Ammo For Sale

« « Wow | Home | Gun Porn » »

The Department of Defense has some issues with the Sig P320

Per SOFREP, it seems some of them can’t reliably feed the Army’s issue ammo; the trigger can come apart; and it may eject more than one round.

Glock fans in 3 . . . 2 . . . 1

13 Responses to “The Department of Defense has some issues with the Sig P320”

  1. Fred Says:

    Not a fan. had a sig that wouldn’t feed for nothin. It’s 2018, your weapon eats everything right out of the box with no break in period or you suck. And I’m sorry but does that say that the trigger can fall apart? WHAT? Precision measurements, instrumentation, manufacturing, and tolerances are not new, ugh. What happened to over engineering? It ain’t like these things are cheap.

  2. HL Says:

    I don’t believe that shit. Eject more than one round? Huh?

  3. Stretch Says:

    Paging Mr. Browning.
    Is there a Mr. John Browning in the house?

  4. Rivrdog Says:

    Bow that Army is training with them, could these be a collection of anecdotal range idiocies?

    If so, let’s have stats on current training to go with the beefs. I’ll bet that the 1911 had suck issues when first mass training started.

    No, Glock is NOT necessarily the answer – it’s very easy to limp-wrist a Glock.

  5. Drang Says:

    Per the report, the malfs all occurred with 8 of the 132 shooters in the test. Apparently a combination of limp-wristing and positioning the support hand where the fingers can foul the slide lock.

  6. Paul Says:

    Awwwww come on man.

    Just get a Gen 5 Glock 19, add a slide mounted safety that works like the M9 and simply stops the striker.

    It don’t take no geniuses to make that!

    By the time they decide on a new service handgun they are gonna spend so much on this Ordnance R&D they could have just bought it off the shelf with that change and saved 50 million.

  7. LKP Says:

    Funny, I’ve put 600 rounds thru my P320 compact and had no issues with ammo, feeding or the trigger. When it came time to to send it back to Sig for the drop issue it was only gone for two weeks. Granted, mine is a 40 s&w, but still, I’ll believe it’s a real issue when they have hundreds of the weapons with these problems. I own both Sigs and Berettas and the only issue I ever had with ammo was with my Beretta. I had bought several boxes of Federal Red box at Walmart and kept having failure to eject issues. I quit buying the ammo at Walmart and the issue stopped. I think they got a bad batch of ammo from Federal and I had just bought from the same lot each time. We had Beretta compacts with my agency and they issued us Ranger SXT. We just kept having stoppage after stoppage so they finally quit issuing it to us. The weapon just did not like that ammo. My Sigs have never given me trouble with ammo.

  8. Drake Says:

    Uh… Didn’t the DoD / Army test the hell out of the pistols before selecting the Sig? Sounds like sour grapes from Glock guys.

  9. Jeff the Baptist Says:

    Neither XM1153 ore XM1152 are the Army’s standard issue ball round. If they were standard issue then they wouldn’t have the X prefix for developmental ammo. The standard issue ball round is M882.

    This is almost certainly sour grapes from the Glock guys. According to government acquisition standards, the Army source selection board would be limited to the testing used as part of the contract down-select and not any of this other testing.

  10. ASM826 Says:

    Glock fans can get in line.

    If the standard is feed ball ammo reliably, not shit out trigger parts, and hit the target, I’m going to venture that the 1911s that the CMP is getting ready to release would be a better choice than these SIGs.

  11. Paul Koning Says:

    Drang, if 5 out of 132 shooters can get the gun to malfunction, clearly it isn’t fit for mass use. It may be ok for highly trained specialists who have learned how to handle it in a way that accommodates its quirks. But in my view, a gun that fails when “limp wristed” has a problem. For one thing, can you be confident you’ll always be able to get a good grip on your weapon? What if you’re injured?

  12. SPQR Says:

    The ammo comments are odd especially as it does not match my understanding of issue ammo.

    But otherwise, this just sounds like the usual initial teething of a new procurement program.

    Yawn.

  13. Paul Koning Says:

    But a P320 isn’t a new design, is it?