TexasCHLforum.com

http://www.sigsauer.com/customerservice ... grade.aspx" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

SIG SAUER, Inc. has initiated a Mandatory Safety Upgrade pertaining to our new Model P238™ pistols. We have determined that a small number of P238 pistols may have safety levers that are not manufactured to factory specifications. Under certain conditions, it may be possible for the lever not to be completely engaged in the safe position. In this condition, the gun will not fire when the trigger is pulled. However, when the safety lever is moved to the off position, the hammer may fall, with the remote possibility that the gun could fire unintentionally, thus creating a risk of injury or death.


Oops.

- Jim

Ouch!

Well, Ruger LCP made it through it's early recall with its reputation basically intact. Sig should fair well also (though an accidental discharge from disengaging the safety is a bit scarier than AD from a drop/fall). Keep those muzzles pointed in a safe direction.

Glad they jumped on it quickly with a full recall.

Well I'm surprised that Sig would let this get by them. I thought they had one of the most stringent QA programs in the firearms industry.

It seems though the little bitty guns have had their problems. As austinrealtor said the LCP had a recall, as did the Walther PPk/S(S&W), now it's the nifty new P238.

It's very unusual for SIG to have a quality problem; but sooner or later a new design will have a bug. That's why I don't buy the first model of anything, no matter how tempting it is.

- Jim

seamusTX wrote:...but sooner or later a new design will have a bug. That's why I don't buy the first model of anything, no matter how tempting it is.

- Jim

Me neither Jim....I'm sticking with the 1911's! Although I do like the SIG 226

Not a bad policy Jim. I do the same, especially with Microsoft products.

joe817 wrote:Not a bad policy Jim. I do the same, especially with Microsoft products.

Windows 1911 has a nice ring to it.

seamusTX wrote:but sooner or later a new design will have a bug.

Actually this is not a new design, almost identical duplicate of the old Colt Mustang .380. Which is why I'm a bit surprised at this recall. Sounds like a parts supplier messed up the specs on one of the parts; more a manufacturing/fabrication problem than a design problem.

Unless SIG actually made the parts from Colt's original drawings, they have to work out the tolerances by themselves.

It could be that something is off by 1/1000 of an inch on 1% of the parts, but the riskiness of the fault requires them to check every unit.

- Jim

seamusTX wrote:Unless SIG actually made the parts from Colt's original drawings, they have to work out the tolerances by themselves.

I thought I had read that this was literally the case with the P238, but now I can't find the reference to that info anywhere. Thought I'd read that they literally bought the design from Colt or something?

Who knows, maybe I dreamed it ...

They're very similar, but the P238 doesn't look to me like a clone. Here are photos of both:

http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2009 ... -380-1911/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

- Jim

seamusTX wrote:They're very similar, but the P238 doesn't look to me like a clone. Here are photos of both:

http://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2009 ... -380-1911/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

- Jim

Getting off topic a bit, but what I'd read elsewhere (and can't find it to save my life) is that the guns are substantially the same to the ponit of being "clones" except for cosmetic changes to the Sig slide to make it look more "Sig-like" and some added serations to grip and new grip panels etc. Someone I met at a gun shop who owns both says he runs his old Mustang mags in his P238. From the photos, the frames do look identical to me.

But all conjecture on my part at this point as I don't KNOW any of this with any degree of certainty, just what I've read/been told elsewhere and now cannot find for reference/verification.