我的手槍都必須有拇指手動保險，否則不會隨身攜帶。寧可打不響，也不能打自己。
丢了个蛋蛋。。。。。这个锅算320的？
-
oldestghost楼主
- 论坛精英
oldestghost 的博客 - 帖子互动： 632
- 帖子： 5660
- 注册时间： 2024年 5月 4日 23:25
-
oldestghost楼主
- 论坛精英
oldestghost 的博客 - 帖子互动： 632
- 帖子： 5660
- 注册时间： 2024年 5月 4日 23:25
#4 Re: 丢了个蛋蛋。。。。。这个锅算320的？
320有手動保險就是M18，已經大規模裝備美軍好多年了，我沒有聽到過一例美軍的M17/M18走火問題，如果手動保險沒有用，320同樣的設計，幾十萬美軍這麼多年至少應該發生一起走火事件吧？Glock走火都發生過多起。
為什麼同樣的槍，同樣的設計，同樣的工廠，同樣的質量，M17/M18沒有走火問題？這本身就很說明問題。
#5 Re: 丢了个蛋蛋。。。。。这个锅算320的？
遇事不決問GPT：
There haven’t been any confirmed accidental discharge cases involving the SIG Sauer M17 or M18 comparable to those seen with the civilian/military P320 variants. Here's a breakdown:
---
1. No documented ADs for M17/M18
A Reddit user on r/SigSauer noted:
> “The M17s and M18’s have not had reports of accidental discharges. Since it's the new standard issued sidearm, if it was going off on its own, we would have heard about it by now.”
Another commented that military users are highly trained and less likely to try to conceal negligent discharges.
That matches the lack of any mainstream news or filed lawsuits involving the M17/M18.
---
2. Why the M17/M18 are safer
External manual safety: Unlike many civilian P320s, both M17 and M18 include external safeties, an extra layer of protection that prevents the gun from firing unintentionally—particularly during drawing or holstering.
Military-grade controls: The M17/M18 follow military specs, including tighter manufacturing tolerances and quality assurance protocols compared to civilian versions.
Holster & training consistency: Military gear is standardized to match the pistol’s profile and is rigorously qualified, reducing risks from holster-trigger interference or foreign objects in the trigger guard (a contributor to some P320 discharge reports).
---
3. P320 accidental discharge context
Over 100 reported unintended discharges and at least 80 injuries have been tied to civilian/military P320s, often while holstered or during drop tests .
Investigators pointed to factors like MIM-part wear, poor sear engagement, incompatible holsters, and a lack of a physical safety levers in civilian variants .
High-profile lawsuits (Georgia, Philadelphia, etc.) settled or awarded damages highlighting the issue .
---
Bottom line
M17/M18 have no documented accidental discharges to date.
This is likely due to a combination of:
External manual safeties
Military-grade holster compatibility
High-standard QC & training protocols
Meanwhile, the civilian P320’s accidental discharge cases stem from its "fully cocked" striker design with lighter trigger pull, lack of mechanical safety, and inconsistent holster or component compatibility.
There haven’t been any confirmed accidental discharge cases involving the SIG Sauer M17 or M18 comparable to those seen with the civilian/military P320 variants. Here's a breakdown:
---
1. No documented ADs for M17/M18A Reddit user on r/SigSauer noted:
> “The M17s and M18’s have not had reports of accidental discharges. Since it's the new standard issued sidearm, if it was going off on its own, we would have heard about it by now.”
Another commented that military users are highly trained and less likely to try to conceal negligent discharges.
That matches the lack of any mainstream news or filed lawsuits involving the M17/M18.
---
2. Why the M17/M18 are safer
External manual safety: Unlike many civilian P320s, both M17 and M18 include external safeties, an extra layer of protection that prevents the gun from firing unintentionally—particularly during drawing or holstering.
Military-grade controls: The M17/M18 follow military specs, including tighter manufacturing tolerances and quality assurance protocols compared to civilian versions.
Holster & training consistency: Military gear is standardized to match the pistol’s profile and is rigorously qualified, reducing risks from holster-trigger interference or foreign objects in the trigger guard (a contributor to some P320 discharge reports).
---
3. P320 accidental discharge context
Over 100 reported unintended discharges and at least 80 injuries have been tied to civilian/military P320s, often while holstered or during drop tests .
Investigators pointed to factors like MIM-part wear, poor sear engagement, incompatible holsters, and a lack of a physical safety levers in civilian variants .
High-profile lawsuits (Georgia, Philadelphia, etc.) settled or awarded damages highlighting the issue .
---
Bottom lineM17/M18 have no documented accidental discharges to date.
This is likely due to a combination of:
External manual safeties
Military-grade holster compatibility
High-standard QC & training protocols
Meanwhile, the civilian P320’s accidental discharge cases stem from its "fully cocked" striker design with lighter trigger pull, lack of mechanical safety, and inconsistent holster or component compatibility.
#6 Re: 丢了个蛋蛋。。。。。这个锅算320的？
P320跟M18的主要區別不就是有沒有手動保險嗎？100:0事故比例就很能說明問題。Glock走火事故也不是0，即使Glock 19x軍用競標版也有手動保險，我不明白為什麼警用市場和民用市場如此討厭手動保險，不喜歡可以一直關閉手動保險，但是沒有就永遠無法打開。SIG P320學Glock無保險就是東施效顰。。。
-
oldestghost楼主
- 论坛精英
oldestghost 的博客 - 帖子互动： 632
- 帖子： 5660
- 注册时间： 2024年 5月 4日 23:25
#7 Re: 丢了个蛋蛋。。。。。这个锅算320的？
你不妨看下ben和其他几个人的视频，因为我没有，所以没关心过结构细节。
最开始都认为这个问题已经解决了。
但好像最近更多的信息说不是。
https://navalsafetycommand.navy.mil/Por ... ishaps.pdf
Like这个来自军方的报告
最开始都认为这个问题已经解决了。
但好像最近更多的信息说不是。
https://navalsafetycommand.navy.mil/Por ... ishaps.pdf
Like这个来自军方的报告
#8 Re: 丢了个蛋蛋。。。。。这个锅算320的？
P320的機械結構問題並沒有解決，所以M18的手動保險是必須的，沒有手動保險就上膛EDC相當於裸奔，所以才有以色列攜帶，或者Condition 3，因為以色列全民皆兵，包括女性，美式上膛攜帶Condition 1對於新兵非常容易出問題。Glock上膛攜帶的都是大神或美國警察，屬於Condition 0。DA/SA和左輪手槍則屬於Condition 2。oldestghost 写了： 2025年 7月 1日 19:58 你不妨看下ben和其他几个人的视频，因为我没有，所以没关心过结构细节。
最开始都认为这个问题已经解决了。
但好像最近更多的信息说不是。
https://navalsafetycommand.navy.mil/Por ... ishaps.pdf
Like这个来自军方的报告
你報告裡面的事故也是源於Glock，一把不pull trigger不能拆卸的腦殘槍，導致很多人拆槍都養成了扣扳機的壞習慣，只有Glock和少數槍需要扣扳機。
-
oldestghost楼主
- 论坛精英
oldestghost 的博客 - 帖子互动： 632
- 帖子： 5660
- 注册时间： 2024年 5月 4日 23:25
#10 Re: 丢了个蛋蛋。。。。。这个锅算320的？
我有M17，覺得這槍除了不准，沒什麼問題，軍隊如果發現問題，肯定會RMA的，不會僅僅要求改成Condition 3。這就跟高鐵一樣，也出過不少事故死不少人，但是減速後就沒事了。但M17/M18一定要有手動保險，沒有手動保險的P320絕對有問題，而且是設計問題，也修不好，我從來不買P320。