Another P320 goes off in a holster

[Sheepdog1968]

I agree with you, the Beretta 92FS is a brilliant. It's an extremely safe design, accurate, reliable, with minimal recoil.

Only problem is it's a crashing bore to shoot. I'm going to replace all the plastic and throw some Langdon/Wilson bits in with a SAO flat trigger and hope I like it more. As it stand I hate that trigger, it's awful with large hands. Miles of makeup, and doesn't actually break until it's almost touching the grip.

lol. Good problem to have I suppose.

 

[Gawernator]

The guy is really going off on me on the IG post - lol

He says this is the holster used https://warriorland.net/products/p3...0-adj-retention-ride-height-right-warriorland

 

[LateBraking]

The guy is really going off on me on the IG post - lol

He says this is the holster used https://warriorland.net/products/p3...0-adj-retention-ride-height-right-warriorland

Plot twist you're talking to an AI bot from a foreign country. /joke

 

[grandpapeepap]

The guy is really going off on me on the IG post - lol

He says this is the holster used https://warriorland.net/products/p3...0-adj-retention-ride-height-right-warriorland

i saw stoeger talking about the sigcident too, and it seems the gun went off while the person was reholstering it? gonna need some real evidence for this one if true

 

[AR15barrels]

Stock P320 X5 Legion

"Seemed completely stock" is not facts in evidence.
I don't see anywhere that said the gun was examined internally.
You can't "see" a gun being stock from the outside.
Most fire-control related changes that actually effect the safety of firearms are done where you can not see.

 

[Gawernator]

"Seemed completely stock" is not facts in evidence.
I don't see anywhere that said the gun was examined internally.
You can't "see" a gun being stock from the outside.
Most fire-control related changes that actually effect the safety of firearms are done where you can not see.

100000%

 

[paintballdad]

It's not only the fact that it's a decocked DA/SA. The 92FS takes that concept, similar to how a P226 operates, and takes it a step further by also physically disconnecting the hammer>firing pin>primer link. The link is physically broken. Whether a P226 is decocked, or if say a modern revolver with a transfer bar also physically disconnects the hammer>firing pin link, the difference is that both of those weapons will fire if you simply pull the trigger. The 92FS won't.

I agree, this only applies to the 92FS and not the other variants but a lot of them eventually convert it to a G.

 

[grandpapeepap]

"Seemed completely stock" is not facts in evidence.
I don't see anywhere that said the gun was examined internally.
You can't "see" a gun being stock from the outside.
Most fire-control related changes that actually effect the safety of firearms are done where you can not see.

same stoeger video, had someone that informed him of the incident was in the class and said same thing about it being "stock" and "didnt have an optic yet". take that as you will i guess

 

[Gawernator]

same stoeger video, had someone that informed him of the incident was in the class and said same thing about it being "stock" and "didnt have an optic yet". take that as you will i guess

"I didn't see the motorcyclist, just hit and killed him"

"I didn't pull the trigger"

People lie or are dumb

 

[grandpapeepap]

"I didn't see the motorcyclist, just hit and killed him"

"I didn't pull the trigger"

People lie or are dumb

i get what you mean, but i think the person who gave the infomation to ben could see if an optic was on the firearm or not. i have some amount of faith in others

 

[Sheepdog1968]

Does anyone know if someone has been keeping an excel sheet for the various discharges to track if stock/not stock, had external safety, was using P320 and not P226 holster, activity when it went off, LEO/Military/Civilian, etc? Would like to see the data myself in a bit more detail if it has been summarized.

 

[Skilly]

Does anyone know if someone has been keeping an excel sheet for the various discharges to track if stock/not stock, had external safety, was using P320 and not P226 holster, activity when it went off, LEO/Military/Civilian, etc? Would like to see the data myself in a bit more detail if it has been summarized.

i think Sig probably is....

 

[Sheepdog1968]

i think Sig probably is....

lol. Someone who might share that data.

 

[Darqhelmet]

No one has access to all that data outside of maybe Sig.

 

[Walmart_AR15]

Strange SIG not just add a trigger tab safety. Every other striker fired design has the trigger safety tab.

The holster looks like it has a trigger guard retention design. It is where the trigger can be “pulled” just a 1mm movement of trigger will disengage the trigger block.

 

[cali_jazz]

Strange SIG not just add a trigger tab safety. Every other striker fired design has the trigger safety tab.

The holster looks like it has a trigger guard retention design. It is where the trigger can be “pulled” just a 1mm movement of trigger will disengage the trigger block.

Grayguns and Wilson Combat make aftermarket triggers with safety levers.

 

[miles888]

Strange SIG not just add a trigger tab safety. Every other striker fired design has the trigger safety tab.

The holster looks like it has a trigger guard retention design. It is where the trigger can be “pulled” just a 1mm movement of trigger will disengage the trigger block.

they sell versions with a manual thumb safety

 

[DJD100]

Strange SIG not just add a trigger tab safety. Every other striker fired design has the trigger safety tab.

The holster looks like it has a trigger guard retention design. It is where the trigger can be “pulled” just a 1mm movement of trigger will disengage the trigger block.

Here's what has been proven regarding the P320's striker safety...

• The Striker Safety needs to move only 0.036" to disengage from the striker (brand new P320).
• That correlates to a trigger pull of only 0.09" to fully disengage striker safety (brand new P320).
• The trigger breaks and the sear releases the striker at 0.201" (brand new P320).
• That means the additional trigger pull past striker safety disengagement needed to have the sear release the striker is 0.11" (brand new P320).

That means it's certainly possible that if the the trigger is barely moved 0.09" or perhaps even less if striker safety and/or the striker is broken in/worn, and/or the slide to FCU/Grip fit is loose, and then if the slide is torqued vs the FCU/Grip in a holster like it appears is happening with many of the LEO UD's, that ultimately the striker could be released ("wiggle fire").

The P320's striker safety is rather unique design, and nowhere near as robust as the much more commonly used vertical plunger designs (P365, Kahr, Glock, CZ and many others etc), which also includes the fact that the FBI Ballistics Lab reported the striker safety's torsion spring is only captured on one leg which means means it's feasible the P320's striker safety spring could fail to control the striker safety without breaking if the non-captured spring leg were to move and there by lose tension). The P320's optional manual safety is also inferior in that it only blocks the trigger bar, and not the sear.

I'm not a Sig hater seeing I love my P365 with Spectre Comp Slide which has a relatively tight slide to FCU/grip fit and it will simply not "wiggle fire" at any trigger pull prior to the break.

So, IMO the P320's striker safety timing is possibly too aggressive, and when combined with MIM parts tolerance stacking and a possible lack of effective MIM parts QA in some cases, and that's in addition to some sloppy slide to FCU/grip tolerances, then there's currently a cause for concern in an admittedly small percentage of the many P320's/M18's/M17's produced (while of course noting that some percentage of the UD's were operator or armorer error etc (10mm parts in 9mm guns etc).

 

[Gawernator]

Here's what has been proven regarding the P320's striker safety...

• The Striker Safety needs to move only 0.036" to disengage from the striker (brand new P320).
• That correlates to a trigger pull of only 0.09" to fully disengage striker safety (brand new P320).
• The trigger breaks and the sear releases the striker at 0.201" (brand new P320).
• That means the additional trigger pull past striker safety disengagement needed to have the sear release the striker is 0.11" (brand new P320).

That means it's certainly possible that if the the trigger is barely moved 0.09" or perhaps even less if striker safety and/or the striker is broken in/worn, and/or the slide to FCU/Grip fit is loose, and then if the slide is torqued vs the FCU/Grip in a holster like it appears is happening with many of the LEO UD's, that ultimately the striker could be released ("wiggle fire").

The P320's striker safety is rather unique design, and nowhere near as robust as the much more commonly used vertical plunger designs (P365, Kahr, Glock, CZ and many others etc), which also includes the fact that the FBI Ballistics Lab reported the striker safety's torsion spring is only captured on one leg which means means it's feasible the P320's striker safety spring could fail to control the striker safety without breaking if the non-captured spring leg were to move and there by lose tension). The P320's optional manual safety is also inferior in that it only blocks the trigger bar, and not the sear.

I'm not a Sig hater seeing I love my P365 with Spectre Comp Slide which has a relatively tight slide to FCU/grip fit and it will simply not "wiggle fire" at any trigger pull prior to the break.

So, IMO the P320's striker safety timing is possibly too aggressive, and when combined with MIM parts tolerance stacking and a possible lack of effective MIM parts QA in some cases, and that's in addition to some sloppy slide to FCU/grip tolerances, then there's currently a cause for concern in an admittedly small percentage of the many P320's/M18's/M17's produced (while of course noting that some percentage of the UD's were operator or armorer error etc (10mm parts in 9mm guns etc).

I think that theory goes further than the evidence actually supports.

Yes, the P320 striker safety apparently disengages relatively early in the trigger stroke. But that fact, standing alone, does not prove much. A firing-pin block has to clear before the striker releases. That is normal operation in a striker-fired pistol. The relevant question is not whether the safety clears before the break. The relevant question is whether the sear can release the striker without a sufficient trigger stroke.

That is where the “wiggle fire” theory still has a causation problem. The theory assumes a partially moved trigger, possible wear, possible tolerance stacking, possible slide-to-FCU movement, possible holster torque, and possible sear disturbance. That is a chain of hypotheticals, not proof of a general defect.

The FBI/DEA testing raises fair questions about the robustness of the P320’s striker safety design, especially if sear engagement is already lost or compromised. But that is the key point: “if sear engagement is lost” is doing a lot of work. The striker safety is not supposed to be the primary sear. It is a passive drop/fire-control safety. If the argument requires the sear relationship to already be defeated, then the real issue is proving how that happened in the first place.

I am not saying every P320 incident is user error. I am also not saying the design is above criticism. But the measurements you cited do not establish that a normal P320/M17/M18 will fire from holster torque without a trigger press. They establish, at most, a theory of reduced safety margin under a stacked set of adverse conditions.

So I would frame it this way: the P320 design may deserve scrutiny, but the current argument still does not prove “wiggle fire.” It proves a possible mechanism only if several disputed assumptions are first accepted.

 

[john_marsten_1873]

Yet to see any alleged UD’s on a California model 320 with manual safety (engaged) or without someone touching the gun itself in some kind of manner.

Sig’s problem is that they should’ve the P320 with a tabbed trigger, manual safety or not. The P365 - better design or not - is going to far less reholstring reps and manipulations since the 320 is often used for competition and duty.

Perhaps the best path forward for them is to release a new P320 with a tabbed trigger that’s still compatible with all the current released P320 parts and upgrades - except non-tabbed triggers if that’s possible.