Handgun Radio 119 - The Sig-Sauer 320 and Chassis Systems

Hello and welcome to Handgun Radio! I’m your host Ryan Michad from the wild woods of Central Maine, and this is your home for all the news, information and discussion in the handgunning world.This week, I’m joined by Matt Lohafer and Clay Klemm to discuss the Sig Sauer 320 pistol as well as pistols that use a chassis design!

Brought to you by the Firearms Radio Network

Please check out the Patriot Patch Company for their Bullet Bill patches and other high quality items! Visit www.patriotpatch.co for more information!

Remember also that the new email for the show is handgunradio@gmail.com the old ryan@handgunradio.com no longer works!

Clay & Matt, how are you doing?

Week in Review:

Ryan- Tested out my new camera, the Canon Vixia HF R60. So far pretty impressed with it! Shot my Jennings J-22 to remind myself of how much that gun malfunctions =)

Matt- Traveling to see family, and showing off my new J67 carbine.

Clay- Finishing up my 2015 gun projects and getting ready for SHOT and my 2016 projects. Just finished my VZ58 SBR project this past week.

Main Topic: The Sig-Sauer 320 and Chassis Systems

So with the recent introduction of the Ruger American, there has been yet more discussion about the chassis system in handguns. The new Ruger uses a chassis system, and from what I understand it is NOT intended to be removable like the Sig 320 or 250. I find that a bit odd because I would think one of the main advantages to the chassis system is having that increased modularity that it offers. Matt and Clay are both quite familiar with the Sig 320 and 250, and I am only experienced with the 250.

So Matt, what is the extent of your experience with the 250 and the 320?

Clay, what is the extent of your experience with the 320?

The 250 was introduced in 2007, so the concept of a chassis that is the serial numbered part is nothing new. I know when I have shot the 250, the trigger is nice but long. The trigger on the 320 that I tried at NRA show was markedly better. Is there anything else Matt that you feel changed between the 250 and the 320?

Clay, what did you shoot before you started shooting the 320 in competition and how do you feel the 320 stacks up against the other guns you’ve used?

When people think of Sig Sauer, they think P226/229 DA/SA with a decocker. The 250 and the 320 is neither of those. Do you think the 320/250 is getting the attention it deserves or do you think that they are hurt by not following the traditional Sig form/function?

Is the “modularity” factor of the 250/320 as convenient and user friendly as its made to sound in terms of availability of other grip frames, ease of changeover, etc?

One common complaint is the high bore axis of Sig pistols compared to other offerings. Friend of the show Nick Humphries from Practically Tactical just finished an evaluation of the Sig Sauer 320 and found that the high bore axis made it really tough for him to shoot as well as he did when using his Glocks. I shoot and carry a Steyr C9A1 which has a very low bore axis, and having gone from a Sig Sauer P226 to the Steyr, I can definitely notice a difference. Have you found that the bore axis has hindered your ability to shoot better? Have you found any ways to minimize the effects of the high bore axis?

If there was one thing on the Sig 320/250 that you could add, remove or change, what would it be?

Wrap-Up: