SIG Verdict

G4Y4HK said:
Nah. I'm a lefty and until Sig acknowledges our existence, daddy Hk and a lesser extent, FNH got what I need.
Click to expand...

i feel for you, I'm actually a lefty too but ambidexterous. I can write with both hands. my left handed groups aren't as good because i'm right eye dominant.

if you're a lefty you should probably start practicing everything right handed. you might surprise yourself how far a few thousand hours of practice can bring you.

are you right eye dominant too? because that sucks for you.
 
honestly if you're a lefty and you want to be good at fighting you need right handed skills too

stop making excuses and train
 
whatluck said:
i feel for you, I'm actually a lefty too but ambidexterous. I can write with both hands. my left handed groups aren't as good because i'm right eye dominant.

if you're a lefty you should probably start practicing everything right handed. you might surprise yourself how far a few thousand hours of practice can bring you.

are you right eye dominant too? because that sucks for you.
Click to expand...
I think I'm right eye dominant? When I pick up a pistol my right eye goes to the optic red dot naturally. Of course when shouldering a rifle, I gotta use my left eye no big deal. I do practice with both sides with rifle but you're right I typically do 10-15% of my pistol shooting with my right hand at the end of a range trip to finish off a box.
 
G4Y4HK said:
I think I'm right eye dominant? When I pick up a pistol my right eye goes to the optic red dot naturally. Of course when shouldering a rifle, I gotta use my left eye no big deal. I do practice with both sides with rifle but you're right I typically do 10-15% of my pistol shooting with my right hand at the end of a range trip to finish off a box.
Click to expand...

good. keep practicing. and if you get a chance have a better look at the sig pro. best $400 used pistol on the market. I'm not gonna hate on HK, the HK45 is one of the coolest guns on the planet. and I shot a similar group borrowing a friend's HK P30SK. Def great guns.

I've been shooting almost daily since bush was in office. so take it fwyw
 
Sig put all of its customers in harms way when they refused to recall the p320 so they wouldn’t lose their profitable military contract. Having been a loyal customer for years I absolutely despise them for doing this. I hope they lose millions more.
 
not new guy said:
View attachment 938131

View attachment 938133
Click to expand...


SIG-Sauer_P225_Scully.jpg

I will neither confirm nor deny that because Dana Scully carried a 239 for a season of X-Files there may or may not have been one in my safe because of it. (That's not the 239. I oculdn't find a pic)

Her grip was always so bad. LOL

SIG-Sauer_P228.jpg

(bad pic of her, great pic of her typical gun holding skills. If she held any furtehr down, she'd be UNDER the gun. LOL)
G4Y4HK said:
Taylor Sheridan prefers his Sig Spear

View attachment 938234
Click to expand...

Uh oh. Yet ANOTHER reason not to own one. LOL
 
Could be any firearm, today it's Sig tomorrow its any other gun manufacturer. A liberal city with liberal juries sticks it to a gun manufacturer. 11 million is all you need to know about how the left intends to use liberal courts and liberal juries to implement their leftist agenda. I have been around a few over the years who discharged a weapon in a group and swore up and down the firearm was defective.

Leftist courts threaten all of us in one way or another.
 
I looked at the article to see what defect in the 320 pistols that SIG has been found responsible for. According to the article, the defect is that the pistols do not have a trigger safety. Of course, I do not have all the details based on a brief summary in an article. But if the defect is really the lack of a trigger safety, then this is a truly bad verdict. It sounds like no engineers were permitted in the room.

Most people do not understand what a "trigger safety" is for, but it is not a traditional safety. It is one of the mechanisms to make the pistol drop safe, and its job is to prevent the trigger from being pulled by inertia if the pistol is dropped at certain angles. If other aspects of the trigger design make a pistol drop safe without a trigger safety, then the trigger safety is not necessary. The Kahr pistols are another example of a striker fired pistol without a trigger safety, so the idea is not new. And of course, the SIG P365 pistols also seem to be fine.

I have been following the SIG 320 issue for years now trying to understand if there is really a problem with the pistols. Generally, when a design gets this level of scrutiny, it becomes clear what the problem is, and whether the problem is defective parts or a design flaw. So far, no explanation of a defect has been presented in any of these cases. I have not seen any credible claims of an engineering problem since the early recalls for drop safety. And those issues were resolved years ago.

I don't know for sure whether there is a problem with the 320 design or not, but I was expecting a clear explanation of the problem to develop pretty quickly after these cases started, and so far, that has not happened.
 
straightshooterjake said:
I looked at the article to see what defect in the 320 pistols that SIG has been found responsible for. According to the article, the defect is that the pistols do not have a trigger safety. Of course, I do not have all the details based on a brief summary in an article. But if the defect is really the lack of a trigger safety, then this is a truly bad verdict. It sounds like no engineers were permitted in the room.

Most people do not understand what a "trigger safety" is for, but it is not a traditional safety. It is one of the mechanisms to make the pistol drop safe, and its job is to prevent the trigger from being pulled by inertia if the pistol is dropped at certain angles. If other aspects of the trigger design make a pistol drop safe without a trigger safety, then the trigger safety is not necessary. The Kahr pistols are another example of a striker fired pistol without a trigger safety, so the idea is not new. And of course, the SIG P365 pistols also seem to be fine.

I have been following the SIG 320 issue for years now trying to understand if there is really a problem with the pistols. Generally, when a design gets this level of scrutiny, it becomes clear what the problem is, and whether the problem is defective parts or a design flaw. So far, no explanation of a defect has been presented in any of these cases. I have not seen any credible claims of an engineering problem since the early recalls for drop safety. And those issues were resolved years ago.

I don't know for sure whether there is a problem with the 320 design or not, but I was expecting a clear explanation of the problem to develop pretty quickly after these cases started, and so far, that has not happened.
Click to expand...

The frame flexes and the sear can move in relation to the hammer.
 
straightshooterjake said:
I looked at the article to see what defect in the 320 pistols that SIG has been found responsible for. According to the article, the defect is that the pistols do not have a trigger safety. Of course, I do not have all the details based on a brief summary in an article. But if the defect is really the lack of a trigger safety, then this is a truly bad verdict. It sounds like no engineers were permitted in the room.

Most people do not understand what a "trigger safety" is for, but it is not a traditional safety. It is one of the mechanisms to make the pistol drop safe, and its job is to prevent the trigger from being pulled by inertia if the pistol is dropped at certain angles. If other aspects of the trigger design make a pistol drop safe without a trigger safety, then the trigger safety is not necessary. The Kahr pistols are another example of a striker fired pistol without a trigger safety, so the idea is not new. And of course, the SIG P365 pistols also seem to be fine.

I have been following the SIG 320 issue for years now trying to understand if there is really a problem with the pistols. Generally, when a design gets this level of scrutiny, it becomes clear what the problem is, and whether the problem is defective parts or a design flaw. So far, no explanation of a defect has been presented in any of these cases. I have not seen any credible claims of an engineering problem since the early recalls for drop safety. And those issues were resolved years ago.

I don't know for sure whether there is a problem with the 320 design or not, but I was expecting a clear explanation of the problem to develop pretty quickly after these cases started, and so far, that has not happened.
Click to expand...
My guess is that Sig is settling with a lot of these people and they're buying them out with gag orders which is why the actual evidence never really gets produced.

It's patently obvious that there are issues with the gun but actually getting to the bottom of it as you suggest is very difficult.
 
drgrant said:
The pro is probably one of the most underrated guns Sig ever made.
Click to expand...
Must be a good gun. First time I saw one was when Jason Bourne had it in his bank stash. Or was that a SP2009? Someone told me the Sig Pro was for the poors who didn't have coin for a 228/229 but still wanted a Sig.

1000001345.jpg
 
G4Y4HK said:
Must be a good gun. First time I saw one was when Jason Bourne had it in his bank stash. Or was that a SP2009? Someone told me the Sig Pro was for the poors who didn't have coin for a 228/229 but still wanted a Sig.

View attachment 938495
Click to expand...

Honestly the only thing I don't like about the pro is that it doesn't have mag compatibility with the P-Series guns. But they did that on purpose to make the ergonomics better.

I don't think the primary Market was poors because it still wasn't a cheap gun. I think the idea was to get sig into the polymer market and maybe get some of their existing customers to buy into the " school bus on a diet. "
 
drgrant said:
Honestly the only thing I don't like about the pro is that it doesn't have mag compatibility with the P-Series guns. But they did that on purpose to make the ergonomics better.

I don't think the primary Market was poors because it still wasn't a cheap gun. I think the idea was to get sig into the polymer market and maybe get some of their existing customers to buy into the " school bus on a diet. "
Click to expand...
It's a beautiful piece and I might have bought one back then if the polymer didn't feel like Keltec.
 
straightshooterjake said:
I looked at the article to see what defect in the 320 pistols that SIG has been found responsible for. According to the article, the defect is that the pistols do not have a trigger safety. Of course, I do not have all the details based on a brief summary in an article. But if the defect is really the lack of a trigger safety, then this is a truly bad verdict. It sounds like no engineers were permitted in the room.

Most people do not understand what a "trigger safety" is for, but it is not a traditional safety. It is one of the mechanisms to make the pistol drop safe, and its job is to prevent the trigger from being pulled by inertia if the pistol is dropped at certain angles. If other aspects of the trigger design make a pistol drop safe without a trigger safety, then the trigger safety is not necessary. The Kahr pistols are another example of a striker fired pistol without a trigger safety, so the idea is not new. And of course, the SIG P365 pistols also seem to be fine.

I have been following the SIG 320 issue for years now trying to understand if there is really a problem with the pistols. Generally, when a design gets this level of scrutiny, it becomes clear what the problem is, and whether the problem is defective parts or a design flaw. So far, no explanation of a defect has been presented in any of these cases. I have not seen any credible claims of an engineering problem since the early recalls for drop safety. And those issues were resolved years ago.

I don't know for sure whether there is a problem with the 320 design or not, but I was expecting a clear explanation of the problem to develop pretty quickly after these cases started, and so far, that has not happened.
Click to expand...
They got the verdict they wanted......
 
The fact the military picked these up is never going to make me not laugh.

The military has a lot of bullshit requirements for its small arms, which ironically seem to be limiting ADs with these in service since they require a safety (although i suspect it has to do more with weapons are almost never with a round in the chamber)

Should of just chose a G17 or G45 and been done with it.
 
drgrant said:
Honestly the only thing I don't like about the pro is that it doesn't have mag compatibility with the P-Series guns. But they did that on purpose to make the ergonomics better.

I don't think the primary Market was poors because it still wasn't a cheap gun. I think the idea was to get sig into the polymer market and maybe get some of their existing customers to buy into the " school bus on a diet. "
Click to expand...

It was designed for the French police in 2002. Warranty contract good for 20 years, so they got dumped on the used market.

It's still 30 ozs, lighter than the 226 but not by much. I only love them so much because for some reason it's stupidly accurate in my hands. Like it was made for people with my hand size.

My philosophy on CCW is you should carry the biggest pistol you can manage.
 
We had 2340 Pros as duty guns for a while, never a problem and shot well. Only real downside was that Sig used some proprietary rail, so only their flashlights fit. They fixed that in the later releases.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Sig romeo 5 recall
Replies
24
Views
522
Agnotology
Agnotology
Sig spear 7.62 x51
Replies
1
Views
162
bigred460
bigred460
Sig 320 $11 mil award
Replies
1
Views
174
GeorgeMason
GeorgeMason
SIG P320 FCU under new law?
Replies
15
Views
758
PappyM3
PappyM3
Trigger suggestions for Sig P365 X Macro?
Replies
18
Views
462
LittleCalm
L
Back
Top Bottom