Bitch what

Your shit keyholed, man. Simple as that.

did it only do it once? If so, I suppose it was just a funky round. If it repeated, then something might be fugged with your gun.

File: image.jpg (21KB, 640x173px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 640x173px

>>34453151
I'm aware, but I am pretty sure it isn't supposed to happen 50 rounds in from a brand new gun.

post the ammo you used

Because P320s are shit guns

>>34453139
Disassemble gun, look down barrel. Does it have a ring? Maybe a dark area where it looks like the bullet rubs as it leaves the barrel? Is the barrel leaded?

>>34453139
looks fine to me.
bullet went into the general direction you were aiming.
remember: these arent high-precision benchrest rifles

>>34453139
P320 BTFO'd

>>34453550
Sig has already started the damage control. How can they ever recover?

>>34453139
Those swiss experts sure know how to make an effective and large entry wound. The advanced shublieniblien pistol techs make the bullet tumble just before the target

>>34453606
>swiss

File: IMG_1198.jpg (84KB, 640x587px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 640x587px

>>34453139
It's not the gun
It's not the ammo
The bullet hit the ground in front of the target
Bullet ricocheted, tumbled and hit the board/target
Shooter was flinching is my guess

>>34453752
Sig pls stop. This is just embarassing. Try owning up to a mistake every once in a while.

>>34453752
He was using overpressure load with his limpwrist

Post a pic of your crown.

Most likely an issue with the crowning

File: Experiment setup.jpg (141KB, 528x960px) Image search: [Google]

141KB, 528x960px

sweet, a keyhole thread. got this after setting up 10' thick chunks of wood in front of the target to see what silver bear would do outta me PTR. Was my first time seeing key holing so it was kind of neat for me

File: 308 keyhole.jpg (83KB, 528x960px) Image search: [Google]

83KB, 528x960px

>>34454782

>>34453139
>p320
found your problem

>>34453139
>buy exetershit
>complain
it's like this is some masochistic fetish

>>34453139
The p320 is disposable garbage
You were meme'd

>>34454848
Do we have any actual quality data, like percent of sales that require warranty service? I'd like to know the odds of getting a lemon from anywhere, but companies usually don't publish that kind of data, or package it into press releases.

File: 1495118385900.gif (881KB, 200x232px) Image search: [Google]

881KB, 200x232px

>buying sig

>>34455251
Mine was an enormous lemon.

>>34454782
>>34454793
How far away were you? Looks like they bounced off the ground. I had that happen once with my K31 and I realized it hit a snowdrift before making it to the target.

>>34455251
At the shop were I work we sell 20 or so P320s a week these days.

Roughly half of them I wouldn't buy. Shit barrel fit, shit extractor fit, loose mags, machining marks on the slide, etc. It seems like the X series have more attention paid to them and they have a higher hit rate.

I have shot a few and they are decent but not as reliable as I'd like. I will probably keep an X5 around for goofing off at competition shoots once we fill all our customer reservations, just because they are a really food out of the box setup and reliability isn't too big a deal in that application.

>>34455304
Sadly, case studies are not data. I'm looking for something that evaluates the company's quality performance over a year. I'm actually looking at sig's financial report at the moment, but I'm not well versed in financial jargon.

>>34455414
Well, that's sort of statistics.

Forgive me if this seems like a dumb question, for I am young and inexperienced in the ways of life: If a customer asks to inspect a firearm before purchasing it, do you let them? Also, does Sig (or any other manufacturer) give you any way to send back firearms you think are of poor quality?

Post a pic of your pistol, OP. Fifty bucks it's actually a Glock.

File: 1498016968777.jpg (112KB, 810x1024px) Image search: [Google]

112KB, 810x1024px

>>34453139

>>34456227
This is the sort of thing I'm on about. I feel like the lack of a bore could have been noticed at the gun store had the customer OR sales attendant picked up the gun and inspected it. If we're having rumors of industry-wide quality issues, surely product inspection would be acceptable, no?

File: GlockPerfection.png (137KB, 1000x618px) Image search: [Google]

137KB, 1000x618px

>ITT

I'm just memeing, I guess Sig had some QC issues pop up in recent batches? I bought my P320 like 2 and a half years ago, so it works amazingly well (never even had an issue with it stovepiping or anything out of about 3 thousand rounds).

>>34456366
You can find quality complaints for new Sigs going back to early May this year in internet forums. The NJ state PD filed their suit with Sig in April, but that was related to a 2014 batch of p229s. I don't know if the police get new guns faster than the public do, but this might make sense. Alternatively, this might contribute to a conclusion that Sig's been on the downhill for the past three years.

>>34455419
even if you found it you wouldn't know what you're looking at

>>34456660
You're absolutely correct.

File: 1458940310188.png (13KB, 657x527px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 657x527px

>>34453139
>He paid money for an Exeter shit-shower

>>34455251
Yeah, I'm sure Sig is going to publish their numbers on what percent of handguns they sell get returned for warranty work. If that's the only cold hard proof you'll accept then you're likely to never accept any manufacturer as shitty. You can't see the forest for the trees. Sig is shit.

>>34456737
At no point did I say that Sig quality had not declined; all I expressed was a desire to know how much. I'm going to explain why, and it's going to be long form because you clearly don't read enough.

We just had (a shitty) thread that raised concern that quality in general is slipping across the industry. While most of the posters had strange ideas about what quality is (most posters couldn't get past "paying more"), there were legitimate concerns in things like declining fit and finish consistency (none listed, CZ comes to mind), bad screw treatment (didn't say who), and worsening triggers (10/22, but also M&P). These concerns relate to the amount of care put into making a product correctly. I am trying to lead toward consistency as a measure of quality, rather than appealing to "niceness." We can measure variance with statistical methods and agree on what we're measuring, but we can not measure niceness.

I'll use the Glock trigger to explain: Colion Noir likes how easy it is for him to understand what phase a Glock trigger is in (take up, creep, break, reset). In any Glock review, he notes that every stock Glock he shoots has the same trigger feel with roughly the same weight. It isn't a hand polished single action trigger that has an overall motion of less than 0.125 inches and virtually no takeup or creep, but it is consistent from gun to gun. I personally tried out a G20 and a G19 in the same day, and the two triggers felt very similar to me as well. Combine a force gauge with a position transducer and you can measure a bunch of Glock triggers to evaluate force at a given displacement. You can then compare the variance in trigger pull metrics like weight and thresholds for every trigger phase. Much more easily, you could take a bunch of Sig barrels and measure how different the amount of total runout along the bore or the angle of the feed ramp is from barrel to barrel. In either case, a wild variance indicates something is wrong.

>cont.

>>34457634
To generalize, quality could be better described as the control of variance when making a product. The point that struck me the most from the NJPD Sig lawsuit story was when Sig QA tested the pistols, they found them to be wildly outside of specification. Essentially, it's not the engineer's fault the guns don't work if the guns are out of spec. It took Sig two years to conclude that variance in barrel production was to blame for the feeding and ejection issues the NJPD lot was having, and by that point NJPD had chosen to buy Glocks instead. Consumers have reported sloppy slide cuts, sloppy component fit, and sloppy muzzle crowns (which can cause keyholing) in forums like arfcom and sigtalk for most modern Sigs.

This ultimately translates to the consumer as "lemon or not." Does the individual specimen work, or no? This can be measured, if somebody cared to. The odds of getting a lemon could then be used to objectively score a product's quality. Sig, and likely any other manufacturer, won't give out any data they don't have to report by law. However, gun stores do have the benefit of being able to track how much a particular product comes back with issues, and they may not be bound by an agreement to keep quiet about it. Gun stores have a stake in being able to sell quality (consistent) products if the demand is there. This plays into the point that inspecting a gun before you buy it might need to come back as a thing people do.

In the same vein of statistical validity, I'd really like it if T&E pistols were not a thing. A lot of gun reviewers will end up getting the same specimen to test. I'd rather the reviewers pick the gun from a retail shelf so we have a more random sample in reviews, even if this will cost a shitload more. This would also deal with the possibility that manufacturers aren't being dishonest with the T&E guns and checking them for function before sending them out.

>>34453139
>Buys sig
>Surprised when it shoots sigways

>>34453139
Did you see anymore than just that one profile? If it's a problem with the barrel or crown, you would expect to see more.

If it's the only one, I'd keep an eye out for a repeat offender, but I figure >>34453752 is right and you jerked the trigger.

I was going to buy a 2002 sig p229 (serial number AC163xxxx. Slide says Exeter, railless frame.
Thoughts other than "just buy a glock lol"?

>>34457730
Try and find out when Ron J Cohen moved from Kimber to Sig and see if your mfg date falls before or after.

>>34457766
Wikipedia says he joined in 2004

According to this thread it was probably made sometime in 1993, not 2002.
http://sigforum.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/430601935/m/7320040262

Exeter slide, German frame

>>34457835
General firearm inspection routine before purchasing still applies, but on the basis of "predates the general manager of Kimber moving to Sig" you're good.

File: Wolf 303 Keyhole.jpg (387KB, 1536x2048px) Image search: [Google]

387KB, 1536x2048px

>>34454782
>>34454793

I can contribute too. Don't put Wolf .303 into a 2-groove No 4 Mk 1, because this shit happens.