• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Special Forces pulls new pistols from service after soldier injured in misfire

SupersonicMax

Army.ca Veteran
Mentor
Reaction score
117
Points
680
The article mentions the US Forces also had issues with the P320 and recommended an Engineering Change to the slide. I am thinking it is related to the weapon itself rather than operators.
 

NavyShooter

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Reaction score
65
Points
530
No, there were known issues with the P320 - drop/bang issues.
 

Humphrey Bogart

Army.ca Veteran
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Reaction score
112
Points
780
SIG was known for making high quality pistols for a long time. That was when they were a German Company. They are entirely based in the States now as gun control/decline in Euro Military budgets has caused their historic markets to dry up. Their business strategy has shifted as has their quality control.
 

Haggis

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
123
Points
680
The original P320 was known to have an issue whereby it would fire if dropped at a very specific angle on a certain part of the rear of the slide. Sig remedied that by modifying the striker assembly in the slide and fire control group in the lower receiver. This modification was offered as a free "voluntary upgrade" to owners of older model 320's. (I had mine done by MD Charleton and added SigLite sights at the same time.) The US military insisted on adding a manual safety, a loaded chamber indicator and a sear sight plate to accommodate either iron sights or optics, thus creating the M17/M18.

The location and severity of the injury, as reported in the media, would lead me to believe it may have been caused by holstering with the finger on the trigger, as I have seen this occur before. It would be interesting to know what model of 320/M17 was in use. Alas, we will likely never know the facts entirely.
 

CBH99

Army.ca Veteran
Donor
Reaction score
101
Points
630
There was some discussion in the "Replacing the Browning Hi-Power" thread that perhaps the P320 would be picked as the replacement.

Given this incident, issues in US service, similar issues over the years, and a class action suit which was settled last year - I'm thinking maybe this model might be eliminated from consideration.
 

Remius

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
128
Points
630
There was some discussion in the "Replacing the Browning Hi-Power" thread that perhaps the P320 would be picked as the replacement.

Given this incident, issues in US service, similar issues over the years, and a class action suit which was settled last year - I'm thinking maybe this model might be eliminated from consideration.
Or given Canada’s awesome record at procurement, they’ll buy them and get a huge discount and we’ll be stuck with them for 80years.
 

Eaglelord17

Full Member
Reaction score
48
Points
330
There was some discussion in the "Replacing the Browning Hi-Power" thread that perhaps the P320 would be picked as the replacement.

Given this incident, issues in US service, similar issues over the years, and a class action suit which was settled last year - I'm thinking maybe this model might be eliminated from consideration.
Depends on what the issue actually is. Just because there is a incident doesn't mean it is the pistols fault. How many NDs did we have with the Browning Hi-Powers due to the magazine disconnect? It wasn't a gun defect rather a lack of training. Even if people are well trained, accidents/mistakes happen.

I would be waiting to see what the full story is before completely removing a model of pistol from consideration, especially one that was just adopted by our neighbour to the South.
 

Haggis

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
123
Points
680
Given this incident, issues in US service, similar issues over the years, and a class action suit which was settled last year - I'm thinking maybe this model might be eliminated from consideration.
Despite the incidents and lawsuits regarding the older, unmodified, P320s, the US military still selected it as their new service pistol after some mods (mentioned earlier) were added by Sig Sauer to meet their requirements. The civilian version of the US service pistol is selling like hotcakes. Again, there is no evidence this was an equipment failure. Even police/military SOF members can have brain farts resulting in accidents.
 

SupersonicMax

Army.ca Veteran
Mentor
Reaction score
117
Points
680
Depends on what the issue actually is. Just because there is a incident doesn't mean it is the pistols fault. How many NDs did we have with the Browning Hi-Powers due to the magazine disconnect? It wasn't a gun defect rather a lack of training. Even if people are well trained, accidents/mistakes happen.

I would be waiting to see what the full story is before completely removing a model of pistol from consideration, especially one that was just adopted by our neighbour to the South.
No, there is a deficiency with the gun. But often, we mitigate deficiencies with training (or train-away bad designs). In this case, it is a highly-trained, special forces individual. I doubt training would sufficiently mitigate the deficiency for non-SOF personnel.
 

SupersonicMax

Army.ca Veteran
Mentor
Reaction score
117
Points
680
There was a deficiency, which Sig Sauer remedied with an upgrade. I'd buy your assertion if this was an unmodified pistol.
So, did our SOF have the upgraded version? My understanding is that only the US Army had the modification.
 

Haggis

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
123
Points
680
So, did our SOF have the upgraded version? My understanding is that only the US Army had the modification.
That's a good question.

They may have had an older, unmodified version., without an external safety, which may fire if dropped. As I mentioned upthread, once the deficiency was identified Sig Sauer (through MD Charleton in Canada) offered a free voluntary upgrade to all owners/users to correct this. The US military went further, requiring the M17/M18 have the safety upgrade, in addition to the manual safety, and having the slide lock moved forward to accommodate the manual safety.
 

SupersonicMax

Army.ca Veteran
Mentor
Reaction score
117
Points
680
That's a good question.

They may have had an older, unmodified version., without an external safety, which may fire if dropped. As I mentioned upthread, once the deficiency was identified Sig Sauer (through MD Charleton in Canada) offered a free voluntary upgrade to all owners/users to correct this. The US military went further, requiring the M17/M18 have the safety upgrade, in addition to the manual safety, and having the slide lock moved forward to accommodate the manual safety.
Sure. Assuming the SOF weapons were not modified, there was a deficiency with those weapons.

Given that JTF-2 are generally highly competent, I think it is fair to assume, initially at least, that the operator is not at fault.
 

Colin Parkinson

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
322
Points
880
I had a chance to play with the M17, it's a very nice pistol. I take it over a G17 any day.
 

Good2Golf

Army.ca Legend
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Mentor
Reaction score
314
Points
980
Given that JTF-2 are generally highly competent, I think it is fair to assume, initially at least, that the operator is not at fault.
Why? Without knowing more, that’s not necessarily a good assumption. Stuff happens. Heck, even COMCANSOF can have a ND. 🤷🏻‍♂️
 

SupersonicMax

Army.ca Veteran
Mentor
Reaction score
117
Points
680
Why? Without knowing more, that’s not necessarily a good assumption. Stuff happens. Heck, even COMCANSOF can have a ND. 🤷🏻‍♂️
That's why I said initially. Yes, stuff happens but the likelihood of operator error is smaller amongst that cadre.
 

Gunnar

Sr. Member
Subscriber
Reaction score
11
Points
230
It's funny, but having fired a grand total of 5 handguns in my life, all of which within the past few months, the Sig 320 was one of my faves. I did better shooting with it because the trigger was not quite as heavy to pull. If one were to holster the weapon with finger on trigger as suggested above, it would most assuredly fire. Whether that was the issue or not remains to be seen, and I look forward to hearing about it.
 

Good2Golf

Army.ca Legend
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Mentor
Reaction score
314
Points
980
That's why I said initially. Yes, stuff happens but the likelihood of operator error is smaller amongst that cadre.
Using what metrics? Incidents vs rounds fired? Incidents vs population of Cat 1 Assaulters? Incidents vs population of other types of JTF 2 personnel?

would you be so quick to intimate an equipment cause if there was an accident with a CF-18? I mean, fighter pilots are professed to be awesome, best of the best, so incidents must be assumed to be materiel failure initially umtil proven otherwise?

Have you actually shot a P320? P226? P225? etc. and know the nuances of a striker-fire vs hammer-fire pistol? Just wondering, because you seem very quick to make assumptions...
 
Top