Not my post, just copied and posted here as good general information about the Sig p320 pistols.
New 2 July 2020 SIG P320 Lawsuit and P320 Concerns
On July 2nd, a suit against SIG regarding the P320 was filed in Federal District Court, in New Hampshire:
https://bloximages.newyork1.vip.town...63c886.pdf.pdf
The suit is very interesting; the plaintiff alleges he had a P320 that essentially went off by itself, with no trigger manipulation. The plaintff's P320 is one that had not undergone SIG's "Voluntary Upgrade Program (VUP)."
What's interesting about the lawsuit (and it goes without saying, it's a lawsuit, with one party alleging) is that it cites specific instances of other P320s that HAD undergone the SIG VUP upgrade similarly self-firing; this is a huge concern.
This suit was brought to my attention by someone who is an active sworn career LEO and also a leader in a large church security team, which is armed with P320s. Both he an I have been delving deep into this as best we can for the past week or so, due to our personal and organizational concerns.
I've read through the complete suit several times, and it provides a seemingly accurate picture of the P320 and SIG. As many of you know, I personally own a 2019 production in 9mm (more about the significance of P320 production dates shortly), originally a Compact RX, currrently (and probably permanently) equipped with a X Carry grip module and a SIG steel shroud for the OEM Romeo1 RDS. To date mine has 1068 problem-free rounds through it, all of it factory cartridges, primarily Sellier & Bellot 124 gr.
After some research, we've determined what we feel are the essentially 4 production year categories of the P320:
1. Military M17/M18s;
2. Original P320s without the VUP modifications;
3. Pre-4/2018 production P320s that have undergone the VUP modifications by SIG;
4. 4/18 and subsequent production P320s.
Essentially, we believe that P320s in Categorys 1 and 4 are intrinsically good to go, without evidence of self-discharging issues. Categories 2 and 3 are problematic, and of significant safety concern to both users, organizations and bystanders. We strongly suspect (based on component inspections and comparisons of a 2017 and 2020 production P320 components), but have not had officially confirmed by SIG that SIG has induced running changes to the P320 subsequent to the initiation of the VUP in 2017, particularly regarding the sear and sear springs, and that those changes may have become incorporated into April 2018 and subsequent production.
He is a factory certified SIG P320 Armorer, and has personally detail examined and inspected at least 40 P320s of varying production dates, and found QC issues with 13 of the 40 P320s. I'll let Larry address those in greater detail.
We've had some detailed discussions on the forum regarding SIG's issues and integrity in dealing with them. My personal expereinces with SIG, both recently and back to the 1990s have been superb; I have nothing but praise for the individuals with which I've dealt with, and my personal P320 has been a flawless performer, and is used for duty, IDPA, EDC and home defense. But I'm very troubled by the Category 2 and 3 P320s-particularly with the possibilities that the VUP did not intrinsically resolve the previous safety issues with the P320, and they may not have been resolved until possibly 4/18 and subsequent production.
Realizing that what we're predominantly looking at is a lawsuit, with aggrieved party allegations, yet to go throughly through the legal process, my thoughts are as follows:
1. If you own and use what I've temed a Category 2 or 3 production P320, I would either cease carry/suspend use or carry only Condition 3 (magazine loaded, chamber empty) until the gun was sent to SIG for them to individually examine and certify the weapon-especially upgrading with the necessary current production upgraded/modified components;
2. If you are LEO, I would suggest individually and or organizationally addressing these P320s with your Regional SIG LEO Representative; if a commercial user, I'd contact SIG Customer Service and request a RMA (and shipping label) for inspection and servicing.
Personally, I'm invested in my P320; it's been an accurate and reliable pistol that has earned my trust, and is also being used to test current Check-Mate Industries' P320 magazines (which are also performing flawlessly-collectivelly mine and with multiple other people participating; there are currently about 65 of these magazines being tested).
I am hoping that SIG responsibly steps up and thoroughly ventilates and addresses these allegations with urgency and immediacy-legally and publically.
New 2 July 2020 SIG P320 Lawsuit and P320 Concerns
On July 2nd, a suit against SIG regarding the P320 was filed in Federal District Court, in New Hampshire:
https://bloximages.newyork1.vip.town...63c886.pdf.pdf
The suit is very interesting; the plaintiff alleges he had a P320 that essentially went off by itself, with no trigger manipulation. The plaintff's P320 is one that had not undergone SIG's "Voluntary Upgrade Program (VUP)."
What's interesting about the lawsuit (and it goes without saying, it's a lawsuit, with one party alleging) is that it cites specific instances of other P320s that HAD undergone the SIG VUP upgrade similarly self-firing; this is a huge concern.
This suit was brought to my attention by someone who is an active sworn career LEO and also a leader in a large church security team, which is armed with P320s. Both he an I have been delving deep into this as best we can for the past week or so, due to our personal and organizational concerns.
I've read through the complete suit several times, and it provides a seemingly accurate picture of the P320 and SIG. As many of you know, I personally own a 2019 production in 9mm (more about the significance of P320 production dates shortly), originally a Compact RX, currrently (and probably permanently) equipped with a X Carry grip module and a SIG steel shroud for the OEM Romeo1 RDS. To date mine has 1068 problem-free rounds through it, all of it factory cartridges, primarily Sellier & Bellot 124 gr.
After some research, we've determined what we feel are the essentially 4 production year categories of the P320:
1. Military M17/M18s;
2. Original P320s without the VUP modifications;
3. Pre-4/2018 production P320s that have undergone the VUP modifications by SIG;
4. 4/18 and subsequent production P320s.
Essentially, we believe that P320s in Categorys 1 and 4 are intrinsically good to go, without evidence of self-discharging issues. Categories 2 and 3 are problematic, and of significant safety concern to both users, organizations and bystanders. We strongly suspect (based on component inspections and comparisons of a 2017 and 2020 production P320 components), but have not had officially confirmed by SIG that SIG has induced running changes to the P320 subsequent to the initiation of the VUP in 2017, particularly regarding the sear and sear springs, and that those changes may have become incorporated into April 2018 and subsequent production.
He is a factory certified SIG P320 Armorer, and has personally detail examined and inspected at least 40 P320s of varying production dates, and found QC issues with 13 of the 40 P320s. I'll let Larry address those in greater detail.
We've had some detailed discussions on the forum regarding SIG's issues and integrity in dealing with them. My personal expereinces with SIG, both recently and back to the 1990s have been superb; I have nothing but praise for the individuals with which I've dealt with, and my personal P320 has been a flawless performer, and is used for duty, IDPA, EDC and home defense. But I'm very troubled by the Category 2 and 3 P320s-particularly with the possibilities that the VUP did not intrinsically resolve the previous safety issues with the P320, and they may not have been resolved until possibly 4/18 and subsequent production.
Realizing that what we're predominantly looking at is a lawsuit, with aggrieved party allegations, yet to go throughly through the legal process, my thoughts are as follows:
1. If you own and use what I've temed a Category 2 or 3 production P320, I would either cease carry/suspend use or carry only Condition 3 (magazine loaded, chamber empty) until the gun was sent to SIG for them to individually examine and certify the weapon-especially upgrading with the necessary current production upgraded/modified components;
2. If you are LEO, I would suggest individually and or organizationally addressing these P320s with your Regional SIG LEO Representative; if a commercial user, I'd contact SIG Customer Service and request a RMA (and shipping label) for inspection and servicing.
Personally, I'm invested in my P320; it's been an accurate and reliable pistol that has earned my trust, and is also being used to test current Check-Mate Industries' P320 magazines (which are also performing flawlessly-collectivelly mine and with multiple other people participating; there are currently about 65 of these magazines being tested).
I am hoping that SIG responsibly steps up and thoroughly ventilates and addresses these allegations with urgency and immediacy-legally and publically.
Last edited:
