Sig M17....what is everyone's opinion?

[rmcc]

Have shot Sig 226 and 228 for years and love both!! Have a chance to buy a M17 and know very little about them other than the military adopted them. What are your thoughts?

Thanks!!!
rmcc

[376Steyr]

I have a 320, which is the same thing without the manual safety. I'm satisfied with mine. If you are getting a great deal, and want a bulky service pistol, I say go for it.

My 320 is still unmodified, even though aftermarket parts are available, and its trigger pull is rather long and spongy. It is quite muzzle-heavy, with the full size barrel and slide. It is wide from side-to-side, which makes no difference if you're carrying in the open. I don't bother with trying to carry it concealed. The slide rides high in the frame, which keeps it from gouging my pudgy paws. As a service pistol, it is fine for military or law enforcement use. I like it better than the M9 which I was occasionally issued when I was in uniform.

Stand by for lots of posts insisting that 1911s or Glocks are far superior, and you should not sully your safe with a M17.

[winelover]

Have had the P320 RX Compact, going on 5 years. This is the version with the factory installed Romeo 1 micro reflex and suppressor height night sights. It's not a small pistol, by any means, for a compact. I purchased it strictly as my dedicated house gun and installed a Crimson Trace weapon light on the dustcover rail. Originally, purchased Sig's light but found the activating paddles a bit on the heavy side.

No manual safety. Pleased with the DAO trigger. Mine is the early version with the curved trigger. Advantage of the Sig, besides being adopted by the military, is the users ability to change frame/grip sizes.

Winelover

[AnthonyB]

I have an M17. If you know the 320 platform, it is just a big 320 with a manual safety and ready for the Leupold Delta point or Sig optics from the box. As stated, not an easily concealed pistol. I don't love mine but trust it completely.
Tony

[Divil]

I think replacing the M9 for the M17 was a mistake. The armed forces should have went with the M9a3 if they wanted something new or if they wanted to more liberally issue sidearms.

[nicholst55]

I handled dozens of M17s before I retired the end of 2021. What stuck in my mind was that if I dry fired five different pistols, they all had a distinctly different trigger pull. I think that the P320/M17/M18 is an interesting concept, but I didn't rush out and buy one.

[Bigslug]

Stand by for lots of posts insisting that 1911s or Glocks are far superior, and you should not sully your safe with a M17.

Put me down in that camp, although the M17 solves what I consider to be THE major issue with the 320 - a lightish trigger pull combined with NOTHING AT ALL in the way of any kind of safety.

The big selling point on pistols for a lot of folks is "feel", and I'll grant that the Sigs do feel good. As the guy that has to keep the guns running however, it's something I care a lot less about than ease of serviceability at the armorer level, and the Glock, followed by the 1911 are the king and queen of that particular discussion. Keep the sights aligned while you press the trigger and grip shape ceases to mean so much. The Sigs have a longer list of tiny stuff that wants to disappear on you, or stuff that it's better to send back to the Mothership for repair.

The flat trigger option on the Sig sucks for me. I get pinched between it and the trigger guard every shot - and that DOESN'T feel good.

The modularity of grip frames and slide sizes plugged onto a single, serialized trigger module seemed incredibly gimmicky to me and a potentially HUGE logistical hassle. Don't try to order off a parts list when tired kids.

And for reasons known only to them, they have this desire to make various models of 320 with different red dot cuts in the slide, each requiring a different mounting plate design.

I dunno. . .seemed to me like yet another boondoggle in the 200+ year history of U.S. small arms procurement train wrecks, with an extra measure of rushing it onto the market before the salmonella was fully baked out of the eggs in the cookie dough thrown in. Your mileage may vary.

[rmcc]

Thanks guys!! I carry 1911 Colts mostly. Have Glocks, Berettas, and as stated earlier Sigs. Getting older, not shooting as much and just thought about something new. What appealed to me was the safety and ambi controls ( I am a lefty). What does not appeal to me is the modular fire control unit. I can swap out anything on a 1911 in a matter of minutes, what happens when something goes south in the modular unit? I would hope that is a minute problem as we just swapped out from the Berettas. I still think I will try the M17 out, just to see how it is.

[johnsonian09]

I own the m17 with the manual safety, I’ve carried it with alternate grips/slides basically making it a p320 subcompact as well. No issues and mine has a nice trigger. Maybe I’m lucky considering some other comments on this thread. Mine creeps with some light pressure, hits a wall and breaks like a glass rod at about 4.5-5lb of pressure.


I personally don’t want a 2.5lb or really light trigger on a carry gun, let alone a striker fired one.

If your using this as a base to build a race gun/ target competition you may want to lighten it up. But if that’s your endgame I’d recommend a hammer fired sig that you can convert to rimfire for more practice trigger time, since strikers can’t typically be made to convert to rimfire reliably.

If you can’t find the manual safety grip module that you want ( to use a p320 grip on a m17)
It’s an easy notch to make on each side with a file or dremel.

The parts to repair components on the FCU module itself are available from sig online, and also from (iirc) jsd supply because they sell the components for a DIY 80% 320 FCU. Although I haven’t needed to do anything but clean the (factory) FCU. I have approx 30,000 rounds through it over 4 years.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[FergusonTO35]

I like the 320 alot, and would seriously consider it if I wasn't already so deep in Glocks. I would insist on a manual safety though, that trigger pull is awfully light not to have one.

[justindad]

I have the P320 in .357 Sig & .40 S&W. It’s my main carry weapon, proven in my hands to be more reliable than my DAO .357 Mag and my .45 SAA. Notice I didn’t feel the need to compare it’s reliability against my short barreled 1911. With the modular FCU, you might be able to run 9mm, .40 S&W, and .357 Sig all from the same frame (double check that for the M17 version.)
*
Now for the bad:
1) Early samples of the P320 can accidentally fire when dropped in some particular way. Sig has a “voluntary upgrade” (eh hem, recall) where they fix that design error. This may apply to your M17. I don’t really think this matters.
2) Early versions have a weaker extractor assembly. Basically, it wears out quickly when loaded hot, causing a failure to extract. I’ve had one failure to extract, but it was 5X used brass with a very compressed charge of Enforcer in a .357 Sig case (I probably exceeded 40ksi pressure). There’s a third party that produces a stronger extractor claw and spring. That one failure to extract is the only issue I can remember having with the P320, after 4 years and maybe 3,000 rounds (mostly reloads).
3) The chamber is supported better than Glock, but not quite as well as a 1911. I run my .357 Sig brass through a bulge buster, but not my .40 brass. My first thought is that this difference in brass bulge is probably a combination of higher pressures in the .357 Sig round and barrel chamber manufacturing variances. The brass bulge with this pistol is very slight.
4) I fixed my revolvers, so they may prove out to be more reliable over the next 3k rounds.