[FlyBri]

Still haven’t bought a P365. Still hear stuff that makes me hold off.

What are you still hearing about the P365?

 

[stratplexi]

As far as I know, P365 primer drag problems have been solved. I can’t say for sure when but I think it has been a few years. I don’t know of any other problems.

 

[Barang]

I don't mind it. I like the real estate by making it comfortable and easy to rack.

 

[BEEMER1]

Until I obtained one of the Laugo Aliens I had never shot anything with a significantly lower bore axis than the conventional Glocks and Sigs.

Believe me it, makes a real difference when you can get this low. The recoil is somewhat stouter and it gives the pistol a different feel when rapid firing but you do stay on target.

The 9mm is easy to shoot but I would have to shoot a 45 before I would buy one.

 

[ClayD]

Seems to me that a lower bore axis would be a natural part of engineering a compact or smaller pistol, even if a lower bore axis was not a particular design objective.

 

[IronSites2NS]

The only pistol I know that Sig makes with a low bore axis is the P210.

 

[airgunner]

One oh my "high bore axis" SIGs. BTW I don't own anything but hammer fired SIGs.

You do realize the size of the group, in and of itself has nothing to do with the bore axis right?

Bore height affects recovery time and that affects the speed in which you can make follow-up shots. Post a video showing you on a timer making 3 "A-Zone" hits as quickly with a high bore axis gun as you can with a low bore axis gun then you might have a point to make.

 

[IngramTx]

You mean the earth isn't flat?

If you walk out to the edge and look over you'll understand that we never really put a man on the moon.

Once all the pieces were in place the calls 📞 concerning my soon to expire auto warranty fell off to just 6 per day.

 

[saolegion]

What those of you who have strong subjective opinions on the matter are either unknowingly or intentionally not factoring in is that some folks don't have the hand strength that you might. And for those people a lower bore axis is going to result in at least a couple of things, one being the tendency to allow the holder to physically control the gun better, and two the tendency of that same holder from being intimidated by said flip and therefore more comfortable with the gun. If they shoot it first they're more likely to buy it if the flip is not as pronounced to them, and if they shoot it after after buying it and find it's more of a handful than they're comfortable with they're more likely to dump it. I'd venture to say that Sig would be happy to make more people happy with their products, including those who aren't young, strong, and bold.

I've never shied from recoil or been particularly affected by it. Having worked construction for many years I had strong hands and wrists. Now that I'm retired and losing muscle tone due to less exercise and age I'm starting to notice it more. I still have and shoot 40S&W and 45acp but they takes more of a concerted effort on my part to keep them corralled.

Just my $.04

 

[Sigarms228]

You do realize the size of the group, in and of itself has nothing to do with the bore axis right?

Bore height affects recovery time and that affects the speed in which you can make follow-up shots. Post a video showing you on a timer making 3 "A-Zone" hits as quickly with a high bore axis gun as you can with a low bore axis gun then you might have a point to make.

You do realize that there are many factors in firearm design that can affect how accurate and how fast a shooter can get on target right?

Take the P320 X-Five Legion as an example. SIG came up with a tungsten infused frame for it to substantially increase the weight of the pistol and do so lower in the frame resulting in the ability to shoot faster. Bore axis is no holy grail. As always try out and choose firearms that work best for your individual needs.

 

[88e30m50]

My opinion is that Glock needed a very low bore axis to make their shiny new poly gun as shootable as the existing metal frame firearms of the day. They went so low, that they had to rotate the grip a few degrees to get the trigger finger back to the trigger.

With the new Sigs, they may be trying something similar to make the new 365 as nice to shoot as possible. I kind of prefer a naturally balanced pistol such as the P229 that does not need a low bore axis to be easy to shoot.

 

[airgunner]

Bore axis is no holy grail.

I must have missed the part where I or anybody else claimed that Bore Axis is the holy grail or the only important factor in handgun design?

That said... everything else being the same, a low axis bore will be easier to control then the same exact gun with a higher bore axis in the same shooter's hands.

So is bore axis the holy grail? No. Is it the only factor to consider? No. Is it the most important factor to consider? No. Is a low bore axis better then a higher bore axis? Hell yes. That's all I'm saying.

 

[29124]

In my opinion—and that's all it is (I can't state this for a fact)—the firearms industry uses a point system far more advanced than the alleged import point system used by the ATF. This is done across the board to ensure the most long term profits for each of the firms manufacturing firearms. It's referred to in academic circles as engaging in "anticompetitive practices". Essentially the firearms industry formed an oligopoly (like many industries) and each design is subjected to the point system to ensure no one corners the market and everyone competes. Every attribute is weighted and scored so that all offerings remain competitive in some way (through features and/or price).

So in my opinion, when SIG decided to go with striker-fired guns, they unnecessarily (from an engineering standpoint) designed the P320 with a higher bore axis. They probably figured they had done so well mitigating muzzle flip with the heavier classic P series this might translate enough to the striker-fired platform. By going with the higher bore axis, they can use or save their points (depending on how it works) to offer other features and/or a lower price.

When it came to the micro compact genre, the pistols are too small to shoot well with such a high bore axis, so they decided to spend their points on a lower bore axis. That's my theory.

Of course, it is important to keep in mind this is only a theory and my opinion because it is illegal. That said, many mid-level and higher corporate executives have been found guilty and convicted of this (so if you think it's a wild conspiracy theory, guess again. It happens for a fact). Virtually every industry from banking to consumer electronics companies have had executives fined or serve time for anticompetitive practices. It happens for a fact, but I can't prove it's happening directly beyond a shadow of a doubt, per se, in the firearms industry.

I think I could, however, indirectly prove it by comparing features and prices to convince a jury, but who knows. But there must be a better explanation for the high bore axis of a P320, PDP/PPQ, Hi-Point etc... HK is another one, but it works better than say a PDP/PPK because HK really learned how to engineer pistols with a higher bore axis offering hammer-fired pistols with lighter polymer frames. Most people feel a VP9 is less flippy than a PPQ, for example.

But like I said, a high bore axis is no way to go with a small & light firearm.

 

[TerminalSigness]

In my opinion—and that's all it is (I can't state this for a fact)—the firearms industry uses a point system far more advanced than the alleged import point system used by the ATF. This is done across the board to ensure the most long term profits for each of the firms manufacturing firearms. It's referred to in academic circles as engaging in "anticompetitive practices". Essentially the firearms industry formed an oligopoly (like many industries) and each design is subjected to the point system to ensure no one corners the market and everyone competes. Every attribute is weighted and scored so that all offerings remain competitive in some way (through features and/or price).

So in my opinion, when SIG decided to go with striker-fired guns, they unnecessarily (from an engineering standpoint) designed the P320 with a higher bore axis. They probably figured they had done so well mitigating muzzle flip with the heavier classic P series this might translate enough to the striker-fired platform. By going with the higher bore axis, they can use or save their points (depending on how it works) to offer other features and/or a lower price.

When it came to the micro compact genre, the pistols are too small to shoot well with such a high bore axis, so they decided to spend their points on a lower bore axis. That's my theory.

Of course, it is important to keep in mind this is only a theory and my opinion because it is illegal. That said, many mid-level and higher corporate executives have been found guilty and convicted of this (so if you think it's a wild conspiracy theory, guess again. It happens for a fact). Virtually every industry from banking to consumer electronics companies have had executives fined or serve time for anticompetitive practices. It happens for a fact, but I can't prove it's happening directly beyond a shadow of a doubt, per se, in the firearms industry.

I think I could, however, indirectly prove it by comparing features and prices to convince a jury, but who knows. But there must be a better explanation for the high bore axis of a P320, PDP/PPQ, Hi-Point etc... HK is another one, but it works better than say a PDP/PPK because HK really learned how to engineer pistols with a higher bore axis offering hammer-fired pistols with lighter polymer frames. Most people feel a VP9 is less flippy than a PPQ, for example.

But like I said, a high bore axis is no way to go with a small & light firearm.

So????? when Sig engineered the P320, it intentionally spent its engineering dollars creating an intentionally inferior design, in order to not corner the market and make too much money.
And Then????? when Sig engineered the P365, it intentionally spent its engineering dollars creating a cutting edge design, in order to corner the market and make a lot of money.

I’ve been doing it wrong for 45 years. I’ve always aimed (pun intended) to create the best designs with the best craftsmanship. And then charge the most money for it. When I found that my market share was approaching an uncomfortable level, I foolishly raised my price point, when the smart move would have been to lower my quality of design.

 

[airgunner]

In my opinion—and that's all it is (I can't state this for a fact)—the firearms industry uses a point system far more advanced than the alleged import point system used by the ATF. This is done across the board to ensure the most long term profits for each of the firms manufacturing firearms. It's referred to in academic circles as engaging in "anticompetitive practices". Essentially the firearms industry formed an oligopoly (like many industries) and each design is subjected to the point system to ensure no one corners the market and everyone competes. Every attribute is weighted and scored so that all offerings remain competitive in some way (through features and/or price).

I have to say buddy, that theory is pretty far out there.

So in my opinion, when SIG decided to go with striker-fired guns, they unnecessarily (from an engineering standpoint) designed the P320 with a higher bore axis. They probably figured they had done so well mitigating muzzle flip with the heavier classic P series this might translate enough to the striker-fired platform. By going with the higher bore axis, they can use or save their points (depending on how it works) to offer other features and/or a lower price.

I don't think it has anything to do with any point system, it's just a natural progression of the design. The had their P22x series and decided to get into the polymer pistol game because Glock was killing it and that's where the industry was heading.

Their first swing was the SP2xxx series which were basically kind of polymer framed P229's. It did not sell well (at least here in the US, apparently it did OK in Europe?) because most people who wanted a polymer handgun didn't want a polymer version of the 229 and most people who wanted a 229 didn't want a polymer handgun

So then they took another swing with the P250. This is when they hit on the idea of a modular pistol design using the FCU as the registered part. This was a big step in the right direction but they completely failed with the DAO trigger. The polymer pistol buying market wants striker fired guns and Sig finally gave it to them with the P320.

I can only guess why they went low bore axis with the P365 line but it's probably 1 of 2 reasons (or some combo of both)? Whenever a new polymer pistol comes out, it's automatically compared to the Glock because Glock is still the gold standard of polymer pistols. One area where Glocks are still generally perceived to be superior over the P320 is its bore access. So maybe Sig got tired of hearing about that and decided to do something about it with the P365 line? OR... They realized if they are going to make something as small as the original P365 in 9mm (which is the same size as the G42 in 380), they are going to have to do something about how snappy a gun like that would be with a high bore access? If I had to guess, probably a little of both but more the latter then the former?

Either way, if you look at their various models in the order in which they were introduced, you see a very natural and logical progression of the design that coincides with what the market has been asking for and moving towards.

That's my opinion on it anyway

 

[airgunner]

So????? when Sig engineered the P320, it intentionally spent its engineering dollars creating an intentionally inferior design, in order to not corner the market and make too much money.
And Then????? when Sig engineered the P365, it intentionally spent its engineering dollars creating a cutting edge design, in order to corner the market and make a lot of money.

I’ve been doing it wrong for 45 years. I’ve always aimed (pun intended) to create the best designs with the best craftsmanship. And then charge the most money for it. When I found that my market share was approaching an uncomfortable level, I foolishly raised my price point, when the smart move would have been to lower my quality of design.

So much fail I wouldn't even know where to start. Something about winning the Special Olympics comes to mind so I'm not going to bother

 

[originalBB]

I’ll just leave this here.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[TinyL]

Until I obtained one of the Laugo Aliens I had never shot anything with a significantly lower bore axis than the conventional Glocks and Sigs.

Believe me it, makes a real difference when you can get this low. The recoil is somewhat stouter and it gives the pistol a different feel when rapid firing but you do stay on target.

The 9mm is easy to shoot but I would have to shoot a 45 before I would buy one.

View attachment 479336

I love the looks if these!

 

[originalBB]

Here is another video demonstrating muzzle rise with data from the Mantis. It shows that height over bore is just a talking point on Gun review channels. There isn’t much difference to make a difference.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[jdpavelec]

I’ll often shoot my Swiss P210-6 back to back with my P226 or P320. Bore axis seems inconsequential compared to the hold needed to get on target- 210 is a 6 ‘o’clock hold vs combat hold on the newer guns.