Not real familiar with handguns but doing some research on first purchase. I am 58 and have done a very little shooting over the years but I can see whats on the horizon. Came across the Sig P320and it seems like a good place to start due to Sig quality, price and changeability. Something to grow into. Does anyone have experience or opinion on the changeability affecting the fitment or quality after shooting thousands of rounds through it. Art
Sig P320 Questions
1 - 13 of 13 Posts
Joined
·
18 Posts
The P320 is a great platform at a decent price. It is a solid performer with great accuracy. The changeability and fit is very good. My issue is that Sig wants to much money for the change over parts, mostly a barrel and slide. IMO don't buy the 320 for the changeability. The p250 has the same changeability for less $$$$. Never the less the option is there if you want it.
I've shot the p320 several times, it's a quality gun. I didn't like it enough to buy. I went with a Cz p07 duty. For me I would rather buy a second or third gun than swap parts for carrying or caliber. I don't think it's practical or cost effective, but it's not my gun either, so its up to personal preference. My suggestion would be to try and find a range that is having an shooting expo and shoot as many as you can and find the perfect gun for you. I wouldn't buy a gun that you need to tie up money to fit to you, when there are so many options for quality hand guns in every size and shape imaginable. The only thing I didn't like about the CZ was I couldn't swap the grip, but it already fit me like a glove, so I was OK with that.
Joined
·
3,008 Posts
I love the Glock platform. The 26 is pretty small. You're going to have a steeper learning curve for shooting it well, but that's not insurmountable. My advice is shoot a lot of lighter bullet loads, as recoil will be slightly less pronounced. Work with the pistol as much as you can and get comfortable with the Glock trigger.
You might consider saving up for a larger pistol (perhaps a used Law Enforcement Glock 9mm like a 17?) To use for practice, as the bigger gun will operate the same as the smaller one, but be more pleasurable to shoot for extended periods.
You might consider saving up for a larger pistol (perhaps a used Law Enforcement Glock 9mm like a 17?) To use for practice, as the bigger gun will operate the same as the smaller one, but be more pleasurable to shoot for extended periods.
Joined
·
2,942 Posts
Practice drawing it at home from your holster without bullets in it, but with the slide racked. A Glock's safety is really no safety at all since it's on the trigger. If you draw stupidly (booger hook on the bang switch) without practice and you're in a life/death situation you're gonna have a bad time. If you can draw it easily from where you would normally concealed carry without dry firing it then you're set. Practice makes perfect and in a scenario where your life depends on being perfect you don't want to screw it up.
This is one of the main reasons I went with a Springfield XD over a Glock. The grip safety isn't an inconvenience and makes it less likely for there to be an accidental discharge.
This is one of the main reasons I went with a Springfield XD over a Glock. The grip safety isn't an inconvenience and makes it less likely for there to be an accidental discharge.
Joined
·
3,008 Posts
The key to good technique with a Glock or any other trigger-shoe safety pistol is to have an index point for your fingertip, which is not the trigger. I learned this from a police trainer, and it's a perfect technique. When drawing the pistol, find some comfortable point along the side of the frame where your trigger finger can rest and have a distinct, noticeable tactile sensation, so you know you're on the index point without looking. I've used the serrated takedown slider on some pistols, screw heads on others, and the butt end of a round pin protruding on others. Just something to train your finger to go to every time. If you're in a life and death situation, your finger will go there, and you'll have to consciously think "finger on the trigger" but that's a good thing, I'm told.
I've taken to indexing with all firearms now. It's a good habit not to finger the trigger until your ready to shoot, regardless.
I've taken to indexing with all firearms now. It's a good habit not to finger the trigger until your ready to shoot, regardless.
Joined
·
2,942 Posts
100% agree and you should never have your finger on the trigger unless the gun is going to be shot, period. All other times index finger should be straight along the gun above the trigger (wherever you decide is best feel). Mine has a sort of 1/4 cylindrical indentation right above the housing that my finger is just slightly larger than. If I can feel the entire indentation I know I'm nowhere near that trigger.
Since this is his first purchase and it's a Glock I figured I'd mention practicing it since a lot of people don't think about it. Even if you think it's dumb, practice practice practice. If the range lets you draw from a holster (probably not) practice that and then shooting after you've gotten a feel for drawing without bullets.
Joined
·
559 Posts
Sigs are nice... so many choices, options. Suggest you search the AR15 forums for experience from owners, and search Chuck Hawks - a good resource for handgun and rifle reviews.
I have 3 Bushmasters, 2 of which are older LE carbine trade-ins that were produced in the ME plant, which is now run by Windham Weaponry (former owners of Bushmaster, and same tooling). New production is in Ilion, NY - traditional home of Remington Arms. The Bushmaster XM-15s are well built, to say the least. I don't care for their new polymer "Carbon 15."
Since you are looking at Ruger, take a look at their Mini-14 "Ranch Rifle." It's modeled after the famous M1/M14 platform. Not as customizable as an AR-15, but they are great fun, and have lots of variants - blued, stainless, wood stocks, composite stocks, etc. Earlier models were said to have accuracy problems, but Ruger made manufacturing changes in the mid-2000's to improve that (heavier barrel near the front handguard is the easy way to visually tell the updated model). If you get one, suggest you get it chambered in 5.56 NATO, not .223 (Ruger makes both chamberings). If the rifle is chambered in 5.56, you can shoot either that or .223. If it's chambered in .223, you shouldn't shoot 5.56 due to likelihood of higher chamber pressures than designed-for.
Have fun!
I have 3 Bushmasters, 2 of which are older LE carbine trade-ins that were produced in the ME plant, which is now run by Windham Weaponry (former owners of Bushmaster, and same tooling). New production is in Ilion, NY - traditional home of Remington Arms. The Bushmaster XM-15s are well built, to say the least. I don't care for their new polymer "Carbon 15."
Since you are looking at Ruger, take a look at their Mini-14 "Ranch Rifle." It's modeled after the famous M1/M14 platform. Not as customizable as an AR-15, but they are great fun, and have lots of variants - blued, stainless, wood stocks, composite stocks, etc. Earlier models were said to have accuracy problems, but Ruger made manufacturing changes in the mid-2000's to improve that (heavier barrel near the front handguard is the easy way to visually tell the updated model). If you get one, suggest you get it chambered in 5.56 NATO, not .223 (Ruger makes both chamberings). If the rifle is chambered in 5.56, you can shoot either that or .223. If it's chambered in .223, you shouldn't shoot 5.56 due to likelihood of higher chamber pressures than designed-for.
Have fun!
Joined
·
105 Posts
I know this is an old thread, but figured I'd throw some insight in as well.
The P320 is solid firearm, but as mentioned, the conversion kits for the barrel and slide are expensive and the original model had a sloppy trigger that most people swapped out with the Apex flat trigger. I own one in 9mm with all grip modules and slide configurations. The new version X5 comes with an updated trigger that you can also retrofit into the older pistols.
The Glock 19, 17 and 26 (9mm) are all great firearms and have a proven track record from multiple police departments, federal agencies and world wide military use that is unsurpassed. I personally don't like the 26, for a smaller frame I chose the Glock 43, but most of the time I either carry the 19 or 17. The 26 has a lot of failures to feed and failure to function with new shooters due to the shorter grip and slide because the shooters tend to not hold the firearm properly and get muzzle flip.
Just my thoughts as a Glock and Sig Armorer, US Marine, NYC LEO and competitive shooter.
The P320 is solid firearm, but as mentioned, the conversion kits for the barrel and slide are expensive and the original model had a sloppy trigger that most people swapped out with the Apex flat trigger. I own one in 9mm with all grip modules and slide configurations. The new version X5 comes with an updated trigger that you can also retrofit into the older pistols.
The Glock 19, 17 and 26 (9mm) are all great firearms and have a proven track record from multiple police departments, federal agencies and world wide military use that is unsurpassed. I personally don't like the 26, for a smaller frame I chose the Glock 43, but most of the time I either carry the 19 or 17. The 26 has a lot of failures to feed and failure to function with new shooters due to the shorter grip and slide because the shooters tend to not hold the firearm properly and get muzzle flip.
Just my thoughts as a Glock and Sig Armorer, US Marine, NYC LEO and competitive shooter.
Thought I'd revisit this thread now that the Army has selected a version of the Sig P320 for their new sidearm. Has any one tried any of the versions sent to the army? I saw that Glock's entry which was not selected in now in the marketplace. Art
1 - 13 of 13 Posts
Join the discussion
Join now to ask and comment!