I'm convinced what sold the military on the 320 was the modular fire control assembly, which counts as the actual firearm, that allows all sorts of configurations to be built without having to go back to Congress to get money for a new pistol. Do the Parachute Ski Marines need some 14-shot, 357 SIGs with short barrels? Order a bunch of "repair" parts and put them together, and you don't have to deal with politicians demanding that a new pistol be built in their congressional district.
Remember: Ammo will get you through times of no money better than money will get you through times of no ammo.
While the P320 is certainly ascendant, it's not anything more than just another striker fired pistol. There are many and this one got selected by DoD purely on a price point, not on objective testing. The mil testing wasn't conducted the same for both contenders (Glock being the other), with the 320 being tested to 10-12k rounds and the Glock to 20k. It will be interesting to see what the 320 does when it gets to that level of use, since informed personnel know it starts pooping the sheets around that time. The drop safe issues are still nagging and one major user is confronting major component cracking/breaking at this time with some of the MIM components. Time will tell what the 320 really is. Right now, I put it in the category of the latest pop culture fad and not a long time performer.
Colt's Manufacturing Company Armorer Instructor
Aimpoint USA L/E Pro Staff
Co-owner Hardwired Tactical Shooting (HiTS)
I think it's funny and sad how the Ruger edition of the P320, the American Pistol, is about as dead as it can be. No shops around here keep it in stock and the long discontinued P series generates way more chat on the forums.
Currently casting and loading: .32 Auto, .380 Auto, .38 Special, 9X19, .357 Magnum, .257 Roberts, 6.5 Creedmoor, .30 WCF, .308 WCF, .45-70.
Put me firmly in the camp of viewing acceptance by the U.S. military as a reason for caution, and NOT as a form of glowing endorsement.
In the history of U.S. small arms procurement, about the only thing since the days of George Washington that went right was the 1911 and maybe the Garand - and even with the Garand there was plenty of near-trainwreck going on. One needs only to look at the legions of American arms designers who sold their brainchildren abroad after throwing up their hands at the idiocy of U.S. Ordnance. John Browning would have been a richer man, and indeed the United States may have ceased to exist, had he been more smart and less patriotic and decided to sell his machine guns elsewhere.
I truly hope the U.S. military FINALLY has a serviceable sidearm. After having spent over TWICE the amount of our tax money that they intended to spend on the final guns merely deciding what the final gun was going to be, they better have. The M17/18 has been another act in the ongoing goat rodeo of American service weapons. The modularity is DUMB from the viewpoint of both logistics and accountability, and opens the door for all kinds of shenanigans. There's plenty of companies making small and large versions of the same platform - we don't need to Tinker-Toy them together at a FOB.
For my money, we had a decades-proven platform with the Glock 17 and 19, and instead played the naive child opting for what was shiny, new, and "OOOOOOH! COOOOOOOOL!"
And last I checked, don't we try to fight with airstrikes, artillery, and tanks whenever possible? Is not perhaps this quest for a PISTOL just a little bit overblown?
WWJMBD?
In the Land of Oz, we cast with wheel weight and 2% Tin, Man.
Here is the real story:Originally Posted by Wayne Dobbs
"Long before the P320 furor erupted, SIG had worked with the Army, instituting an Engineering Proposal Change, which involved 30 percent lighter fire control components, thus, incidentally, eliminating the potential drop issue."
No drop problem M17s or 18s were ever issued to military personnel
SIG SAUER M18 Sets New Standard for U.S. Army’s MHS Reliability Test and Marine Testing for that matter
Marine testing was 36,000 rounds
Zero stoppages- You cannot do better than that as far as the MHS testing goes
36,000 rounds zero stoppages. That is a record that is unequaled.
"Recently, the M18 successfully completed a MHS Material Reliability Test that consisted of firing three M18 pistols to 12,000 rounds each for a total of 36,000 rounds in accordance with the MHS requirements. Comparatively, the U.S. Army’s legacy pistol was only tested to 5,000 rounds making the test duration for the M18 pistol 2.4 times greater than that of the legacy pistol. In this testing, the M18 experienced zero stoppages despite being allowed up to twelve stoppages. Additionally, the M18 passed a parts interchange test, and met stringent accuracy and dispersion requirements."
The comment is a bit misleading.
The quote specifies that they use THREE pistols and shot 12,000 EACH. That is NOT a 36,000 round test of a single pistol.
So, is 12,000 rounds without stoppage in a pistol unequalled? Or is this the first time the military has shot 3 pistols to 12k each in a single test. Why did they choose three and not 4 or 5? And why only 12k?
The previous pistol was only tested to 5k. Does that mean it could not do more or they just chose not to do more. Big difference. Did they test three pistols or 10 or 20?
It would be nice to have an apples to apples comparison.
When a government press release is prepared it is configured to show the best possible results of a government procurement, not necessarily the 'truth' about a product.
I'm going to be one of the dissenters.
A polymer framed, striker fired, high capacity pistol that operates on the Browning short recoil system and utilizes a squared off ejection port to accomplish barrel to slide locking is either a Glock or a COPY of a Glock. That's all there is to it.
You can add removable fire control groups, stick a manual safety on it (for NO good reason), give the slide some funky contours and cuts, generally make the whole pistol more complicated than it needs to be; but in the end it's still just a Glock knock-off.
The military has some obsession with manual safeties and it's practically become tradition at this point. A manual safety serves absolutely ZERO purpose other than to make non-gun people happy. The SIG's removable fire control group may prove to be a good idea or it may not turn out well. We'll see.
The Beretta M9 has been in service with the U.S. military since 1985 which gives it a 34 year run. No too bad for a military firearm. It saw a lot a of use during that 34 years, mostly in the war on terror and mostly in harsh places.
I think the Beretta served us well but I also think the design represented the last of an era when it was adopted. The design was very old school, even by 1985 standards. Lots of forged & milled parts, LOTS of little springs, tiny pins, very complex shapes. I think if we had adopted a DA 9mm in the mid 1970's, we would be a little farther ahead of the curve than we find ourselves today.
I don't dislike the M17/M18 concept and I agree it's time to retire the Beretta but I would like to have seen that decision made about 10 years ago. I also would have liked something with a bit more track record.
One cannot help but wonder.....if no safety is “the only way” why there hasn’t been a huge clamor to create safetyless rifles and shotguns. For whatever purpose. Or do we conveniently forget those that use them train to use the safety and get on with their lives?
There are some designs that by their nature must have a safety. The 1911 comes to mind. Most break action, internal hammer shotguns, most riles, etc. need a manual safety. HOWEVER, there are some designs that do not need a manual safety and are far better without them - Just about any modern DA revolver, a Glock pistol, any of the DAO pistols, the H&K P7, DA pistols with de-cocking levers like the SIGs and the Walther P5, just to name a few.
Adding a safety to a gun that doesn't need an additional manual safety doesn't make the gun safer; it just makes the gun more complex.
I've been around enough idiots to say that a manual safety will not prevent them from doing something stupid with a gun. They'll just dis-engage the safety and STILL do something stupid. In fact with those people, a passive safety is a far better design.
For a handgun, your holster can be your primary safety, for if the need for it to come out exists, you should no longer be in a state of handling the thing casually.
Rifles and shotguns, by virtue of their size, will have a lot more of their bits exposed and will get carried and slammed around more clumsily and casually in a field setting, to say nothing of a MILITARY field setting. The off switch is far more necessary there.
WWJMBD?
In the Land of Oz, we cast with wheel weight and 2% Tin, Man.
I seem to remember a Russian training class that claimed no use for a safety. If you were going to be using a weapon you chambered a round. No need for safety at that point. IIRC weren't the Israeli drills along those lines as well? Carry with empty chamber until needed.
I hunted with bolt rifles and did not chamber a round until ready to fire. Can't remember the last time I used a safety on a rifle. That wasn't dangerous game.
OTOH, I have carried a 1911 locked and cocked with safety on for quite a few years. Took me quite a few training sessions to get used to my striker pistol without a safety lever. I like it.
What sold the military on the 320 was it was cheapest of the submitted pistols, that is it. The bid submitted by SIG was almost half the price of the other finalist, the Glock. They didn't even do the required second round of testing. Small Arms Solutions goes over this in great detail.
I dont know if there is a perfect handgun and if I could I would probably pull favorite attributes from couple handguns to make my perfect gun. As for the P320 I very much like that platform for defensive / military use. I dont think i ever had my P320 jam, misfeed, stove pipe etc. I consider it very reliable and will shoot any ammo you can throw at it. Its also propbably the easiest gun to break down and clean because of the modular design. I think in military setting that can be very useful. As many other pointed out that allows for many options without replacing the whole gun. For me P320 fits my hands like no other and points naturally better then any Glock out there.
Does it have weak points ? Sure it does its not a perfect handgun. Factory trigger on my original P320 was just OK nothing spectacular but for defensive purposes it would server well. Wish it had my Canik TP9 SFX trigger but its not bad. I still think that Walther PPQ / Canik TP9 (same gun design) has the best striker fired trigger.
I know there are many Glock lovers out there that believe that Glock is the only manufacturer capable of manufacturing a good handgun but I dont believe that to be the case. Yes Glocks work well but they are not the only player in the game and frankly havent done much the last few years.
We shoot these at work to test ammo. I'm a Glock guy but I have to say they are very nice pistols. I love the triangle mag release.
And reversible with a paperclip.
You can miss fast & you can miss a lot, but only hits count.
What's the last thing they issued without a safety? The TT-33 pistol? Not having a safety works just fine if the guns main purpose is a sign of rank and shooing people in the back of the head.
Former cylindersmith.
This.
The SIG is a decent gun but there are many others out there just as good or better. The competition didn’t provide the modular concept that the Army want and the SIG was cheaper. The decision was pretty easy to make at that point. Does that mean the P320 is better than a Glock or a S&W? Nope. It just means it was cheaper and met the Armies requirements.
The conversion to other calibers is nice in theory and the different sized frames is nice for a organization that size, but that provides no benefit to me. The Sig caliber conversion kits cost the same as some moderate priced guns.
About the only part of modular that is reasonable is the grip frame.
Posting Permissions
| BP | Bronze Point | IMR | Improved Military Rifle | PTD | Pointed |
| BR | Bench Rest | M | Magnum | RN | Round Nose |
| BT | Boat Tail | PL | Power-Lokt | SP | Soft Point |
| C | Compressed Charge | PR | Primer | SPCL | Soft Point "Core-Lokt" |
| HP | Hollow Point | PSPCL | Pointed Soft Point "Core Lokt" | C.O.L. | Cartridge Overall Length |
| PSP | Pointed Soft Point | Spz | Spitzer Point | SBT | Spitzer Boat Tail |
| LRN | Lead Round Nose | LWC | Lead Wad Cutter | LSWC | Lead Semi Wad Cutter |
| GC | Gas Check |
Reply With Quote