Ive yet to run into any issues. And i have every combination possible. Run my 45 fcus in 9, 40, 357, 45 and 10mm..
I COMPLETELY agree. In my opinion the Army was not wrong in doing that, but you have to wonder about the purpose of a Modular Handgun System if you're not going to take full advantage of it. If you read the requirements laid out in the MHS request for proposal for a handgun to be modular, its sole purpose was to make the handgun adaptable to different size hands. It had nothing to do with a removable chassis per se (which is why Glock and others submitted what they did). With a Glock, Smith & Wesson M&P, Beretta APX etc. all one has to do to adjust the grip size is change the backstraps. With the SIG P320, however, you would have to carry three or four (M&P) different size frames to do what those other pistols can do. It's just one more piece of evidence—in my opinion—that proves the MHS trials were a forgone conclusion before they even started. It's very possible that SIG was promised the contract when the Army basically did the same thing for Beretta in 1984 because there is a good argument to be made that the SIG P226 was a better firearm at the time than the Beretta M9 (as investigated by Congress).Not for nothing... but if you've been in the military, you know why they tried to take that ability away from the end user (and left that ability to the armory)
That said... I would LOVE to find one of those takedown levers and the tool to go with it.