SIG Talk banner
  • Notice image

    SigTalk is a forum community dedicated to SIG Sauer enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about Sig Sauer pistols and rifles, optics, hunting, gunsmithing, styles, reviews, accessories, classifieds, and more!

Status
Not open for further replies.

Issues with my new P220 Elite, Magazines problems??

12K views 24 replies 13 participants last post by  Slowmo 
#1 · (Edited)
Hello all. Im just an owner of a new P220 Elite. Yesterday I had some problems on my first day using it. I found a video in YouTube with that same problem. I used 3 different kinds of defensive amnos (on my first day on use in the shooting range), video: https://youtu.be/39BSX9ilb88.
The mags that came with the weapon are crimped in front. As a result the mags won't load.
Im start shooting with Remington UMC 230gr JHP (issues!) then Hornady 230gr XTP (issues!) and finally Magtech 230gr JHP Defensive Bonded (issues!), only works fine with Magtech FMJ.
I think its a very common problem with the P220 so
It's NOT an amno problem it's a P220 problem. Problems with most kind of hollow point amnos? Sorry but If I know that I cant use "deffensive" amno with a P220 I think I would not have bought one.
Someone try straighten the corners of the magazine?
Any solution?
Thanks in advanced.
 
#2 ·
Interesting. The cartridges he is measuring in his video all fall within the SAAMI maximum length spec for 45 ACP, which is 1.275". I just grabbed 6 SIG 45 ACP mags, 3 for a P220 Compact/P245 and 3 for a full size P220. I loaded a wide variety of ammo into these mags with no issues. Winchester White Box, Fiocchi FMJ, Hornady Critical Duty, Federal HST, Winchester Ranger T, Speer Gold Dot. Measuring the lengths of these cartridges I loaded, I found lengths ranging from 1.206" (the hollow points except Critical Duty) to 1.266" in the others. I will continue playing with some cartridges and magazines to see if I can come up with this interference, might even assemble some to the maximum overall length. But at this point, I am finding nothing that would lead me to believe there is an issue with the mags I am using and own.
 
#3 · (Edited)
There was a recent thread here that indicated (to me) that SIG has received some bad magazines from Mec-Gar. They are crimped much more than the P220 magazines have ever been crimped before. They are bad magazines. You need to let SIG know about it and tell them you want corrected magazines.

I saved a picture from the thread. The correct P220 mag is on the left and the bad is on the right.
Here is the thread.
 

Attachments

#6 ·
My mags will load every hollow point I have, around 6 or 7 different ones including the Remington the OP has troubles with, and my magazines all look like the magazine on the right, not the left, so that identification isn't true in all cases. For what it's worth, I have a dozen of the ones like on the right, and they all work fine.
 
#4 ·
I have a new P220 SAS Gen 2 Carry coming.
I get to wonder if I get the bad mags with that one.
 
#18 ·
It will include Sig mags with the extra crimp.

I ordered some new mags from Greg Cote, they came in sealed Sig parts bags and have the same crimp. I don't believe the Sig mags are made by ACT, there are too many minor differences.

I haven't tried modding one of mine yet, but it doesn't look like it would take much to gain the needed clearance by tweaking the top of the crimps with a piece of 5/16" - 3/8" drill rod or something similar.
 
#19 ·
I picked up my new P220 SAS Gen 2 Carry today.
Build Date: 11 February 2017.

It came with two standard 8-round magazines.
They did have the detent. On that issue, I am convinced that the ones you purchases a while back were new-old stock of the original P220 mags.

But these two mags do indeed have the more severe crimp on the front-right corner that pushes the magazine catch aside. I compared them to the stash of SIG factory standard-capacity 8-roung mags I have in the safe. These two that came with the SAS are crimped much more just like those from the other thread. Which means that they are COMPLETELY unsatisfactory to me. Especially if they have any hint of an issue with my Federal 230 gr HST JHPs which have a fairly wide mouth.

I didn't bother getting the container of my SIG factory 10-round extended mags out. I know that they are properly crimped like my standard 8-round mags.

I am going to contact SIG and send them the photo of the top of the two mags borrowed from the other thread. Or I may take my own pics. See if I can convince them that they have bad mags.

I'm glad I have plenty of good mags stocked up.

If SIG sends me replacements and they are screwed up, then I'll re-shape the corner.

But I love that gun! Almost the same size as my P239 SAS Gen 2 9mm, the same number of rounds, but a much bigger bore. :D
 
  • Like
Reactions: FLASIG
#20 ·
I picked up my new P220 SAS Gen 2 Carry today.
Build Date: 11 February 2017.

But I love that gun! Almost the same size as my P239 SAS Gen 2 9mm, the same number of rounds, but a much bigger bore. :D
My P220 SAS Gen 2 has the same date. They must have been in the same batch.

I have a list of other issues to call Sig about concerning some recent purchases. The mag issue is on there too. I haven't tried modifying one yet either.

My 10 rounders work fine and have the smaller crimp.
 
#5 ·
Welcome to Sig Talk, from the southwest corner of Indiana. Due to your location, any normal answer will not be welcome. It appears there were some magazines as you have noticed, that were made with too deep of crimps, which will cause some bullet profiles to hang up both in loading and feeding. Normally I would suggest contacting Customer service, but I don't know if that is a viable option for you.
If you had a good feeding magazine, to use as a guide, then you could attempt to modify yours. There is a question as to who actually makes the magazines for Sig. At one time I know Mec-Gar probably did, but another Italian company, Act-Mag, currently markets identical 8 round magazines, both blued and nickel plated, but not stainless, commercially. All of the components appear identical, to the Sig marked magazines, so I believe they are the manufacturer. Their blued magazines are available here from one vendor for $17.95 each SIG SAUER MAGAZINES : Greg Cote, LLC I don't know if they do international sales or not.
 
#9 · (Edited)
Only Mec-Gar supplies magazines for the P220 and they are stainless.
The ACT mag is visibly different in that it does not have the detent in the sides of the magazine tube (body) near the top-rear corners of the magazines. Those detents in the Mec-Gar mags grab the case rim and helps prevent the second-from-top round from being pulled halfway out as the slide strips the top round. Makes it more reliable should you need to drop a partially-loaded magazine. It was something that competitors found shooting the P220 at one point. People like the ACT mags but I've never used any. I may buy some for the range but I use the SIG factory mags for defense.
 
#15 ·
pedroarg, I hope you hav not confused the two different subjects. Your problem is resulting from the indented areas at the front of the magazine (Orange Arrows), the magazine with feeding problems is the one on the right. The one without feeding problems should be the one on the left. The indent (Purple arrow) that prevents the cartridge from moving forward under recoil, just happens to be on the magazine with the too deep indentations.

The front indented area are necessary to allow the magazine to slide past the magazine catch, but not so deep, as to interfere with feeding some profiles of bullets, such as most hollow point projectiles.

Adjusting yours to look more like the magazine on the left, than the one on the right should help you with your problem.
 

Attachments

#21 ·
I got in touch with SIG and they sent me a label to return the magazines.

But I've decided that I can correct mine myself. The way mine are crimped, I believe that I can easily move them outward by using a cylindrical punch or alignment tool of the proper diameter to shape the corner, with the magazine properly secured.

I've loaded several different types of ammo into mine and they catch somewhat on my Federal HST 230 gr JHPs (my preferred defense load) and on Hornady XTP 230 gr JHPs. They slightly brush a couple of others.

I'm going to keep these two and fix them. If they cause any issues, I'll mark them and keep them for range duty only.

I have others.
 
#23 · (Edited)
I have several Sig mags and Act mags for my various P220 pistols. I have had no feed issues with any brand SD or practice/plinking ammo from any of them.
However, I did find that all my P220 mags, regardless of manufacturer, require a shorter length round than what will fit into my Kimber/standard 1911 mags.
Hand loads using 200gr LSWC in the 1911 mag can be as long as 1.262". The p220 mags will only allow (for full, 8 rd loading) a max of 1.243".
For 185gr LSWC, the 1911 mags will take up to 1.265", the P220 mag, 1.250" I find that a little strange. But it appears that for a given bullet shape, the P220 requires a shorter cartridge length than a 1911. At least for those two bullets, anyway.

EDIT:
I originally confused this thread with another here, talking about feed (nosediving rounds) problems. I now realized that it is a cartridge into mag, fit issue. Which kinda goes along with my findings in the second part of my post. I did just go look at all of my mags. And all have the detents at the front of the mags. All but one! I have on older 7 rd, flat base mag with a steel follower. It has an almost perfectly round front contour. Just short of the round 1911 mag shape. It fits into my Euro release P220 (Browning BDA in 9mm). I also have a newer stainless 7 rd mag. It has the flat base, but a plastic follower and those weird detents. :confused:
 
#24 ·
I find it hard to believe there are problems with a magazine that is as old as the P220s.I did know 1911s can be fussy with regard to HP ammo but the P220 I own is suddenly having the same problems with the factory mags. I have ACT magazines that have a better track record. How can this be possible? twice the price and years of experience. I am very disappointed.
 
#25 ·
It’s a big fat cartridge going into a skinny mag which is inserted into a skinny well...

I’m not sure as to your vintage of 220 and the problem mags. The older comments in this thread address a situation where the crease or indentation on the top edge (needed to slide past the mag catch) was excessive and limiting insertion for certain rounds.

I personally haven’t had that issue with new 220’s bought over the last 12 months (one produced in late ‘17 and the other produced in early ‘19.) But, I have had problems with the newest mags having a much more subtle indentation which caused the top edge to interfere with the mag catch upon insertion. That problem was with the mags accompanying the 2019-produced 220, but not the earlier 220. Replacement mags mailed by Sig CS had the same problem. Thus, it seems that it has been a struggle for Sig and its mag supplier to find the right delicate balance. But, keep in mind that those problem mags otherwise worked fine. I just needed to slam them in a tad harder or depress the mag release when inserting.

On an unrelated note, my first 220’s mags were very stubborn when loading cartridges beyond 4 or 5. But I quickly learned that the springs needed some break-in and they’ve been flawless since the initial two outings. Also, a mag loader helps when the springs are new.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
You have insufficient privileges to reply here.
Top