Quote:
Originally Posted by CDRODA396
I have pawed the P320 and find it appealing, but haven't shot one, and would love to.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by SF718
RA might as well stick with the M9 since 99% of RA soldiers can barely qualify.. including SOF with an M9.
|
Can't believe I waited this long to try one. I guess I already formed a negative bias due to the price and the trouble with the SEALs. Went to my buddy's gun range today and oh la la, IF the army version has the same trigger then I am 99.99% convinced more soldiers will qualify with pistol using the 320. I have been part of several MTT and soldiers had easier time qualifying once I handed them my national match M9. Still same dimension of regular M9, but good trigger makes a world of difference and can make up for some bad habits i.e. poor follow through.
I confess. I'm a trigger snob. Geisselle national match, SD3G, ALG AKT, 1911 national match, Beretta national match, and endless hours and $$$ tinkering with the glock trigger until it is as close to the 1911 national match as possible with the pretravel, weight, and overtravel. I am also excited about the upcoming CZ P10c with all the trigger rave reviews.
Still, I am impressed with the out-of-the box Sig 320 compact trigger. It has that same fat trigger as P226 so I was expecting the 226 pull and reset, but whoa...No overtravel without any trigger job, very little take up, and very short reset. Crisp break, and 3 smallest iterations your finger can make with both the squeeze and reset. Not to Walther PPQ trigger level, but sure beats the hyped HK VP9. I have handled the Beretta submission as well, and unfortunately no comparison with the SIG trigger.
I hope I'll be part of the MTT with the transition to the 320. I look forward to a solid reception and increased qualifications/proficiency.
Next I want to see if the AMU armorers can make the Sig320 shoots <2 inches at 50 yards. Of the various striker fired pistol they tried, only the XD was modifiable to that standard!