People ask me why I don't like Sig.......

[ToddM]

I should just make a handout of this. This is why I don't like Sig.....among tons of other things there are so many lemons in their barrel lotteries.

Let's start with my Gen 2 MPX 16" with a red dot. These are typical groups 6-8" out of it at 50yds, 115gr, 147gr, match ammo etc. doesn't matter. It runs fairly reliable as far as MPX's go but the accuracy is abysmal. $500 combat handguns print better groups than this in a rest with match ammo at 50yds. Shot off an accutac bipod and rear bag. Tried all the tricks, removing the muzzle device, making sure the barrel was torqued properly, adjustable gas block, even tried a different bolt since I had one replaced when Sig changed firing pins. Doesn't matter if it's off a bipod or bags. It's a shotgun. I would expect something like this, especially with better match ammo to easily hold 3-4" at 50yds. I've seen JP-5's do close to that at 100yds with match ammo. Some of these almost look like the bullets are starting to tumble.




Then let's move onto my MCX Legacy 16".......these are two sets of groups at 50yds. Both are 3 separate groups of 5 rounds each (the far left round on the right target is actually part of the left target's groups). The one on the left with typical 55gr AE ammo (no one expects much out of that) the group on the right is Barnes 69gr. No sight adjustments mind you, shot off an accutac bipod and rear bag. Actually worse than the groups shot out of the MPX.....that alone is impressive! This barrel was actually returned to Sig a couple years ago and I was told it tested to their specs. I've done all the things, barrel nut torque, removed the flash hider in case it was torqued on too hard, all the things. It's a shotgun even with match ammo. I can say without a doubt this is the worst shooting barrel accuracy wise I've ever had. No tumbling here, the bullet holes you can find on a target at 100 are still clean holes.




Now you might just say "Oh that guy just bitter and doesn't know how to shoot. Well here's a 20rd group (4 separate groups of 5 shots) with the same 69gr Barnes ammo shot out of a virtus barrel installed on the exact same optic (1-6x)/upper/lower (different tapered bolt of course for the virtus) today as well, shot off the same bipod and rear bag. Except this group is at 100 yds. Still not as impressive as a couple of my JP barreled AR's with match ammo (especially considering Sig charges $900 for a barrel) but for a 1:7 Sig barrel, of a bipod and rear bag, and 4 separate groups, It's more than acceptable.. The downside is the weight of the Virtus barrel destroys the gun's balance and you lose the best part of the MCX (light weight and balance) in the process.



I could go on, we could get into the issues I had to solve with my 320 X-five to get it to run, but those were fairly easily solvable.

 

[dms416]

Pics no worky

But agree…fuck Si….errr actually Cohen

My pre-virtus 16” mcx was a dog that couldn’t out shoot a mini-14

 

[Cascade Hemi]

I don't know anyone that would buy a Sig.

 

[ToddM]

Pics fixed hopefully. Yeah I could rant about Sig for hours, even the government is learning their stuff sucks. Genius marking hype though, man they could sell ice to eskimos in winter.

I bought my MPX, MCX, and a P320 X-five around the same time, and prior to that I'd had good luck with Sig, that said they were P226's and mostly German ones at that. Those 3 guns have caused me more headache than all my other guns combined in at least 10 years, and that's saying something after having to deal with Beretta CS.

 

[TonyTheTiger]

Was RO'ing a match a couple years ago. Dude comes up with an MCX if I remember correctly. I don't know anything about them and he notices me checking it out. Proceeds to walk me through all the special features and tell me how it's the greatest thing since sliced bread, and how he "knows a guy" that got him a deal so it only cost him about as much as a nice JP rifle.
Then I get to watch it shit the bed for three minutes straight and struggle to hit a 10" plate at 200 yards. Dude wasn't so talkative after that.

 

[flogxal]

The problem is SIG USA, and if SIG/Sauer is smart they'll spin it off/sell it off and require the successor to be named as not a SIG company/product. All that fat dollarage from gov contracts must have been needed at SIG/Sauer's end of things, somehow. As a historic company they will regret that dollarage influx because of the reputation damage it's done.

 

[Jimichanga]

I should just make a handout of this. This is why I don't like Sig.....among tons of other things there are so many lemons in their barrel lotteries.

Let's start with my Gen 2 MPX 16" with a red dot. These are typical groups 6-8" out of it at 50yds, 115gr, 147gr, match ammo etc. doesn't matter. It runs fairly reliable as far as MPX's go but the accuracy is abysmal. $500 combat handguns print better groups than this in a rest with match ammo at 50yds. Shot off an accutac bipod and rear bag. Tried all the tricks, removing the muzzle device, making sure the barrel was torqued properly, adjustable gas block, even tried a different bolt since I had one replaced when Sig changed firing pins. Doesn't matter if it's off a bipod or bags. It's a shotgun. I would expect something like this, especially with better match ammo to easily hold 3-4" at 50yds. I've seen JP-5's do close to that at 100yds with match ammo. Some of these almost look like the bullets are starting to tumble.

View attachment 8721715

I purchased a Sig MPX-K pretty recently. Mine printed like that off rest and rear bag at 25. Different ammo, 115, 124, 147. It was an absolute joke for what I paid for it. Different muzzle devices and can. It did not matter. I was going to purchase the ILWT barrel but I spoke with the owner who was very helpful. He suggested having the bbl recut and threaded. I took it to local gunsmith who cut it just past that stupid taper. The gun now shoots acceptably. May be worth a try.

This will be my last Sig product as well.

 

[ToddM]

That's interesting, and we've seen other reports over the years where removing a muzzle device on Sig's can significantly increase accuracy, the idea being the overtorqued device causes constriction at the end of the barrel, but I wonder if for some barrels just removing it is not enough and the barrel was permanently damaged and setting it back and recrowning it is the only fix for those.

 

[vvarvnn]

At times I didn’t like Sig because their QC felt inconsistent but the ergonomics were mostly ok…they have made some iconic guns that anyone would be lucky to have….i still keep my 226 Legion by my nightstand. Pretty accurate.

 

[ToddM]

Yeah I have a couple German X-five's P226s that are amazing, and Sig certainly seems to push new designs out that are appealing, it's the execution of them that seems lacking. Pretty much every new design they've released for almost 10 years that was not based on the P226 has had significant issues after release that should have been caught in testing. There's always stuff that can show up after tens of thousands are in the wild being used over time, but designs like the MPX were on Gen 3 before it was even 3 years old, MCX had issues out of the gate. 320 had issues, 365 had issues, P210 had issues, the list goes on. The other problem is their product turnover rate is so high that (which makes them tons of $) that parts/accessories wise you quickly can be out of luck. The MPX/MCX are not that old by gun standards, but they both already have 3+ generations of which many parts are not compatible between them, so if you have an older generation model, aftermarket support is quickly abandoned. It's genius marking, as long as sales hold out and they don't destroy their reputation like Cohen did with Kimber, who has never recovered. With the LEO/Mil contracts and much longer established reputation before he took over Sig has been able to resist their reputation being damaged too much, but you can see it taking it's toll. More and more people are down on Sig these days.

I suspect their new 2011 will have issues as well.

 

[6brshooter]

The problem is SIG USA, and if SIG/Sauer is smart they'll spin it off/sell it off and require the successor to be named as not a SIG company/product. All that fat dollarage from gov contracts must have been needed at SIG/Sauer's end of things, somehow. As a historic company they will regret that dollarage influx because of the reputation damage it's done.

Yeah, pretty much change the name like sti did. Spotty quality and piss poor CS at STI, now we're staccato and make "super great 2011s."

 

[Runnineh]

I have the 226, 227, and 229. Never had a problem with any of them. Was issued the 320 at work and had more problems in 2 days of shooting than I had in over 10 years of ownership. Not to mention I don't trust it. They just don't make'm like they used to.

 

[flogxal]

Yeah, pretty much change the name like sti did. Spotty quality and piss poor CS at STI, now we're staccato and make "super great 2011s."

I appreciate the cynicism and reality-based example, but SIG/Sauer is not STI. The wisdom of history in one company (SIG/Sauer) may have been silenced by unky's bucks temporarily but you do not get to the level SIG/Sauer was on, globally, by end of 20th Century by selling half-arsed stuff. If you spin off/sell a company it is very possible to make restrictions on name use and to make a later PR campaign to distinguish the fakers, if the fakers arise.

Flip side worst case is, of course, your scenario.

 

[matt33]

I used to be the biggest Sig fanatic. I discovered their pistols more than 25 years ago, my older P226's and 228's were amazing. My earliest one even came with a test target signed by Hans Gruber or somebody. The level of pride that was taken to make arguably the finest combat handgun in the world at that time was obvious.

Ron Cohen destroyed that once great company. They even cheapened the old classic P-Series pistols. Take a look at the newer external extractor versus an earlier external extractor. It is much larger now, it goes into the slide serrations. I'm virtually positive they changed the design because they are now using cheap third world MIM extractor's, they needed additional mass to get the same strength from the pot metal they now use. They are an absolute joke of a company, it makes me sad.

 

[flogxal]

If anyone remembers the public tar & feather for Ivan Boesky and Michael Milken the junk bond boys of the 80s, well that's what good old Ronnie has to look forward to, once people get enough distance to see this was all SIG USA and not SIG/Sauer the historical company.

About the MPX -- I thought of getting one, or a CZ Scorpion, to run in PCC class in USPSA. But then started hearing about MPX issues and decided to build my own PCC. Which I did for less $$ than either an MPX or Scorpion. And it has run w/o hitches unlike the MPXs I hear about or witness in matches.

 

[WeR0206]

Was RO'ing a match a couple years ago. Dude comes up with an MCX if I remember correctly. I don't know anything about them and he notices me checking it out. Proceeds to walk me through all the special features and tell me how it's the greatest thing since sliced bread, and how he "knows a guy" that got him a deal so it only cost him about as much as a nice JP rifle.
Then I get to watch it shit the bed for three minutes straight and struggle to hit a 10" plate at 200 yards. Dude wasn't so talkative after that.

Were you able to keep a straight face? I would have been laughing my ass off. I bet This was that dude after the match:

 

[GhostFace]

I guess I'm in the minority here, classics Sigs are.....well classic. I have a bunch of those. They just plain work and are lasers. I have two 320s from retiring from my small dept. of around 100.

We had the 320 from 2016, started with a plain jane carry and they still have them with no plans to drop it. We had no problems with 320 whatsoever. Our last and current issue is a 320 RXP carry. The ERT guys beat those things up so bad sometimes the optic shattered but the pistols never fired on their own.


We had 516 SBRs with a happy switch (ERT) and cans. Those things ran like a top and were pretty accurate for a SBR. No parts breakage. One of the guys purchased the MCX in .308 a couple of years ago when I sent my firearms instructors to the mother ship for training (I couldn't go) and he was able to purchase it at a significant discount but it was still expensive. Last I knew he was happy with it. I would have got one too had I been able to go but work got in the way for me.

I have an Xten comp that I'm really really liking but with all of the videos of the pistols firing in the holster, especially the one that came out a couple of days ago I don't trust it to carry it anymore. Damn shame too because it's a sweet shooter with full house 10mm loads. Very controllable...

My complaint has been how they drop and or change products with no notice. And the way they are handling the 320 debacle has boxed them into a corner. I would be very happy of Cohen left....

 

[ToddM]

Yeah, aside the trigger recall the 516/716's seemed pretty solid, no idea why they stopped them aside maybe the profit margin was not good enough. I think it's part of the reason some guys are pretty excited they are bringing back the "Mohawk" version of the 516. Even the M400 seems fairly problem free, but I think those designs are more "classic" AR15 and less "unique".

Sig seems to struggle when they go outside the design box, unless customer beta test enough to fix them, sometimes taking several iterations. They really seem to struggle with getting guns to cycle properly. They also went through their phase where they tried to force people into proprietary optic mounts, I still have a couple slides that had to be milled because they could not use anything but the original romeo red dot, which was garbage. They didn't change that till the contract guns required them to.

I had one of the original 320 X-five's. It ran horrible, they completely got the spring rate wrong, using a contained recoil spring. It didn't have enough power at extension to reliably lock up the slide, but it had so much power when compressing it would not eject/strip a new round reliably without +p ammo. Sig's answer was "well you need to run 1000 rounds of break in ammo in it first". Most of the comp guys I know, myself included fixed the problem by going to an aftermarket recoil spring rod that ran 1911 springs, totally fixed the problem. The other issue many had was they used the wrong height front sight (too high) as a result you had to run the elevation screw almost all the way out in the rear to sight the gun in, and under recoil the screw would work itself out and the rear sight would come apart. When I talked to Dawson to get a lower front sight the guy basically told me they told Sig it was too high but Sig did it so it would be high enough to still be visible with their optic, but the rear target sight didn't have enough elevation adjustment to compensate. Let's not forget how Sig hoped to sweep their failed drop tests under the rug for civilian sales until they started getting really bad press about it. Even if you don't care about the drop test/safety, how they handled it was super sketchy.

Then you had the 365 and it had all kinds of cycling problems when new, really bad primer swipe, broken firing pins, broken trigger return springs, recoil spring issues, etc. Sig got that one worked out in the first couple years.

Then you had the P210, when it first came out it was eating recoil spring assemblies very quickly. Aside that it seems to have done okay, but it's not really a volume seller so even if it had issues we probably would not hear much.

The MPX had massive issues. Stripped barrel retainers, ejector issues, firing pin issues, recoil assembly issues. The amount of changes Sig made to the MPX in the first 2 years was staggering. I think ILWT has stated he's seen at least 5-6 different barrel extension/feed ramp styles and at least 4 gas/piston styles. It's action cycles so violently that the only way Geiselle could make a trigger durable enough for it was to include 40-55% strong recoil springs in hopes of slowing it down a bit. Let's not forget folks jumped on the MPX for the promise of multi-caliber options, which never happened. I ran a 45% stronger recoil spring, and adjustable gas block set lower than factory just to run weak $10 a box range 9mm and it still shot casings 12', that's screwing up your gas and recoil spring rates impressively badly, and mine was the 2nd generation after fixes

The MCX was a little better, still an action so violent you could not use normal AR triggers on it. Tons of people had accuracy problems with the Legacy version. Folks blamed the 1:7 and thin barrel, but I've seen plenty of thin 1:7 barrels shoot really well especially with heavy match ammo. They had to change the recoil assembly in a recall because they had unintentional firings during factory testing with slam fires so they not only had to add a firing pin spring, but another lever that blocked firing pin travel incase of inadvertent release. Which forced users into MCX only triggers. They went to the Virtus in less than 2 years of those problems to get a heavier barrel in hopes of more accuracy, and it worked, but it required a new bolt and handguard hanging legacy owners out to dry for future parts. It took them 7 years to figure out the cycling/gas better when they got to the Spear which can use normal AR triggers.

It's really an accomplishment (but not in a good way), I mean you have hundreds of gun manufacturers making AR like platforms for decades, and I can't think of one other where the manufacturer got the cycle rate and recoil/gas setup so bad, that it eats normally very durable AR triggers like fat kids eat cake and Sig did it to two of them in a row! Decades ago 9mm AR's were pretty hard on triggers but just running a 9mm version worked fine, the MPX/MCX even ate those triggers up.

 

[dms416]

Sig seems to struggle when they go outside the design box.

Depending on how one looks at it, I don't think this is true (or maybe it's very true).

Before the civilian MCX launch (in the long, long ago when LAV and M4C still had a fair amount of cred on the net*) I remember Vickers making comments on the MCX being a good concept, but still had issues to work out as it struggled in full-auto which is a telling sign. And in the same post, noting that Sig has excellent design concepts and even prototypes. But where they always step on their dick is transitioning to full production of said concepts.

Whether it's pulling in people that were present in the HK416* development, or (sigh) Brittingham*, or a bunch of dudes from Leupold, or whatever... they have the talent for good concepts which is why it's so maddening to watch them being managed by a turd who continues to enjoy success cutting corners and putting out sub-par products.


*not wanting to turn this into personal debates regarding these polarizing industry types, but one has to acknowledge these folks/things were more well-regarded than at present

 

[Marine52]

I have a SIG P239 that is my EDC. Got it 27 years ago. Single-stack 8+1, slim, reliable, and built like a tank. I don’t need 15+ like the Glock fanboy sprayers. Would not trade it for any POS Glock or the new SIG striker-fired crap.

 

[ToddM]

Certainly that's true, I'd imagine in any business decisions are made for shareholders, marketing, profits, mass production, and a ton of other reasons that cause products to be less than they could be. It's not the designers/engineers fault most of the time that the customer (or bean counters) won't give you the time or $ to do the job properly. In the gov't world "MVP" has been the biggest buzzword of the last few years. Minimum Viable Product, basically the cheapest thing that just meets requirements. They care much less about how well something works, as long as they get it fast, and it's cheap. Mostly from what I've seen so they can check boxes with their bosses and claim success.

I doubt anyone would argue that Sig is pushing the boundaries in cool designs, it's the execution that fails over and over. The MPX/MCX were great concepts, so was the 365, and they have unbeatable marketing. The BDX optic line was revolutionary (but again horrible execution), and their range finding binos have been very popular and done pretty well aside optically. If the MPX was reliable and they did the multi-caliber option, they would still be dominating sales. The Legion concept, giving ego driven folks a "club" to belong to and paying a premium to do so in the gun industry was profit/marketing genius. Even Cohen's SOP of making 15 versions of every gun, and I think in Sig's case you could make a very good argument for regular planned obsolesce is marketing genius. Bring out slightly different variations all the time, and when a new product comes out, hold back features so you can market upgrades to folks almost yearly has to be a huge profit generator. No other gun company even comes CLOSE to the product and feature turnover that Sig has, and as long as you can keep customers buying, it's a win for Sig. Sig is much closer to the archery model, make slight tweaks to products every year, put in marketing hype every year to get people to buy a new $1500 bow, and then about every 5-10 years you recycle the updates back in with a new name. As long as customers don't rebel and stop buying, it's a huge win for profits.

However profitable or not it's a lose for customer's that get stuck with poorly executed products, and the cracks are showing more in their reputation now that more people have been bit by them over the last few years with various products that I hear more and more people talking about how Sig has gone downhill.

 

[flogxal]

The biggest question is why Ronnie got his spot at SIG USA and why SIG/Sauer even thought to have a SIG USA helmed by a fool and eedjit like Ronnie who already had ruined a few brands during his tenure there. Did SIG/Sauer want the same result?

 

[ToddM]

From a business standpoint he's probably made them ridiculous amounts of money, esp. with all the new LEO/Mil contracts, as long as people keep lining up to be beta testers it's still a genius move by Sig. So far they've resisted going the way of Kimber, but I would say they their reputation is slipping.

 

[flogxal]

"Genius move" with a very liberal definition of "genius," I suppose. Genius of destruction isn't what I consider literal genius. Literal genius sees all outcomes before implementation and avoids the negative ones. So-called "genius" of destruction cares only for self and ego.

 

[mark5pt56]

I have a SIG P239 that is my EDC. Got it 27 years ago. Single-stack 8+1, slim, reliable, and built like a tank. I don’t need 15+ like the Glock fanboy sprayers. Would not trade it for any POS Glock or the new SIG striker-fired crap.

That was one of the best handguns Sig ever made.

 

[ToddM]

"Genius move" with a very liberal definition of "genius," I suppose. Genius of destruction isn't what I consider literal genius. Literal genius sees all outcomes before implementation and avoids the negative ones. So-called "genius" of destruction cares only for self and ego.

Very true, but sadly in this day and age 95% of businesses only care about profits and shareholders. As long as those keep coming in, cutting corners is just "good business" until it catches up with their sales.

 

[Marine52]

Very true, but sadly in this day and age 95% of businesses only care about profits and shareholders. As long as those keep coming in, cutting corners is just "good business" until it catches up with their sales.

Profits are the keystone of capitalism. Cutting corners for short-term gains is not conducive to long-term profits and company/corporate solvency. I can understand criticism of corporate CEO stupidity for making bad decisions that harm the long-term profitability of a company but the blanket statement that “95% of businesses only care about profits and shareholders” is wrongheaded. The real problem in recent years was that most companies/businesses were focused on DEI related goals and not maximizing profits and serving shareholder interests.

 

[ToddM]

Perhaps, but I can think of very few major companies (small businesses aside) these days that still hold an outstanding customer service reputation and reputation for extremely high quality products that market things to the average consumer, but the vast majority of them are making plenty of profits. Cutting corners for short term gains has become the norm, not the exception. Employees are seen as an expense, not a valued asset. Small businesses of course have to rely on a small loyal customer base so their incentive is much higher to keep those customers happy. Companies like Sig could give a flying rats ass if they upset a few customers here and there until it makes a big dent in their bottom line. There's a lot of crony capitalism going on in big business.

We all know the quality of goods and services has tanked the last few years in just about every industry, but the last two years corporate profit margins after taxes are the highest they've ever been, and the last decade by far the highest average as far back as records go.......clearly plenty of companies are trading short term profits for long term success by cutting corners and it's not significantly impacting them in any negative way.

The crux of it is, Sig has had shitty products for years now, but people still line up to pay ridiculous prices for them, every time they market a new toy, they can't sell enough of them. Until the corner cutting catches up to sales, it's pretty clear the majority of big business does not care. Consumers as a group hold all the power, but unfortunately as a group they have the IQ of a carrot......on a good day. As long as people keep lining up to pay high prices for junk, it will continue.