Is the Browning Hi-Power still relevant?


PDA






RNB65
April 25, 2008, 07:46 PM
The Browning Hi-Power. The Grande Puissance. The P-35. Concieved by John Browning but realized by Dieudonne Saive. A wonder of its time as it introduced many of the common features found on most semi-auto handguns made today. At one time, it was perhaps the most widely issued military sidearm in the world and many consider it to be the crowning achievement of JMB's remarkable career.

Yet, today, it's typically looked upon as the proverbial red-headed stepchild. An interesting historical relic which fails to generate any of the passion associated with the 1911. A handgun few want unless it comes out of some cheap sweatshop in the Philippines (CD) or Hungary (FEG). Which leads to my question --

Is the Browning Hi-Power still relevant in the 21st century?

Thoughts?
-

If you enjoyed reading about "Is the Browning Hi-Power still relevant?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Chipperman
April 25, 2008, 07:50 PM
They have a rabid following, as you will soon find in the replies.

Are they relevant?

To me they are Historically Relevant, but not Practically Relevant.

There are many other guns I would choose to carry (1911 included) before the BHP.

jlbraun
April 25, 2008, 07:52 PM
(cue thundering hordes of BHP adherents)

RNB65
April 25, 2008, 07:59 PM
I would love to hear folks opinions. Even here on THR the BHP doesn't generate much discussion. They're beautiful handguns and I've been thinking about buying one for the past 20 years. But ever time I'm ready to make a handgun purchase, there's always something else at the top of my list. :(

Fat Boy
April 25, 2008, 08:10 PM
I think Browning guns historically are among the best in the world. I would love to have a HP, but cost is a factor...

ExSoldier
April 25, 2008, 08:12 PM
I own a Browning HP and sure they're relevant. Many folks think of them as an upgrade to the venerable 1911. Up till the 1980s (IIRC) they were the standard sidearm for the British SAS. When the SAS upgraded they went to the SIG P226, which is where they reside today. I don't think any of them would hesitate to use a Hi-Power again. Also the FBI's HRT had Brownings customized (by I want to say Les Baer or maybe Cylinder & Slide but I'm not sure) Hi-Powers for many years. There are still other folks who use them and who swear by them. No gun designed by John Browning is going to be irrelevant. Ever. I have my gun for the sole purpose of passing on to my nephew, but I wouldn't hesitate to use in a self defense scenario. In fact, I took it to the range just last week. Along with my Sig P226.

un_lucky
April 25, 2008, 08:12 PM
I think the BHP is as relevant as the Luger or Walther P-35. Neet, but not timeless like the 1911.

tipoc
April 25, 2008, 08:13 PM
What do you mean by "relevant"?

They are good guns. They work. They are used by millions, preferred by many.

Many top smiths continue to offer High Power packages. Replacement sights and parts sell briskly. They have a separate section over to the 1911 forum.

tipoc

BullfrogKen
April 25, 2008, 08:25 PM
Still relevant?

Absolutely. Its got a thin profile. I've found women love them. They fit their hands; they have a good trigger; they don't recoil terribly.


I think it is still a great handgun. It can't be chambered in anything beyond the 9mm or 40 S&W sized cartridges because the magazine well is too shallow. The 1911 took off because it dominated IPSC. A simple rule change forced the Hi-Power into minor.

I'd feel well armed with one. I know my wife does with hers.

rabid_rob
April 25, 2008, 08:29 PM
Relevant, schmelvent...it's just a damn sexy piece.

http://www.dropfiles.net//files/1227/hi_po.jpg

bannockburn
April 25, 2008, 08:44 PM
RNB65

If I had to go to somewhere in harm's way, and my only caliber choice was 9mm., I wouldn't hesitate to pick my Hi-Power over any other 9mm. Relevant enough for me.
http://i218.photobucket.com/albums/cc231/buckeroobanzai/DSC02362.jpgvvv[/IMG]

tekarra
April 25, 2008, 08:49 PM
Is the P35 still relevant? That statement would only be made in America because America does not have a history associated with the pistol. Elsewhere in the world, it is still in front line use and is as relevant today as it was when introduced. Based upon it's widespread acceptance and use worldwide, the P35 cannot be considered a "red-headed stepchild".

czhen
April 25, 2008, 08:49 PM
Even here on THR the BHP doesn't generate much discussion.

Because there is not much to argue, about something almost perfect.

Czhen
Fl

jaydubya
April 25, 2008, 08:55 PM
I bought mine in 1967, and carried it as my personal weapon on two flying cruises to Vietnam. It was not only relevant then, it was just about the ONLY high capacity 9x19 autoloader I could find. I still shoot it weekly, rather thoroughly upgraded with Crimson Trace grips and C&S's SFS kit. The latter is a revolutionary upgrade. If FN had come out with it ten years earlier, the HP might still be king of the roost. But it is not, I am sorry to say. There are many excellent, albeit plastic, handguns out there -- and FN seems to be drifting that way too.
Cordially

tipoc
April 25, 2008, 08:59 PM
I'll ask again since no one has answered yet...In what way aren't they "relevant"?

They are currently in use in Afghanistan with the British. Other militarys around the world still use them.

By the time law enforcement in the U.S. went from revolvers to pistols and the military left the 1911 behind both had already decided to not go to sa pistols but with da/sa pistols. They both felt the latter were "safer". Is that what you mean by "relevant"

tipoc

Dick1911
April 25, 2008, 09:18 PM
I think the Hi Power is as relevant as any other full sized pistol. Still widely used by military and sportsman. It has a large following although I would guess not as large a following as a 1911.

I don't think I'd give up my Hi Power unless I was getting another one. Same for my 1911....but the Hi Power's cheaper to shoot so I get more rounds/trip to the range ! :D

MM
April 25, 2008, 10:07 PM
What is irrelevant about any reliable, accurate, hi capacity, well made hand gun. The BHP fits all these categories suberbly.
MM

Walkalong
April 25, 2008, 10:10 PM
Absolutely, without question, duh. :)

distra
April 25, 2008, 10:24 PM
You are kidding right? I shoot this in a pin league. IMHO this is the best 9mm out there. I like my G19, but the BHP is on a totally different level.

http://images6.theimagehosting.com/BrHP 001.th.JPG (http://server6.theimagehosting.com/image.php?img=BrHP 001.JPG)

browningguy
April 25, 2008, 10:30 PM
Yet, today, it's typically looked upon as the proverbial red-headed stepchild. An interesting historical relic which fails to generate any of the passion associated with the 1911. A handgun few want unless it comes out of some cheap sweatshop in the Philippines (CD) or Hungary (FEG).

Well it appears you started with a false assumption, I don't know any "knowledgable" pistoleros that consider the BHP to be a relic.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v11/jcm9371/Pistols/bhpcelticcrossgrips1.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v11/jcm9371/Pistols/PracticalCocoboloGrips1.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v11/jcm9371/Pistols/highpowerpractical.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v11/jcm9371/Pistols/highpowercompetition.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v11/jcm9371/Pistols/40HPStandard.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v11/jcm9371/Pistols/browninghp.jpg

Marshall
April 25, 2008, 10:44 PM
They're so irrelevant I just took one of mine off my hip a few minutes ago.

It's rather ironic this thread came up today. I e-mailed a buddy, that just got into handguns a few months ago, a link to Bar Sto's site today. He called me on the hook bitching that there wasn't a barrel offered for his M&P. But there is for the Hi Power. I picked my new CDNN catalogue today to read, there's all kinds of stuff for Hi Powers offered. Irrelivent? I don't think so.

*All steel
*Battle proven
*World renown
*Perfect feel in the hand
*Slim profile
*Hi capacity
*Great balance
*Outstanding point ability
*Single action
*Accurate
*Good with recoil
*Reliable as the day is long
*Parts and accessories easily available
*Most custom smiths have upgrade packages for them
*Immitaded by many
*Sexy as hell
*They're an FN/Browning

The downside is that they're not a $420.00 priced gun like the CZ 75 variants. Price alone is why many people don't buy a BHP, that and the fact that it's not a 45ACP.

From one who owns a few, as well as other handguns, I can tell you that once you own one, it's the kind of gun that you don't consider selling or trading.

Yes, I'll go to my striker fired polymers many times for a gun to slap on my hip, nothing wrong with them at all, I love them. But when you have on a Hi Power you know you're wearing a piece of history and not just another polymer pistol that are a dime a dozen. It's a nice feeling. Like wearing a Colt 1911. There are many other manufacturers but there's only one Colt and there's only one real Hi Power.

Everyone should have one in their collection.

gbran
April 25, 2008, 10:51 PM
Mine is in the 1969 era and is in mint condition. It is not a redheaded stepchild to my Colt 1911. I love both.

easyg
April 25, 2008, 11:09 PM
Is the Browning Hi-Power still relevant in the 21st century?
As a fine handgun?
Yes.

As a combat handgun?
No.

McCall911
April 25, 2008, 11:15 PM
No, Hi-Powers are completely irrelevant and worthless.

So send them all to me at this address:





:D


Seriously, I would say there are few handguns on the market which are any better. Just MHO.

Nathanael_Greene
April 25, 2008, 11:20 PM
Not long ago, I took a young man shooting; he was unfamiliar with the Hi-Power (poor benighted soul).

After shooting a few other revolvers and automatics, the one he came away loving was the Hi-Power.

My favorite adjective for this pistol: elegant.

RNB65
April 25, 2008, 11:24 PM
How does the quality of current production compare to the older BHP's? I rarely see a used one locally, so if I buy it will probably be new.

Thanks.
-

rooter
April 25, 2008, 11:34 PM
As a combat handgun?
No.
easyg, could elaborate on your reasoning for this statement?

Texas Colt
April 25, 2008, 11:39 PM
Yes, it is still very relevant. I'd say it's better now than when it first hit the market. We now have custom goodies like those from C&S. We have accessories like a huge selection of leather, MecGar mags, and Craig Spegel grips.

It is slim, accurate, reliable, and with a little work has a trigger as good as a 1911. The Mark III even has a firing pin block.

There is only one 9mm that I will carry, and that is my Hi Power. The other 9's are just range toys.

http://i135.photobucket.com/albums/q125/redcolt/Guns/HiPowerTritium1.jpg

distra
April 25, 2008, 11:42 PM
As a combat handgun?
No.

Only because it's a 9mm :neener: Nothing wrong with a BHP for combat handgun. I can out shoot most Glockers and 92ers with mine in our club matches.

gallo
April 25, 2008, 11:47 PM
Irrelevant? No. Pricey? Yes, too much for its own good. Nonetheless a classic contemporary, the culmination of perfect form and flawless function manifested directly from God through the genius of John Browning as gift to mankind.

jungle
April 25, 2008, 11:53 PM
http://i237.photobucket.com/albums/ff249/jungle375/DSC_0044.jpg

gallo
April 25, 2008, 11:58 PM
Jungle, if all those are yours, you possess great wealth.

mokin
April 26, 2008, 12:01 AM
Drool,

Very nice gentlemen. I stopped carrying my BHP when I took my wife to the range and she decided she didn't want me to leave her home without the pistol. So, I got to finally buy a Glock. I'm still not sure if it was fair. The BHP is more accurate and more concealable. It also has way more class.

jungle
April 26, 2008, 12:17 AM
Jungle, if all those are yours, you possess great wealth. gallo


Yes, they are all mine and I took the photo, but great wealth? No, the top two were bought for around 300 and reworked slightly. The others almost all bought used as many clamored for new DA autos and sold their older pistols.

I like JMB's other work too:

http://i237.photobucket.com/albums/ff249/jungle375/DSC_0142.jpg

mattk
April 26, 2008, 12:29 AM
Relevant to what??
The HiPower isn't a debunked economic theory.
Its one of the most used handguns in the world.

My wife and I each have a HiPower that we use for home defense. I also carry mine. Lots of people do.

Plus the CD HiPower was not made in the Phillipines.

dogtown tom
April 26, 2008, 12:32 AM
The Browning Hi Power is revered WORLDWIDE as the finest service handgun ever. From Idi Amin & Saddam Hussein to Prince Harry, military and police, ANYWHERE you go, the Hi Power has been first choice. Call it Hi Power, High Power, P-35, GP whatever........it is unquestionably the MOST relevant handgun worldwide.

With two notable exceptions: The USA and the ComBloc.

The real question is.........is the 1911 still relevant? Certainly not in US law enforcement, and military usage is miniscule compared to the M9 & M11.

blitzen
April 26, 2008, 01:03 AM
Here's a guy ( Prince Harry) who could have or be issued anything he needed. Yes that is a BHP. Yes, I think it is still relevant.

DougDubya
April 26, 2008, 01:12 AM
easyg - not as a combat handgun?

Uhm... why?

The features of the BHP are pretty much the measure of all other high capacity autoloaders:

1 - is it as ergonomically perfect?
2 - does it have a foolproof system to prevent negligent discharge while still being lightning fast into combat?
3 - can it fit 13 shots into the same sleek, handy package?
3a - can it fit ten BIG shots in the same sleek handy package (for .40s)?
4 - is it as finely concealable?
5 - is it battle proven?
6 - has it been working for longer than I've been alive?
6a - has it been working well since even before my FATHER was born?

Little questions like those matter.

DougDubya
April 26, 2008, 01:14 AM
dogtown tom - the 1911 is regaining approval - the LAPD's best teams (SIS and SWAT), the FBI SWAT and HRT...

plus it's still allowed for use in Chicago last I'd heard.

Tribal
April 26, 2008, 01:44 AM
Let's hope Prince Harry's Crown Jewels remain safe with that mode of carry...

Monkeybear
April 26, 2008, 01:47 AM
Its a reliable, well made, and is chambered in the most popular centerfire cartridge on the planet. What's not relevant about that?


So.....what exactly makes a hand gun a "combat" handgun?

RickH
April 26, 2008, 02:07 AM
It is an all steel gun, reliable and accurate, designed a long time ago, just like the 1911. Is the 1911 still relevant? I think yes. Are more soldiers carrying the 1911 or the Hi Power today? I don't know that either, but at least the English still issue the Hi Power. Only special groups get the 1911.

mgregg85
April 26, 2008, 04:07 AM
I'd love to own a HP, just too expensive to justify at this point. And I don't like the mag safety.

MountainBear
April 26, 2008, 04:09 AM
Slightly off-topic I know, but the 1911 is moving back into relevence, not only as a swat/hrt/sis pistol but as a standard issue, especially in departments that do not have a designated everyone will carry this pistol, but rather a list of acceptable choices.
They are, in my opinion, doing it right in that I have heard of several departments offering crossover classes before you are allowed to carry a cocked and locked 1911.

And to answer the actual topic of this thread (more beating a dead horse at this point), the HP is not irrelevent, and probably will not be for a good long time. I would liken this question to asking if the FN/FAL and its variants are irellevent. The answer, like several have alluded to above, is that they are less popular in the US, but in the grand wordly scheme of things, they will continue to be relevent.

VirgilCaine
April 26, 2008, 04:38 AM
Yeah, how is the BHP not a combat pistol?

buttrap
April 26, 2008, 05:09 AM
Last one I priced new was around 600bucks, I would not call that expensive by any means. Could probably also be called the most popular combat pistol in history too. Guess now its not "taticool" so its not a combat gun even though it was more popular than the 1911. You get out of the US the 1911 is considered silly almost vs a HP.

Tribal
April 26, 2008, 08:42 AM
Is the BHP still relevant? Well, yes. Other than ease in take-down and being DA/SA, I don't see that the Beretta 92 is really an advance on the BHP (and you could fix most of that with a light redesign).

As compared to a 1911, they would seem to me to be useful for different things. If you're expecting determined resistance (such as Moro rebels) you want the big bullets where capacity isn't such an issue because if you need more than eight rounds then you need something more than a pistol. If you're expecting more "skittish" opposition, having more shots (although of a properly lethal caliber) which cause your opponent to keep his head down is better.

It always seemed to me that the Hi Power is a better officer's pistol and the 1911 is a better NCO's pistol, if that makes any sense.

legion3
April 26, 2008, 08:49 AM
OMG yes and I don't even have one but it is a classic combat pistol and always will be.

TimboKhan
April 26, 2008, 09:01 AM
Even considering caliber, I can't see why the HP wouldn't be relevant as a combat arm today. It does everything newer pistols do, and at least as well. The 9mm is an OK, though not great, combat round depending on the round used, and the HP is plenty strong enough to handle +p. It hasn't been around as long as the 1911, and everyone faints dead away from horror if it is suggested that they aren't the bestest combat pistols around. Age isn't a good indicator of relevance, I guess.

Pilot
April 26, 2008, 10:03 AM
The BHP is the one of the best balanced pistols available. Its accurate, reliable, hicap, slim and classy. The king of the wondernines. The only reason its not more popular is its not DA/SA and people that aren't properly trained including LEO's and their agencies are ignorant to the safety and benefits of cocked and locked.

My BHP is my most accurate centerfire handgun over my HK, Sigs, Berettas as just slightly more accurate than my CZ's.

1911Tuner
April 26, 2008, 10:03 AM
Relevant? Of course. A 13+1 round capacity in a serious caliber...single-action trigger...slim and easy to carry. Why wouldn't it be?

The HP may have a smaller following than the 1911, and it may not be as high in demand in certain circles, but it's a sound design...and it's positively elegant.

hhb
April 26, 2008, 10:25 AM
I own a lnib 1966 mfg BHP and a Colt Govt Model .45. The Holy grail. Bought later ones to fire, keep the good ones in the safe.

Silvanus
April 26, 2008, 01:12 PM
I don't know about the US, but they are still rather popular around here. I know I love my Belgium made High-Power. I wouldn't trade it for any other handgun. There's nothing any modern 9mm can really do better IMO.

http://i22.servimg.com/u/f22/11/50/35/28/bhp10.jpg (http://www.servimg.com/image_preview.php?i=2&u=11503528)

http://i40.servimg.com/u/f40/11/50/35/28/bhphog10.jpg (http://www.servimg.com/image_preview.php?i=124&u=11503528)

Billy Shears
April 26, 2008, 01:58 PM
Of course it's still relevant. I work as a detective, and I carry a Glock 17 on duty. Off duty, I carry a .40S&W FN Hi-Power SFS, and I'd carry it on duty if I were allowed to. The reason I carry the SFS is that my department categorically won't approve any single action auto for off duty carry (if they would I'd carry my Les Baer off duty). FN officially considers the SFS to be a double action mechanism, even though technically it's actually nothing of the sort. The trigger is the same short, crisp, though rather heavy (it's a Hi-Power, after all) trigger Hi-Powers are famous for. Mine breaks at about 7 pounds. It doesn't feel that heavy though, thanks to the short pull and crisp break.

I love the Hi-Power, and carry it in preference to other, less expensive, higher capacity pistols out there because it's completely reliable with my chosen ammo (or any other I've fed it for that matter), points very naturally, thanks to the grip that remains probably the best designed on any service pistol ever, and I simply shoot it better than most other guns (my Les Baer excepted). It points so naturally and shoots so well that it almost seems to aim itself, so I like it well enough to carry it in preference to the Glock, which is, admittedly, an outstanding pistol. Despite being a little heavier, it carries far more comfortably, especially in an inside the waistband holster, thanks to the slim design and rounded slide contours. It's just a bonus that the Hi-Power also has aesthetics that modern pistols, with their polymer frames and blocky slides, simply can't match. It's more expensive than a lot of other guns out there, and it doesn't have the following the 1911 has, but it's still a superb gun, guaranteed to give excellent service to anyone willing to pay for one.

1911Tuner
April 26, 2008, 02:28 PM
There's nothing any modern 9mm can really do better IMO.

I'll second that...

Sistema1927
April 26, 2008, 03:08 PM
The one that saved my life (twice) was certainly relevant. I sometimes wonder if the post-graduate degree that I sold it for was worth the price.

Janos Dracwlya
April 26, 2008, 03:33 PM
Let me count the ways:

1. A full size gun that can be carried concealed as easily as my Sig P-225.
2. The only all-steel double stack gun I own that my wife can shoot comfortably.
3. Mine has an excellent trigger pull. It was good before I took out the magazine disconnect, but it is almost glass-rod nice since then.
4. 13 shots, 15 with MecGar magazines (need to get some of those), and nobody pans the Beretta M-92 because it doesn't hold as many as a Glock 17...
5. One of the most accurate handguns I own, exceeded only by the Star Model B and, maybe, the Sig P-226 I used to own.
6. I don't own a 1911 and I have no plans to do so, though I do own a Star Model B.
7. It's proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy.

That's enough for me.

Dick1911
April 26, 2008, 04:08 PM
The one that saved my life (twice) was certainly relevant.

Sistema1927,
Inquiring minds want to know - are you willing to share the details? :)

Sistema1927
April 26, 2008, 04:40 PM
I think that I have in other threads, but here is one of the situations in a nutshell:

I was paying for gasoline in a northern New Mexico town many, many years ago (before CCW, but I think that the statute of limitations has run out) when the clerks eyes got as big as saucers. Turning around I saw three menacing guys standing there, one with a bowie knife that looked about a foot long. I drew the Hi-Power out of a shoulder holster under my down vest, slipped off the safety, and held it COM on the knife holder. As I backed out of the store the three of them matched me step for step. I continued to hold the weapon on him until I was in my truck and driving off. If he had closed the distance, made any type of aggressive move, etc. I would have shot him. As it was, my finger was on the trigger the whole time (the "trigger, trigger" drills weren't in vogue then, and the "4 Rules" weren't in wide circulation).

Coronach
April 26, 2008, 04:46 PM
Perfectly relevant. It's a hicap 9mm with an oustanding trigger and wonderful ergonomics. I would carry mine on duty if I was allowed to do so.

Mike

velocette
April 26, 2008, 04:57 PM
My .40 S&W HP is stone cold reliable, It has never choked in any manner no matter what ammo I feed it, from my reloaded SWCs to hollow points and anything in between. With Personal defense HP ammo it prints nice small groups right at point of aim. It is comfortable in my hand and has a nice 4 1/2 lb trigger pull.
Is it relevant? Yer darn right it is!

Roger

Storm
April 26, 2008, 04:57 PM
I'm curious as to what the Hi-Power doesn't have that anyone could reasonably want.

tipoc
April 26, 2008, 05:14 PM
Yep that question hasn't been answered yet...


Yet, today, it's typically looked upon as the proverbial red-headed stepchild.--

By who exactly? Why does the op hold this opinion?

An interesting historical relic which fails to generate any of the passion associated with the 1911.--

Few guns do generate the passion the 1911 does. But that alone doesn't tell you anything. It only tells you that the 1911 is one of the few guns that folks compare all others to.

A handgun few want unless it comes out of some cheap sweatshop in the Philippines (CD) or Hungary (FEG). Which leads to my question --

Decidely untrue and simply a false statement.

So the only knock on the P35 seems to be that is made of steel, is sa and is a full size service gun. That is what it is and that attracts many. No one has said that it does it's job poorly and no one has said that it is inferior mechanically to other designs. The mag disconnect can be removed. The trigger can be slicked up.

So what's the gripe?

tipoc

Trebor
April 26, 2008, 07:15 PM
The current "state of the art" for defensive pistols is plastic guns with striker fired mechanisms.

You have to understand though, some of the real advantages of that system are for the manufacturer. Plastic guns are simply cheaper to make, thus the profit margin is higher.
Sure, there are some user advantages, mainly ease of care, but the big gains are at the manufacturer's side.

So, the Highpower isn't "state of the art" in that way. That doesn't mean it isn't relevant though.

It is a still a reliable, accurate weapon with great ergonomics and a good mag capacity for it's size.

The Highpower continues to serve in many militaries and police forces around the world. It's probably one of the most common handguns you'll encounter outside the U.S., if not THE most common.

So, what's not relevant about that?

RNB65
April 26, 2008, 07:21 PM
So what's the gripe?

No gripe. But you rarely see the name Hi-Power mentioned on THR unless FEG or Charles Daly are preceeding it and I rarely see a Hi-Power at the range. In fact, I can't remember the last time I saw a BHP at the range. Just trying to figure out why.

Perhaps it needs a light rail to make it tacticool? :evil:
;)

Trebor
April 26, 2008, 07:23 PM
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v494/Trebor1415/MotivatorBHP.jpg

rcmodel
April 26, 2008, 07:32 PM
4. 13 shots, 15 with MecGar magazines (need to get some of those), and nobody pans the Beretta M-92 because it doesn't hold as many as a Glock 17...AH! But those old-school 13 round mags will still be good to go, if left fully loaded for a hundred years!

Can't say the same about the over-capacity 15 & 17 rounders that stack the spring in a wad in the bottom of the magazine when you force the last two rounds in.

rcmodel

tipoc
April 26, 2008, 08:08 PM
You have to understand though, some of the real advantages of that system are for the manufacturer.

Also for law enforcement budgets.

The da/sa, and dao pistols also address limited training budgets for the military and LEOS and liability issues for law enforcement.

What the cops and the military uses has a big impact on what shooters in the U.S. think is "cool".

If we were only to go by what we read here on THR we might have a slightly skewed view of what is relevant.

tipoc

Comanche180
April 26, 2008, 08:18 PM
Still relevant and elegant; I only wish I had one.
It matters not to me what the military and LEOs use.

1911Tuner
April 26, 2008, 08:30 PM
What the cops and the military uses has a big impact on what shooters in the U.S. think is "cool". If we were only to go by what we read here on THR we might have a slightly skewed view of what is relevant.

So true...sadly.

We think we "need" hi-cap pseudo military rifle, lest we are outgunned.
Law Enforcement falls into that mindset as well...so they opt for the same, often at great expense for very little advantage.

The could probably do as well with 16-inch "Trapper" length lever-action rifles in pistol calibers...reserving the .30-30 rifles for special problems, and...by practicing marksmanship diligenty and with determination...maybe even do a little better than with the others.

At a cost per rifle ratio of about 2.5-or 3:1 they could issue more rifles per department for the same money, and use the savings to buy more ammunition.

PR would be much improved by the use of "Cowboy" guns instead of something that looks like it should be used in assaulting a beachead...and they'd become better marksmen because they'd understand that they have to hold steady and squeeze the rounds off.

There are a few of us coots and codgers who feel that the venerable old levergun is one of the best-kept secrets of the 20th century. Power aplenty. Accurate enough to do what needs to be done out to a distance where it shouldn't be attempted by an urban police agency, except by a specialized rifleman with a scoped bolt gun. The ability to top off the magazine without taking the gun out of battery. It encourages care and fire discipline, and prevents the surrounding real estate from being hosed down with wild or indiscriminate fire...and it doesn't frighten the Soccer Moms nearly as badly as the dreaded Black Rifles do.

Win-Win.

:cool:

I like the High-Power very much. Things like that never become invalid.

falnovice
April 26, 2008, 08:44 PM
I love my Hi Powers....great guns. Slim and sexy with great ergos!
Asking if the Hi-Power is relevant strikes me as funny. One of the most, if not the most common auto pistol in the world. Still issued by over 50 nations, including a good number of our allies. I am willing to bet the design has seen service in every conflict since WWII.

Let me ask you, is the Glock pistol (adopted by what....five countries?) still relevant?

Cliff47
April 26, 2008, 09:50 PM
I'v only got two complaints about the Hi-Power, both easily corrected. The first is the itty bitty manual safety that has (thankfully) been replaced with a much larger unit that allows better leverage. The second is the factory 2X4 grips. I have replaced my original walnut grips with a pair by Craig Spegel in cocobolo, and now it feels like it's an extension of my hand.

Relevant? It's what I'm familiar with, and can place the round accurately.

Outdated? Perhaps, but it's still a classic design that works every time.

sm
April 26, 2008, 10:01 PM
In what way aren't they "relevant"?

BullfrogKen's post number 9 shared why, and I will reiterate and add my take.

Note: I am speaking of the 9mm, as it was designed.

-The gun is a proven combat weapon, and is still in use all over the world, and still proving.

-The gun fits a wide spectrum of hands.

-The felt recoil to payload is managaeblae for a wide spectrum of hands, which attributes to quick, effective hits.

-Single Action - proven, and it too attributes to quick effective hits.

-Slim, and easy to carry, thus it does get carried

-It does not get much discussion, as :

(a) some folks are mature enough to find what works and see no need to re-invent the wheel.
(b) folks have been there , and done that with a BHP, and these types never have paid attention to the immature whom speak of things they no nothing about.
(c) Many today in society are into GroupThink, instead of being Free Thinkers whom do their own Investigation and Verification on anything.

GroupThink has its Gurus whom need Groupies - and Groupies looking for a Guru.

1911Tuner
April 26, 2008, 10:07 PM
sm's quotes: a-b-c

Y'know, Steve. Sometimes I think your head's screwed on straighter'n some people think...

;)

jkingrph
April 26, 2008, 10:11 PM
Revelaant, yes. I have one BHP, an early 80's model with adjustable sights, accuraized by Cylinder and Slide with Barsto barrel, cnc machined hammer and sear, C&S wide trigger that eliminates magazine safety.

I have 1911's in standard combat, Gold cup, and mineature configuratinon ie Kimber ultra carry, Para P-10 and am waiting for a Para Ordanace PDA LDA for carry. The small Kimber,& Para's are better sized for concealed carry, and my Gold Cups and Kimber custom Eclipse II are slightly better on targets, but the high power is the best feeling, most pleasant shooting of the bunch, and accuracy is kicking hard on the heels of the full target 1911's

atblis
April 26, 2008, 11:06 PM
Quote:
There's nothing any modern 9mm can really do better IMO.
I'll second that...

Sure there is. A modern 9mm can be/is cheaper to manufacture. That what more or less makes the Hipower irrelevant by todays standards.

McCall911
April 26, 2008, 11:15 PM
A modern 9mm can be/is cheaper to manufacture. That what more or less makes the Hipower irrelevant by todays standards.

<gasp>

Quality is irrelevant nowadays????

:confused:

un_lucky
April 26, 2008, 11:23 PM
I know that no one wants to point out her flaws but come on. From the factory she has never had a good trigger, has a silly little safety and will bite the web of your hand. Count the magazine safety and one has to admit that she's not perfect. The three I own are "safe queens", but for some reason I do like to shoot them.

1911Tuner
April 26, 2008, 11:36 PM
one has to admit that she's not perfect.

What IS perfect?

The trigger may be a little heavy...but still better IMO than a long, mushy pseudo DA trigger that doesn't provide the "flywheel" effect of the DA revolver and easier to manage in any event than a long, heavy DA trigger that resets to a short, light SA trigger for subsequent shots. Confusing...and confusion isn't something that you want in an awful moment of truth, when consistency is needed.

Many of us don't get bitten...even with the ones that wear spur hammers...and the safety can be managed with diligent practice and familiarity.

Admittedly, the magazine disconnect could be a drawback, but with 14 rounds on tap...if you run the gun nearly dry and actually need a fast reload with the chamber hot...you're probably in over your head anyway.

sm
April 26, 2008, 11:39 PM
1911 Tuner wrote:
Y'know, Steve. Sometimes I think your head's screwed on straighter'n some people think...

Well that or we both are crazier than road ticks. *wink*


The BHP I admit has two faults:

1. I ain't got at least one anymore.
2. It comes in .40 cal.

Yes I know some like this durn caliber, but to me, who come up before it came to be, it is flat wrong, and especially in a BHP.

This way this works is-

BHP does 9mm
Gov't Model of 1911 does 45 ACP
Win 94 does 30-30.

I mean this ain't rocket science folks!

*curmudgeon grin*

browningguy
April 26, 2008, 11:40 PM
Sure there is. A modern 9mm can be/is cheaper to manufacture. That what more or less makes the Hipower irrelevant by todays standards.

Now we understand, some want the cheapest pistol, probably with the cheapest ammo as well. Oh, does anyone know where I can get a good holster for $9.95 to go with my new rig? I do have some plastic, sorry thats engineered polymer, pistols, but they are not what I carry.

I stand by my first statement, no "knowledgable" pistolero I know of considers the BHP irrevelant or out of date.

McCall911
April 26, 2008, 11:45 PM
1. I ain't got at least one anymore.

I don't either, but I love them. And they're far from perfect for me, too, because they bite me.
2. It comes in .40 cal.
Yes I know some like this durn caliber, but to me, who come up before it came to be, it is flat wrong, and especially in a BHP
Amen and amen! Most especially, I never liked the uber stiff recoil spring of the .40 BHP. Too easy to kink. The pistol just wasn't designed for such a cartridge IMO.

Billy Shears
April 26, 2008, 11:50 PM
<gasp>

Quality is irrelevant nowadays????
Of course it is. But are you trying to suggest that a Glock or a Springfield XD that sells for not much more than half what a Hi-Power sells for aren't quality products?

The Hi-Power's price is indicative of the fact that it's an old design, produced with more labor intensive manufacturing methods. There's simply a lot more machining that goes into a Hi-Power than many, if not most more modern pistols, and this prices it above what a lot of folks are willing to pay. The same applies to the 1911.

Royalsalute
April 26, 2008, 11:57 PM
I'll second that...\

I guess I'll third it.

Regards, Chang

bluez4u
April 26, 2008, 11:59 PM
When I was looking for a 40cal, I knew what I wanted.
It was the Browning HP 40cal. 10 in the mag and one in the tube.
Accurate, great handling, Sexy and handles the round well.
It's my favorite carry.

Billy Shears
April 27, 2008, 12:01 AM
Amen and amen! Most especially, I never liked the uber stiff recoil spring of the .40 BHP. Too easy to kink. The pistol just wasn't designed for such a cartridge IMO.
No, which is why FN re-engineered it to be capable of firing such a cartridge, and they succeeded very well.

Face it, the original Hi-Power was not without its flaws. It was originally designed around a 1920s French military specification that put a premium on light weight. Browning and Saive made the pistol as light as they could, and this had an adverse effect on its durability. I've read that IPSC shooters who put a lot of rounds through their guns found the old forged frame Hi-Powers simply wore out a lot faster than other pistols, and the FN .40S&W prototypes, also made with forged frames were worn after after a mere 2500 rounds. Many gunsmiths have advised for years that even a few magazines of 9mm +P could easily damage the locking lugs.

In engineering the .40S&W Hi-Powers, FN fixed all these problems. The slide is beefed up, the recoil spring is heavier, there's a third locking lug, and the frames are now cast from a much harder steel. This is all to the good if you ask me.

Browning
April 27, 2008, 12:06 AM
Well it's my all time favorite pistol, so yes, I think that they're relevant.

The BHP was used as the sidearm for the military and police forces for 50+ countries. Besides the FN FAL when was the last time that 50+ countries ever agreed on anything? There must be something good about it if that many countries adopted it to give to their soldiers and policemen as they went into harms way.

Even though it was designed way back in the 1930's it doesn't really give up all that much to modern semi-auto pistols, if it gives anything up at all. Even in it's lowest capacity (13 + 1) that's still not bad when compared to some of the modern crop of wonder nines and the Browning HP was ergonomic before that term was ever applied to pistols at all. Now there are mags which will increase the mag capacity to 17 +1, so even a slightly higher mag capacity for the newly made pistols isn't an issue.

Not to mention the fact that out of all the pistols that I've ever shot the BHP has always been the easiest to get hits with (maybe because I love shooting them so much that I get ALOT of practice in with them).

jpr9954
April 27, 2008, 12:18 AM
I think it is highly relevant. I just got my first "real" HP - a 1970 Belgian Browning this week. I also have a Charles Daly HP and both are good.

I plan to carry my Belgian beauty in a Roy's Pancake leather holster. Some would consider that doubly irrelevant but I don't.

John

atblis
April 27, 2008, 12:26 AM
Quality is irrelevant nowadays????
It has nothing to do with quality, simply taking advantage of advances in technology.

Now, one might want to define irrelevant.

In terms of actually shooting. Not irrelevant. Collecting sure. Being likeable, sure. People like to say they're relevant because they have one, but...

In terms of mass producing, competing for contracts where cost is important, and being marketable, it is noncompetitive and thus irrelevant.

BHPshooter
April 27, 2008, 12:26 AM
Sure there is. A modern 9mm can be/is cheaper to manufacture. That what more or less makes the Hipower irrelevant by todays standards.

So, stated simply, "relevance" is attained by cutting corners in production, making small parts out of hi-tech stamped sheet metal instead of good old-fashioned machined steel, by making the frame out of a recyclable material, and charging the same price. Right. Gotcha.

I know that no one wants to point out her flaws but come on. From the factory she has never had a good trigger, has a silly little safety and will bite the web of your hand.

That's completely subjective.
1) All 6 of my HPs have had triggers as good as (or better than) all of the entry-level 1911s that I've owned or fondled as they passed through the shop. When they are heavier or grittier than desired, the removal of the mag disconnect almost always solves the problem.
2) The "silly little safety" works fine for my hands. I do like the extended safety on the MkIIIs better, but I've never had a problem manipulating the original safety.
3) Never had a problem with hammer bite from my Hi Powers. I have had it from Mil-Spec 1911s, however.

Owning a Hi Power and complaining is kinda like being married to Cindy Crawford and whining about it. It's hard to have any sympathy, because it just doesn't get much better.

As a combat handgun?
No.

To me they are Historically Relevant, but not Practically Relevant.

:confused: What do you think it is that made them historically relevant? It was their performance and dependability.

Yeah, it's not everybody's thing. But for me, the sun rises and sets on the BHP. ;)

http://www.hunt101.com/data/549/HP_trio.jpg
http://www.hunt101.com/data/500/9288My_Novaks.jpg
http://www.hunt101.com/data/500/9288CarryCombo_Med.jpg

Wes

Caimlas
April 27, 2008, 12:34 AM
I suspect that the primary difference between the BHP and the 1911 is licensing. As near as I can tell, Browning (or some other company) still holds licensing/production rights on the BHP design. That is apparently not the case with the 1911.

I would suspect that there would be a large, custom gun following for the BHP if it were otherwise.

Caimlas
April 27, 2008, 12:36 AM
It has nothing to do with quality, simply taking advantage of advances in technology.


Aside from the use of polymer, I can't really see any 'technological advances' in modern guns. Night sights, maybe?

1911Tuner
April 27, 2008, 12:38 AM
I've read that IPSC shooters who put a lot of rounds through their guns found the old forged frame Hi-Powers simply wore out a lot faster than other pistols,

I suppose that could be because...like the 1911...they never envisioned the tens of thousands of rounds that today's shooters would demand of the pistols. The European military forces don't place the pistol in quite the same role as the US did with the 1911 during its development. The 1911 was designed to be a mounted soldier's primary weapon system...and thus had to be durable and easily serviceable. The P-35 wasn't under that sort of demand, and FN likely figured that the average pistol probably wouldn't see 2500 rounds in a 30-year career. Like Browning with the 1911...They didn't necessarily design what they wanted. They designed and delivered a pistol around someone else's requirements...the ones who had the money.

I know that this will come as a shock for some, but the same old question applies: "What is it for?"

The pistol under discussion wasn't designed for IDPA and USPSA competitors to shoot 100,000 rounds a year through. The US military ordered about a half-dozen slides and barrels for each complete 1911 pistol delivered.

So, it could be said that the P-35 wasn't as durable as the 1911, or as easy to repair and return to service...because it didn't have to be. That wasn't a criteria for its intended role. One of the requirements was that it be light...so that's how it was designed. Durability wasn't the primary concern. Portability was...as long as it was adequately durable for the projected use.

So, while the point about lack of extreme-duty durability may be a concern...or even valid in some circles...it's essentially irrelevant.

The Hi-Power is a fine pistol, but it's not an exceptionally strong pistol. The same could be said for the K-frame Smith & Wesson revolvers.

Billy Shears
April 27, 2008, 01:07 AM
Aside from the use of polymer, I can't really see any 'technological advances' in modern guns. Night sights, maybe?
The technological advances are in methods of manufacture. While the end product may be no more serviceable than an older gun, the fact is that modern pistols are cheaper to manufacture, which means they can retail for less. Labor costs more than it did in the old days, and any gun that demands more labor to make will be more expensive than a gun that demands less. Lots of shooters have a budget to consider and this means they often have to go with what they can afford rather than what they would like. As long as the weapon is fully serviceable, that's fine. A Glock, for example, may be a lot less elegant than a Hi-Power, but it's as least as reliable.

So, it could be said that the P-35 wasn't as durable as the 1911, or as easy to repair and return to service...because it didn't have to be. That wasn't a criteria for its intended role. One of the requirements was that it be light...so that's how it was designed. Durability wasn't the primary concern. Portability was...as long as it was adequately durable for the projected use.
Don't misunderstand me. I realize the final form of the Hi-Power, like a lot of other products, was dictated by what the customer wanted, rather than what the designer might have produced if given free reign. I'm simply saying that all things being equal, more durability is certainly a plus. With a very slight addition to the mass of the slide, a heavier recoil spring, an extra locking lug, and a frame cast of more durable, harder steel, the Hi-Power has now been given this extra durability, and all without taking away from its superb ergonomics, excellent balance, or renowned elegance and beauty. Thus, re-engineering the gun for the .40S&W cartridge was not the heresy some purists insist it was, it was a genuine example of product improvement -- and moreover an improvement that was sorely needed if the pistol was to continue to be a success in the marketplace.

Royalsalute
April 27, 2008, 01:08 AM
The Hi-Power is a fine pistol, but it's not an exceptionally strong pistol.

Then allow me to inquire- what would be in your opinion, an exceptionally strong pistol?

Regards, Chang

Billy Shears
April 27, 2008, 01:14 AM
The 1911 was designed to be a mounted soldier's primary weapon system...and thus had to be durable and easily serviceable.
I have to correct you here. The 1911 was never considered to be the cavalry troopers primary weapon, the 1903 Springfield was, and every trooper was issued one. Cavalry have always been issued long arms, and used them as their primary weapon. Cavalry were, however, likely to need a repeating weapon suitable for one hand use from horseback (the other being needed for the reins) at close ranges, which was every every cavalry trooper was issued a pistol, whereas only officers and NCOs in the infantry usually got one.

Marshall
April 27, 2008, 02:51 AM
A modern 9mm can be/is cheaper to manufacture. That what more or less makes the Hipower irrelevant by todays standards.

Bunk

I guess the $700.00 to $1,000.00 polymer H&K's are not modern weapons?

I wouldn't call a BMW or Mercedes irrelevant just because there are cheaper, reliable cars available. Is a Tag or Rolex irrelevant? Maybe they're just irrelevant to those who choose not to afford them?

I could provide a gazillions examples of supposed irrelevance based on that criteria.

McCall911
April 27, 2008, 03:22 AM
But are you trying to suggest that a Glock or a Springfield XD that sells for not much more than half what a Hi-Power sells for aren't quality products?


No, sir. That's what you said.

All I said was:


<gasp>

Quality is irrelevant nowadays????

It has nothing to do with quality, simply taking advantage of advances in technology.


No, I didn't think it had to do with quality. That's why I said what I did. And I question this "advances in technology" idea.
I'm just looking at the Hi-Power from a purely subjective point of view. And I'm entitled to my point of view, okay? If some of you guys don't like it, then go on to the next post. Sheesh.

bluez4u
April 27, 2008, 03:58 AM
The BHP goes Bang every time.
Folks who own a Browning know what i mean.

tipoc
April 27, 2008, 05:22 AM
It is possible to find good quality used HPs in the same price range as used Glocks or within 100.

New the price is within 200. of a new Glock or Springfield.

The HP is more expensive than some guns. This has been pointed out (I pointed it out earlier). It is however a poor argument for irrelevance.

The argument that modern machining and production methods result in a less expensive product and can also produce a product that is more durable and can do it's job as well, if not better, is a good general point. It is the argument of a bookkeeper, engineer, or a CFO. We are speaking of sidearms here.

S&W produces revolvers based on an antiquated 100 year old design. They have made many engineering improvements to that basic design over the generations but it is still not as strong as the more modern design of a Ruger DA revolver. Yet many shooters prefer the feel and action of the S&W K, L or N frame over the Ruger. By Billy Shears criteria all S&W hand ejectors should be considered non-relevant.

The use of MIM internals, stamped metal, polymer, etc. does not make a gun more or less relevant to shooters. The Mauser 98 action would have passed from this earth long ago if it did. The 1911 by the same criteria is not relevant. It is the usefulness of a gun to shooters that makes it relevant or not. It becomes irrelevant when shooters no longer buy them or when they pass into the realm of a few collectors, like the Frommer Stop.

No gun is without weaknesses. That is inherent in the nature of the beast. The HP is relevant because it's simple design works well for many shooters and has for about 3 generations and will likely soldier on for at least one more. A very long run for a sidearm.

tipoc

McCall911
April 27, 2008, 06:35 AM
The use of MIM internals, stamped metal, polymer, etc. does not make a gun more or less relevant to shooters. The Mauser 98 action would have passed from this earth long ago if it did. The 1911 by the same criteria is not relevant. It is the usefulness of a gun to shooters that makes it relevant or not. It becomes irrelevant when shooters no longer buy them or when they pass into the realm of a few collectors, like the Frommer Stop.


+1
The argument that modern machining and production methods result in a less expensive product and can also produce a product that is more durable and can do it's job as well, if not better, is a good general point. It is the argument of a bookkeeper, engineer, or a CFO. We are speaking of sidearms here.


I was going to suggest that this was the argument of a bean-counter, but you said it better, sir.

Sure, Browning Hi-Powers are expensive. And simple economics suggests that Browning Hi-Powers are expensive because of....?????


Anybody?


They're expensive because of demand!

1911Tuner
April 27, 2008, 06:42 AM
I have to correct you here. The 1911 was never considered to be the cavalry troopers primary weapon,

Not when they were mounted, Billy. Read your history a little further. The rifles were to be used when dismount was necessary...when enemy fire prevented the horsemen from getting in close, but the cavalryman's mission was on horseback...just like every prior conflict in which cavalry was on line. "Charge!" Like that...

Then allow me to inquire- what would be in your opinion, an exceptionally strong pistol?


Something more massive, to absorb the pounding of recoil, with a stronger method of breech lock than the Hi-Power or the 1911.
The 1911's weak point is its small radial lugs. The Hi-Power shares the same drawback. The 1911's main advantage lies in the fact that it fires a low intensity cartridge and in the fact that it can be quickly and easily rebuilt...in the field if need be, without the aid of a fully-equipped unit armorer. That was what led to the revamping of the specs in the WW2-era pistols. They were manufactured using a standardized gauge system, with all parts select-fitted on the principle of "GO" and "NO-GO" gauges...and the concept of the drop-in part was born. The earlier ones were field armorer friendly...but not to the extent that the later ones were.

atblis
April 27, 2008, 08:44 AM
Sure, Browning Hi-Powers are expensive. And simple economics suggests that Browning Hi-Powers are expensive because of....?????

Anybody?

They're expensive because of demand!

You forgot, "and lack of supply". No major contracts, so... guess what? There's your high prices. Plus the darn things just cost more to make. I wouldn't say there's demand, more like lack of supply.

The Hipower is dying slowly but surely. All the kids want Glocks/HKs/Sigs etc.

wristtwister
April 27, 2008, 08:55 AM
As an old pistol officionado, Browning has owned "pistol history" for a long time. It's only recently when the Sig cult and Glock cults took shape that anybody ever even questioned the usefulness or historical relevance of Browning's design.

"Futureweapons" had a piece on an electronic gun that's been invented that will make all pistols obsolete, so let's ask the question a different way... How relevant are the "replacement pistols" for the Hi Power? It appears that some were replaced by Glocks, some by Sigs, and some by CZ's... but the majority of the pistols "replaced" were Browning Hi-Powers... which tells the tale.

I like my modern guns, and I like my older guns... some shoot better than others, but the Browning Hi-Power rules the roost of history. There are still millions of them out in service, and not replaced by the plastic sissie pistols that everybody rants over. Technology is a wonderful thing, but where it fails is in mechanical advantage. The Hi-Power is a terrific design, and both its original design and clones shoot well under duress... which is the measure of a pistol. It's well designed and it functions at nearly 100 percent all the time.

All autoloaders are quirky, but the most consistent piece that I've seen over 45 years of shooting has been the Browning/FN Hi-Power. I'd carry it in a minute to the biggest gunfight going.

WT

1911Tuner
April 27, 2008, 09:08 AM
As an old pistol officionado, Browning has owned "pistol history" for a long time. It's only recently when the Sig cult and Glock cults took shape that anybody ever even questioned the usefulness or historical relevance of Browning's design.

If you'll take a close look at the two you named, you'll find that they're pretty much the same as Browning's pistols under the skin. Tilt-barrel...Locked-breech...Short recoil operated. Basically, the only real change is in the fire controls and the grip angles.


All autoloaders are quirky,

Another misconception that may apply to bad designs or good designs that are poorly executed...but not to good ones that are well done.

I'd carry it in a minute to the biggest gunfight going.


I'd prefer to carry a rifle, thanks.

:D

Pilot
April 27, 2008, 11:20 AM
The Hi-Power is a fine pistol, but it's not an exceptionally strong pistol.

Tuner,

In your opinion, is the above still true with the MK III Hi Power which was strengthened for the .40 S&W round?

1911Tuner
April 27, 2008, 11:28 AM
In your opinion, is the above still true with the MK III Hi Power which was strengthened for the .40 S&W round?

Dunno. Probably. Recoil impulse is what breaks slides. The slide for the .40 was beefed up to handle the higher forces imposed by the .40 cartridge...so it likely averaged out to about the same.

kwelz
April 27, 2008, 11:47 AM
I personally find them ugly and to have the WORST ergonomics of any firearm I have ever handled. I know they have a cult like status but I just don't understand why.

cronen
April 27, 2008, 11:48 AM
Hmm, I hope they are still relevant. I am (hopefully) buying one today. Well, a clone actually.....and this will actually be my first handgun! I'm very excited to be getting a hi power.

Billy Shears
April 27, 2008, 11:48 AM
Not when they were mounted, Billy. Read your history a little further. The rifles were to be used when dismount was necessary...when enemy fire prevented the horsemen from getting in close, but the cavalryman's mission was on horseback...just like every prior conflict in which cavalry was on line. "Charge!" Like that...
I'm quite familiar with my history thanks. That kind of charge was almost completely a thing of the past by the time the 1911 was issued. Thanks to machine guns cavalry charges were suicidal by then, just as infantry frontal assaults were. Cavalry was pretty much limited to scouting or to acting as dragoons, that is to say riding to the battle and dismounting to fight. The British, following their experience in the Boer war, where Boers who fought like dragoons proved superior to cavalry, withdrew the lance for all but ceremonial purposes, and emphasized dismounted fighting in the training. Other armies, like that of Imperial Russia, followed this same trend at around the same time. Then they did revert to old-style cavalry on the eve of WWI, but combat experience proved what hide-bound, conservative officers hadn't wanted to admit: the old days really were over, and there was essentially no place for old-style cavalry tactics on the modern battlefield. Apart from a few scattered and small scale actions early in 1914, cavalry had virtually no role to play.

Consequently, with a few exceptions, when cavalry troops did see action, they tended to see action in the role of mounted infantry, and to rely on their rifles far more than their pistols.

paul45
April 27, 2008, 11:50 AM
Yet, today, it's typically looked upon as the proverbial red-headed stepchild. I am late on this, but must add my 2 cents......

You must not get out much.

1911Tuner
April 27, 2008, 11:51 AM
Lemme try again...and let me add that both my grandfathers were there...WW1 vets...and saw how it went down. Remember, too that the call for the 1911 pistol predated WW1 by a good many years, when the cavalry charge was still very much in vogue.

Study the deployment of mounted cavalry in armed conflict...starting with the Middle Ages. Armored cavalry. Heavy horse. Its mission was to ride the opposing infantry down, get in close, and create a break in the infantry line. They were shock troops.

Enter ..."Light Cavalry" and "modern" warfare.

They were sorta like the paratroops of their era, and it remained so until mechanized warfare forced it into obsolensce. Speed was its advantage. That's why large soldiers didn't make the cut for the cavalry. The horse's load had to be kept as low as possible in order to maintain the edge of speed and surprise.

The other strength of light cavalry was its maneuverability. The goal was to flank and ride in amongst the opposing infantry line before they could be moved in time to mount an effective defense. They disrupted and damaged what they could...as quickly as they could...shot everybody they could...and got out with as few casualties as possible. "He who fights and runs away" etc. Hard to accomplish that mission on horseback with a bolt-action rifle.

As we all know, the machinegun largely nullified the massed and/or small unit "Lightning Strike" cavalry charge in WW1, even though it took'em a while and a few thousand dead bodies to come to grips with that, as well as the "Over the Top" tactics. The MGs were even better than cannister and grapeshot was in the War of Northern Aggression from 1861-1865...but the concept was for the pistol to be the cavalryman's primary weapon...at least until they discovered how effective the machineguns were in forcing them to the ground before they got within striking distance. Thus the '03 Springfield and the 1917 Enfield were secondary weapons that allowed the halted, dismounted and possibly pinned-down cavarlyman to remain in the fight, albeit with reduced effectiveness...or to take up a defensive position should the enemy send an infantry unit to kill them.

The enemy's goal when faced with light cavalry was...of course...to make them get off their horses, turn them into static infantry, and bring machinegun fire on them...plunging or grazing... depending on how close the cavalry was able to get before having to dismount and turn to their rifles.

Back on topic!

Billy Shears
April 27, 2008, 11:53 AM
Sure, Browning Hi-Powers are expensive. And simple economics suggests that Browning Hi-Powers are expensive because of....?????


Anybody?


They're expensive because of demand!
Demand alone doesn't cover it. Supply has a role in that as well. Look at really expensive guns like the SIG P210 or the Korriphila HSP701. I own neither one, and likely never will at the prices they charge for them. I don't personally know anyone else who owns or plans to own one either. Demand for these guns does not appear to be high. On the other hand, demand for the Glock is high, and it sells for around $500, which is pretty cheap for a quality autoloader these days.

It's the method of manufacture that allows this. Glocks are cheaper to make, and the high demand has brought their price down, not up, because that demand has made it profitable to produce them huge numbers, and the economy of scale comes into play. The more you produce of something, generally speaking, the less you can charge per unit.

Tribal
April 27, 2008, 01:27 PM
Hi Powers are still relevant because they occupy a niche in the market and have not yet been superseded in that niche. It's hard to define, but it's for a "classy" old-style autoloader which is still as good as its more modern competitors (although its thinness is a pretty good argument as well). Like the 1911, it has a history to it which Glock and Sig and all can't really match. As long as there are shooters who want a history-packed weapon that is still useful for defense, hunting, and target shooting, the Hi Power will remain relevant.

coyotehitman
April 27, 2008, 01:32 PM
You forgot, "and lack of supply". No major contracts, so... guess what? There's your high prices. Plus the darn things just cost more to make. I wouldn't say there's demand, more like lack of supply.

+1

John C
April 27, 2008, 01:34 PM
I do think the Hi-Power is irrelevant. Let me explain.

The Hi-Power is an excellent design, and I know why people love them. But the key design features were evolutionary dead-ends. (The one exception being the replacement of the Browning link with a machined extension. What do you call that?) The single action design, and the barrel with machined top lugs are no longer in use. Other designs are now in the forefront of design.

It's kind of like the '57 Chevy. A great car, the pinnacle of technology and style of it's day. Everyone loves them, and would buy one tomorrow if they could. Current owners use them as daily drivers (CCW), and would happily smoke anyone off the line who would challenge them at a red light (bring it to a fight).

Is the '57 Chevy irrelevant? Yes. Design and use have surpassed it. They, and Hi-Power, are great, and still get you where you need to go, in style. But the advance of technology, for better or worse, have passed them both by.

-John

ccmdfd
April 27, 2008, 01:42 PM
Just so I'm on the same page:

Are we saying that only the early model BHP's are not as durable as more modern semi-auto's, and that the current MKIII's are as durable?

Thanks

tipoc
April 27, 2008, 02:42 PM
Yes the MkIIIs are more durable. The frames are cast and are thicker than the older frames. This has altered the feel of the gun in the hand and it's weight a small bit.

A little more info can be found here. http://www.hipowersandhandguns.com/
tipoc

Stephen A. Camp
April 27, 2008, 02:42 PM
Hello,

http://www.hipowersandhandguns.com/Hi%20Power%20Longevity.htm


Best.

McCall911
April 27, 2008, 03:03 PM
You forgot, "and lack of supply". No major contracts, so... guess what? There's your high prices. Plus the darn things just cost more to make. I wouldn't say there's demand, more like lack of supply.

:confused:

Hey, has anyone had trouble locating a Hi-Power in gunbroker, gunsamerica, auctionarms, etc? Maybe I've labored under a huge misconception.

:rolleyes:

tipoc
April 27, 2008, 03:36 PM
There seems to be confusion about the word relevant.

For self defense and general range work-The gun is used by millions around the world and thus by definition still relevant. It still meets the needs of it's users, it continues to do it's job and does it as well, and for many users better, than it's competitors.

As a military sidearm- It is being phased out. While still widely used within a decade or two it will likely be gone from this role and thus no longer relevant to the military. But that has not happened yet so it is still relevant as a military sidearm. It is in use and does it's job and by definition-relevant. The list of sidearms that have seen unbroken military service worldwide for over 70 years is slim.

Engineering-Improvements have been made on pistol design since 1935. The Petter lockup is more durable than the locking lugs of Brownings design. Both Petter and the designers of the Radom Vis had figured out the weakness of the 1911s link back in the 1930's. The frame and slide of many designs are stronger now. Yet old as it is the basics of the design are still widely in use and production. So while other, stronger, less expensive designs exist production figures, sales and profit margins tells use that the BHP is still relevant. That is it is still in use widely and meeting needs.

The existence of vacuum cleaners does not make the broom irrelevant. Only a first year economics student would argue that it does. Or maybe a professor of economics.

The single action design, and the barrel with machined top lugs are no longer in use. The sa trigger makes it irrelevant. If so than add the 1911 to the list of irrelevant guns. The number of pistol manufacturers which offer single action guns is growing, someone should send them a note on this bit of irrelevancy.

I personally find them ugly and to have the WORST ergonomics of any firearm I have ever handled.

That a gun does not feel "right" in a fellas hand does not make it a bad design or irrelevant. Such a thing is subjective. What is not subjective is that the ergonomics of the Hi-Power set an engineering standard. That grip angle and shape have been widely copied, adapted and built on.

Folks may want to rethink what they mean by relevancy.

By the way, the basic discussions for the 1911 began about 1905 within the military. 1911 Tuner is correct on this bit of history. The basic features of the 1911 were designed to meet the needs of mounted soldiers.

tipoc

John C
April 27, 2008, 05:15 PM
Tipoc;

You quoted me to the tune that the SA trigger is (one of the) reason(s) that the HP is irrelevant. You state that someone should tell the 1911 manufacturers. I would agree.

The SA handgun is at an evolutionary dead-end. Although these remain specialty pistols, largely for American consumers as range pistols, and to dedicated pistoleros, manufacturers are not pursuing this as the future of large-scale pistol designs. While it's true that some large manufacturers have modified their SA/DA designs to be SAO, this is done to service niche target shooting markets in the US. I can think of the Sig 220 SAO and the S&W 952 and 945. These are not new designs and by no means defence or duty pistols.

I am a die-hard bullseye shooter, and I shoot SAO or SA striker fired pistols exclusively when punching paper. I have an example of what I believe to be the only new SAO .45 design in the last 30 years, the Pardini GT-45. Pardini is hardly a major manufacturer and the pistol is not a duty or defensive pistol. It is, by design, a range toy. An excellent range toy, but a toy nonetheless.

-John

Tribal
April 27, 2008, 05:31 PM
Maybe I'm just ignorant, but the DA/SA trigger seems to me to be more of a "difference" than an "improvement" on the SA trigger. Unless you don't trust yourself to carry in Condition One, what use is the DA portion? It took me all of about five minutes to incorporate "flip the safety off" into my draw (besides, if you're going to carry in Condition Two on a DA/SA pistol, you probably keep the safety on anyway).

The advantages I can see of SA are that it makes it easier to have a good trigger and that it keeps the ignorant (such as a criminal who may grab a cop's gun) from knowing how to use it.

In short, I don't see how the BHP's SA trigger is something that can be declared as anything other than a matter of preference.

What am I missing?

dogtown tom
April 27, 2008, 07:46 PM
Well, I did my part to help the economy (or at least contribute to the "relevance" of the BHP)

Yesterday, I went to the Big Town gun show in Mesquite and lo and behold what did I find amongst a sea of plastic guns, beef jerky, Moisin Nagants and overpriced ammo?

Well, I wasn't looking for one but for $432 OTD I couldn't pass this up:

My new "best friend":

http://i282.photobucket.com/albums/kk274/dogtowntomstuff/DSCF0045.jpg

Now to all of those who say that a "real" Browning is too expensive.......ya got to look. This one happens to have a perfect outside and a near perfect inside (it has been fired).

DougDubya
April 27, 2008, 08:13 PM
John C - too many skilled people like the single action autoloader for it to be irrelevant. It is one of the easiest triggers to master shooting well.

RNB65
April 27, 2008, 08:17 PM
am late on this, but must add my 2 cents......

You must not get out much.

I salute your wisdom, sir. We have 5 pages of insightful discussion about the BHP and your's is the first post that adds absolutely nothing to the discussion. Keep up the outstanding contributions.

:rolleyes:

Svg99
April 27, 2008, 08:20 PM
I have one it is a indian manufactured ingliss clone, works pretty good for $280 just a little inaccurate...

i know a guy with a real candadian ingliss hp with the holster/stock. Does having the stock make it a sbr?

tipoc
April 27, 2008, 08:47 PM
From John C.

The SA handgun is at an evolutionary dead-end. Although these remain specialty pistols, largely for American consumers as range pistols, and to dedicated pistoleros, manufacturers are not pursuing this as the future of large-scale pistol designs.

It's difficult to improve on the basic design of the hammer. Different materials for the handle, different weight heads, different shapes for different tasks, etc. But the hammer remains. (So does the knife, the fork, the shovel, etc. for that matter). A lonely fella could conclude that it had reached an evolutionary dead end. Another fella, me for example, could conclude that the basic simple design works well for it's intended task and is thus relevant to the needs of many.

The sa pistol remains relevant because the simple, basic design works very well at it's job. So much so that manufacturers all want a piece of that pie.

Since the second world war both military and law enforcement have moved steadily towards da/sa, dao and or striker fired pistols. The reasons for this are well known. The possibility for large scale military contracts and declining profit margins fuel competition in this area. But this does not make the sa pistol obsolete or irrelevant. Kinda scholastic to think so IMHO.

The market for target and self defense shooters alone is a very large one. By your line of thinking the bolt action rifle, the levergun and single action handguns are all irrelevant.

You quoted me to the tune that the SA trigger is (one of the) reason(s) that the HP is irrelevant. You state that someone should tell the 1911 manufacturers. I would agree.

If you do agree and believe that a few letters should be sent to encourage them to get on the evolutionary good foot and cease production of sa pistols, then, I think and no offense meant but, you have left the realm of the real and can take up a position in line with the fella who has invented the gizmo that will allow us all to get 200 miles to the gallon except the auto manufacturers bought his patent and won't put his genius idea into production.

tipoc

Browning
April 27, 2008, 09:19 PM
atblis : You forgot, "and lack of supply". No major contracts, so... guess what? There's your high prices. Plus the darn things just cost more to make. I wouldn't say there's demand, more like lack of supply.

Well you couldn't be more wrong about that little tidbit.

http://www.fnherstal.com/html/Index.htm

The MK3s Hi-Power Pistol, 9 x 19 mm NATO
The world's most famous handgun
Fully reliable, totally safe
Improved design
A dependable weapon
Technical data
The world's most famous handgun

FN HERSTAL's pistol is in service in more than 100 countries and has built its reputation on high quality and total reliability. It is the type of weapon that make you feel secure because it will never let you down whatever the situation, and will help you accomplish your mission.

And that's just the ones made by FN, that doesn't include all the BHP clones (Hungarian FEG and the Argentine FM) that have come out as well. Just from the numbers alone I'd say that it's still pretty popular.

jaydubya
April 27, 2008, 10:22 PM
I think 'big buys', such as are made by military services and police departments, determine the future of a weapon. I don't know this, but I would bet no such groups are ordering big lots of new Hi Powers. Did y'all see that picture of Prince Harry in Afghanistan with was clearly an old Hi Power (an Inglis?) strapped to his chest? With all the holster wear? That pistol may have been older than Prince Harry. FN Herstal is a world class combat weapons producer. It is completely uninterested in providing Hi Powers to niche markets. I think it is over, folks.
Cordially, Jack

Stephen A. Camp
April 27, 2008, 10:50 PM
The grips and ambidextrous extended thumb safeties on the picture of the Hi Power he was carrying were the current blk checkered nylon grips and thumb safeties found on the Mk III. Wear was very noticeable but I do not believe that his pistol was an Inglis.

jaydubya
April 27, 2008, 11:16 PM
Stephen, I yield to your expertise.
Cordially, Jack

Phoinex
April 27, 2008, 11:25 PM
As a HP fan, I just had to jump in here. I had a nice brushed nickle HP in the 80's and with some home cast loads, the accuracy was amazing, even at distances to and beyond 100 yards! Like an idiot, I let someone talk me out of that fine gun.
Last year, I was able to buy a two tone Browning HP with adj sights and a few clips. I shot four rounds out if late one afternoon and then took it to a bowling pin shoot, and won!! Like most HP owners, I really love my hp and it is built like a Swiss watch. With all the new choices on the market, not everyone is forking out the bucks for a new HP, even though they will gladly pay even more for a Kimber!
I don't see that many HP shooters but like me, if you have one, you love it. That is all the relavience I guess I need.

Have fun out there, that is what counts. :)

Dienekes
April 27, 2008, 11:44 PM
Guess I will have to stop by the safe and reassure my Inglis and FN that they are still relevant in my life.

Whereas Glocks, SIGs, and one polymer Ruger have come and gone.

Don't get me started on all those irrelevant revolvers in there with the High Powers...

McCall911
April 27, 2008, 11:55 PM
Don't get me started on all those irrelevant revolvers in there with the High Powers...


You have my deepest sympathy for your tumble into irrelevance, Dienekes.

;)

:D

I wish I could be only half as "irrelevant.."

wristtwister
April 27, 2008, 11:59 PM
Uh, "quirky" means that every gun has it's own "personality", as in "features"... not that they are finicky or hard to cycle or anything like that... each gun is "its own design". Some cars have power steering, others have rack and pinion... etc... those are "quirks" of the design.

Interesting that the Browning is supposed to be "like a glock or sig"..."except for the trigger"... Is that like a Chevrolet is "like a Ford... except for the tires, motor, and looks"? Similar is still different... and in the world of pistoleros, I find it interesting to "equate" them in a thread about the relevance of JB's design, and then turn around and discount them because of the features of that design.

From that "ideal", then Glocks and Sigs would also be irrelevant, if the Browning HP is irrevelant... and I just walked out of a gun show this afternoon that was rift with them... matter of fact, I picked up a Model 92 Beretta (M-9 for the military wonks) that probably has a few "quirks" of its own. Is it irrevelant too? It has many of the same features of the Browning HP.

It seems hypocritical to dismiss a design that took 14 years (1921-1935) as irrevelant, when after the first pistols were produced (the Model 35) and went through at least 17 different revisions to that design... adding features and taking them away, as technology advanced with "field information". I suspect that if the truth of the matter was known, the only reason that the BHP isn't a hot production gun right now, is because the advertising is all focused on those little sissie pistols for concealed carry and the "lightweights" made out of carbon fiber materials.

It would be more expensive to set up the cnc machines to machine good quality steel than the new plastic and carbon fiber materials, but while the technology might be new, the designs and majority of pistol parts still look the same. Field strip almost anything and you still come up with about 4 or 5 main pieces... slide, barrel, recoil spring and guide rod for the upper, and the frame for the bottom. The design isn't a major change if it has a DA or SA trigger set... it's still part of the frame... it's a feature... and from the morphing of the original Browning design (that went through at least 17 versions) the major parts are still the same.

I have a Ruger SR-9, and when I field strip it, there are all kinds of "little parts" all over the inside of it, but it's still a slide, rail, recoil spring, and frame... it's difference is that it's a striker fired pistol, but do changes being made for it's safety make the design "relevant" or irrevelant? They are evolving with field information.

The Browning was the choice of field weapon for 15 different countries, NATO, and many other police and military agencies of those countries, so trying to erase it's memory by telling people it's design is"irrevelant" is something we're all getting used to seeing in the news any more... false advertising. The arguments that the design is irrevelant is like the argument that the wheel is irrevelant... way too much depends on what we learn and use from the design for it to ever be irrevelant until pistols completely change into something else... which they have now, with the invention of the electronically fired weapons.

WT

Northslope Nimrod
April 28, 2008, 12:54 AM
Since Hi-Powers are soooo much sweeter to shoot than a Glock.....doesn't that make Glocks irrelevant?

An earlier poster suggested they were not relevant as a combat pistol.....The Beretta 92 IS relevant but NOT the Hi-Power? Can anyone explain that to me?

Try finding many threads where people are dissapointed with their Hi-Powers. They are hard to find indeed. There aren't many firearms that can claim that.

Also, why is the 1911 so relevant when the Hi-power is not? (both are clearly relevant) Many agencies (especially SWAT and bigger budget cities are dropping their Glocks and picking up 1911's again).

EDITED TO ADD: Weird! I wrote my post before reading the one directly above it...by wristtwister. I could have just put "DITTO"

JoeSlomo
April 28, 2008, 01:02 AM
I personally find them ugly and to have the WORST ergonomics of any firearm I have ever handled. I know they have a cult like status but I just don't understand why.

/shrug

IMO the BHP is THE 9MM pistol PERIOD. I owned a glock 9mm, fired the beretta, a sig, and a couple of others and NONE fit my hand OR shot as well as the BHP passed down to me by my father. He picked it up during a tour in Viet Nam in 71', and carried it until he passed away.

The BHP is not only still relevant, it is the bar that ALL other 9mm's should try to meet, and that MOST fail to do imo.

If I carried a 9mm, it would be the BHP.

LUPUS
April 28, 2008, 07:41 AM
It is still so much relevant COMBAT PISTOL; Time tested decades after decades and field tested through out the world from Sahara to the poles.
I do not mind whether it has a lawyer proof trigger system or not.
It is one of the few pistols I would not hesitate to bet on it my life when it is on the line just right out of the box.

atblis
April 28, 2008, 09:50 AM
FN HERSTAL's pistol is in service in more than 100 countries and has built its reputation on high quality and total reliability. It is the type of weapon that make you feel secure because it will never let you down whatever the situation, and will help you accomplish your mission.
That's great. So which US police department issues this thing? Which hundred countries and do they even issue them to their main army? Andorra? Zimbabwe? Your link proves nothing. That's just like CZ making this assertion
CZ 75 B is used by more Govern-ments, Militaries, Police and Security agencies than any other pistol in the world. The CZ 75 is quite possibly the perfect pistol.
Okay, great what did they actually just say?

Pilot
April 28, 2008, 09:53 AM
And that's just the ones made by FN, that doesn't include all the BHP clones (Hungarian FEG and the Argentine FM) that have come out as well. Just from the numbers alone I'd say that it's still pretty popular.

Not to mention the Bulgarian Arcus BHP clone.

1911Tuner
April 28, 2008, 09:59 AM
So which US police department issues this thing?

Not a consideration. What our police departments issue is based on the individual agency's requirements...and made on what a committee decides is the best compromise that will fill those requirements. It also very often...not always, but often...comes down to the lowest bidder.

Just because X doesn't fit a given US police agency's criteria is not taken as proof that it doesn't fit anybody's.
Diff'rent strokes and all that.

Ghost Tracker
April 28, 2008, 10:47 AM
The BHP was designed & used primarily during a period of time when the VAST majority of adult males were quite accustomed to the general use of long-guns (shooting, hunting) well before their first introduction to handguns. So issues of safety, trigger control, manual-of-arms, etc. were more or less ingrained by the time someone began training to use a 1911 or BHP.

Now days, it's common for a firearms "rookie" to be introduced to handgunning as his FIRST exposure to guns of ANY sort. Many have never before seen, held or (much less) fired a gun. In light of this cultural shift, handguns were then necessarily designed to be more "rookie proof". So trigger-pulls were made longer & heavier, safeties were made more indirect, locks & chamber-indicators were added...all in an effort to prevent the inexperienced user of a handgun from being a walking liability-lawsuit waiting to happen.

More modern GLOCKs, Kahrs, S&W M&P, SIGs, etc. are ALL designed with an eye toward specifically addressing this legal (not functional) issue. So it could be argued that the BHP's fall-from-grace ("irrelevance?") has nothing to do with its capability as a fighting handgun. But more to do with its lack of corrective & protective features to compensate for inexperienced shooters...and EXPERIENCED lawyers!

robctwo
April 28, 2008, 11:00 AM
Hmmmmm. As a lawyer, I guess I'll need to explain to the next new shooter that once the Glock 34 has a round in the chamber it is MUCH more difficult to get the gun to fire than the BHP with a round in the chamber and the safety engaged. Legally speaking.

Pilot
April 28, 2008, 11:09 AM
But more to do with its lack of corrective & protective features to compensate for inexperienced shooters...and EXPERIENCED lawyers!


While I agree with your post in general, I think the cultural shift has been less from lack of familiarity with guns and more from people trying to win the lottery through frivolous law suits. The lack of personal responsiblity and honor in more and more people is to blame. SOME lawyers may promote this behavior through advertising and legislation in order to proft. However, no client, no case, so the ultimate responsible or irresponsilbe party is the client not the lawyer.

1911Tuner
April 28, 2008, 11:15 AM
once the Glock 34 has a round in the chamber it is MUCH more difficult to get the gun to fire than the BHP with a round in the chamber and the safety engaged. Legally speaking.

Legally speaking...yes. On a practical level, the cocked/locked SA pistol is more difficult in that it requires two separate, deliberate actions to make it fire. Once the safety is in the OFF position...both only require one. With a finger on the trigger, the DAO pistol is the more difficult in that it requires more deliberation...or at least a longer brain dwell time...and there's the catch. Some brains are just slower to fully engage before directing the nerves to twitch.

And that, ladies and laddies...is what most often drives decisions to adopt pistol X instead of pistol Y. It's known as the lowest common denominator.

Ghost Tracker
April 28, 2008, 11:17 AM
Well, you being a lawyer and all, I would expect that sort of pretzel logic. :D
BHP with a round in the chamber and the safety engaged

Don't mistake my post as a lawyer-bashing. I like, need & appreciate y'all!

My point is; traditional, single-action, manual-safety, centerfire, autoloading handguns (1911, BHP) aren't the ideal platform from which to launch a shooting novice into high-stress, defensive shooting situations. For better-or-worse, from a ready-to-fire condition,...it IS easier (quicker, with less effort) to get a BHP to fire than a G34.

I'm just offering an explaination as to why the G34 (etc,) is now more often issued than the BHP or 1911 by LE departments.

easyg
April 28, 2008, 12:02 PM
My point is; traditional, single-action, manual-safety, centerfire, autoloading handguns (1911, BHP) aren't the ideal platform from which to launch a shooting novice into high-stress, defensive shooting situations.
Nonsense!
The military has done it for years and years....and continues to do so.

For better-or-worse, from a ready-to-fire condition,...it IS easier (quicker, with less effort) to get a BHP to fire than a G34.
How do you figure?
A loaded Glock has no manual safety and does not have a heavy double-action trigger....just point and shoot.
How is a BHP "easier quicker, with less effort"?

As I see it, the Glock is easier and quicker for novices to shoot than any pistol with a manual safety.

atblis
April 28, 2008, 12:12 PM
Just because X doesn't fit a given US police agency's criteria is not taken as proof that it doesn't fit anybody's.
Diff'rent strokes and all that.
Had nothing to do with the suitably/performance of the firearm in question. Hipowers no doubt perform just fine in many roles.

1911Tuner
April 28, 2008, 12:20 PM
Not my point, either. Mine addressed the comment/question:

So which US police department issues this thing?


What the police choose generally has little to do with the "combat" superiority of one over another and more with the reduced liklihood of departmental liability. Other considerations like reliability and ease of familiarization/training for people who have never fired a gun before entering the profession also enter the equation. The rank and file LEO service sidearm must be a generally-suited weapon rather than a specialty or "Expert Required" platform. The P35 is like the 1911 in that it requires more dedication to handle safely and effectively under the oddball situations that beat cops often become tangled up in during the course of a shift.

Billy Shears
April 28, 2008, 12:28 PM
Quote:
My point is; traditional, single-action, manual-safety, centerfire, autoloading handguns (1911, BHP) aren't the ideal platform from which to launch a shooting novice into high-stress, defensive shooting situations.
Nonsense!
The military has done it for years and years....and continues to do so.
You're forgetting, the military mandates that the pistol will be carried hammer down on an empty chamber, which means you can't just draw and fire, negligently or otherwise. You have to rack the slide first. This is fine for military use, because the pistol is purely a secondary weapon for a soldier. For law enforcement or civilians, however, the pistol will likely be the primary weapon used for self defense, and is not carried that way.

For better-or-worse, from a ready-to-fire condition,...it IS easier (quicker, with less effort) to get a BHP to fire than a G34.
How do you figure?
A loaded Glock has no manual safety and does not have a heavy double-action trigger....just point and shoot.
How is a BHP "easier quicker, with less effort"?

As I see it, the Glock is easier and quicker for novices to shoot than any pistol with a manual safety.
But a single action is easier for them to fumble with, or to have a negligent discharge with its lighter trigger. To incorporate the motions in your draw into muscle memory, you need to practice drawing and presenting (and disengaging the safety if your pistol has one) over and over. It takes, generally speaking, 3000+ repetitions of a motion to commit it to muscle memory, and then you still need to practice after that to maintain it. How many civilian shooters do this? My guess would be hardly any. But with a single action, you need to do this even more scrupulously, thanks to the need to disengage the safety, and thanks to the lighter trigger. Also, for law enforcement, who may have to hold suspects at gun point, the light single action trigger is seen by many as a liability, since it may be more easily pulled unintentionally under stress.

However, the single action is easier and quicker for someone who has trained with it and committed its manual of operation to muscle memory. The short, light trigger enables a highly trained shooter to place accurate shots more rapidly and more consistently than any other platform, which is why the single action dominates shooting sports like IPSC and IDPA, and why it's still the first choice of special operations personnel.

rellascout
April 28, 2008, 12:29 PM
What a pointless argument.

The BHP is relevant as long as people still buy them and shoot them. It is wonderful old school design and it suits many shooters.

What does it matter if someone else does not want one. For those who love them that means more for us. For those who don't simply move on buy what you like.

There is no one single solution for all shooters. Everyone of us is different so it would make no sense for there to be 100% consciouses on any given pistol.

Ghost Tracker
April 28, 2008, 01:01 PM
Thanks Billy Shears, you beat me to my response.

Well-trained, experienced pistoleros still do (and always will) like some "old-school" designs. Quick Draw guys still like the SAA. IPSC/IDPA guys still like the 1911. I still like the BHP. And as long as I do, it will still be relevant...to ME! While I can easily rationalize this choice all afternoon long, and wonder/guess why more folks don't feel the same way. I really don't need to justify anything. Everyone go out, put a BHP in your hand & SHOOT IT! A number of shooters will say "WOW" & a number of shooters will say "YUCK". It's been my experience that the WOWs usually outnumber the YUCKs by a strong margin. Past that? No excuse needed.

In these 150+ responses, has ANYONE said "I would've OWN a (deleted) BHP because they're all (deleted) junk!" Heck, it's hard to find any design we've mentioned that someboby doesn't hate.

easyg
April 28, 2008, 01:13 PM
You're forgetting, the military mandates that the pistol will be carried hammer down on an empty chamber, which means you can't just draw and fire, negligently or otherwise. You have to rack the slide first.
This is a widespread misconception of the truth....
This is true in training, and often in secure areas far from the frontlines....but not in forward hostile areas or on patrol.
When I was in Iraq, those that carried pistols did so with one in the chamber and ready to draw and fire (101st ABN DIV (AASLT)).
Don't confuse "official training doctrine per the manual" with actual applied tactics....nobody knowingly goes in to hostile territory with an empty chamber.

But a single action is easier for them to fumble with, or to have a negligent discharge with its lighter trigger.
Not if that SA has a manual safety.
Besides, how much difference is there in the trigger weight?
What's the trigger weight of the BHP?
According to FN's website, their BHP has a trigger weight of 2.5-4.5 lbs.
The Glock has about a 5 lb. trigger.
Not too much difference if you're careless with either.

It takes, generally speaking, 3000+ repetitions of a motion to commit it to muscle memory, and then you still need to practice after that to maintain it.
More nonsense....
One does not need to practice 3000+ reps in order to draw a Glock, point, aim, and pull the trigger.
It's just not that difficult.

Billy Shears
April 28, 2008, 02:00 PM
This is a widespread misconception of the truth....
This is true in training, and often in secure areas far from the frontlines....but not in forward hostile areas or on patrol.
When I was in Iraq, those that carried pistols did so with one in the chamber and ready to draw and fire (101st ABN DIV (AASLT)).
Don't confuse "official training doctrine per the manual" with actual applied tactics....nobody knowingly goes in to hostile territory with an empty chamber.
The M9 is a modern double action design with a firing pin safety that the military's previous, single action pistol did not have.

Not if that SA has a manual safety.
The manual safety is easy to fumble with if you haven't trained yourself to do it smoothly and unconsciously, so that you'll be capable of doing it under stress.

Besides, how much difference is there in the trigger weight?
What's the trigger weight of the BHP?
According to FN's website, their BHP has a trigger weight of 2.5-4.5 lbs.
The Glock has about a 5 lb. trigger.
Not too much difference if you're careless with either.
I've yet to see a BHP with a trigger of 2.5 lbs. Usually it's between 5-8. And most police departments, again out of fear of liability, mandate the New York trigger, which ups the weight to 8lbs.

More nonsense....
One does not need to practice 3000+ reps in order to draw a Glock, point, aim, and pull the trigger.
It's just not that difficult.
Nonsense eh? Well maybe you can explain why my department, and every other department, as well as firearms training outfits like Gunsite, Thunder Ranch, Blackwater, Lethal Force Institute, and others all teach you to practice your draw over and over and over again. 3000+ times. In order to build the motion into your muscle memory. If you want to be smooth and fast -- and your life may depend on your ability to draw quickly without sacrificing accuracy -- you damn well better practice those 3000+ repetitions.

It's clear to me from the above comment that you frankly don't know what the hell you're talking about. If you did, you wouldn't say something so asinine. When you are suddenly faced with a potentially lethal threat, your body goes into fight or flight mode. Adrenaline, and a whole pharmacy of other drugs gets dumped into your bloodstream. This increases your speed and strength for either fight or flight, but it throws your fine motor skills out the window. Psychologists tell us that in times of extreme stress, the unconscious -- which is thought to be the repository of survival instincts, “muscle memory,” learned responses and emergency reflexes -- takes over from the conscious mind. Survivors of gunfights report temporal and auditory distortion and a narrowing of the field of vision to focus on the threat. All of this profoundly changes your ability to hit what you are shooting at for the worse, and it means that the first time you are faced with a lethal threat is not the moment work out new fighting techniques. Knowledgeable professionals, which you clearly are not, who carry a gun and may may have to use it to defend their lives practice, practice, practice, in order to build their responses into muscle memory and achieve that level of unconscious competence that allows them to deploy their weapons instantaneously and without any conscious thought.

Geno
April 28, 2008, 02:07 PM
dogtowntom:

Wow, that's almost shameless theft. Congratulations. She a beauty!

Doc2005

Brasso
April 28, 2008, 03:47 PM
How can it not be? It's a modern pistol. Every modern pistol out there is a knock-off of the Hi-Power except for the SA trigger. There's nothing obsolete about it. Sure, it may be more expensive to make, but that's because they actually take the time to fit the parts. It's not an assembly line gun with loose tolerances, but it's design is pretty much exactly like every other gun currently being made. The cost to manufacture it may be it's demise, but not it's design.

rellascout
April 28, 2008, 04:07 PM
I just picked this one out the Classifieds here on THR:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v75/akscott60/hipowerfixed2.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v75/akscott60/hipowerfixed1.jpg

The pistol has been to Don at The Action Works for a trigger job,
C&S wide trigger & Commander hammer.
Heine sights install.
The slide has been re-blued.
Grips are black Navidrex

$600 shipped. I consider that relevant.

easyg
April 28, 2008, 05:42 PM
It's clear to me from the above comment that you frankly don't know what the hell you're talking about. If you did, you wouldn't say something so asinine. When you are suddenly faced with a potentially lethal threat,....
Billy, I don't know what your own experience is but I have been in combat in Iraq, and I know all about facing "potentially lethal threats".

Have you ever been shot at by a squad of enemy soldiers?

easyg
April 28, 2008, 05:45 PM
Rellascout, nice pistol!

What do you think about the placement of the safety lever?
Do you have to adjust your grip in order to switch it off safe?

Thanks,
Easy.

rellascout
April 28, 2008, 05:50 PM
No not at all. I will be replacing the standard ambi with a extended C&S so it is setup like my other ones.

Billy Shears
April 28, 2008, 06:03 PM
Billy, I don't know what your own experience is but I have been in combat in Iraq, and I know all about facing "potentially lethal threats".

Have you ever been shot at by a squad of enemy soldiers?
No, but I've been shot at by thugs on the street, and their bullets kill people just as dead. I've also been in the army (MOS 11B, 2/35IN, 25th Div. Tropic Lightning, '97-'00), so I know what training the infantry gets with pistols: none. Unless you are an officer or senior NCO issued one. I never was, not even after PLDC when I had three stripes on my collar. There are too many other things that take up limited training time for the army to focus on training everyone on a weapon that most of them will never even carry.

For police, on the other hand, the pistol is the primary weapon. If you know trouble's coming, you grab a shotgun or patrol rifle, but since you don't always know, and you can't carry them everywhere in law enforcement, you train primarily with the pistol, because that's what you always have with you.

So I know whereof I speak, and when you dismiss the need to practice those 3000+ repetitions and practice your draw as "more nonsense", it's clear to me that you haven't had any extensive training with a pistol, and don't know what you are talking about, because that's absolutely contrary to the training that people like me who carry a gun for a living are getting these days.

1911Tuner
April 28, 2008, 06:07 PM
you frankly don't know what the hell you're talking about. If you did, you wouldn't say something so asinine.

Whoa, up! We attack the argument here...not the member. Step back and take a breath, Billy. If it turns into a brawl, I'll close it.

coyotehitman
April 28, 2008, 06:12 PM
Must be pretty relevant if folks are engaging in arguments over it.

easyg
April 28, 2008, 06:18 PM
So I know whereof I speak, and when you dismiss the need to practice those 3000+ repetitions and practice your draw as "more nonsense", it's clear to me that you haven't had any extensive training with a pistol, and don't know what you are talking about, because that's absolutely contrary to the training that people like me who carry a gun for a living are getting these days.
Some folks just need more practice than others I suppose....heck, some folks will never be competent regardless of the number of times they practice.
They can practice 10,000+ times and still screw it up.

But here's a bit of psychobabble to consider.....

If you have convinced yourself that you MUST practice 3000+ draws in order to be competent, then you will NEED to practice 3000+ draws in order to be competent.
You've already convinced yourself that any number less equals failure, regardless of the truth.

Billy Shears
April 28, 2008, 06:22 PM
Whoa, up! We attack the argument here...not the member. Step back and take a breath, Billy. If it turns into a brawl, I'll close it.
Sorry, but although I am not being deliberately contentious, I make no apologies for my tone. I think it was appropriate given the provocation. It was not I, after all, who derisively dismissed the comments of another board member as "nonsense". That is frankly insulting. It is doubly so when the person so dismissing is clearly speaking out of ignorance. Easyg could have said something like "It doesn't seem to me like it ought to require 3000 times to learn how to draw and fire a Glock". He did not opt for respectful disagreement, he chose to do so in way that was dismissive and therefore insulting.

Well, as I said, it's not nonsense. It happens to reflect the most advanced current training when it comes to carrying and using a pistol for self defense, training that has been devised after decades of law enforcement and civilian shootings were scrutinized. If easyg wants to dismiss that training as "nonsense", he has every right to do so. But he has, I think, little right to be offended at getting an equally disrespectful response in reply.

1911Tuner
April 28, 2008, 06:30 PM
Billy...Easyg...Let's try to agree that, on the one hand...repetitive practice is a good thing, and the more we do, the better we get...PROVIDED...that it's good practice. A wise quote that I don't know who to attribute to made the most sense that I've seen in a while. To wit:

"Practice doesn't make perfect. Practice makes permanent."

Let's also agree that some people are blessed with the hand-eye coordination that allows them to perfect a move quickly...and some aren't.

And now, let's move on before this one goes south.

The Hi-Power is a good pistol. If I had to pick one up and go, I wouldn't feel at any sort of disadvantage unless I was facing the Hordes of Atilla. It's not a perfect pistol...and there are none that are. In the end, there is only what we choose. Choose wisely. Work diligently. Pray that you don't need it, and if you do...pray that you'll be lucky. Remember that you have to be lucky every time your attacker pulls the trigger. He only has to get lucky once.

And, Billy...Always be apologetic when you put a toe across the line. It's just the right thing to do.

Cheers, all.

Baker's at the dip! Stand down!

Timthinker
April 28, 2008, 06:33 PM
As others have noted, the trend in military and law enforcement communities has been toward some type of DA pistol. This part of the discussion seems beyond refutation. What can be argued, as this lengthy thread demonstrates, is the relevance of the BHP design. To me, it remains a relevant design, but probably not the best with which to train "rookies". I see merit in the switch to DA designs, particularly for those who will rely upon a hangun as their primary weapon. Yes, I think the BHP is a fine handgun. But I think it, along with the 1911 design, has been superceded by other semi-auto pistols for military and law enforcement usages. I do not see this trend as reversible, but a discussion about such a topic would prove interesting.


Timthinker

RNB65
April 28, 2008, 06:33 PM
A little civility please, gentlemen. We're discussing the merits of the BHP, not military/civilian/LE training doctrine.

Thank you.
-

Billy Shears
April 28, 2008, 06:43 PM
Some folks just need more practice than others I suppose....heck, some folks will never be competent regardless of the number of times they practice.
They can practice 10,000+ times and still screw it up.

But here's a bit of psychobabble to consider.....

If you have convinced yourself that you MUST practice 3000+ draws in order to be competent, then you will NEED to practice 3000+ draws in order to be competent.
You've already convinced yourself that any number less equals failure, regardless of the truth.
Or, one could very sensibly take the view that, practicing 3000+ repetitions of a motion is a small price to pay for ensuring one has the skills to call upon when the $#!& hits the fan, rather than discovering too late that one hasn't.

You can dismiss this if you like. It's your ass. But no one achieves unconscious competence without lots of practice. Tiger Woods isn't the best at golf just because he's naturally gifted. He's the best because he's gifted, and because he practices more than anyone else. Michael Jordan wasn't the best on the basketball court because he's naturally gifted, he was the best because he cultivated his talent with lots and lots of practice.

If this applies to sport, how much more so to defensive use of a firearm, where the stakes are orders of magnitude higher. If Tiger Woods missed a put, or Jordan missed a free throw, they only risked losing a game. If you screw up in a gunfight, you risk losing your life. If you really were in the army, then you must have heard the saying "you fight like you train."

It's a documented fact that people revert to training under this kind of extreme stress. In the investigation following the tragic CHP Newhall gunfight that left four CHP officers dead, it was found:

“…that officers would react to a situation exactly the way they were taught in training. This occurred with Officer Pence. After Officer Pence had fired his sixth and last round, he tried to perform and reload just the way he was taught at the academy. He dumped the expended rounds from his revolver into his right hand and put the expended rounds in his pants pocket, as he had done on the firing range, then reloaded 6 rounds into his revolver. This gave Twining enough time to flank Pence and put a bullet in the back of his head. After the California Highway Patrol learned of this they issued speed loaders to their officers and changed their firearms training program to reflect real life shooting scenarios.”

– Tom Kohl, STAYING ALIVE ON THE JOB - A SURVIVAL GUIDE FOR PEACE OFFICERS

This is a perfect illustration of the principle that we fight like we train. We revert to it totally without conscious thought. Even when it makes no sense, even when it may be the worst thing in the world to do, people under extreme stress almost invariably tend to default and revert to the methods they have practiced and rehearsed. In this particular case, the training this officer had received caused him to put empty cases in his pocket, wasting precious seconds while a bad guy was moving to a better position to shoot him. No doubt he and his fellow troopers trained that way so as to save themselves the bother of scrabbling around in the dirt for empty brass after shooting. But it had the effect of ingraining a useless set of movements into his muscle memory that he unthinkingly reverted to in combat.

Now in the case of the draw, the reason you practice 3000+ times is so that you can do it smoothly and quickly, without conscious thought, even while running, crouching, turning, possibly even falling, and still get an accurate first shot off from the holster as fast as possible. If you don't practice those 3000+ repetitions, it's a fact that you won't be as fast or as smooth. Maybe you'll still be lucky enough to shoot the bad guy first. If you want to depend on luck, be my guest. I'd rather stack the deck just as much in my favor as humanly possible, thank you very much.

Billy Shears
April 28, 2008, 06:45 PM
Billy...Easyg...Let's try to agree that, on the one hand...repetitive practice is a good thing, and the more we do, the better we get...PROVIDED...that it's good practice. A wise quote that I don't know who to attribute to made the most sense that I've seen in a while. To wit:

"Practice doesn't make perfect. Practice makes permanent."

Let's also agree that some people are blessed with the hand-eye coordination that allows them to perfect a move quickly...and some aren't.

And now, let's move on before this one goes south.
My last post was being typed while you posted this. I'm perfectly willing to leave it here though. I think I've made my point as well as it can be made.

1911Tuner
April 28, 2008, 06:50 PM
I'm perfectly willing to leave it here though.

Outstanding!

Gentlemen...The topic is:

"The BHP: As good as any or outdated and obsolete in the modern arena?"

Carry on!

tipoc
April 28, 2008, 08:14 PM
This has been a good and useful discussion on a number of levels I think.

I think the question of the transition to da/sa handguns by the military and law enforcement is an important one that should be taken up in another thread. It's a transition that has been much discussed but is clearly still relevant. I also think that for some it's the heart of the matter if they hold the opinion that the P35 is irrelevant.

One thing oughta be clear, we usually don't spend 7 pages discussing an irrelevant handgun.

tipoc

chrismc410
April 28, 2008, 08:41 PM
The fact that the Charles Daly version, the FEG version, the Argentine version, the Arcus, Kareens, etc. even exist is a testament to the Hi Power's success. They say imitation is the most sincere form of flattery, by that logic, John Browning and Saive must be quite flattered wherever they are spending eternity. I've owned two FEG versions, one Argentine, and one actual Browning, all four functioned flawlessly, all four cycled every round I put in it, all four were more than enough for me. Yes, there are technologically better pistols out now, but the Hi Power still will get my attention faster than anything else out there.

Dienekes
April 28, 2008, 09:28 PM
I wonder if the Glock 17 or the Ruger SR9 will be generating this amount of discussion and affection (in most cases) when they have been around for 73 years?

I suspect not. :rolleyes:

I first laid hands on an Inglis BHP almost 50 years ago and my first thought was, "This is one classy little gun!". Sort of like the '57 T-Bird of pistols...

colt1903
April 28, 2008, 11:19 PM
Mine is still relevant:
http://i284.photobucket.com/albums/ll17/colt1903/009-7.jpg
31 foot target
http://i284.photobucket.com/albums/ll17/colt1903/063-1.jpg

AndyC
April 28, 2008, 11:25 PM
A BHP was my sidearm in Iraq, so yes - still relevant.

http://img187.imageshack.us/img187/8450/andybhptf1.jpg

Marshall
April 28, 2008, 11:43 PM
Andy,

Thanks for your service!

Is that a spent case flying in your picture or a chopper? Or bumble bee?

Pilot
April 29, 2008, 09:37 AM
A BHP was my sidearm in Iraq, so yes - still relevant.

I agree, still VERY relevant.


Andy,

What contract firm did you work for?

DougDubya
April 29, 2008, 01:24 PM
Andy - your photo album of your work in Iraq were amazing. Thank you for sharing them.

AndyC
April 29, 2008, 02:20 PM
Thanks, guys; I honestly consider myself very fortunate to have been given the opportunity to go there. I worked for a Brit/US company called ArmorGroup - outstanding people.

Marshall - it's a spent case.

Doug - my dad is a huge fan of your work (I haven't read any myself yet), so thanks ;)

Candiru
April 29, 2008, 02:34 PM
Any gun that fires when you need it to is relevant. Everything beyond that is just shades of applicability, which vary wildly based on the circumstances and the shooter.

That being said, I think the Hi-Power is an excellent gun whose prevalence worldwide dwarfs even the acceptance of the 1911 in these United States. Just as the 1911 represents the apex of 45 caliber handgun design, the Hi-Power is the ideal platform for the 9mm Luger round: It is slim and light and takes advantage of the compact round by providing amazing capacity without sacrificing grip ergonomics. The Hi-Power is the oldest 9mm handgun still in modern production, and almost all modern semi-automatic handguns sprang from its design. Its numerous progeny notwithstanding, the Hi-Power can still be found in its original form for the same reasons as the 1911, and for the same reason that sharks and crocodiles are still successful predators despite the fact that their forms have remained virtually untouched by evolution for hundreds of millions of years: Sometimes, things are done right the first time.

This isn't to say that the Hi-Power is perfect; like any work of man, it has shortcomings. None of these drawbacks are unintentional, though; all are design tradeoffs or intentionally implemented. The strength of the gun, though, lies in the fact that it is the product of an earlier handgun design mindset that remains relevant despite attempts to brand it as pure anachronism. The Hi-Power, like the 1911, is a handgun designed for one purpose: to shoot well. With a singular shark-like focus, all elements irrelevant to this purpose, unless imposed by external fiat, have been stripped away. What remains is nearly the Platonic ideal of a semi-automatic pistol: flat, compact, ergonomic, accurate, reliable, and quick to recover from recoil. Safety mechanisms exist to prevent inadvertent fumbles, but keep well clear of the primal interface between the shooter and the gun. Compare this to modern safety mechanisms, many of which act to prevent the user from firing the gun easily. By contrast, the Hi-Power acts like an extension of one's hand, melding seamlessly into the intermediate space between the shooter and the target.

Art is what remains when all that is unnecessary is removed. In this sense, the Hi-Power is a work of art. Like any work of art, its status as such is debatable, but one thing can be said for sure: It's still relevant and useful to those who like its ergonomics and shootability, and it will continue to serve a valuable role long after many of its supposed successors have drifted into obscurity.

UnTainted
April 29, 2008, 03:07 PM
Back when I only owned 1 handgun the HI-Power saved my life.

Relevant enough for me.

glockamolee
April 29, 2008, 05:01 PM
With my .40 caliber Hi-Power using the Bar Sto 9mm conversion, I can shoot HOT +p+ 9's in it all day. I have the SFS upgrade (some think that it is a downgrade... ok), and the 15 and 17 rd argentinian magazines.

Certainly relevant, and comparable to a 57 chevy.

If I want raw power, then its 10 mil time in a polymer packsage.

platform
April 29, 2008, 05:58 PM
If I am to define the following criteria

smoothness of the trigger pull
resistance to dirt & sand (meaning that it can shoot after being mouled
in dirt and sand)
consistency of hits on target from shot to follow up shot
ability to shoot over 30,000 rounds of +p 9mm ammo without parts replacement
single - hand operation
ability to eject less than perfeclty sized cases



Will the newly manufactured hi-power fail for any of the above, while
the other guns not?

To me the only thing where high-power yelds CZ for example -- is the capacity
as 9mm CZs take 18-19 rounds
and tactical rail.

tipoc
April 29, 2008, 06:23 PM
A simple gun.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v432/tipoc/bhp1.jpg

tipoc

atblis
April 29, 2008, 11:44 PM
To me the only thing where high-power yelds CZ for example -- is the capacity
as 9mm CZs take 18-19 rounds
and tactical rail.
That's actually not quite correct. The CZ75/SP01 only holds 15/16 rounds. The 18/19 round mags extend below the gun, so technically the gun doesn't actually hold that many. No reason you couldn't use extended mags on a HP (I am sure somebody somewhere makes them).

Marshall
April 30, 2008, 12:02 AM
Yep

MEC-GAR makes 15rd flush fitting mags for the HP. And there are higher capacities than that offered, I've seen 20 rounders. Fifteen is enough for me.

http://www.cdnninvestments.com/hi9mm215mane.html

springmom
April 30, 2008, 12:33 AM
A handgun few want???? Are you out of your mind????

If they're so unwanted, why, pray tell, are they so bloody hard to come by? I asked (nicely) if the guys at my local gunshop would please, please, PLEASE keep an eye out for a nice BHP (mine is lonely and wants a friend). They just laughed. They'd love to oblige, but they NEVER get them in.

The BHP is the epitome of classy, functional, autoloaders. Irrelevant....snort.

Springmom

sixgunner455
April 30, 2008, 03:18 PM
Relevant, schmelvent...it's just a damn sexy piece.

Durn straight!!

The ONLY reason I bought a CZ75 SA instead of one of these was... the CZ fits my hand better. Gun fit, not appearance, not respect, not tradition, not "caliber," since I have no problem carrying 9mm and actually prefer it to harder kicking rounds.

Gun fit. I was looking at the P226/P228/P220/BHP. Picked up a CZ out of a display case on a whim, and I no longer wanted to look at the other ones for buying purposes. At all. The fit in the hand trumped ALL the reasons I was looking at the other guns. Just a visceral "rightness" when that gun hit my palm.

If you've never experienced that "rightness" in anything in your life, you won't understand. I've experienced it just a few times, three of them with firearms and once with a woman. I married her and bought the guns, and I'm keeping them all.

All that said, if I hadn't bought the CZ, I would have bought the BHP. In my hand, it was second place.

If you enjoyed reading about "Is the Browning Hi-Power still relevant?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!