Ohioans For Concealed Carry Discussion Forums

The Gun:
Ruger SR22, black and FDE

Purchased new. Took it home, stripped it,cleaned and lubed it (not too much) including mags which were pretty greasy for some reason, no polishing or sight adjustment, just out of the box & into trial by fire.

Shooting:
First time shooting it today. Daughter also in tow, her first time shooting too; so I let her help me christen it. As such, I wasn't too caught up shooting to test it for accuracy. Most of my time was spent coaching her, going through function & safety checks and getting a feel for this piece's characteristics.

My questions for this little gun today were; how reliable are you and what kind of ammo do you like to eat? I can test it for accuracy later once I get ammo questions answered and become more comfortable with it. I mean, early impressions are everything and really; until I get a few hundred rounds through it there's no point in stressing over accuracy just yet, imo, ymmv.

Daughter had no trouble with the gun. It was easy to handle in her little hands and it did not misbehave, even with her beginner's grip. So, good initial experience for her. In fact, she started out unimpressed but warmed up to it and was having fun by the end (but she still wants a crossbow ).

When I shot it, I was very pleased and would like to have stayed longer and shot it some more - a lot more! Easy to handle (well, it's a 22!) comfortable grip even if smallish & good safety systems. DA pull, did not waste much time on that, it's not great. However, I was able to keep my groups to a quarter size hole with one flier out of ~50 that still has me scratching my head; oh well, nothing's perfect.

Bottomline:
Great little plinker, actually lots of fun! As far as 22's go, this one is easily 9/10. I have to ding it one for its disappointing DA pull. Unacceptable Ruger, but thanks for trying. The fact that it ate most of the ammo I fed it with no problem was a pleasant surprise because these 22 autos can be so very picky. But, now that I know exactly what to feed it; I expect many pleasant plinking trips to the range in my future with this little gun.

Best ammo - no fte/ftf, in no particular order:
CCI Mini Mag HP 36gr. 1260fps - excellent performance
Remington 550box HP 36gr. 1280 fps - flawless performance
CCI Velocitor 40gr. 1435 fps - same
Remington Target Rifle (no data) - same
CCI Stinger 32gr. 1640 fps - awesome with some brilliant muzzle flash! (Q: would I be wise to avoid this ammo in the future to preserve the function of the gun?)

Bad ammo, bad:
Federal 325 box 40 gr. 1200 fps - wouldn't extract 60% of the time
Winchester 333 box 36 gr. 1280 fps - ditto, guess I continue to be optimistic with this brand, but it just disappoints on every single platform:/


If you like to read reviews, hope you enjoyed. If you're considering purchasing one, I hope this helps you decide one way or the other.
Thanks!

I took my new lc9s pro to the range today and couldn't be more pleased. I've had almost 80 pistols since getting my CHL so I can truly say I've just about tried every carry gun. I continually got smaller and lighter as pocket carry became necessary because of back issue. My back muscles spasm with any type of belt or pressure around the mid section. I now resort to suspenders. The Shield is an excellent gun but not a true pocket gun. I bought a Glock 42 recently and realized it had a 9 lb. trigger which many people complain about.
I had a chance to try the trigger on the lc9s recently and couldn't believe the difference compared to the lc9. I bought my lc9s pro at the Canton gun show for $ 349 plus tax. I started at 5 yards today just as a reliability check. I used Remington and Blazer Brass ball ammo and Hornady Duty HP with no failures.
I started slow and with perfect breathing, squeezing not jerking the trigger and not anticipating the shot I was able to put rounds on top of each other at 5 yards and again at 10 yards. Then I decided to see what would result if I tried my " convenience store " scenario where I shoot rapidly as I feel I would in a shootout situation where I am nervous. Of course replicating adrenaline is impossible. All seven rounds struck the head of my target. I was sold.
This gun is light enough and small enough for pocket carry. Feels great in my small hand and recoil was very manageable.
This may be one gun I'll have to hang onto.

Taurus pt111 g2 black 9mm

I've been contemplating getting a Taurus pt111 g2 but wanted to actually fire one first. I recently had the opportunity to try out a range rental. The trigger on a pt111 is a little different than most striker fired pistols. Some reviews of it online call it a DA/SA, but it's really more like a SA/DA. A traditional DA/SA (like a Beretta M9 or S&W M59, Walther P38, etc) is a long moderate to heavy DA pull, then after the first shot is SA. With the pt111 when you chamber a round it's in SA mode, and stays that way unless a round fails to go off. (like a light primer strike) Then it reverts to DA and has second strike capability, unlike most striker fired pistols. Even in SA mode however, the trigger has a very light (perhaps 2 lbs) takeup before getting to the back of the movement, where the trigger has what felt like on the range gun a short chrisp 6 lb. pull. One thing I don't like about traditional DA/SA handguns is for me having to shift my grip to deal with one long trigger and heavy pull, and subsequent shots being different. The take up with the Taurus is so light however it's not an issue. My finger's natural curl takes up the slack without any effort, and in good finger position (for me) to pull the real pull at the back.

On many review videos the reviewers let the trigger all the way out for follow up shots, but that's not needed with the pt111. All that's needed for the 2nd and subsequent shots is just a short slight release, and the gun is ready to fire again, making follow up shots or double taps very fast.

Although it has a frame mounted safety, you don't have to use it. I tend to prefer to have a frame mounted safety on a semi auto, as the semis I'm most practiced with is the 1911 type handguns. The pt111 has the blade safety on the trigger (like the glock) and also a firing pin block, but should something besides the finger get into the trigger guard area and depress the trigger (as has happened with other types of striker fired pistols) with the safety up it won't fire. Using the safety was easy for my hands. Some people claim that during a real life potential shooting situation you'll forget to push the safety off, or put it back on when reholstering, and maybe that was true for them, but for me I know that wasn't the case. I think the key is regular practice with whatever type of firearm you have in order to properly operate it in the manner you want.

Mag release was okay for my hands, empty or full mags dropped free easily.

The pt111 doesn't have a magazine disconnect, so it has the ability to fire a round if needed, like during a tactical reload.

I shook the pt111 both empty and loaded to see if it any rattling, none was heard. I had heard loading the 12th round was tough, and it is. Ammo used was Aguila 9mm ball ammo, just 50 rounds. I fired it 2 handed strong hand, one handed strong, 1 handed weak, no malfunctions. I did slow and rapid fire, and distances from 5 yards to 25 yards. The best group I got was a slow fire 3 shot group at 5 yards of about 1/2 inch, basically one big hole, slightly lower than my point of aim. I got about a 2.5 inch group at 15 yards, lower and left to point of aim by about 2 inches. The worst was a fast fire group at 25 yards but I kept all the shots on the target graphic (6 inch) with most of the rounds ending up slightly lower and left of center Not very good, but that is more a reflection of my decreased shooting ability than the handgun. In addition I don't do as well with all white 3 dot sights as traditional sights.

After I fired the pt111 I tried out a Ruger SR9c, and prior to this had tried a Glock G26. My accuracy results were pretty much the same with all 3 pistols. The slow fire accuracy was slightly better with the Glock for me, but then it had a better sight setup than the other two IMO. The difference wasn't great enough to hardly be relevant for defensive purposes. The main difference was the Ruger and Taurus were more comfortable to shoot, particularly rapid fire, but they're both longer in the grip area also. It wasn't just the felt recoil, I felt like my hand was getting pinched when firing where the mag fits into the grip. For size the Glock wins hands down, only due to the shorter grip. I'm going to try to practice more with the G26, and also want to try out the M&P9c and the XD mod 2 compact version in the future. The bottom line though for the test was that the pt111 seemed to function as well as the other guns in it's class, yet is less than half the price. Obviously 50 rounds of fmj ball isn't a reliability test, and reliability is the brands main issue, but at least when firing it I didn't notice any major issues with that particular model.

Bersa Thunder in .32 acp.

Bought this gun low miles used. It is much like many previous Bersa models, DA/SA semiautos which take their cues from the Walther PPK. For me this gun will hopefully be an enjoyable plinker, as I was sitting on a good many .32 auto rounds these last few years and had nothing to fire them in. So, the fact that it's not got the greatest DA trigger pull isn't that bad a thing.

It came with two ten round (factory) magazines, they extend out the bottom of the well just a little bit, but the base plates are extended so you get a good grip on the frame with no gap. Adds a bit of height to the gun, but I'm very unlikely to ever worry about using it for concealed carry, so it doesn't matter.

I was easily making head shots on an IPSC target at ten yards at decent speed. Definitely accurate enough that will guarantee more fun at the range. Ran 50 rounds through it the first session, another 50 a few days later. Totally reliable.

Another Taurus Pt-111 G2 black 9mm

Not long after test firing a Taurus PT-111 G2 pistol at a gun range, I had the opportunity to purchase a never fired NIB PT-111. Everything I said in the first range review (of the range rental gun) equally applies to this handgun, like the unusual way the SA/DA trigger works, and the light take up, followed by the real trigger pull at the rear of the trigger guard. Instead of repeating characteristics of the first review, I'll just mention what is different about this particular pistol. So far I've fired 575 rounds through it, with no malfunctions. Unlike the range gun, I fired a variety of ammo types, 115 & 124 grain ball, a variety of JHP and silvertip, some standard pressure, some +p, some 80 grain glaser and magsafe defender ammo left over from the mid 80's, some norinco from the 90's. The only kind of ammo I didn't shoot was aluminum or steel case. I also didn't fire any 380 acp through it, like a friend of mine accidentally did with his PT111. Surprisingly his gun functioned okay 3 out of every 4 shots even with the wrong ammo. He shot 24 rounds of 380 through it before realizing what he had done, grabbed the wrong box of ammo to go to the range with.

I also did a cold weather simulation by getting it extra dirty, putting it in a zero degree freezer for 24 hours, then fired it again. I wasn't able to measure the trigger pull on the range gun, but this gun seemed slightly lighter than the range rental. When I measured it the striker activated at a little over 5 1/2 pounds. I think I read somewhere the specs for this gun are supposed to be 6.2 - 6.8 lbs, but I'm not complaining to Taurus about it. I've not had any light primer strikes, even with some military surplus ammo that I've been told has hard primers. I also tested out some 18 round magazines designed for the Sig P226 that work just fine in the PT111, although they stick out the end of the grip a little bit.

At 5 yards with 115 grain perfecta the holes basically overlap each other in a 3 or 5 shot group. At 15 yards offhand the groups are between 2 1/4 to 3 1/2 inches slow fire, depending on the ammo, and whether my disability was acting up at the time. The best group happened to be with some older Hydrashocks, although the newer Gold dots were a very close second. Someone with better eyesight and steadier hands could probably have done better. My main concern though with it being a Taurus was reliability, and so far it's been as reliable as other handguns costing twice or even three times the price. Not that it makes any difference in a defensive gun, but it's a nice looking gun also, at least as nice looking as it's direct competition in that style of a handgun. Not ugly or clunky looking like a Jimenez or Hi point. If someone is looking for a reliable low cost handgun, it seems to fit the bill. The main downside at this time is there isn't as many accessories for it as other brands, although the number of available holsters and accessories seems to be going up as time goes by, and it's numbers are increasing in the marketplace. I've never purchased a Taurus before, never been a fan of them due to their previous shoddy QC, but if they continue to put out handguns that are reliable I might have to alter my opinion of them.

M-Quigley wrote:My main concern though with it being a Taurus was reliability, and so far it's been as reliable as other handguns costing twice or even three times the price.

The way I look at it, it doesn't really matter the "street reputation" of any particular gun - it's really more about that n of 1 that's uniquely in your hands.

Look at it from the flip side:

Would any of us be willing to pick up a brand new Glock - regardless of model designation - and pick up a box of ammo and shove it into a holster and start carrying it?

A range toy is one thing, but a defensive weapon and its magazines/ammo should always be vetted.

TSiWRX wrote:

M-Quigley wrote:My main concern though with it being a Taurus was reliability, and so far it's been as reliable as other handguns costing twice or even three times the price.

The way I look at it, it doesn't really matter the "street reputation" of any particular gun - it's really more about that n of 1 that's uniquely in your hands.

Look at it from the flip side:

Would any of us be willing to pick up a brand new Glock - regardless of model designation - and pick up a box of ammo and shove it into a holster and start carrying it?

A range toy is one thing, but a defensive weapon and its magazines/ammo should always be vetted.

That's a very good observation. Had a question though, what is or should be the definition of "vetted"? Obviously it should be test fired with your particular flavor of defensive ammo instead of just practice ball ammo, but what else? One person recently told me that he wouldn't consider it worthy to carry until it's gone 2K rounds without a hitch. I asked him if that's what he did with his Glock, and after a hesitation, said, "Well, no, but it's a Glock" Later that day we participated in a shooting exercise, and his Glock jammed twice, while my Taurus had no malfunctions, even with aftermarket mags designed for a SIG P226.
He swears it's never happened before, and he could be right. He did some kind of modification or add on prior to the exercise, and didn't test it out beforehand. He later jokingly claimed (at least I think it was jokingly ) that it was my fault his gun jammed, that the Taurus was bringing some "bad mojo".

M-Quigley wrote:

TSiWRX wrote:
A range toy is one thing, but a defensive weapon and its magazines/ammo should always be vetted.

Had a question though, what is or should be the definition of "vetted"? Obviously it should be test fired with your particular flavor of defensive ammo instead of just practice ball ammo, but what else? One person recently told me that he wouldn't consider it worthy to carry until it's gone 2K rounds without a hitch. I asked him if that's what he did with his Glock, and after a hesitation, said, "Well, no, but it's a Glock" Later that day we participated in a shooting exercise, and his Glock jammed twice, while my Taurus had no malfunctions, even with aftermarket mags designed for a SIG P226.
He swears it's never happened before, and he could be right. He did some kind of modification or add on prior to the exercise, and didn't test it out beforehand. He later jokingly claimed (at least I think it was jokingly ) that it was my fault his gun jammed, that the Taurus was bringing some "bad mojo".

Ah, so that's the trick, right? Indeed, what is "vetted?"

I don't think it - at least in the context of a Joe/Jane-LawAbidingLegalDefensiveCarry-Citizen manner - needs to be excessively quantified.

Why?

Because just as in the example you mentioned: there's always that possibility that something weird will happen on that 2,001st or even 20,001st round that is just on the level of sheer bad luck.

That said, I think that the person who suggested that he "wouldn't consider it worthy to carry until it's gone 2K rounds without a hitch" was being just a bit disingenuous if he himself had not asked the same of that very same pistol he had in his hands, regardless of the roll-mark or engraving on its side.

I think that everyone will have their own magic number. That mine may not match yours or any other person's, that I don't think is all that important. Rather, it's about that single person having sufficient faith in the tool that's in their hands. My belief is that for us Joes and Janes, the bare minimum we should ask of our defensive weapons is that it - from the condition that it is usually carried or stored-ready in (i.e. however full of pocket-lint, dust-bunnies, pet-hair, etc.) - be able to successfully discharge its resident magazine/cylinder/clip-full of ammo and, if-so-prepared, the user's identified spare ammunition source (to wit: what's the point of that spare ammo, if it won't successfully function in your weapon when you call upon it?), also in the manner that it is usually kept ready.

Now, how many repetitions of that is necessary in order to "trust" that firearm? Hopefully, with that embarrassing outing above, the shooter you wrote of will decide to heed his own words rather than just preach them, but in-reality, every time we shoot that firearm, we're adding some level of stress and wear. So we wrap back to that sentence I led of with: sure, I'd put more trust in a firearm that I've successfully discharged 500 times versus one that I've only managed 1% or even 10% of that - but I also cannot readily see the stresses I've incurred on the gun via even normal use. And yes, routine maintenance should address such problems, but nevertheless, the specter is always going to be there. There's always this counterbalance.

And, of-course, I could say that the XYZ make model ABC caliber 123 firearm that I shoot as a practice/training/range-only tool has successfully discharged 15K rounds and, with regular maintenance, has been "flawless." But does that really guaranty the same of an identical copy of the same firearm - of maybe a tenth of that round-count - that I've reserved for defensive use?

That's a great question, M-Quigley. And while I really don't have a definitive answer, I think that we each owe it to ourselves to really sit down and think about what this "vetting" means to us as individuals, and furthermore, to take the time to truly vet what we carry or have set aside as defensive firearms to the standards that we've deemed acceptable, instead going the way of the shooter that you'd cited.

-----

Since this is the "Range Reports" thread, I'll a recent range experience I had that also serves to illustrate the points I made above:

Last October-November, I'd put together an AR from a stripped lower and pre-built upper (I was going to self-build, but I found exactly what I wanted in a pre-made package by BCM). This particular carbine was going to be my new training beater - built with enough consideration for the weight factor so that I could mount a low-power variable scope on it (I want to try this as a way to potentially circumvent my distance-vision issues) and yet still be within what I thought was reasonable for toting around in a dynamic, multi-day class.

I zeroed it in steps. First at an indoor range a the 25 for the BUISs, then at an outdoor range to both confirm as well as to zero the scope. I wasn't really shooting for groups nor pursuing a true zero - just something that "got me in the ballpark" so that when I did go to class with this rifle, I'm not printing in the berm, outright.

Winter rolls into spring, and I go with a couple of friends (including my good buddy LegoGlock) to a fun range-date, and for the first time, I would get inconsistently inconsistent ( ) FTFeeds with PMags. I had three Gen2 PMags on-hand, and they all were somewhat problematic; two of the three failed to lock into the lower outright, and all were near-impossible to seat on a closed bolt. Another friend's Gen3 PMag 40 functioned just fine, as did my 30-round Lancer L5AWMs (of which I brought two with me), but then my 20-rd. AWMs also failed to lock in. Strangely enough, at the indoor range and by myself the two times before, I'd exclusively used 10-round AWMs, and everything had been just peachy.

Among the three of us, we had 4 ARs at the range for the day, with only my BCM/BAD being the non-vetted unit. My DDM4V5LW complete, LegoGlock's Colt 6920, and our friend's BCM Recce complete with an upper that was pretty much identically spec'ed to mine - all three were proven carbines that had several thousand rounds through each, and had been through multiple multi-day training classes. We were thus able to do a quick and basic troubleshoot by swapping lowers/uppers.

The trouble was isolated to my BAD lower, but none of the three of us could exactly figure out what it was given the limited time we had at the range.

That night, I spent about 10 minutes looking things over, and initially thought that perhaps the aftermarket bolt-catch that I used was out-of-spec. The next day, though, I was able to play around with things a little more, and it then became apparent that instead, it was the magazine catch that was the issue: with this particular lower, spec USGI magazines (I had ten Okay 30-rounders as well as a LMT 30-rounder [which is, in-turn, Okay/NHMGT OE]) latched in without issues, but Lancer L5AWMs were hit-and-miss (my sample size was initially my ten main training/range magazines), particularly when loaded to 28 rds capacity, and PMags (Gen2 30-rounders, also numbering ten total, my secondary training/range mags) were a complete crap-shoot.

I'm all-in for consistency, so I have the same bolt-catch (POF) and mag-release setup on all three of my ARs, with the latter being a Troy unit that's offset on the other side with a BAD extended mag release button. With my other two ARs - the aforementioned DDM4V5LW and a LMT MRP CQB16 - In studying the mag-catch assembly a bit more, I could easily see that the magazine catch, internally, protruded into the body of the magwell noticeably further than the same combination did on my BAD lower.

My first instinct was to cut a bit of threading off of the Troy catch, so that it would thread into the mag release button a bit further, but this turned out to be inconsequential.

Rather, the root of the problem was that the left-hand mag release button of the Troy ambi. catch was interfering with the wider-than-spec'ed body of the BAD Billet Lightweight Lower's outer body cosmetic flaring, essentially levering the entire catch more outward, and thus causing it to fail to latch securely into, particularly, the polymer magazines.

I ended up Dremeling a bit of material off of this lever's contact area with the lower - still leaving plenty to achieve that leveraged action so that it maintains its ability to serve as an ambi magazine release - thus allowing more ingress of the mag catch inside the magwell, which solved the problem.

The next time I went to the range, I was able to prove to my own satisfaction that this was no longer a problem.

So, anyway, that's the long way of saying that vetting isn't necessarily a once-and-done process. I wanted to give this carbine a couple of chances to stretch her legs before I started really beating on her in a class, and it was a good thing that I did, too, because there would have been no way to take the time that I did to get that clarity-of-mind to troubleshoot this, in the middle of a class. That it seemed just fine the two times I'd taken her out previously apparently was just because those particular magazines I used somehow managed to have tolerances sufficient to just make it work.

A few months ago I purchased a Canik TP9SA ( Century Arms ) from a wonderful little place in Massillon called AJ Harris Tactical.
Barrel Length 4.09″
Sights White three-dot ( rear adjustable, and had a vertical line between the 2 rear dots )
Action Striker-fired single-action
External Safety Two-piece trigger safety ( Fairly common I am finding anymore )
Ammo Capacity 18+1 ( have fun squeezing that 18th round in the mag )
Trigger pull weight 5.5 lbs
Included Accessories Two magazines, serpa style general release button OWB holster ( fairly nice actually, but feels a little loose on the gun )
Two backstrap inserts ( neither is for someone with small paddies )
Magazine loader ( never did figure out how to properly use this thing )
This has the under slide rail so popular. There is no external safety besides the trigger, although this model has a push down decocker on the top of the slide by the rear sight. There is a loaded chamber indicator built into the top. Strange setup, quite a novelty.
To reset the pin from decocked to rip roaring and ready to go, move the slide back about half an inch. For those of nimble fingers this can be achieved one handed, but not recommended.
I grabbed 50 rounds to throw down range at 25', and began without cleaning.
First notes: No failures, no misfires, no hiccups. Shot nicely out of the box, but the trigger does have a long pull and reset. I was out of practice, and with the long pull was shooting fairly low left. ( I'm a righty, and have since made corrections. My technique and not the pistol was at fault here )
Took it home, cleaned it up all nice and pretty, installed the larger back strap, and went back out on 3 more occasions, throwing approximately a total of 250 rounds through it.
Take down is fairly straight forward, and can be performed even with a round stuck inside of the barrel if necessary. 2 larger buttons similar to glock; hold the slide back a hair, push down, and slide forward. The nice aspect is it doesn't hurt the fingers if you lose your grip.
Ammo: Blazer brass and remington fmj 115g are easily thrown through.
In those rounds I have had no misfires, hangfires, FTF, squibs, FTE. It worked flawlessly each time. The recoil is minimal, allowing rapid target acquisition. I am happy to note my technique improved and I am shooting decent groupings. ( I'm no marksman, and while I am pleased with my progress, embarassment will keep me from posting pictures )
In closing I would recommend this firearm and platform to anyone. I have seen prices range from 349 to 419. I have since discovered the next generation has been released and have found myself tempted to buy the new one. They did away with the top mount de-cock and trigger safety, but I don't have all the details yet.

Range Report - S&W M&P Shield in 45ACP

A short one, as I am sure everyone has read the particulars on this gun since it was introduced with much fanfare during the NRA Annual meeting. I will focus on hand's on and shooting from this past Monday.

My first impression when I held the gun was with the grip texture built into the frame of the gun. This texture is aggressive, and reminded me of some of the grip tape type of products that are out there. I like a more aggressive texture personally, as it gives me a better grip and tactile feel when using the gun. Having taken TDI's Handgun 1-3 twice during warm weather, I like the better texture from the aspect of sweaty hands having trouble gripping the gun.

The thinner grip of the Shield platform was a little different for me (I am more used to the MP9 and MP9c that I shoot). However, it was still a natural fit to my hands in terms of grip angle and presentation of the gun to the target.

Shooting this gun took a few good shots for me to adjust to it. I had been shooting my MP9 during this range session first, so the difference in recoil between the platforms took a tiny adjustment on the first 2-3 shots.

The biggest adjustment for me was the difference in size of the frame (compared to the MP9) and the additional recoil (compared to my 1911). However, with those adjustments made, I felt good with this gun. I put about 25-30 rounds down range with it (I was shooting with my son, so I wanted to give him some time to shoot) during the session with this gun. Those were tight groups for me, with a few of the rounds finding their way to the edge of existing 45ACP holes from previous shots.


Overall impression from my first session were positive. With more time on the range with it, and when magazines become more readily available, I can foresee this becoming a daily carry gun. The slim profile can fit IWB nicely, and the capacity is the same as the Sig P938 I carry IWB when I want deeper concealment.

When a revolver guy who favors .44s and .357Mag goes out and buys a 9mm doublestack polymer framed semi-auto striker fired pistol...it merits a review.

Last weekend I went to the Akron Gun Show and bought a Sig P320C from Kyle's Gunshop.

The specific one I bought was a FDE model with Siglite Night Sights and a medium grip, looks like this:

My actual gun:



I had been vacillating between the Sig P320C and the Springfield Armory XDM-9 Compact. Ultimately what swayed me was Kyle had a P320C in stock but not an XDM-9. This is my FIRST product by Sig Sauer whereas I own several XD products in .45 (including a double-stack).

Others have reviewed the P320C aplenty:
TTAG
Massad Ayoob
GunDigest
hickok45

But this thread is about what I thought of the gun...

First off, the grip size is perfect for me. I have VERY LARGE hands yet the medium grip frame on the compact version of the 320 was JUST RIGHT. I have gripped the large and small grips as well at FFF with their display that has all 3 sizes for you to try - I think any of them are doable and the small grip might even be a HAIR more concealable. Regardless, the medium grip is good for me. I cannot imagine how massive the Carry and/or Full size P320 must be. If you are a shaved ape with knuckles dragging on the ground and mittens the size of pillow cases then you might want to look into those.
Here I am gripping the gun:



Despite being a compact that holds 15-rounds in the magazine (plus one in the chamber) it can also accept the full-size magazines from either the Sig P250 or P320. Thus, you can insert either the normal 17-round full-size mag or the extended 21-round mag (both are Sig factory magazines). I got one of each of these big boys from FFF just to try. Even though there is a small gap between the full-size mag floor-plate and the grip bottom that is not an issue AT ALL with how I am holding the gun. There is an X-Grip adapter to eliminate that gap but frankly I don't know why you'd want it.
Here is the grip gap between compact frame and full-size mag:



Magazine extraction is very easy due to the extra grip area on the sides. Like any semi-auto you need to firmly slam in the replacement magazine.

I shot a few hundred rounds through it via 4 magazines (2-15s, 1-17, 1-21 round capacity):
Winchester 115-gr FMJ
Winchester 124-gr FMJ
Remington 115-gr MC
PMC Bronze 115-gr FMJ
Federal Hydra-Shok 124-gr +P+ JHP

The ammo boxes:



All ran flawlessly. No chrono data just yet (my chrono backlog is VERY LONG).

I measured the trigger pull at 7 pounds which is both acceptable and within the tolerance band that Sig advertises. If you like "riding the reset" you can certainly do this with the P320C to speed up your split times.

The SigLite Night Sights are easy to see under both daylight and darkness conditions. They're just stupid easy to see. I haven't a clue why anyone would ever replace them unless they got so old that their night brightness became diminished.

It is a very easy shooting gun. I was able to quickly put a lot of rounds onto my resetting steel target.

Some folks dislike the rail underneath the muzzle. To me it is a non-issue. I MIGHT someday slap a light on the gun but I rather doubt it. Besides, having the rail or not doesn't influence concealability like excess grip length or thickness might.

The COOL aspects of this gun:

1 - There is NO TRIGGER PULL ON DISASSEMBLY. It has always irked me that in order to field strip most striker-fired guns for cleaning you had to break one of the sacred rules of gun handling. The Sig P320 doesn't force you to break any safety rules.

2 - Modularity. The legal "gun" is the metal chassis fire control unit inside the polymer frame that includes the trigger and striker. Thus, you can swap the "Fire Control Unit" of "FCU" into any other P320 grip size or variant (note that 9/.357/.40 interchange with each other but not with .45) you like without issue. That means you can buy just 1 "gun" from your local FFL but keep a half-dozen different calibers/grips/lengths around (none of which require an FFL to transfer) for flexibility when the situation calls for it. Maybe you prefer to shoot the 9mm fullsize for practice most days but rather carry the compact .357 for SD - that's just one gun for you to buy with a spare Caliber X-Change Kit.

3 - A smooth trigger face. Most other striker-fired guns have an annoying lever on the trigger face. The Sig does not. This adds to the overall excellent feel of the trigger.

Drawbacks:

1 - Lack of a grip safety like the XD series has. I firmly understand that thumb safeties can get left on in the adrenaline rush of an actual SD encounter but grip safeties I view differently. Indeed, I rather like the fact that they force you to grip the gun correctly during practice thus building the right muscle memory to avoid a poor-grip/limp-wrist when you actually need it. It isn't a dealbreaker but it was the one thing the XD had over the Sig when I compared the 2 guns head to head.

So final verdict - would I carry this for SD? Well, no...at least not just yet. Why? First, 300 flawless rounds isn't enough for a wheelgun guy to start trusting the semi-auto when I've been burned so many times before (including at F&G this year). Second, I don't yet have a holster for it aside from the kydex one that came with it. Third, I would need to stock up on 9mm defensive ammo (the one thing I wish I'd have bought from Kyle that I forgot about); that Fed Hydra-Shok is cool and all but I'd probably prefer some Speer Gold Dots in 124-gr flavor.

This gun is the real deal. If you are comfortable carrying a striker-fired semi-auto in 9mm this is the gun for you.

I basically agree with all of this (with maybe the minor exception of that I don't care for grip safeties).
I am not carrying one only because they don't have a green laser available for it that I have seen (sig is making one but I haven't seen one in the wild yet).
I have small hands and the small grip size still gives me plenty of trigger access.
The wife likes the size as well (I have the subcompact) so it may end up eventually being her gun.

Thanks for the review it was very helpful, I think it's time to add one of these to the household.
Do you mind letting us know what was the price?

All the best, Bob.

tbram88 wrote:Thanks for the review it was very helpful, I think it's time to add one of these to the household.
Do you mind letting us know what was the price?

All the best, Bob.

Kyle was asking $579.99 for it. Being a small businessman I paid cash rather than hassle with a credit card and thus sticking him with fees.

+P+ Do the recommend it?