4 ms·

I'm assuming they're taking advantage of the fact that these models share a design spec with military models, which both have the same flaws. I would assume the

I'm assuming they're taking advantage of the fact that these models share a design spec with military models, which both have the same flaws. I would assume the only difference is that the military model is full auto. Edit: apparently not full auto, man we should have just let Glock take the contract when they started manufacturing in the US instead of Sig, their track record is much more sound.

eoskx 1y ago
Not even that - the only difference between the Sig M17/M18 handguns that the US Army uses and the consumer P320 is a manual safety. Otherwise, they are indistinguishable.
- lenerdenator 1y ago
  A manual safety that does not seem to prevent uncommanded discharges. Which is, y'know, part of the point of a safety.
  - coldbrewed 1y ago
    Yep, the fact that the safety merely blocks the trigger and doesn't block the striker in case of accidental sear disengagement is horrifying.
    - jibe 1y ago
      The M17/M18/P320 has a striker block, and you have to pull the trigger to disengage it.
      - some_random 1y ago
        Not really, it doesn't have a firing pin block like every other striker fired handgun, it has a weird sear block thing from a hammer fired handgun because it's a shitty hack job conversion from the P250
        jibe 1y ago
        The P320 does have a firing pin block. There is a lever that physically blocks the striker from moving. When you pull the trigger, the trigger bar lifts the lever, allowing the striker to move if the sear is also disengaged. None of this is a sear block, or has anything to do directly with the sear. It will prevent the gun from firing if the sear were to fail. You can see the lever in green in this animation: https://us1.discourse-cdn.com/flex015/uploads/dd_dev/original/3X/0/3/03ae68c348b537ede868bb7ac1c6315a6a35de8e.gif https://us1.discourse-cdn.com/flex015/uploads/dd_dev/origina...
      - lazide 1y ago
        Notably, the FBI found it was entirely possible to disable the striker block without the trigger being pulled. A combination of wear, inadequate design, and loose manufacturing tolerances. They couldn’t get it to fire uncommanded however, unless they bypassed the trigger. However, they got the gun because it had gone off uncommanded in the holster - with witnesses - and no hands or anything else near it.
        jibe 1y ago
        FBI found it was entirely possible to disable the striker block without the trigger being pulled. A combination of wear, inadequate design, and loose manufacturing tolerances. To disable the striker block, they removed the rear plate, applied pressure to lift the slide up and away from the grip, then stuck a punch into the back of the gun to manually release the sear. Maybe this is the beginning of discovering an issue with the striker block, but this isn't simulating a failure that could happen under normal circumstances (specifically jamming a punch in the back and releasing the sear).
        lazide 1y ago
        That is how they bypassed the trigger. The internal safety released when it should not and that is how they proved it. How else do you want them to demonstrate an internal safety that was supposed to work was non-functional?
- justin66 1y ago
  Consumer P320s, and Sig striker-fired pistols more generally, are generally available both with or without manual safeties. Consumers can buy a civilian version of the M17 that's really difficult to distinguish from the Army's version (the safety's a different color, black instead of brown, or something like that).
oldpersonintx2 1y ago
[dead]
dfc 1y ago
Does any service in the world have a standard issue full auto handgun?
- avidiax 1y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Machine_pistol https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Machine_pistol There are many that have adopted machine pistols for various uses, particularly special forces, VIP protection, and for the roles currently filled by PDWs, which means that common troops sometimes were issued them.
- dylan604 1y ago
  what would be the point other than to just waste bullets?
  - TrippyAcidCats 1y ago
    Bullet volume is very important for suppression. Although the role of suppression usually is filled by a SAW rather than a MP.
    - dylan604 1y ago
      So once again, what would be the point for an auto handgun? You just said it's the wrong weapon for suppression. A 17 round mag fired in single rounds in quick succession would keep an opposing foe's head down longer than a 17 round mag in auto fire single trigger pull. Even pulling double tap style firing requires training/practice to keep both bullets accurate or else even that's wasteful
      - bombcar 1y ago
        Full-auto anything that isn’t a chaingun is basically a meme anyway, even for rifles and friends. What is NOT a meme, and is useful, but counts as fully automatic, is three or five round burst mode.
        1y ago
wl 1y ago
Sig's track record was just as sound as Glock's before the P320. The P226 was the Navy SEAL's sidearm of choice for a bit and it nearly became the standard sidearm for the US armed forces in the 1980s, narrowly losing out to the Beretta 92. The P210 is widely considered to be the most accurate service pistol ever created.
- 4MOAisgoodenuf 1y ago
  Sig Sauer Inc in Exeter, NH is a completely different company than SIG Sauer AG in Switzerland. The Swiss Sig's have a sterling reputation. The P226 that entered the XM9 trials (against the Beretta 92) was imported from Switzerland by SAKO. The US company didn't really start manufacturing until the 90s with the P229 and the Sig Pro series (where they were only tasked with making the plastic frames, not the more intricate lock work).
  - eoskx 1y ago
    That company structure is no longer quite the case. L&O Holdings (Germany-based holding company controlled by 2 German individuals) owns Sig Sauer USA, Sig Germany, and Sig Sauer AG.
  - wl 1y ago
    If we're talking about Swiss SIGs, that'd be the P210 handgun and to a lesser extent, the SG 510 assault rifle. The P226s were always German SIGs (at least until SIG US got started), the "Montage Suisse" models being assembled in Switzerland from German parts rather than being the product of the Neuhausen factory.
justin66 1y ago
> man we should have just let Glock take the contract when they started manufacturing in the US One of the stated requirements for the updated pistol was a thumb-operated external safety. Glock's never been willing to manufacture a pistol with that feature, so they effectively excluded themselves from the competition.

eoskx 1y ago

Not even that - the only difference between the Sig M17/M18 handguns that the US Army uses and the consumer P320 is a manual safety. Otherwise, they are indistinguishable.

lenerdenator 1y ago
A manual safety that does not seem to prevent uncommanded discharges. Which is, y'know, part of the point of a safety.
- coldbrewed 1y ago
  Yep, the fact that the safety merely blocks the trigger and doesn't block the striker in case of accidental sear disengagement is horrifying.
  - jibe 1y ago
    The M17/M18/P320 has a striker block, and you have to pull the trigger to disengage it.
    - some_random 1y ago
      Not really, it doesn't have a firing pin block like every other striker fired handgun, it has a weird sear block thing from a hammer fired handgun because it's a shitty hack job conversion from the P250
      - jibe 1y ago
        The P320 does have a firing pin block. There is a lever that physically blocks the striker from moving. When you pull the trigger, the trigger bar lifts the lever, allowing the striker to move if the sear is also disengaged. None of this is a sear block, or has anything to do directly with the sear. It will prevent the gun from firing if the sear were to fail. You can see the lever in green in this animation: https://us1.discourse-cdn.com/flex015/uploads/dd_dev/original/3X/0/3/03ae68c348b537ede868bb7ac1c6315a6a35de8e.gif https://us1.discourse-cdn.com/flex015/uploads/dd_dev/origina...
    - lazide 1y ago
      Notably, the FBI found it was entirely possible to disable the striker block without the trigger being pulled. A combination of wear, inadequate design, and loose manufacturing tolerances. They couldn’t get it to fire uncommanded however, unless they bypassed the trigger. However, they got the gun because it had gone off uncommanded in the holster - with witnesses - and no hands or anything else near it.
      - jibe 1y ago
        FBI found it was entirely possible to disable the striker block without the trigger being pulled. A combination of wear, inadequate design, and loose manufacturing tolerances. To disable the striker block, they removed the rear plate, applied pressure to lift the slide up and away from the grip, then stuck a punch into the back of the gun to manually release the sear. Maybe this is the beginning of discovering an issue with the striker block, but this isn't simulating a failure that could happen under normal circumstances (specifically jamming a punch in the back and releasing the sear).
        lazide 1y ago
        That is how they bypassed the trigger. The internal safety released when it should not and that is how they proved it. How else do you want them to demonstrate an internal safety that was supposed to work was non-functional?
justin66 1y ago
Consumer P320s, and Sig striker-fired pistols more generally, are generally available both with or without manual safeties. Consumers can buy a civilian version of the M17 that's really difficult to distinguish from the Army's version (the safety's a different color, black instead of brown, or something like that).

oldpersonintx2 1y ago

[dead]

dfc 1y ago

Does any service in the world have a standard issue full auto handgun?

avidiax 1y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Machine_pistol https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Machine_pistol There are many that have adopted machine pistols for various uses, particularly special forces, VIP protection, and for the roles currently filled by PDWs, which means that common troops sometimes were issued them.
dylan604 1y ago
what would be the point other than to just waste bullets?
- TrippyAcidCats 1y ago
  Bullet volume is very important for suppression. Although the role of suppression usually is filled by a SAW rather than a MP.
  - dylan604 1y ago
    So once again, what would be the point for an auto handgun? You just said it's the wrong weapon for suppression. A 17 round mag fired in single rounds in quick succession would keep an opposing foe's head down longer than a 17 round mag in auto fire single trigger pull. Even pulling double tap style firing requires training/practice to keep both bullets accurate or else even that's wasteful
    - bombcar 1y ago
      Full-auto anything that isn’t a chaingun is basically a meme anyway, even for rifles and friends. What is NOT a meme, and is useful, but counts as fully automatic, is three or five round burst mode.
      - 1y ago

wl 1y ago

Sig's track record was just as sound as Glock's before the P320. The P226 was the Navy SEAL's sidearm of choice for a bit and it nearly became the standard sidearm for the US armed forces in the 1980s, narrowly losing out to the Beretta 92. The P210 is widely considered to be the most accurate service pistol ever created.

4MOAisgoodenuf 1y ago
Sig Sauer Inc in Exeter, NH is a completely different company than SIG Sauer AG in Switzerland. The Swiss Sig's have a sterling reputation. The P226 that entered the XM9 trials (against the Beretta 92) was imported from Switzerland by SAKO. The US company didn't really start manufacturing until the 90s with the P229 and the Sig Pro series (where they were only tasked with making the plastic frames, not the more intricate lock work).
- eoskx 1y ago
  That company structure is no longer quite the case. L&O Holdings (Germany-based holding company controlled by 2 German individuals) owns Sig Sauer USA, Sig Germany, and Sig Sauer AG.
- wl 1y ago
  If we're talking about Swiss SIGs, that'd be the P210 handgun and to a lesser extent, the SG 510 assault rifle. The P226s were always German SIGs (at least until SIG US got started), the "Montage Suisse" models being assembled in Switzerland from German parts rather than being the product of the Neuhausen factory.

justin66 1y ago

> man we should have just let Glock take the contract when they started manufacturing in the US One of the stated requirements for the updated pistol was a thumb-operated external safety. Glock's never been willing to manufacture a pistol with that feature, so they effectively excluded themselves from the competition.