Army chooses Sig
Moderator: carlson1
Re: Army chooses Sig
Owning a Military grade weapon has a certain appeal.
Liberty''s Blog
"Today, we need a nation of Minutemen, citizens who are not only prepared to take arms, but citizens who regard the preservation of freedom as the basic purpose of their daily life and who are willing to consciously work and sacrifice for that freedom." John F. Kennedy
"Today, we need a nation of Minutemen, citizens who are not only prepared to take arms, but citizens who regard the preservation of freedom as the basic purpose of their daily life and who are willing to consciously work and sacrifice for that freedom." John F. Kennedy
Re: Army chooses Sig
I was in North Little Rock, Arkansas, this week, and one gun shop had a new Sig P320C Gen 1 for $509, and another shop had a Gen 2 for $599.99. My Subcompact 320 Gen 1 cost $549.99 last October in Tyler, TX. My Sig P250C cost $399 last April at the same store. A lady friend in Arkansas liked my 250 better than my 320 because it was similar to the Glock 19 she shot to qualify for her CHL. She didn't like the short grip on the subcompact, but I like it just fine. IMHO, I love them both. I also have the SIG357 caliber conversion kit for the 250. I'm in love with the SIG357 kit.growlerVII wrote:Looks like the idiocy has started. I'll explain:
A little bit ago I made the decision to trade off a pistol for a p320. I'd been looking at them for awhile, hemming g and hawing. Made the leap to put my other pistol up for trade (5 days before the army's announcement) then all the p320's just disappeared. Saw a full sized used model for $1000 today. Lord, I hope it was a joke.
SIGFan43
Where am I going, and why am I in this handbasket?
Where am I going, and why am I in this handbasket?
Re: Army chooses Sig
With the exception of the high bore axis, I like everything about them. Unfortunately, high bore axis isn't something you can fix with aftermarket parts. On the other hand, I found the difference in muzzle flip to be minor compared to a Glock. I will continue shooting (and carrying) Glocks, but the SIG 320 is definitely another favorite of mine.Abraham wrote:What makes the Sig 320 great?
Or, are they just so-so?
I don't fear guns; I fear voters and politicians that fear guns.
-
treadlightly
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1335
- Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2015 1:17 pm
Re: Army chooses Sig
Very reliable, very accurate. Trigger is good by modern double-action, creep-y striker fire standards. Comparing to a Glock and expressing personal, flawed opinion, it's a much more solid gun, more steel on steel. The grip angle is natural to me, where the Glock's ergos are not. I'd rather carry the grip angle I'm used to than reprogram.
Depending on attire and signage, being genetically toxic and politically deplorable, I carry either my P320 subcompact, a Kahr PM9, a Kimber compact 1911, or a helpless expression.
I really like the P320. Not a beginner's gun, particularly without a safety, but nice for respectful, safe carry. I continually tell myself I'm not "professional" enough to take anything about any gun for granted, particularly the P320.
Depending on attire and signage, being genetically toxic and politically deplorable, I carry either my P320 subcompact, a Kahr PM9, a Kimber compact 1911, or a helpless expression.
I really like the P320. Not a beginner's gun, particularly without a safety, but nice for respectful, safe carry. I continually tell myself I'm not "professional" enough to take anything about any gun for granted, particularly the P320.