There's another article that is cited where Sig with someone else was apparently developing the fixes to resolve these issues years before the gun was actually tested with the US Army, but didn't deploy the fixes until they were pressured:
Those fixes apparently resolved the drop safety issues. The uncommanded discharges that have been in the news as of late—where holstered P320s seemingly discharge on their own—is an entirely separate issue. Sig denies that there's a problem, blaming holster designs, debris in holsters, and people lying to cover up their own carelessness.
One thing this article fails to mention about the Air Force incident is that the Air Force has made an arrest for "making a false official statement, obstruction of justice and involuntary manslaughter."
Sig claims the issue was resolved. Keep in mind that Sig never admitted to the issue. They only issued a voluntary upgrade and never issued a safety recall.
Yes, Sig should have issued a recall instead of doing a "voluntary upgrade."
Nevertheless, is anyone actually claiming that the upgraded P320 is not drop safe? The issue people are talking about these days is holstered P320s apparently discharging uncommanded, apart from any drops.
I see these as potentially the same thing depending on the details. There are some videos that show the gun was in a holster and not being messed with, etc. It also seems it could be from something hitting the holster (most reports include this). Whether the impact is from being dropped or being struck in the holster (or even vibrations as the one report mentions) is essentially the same - kinetic energy transfer to the gun. The question now is are some of the reports of discharging in the holster due to lies, holster design, debris, etc. I haven't found any official drop testing with the new FCU that found an issue (unofficially there are some, but who knows if the person really has the new FCU in those posts).
They are not the same issue. The drop safety issue was when the pistol was dropped at a particular angle (that wasn't part of standard tests—how it was missed!), the trigger was massive enough and the trigger pull was light enough that inertia would lead to the trigger moving to the rear, causing the firearm to discharge. It was a very specific failure nothing like any of the alleged uncommanded discharges.
The trigger movement wasn't enough to fully depress from my understanding. The problem is, even a slight depression of the trigger disengages the striker safeties. Most of the uncommanded discharges dod alleged that the gun or holder were struck. There are multiple standards for drop tests requiring various angles and heights.
https://practicalshootinginsights.com/a-year-before-the-army...