ICE dumps the SigP320/M18

[breamfisher]

BTW, some are trying to blame Safariland because "all the discharges are in Safariland holsters." But they're not.

[GrapeApe]

Re: Big and Bream:

We (firearm owners) have gotten complacent, because we're used to firearms the normally don't go "bang" without some sort of manipulation of the "bang switch" whether intentional or accidental. So we consider a pistol in a holster that covers the trigger "safe"
It appears that the M18/P320 change that rubric.

[GrapeApe]

BTW, some are trying to blame Safariland because "all the discharges are in Safariland holsters." But they're not.

If it was holster related, wouldn't it also affect Glocks, along with the other striker fired pistol???

[breamfisher]

BigSlug can better comment, but from what I understand the Sig is a fully cocked striker, which means that a trigger or sear release is potentially worse.

[CPJ 2.0]

Sounds like the USAF incident involved a Safariland holster on their QLS system - basically a great big Fas-Tex buckle that lets you rapidly disconnect your holster from its duty belt or thigh-rig platform. It's a cheap and really handy option if you have one (expensive) holster that needs to go from a more formal duty uniform to the green BDU's of a SWAT team, or run a Glock holster one day and a 1911 the next.

The guns are pretty well clamshelled up inside those holsters. It's pretty common practice to move them around on QLS platforms with loaded guns in them and nobody thinks anything of it. Muzzle discipline SHOULDN'T end just because a piece is holstered up, but frankly it does. . .all the time. When you get right down to it, any time you sit across a table from a cop wearing a thigh-rig, his pistol is . .ideally situated to knee-cap you.

. . .and we seem to have a pistol in these holsters with less trustworthy fail-safes than the half-cock notch on hand-fitted British army flintlocks from the 1750's.

CAD-CAM and MIM boys - they're the FUTURE!

Actually properly designed CAD/CAM is, and allows for far better tolerances than paw paw cranking lathe and mill handles.

[GrapeApe]

CAD/CAM = good
MIM, not so much IMO

[CPJ 2.0]

Proper use and design is key.


Ruger revolver frames don’t have any issues.

[GrapeApe]

I still trust a solid milled piece more than a molded MIM one
I've had one firearm part failure that "killed" a defensive weapon I used for HD.
MIM hammer snapped on a FNC carbine I bought just before the AWB.( https://gundigest.com/military-firearms/fn-fnc ) I stupidly sold it, but did at 4x my cost. So maybe not so stupidly.

[GrapeApe]

Proper use and design is key.


Ruger revolver frames don’t have any issues.

Investment casting is different than MIM

MIM is powder with a binder that is molded, then heating to the point of burning off the binder and fusing the metal together
Investment casting is pouring molten metal into a mold ("lost wax" in Ruger's case. Where the mold is a wax mock up, packed into sand, where it burns off when introduced to the HOT molten metal)

[CPJ 2.0]

Fair point.


But proper design and application makes fine MIM parts. Not parts made in India from ground up brake rotors.


Lathe/mill insert tooling is made by sintering metals, and a lathe inserts are precise to a level 5 times what a gun part would be.

Sig simply cheapes out, had a poop design they don’t want to admit.

[GrapeApe]

Fair point.


But proper design and application makes fine MIM parts. Not parts made in India from ground up brake rotors.


Lathe/mill insert tooling is made by sintering metals, and a lathe inserts are precise to a level 5 times what a gun part would be.

Sig simply cheapes out, had a poop design they don’t want to admit.

Can't disagree with any of those points

[Japhy]

July 21, 2025, memo for Air Force Global Strike Command (AFGSC) makes clear all AFGSC personnel are to pause use of Sig Sauer’s M18 pistol.
The M18 is a Sig Sauer P320 variant.
The memo comes in response to an “incident at F.E. Warren AFB.” Personnel are to be armed with M4 rifles instead of the M18 pistol while the investigation is ongoing.

Follow up: the incident T Warren AFB was a single fatality not much more detail

[Bigslug]

Actually properly designed CAD/CAM is, and allows for far better tolerances than paw paw cranking lathe and mill handles.

John Browning designs a pistol in 1911 with cardboard cutouts thumb-tacked to a cork-board, and that pistol can be used to beat an enemy to death while fully loaded, if for some reason you don't want to make the noise.

After over a century of supposed learning and improvement, a pencil neck geek designs the P320 with 3D animations on his laptop, and it will apparently kill its owner by flexing the juncture between the slide and frame.

I gotta go with paw paw in this case.

[CPJ 2.0]

Notice I said *properly*.

[Bigslug]

BTW, some are trying to blame Safariland because "all the discharges are in Safariland holsters." But they're not.

If it was holster related, wouldn't it also affect Glocks, along with the other striker fired pistol???

The simple truth is we really don't know yet.

The Glock has an uncocked striker when at rest, which is also blocked from forward travel by a pretty idiot-simple firing pin safety, and held back by the trigger bar, which is also held UP into engagement with the firing pin by the trigger housing until pulled all the way back, AND it has its famous trigger tab safety that keeps the trigger locked forward unless something presses on that centrally-located tab. ALSO, one of Glock's inspection points is to check striker/trigger bar engagement with a cutaway slide cover plate in place for observation. That engagement typically only gets out of whack when Bubba starts messing with things. There's a solid amount of redundancy to prevent a bang until you want a bang. Even when the .40 cal was beating up our Gen 3's we never had a questionable discharge due to a mechanical. Zee and I are very much on the same page here - it's a confidence-inspiring beast. The Gen 5 even more so.

You can fire a P320 with about the same 5.5 to 6 pounds of rearward force, WITHOUT having to be centered up on the trigger.

So, assuming we gave Sig the benefit of the doubt and that the triggers somehow ARE being pulled by some interference from NUMEROUS holsters out there in the world, we then STILL have to look at possible issues like trigger-guard design. Maybe also the mechanisms responsible for biasing the trigger forward. Maybe the trigger's getting a partial pull from something, and a final wiggle and jiggle pushes it over the edge.

One thing with the potential to give us all fits is that Sig is molding a different grip. . .or cutting holes in the slide. . .or doing a different optic cut. . .and calling them the P320, A, B, C, D, and EIEIO. Will all these possible variants lock correctly and safely into these holsters, even assuming the poor, befuddled end user even orders the right one? Damned if I know, but if the trigger IS getting actuated, it is happening WAY too easily and too often to keep saying "THERE AIN'T NOTHING WRONG HERE!"

And if the trigger is NOT being pulled, at least three things have to be simultaneously failing in the fire control system to allow a primer to get hit.

So I think we may have:

A. Faulty design
B. Faulty execution of design.
C. Both A and B.

We round-robined it around the campfire and ordered all our (not issued, personally-purchased) P320's out of the field last week. Some mild disgruntlement, but that mostly ended when we started showing vids and it totally ended with this most recent USAF situation.

It's at the point where if you are aware of this issue and DON'T pull them out of service, you're opening yourself up to a world of grief if somebody has a bad day with one.

[GrapeApe]

Well said, and I'm tickled pink to NOT own one

[shotgunshooter3]

Well said, and I'm tickled pink to NOT own one

I guess my commemorative one will remain a range toy/wall hanger. I should have pushed my unit more aggressively on my revolver idea. Oh well.

[shotgunshooter3]

it's a confidence-inspiring beast. The Gen 5 even more so.

Thread drift here, but what makes the Glock Gen 5 even more confidence inspiring?

[Elk Creek]

it's a confidence-inspiring beast. The Gen 5 even more so.

Thread drift here, but what makes the Glock Gen 5 even more confidence inspiring?

The cool new grip texture?

[Diver43]

Well said, and I'm tickled pink to NOT own one

I guess my commemorative one will remain a range toy/wall hanger. I should have pushed my unit more aggressively on my revolver idea. Oh well.

Im old. I remember when aviators and train conductors were issued a .38 Spcl

[CPJ 2.0]

Sig: Self Inflicted Gunshot

[Elk Creek]

Sig: Self Igniting Gun

[GrapeApe]

No offense SS3

Sig: Some idiot's gun

[Bigslug]

it's a confidence-inspiring beast. The Gen 5 even more so.

Thread drift here, but what makes the Glock Gen 5 even more confidence inspiring?

The firing pin safety got a nice upgrade to include both a more positive engagement interface with the firing pin and a ramp built onto the trigger mechanism housing which keeps it elevated through the full stroke of the slide. The Gen 1-4 system - at least in .40 cal - had a marked tendency for the two parts to chew on each other under the whiplash of recoil to the point of being able to push the firing pin past the safety on a field-stripped function check once they wore past a certain point. Not a super huge cause for alarm because the FP is still held back by the trigger bar, which has its own failsafe, but it shows that they looked at what was a common wear point and addressed it handily.

I think my 17 is on year 5 and there's still no visible wear where the two parts interface.

[PFD45]

it's a confidence-inspiring beast. The Gen 5 even more so.

Thread drift here, but what makes the Glock Gen 5 even more confidence inspiring?

The firing pin safety got a nice upgrade to include both a more positive engagement interface with the firing pin and a ramp built onto the trigger mechanism housing which keeps it elevated through the full stroke of the slide. The Gen 1-4 system - at least in .40 cal - had a marked tendency for the two parts to chew on each other under the whiplash of recoil to the point of being able to push the firing pin past the safety on a field-stripped function check once they wore past a certain point. Not a super huge cause for alarm because the FP is still held back by the trigger bar, which has its own failsafe, but it shows that they looked at what was a common wear point and addressed it handily.

I think my 17 is on year 5 and there's still no visible wear where the two parts interface.

Damn.
What a straight forward answer.
Pretty cool.