I agree this is an issue as well. I like the holster to fit snug on the triggerguard which is why I don't carry a WML.I k ow several makes of guns have had ADs when the user have used them with WML holsters both with and without a light attached. The opening needed for the light to fit (depending on make) looks like a LG mouth base on some.
I almost forgot about Bruce Bray. Yeah...good to not have gurus.So my local Sig armorer and I were messing around with it after the last batch of OOB discharges. He was at a match were one happened. On all of our 320's you can push the slide back about 1/8 of am inch and still get the trigger to break. This is about where the hood and barrel start to unlock. We could not for sure determine that this would for sure cause an OOB discharge but it sure looks possible. If you take Walthers and Glocks which is what we had on hand to compare it to, they move only about .03-.04" before deactivating the trigger.
Edited to add. For what it is worth. My guy is a big Sig fan and a big Bruce Gray fan so when Bruce Gray said this was not possible, he believed it, until he saw it happen for himself at a match.
I realize this proves nothing, especially to Sig fans, but it has sure had me contemplating whether or not to keep using my 320s in matches.
Agreed, continuous improvement can be a good thing, but the lack of clear generations and indicators of what parts work with what other parts makes things difficult on many levels. One of my biggest peeves with Sig.The P365 breaking firing pins non stop until youtube reviewers got them to do a second generation to solve the problem, and none of the guns carry a mark signifying they're part of the fixed guns.
The MCX has gone through more of these kind of changes than I can possibly ever hope to list out. The MPX has had enormous rolling changes that totally alter the gun's value and reliability, with no changes to the naming to make customers aware of the generation.
There's a lot of them.
As for stacking tolerances, it's easy to jack up a trigger and safety system as a manufacturer and end up with the issues remmy 700s had at that scale.
Well, My understanding with the 365 is, at 6 months out Sig had a fix and did a voluntary recall.The P365 breaking firing pins non stop until youtube reviewers got them to do a second generation to solve the problem, and none of the guns carry a mark signifying they're part of the fixed guns.
The MCX has gone through more of these kind of changes than I can possibly ever hope to list out. The MPX has had enormous rolling changes that totally alter the gun's value and reliability, with no changes to the naming to make customers aware of the generation.
There's a lot of them.
As for stacking tolerances, it's easy to jack up a trigger and safety system as a manufacturer and end up with the issues remmy 700s had at that scale.
There's various versions of 365s running around with different extractors that work with certain slides, per this there are apparently some designating marks: https://www.midwestgunworks.com/page/mgwi/prod/kit-365-extractorWell, My understanding with the 365 is, at 6 months out Sig had a fix and did a voluntary recall.
That problem as I see it now was taken care of in a timely fashion.
Teething happens with all manufacturing.
As for marks or stamps added to others property? I'm not good with that myself.
I have sent a few guns in to the manufactures over my life, and none have come home with any extra manufacturing marks. I have sent a few 3 screw Rugers back for the upgrades,
no extra marks and the old parts were returned.
But im certain all of them are in Rugers data base of upgraded flat tops.
The MCX, I will simply say to someone thats going to buy any Piston AR, Caveat Emptor.
The MPX I have no knowledge of.
I own a bunch of old and newer 700's, never had a problem with any of them.
Stacking Tolerances, Have you ever spent time in a manufacturing Plant?
Have you worked around different ISO's?
This is definitely a legitimate problem. When I went through the P365 armorer course, the instructor (who was a Sig employee, not an adjunct) had to call back to the office to figure out how to remove the slide plate to get the striker assembly out of the gun, because the guns they'd sent us for the class were different than the ones he'd been trained on.The P365 breaking firing pins non stop until youtube reviewers got them to do a second generation to solve the problem, and none of the guns carry a mark signifying they're part of the fixed guns.
The MCX has gone through more of these kind of changes than I can possibly ever hope to list out. The MPX has had enormous rolling changes that totally alter the gun's value and reliability, with no changes to the naming to make customers aware of the generation.
There's a lot of them.
As for stacking tolerances, it's easy to jack up a trigger and safety system as a manufacturer and end up with the issues remmy 700s had at that scale.
Why is it a bad design, show your work.Sorry Sig fanboys. It's a bad design.
I like Sigs...but not the 320.
Yep, forgot about the slide plates but remember reading a bit about it, now that you mention.This is definitely a legitimate problem. When I went through the P365 armorer course, the instructor (who was a Sig employee, not an adjunct) had to call back to the office to figure out how to remove the slide plate to get the striker assembly out of the gun, because the guns they'd sent us for the class were different than the ones he'd been trained on.
I'm all for continuous improvements, but any changes need to be clearly documented and publicly published so that you know what variant of the gun you're looking at.
Why is it a bad design, show your work.
I don't think that's what's happening in this thread at all. There are at least several of us here who are open to believing there is a flaw in the design...if somebody can demonstrate what that flaw is.Stop defending your favorite brand and favorite guru(s) within that brand.
Anybody can say "It's a bad design." But it gives your statement credibility and makes it useful if you can show the reason why. That's what Creedmoor is asking you to do.
This is definitely a legitimate problem. When I went through the P365 armorer course, the instructor (who was a Sig employee, not an adjunct) had to call back to the office to figure out how to remove the slide plate to get the striker assembly out of the gun, because the guns they'd sent us for the class were different than the ones he'd been trained on.
I'm all for continuous improvements, but any changes need to be clearly documented and publicly published so that you know what variant of the gun you're looking at.
Anybody can say "It's a bad design." But it gives your statement credibility and makes it useful if you can show the reason why. That's what Creedmoor is asking you to do.
Again you still haven't shown your work...I've already said, it needs a trigger dingus. Reason being is it's possible for a trigger to pull its self due to inertia alone, which is why the trigger dingus is prevalent.
The incredible hesitation to do so gives me pause to ever consider a sig product.
Are you saying no heavy M9 never had any hard upgrades over its life?This is why even though there were an incredible number of improvements to the beretta 92, service M9 pistols had to stick to the original TDP.
Sometimes an improvement isn't worth the headaches it brings. At least beretta is competent enough to make everything backwards and forwards compatible.
This is why even though there were an incredible number of improvements to the beretta 92, service M9 pistols had to stick to the original TDP.
Sometimes an improvement isn't worth the headaches it brings. At least beretta is competent enough to make everything backwards and forwards compatible.