Browning Hi Power, Discontinued

dh1633pm

The CZ finally did them in. Lets face it the plastic crowd (nothing wrong with that) didn't do them in. As much of a classic as it is, the CZ was a better version.

Click to expand...

I would have to disagree with your premise in that as much as I love my Hi-Power I also enjoy the grip shape of the CZ P01. But the distance to the trigger of the P01 (and the full size CZ 75 in particular), is still a bit of a reach if you have a small hand like I do. Likewise the grip of the Beretta Model 92 is too big and the reach to the trigger too far as to make it a less than desirable choice for me in a high capacity 9mm.

And while it is in some ways similar to the Hi-Power I don't think the CZ 75 is that much more of a better version and thus the reason for the Hi-Power to be discontinued. I tend to think it's the lower production costs associated with polymer framed pistols that is the driving force at work here.

JTQ said:

Oh my, no. The CZ is a fine gun, but the Hi-Power is uniquely a higher capacity pistol that is suited to the small hand. The CZ75, while having a very comfortable grip, has one of the longest trigger reach of all.

Click to expand...

It's not exactly fair to compare the DA trigger of DA/SA to a SA gun like the BHP. Doing so ignores the fact that the safety-equipped models of the CZ can also be started from cocked & locked just like a BHP. From cocked and locked, the CZ SA trigger pull is much shorter and more comparable to the BHP. (If you have a decocker-equipped CZ, it decocks to and starts from the half-cock notch, and while it's still longer than the BHP, it's much more user-friendly for those with shorter fingers or smaller hands.)

If you switch to a CZ-75B SAO model (the version best compared to a BHP), that model can be ordered or retrofit with a two-way adjustable trigger that lets you reduce both over-travel and take-up to an absolute minimum. The result can be a very fine trigger, indeed.

(The out of the box "factory" triggers for either of these guns seem, nowadays, to need a little help.)

bannockburn said:

...And while it is in some ways similar to the Hi-Power I don't think the CZ 75 is that much more of a better version and thus the reason for the Hi-Power to be discontinued.

Click to expand...

As others have noted already, there is very little about the CZ that is like the Hi-Power, except a general appearance. I would argue that the CZ is much more in one way -- as it it is a DA/SA design that was later modified to offer DAO or SAO, too, and then a decocker model. The Hi-power comes in one basic design and, now, in one caliber.

They both, like most modern center-fire semi-autos, use a variation of the Browning Short-Recoil Locked-Breech design. Not much else is shared. SIG, H&K, Glock, and many others share that with the Hi-Power, too.

JTQ said:

Oh my, no. The CZ is a fine gun, but the Hi-Power is uniquely a higher capacity pistol that is suited to the small hand. The CZ75, while having a very comfortable grip, has one of the longest trigger reach of all.

If you chose a Hi-Power because you wanted a double stack 9mm, and the Glock or Beretta 92 didn't fit, you're not going to pick the CZ75 over the Hi-Power.

Click to expand...

I'm a big CZ fan as well as HP fan. The 75 with single action trigger (either an SA model or originally a DA/SA with the SA trigger fitted, such as the outstanding Cajun Gun Works 6SAO trigger) feels to me slightly smaller in the grip than a HP due to the more ergonomic shape of the CZ. The HP feels wider, among other ergonomic differences. I THINK the 75 with SA trigger would feel a little more secure than the HP in a smaller hand. My wife says this is the case for her.

tarosean said:

Odd statement considering the Brits just replaced it 3 years ago!

Click to expand...

Yep they did replace it only 3 years ago. It was mainly a matter of costs as well (costs of the gun, replacement parts and costs to train armorers, etc.). The British had no major complaints against the BHP and it began in their service during the second world war. They were one of the last hold outs though, and one of the best endorsements for the gun even today.

The fight was won by da/sa guns in the 80s over which way things would go. Generally sa guns were being phased out of service as a military and law enforcement service sidearm internationally by that time. By the time Glocks arrived the story was almost done with.

That's just true. It also doesn't mean much in terms of what to choose as a personal choice for defensive purposes. The BHP is what it's always been an outstanding gun and a good choice for personal defense.

For all the "The CZ in single action..." comments...

How far is the reach to the thumb safety on the CZ75B relative to the the reach to the thumb safety on the Hi-Power?

If you don't see the advantage the Hi-Power has over the CZ75 for the small handed you probably don't have hand size issues with any gun.

From the trigger finger's perspective, a Glock and a 1911 are both "single action." By that, I mean a fairly short, light stroke. Your finger doesn't care about SA vs. striker fired, only that it moves about 1/4" with 4-6# of force and Bang. The Glock ND reputation reflects that.

Glock took over because they cost less then the competition and were as reliable as a revolver with 3x the capacity.

I do not think the Brits have been the last HP holdout. Like the FN FAL, the HP has been in use by a great many third world military and police for a very long time. Be interesting to know how many, if any still use it, retain it in inventory.

JTQ said:

How far is the reach to the thumb safety on the CZ75B relative to the the reach to the thumb safety on the Hi-Power?

Click to expand...

If you use a SA version of the 75B, rather than the DA/SA version in SA mode, the safety is larger, and easier to use,than the Hi-Power safety.. That type of safety lever can be retrofit to the DA/SA version, if desired. (And the Stainles models now have ambi-safeties.) Internally, the DA/SA versions are almost identical -- the SA version has the disconnector removed.

I shot a number of matches using my 85-Combat (DA/DA) CZ in SA mode -- Enhanced Service Ppistol in IDPA -- and really had no problems. I keep thinking I'm going to get the SAO levers and install them, but I'm not shooting much competitively any more, and it would probably be wasted money. I also have a T-Series BHP and it's small factory lever was really NOT noticeably easier to use nor greatly better positioned than the safety on the CZ. I know you can get different (i.e., larger) safety levers for the BHP and I eventually did that with my T-sries BHP -- but it's still not as ergonomic as the levers on current production guns, which are pretty good. I much prefer the safety levers on the SAO version of the CZ to ANY I've found on a Hi-Power.

I like both the BHP and the CZ and the BHP seems a bit narrower when carried. I've never really measured to learn how much of that is real and how much is imagination.

Walt Sherrill said:

If you use a SA version of the 75B, rather than the DA/SA version in SA mode, the safety is larger, and easier to use,than the Hi-Power safety.. That type of safety lever can be retrofit to the DA/SA version, if desired. (And the Stainles models now have ambi-safeties.)

Click to expand...

The issue is not the size of the safety levers, it is where they are positioned. If you can comfortably reach the thumb safety on a CZ75B/SA, you don't have hand size issues that a Browning Hi-Power will address.

tipoc said:

What's the name of the store? Does it have a website? I'd like to buy those parts off him.

How big a tub? Like a tub of butter or "I can't believe it's not butter!" tub, or like a wash tub that ya wash your chonies in?

It's true they don't hold up. I have one that was used for 20 years by the IDF and then for 10 years by me for thousands of rounds and finally I had to replace 2 parts. I once replaced the recoil spring! That's three parts. Until that gunsmith spoke up I thought I had a good reliable piece.

How big a tub again? Like half a wine barrel?

Click to expand...

Well, best I remember the tub was about the size of a dish pan and it was pretty well filled with scrap Hi Power parts. The gun range doesn't have a website but you can reach them at 254-968-8986.

Mizar said:

Yes, they don't hold up - just a bunch of Belgian crap... Send those stupid bloody Hi-Powers to me, please.

P.S. I know that I'm asking too much, but is there any chance that you could tell your gunsmith to bugger off? Please! I would happily do that myself, but I live too far away...

Click to expand...

The phone number is 254-968-8986 if you like to tell him yourself and perhaps purchase the Hi Power scrap parts.

Eugen said:

Your report from that "gunsmith" gave me a good laugh. I think most readers would more than likely question the quality of your gunsmith's opinion and not the quality of BHPs.

Click to expand...

I really liked the only Hi Power I ever shot. I borrowed it to shoot for qualification for my LTC. It fit my hand very well and I shot very accurately with it. In fact it was the first pistol I had shot in about 25 years. The Hi Power really sparked my interest in pistol shooting! And I have since purchased several pistols and shoot regularly. However, a pile of Hi Power scrap parts was enough to convince me to consider other options, regardless of anyone's opinion.

Gander used to stock the HP, Oh wait they gone too

I have a couple Hi Powers and I love them. I'll likely never put enough rounds through them to turn them into a pile of scrap parts but I am amazed at the breadth of opinions I have read on the internet about their sturdiness and durability. It doesn't seem the opposite extremes of opinion could possibly be talking about the same gun. It reminds me of an occupation I was in years ago that was ostensibly based on science and repeatable facts but as I read the literature in the field, I could find testimony for just about every extreme imaginable. Truth can be an elusive commodity sometimes.

JTQ said:

The issue is not the size of the safety levers, it is where they are positioned. If you can comfortably reach the thumb safety on a CZ75B/SA, you don't have hand size issues that a Browning Hi-Power will address.

Click to expand...

I understood your point, but disagree.

If you measure the distance between the center of the trigger (where your finger rests) and the safety's pivot point on both guns, the CZ is about 1/4" greater (i.e., more forward and farther from rear of the grip, allowing less thumb engagement) on the CZ DA/SA version. If you're using the DA/SA version of the gun in SA mode, and have a short thumb that 1/4" difference could be an issue, I don't have a short thumb, so it never was an issue for me. (I don't have a particularly big hand, either.)

That said, I don't find the BHP safeties EASIER to release than the safeties on the SAO version of the CZ, and the dedicated SAO version is the best one to talk about when comparing it to the CZ. (Not the DA/SA guns, as some talk about them -- and indeed, I doubt that most of those advocates carry in SA model. For most of them I suspect it is just an option, or a fall-back position if they don't want to decock manulally.)

The safeties on the SAO version are much larger than the safety levers on the DA/SA version and give you more to press (on what is a more ergonomic lever design). If you've got a short thumb or smaller hand, the CZ DA/SA probably isn't the gun for you if you're focused on SA starts. But I think most folks would find a CZ SAO gun every bit as accommodating as a Hi-Power.

Truly one of the great icons of the shooting world. The pistol was ahead of its time. Just about every one of the more popular pistols today have to some degree employed one or more of the basic principles developed by John M. Browning and used in the High Power... If nothing else the double stacked magazines that are widely used today are basically Browning designs. The High Power has served as the military pistol in a dozen or more countries and that's no accident. The fact of the matter is that the High Power was primarily a FMJ military pistol and a single action design as well. Considering the role of the pistol in military applications this was not a negative issue at all.

Times have changed and so has technology. I'm afraid the High Power will go the way of most of the all time great guns. It will become more expensive to manufacture than the market will support. Firearms manufacturers, just like any other manufacturer, run on money and survive on profit margins. In the end I think the High Power will achieve the cult status and values that will steadily increase in much the same way that the Colt Python has. While I have an abiding love for all steel guns with a deep, rich bluing and trimmed in walnut like the High Power, I will have to admit to owning and carrying any number of plastic pistols. The Glock 19, gen 3 is one of my favorite carry guns. The damn thing only has 34 parts in it and it always goes bang when I pull the trigger. It has NEVER failed to run. It is absolutely NOT something I hold in asthetic contemplation! It's as ugly as a turd in a punch bowl. But if there's a chance that I may have to defend life and limb with a handgun, I will have no problem doing so with any number of the plastic pistols I own. That G19? I can dump fifteen full power rounds in the "A" zone of a silhouette target at bad breath distances in a matter of seconds. We can debate caliber and such all day long. I bet I can ruin someone's entire day with that G19.

"...on the Discontinued Models page..." You may want to look again. Only the .40 S&W flavour is discontinued in all models. And the 75th Anniversary models and the really silly the "Digital Green" finish.
"...dealers don't stock Hi-Powers because the demand is low..." More about the MSRP being over a grand.

You see 98bluewave, I don't think that your gunsmith's opinion worth much for two simple reasons: one is that I have worked on enough Hi-Powers and, although I'm not a gunsmith, I claim to know a thing or two about the gun and it's design. And two - if he really has so many broken parts from a specific gun that means that he is specializing in it's repair. And if he is, than he must know better - any competent gunsmith that has worked on Hi-Powers can differentiate fact from fiction. Although not THE best gun design, the BHP is a good, reliable and solid gun. Most of it's weaknesses can be traced back to the owner - incompetent use and handling. Let me give you a couple of examples:

Sear: disassemble the gun, now press with your finger on the top of the sear - the hammer drops. And hits that sear right on the engagement edge with full force. Do that just a couple of times and the result is hammer follow, and sometimes bend sear pin. Is this a weakness of the design? Only if you are that kind of guy that don't know where to put his fingers...

Trigger bar: this is not a part that can withstand much abuse, but guess what - it does not need to. People usually bend trigger bars when they try to remove the magazine safety without bothering to remove the trigger assembly first - they pry and push away the bar as far as they can out of the frame slot and then act surprised when the said part bends. What to do next when we screwed up? Yes, correct - blame the gun.

Recoil spring guide rod: install it upside down and then wonder why your gun locks up and you are left with a mangled part...

Firing pin locking plates: yes, they do break from time to time - just like in any other gun with such a plate.

Extractors: yes, they do break - just like in any other gun.

Thumb safety: yes, they wear off - just like in any other gun that uses a thumb safety.

Some known and respected gun author once wrote about how he witnessed a huge pile of broken Hi-Powers, belonging to some army and how that was some kind of proof that the design was inferior. Don't remember who he was - maybe Massad Ayoob? Well guess what - if the Browning Hi-Power is the service gun in your army, then I don't expect to find broken Sig Sauers in your warehouse... US Army used Beretta M9 - can we guess what broken guns we will find out in their warehouses? Glocks maybe?

I'm far from thinking that the Hi-Power is the best gun ever - some other "fan boys" are known for such claims. But do consider this - that pistol was the standard issue handgun of the military forces of: Canada, Great Britain, Belgium, Australia, India, Argentina, State of Israel, Indonesia just to name a few... So all of those people were ill informed it appears?

Walt Sherrill said:

I understood your point, but disagree.

....I don't have a short thumb, so it never was an issue for me.

Click to expand...

Probably why you disagree, but for those with a small hand...

That said, I don't find the BHP safeties EASIER to release than the safeties on the SAO version of the CZ, and the dedicated SAO version is the best one to talk about when comparing it to the CZ.

The safeties on the SAO version are much larger than the safety levers on the DA/SA version and give you more to press (on what is a more ergonomic lever design). If you've got a short thumb or smaller hand, the CZ DA/SA probably isn't the gun for you if you're focused on SA starts. But I think most folks would find a CZ SAO gun every bit as accommodating as a Hi-Power.

Click to expand...

Yes, the SAO safety of the CZ is a much better lever than nearly any lever available on the Hi-Power. I think the CZ has a better trigger than the factory Hi-Power, and probably still better on gunsmithed versions of both firearms.

While you say you understand my point, just to be clear, I'll say it again, it is not the quality of the lever (the trigger or thumb safety) it is the reach required to get to it. If the reach to the CZ controls are not a problem for you, then you don't have a hand size issue with the gun. For those that can't reach the controls on the CZ, no matter how good those controls are, the Hi-Power will most likely fit them better.

I have a commercial Hi Power from 1990, like it, and enjoy shooting it.

But, there are not the variations or options available for the Hi Power like for the 1911hence I have a number of 1911s but one Hi Power. I'm sure this is at least factor that has keep the 1911 popular and sales of the Browning declining.

I might need to invest in a military surplus Hi Power just for the the nostalgia factor.

whatnickname said:

Truly one of the great icons of the shooting world. The pistol was ahead of its time. Just about every one of the more popular pistols today have to some degree employed one or more of the basic principles developed by John M. Browning and used in the High Power... If nothing else the double stacked magazines that are widely used today are basically Browning designs. The High Power has served as the military pistol in a dozen or more countries and that's no accident. The fact of the matter is that the High Power was primarily a FMJ military pistol and a single action design as well. Considering the role of the pistol in military applications this was not a negative issue at all.

Click to expand...

Most semi-auto center-fire pistols use a variant of the Browning Short-recoil locked-breech design. But not much else about the Hi-Power is seen elsewhere. Much of the design was a JMB-guided "work around" trying to get function similar to the 1911 design without infringing on the Colt-owned 1911 patents.

The double-stack mag was NOT a Browning design, but something developed by an FN designer who worked with Browning, Dieudonné Saive. Many military hanguns continued to use single-stack mags well into the '70s and '80s. (Sigs and H&K guns immediately come to mind.) Saive went on to become FN's chief designer. Much of the BHP that we know today was developed quite a few years after Browning's death with Saive at the helm, and incorporated some of the by-then expired Colt patents.. JMB's original Hi-Power design was striker-fired, and as best I can tell, used a 9-round single-stack magazine. That early design was adapted to use a 16-round double-stack magazine, but the final version, produced long after JMB's death, ended up with a 13-round mag. Patent info of the original design is available on the 'net. Here's a link from Google: http://www.google.com/patents/US1618510?dq=patent+1618510#v=onepage&q&f=false It wasn't until some of the Colt patents expired that it took its final form.

The Hi-Power was an important design in its day, as was the Walther P-38 -- both widely used during WWII. The fact that British continued to use the BHP until just a few years ago may have been a sign of the British devotion to the design or to their realization that handguns/sidearms just aren't that big a deal in most militaries and the British military continued with a design was good enough until they were all about worn out. Their HP's were replaced by Glocks.

JTQ said:

While you say you understand my point, just to be clear, I'll say it again, it is not the quality of the lever (the trigger or thumb safety) it is the reach required to get to it. If the reach to the CZ controls are not a problem for you, then you don't have a hand size issue with the gun. For those that can't reach the controls on the CZ, no matter how good those controls are, the Hi-Power will most likely fit them better.

Click to expand...

I did understand. And I even mentioned it and talked about the 1/4" difference in the location of the pivot points. The DA/SA safety lever on the CZ could be better designed. (I have a semi-custom AT-84s, which is a based on the Tanfgolio version of the CZ pattern, which was then still quite close to the original CZ design. This semi-custom gun has a much better slide release and safety lever than the standard CZ DA/SA safety.) As you say, the small levers on the DA/SA CZ, when starting from cocked & locked, could be an issue for those with small hands.

That said, the only complaints I consistently hear about CZs has to do with DA trigger reach (which is long), not the position of the safety -- as relatively few people are really into SA guns, or cocked & locked carry. Those who are really into cocked & locked carry or starts tend to go to the SAO CZs if they're interested in a CZ; in the SAO model, where the lever pivot point -- while the same as the DA/SA versions -- is made less of an issue because of the size and ergonomics of the SAO lever. Even those with small hands find they have more leverage (pun intended) with the SAO safeties..

What you describe -- the easier to reach Hi-Power safety -- is arguably an unintended consequence of the design, and not something that was built that way to accommodate small hands. It's there and it's nice, but...

That said, there is a growing number of striker-fired guns with very short trigger pulls and equally short resets, and I suspect that these guns will probably be what folks with small hands end up buying -- as these guns will fit their hands as well as a Hi-Power and are substantially less expensive!

I own two Hi-Powers and love 'em. I would buy a poly framed Hi-Power with an improved trigger (no mag safety), especially if they made a "Detective" version like FM of Argentina used to make.

I have fairly large hands, (large enough to ably handle a para ordnance p14 or FNP45) and I still prefer the hipower. It's just my bias. I fell in love with the C series BHP that I grew up shooting, and the mkIII I carry is my all time favorite.

The final design was so different from the original Browning idea, that I pretty much think of it as a chassis of Saive innovations.

I guess we really need tisas to bring in their zig 14 HP clone then. Only outfit I know who is making one. And bless their little hearts, they have stainless steel one. I'd like one of those please! they still come with tiny garbage sights though......