I own nearly 40 handguns. I first learned to shoot a revolver at 11 years old (1964). That was a police issue Smith & Wesson Model 10, chambered in .38 Special. I own a 1974 Smith & Wesson Model 15-3, which is improved on the old Model 10. Mine is in nearly new, perfect condition. These were made when craftsmanship was a thing.
Among the many semi-autos I own, there's not a SIG among them.
Why? I had some experience with the P226 and P229. These date to the era of all metal "wonder nines". They are large, heavy and hammer fired double action/single action types. Reliable, accurate and heavy. Duty guns. SIG's polymer frame pistols never appealed to me. Even the micro-compact P365 was not something I wanted. Instead, I bought a Glock G43 and a G42 (.380 ACP, aka Browning 9mm Kurtz). Later, I added a Springfield Hellcat and Taurus GX4. All are micro 9s, and all have been trouble free.
As to the issue with the SIG P320/M17/M18... I have shot factory stock and highly customized P320s. I have never enjoyed shooting them. Why? The high bore axis (distance between the bore centerline and frame beaver tail) induces greater muzzle flip. The fit of the slide to the frame rails is sloppy at best. That sloppy fit indicates not only a design issue, but exacerbates the risk of the striker being released under certain conditions. It is probable that unique tolerance stackup combined with excessive vertical slide motion can, when jostled, release the striker. Sticking striker safeties are not uncommon.
Understanding how the P320 came to be is worthwhile knowing. SIG had fallen behind in the polymer frame striker fired tech race. To regain some market share, the hammer fired P250 was quickly reengineered as a striker fire pistol. SIG did not use the industry standard modified Browning action, used by Glock, S&W, Springfield and the like. As an engineer, I did not like their action. Too many potential failure points. Safety is dependent upon torsion springs that can be knocked askew or simply slip out of retention. The Army performed a MTBF analysis and concluded that between .008 and .012 percent of M17/M18 pistols will be or become safety defective. That seems statistically insignificant, but having 34 to 50 pistols that can fire uncommanded is not insignificant. Especially when stacked on top of the usual negligent discharges. Especially when compared to the Glock G19 and G19X, which are several orders of magnitude less likely to experience similar failures. Glocks do not have fully cocked strikers. That means even if the striker safety fails, there's not sufficient spring force to detonate a cartridge primer. Glocks use trigger pull to fully cock the striker.
The other pistol passed over is the Beretta M9A3, which is hammer fired with a de-cocker. They physically cannot fire uncommanded. The DOD was not enamored with the much improved Beretta. It was not modular and was an all metal pistol. Most issues with the older M9 were the result of the DOD cheaping out on magazines. They could have purchased factory magazines or commercial MetGar mags, but went with the lowest bidder. Those magazines were cheaply made and the finish tended to collect dust and debris internally, resulting in jams and failures to feed. When the M9 entered service, several suffered cracked slides. Beretta acknowledged the issue and redesigned the slide to eliminate the high stress point. They then provided replacement slides for all pistols in service. They ate the cost. SIG is still denying that there's potential issues with the P320 types.
So, what should SIG do? At the least, they should hire an independent engineering firm. They should provide this firm with a full drawing package. Then, this firm can model the design in SoildWorks or Catia and apply full tolerance stackups. If there is a possibility that a specific stackup can result in an unsafe condition, SIG can then adjust tolerances to eliminate that problem. Then, develop an inspection procedure to identify those pistols at risk.
Pistol recalls are not uncommon. The difference here is that SIG has nearly a billion dollars at stake.
With all of this said, keep in mind that this issue is unique to the P320 type. All other SIG pistols are safe, including the P365 which does use a version of the ubiquitous Browning action.
Here's a few of my pistols. All of these have red dot optics installed.
Zig-zagging from top left:
Springfield XDM OSP Compact Elite 45 (10+1 in .45 ACP)
Arex Delta Gen 2 Model L (19+1 in 9mm)
Canik TP9SC Elite subcompact (15+1 in 9mm)
Ruger RXM (based upon the Glock Gen 3 G19, with everything the Gen 5 G19 should have, but doesn't (15+1 in 9mm)
