose if you removed the trigger switch and ran it on a 1lb spring, you could maybe replicate it. But that would be removing systems designed to keep it from failing and making it fail.

        • Friend of Tibet

          That’s why you see that tiny trigger safety on Glock that can block trigger movement when not pressed.

          • Lawren Downing

            As a P320 owner you are correct and the reason Sig did not go with that type of trigger is because everyone else already has and for good reason. I understand what Sig was trying to do with not having crap on the trigger, but it’s a simple solution to preventing the issue they are having right now. I think Sig tried to over engineer that part of the gun in order to be different and while it looks good in theory it’s proving to be a poor decision sadly. I don’t think the frame of the P320 can accomodate the little trigger safety dongle thingy anyway. There is too much of a gap so nothing for the hinge to lock into.

        • Patrick R. – Senior Writer

          No. The trigger on mine never moved.

          • Xerxes036

            I watched the Omaha vid the trigger did move but not to the point where the trigger could have engaged unless that P320 had next to no take up.

          • Jath

            to be able to see the trigger moving, you’d need to film it with a high speed camera. The trigger bump could happen between frames, and the different position could be obfuscated by the blur of the camera.

          • Xerxes036

            Did you see the video? The trigger did move just not enough to where the trigger was engaged. Is what you said possible yes but that would mean Omaha didn’t properly demonstrate the issue.

          • Dean Fellabaum

            Yes, he saw the video. And what he is saying is that there is such as thing as “frame rate.” The fully engaged trigger may not have been caught on a frame.

          • Xerxes036

            And I acknowledged that if it’s a matter of the frame simply not catching the trigger going back far enough for the trigger to engage as if there is a finger on the trigger then Omaha didn’t fully demonstrate the issue. Going off the video they shown the trigger wasn’t engaged to the point where it would have been engaged.

          • Dean Fellabaum

            I didn’t see acknowledgement. I interpreted your post as argument. “The trigger did move just not enough to where the trigger was engaged.” If that wasn’t your intent, well, then I guess we can just chalk it up to the usual interwebs communications difficulties.

          • Xerxes036

            It’s cool when I responded to Jath’s comment I mentioned that what he speculated was possible but I’m personally taking the video as is we can speculate what Omaha did or didn’t do all day. I own a P320 Compact so this does concern me not only from my owning the handgun but the fact the industry testing standards don’t test at a 30 degree drop like Omaha did that troubles me more than any one handgun models problems.

          • Tom Currie

            Yes and No, Patrick. If the “trigger never moved” then it IS a trigger problem because driving the gun forward while the inertia of the trigger’s mass holds it still is EXACTLY the same as what Omaha Outdoors demonstrated by dropping the pistol so that the slide and frame came to a sudden stop and the trigger continued to move. (That is elementary physics, go ask Sir Isaac Newton).

          • stealth916

            Put a wedge of foam behind the trigger and try again to be sure.

          • Lawren Downing

            Then explain why on the Omaha outdoors video they swapped to the X5 flat trigger, a lighter trigger, and the issue went away. You smacking it in the back with a hammer can still move the trigger because you are putting the gun in motion and the trigger has only tension to keep it in place. If you smack the gun hard enough to overcome the tension holding the trigger then the trigger is the problem. It’s simple mechanics. Stick a shotgun shell behind the trigger and try it again.

          • Angus Alba

            and there in lies how un-scientific and border line ridicuolus your test was – you claiming the triggger didn’t move is another wild guess (like your claim the M17 has the same issue)

            you are so busy doing “Look me too” that you fail to see the way you are doing this test does not provide any real data – but that doesn’t stop you from play engineer.

            without a high speed camera, you cannot say your trigger did or didn’t move, can’t say the force you were applying was consistent or that you weren’t doing something else to contribute to the ND

          • 1911a145acp

            Trigger never moved?! You have high speed video of that?

          • Patrick R. – Senior Writer

            Correction, it moved 1/8″ and disengaged the striker block. By never moved I mean it didn’t move enough to disengage the sear.

    • Ray

      Nothing would happen. The striker on a Glock isn’t full cocked at ready, so if the hammer strike somehow caused the trigger bar to disconnect from the striker, it wouldn’t move.

      • Lawren Downing

        I’ve personally dropped my Glock 19 and watched it tumble across my tile floor waiting to see how drop safe it truly was and I’m still here. i carry a P320 every day and this whole thing has not turned me off to the P320 because I still personally believe it is a better firearm than the Glock, but knowing how this community latches on to something and never lets go Sig will have to suffer through this and get it fixed. My P320 is my daily carry and I don’t have other handguns I can carry so if I have to mail it in and it’s months before I get it back I guess Glock sales will go up some more.

  • bgav

    Striking the rear and side of the slide with rubber mallet as described is a standard method of testing a firing pin block safety on a semi-auto pistol. It should not fire after a single or repeated strikes, so this is a pretty BFD and NOT beating a dead horse. A voluntary recall is total PR and damage control and God forbid someone gets injured or killed by an AD after dropping a P320.

    • Kim Jong kaboom

      It’s likely less of a shock than dropping it on concrete, as his left hand moves upon impact, absorbing some of the energy.

      Pretty straightforward to put an accelerometer on the gun and see what minimum force is required to fire the gun from an impact (F=ma)

      The question will then be: how much force is condidered “safe” with the proposed fix? I’m going to go out on a limb and say none, because it’s a tolerance issue on an inherent design flaw. That would be pretty expensive with half a million P320’s sold.

      • Gibor Chayil

        This was a firing pin induced ignition.

        • Renato H M de Oliveira

          Political correctness at its best!

        • Kivaari

          Shock induced.

          • Gibor Chayil

            Shock induced, but is there NOT a firing pin block like on the GLOCK? “STRONG INDENTION ON THE PRIMER!!!”

          • Kivaari

            True. But the shock or impact is what induced the firing pin to drop. The SIG system sucks. Glock and others have it right.

        • J_wizzles

          No, the acceleration is causing the trigger shoe to be moved as if being fired. Either a less massive trigger shoe or a stiffer trigger spring will fix the problem.

          • Gibor Chayil

            Causing the FIRING PIN to induce ignition. Either the firing pin block is NOT working and allowing the firing pin to protrude forward, or the trigger is being manipulated by kinetic energy and causing the firing pin to do its’ job. Either way, it was the firing pin that induced the ignition by striking the primer. Though it is NOT the ROOT cause, it is the actual cause. Now we need to track back and find out why. 🙂

          • Jim Larose

            This is a hillarious argument everyone is having. OF COURSE THE FIRING PIN CAUSED THE PRIMER TO FIRE. THAT’S THE ONLY WAY THE PRIMER WILL HAVE AN INDENT IN IT AND FIRE WHILE IN THE CHAMBER. Everyone is arguing over semantics. You are correct!

          • supergun

            No, someone allowed a group of liberals to be employed. These same people were involved with “Fast & Furious”.

          • No: Six (#6)

            Liberal induced, accidental discharge. Like Bill and Monica’s first time!

          • supergun

            Yes, the “liberal dead” wanders amongst us daily.

          • M40

            Will Sig pass the blue dress test?

          • 1911a145acp

            The semantics are important. The STRIKER was released because the hammer moved and tripped the sear portion due to frame impact when dropped on a hard surface. It is NOT a “firing pin” issue.

          • Jim Larose

            That’s what i said. You didn’t read it correctly. It’s not a firing pin issue. It’s what caused the firing pin to hit the primer that is the issue. People are arguing over semantics by saying it was the firing pin.

          • Jim Larose

            And you want to get further semantical by using striker instead of firing pin .. Tomatoe. Tomaaaaatoe….

          • Zebra Dun

            No hammer/firing pin block safety.

          • Jim Larose

            Yes correct, or a glock type trigger like most other striker fired knock off copies of glock have done. It’s a shame really. I love my 320, i hate to see it glockified.

          • 1911a145acp

            Negative- The trigger’s mass must be REDUCED so that it’s inertia’s will not allow it to continue to move when the frame “stops”.

          • dlh0

            I think that is what J_wizzles meant when he typed, “less massive”.

      • noob
        • supergun

          Perhaps we need to check all our pistols.

      • supergun

        Lawsuits more expensive.

      • Kivaari

        A SAAMI mallet test includes hitting the gun on the rear hard enough to drive a nail.

    • noob

      Makes you wonder what the factory testing consisted of. And if you look at the firing pin on the P320 it has a pretty gnarly bit of engineering on it that purports to make it drop safe. Seems a shame that all that engineering, well, didn’t.

      https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/7cc9b8929b0aefb115e40b0dc7614722fec1e3a25cadbebce3592e3ea5bb439e.jpg

      • JumpIf NotZero

        That’s because you’re looking at the wrong part.

        The striker is 100% drop safe. It’s the trigger that is the issue. Watch the videos. The trigger moves under the impact, it’s literally pulling itself. The striker is just fine.

      • J_wizzles

        The issue isn’t in the firing pin. The issue is the trigger moving as if being pulled when the gun is subject to acceleration in certain directions.

        Either the mass of the trigger shoe needs to be lessened or the trigger spring needs to be strengthened.

        • Jim Larose

          That’s what the o.p. is saying. He means that all the engineering that went into the firing pin to make it drop safe didn’t work. A drop safe firing pin shouldn’t move forward enough and fast enough to strike the primer when the gun is dropped. The trigger system is faulty and the engineering of the drop safe firing pin is supposed to mitigate that. It surely did not.

        • KantosKan

          Which should have been discovered during initial testing.

        • Curmudgeon

          My own debunking of a news story of a S&W revolver firing when it fell from a small aircraft’s version of a Jockey Box, and my close RE-examination of the early 20th-century lockwork, led me to believe that the BEST designs block contact with the primer until the last moment of rearward trigger travel. And preferably with total trigger travel being more than a quarter-inch!

          So I’m wondering if the P320 firing pin block is deactivated on the first 1/8-inch of trigger travel. If so, I’ll screan “design defect”! No way that could happen with a P226 and the timing of its firing pin block function.

    • American Patriot

      I wonder if this issue didn’t come to light when it did…would sig have done anything or kept their mouths quiet? It seems that they were already aware of the problem since the military guns already had the fix!

    • Hendo337

      My friend was shot by his holstered (in a SIg holster)P320 yesterday, while he was carrying it. He reached to adjust it and it fired a hollow point round through his left butt cheek. I am mad as hell that this faulty weapons is out there that has the potential to injure or kill more people.

  • Noishkel

    So… you hit your gun with a hammer and you’re surprised it fired. Rriigghhtt.

    Well hey, good safety check for next time. Always only buy guns it’s safe to mail in boards with. And jokes aside good on them for finding the problem and moving on it fast.

    • Kim Jong kaboom

      Don’t hit a Sig with a Glock…

    • Kivaari

      SIG only moved on it after it went public. They knew about this for awhile. Probably forever since it is a warning in their manual to not carry it loaded.

    • Kivaari

      You could hit a 100 year old Iver Johnson and it wouldn’t go off.

      • bgav

        Don’t do it with a Colt 1908…

      • Don’t drop most 1911s muzzle down, either.

    • BeGe1

      Well, most modern pistols wont…so…yah, especially from a company like SIG, this whole thing is super surprising, and unacceptable.

      • Noishkel

        Even the best gun makers will produce the occasional problem child. And by the sound of it Sig is already well on the way to resolve the problem.

        Although to say ‘unacceptable’ is taking it a bit too far. Leaving that problem unresolved, now THAT would be unacceptable. I’m looking at you Remington.

        • BeGe1

          “occasional problems” is not the same as missing out on extremely basic safety engineering and testing that is present on nearly every other modern pistol. That’s a pretty big deal.

          If this had been present on one of the design iterations and then fixed before being mass produced, or an issue present on occasional pistols from QC issues (and therefore easily missed because not reproducible on all of them) or something like that then I’d agree with you.

          But I dang well expect a tier-1 pistol producer to not have their publicly introduced firearms regularly discharge from a 30″ drop. My trust in SIG is seriously shaken from this whole thing.

        • Kivaari

          I think the hammer hit is a valid test. After a career as a cop, I know how guns get banged around. This simulates a lot of things that can and do go wrong in the field. Street fights and getting knocked on you butt (yes it happened to me), crawling into a car wreck to rescue a driver (yes it happens), falling on the fire department floor and hitting the butt of the gun (yes it happens), getting hit in baton training (yes it happens) and so much more.

    • int19h

      A hammer hit is a simple way to replicate a drop in a controllable manner.

      You know that whole Newtonian physics thing? All motion is relative? A hammer hitting a gun is not any different from a gun hitting a hammer. Or the ground.

      • Angus Alba

        there is nothing controllable doing this by hand as all

        doing this properly and repeatably requires a rig

  • Brett baker

    SIG goBOOM!

  • Wright Thinker

    The required drop testing does not subject the gun to being dropped directly on the rear of the gun. Tests have shown that they solid triggers mass seems to be the deciding factor as a trigger that is not solid but has a recess in the back does not reproduce this. Sig will be putting the “double trigger” in to correct the issue.

    • ARCNA442

      All the major drop tests require the gun to be dropped directly on the rear – a test that the P320 passes. The gun goes off when it is dropped on the rear at a 30º angle – which is not an industry standard test.

  • 3 of 11

    So sig took some design inspiration from a type 14 nambu?

  • Gun Fu Guru

    Now do it with a Glock.

    • Kivaari

      Glocks have 30 years of service. It doesn’t seem to be an issue.

      • mosinman

        that doesn’t mean it can’t be tried

        • Kivaari

          Do it. I figure in 30 years of field service if it hasn’t risen its ugly head it wont. I must say that before the first Glock recall there was one case of a Tacoma PD officer saying his Glock 17 discharged when hit with a baton during training. That’s why I bring that aspect up. It led to a recall where the trigger group, firing pin and firing pin safety was replaced.

          • mosinman

            i don’t have a glock otherwise i would try it

      • Gun Fu Guru

        Does longevity mean that it isn’t flawed. What everyone is saying is that the P320 passed the military’s drop test. If that passed the test but couldn’t handle a hit from the rear, I’m inclined to believe that other guns haven’t been tested to check that.

        • Kivaari

          It just means that if there were issues they would be reported on. Most of what we hear about Glocks are poor handling and using crap ammo.

          • Gun Fu Guru

            We also hear that it’s the cop gun of choice. But that doesn’t mean much because most police handguns never leave the holster outside of a flat range.

          • Kivaari

            Cop guns leave the holster often, but rarely get fired off the range. If a cop says he never has drawn his gun he’s not doing his job. I drew my gun pretty frequently over the years.

          • Gun Fu Guru

            I meant that they don’t get knocked around much outside of the holster. Cops fight on the ground all of the time, but their guns are never hit in this one specific position from this one specific direction.

    • BryanS

      Glocks passed that test, time and time again. Or do you not know how their firing check system works?

      • Gun Fu Guru

        Does that mean it shouldn’t be tested again?

        • BryanS

          Its been tested to death. If you want to, knock your socks off.This isnt a polymer gun issue, its a design flaw in the Sig.

          Because Ford put too few many lbs of air in some explorer tires, should we recall every SUV and retest them all, or should we just understand the engineering behind the issue, and correct it current modls, and make it not an issue in future designs?

          • Gun Fu Guru

            That’s not an exact analogy. A better one one would be:

            NHTSA tests rollovers according to Protocol A. Every SUV passed that test. Ford Explorers were subjected to new rollover tests according to Protocol B. It fails and shows the error of using only Protocol A to determine safety ratings.

      • Gun Fu Guru

        I know the military’s drop test. The P320 passed it yet failed when the protocol changed. I think the other guns should be tested with the different protocol.

        • BryanS

          Go to youtube and find the hundreds of abuse videos, being tossed out of planes, off cliffs, into blenders…

          The design does not have the issue. the Sig has the issue because its firing pin / striker is always under tension, and the “drop safety” can act as a sear if hit right. No other current striker design has this fault. So go out there, and smack them all… its not going to make a differnce.

          Plus, the reason these were tested is because it is a known defect. The other guns dont have that known defect, and while they may have their weaknesses, they have been rolling for decades longer.

          • Gun Fu Guru

            Of all of those YouTube videos, how many of them involved being hit at that precise position from that precise direction? None. That’s my point. Until you test the gun the same way as the P320 failed, you don’t really know if Glock (or any manufacturer) can take it without failing.

    • ARCNA442

      Glocks had a similar drop safe issue when they came and required redesigned internals – but that was over 30 years ago and the design is pretty much “perfection” now.

      • Gun Fu Guru

        Does that mean it can’t be tested again?

  • Tim

    Jeez, I can’t wait for Monday’s official statement.

    I guess it’s back to carrying the SP101 til this gets sorted out. Damn it.

    • Lawren Downing

      Why? Are you a clumsy MFer?

      • Rick O’Shay

        Seriously. How many people are dropping their guns on a daily basis?

        • Tim

          Not an issue of frequency, just that it can be an issue if it were to happen.

        • m-dasher

          it doesnt need to happen on a daily basis….it just needs to happen once.

          thats like saying, “oh im going to drive a car that spontaneously explodes when it gets bumped from behind….i dont get into fender benders every day so ill be ok”

        • Curmudgeon

          It only takes once. It’s been a long time since I had to resist name-calling this strenuously. Thinkabouddit.

      • Tim

        Not really, but I am in favor being cautious… I have other options and it’s not worth the risk to me.

        For what its worth, I did not carry my Ruger Blackhawk with a round in the chamber that hammer rested on for the same reason. It and other SAA clones were known to be able to fire when dropped.

        • Oregon213

          Plus… its not like a SP101 is any form of a downgrade.

          • Tim

            Just in capacity. But I’ve carried it for 15 years and am comfortable with it.

        • jcitizen

          The Ruger should have the hammer the hammer safety. No way to set it off unless the hammer is cocked and accidentally releases. In fact the hammer itself acts as a sure shield to the very small light firing pin – (which I’m pretty sure is held by a spring as well.)

          • Tim

            Mine was from the 60s, it had the firing pin on the hammer.

            The newer ones have a transfer bar.

          • jcitizen

            I see – mine was from 1975 or so, and they had it by then.

          • Tim

            Yeah, I have a 78 4″ now. Safer, but the trigger doesn’t seem as nice.

            Still a great gun.

      • m-dasher

        if youve never dropped a gun….youve never carried a gun

  • Gregory

    The issue is with the trigger on a striker fired pistols. When dropped on their rear, the pistols stop their rearward movement on impact. The triggers, being able to pivot on their own, independent of the pistols movement or lack-there-of, continue their rearward movement. The triggers on other striker fired pistols that have a safety in them cannot move far enough rearward to cause the pistols to discharge.

    • Patrick R. – Senior Writer

      Again, no trigger movement when I experienced the discharge.

      • gunsandrockets

        Then block the trigger from moving and replicate your experiment. If the 320 still fires you are right. If it doesn’t fire you are wrong.

      • Angus Alba

        without a high speed camera, you cannot claim that Patrick – you don’t have the data to state that

  • BeGe1

    Next test: wedge the trigger in a forward position and repeat tests to confirm that it’s not trigger movement.

    I say that because some of the tests had some trigger movement, others seem not to. Would be good to confirm that it can happen even without trigger movement. I mean, we didn’t observe trigger movement here, but it would be a little more reliable to actually wedge the trigger solidly into the forward position and confirm.

    • ARCNA442

      Note that Sig’s fix is supposed to involve changes to the slide and frame as well as a different trigger. I’m betting Sig did properly engineer the gun so that the trigger would not pull itself, but missed something in the slide/frame interaction.

      • noob

        There is a thread on the sig forums by user RX-79G that points out two really important thing to note about the firing pin safety:

        1) The drop safety holds the firing pin fully cocked. This is in contrast to most other drop safeties that intercept the firing pin/striker at the end of travel when the spring is fully relaxed. Keeping the firing pin fully cocked means the drop safety can act as a sear.
        2) both the main sear and the purple drop safety operate by swinging down and forwards. I can see what they were going for – if the trigger needs a jolt to move it backwards the drop safety should also move backwards and wedge itself even more safely right? But that’s not the case. the trigger can stay forwards while both the sear and the drop safety can move forwards and down. = bad times.

        https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/7cd5d799bba40e196cb95f838b493b2a7c40fbaee7051514ad7eabb369e21ec1.png

        • Officially the MVP of this thread. That’s super interesting.

          So to be clear, the Sig does not use a normal firing pin block forward of the firing pin, like those developed by Walther in 1975, and used by most designs?

          • burningwar

            To be fair, a lot of designs use this “rear FPB” design, including many hammer fired pistols (of which the P320 is ultimately derived from). Though a hammer fired design doesn’t have to contend with a fully cocked striker spring under full tension (well, full design tension, not full mechanical tension).

            Actually, all I can think of are hammer fired designs. I cannot recall any striker fired designs that do this, other than the P320.

            That being said, the FPB is still setup to block the striker in the event the sear slips away for whatever reason. I have no clue what the SIG forum user is saying.

            The FPB swings down to block the striker. The sear swings down to let go of the striker. They have to move in opposite directions to fully clear the striker. You can see that in the image above. The FPB lifter lifts the FPB away, while the sear drops down.

            As for the first statement made by that SIGforum user. No. They are 100% wrong. When the striker is fully cocked and held in place by the sear, the striker has nearly a centimeter of travel before it reaches the FPB.

          • noob

            I will defer to burningwar – i have not personally handled the firing pin design in question and I’m just guessing from pictures

        • bgav

          I’ve disassembled/reassembled more than my share of firearms, certified as Colt, Glock, H&K, Ruger, Smith & Wesson, Sig armorer. I am not a firearms designer, but that is the most complicated striker assembly and drop/striker block safety I have seen.

          I’m not surprised it’s failing as mentioned as it’s acting as its own sear as mentioned, and not physically blocking the striker/firing pin in the firing pin/striker channel like most other firing pin/striker block safeties.

      • BeGe1

        That’s my suspicion as well, or just plain a pure in-slide issue.

    • DaveGinOly

      Or put the gun in a vise to eliminate inertia as a factor. Either will work.

  • Dude

    I’ve carried a p320 for almost two years and this doesn’t bother me at all. I understand the whole “drop safe” idea but really….if I’m following all the rules of gun safety, what are the chances? Less than the chances of me shooting myself by accidentally pulling the trigger. This is much ado about not much. As long as Sig is willing to make it right there shouldn’t be a problem.

    • ARCNA442

      This is where I am as well. It’s an issue, but I wouldn’t hesitate to carry a P320. The real story here is that apparently none of a half dozen industry standard drop tests caught this problem. But it is easier to whip up conspiracy theories about how Sig intentionally released a horribly unsafe weapon on the public.

      • burningwar

        “Industry standard?” There are laws and regulations pertaining to drop tests in some countries/states, but there is no industry body that independently does drop testing with any level of enforcement and accountability. One may try to say DoD testing is “industry standard,” but that is quite a stretch.

        • ARCNA442

          ANSI/SAAMI Z299.5 Section 5
          NIJ Standard-0112.03 Section 5.7

          • Kim Jong kaboom

            Z299.5 is March 2016 (no revision stated)

            NIJ Standard-0112.03 Rev A
            Supersedes NIJ Standard-0112.02 dated January 1995
            July 1999

            Seems like this may require NIJ Standard-0112.03 Rev B

            Standards evolve as knowledge is gained. I’d bet we’ll see testing in all axes at 90, 60 or even 30° increments. (64, 216 and 1728 drops, respectively). Testing costs money, but it’s cheaper than recalls, lawsuits or brand destruction. The poor mans way to test that much is putting a loaded (primer only of course) pistol in a tumbler or household dryer and seeing if it goes bang. I’d put an instrumented box in first to get an idea of g-forces, but I’d bet a tumbler could be constructed to mimic 6′ drops to concrete.

            No dryer heat or a .45 might come out as a .22 😉

    • Shirley Youcantbeserious

      Good point, you should cancel your car insurance as well as long as you don’t plan on getting into an accident.

      • Dean Fellabaum

        It’s still safer than carrying a DA auto with the safety off, which we have been doing for a century or so. I certainly have with my M9.
        Have some perspective, Brother.

        • Curmudgeon

          Yup, I guess there was a very obscure pocket gun in DA/SA starting 1909. Many of us thought the first was the PP/PPK.

    • int19h

      Drop safety is not just about drops. A drop is really just a particular way of inducing a sudden velocity change along a particular axis. As you can see from this video, there are other ways of doing that.

      I’m also not sure which rules of gun safety would prevent you from accidentally dropping a loaded gun. Unless you’re a cyborg or something (and even then I’d ask how sure you are of your firmware).

  • hacedeca

    This is so “Flintstone(s)”…

  • Walter E. Kurtz

    I don’t have a dog in this race but Sig is starting to look bad. Now they are backtracking after being sued by a Connecticut SRT cop….offering users a new “upgrade”. Sig denied there was a problem. Now they acknowledge one. What is it? Were they stupid or did they lie? This is the kind of stuff that drives people crazy about corporate America. An inability to speak plainly to their customers…because the senior execs are in CYA mode. Heads can and should roll as a result of this. The horror….the horror…

    • Seamus Bradley

      I think his lawyers are seeing nothing but $$$$$$$$

  • Dude

    So the next time I want to buy a gun I need…..money, DL, cc license, and a hammer

  • Carlos Velazquez

    That surge in commercial sales that Sig Sauer was expecting with securing the MHS contract looks to be a very short surge. Glad I didn’t rush out and buy a P320.

    • Just like the Beretta 92 commercial market just dried up and died after slide failures were reported? Or all the Glock commercial market disappeared after their NUMEROUS teething problems (with new ones popping up in each generation)?

  • Jaquiz Washington

    I’ve never liked the looks of the Sig P320 with it’s DA/SA sized bore axis, or really any Sig handgun for that matter for that and other reasons, but unbiased as I think I’m being, this is absolutely a problem. These need to be recalled. Is every owner going to die? Of course not, almost all won’t, but you can’t have a gun out there like this being sold in today’s litigation happy society, and there really shouldn’t be one, regardless of that.

  • Seamus Bradley

    WILL THIS AFFECT THE MHS CONTRACT???? I MUST KNOW ALL THE THINGS!!!

    • Don’t see how. Every single M17 pistol is going to have the upgrade before delivery, and has been scheduled to do so for a while (they have a formal contract mod to do it) – which is part of the delay in getting the fix into the P320 commercial market… they were emphasizing fulfilling a contract, not replacing parts in already sold guns that passed ALL industry standard testing and fail in a very specific set of circumstances unlikely to pop up.

  • Ark

    This made it through testing. Jesus Christ.

  • robert57Q

    I was thinking at first that this was getting blown out of proportion. Not so much now. This is bad. This is very bad.

  • Dude

    So if I run over my glock 42 with my jeep and it goes off…but wait, I probably shouldn’t own a glock 42. And I carry appendix so if something “moderately weight” falls off a shelf it’ll hit me in the head first…but I probably shouldn’t be carrying appendix. Sheesh!

  • gunsandrockets

    Interesting experiment.

  • Joel

    Patrick says that the trigger doesn’t need to move. So, what does this say about M17 pistols with their safeties engaged? Anything? Nothing at all?

  • Mark Chavendish

    I just performed this on a Canik TP9SA with a primed case and a full mag. Fires every time it lands on the rear of the slide. Dropped from 5′ onto carpet over concrete.

    • .45

      What did you hide behind? Or are you Clark Kent and don’t care about flying lead?

      • Mark Chavendish

        I guess you miss the part where I said ‘primed case’. FWIW it fired w/o the mag as well. 4 of my glocks, and one M&P did not fire after multiple drops.

        • .45

          I noticed that as soon as I hit the Post key, but no edit as a guest…

    • hami

      I bet the media claimed you were riding too aggressively next to it

    • ARCNA442

      There are a lot of guns out there with dubious safety – the P320 has just seized headlines because since the MHS down select all the Glock fans have been looking for reasons to bash Sig.

      • Lawren Downing

        That’s exactly what’s going on. Glock fanboys acting like Democrats crying over Russia.

        • Renato H M de Oliveira

          Except this time we’re not talking about “nothing burger”.
          And it’s not some stupid folks saying nonsense without evidence to back their claims – it’s a potentially lethal issue, and now we have video evidence to further back the claims.

        • Oregon213

          Any serious handgun should go bang on command and not go bang any other time.

          We’re not splitting atoms here.

        • Pranqster

          Yep, theyve both been proven to be true: the sig is unsafe, AND russia elected trump.

          • m-dasher

            ummmm……there is like 0 evidence of russia meddling in the elections….but whatever makes you happy

          • Blue Centurion

            Ok, I’ll bite. Where is the information the Russians NEVER were involved….because Putin and Donald J say so?

          • Steven Alexander

            You are familiar with the phrase, “You can’t prove a negative” right…

          • Blue Centurion

            Sure thing. But that doesn’t apply.

          • James Smith

            So give us the proof of your contention.

          • Blue Centurion

            It’s not a negative…now prove yours.

          • James Smith

            Proof acceptable by a liberal Dim. ? Go ahead all the Dim wits in Congress have not proved it , so go ahead and do so.

          • Spice54

            Where is the evidence that you never molested children? Now you can understand the old, “Innocent until Proven Guilty.” You cannot ‘prove’ something that didn’t happen.

          • Pranqster

            How about trump jr’s email “I love it!” when he was told that the meeting was specifically about russian gov. dirt on hillary.

            How about Trump himself encouraging the russians to hack the secretary of state?

            How about the constantly changing stories?

            How about Kushner “forgetting” meetings with russians and his multiple revisions to his security clearance forms.

            How about Michael Flynn getting caught lying about meeting with the russian ambassador?

            How about trump Firing Comey then admitting that it was for “the russia thing.”?

        • m-dasher

          a gun that fires when dropped is totally not the same thing as a made up story of Russia.

          if you fail to see how a dropped gun firing is not a cause for concern, you are an idiot

        • Blue Centurion

          So you’re certain the Russians are behind this Sig issue?

      • Kivaari

        Not so. We just expected the SIG to perform safely. We know our Glocks are safe. Assuming both guns were safe, a mistake, the lower bid from SIG told the story. NOW, that we know the SIG is defective, the low bid makes sense.

    • John

      The fact that we can now compare a Canik to a Sig turns my stomach.

      • Oregon213

        This

      • Gun-Toting Racist

        Not in California you can’t.

    • Mmmtacos

      Now everyone is going to take primed cartridges into every striker fired gun on the market and give them a swift whack with a mallet on the back of the slide. I’d actually like to see a video like that with the latest semi-auto from everyone of note: Glock, S&W, Springfield, CZ, Canik, Walther, etc.

      • Spon Rilker

        Reading these comments, I was wondering if anyone did this with other guns. First time I’ve seen a video of this being done.

    • Not surprised on this Canik and there may be others.

  • Dude

    The 2 rules of gun safety…#1: don’t drop your gun while pointing it at your face #2: don’t hit your gun on the back of the slide with a hammer. Got it. Thanks

  • GordonTrenchard

    Geez. More evidence they should have stuck with the Beretta.

    • Kim Jong kaboom

      Yep.

  • Sigs QC has been horrible. they have made so many mistakes. and still refuse to acknowledge half of them on the market

    • John

      Can you say WAKE UP CALL!

  • Dude

    You dare question Sig’s QC? THEY STILL MAKE HI POINTS!!!

  • Giolli Joker

    Kudos for having done something different from everybody else.
    Kudos/facepalm for having sneaked in a Brownells ad.
    TFB Malfunction Minute

  • Dude

    We may as well just admit that the only perfect gun is a glock 19

    • .45

      I prefer the 17. Not that much of a difference in size really.

    • int19h

      The only perfect striker fired gun, maybe.

      Does any DA gun has this problem?

      • burningwar

        Probably any pre-transfer bar DA revolver or pre firing pin block (and without a hammer block of some sort) DA pistol, especially since the failure involves falling on the back.

  • Harris MC

    The M9 & M16 started with their own issues too…
    Here comes the lowest bidder rule

    • Look at how many ECPs had to be applied to the M1 Garand after it’s official adoption but before it’s actual use in combat.

      • Harris MC

        Thus the term Field Testing

  • John

    Sig is a company, and within that company are the most evil things known to modern man…..SHAREHOLDERS!!

    You see, shareholders want money…LOTS of it. So to make the shareholders happy, companies compromise. They compromise quality, safety and whatever else they have to to make the shareholders happy.

    Oh Sig…you had such promise.

    Welcome to the new world.

    • John

      Where can I buy stock in SIG?

      • John

        Do you REALLY want Sig stock after this debacle?

    • Friend

      A lot of firearms companies are private

      • John

        Understood. In that case, please replace the word “Shareholders” with any three letter title that’s appropriate, e.g. CEO, CIO, COO. The goal is the same, to squeeze out as much cash as possible while putting in as little capital as possible.

    • Christin Hale

      Right. Let’s adopt the North Korean way. They don’t have the dreaded shareholders. Life is so much better there.

      • John

        Not what I’m saying at all. If your first concern as a company is the highest profit above all else, even quality, then I will laugh when you go down in flames. If you are willing to take some of your profits and improve your quality, I will continue to buy your products.
        It’s that companies that pay the CEO $200 Million while buying all their parts from China that I don’t give a damn about when they fail.

        FYI, I happen to own a business and I am constantly being offered cheaper ways to do things. If the quality of my product can remain the same or get better, I will agree, if my quality suffers, even a little, I disregard the option. I guess I am too old fashioned huh?

  • Bearacuda

    Wow, this is disappointing. Hopefully the recall will fix it. I would still feel better with a trigger block safety though. That said, if Glock doesn’t come out with a modular version soon, they must not like money. 😉

  • Risto Kantonen

    Ah well, SIG is a business. When you sweep off all that cream from the top of the cake known as business there’s really only two objectives at the end of the day: 1) To maximise profits. and 2) Minimise costs. From a purely business perspective nothing else matters and the bigger the company, the more ruthless they are in pursuit of achieving those two objectives.

    • Dude

      Of course Sig is a business and the last time I checked the only reason to have a business is to make money. But there’s still customers to make happy and, if you don’t do that, you don’t make any money

    • Christin Hale

      Evidently you’ve never worked at a business. Maybe you you live off other taxpayers?

  • Dude

    So the real question here is not the safety of the gun but how did it pass the gov’t testing in the first place? Is the problem the gun or the testing? I’ll admit that most of my posts tonight have been a little tounge in cheek but what’s the real issue here? Guns are inherently dangerous and if you’re concerned about dropping one or something “of moderate weight” falling off a shelf then you probably shouldn’t carry one in the first place. I think it’s prudent to assume that any gun is going to go off if it is dropped. Go back to Mark’s post about the Canik. Nobody cares because it’s a Canik. The only reason anybody cares about this is because it’s a Sig and MHS. Again, it passed all of the tests, so is it a gun problem, or a testing problem?

    • Kinetics

      It’s technically both. The Sig MHS that was drop tested had a commercial P320 trigger in it (which would theoretically be liable to failure), but it also had a manual safety which makes this question moot.

      The other reality is that the gov testing likely didn’t drop the pistol at the angle required to make it fire. However, it took Sig 2,200 drops over the last few days to confirm the corret drop angle. No military or agency will conduct that many tests on any firearm.

      The problem has been identified, Sig handled it like crap, and now it’s getting fixed.

      Moral of the story is that doubling up and using external safeties is a good thing.

  • Dude

    That’s silly. Car insurance covers me from all the other idiots on the road. I’m the only idiot in charge of my gun

  • MB

    Sig used the Ford Pinto school of thought with the P320. Ford decided it was cheaper to pay the families of people who died when the Pinto’s blew up rather than recall 1/2 million cars for a $100 fix. Sig bean counters were running the numbers a long time ago, but since this a now a major gun story because they are now a U.S. Government contractor, they had no choice but to “offer” to fix something that should never left the factory… I got the feeling just maybe Glock and FN would have done better testing in advance of the submission to military testing.

    • Dude

      Wow. A rear end collision vs dropping a gun that lands on the back of its slide at a perfect 30 degree angle…perfect comparison

      • Kivaari

        Look at some of the other videos where the gun was dropped while in a different attitude. The gun still fired. There is much more to this than just a rearward drop.

        • Dude

          Again, if I’m worried about dropping a gun I’m not going to carry one! It’s the same as the argument about over penetration of ammo. The majority of rounds from trained LE miss their target so why should I worry about over penetration when its much more likely that I’ll miss altogether! If your worried abou dropping your gun just don’t carry one

          • Dan K

            I enjoy comments like these from people that don’t think accidents happen.

          • Dude

            It’s always somebody else’s fault

          • Lawren Downing

            Accidents happen on taco night not with your firearm. If you are accident prone then dont carry one in the chamber.

          • Oregon213

            Do you drive a car?

          • Kivaari

            Just carry a safe gun.

      • MB

        People could ( and did die ) Ford was just wanting to save money and the hell with people. Same with Sig, no one has died yet that we know of, but a LEO was seriously hurt. I think it’s a valid comparison.

        • Dude

          Hurt because he was careless. Not because he was hit from behind. Not a valid comparison

          • MB

            LEO’s never struggle with criminals? You NEVER dropped your gun right? Because you are such a expert? We saw what happened to a Federal marshal when he tried to catch his gun as it fell, he should have let it drop ( well unless it was a Sig ) I think a drop safety is valid device, and apparently you are in the minority.

          • Dude

            Never dropped a gun. Not even close. And I never said it wasn’t a valid device or concept. My only point is that safety is the responsibility of the gun owner

          • MB

            On that we can agree my friend. But also I would say it’s the responsibility of the manufacture if they say a certain device is present, it should work as advertised, otherwise it’s fraud.

          • Dude

            Agreed!

          • Kivaari

            Expect to drop a gun sooner or later. It happens.

          • Kivaari

            That is the kind of thing that happens. It should not have fired.

          • Kim Jong kaboom

            Look at the number of people who temporarily put their firearm on top of a dresser or nightstand or car/truck roof. Only ad hoc testing has been done by users so far, so we really don’t know how much force initiates the defect. Is it 3′ or 4′ or 5′ and to what surface. Lightening masses or changing spring forces may increase the force required to initiate the failure, (i.e. increase the height dropped) but will not eliminate it. That force may well change with wear. This is an inherent design defect.

          • Oregon213

            I haven’t seen anything to show the Connecticut was being careless. From what I read he had a holstered gun on a tailgate of a truck during a training, and it was knocked off while loading other gear. Not careless or uncommon, especially for part-time SWAT guys who usually train in their SWAT stuff and then have to swap gear out to cover the remainder of their patrol shift.

            Lots of stuff gets dropped in locker rooms during shift change, including guns sometimes. When I was carrying my duty gun off duty a lot my normal routine was to draw from my duty gear and holster it in my off duty holster, which then sat on a shelf in my locker while I changed…. anything on a shelf can fall off. Hard to see what was careless about that…

    • Dude

      Gun safety rule #1: don’t drop a gun that’s pointed at your face

      • ColonelColt

        There are all kinds of scenarios where a gun could be dropped or knocked off of a table and go down muzzle up and, of course, most people’s instinct is to immediately bend to pick it up even if they’re smart enough not to grab for it.

    • Stephen Paraski

      That is Remington Business model.

  • Kinetics

    “You don’t even need to drop the P320 to induce a failure”. As if it’s just gonna go off because it’s a Tuesday?

    You did an informal test that replicates an impact (a drop) and it failed. That’s bad, but it’s not like the wind blew through a holster and tickled the pistol and it sneezed and fired.

    • Dude

      All you need to do is hit it with a hammer!

      • Old Tofu

        sounds like the ex

  • MIke H

    I still feel safe carrying my P320, because repeated strikes to the back of the slide while being held or holstered is not the sort of thing that the average user will be subject to, and after several years on the market and in service with numerous departments, it hasn’t been a thing yet. BUT…

    The possibility of several hard strikes to the rear of the slide, while improbable, could still happen for LE while tangling with a suspect… and THAT is what now bothers me about this.

    If Sig knew about this and sat on it completely, and only developed a solution in the last week, then they need to own it. But coming up with a complete solution in only a week seems improbable. And developing a solution, then just sitting on it with no intention to release it is a liability lawsuit waiting to happen. What I don’t hear anyone considering is the idea that maybe Sig figured it out after the LEO incident, but stayed quiet about it while developing a solution that they’re just now figuring out… not talking about it because since after years of being on the market and this only happening once, it wasn’t viewed as that big a safety issue and they didn’t want to panic their customers. And then all of this sudden hullabaloo in the past week forced them to release it earlier than planned.

    Either way, whoever is in charge of their PR needs to be fired. Like, now. Calling the solution being released Monday a “free upgrade” sounds so weaselly it made me cringe. It sounds like they’re trying to convince me because it’s technically dropsafe and passed all tests, they’re doing me some great favor. Seriously, just own the screw up.

    • .45

      I would also imagine that might also be relevant to not just LEOs, but military members who might bump into things or fall on equipment when dropping to ground under fire, being knocked over, etc. Say, do you think that might be important to the Army at all?

      • Jeff S

        No, because the M17 and M18 already have the upgraded parts.

        • Kivaari

          Or do they? SIG says they do, but can you trust SIG?

    • Angus Alba

      hey lets not jump to conclusions on that LEO yet – its still entirely possible that t was his own stupid fault and that was why Sig didn’t settle – because if they knew they had a problem and didn’t, that will come back to bite them.

      The fact the lawyer only filed once this came out could be entirely parasitic and the lawyer trying to take advantage of the situation and force then to settle.

      dropping a gun by itself is once thing, but in a holster, on a belt is another entirely

      • Curmudgeon

        But I thought that a Ruger revolver with a fully loaded cylinder, holstered in a Hollywood style “western” rig with the belt rolled up and put on a top shelf….

        was the gun that killed its careless owner on being dropped and led to the Ruger engineers departing from historical authenticity and obsolete Colt-style lockwork to introduce the quite safe transfer bar system?

        MY handguns must be safe when dropped, even if I stupidly leave them fully loaded and unattended in a belted holster. You, well go ahead and keep riding in the open bed of that pickup truck at 70 mph on a mountain freeway.

        • jcitizen

          That was the first time I remember hearing about the hammer the hammer safety, just before I bought my Ruger Single-six. The next pistol I bought had it too – I’m pretty sure – on the Dan Wesson.

        • Robert Blake

          “Modern” (not copies of old late 1800’s designs) style revolvers have incorporated transfer bar style safeties since the Colt Police Positive of 1907, or the Iver’s Johnson “Safety Automatic” of 1895.
          Both could be safely cocked and dropped on the ground over a century ago.
          There is zero excuse to design and manufacture a firearm, today, that is not actually equally safe.

    • Curmudgeon

      What if the PR guy(s) and legal guy(s) were screaming FIX IT but the accounting people were resistant or insisted on some timetable of delayed action?

  • Duro Sig

    try doing it to another striker fired pistol 😮

    • ColonelColt

      This couldn’t happen on Glock style guns due to the type of striker block in them. Sig incorporated their striker block system into the striker itself and it’s powered by a tiny little non-coil spring, it’s pretty easy to overcome it through inertia and allow the striker to go forward. They also like to break or fly off when you pull it out.

  • Duro Sig

    does the canik have a trigger dingus?

  • subashuscyst

    The dog panting in the background for the win.

  • Kivaari

    Thanks to all the testers for bringing this serious issue to public awareness. Patrick for showing the first Dallas PD note, then SIGs coverup, OO, TTAG video and others all of which show a serious issue. Without this shotgun coverage the issue would likely have been very low key. NOW we need to make sure the Army brass gets exposed to this. Perhaps the over priced Glocks that don’t misfire will be a better choice after all.

    • Lawren Downing

      Don’t hold your breath. As was reported this issue doesn’t effect the M17 production as they already have the upgrades. This Pipe dream that Glock will somehow take the DOD contract away from Sig simply won’t happen. Sig will fix the issue, Glock fanboys will have fun with their memes, and life will go on and Sig will sell more and more P320s in the future.

      I remember the release of the Glock Gen 4 jamomatic and how Glock quietly used customers as beta testers releasing new recoil springs and extractors every 2 months until they got the Gen 4 reliable again. These things happen. As a P320 owner I’m glad this is being addressed as I love everything about the gun. It’s not the first handgun I’ve had to send in for some “upgrade” whether I had an issue or not.

      • Dean Fellabaum

        Hallelujah! A voice of sanity. This is what I’ve been saying, but every time I do I get shouted down by butthurt Glock fanbois with conspiracy theories.

      • stealth916

        You are taking the word of the people who said the P320 was safe, that the M17 is safe? I get it, critical thinking skills go right out the window with fan-bois.

        Now let’s take off the beer goggles: Until a diverse group of independent testers can actually get their hands on a M17, we have no way of knowing if the problem exists there.

        • Tig

          The DOD models also have external (ambi) safeties installed.

          • Curmudgeon

            Useless information without knowing whether those safeties only block the trigger/sear (or equivalent) of if they also activate what purports to be a drop safety/firing pin block. Been 30 years this summer, I passed on buying a nice WunderNine ’cause the ones in stock were the older design without a firing pin block safety. Sure, I’ll never drop my .45 from two ladders up on a ship’s steel deck, but that’s the story on how to make a Government Model fire. The GM’s inertia firing pin is apparently drop-safe to some maximum height of drop.

          • Tig

            I was referring to the new MHS M17, not the GM .45acp. Understand the subject matter first…

          • Curmudgeon

            Subject matter is a SIG’s drop safety failing. Included in that “matter” is the topic of a firing pin or striker being capable of setting off a cartridge when the pistol is dropped or struck. Comparing to a GM .45 is apropos on your M17 manual safety speculation, as the GM safety does not block the inertia firing pin. So regardless of the function of its manual safety, dropping a GM from a sufficient height, to a sufficiently hard surface, is reported from multiple sources to be an event that can cause the exact same failure as the P320. Show me that the M17’s manual safety blocks the firing pin and there would then be reason to believe that your distinction makes any difference.

          • jcitizen

            Can’t happen with the 1911A1 – maybe the older one. All of ours in inventory had inertial firing pin drop safety.

          • Kivaari

            The M1911A1 does NOT have a firing pin safety. The US has not bought new M1911A1s since 1945.

          • jcitizen

            You forget that over the years armorers receive what we call “twixes” that authorize modifications approved by DOD to firearms in inventory. Even if you could drop fire one muzzle first, we were always receiving modified parts for all the various standard issue weapons in inventory. We only had to replace parts, not the weapon. Link awaiting moderation.

          • Kivaari

            The M1911A1 was never modified for a firing pin block. Maybe the new limited and now withdrawn M45 had the feature, but those guns are not 11A1s. Those guns performed poorly. I’d trust a 1944 built A1 over a new Colt.

          • jcitizen

            We had to replace a lot of parts in the 1911A1s because they were so old. Every spring and usually the firing pin was replaced too. It is almost impossible to accidentally fire one by inertia alone. The pin isn’t heavy enough and if a new retainer spring is where it is supposed to be it can’t happen. See my link when the mods let it through. Any coil spring built in before or during WW2 is too crystallized to leave it be. I’ve had to do it to every M1 Garand I’ve ran into in civilian life too.

          • Kivaari

            I was an armorer as well.

          • Curmudgeon

            I’d like to see those Garand bolts with a firing pin spring.

          • jcitizen

            If it had a spring I replaced it, if it didn’t, I didn’t.

          • Curmudgeon

            You mean Series 80 Colt, I believe. Or the Kimber with the grip safety-deactivated firing pin block. Or a couple of other more modern knockoffs which depart from the Holy Original Design of St. JMB. /it’s only mild sarcasm…/

          • Robert Blake

            It can only work if it is engaged when the gun falls onto the floor/deck/etc.

      • Wow!

        Unfortunately Downing is correct. Glock is definitely a superior handgun than the SIG, but the main thing that won the contract was SIG’s amazing price. If they fixed this issue without disrupting the bottom line, they will retain the contract since good enough is often chosen over perfection.

    • Bet the Army already knows

      • jcitizen

        Fortunately before they started shipping them – (I hope).

  • int19h

    And do you believe that if MHS is only drop safe with manual safety on, that’s adequate for a combat pistol?

    I mean, guns get dropped in combat. Which is to say, precisely when safety is already disengaged.

  • Sweet monkey butler O_O

    %$&# SIG-Sauer, man– there is zero excuse for this, and I really hope public opinion kicks ’em a new one over it.

    • BruiseFromFacepalming

      I’m willing to bet the giant dog turd that was the Sig P250 is drop-safe while it’s progeny the P320 isn’t (the 320 is just a repackaged P250 dog-turd with an overly-complicated [and unsafe] trigger/striker mechanism).

      The Steyr M9-A1 (which Sig copied, while somehow making it more complex), is drop-safe and a far superior firearm. Lower bore-axis, better lock-time, faster cyclic-rate, better trigger, etc. you get the idea. Also, it’s been around for quite some time.

  • Jtx

    Wow really yall were all up on sigs balls when they came out with it and when they won the military contract.

  • Klaus Von Schmitto

    OK – Now I agree that the Brownells sponsored Mod in a minute placements are getting ridiculous.

    • Patrick R. – Senior Writer

      LOL. I just wanted to be specific as to what was used. No sponsorship there.

  • Paralus

    Just playing little devil’s advocate:

    To test each angle combination in the 3 different axis would result in over 46,000,000 potential combinations.

    0,0,1
    0,0,2
    0,0,3
    0,0,4

    see where I am going?

    How much do you want to bet that no firearm manufacturer has every attempted 46,000,000 drop tests?

  • armed bear

    Ouch, Hey Taurus, looks like SIG is the new whipping boy for drop discharge. #1, do not drop your pistol. oh it fell out of the sheath, well you should secure that shi# so it does not happen. All the hype and media circus and now this. I am sure Glock will have already drawn up more letters to the Army about how their pistol was a better…

  • Matt

    Could be the stack up tolerance in the slide, firing pin is too close to the breech face. It could also be an inertia driven firing pin.

  • Thinker-1

    The acceleration from a drop may be exceeded by a hammer blow. This article represents junk science.

    • Kim Jong kaboom

      The deceleration forces from impacting a fixed surface may well exceed that of a pistol held in a compliant hand. If you’ve ever been involved with Naval equipment testing (MIL 901) you’d see this demonstrated in rather dramatic fashion. A BF hammer on a pendulum whacks a fixed plate to which your equipment under test is attached.

      Until we see some instrumented tests with accelerometers attached, we can’t definitively assess the forces involved. What we do know is P320’s are going Bang under these tests when they shouldn’t.

  • Pranqster

    I see cheap used sigs in the near future..

  • MrBrassporkchop

    Now it has second strike capability!

  • Edison Frisbee

    I don’t understand…the “hammer the hammer” action was safe for Iver Johnson….

  • Pseudo

    Great job, Patrick. I second a request made here. Wedge the trigger in the forward position and repeat the test. I’d buy “inertial trigger actuation” if you drop it the floor, but I have a hard time believing that a blow from a small hammer would be sufficient to accelerate the gun far enough to actuate the trigger like that. I suspect its a failure of internals, not a simple inertial trigger pull.

  • Ebby123

    “I personally believe based on some statements from within Sig that were made off-record and not publishable.”

    ..buuut you’re just going to go ahead and use them as evidence anyways, because appeal to authority,
    Very classy. Truly top notch journalism.

  • Flounder

    BEST BROWNELL’S MODIFICATION MINUTE EVER!

    • PK

      I’m so glad I wasn’t the only one to have that thought.

  • Veteran for Trump

    A couple of issues.
    Firefox (64Bit) will not play Instagram Videos.
    Firefox (64Bit) does not support JAVA.
    If you could put it on YouTube then I could watch it.

    • GI

      Couldn’t you more easily just use a browser that works instead?

  • Dean Fellabaum

    The striker on the P320 is much more “pre-cocked” than on Glocks and other striker-fired pistols, but trigger pressure does do that final bit of cocking. I forget the actual number, but it might have been something like 80% instead of Glock’s 50% or something. I’m sure someone with better knowledge will chime in.

  • James Wegman

    The problem at Sig is Ron Cohen! He destroyed QC and CS at Kimber and now he is working his “MAGIC” at Sig!

  • Ubama’sTrueLegacy

    That’s an awesome pistol: it chambers a cartridge with no bullet where some guns won’t even feed a hollow point.

    • uisconfruzed

      Every one of my Glocks (43, 23, 27) will chamber and eject a mag full of empty deformed brass.

      • Ubama’sTrueLegacy

        As will my H&Ks and Springfields. Awesome needn’t be exclusive, or do you have an alternate passive-agressive motive?

        • uisconfruzed

          Nope, I didn’t try it with my Sig or Colt. I did it as a test 15 years ago before I purchased a Glock.

  • Joseph Rivers

    I love the P320… I hope there’s a fix soon. I’m not giving up on it.

  • Raoul

    Be careful, the NRA is now calling these videos click bait and part of a “sharknado”. Looks like they have a vested interest in Sig.

  • Louis Bethel

    I am very comfortable and we sell a ton of them.
    But like with all weapons, we advise each customer NOT hit their firearms with a hammers.
    We also tell them to be careful, do not drop them, throw them from trucks, or tall buildings.

    We now advise them NOT to give one to Patrick at TFB as he does strange stuff.

    My guess is we can find a number of ways for any firearm to AD if we try hard enough.

    Will TFB be doing this with Smith and Glock or is Patrick a Glock fanboy with a group mentality?

  • V-MAN

    Absolutely ridiculous, beating on the back of your firearm in “real life” situation will never happen. Is it a firearm or a hammer ? Everybody wants a “free meal” at Sig’s expense … I would tell you all to pound sand!

  • Tony

    I’m impressed the gun was able to feed an empty casing. Many guns can’t do that.

    It appears that the hammer strike that set off the round was on the back of the frame and not the slide. The slide hit, at the start of the test, did not fire the case.

  • John Micheal Stacey

    I blame Obama

  • ToddB

    So guess the question is, do they test guns at all? Seems with some of the garbage put out then recalled they just hoped it would work. If your going to submit a gun for military use, a drop test is pretty standard. So either they didn’t test it, or did and figured screw it we will get the contract, then fix them on the fly.

    As for other guns, seems a good video for the firearm blog. Testing the various striker guns on the market and see whats what. Maybe the Sig is bad, maybe its pretty common. Nobody knows at this point. We might be saying Sig is junk, then find out most of them, do it.

    Dropping a gun should be a consideration. As much as we wish to avoid it, it does happen. And not just about safety, but if the gun will work afterwards. I had a roll pin working its way out of the slide on my S&W M&P compact 22. So went to the garage, knocked it back in. Fumbled it on the way out, cool no big dent in the aluminum slide, no finish tore off. Yea except somehow it did something to the slide lock/release. When I went to load it, the slide lock was jammed, it was impossible to drop the slide anymore. I screwed with it, but unless you can get it apart its done. So back to S&W it went. Just dropping the pistol ruined it.

  • darrell_b8

    Hmmmm; and SIG ‘won’ fair and square…..nothing to see here, right??

  • supergun

    Now we know that we can just bang it against the wall if we need to shoot it. Look Mom, no trigger.

  • dachief_1

    I seem to remember being present during an accidental firing of a Colt 1911, when it fell from a holster, hitting the ground and it discharged. The pistol was “cocked and locked” when the discharge occurred. I have heard of many 1911 “accidents” since that 1970’s incident, but without the outrage that Sig is receiving. Everyone needs to remember, if it’s man made and it’s mechanical, then it can fail.

  • Bill

    Yeah, it is kinda weird that one of the most antiquated and inexcusable firearm defects out there could happen to a gun that is supposedly the ne plus ultra of modern weaponry. What exactly is going on here?

  • pismopal

    All articles about any firearm or firearm related subject will induce references to the “Glock”…

  • survivor50

    WOW !!! Why didn’t I think of that…buy a new pistol and SMACK the Shiite out of it with a hammer to test it !!!
    I’ve been doing this ALL wrong for DECADES !!!

  • Ben Rogers

    How did this thing manage to win the military trials?!?! Good grief!

  • johnmosby

    Glock…for the win….bigly

  • Oldgringo

    Abe Lincoln was right…. where is that “unsubscribe ” button ?

  • olegunny

    Never spend a lot of time hammering on or dropping my rifles or handguns – think this maybe much todo about nothing. If you are afraid just don’t care a round in the chamber. I never did except on patrols.

  • Barry Gaddis

    Wow! I suppose now any LE or Military who gets the “drop” on a suspect. With a P320 should NOT yell….”drop your Weapon”. Very well could be the last command they make.

  • jlarson41

    Patrick, I fail to see the point of this article. Apparently the Sig 320 has a problem with impacts to the back of the slide; what difference does it make how this impact is achieved? If you intended to shock by implying that a hammer applies less impact than dropping the firearm then you don’t understand physics; it may, or may not. You may be applying a greater impact depending on how you are swinging the hammer.

    • uisconfruzed

      The difference is;
      1)- You don’t destroy the pistol by throwing it on the ground multiple times HOPING it’ll be hit at the correct angle.
      2)- You (or his dog) doesn’t get primer debris in the face.

  • trapman

    I live in NH (where SIGS are assembled), and I shoot with two guys who work for SIG. One is a salesman, and the other works as a tester. Both said SIG was having problems with the 320, similar to ones associated with the 250 and proceeded to do nothing about it. Got to be something to the reports of SIG getting the military contract without completing testing. BTW, both of these guys own and shoot pistols not made by SIG. That should tell you something.

  • James Smith

    And they have already started issuing the defective pistols to US Army units.

  • Ruger Shooter

    So a new Sig is not as good as a late 1960’s Iver Johnson where they showed in ads that you could hit the hammer of their gun with a hammer & it would not fire. Progress.

  • 1911a145acp

    To be clear, I can only find the ONE dropped discharge that produced an injury with the Texas SRT officer and resultant lawsuit.If others have documented cases I would like to see them. The weight of a fully loaded gun AND a tactical holster ( and maybe 147 grn ammo?) dropped from the ht of a tailgate onto concrete APPEARS to have caused the trigger to move and release the sear/ striker and internal safeties. THAT 320 had no external safeties and is NOT an M-17 as tentatively adopted by BIG ARMY thus far. There certainly DOES appear to be an issue and a cause for concern, and I understand that SIG is working to correct it. I DO NOT understand why supposed gun rights advocates, gun aficionados and other brand fan boys are so quick to throw SIG under the bus and bash a company with a 150 year old well deserved reputation for safety and quality and help the anti gunners. Perhaps they can explain?

  • Rocketman

    Go Glock! My heavily used 2nd gen Glock 19 has had only 3 failures to fire ALL caused by reloaded ammo. I say that until this is completely resolved that the U.S. military needs to start purchasing either the 17 or 19 Glock and start using them. What the AK-47 is to assault rifles, the Glock is to pistols when it comes to reliability.

  • Eric B.

    Thank you for this VERY enlightening video and explanation of the physical problem.

    I’ll be staying with my gen.1 Glock 17 and Ruger LC9s, thank you veddy nice.

  • uisconfruzed

    I’ve two EDC Glocks (23 & 27) for over 15 years, and have yet to have a single problem.
    The HK VP9 is the only other striker pistol I’m eyeballin’.

  • DaveGinOly

    Of course you don’t have to drop it! You just have to replicate the forces on the trigger that are causing it to move.

  • JoeBoomer

    Good article!

  • Zebra Dun

    No gun is drop safe if it has a round in the chamber ready to fire.

    • Mark Are Reynolds Ⓥ

      WRONG! Where do you get your information? From a trip back on a time machine when you would have been correct?

      • Zebra Dun

        Any firearm, loaded with a round in the chamber can fire if dropped.
        That is why the idea is to not drop your firearm.
        Guano Occurs.

        • John

          Because of the transfer bar, I doubt you could get a modern day revolver to fire by dropping in on the hammer. If you whipped it as hard as you could barrel first, yes, the weight of the firing pin could allow it to hit the primer and ignite it but you would have to hurl the gun barrel first onto a hard surface. So, it would go off if HURLED but not dropped.

          BTW, all cars can suddenly accelerate by themselves if hit with enough force to move the gas pedal to the floor.

          See what I did there?

  • Mikial

    And the Army selected Sig over Glock and the other bidders. This is an issue that needs to be cleared up before we have a bunch of barely trained youngsters carrying these things around.

  • Green tip

    Really..,WHO ACTUALLY DOES THIS? Oh I know…Sig’s R & D! All for the sake of ‘testing’ huh? Well as long as it’s not (OR SHOULDN’T BE) ‘my’ pistol…

  • Green tip

    BEST comment on this ‘abusive’ thread!

  • MrT

    My advice: Stop dropping your guns and don’t beat them with a hammer. If you are still too scared of the gun, don’t have a round in the chamber. That way you can throw it all around the backyard without the fear of accidental shootings. 🙂

  • KCsmith

    This comment…:
    “I personally believe based on some statements from within Sig that were made off-record and not publishable as a result that Sig was aware of the potential failure since at least January when Officer Sheperis was injured after his P320 discharged inside a holster when dropped.”

    …is why TFB fails to be taken seriously as any sort or journalism. You are the Inquirer of the firearm world.

    And we all know this is more butthurt Glock fanboy foolishness with no scientific validity. Stop it.

  • Hank Seiter

    What reckless initial engineering, all in the name of making a better striker-fired trigger pull. I have to admit the P320 has a great trigger pull compared to even my H&K VP9 … but at what cost to life and limb?

    However, glad I hadn’t bought one yet. If the P320 was going to actually become an issue pistol, I was waiting for final word from the powers-that-be and it actually being issued before buying one. Now that that doesn’t seem to be the case just despite all the ballyhooing about it being the “military’s next 9mm issue pistol”, I’m putting that purchase on hold.

    Personally, I still think it was a big mistake getting away from the 1911 .45 Auto platform in the first place, though there are been plenty of veterans (including a Marine major that is a personal friend) who have actually served in the sandbox who have said to me the 9mm M9 was an effective enough sidearm on the battlefield because it’s much more “user friendly” especially for marginal troopers who had little previous experience with pistols or firearms in general. However, the “shooter soldiers” generally admitted the M9 was a bit “clunky” in view of the fact it only shot a 9×19 cartridge but its higher capacity in the hands of a well-trained soldier more than made up for that detraction. The 9×19 has certainly demonstrated its lethality in military CQB scenarios.

  • cisco kid

    Another example of the manufacturers blind greed by failing to thoroughly test their pistol before marketing it. And another gross example of total Military incompetence when they in turn tested the pistol and failed to find it as it makes their tests look like something Alfred E. Neuman would conduct. And if you do not know who he is read Mad Magazine.

  • cisco kid

    The Sig 320 is 90% cocked which was supposed to make the ignition system more powerful as compared to the Glock that is 67% cocked which gives it a very weak ignition system. It would be interesting to see if the Glock will make even a slight dent in the primer if also struck on the back of the slide. A sensitive primer could go off even if lightly struck.

  • carlcasino

    Just goes to prove the point that guns are dangerous! Gee! Who would have known? Snark Facton ON- This is Sigs answer to eliminating Stupid people, goes right along with just eliminating the 25 pages of warnings and cautions that come with even my latest paint spray gun. Eliminate ALL the warnings and the Stupid People Problem will resolve itself.

  • John

    Sig P320 THE BEST OF BOTH WORLDS!

    It’s a striker fired gun AND and hammer fired gun!!!

    YEA SIG!!!

  • jcitizen

    Hmm? I guess all I care about is I don’t want my pistol going off at all unless the trigger is pulled by my finger. So if it is going off without that, I still don’t want that to happen. I have an engineering degree, so yes, I understand physics, but that isn’t my concern here. I can appreciate this video author for wanting true accuracy in identifying the true problem, and forces involved, though.

  • jcitizen

    Wow! I wondered how old that safety feature was!!

  • Richard Lutz

    The S&W M&P series are proven striker fired pistols with an optional safety catch and magazine safety, while Glocks have proven to be even more durable if you don’t want a safety catch or magazine safety. As for the US Army, they should have adopted the Glock 19 (Gen3) as did the US Navy SEALs in 2015.

  • Kivaari

    SAAMI spec has a mallet test that is much tougher than what Patrick did. SAAMI advises to hit the gun in various forces until it is hit hard enough to drive a nail. They use either a leather or hard rubber mallet. The drop test, including muzzle up, is from a fixture 42″ high.

  • Nick Aschenbecker

    Looks like I’m sticking with my Iver Johnson revolver.


    lol

  • Hendo337

    My friend was shot by his holstered P320 yesterday, he was carrying it in the small off his back in it’s Sig holster, he reached to adjust it and it fired a hollow point directly through his left butt cheek. I have advised him to seek legal assistance. Inspite of the fact neither he nor I are the sort of people who are litigous at all. He doesn’t feel like he could get legal assistance or win any compensation for what happened. I am concerned because I don’t want one of these faulty weapons to get someone charged with murder or killed for something that was not supposed to happen with a properly manufactured weapon.