Development of the BHP & the JMB vs Saive Myths

The development of the Browning High Power seems to be a point of contention that often comes up on this and other forums. There is always great love for John Moses Browning which I would argue clouds the narrative about the development of this pistol. There is no doubt that JMB is a god in the world of gun design. I put him at the top of the list of the all-time greats. That said I believe that he is only partially responsible for the development of the gun we call the Browning High Power. The other designer Dieudonne Saive of FN is IMHO the primary designer of the pistol we shoot today. It is his gun design of 1928 that is the true foundation for the pistol we shoot today. If you read R Blake Stevens’ The Browning High Power Automatic Pistol and Anthony Vanderlinden’s FN Browning Pistols, Side-arms that Shaped World History - Expanded Second Edition the real history and development of the pistol we shoot today comes to light. Most of the info I am conveying here comes from these two sources and a few knowledgeable collectors. I do not take credit for discovering this info I am simply cobbling together a summary of what my research has yielded.

The first place to start is with the myths that surround JMBs relationship to FN and to Saive. JMB was not an employee of FN. He was an independent contractor who had an office at FN Herstal and one at his residence in Utah. JMB did contract work for multiple companies over the years but by the time he worked on his last pistol he worked exclusively with FN and Colt when it came to pistol design. Many considered him the "lead" or "chief" designer. FN produced the m1900, m1903, m1905, m1910 and m1922 all of which were JMB's designs. Saive however was not his assistant. Saive was the lead production manager and a desiger at FN and was an FN employee. He later became the lead designer at FN. Still he worked on this project with JMB but he was not his lesser in that he did not report to JMB. He was a designer and had multiple duties in production at FN Herstal. He was not the equal of JMB in terms of knowledge, experience or talent but he was not his "assistant" in the way many refer to him in relation to JMB.

JMB did design the BHP in order to improve on or correct his “mistakes” on the 1911 pistol. I am not sure where the origins of this myth come from but it is simply not true. The development of the BHP did not begin with JMB. It was the results of the Frances desire to develop a new military pistol. Eventually this design resulted in the French pistol trials of 1922 and those that folowed. FN wanted to pursue the contact but JMB had no interest in developing a high capacity gun chambered in a military caliber. So FN turned to Saive. In 1921 Dieudonne Saive modified a 1903 pistol to accept a 15 round magazine which he designed. The magazine and the gun were presented to JMB at Herstal and he then accepted the project and returned to Utah to start working on the project. This account is documented in direct correspondence from Saive to a personal friend and a letter from Val Browning and published by R Blake Stevens. Saive is the one who designed the mag which is the foundation for the BHP design.

John Moses Brown and his brother Ed then designed 2 prototypes using the Saive’s magazine. One was a simple blowback pistol. The second was a locked breech version. Both of these original protypes were striker fired. These are the pistols what were patented. Colt and FN had an agreement to divide up the world into different regions where JMB pistol designs would be manufactured and sold. This included the filing and protection of each other’s patents in their respective regions. This is detailed in R Black Stevens book. The Browning High Power Automatic Pistol. Colt was under contractual obligation to file the patents on behave of JMB and FN in the US. They had no interest at the time in the development of this pistol so the production moved to FN in Herstal.

These pistols were shot during the French Pistol Trials in 1922. The guns were fired and tested. Both deigns passed the trials and the French chose the locked breech version for further development. The blow back design was never produced beyond the original prototype. The locked breech version became known as the Grand Rendement. This is the gun was JMB’s last patent. It was filed on 6/28/1923 and approved on 2/22/1927





Look closely at this pistol. This is the gun that JMB design. If you research the gun and its design you will find it bears very few similarities to the gun we call the Browning High Power. The design was refined during the 1922 trials. The striker fired assembly was abandoned and replaced with a hammer fired assemble because it was overly complicated and needed to be fully removed from the gun in order to field strip and clean the gun. The hammer design is similar to a Colt .38. Other refinements in the design of the exterior of the pistol continued until JMB’s death in 1926. This is where JMBs direct contributions of the development of the Browning High Power ends.

From there it is left to Saive to finish the pistol. At this point it is the best preforming pistol in the trials. There are some issues with rails and other minor problems but at this point it the front runner. FN put Saive to the task of developing the pistol and it became his primary focus. Over the next 12 years he continued to refine the pistol. He reduced the capacity to 13. He made changes to t profile of the slide. The gun still looked like JMBs Grand Rendement but by 1928 the gun was starting to look more and more like what we shoot today.

The Saive-Browning of 1928 is a watershed change IMHO. By 1928 the patents on the 1911 had expired so Saive incorporated elements of the 1911. A 1911 take down system was incorporated. A 1911 like muzzle bushing was incorporated. The slide profile and frame are now looking like the BHP of today. The ring hammer is in place. It originally had a straight rear grip profile. It was changed by 1929 to have a more curved profile. Saive continued to refine and develop the pistol. The stock market crash and the Great Depression came and killed development of the pistol for a while. The gun was basically shelved as the French pistol trials became a comedy of errors which eventually ended in them choosing the MAS 1932 Type B No 3.

FN then moved beyond the French and had Saive continue development of the pistol for other markets. Saive had designed a gun that was ready for production. This is the pistol that the Belgians adopted on 5/23/1935. It was named the Browning Grand Pruissance or High Power. It was also widely referred to as the P35.





If we look closely at the pistol adopted in 1935 and the pistol we shoot today vs the Gran Rendement it becomes clear that the only significant features of JMBs last patent id the locked breech design, the barrel lockup the multi articulated trigger and the high capacity magazine, which he did not design. There is no doubt that Saive used this gun as a starting point but he took JMB’s 1922 design and some of JMBs 1911 concepts and many of his own ideas and built a new pistol. The gun he developed by 1928 is the direct ancestor to the pistol we shoot today not the 1922 JMB design.

The confusions I believe arises from the naming of the pistol. FN chose to name it the Browning 9mm High Power Automatic Pistol and advertised it as Browning’s Patent Depose. It has always been my opinion that FN named the pistol what they did for three reasons. Neither one is because he “designed” the gun that bares his name. First I think they did it out of respect for the man they referred to as “Le Maitre” or The Master. The revered him and his FN Browning 1900 was the pistol that saved FN as a gun manufacturer. It was beloved by the company and the people who worked there. Second the success of designs with his name on it was considered marketing gold. The name Browning = automatic pistol in Europe. It translated into instant name recognition and sales. Finally, it help to maintain and honor the business relationship that FN and Colt had to divide up the world into two distinct pistol markets.

I know others will disagree with this narrative but if you look at the pictures and read the details of the development of the pistol we all know and love to be the myths fall away and the truth comes to light. Saive designed the magazine. JMB developed the prootype before he died. Saive took JMBs protoype and redesigned it and developed it into the pistol we shoot today. To say that that JMB is the designer of the gun we call the Browning High Power would be like saying Leon Levavasseur the man who patented the V-8 engine known as the Antoinette is the inventor of the Ford Flatheat V8 engine or the Cadillac L-Head V8. This does not diminish JMB in anyway but IMHO give credit where credit is due.

*Significant edits after will be in bold.

mavracer said:

While there's no doubt that Salve had a significant roll in the development of the Hi Power some of your myths as to JMB's input are kind of a stretch too.
JMB was FN's chief designer until his death whether he was a direct employee or contracted is really of no consequence. I'd also point out Siave had only been a designer for a couple years in 1921 he didn't go back to work for FN til after WW1. Browning at the time had been designing and building guns for over 50 years and held over 100 patients by that time. Trying to say they were contemporaries is a joke.
IMHO you're tremendously underestimating the influence working under (or beside as you claim) would have had on Siave.
I also find glossing over the fact that Siave had to wait for the Colt owned 1911 patents to run out to incorporate JMBs designs into the Hi Power ironic.

Your narative is akin to saying the Glock 17's design is innovative.

Click to expand...

Sorry but you are incorrect to state that JMB was FN's chief designer. Please show proof of that statement. The Wiki article does not count as a real source. LOL I have never seen anything stating that he was employed by them. He had a contract with Colt and FN dealing with royalty payments, patents and market protections. That does not equal chief designer. He wasn't the chief designer for FN anymore than he was the chief designer for Colt. Both companies relied heavily on JMB for innovation but too often the relationship is misstated. IMHO Saive was not the lead designer either at that time but he did rise to that "employee" position later in his career.

They were in fact contemporaries. Maybe that word does not mean what you think it means. They certainly lived during the same time period. They certainly worked together on this particular project. Each one contributed aspects to the original pistol patented by JMB. I did not intend to say that they collaborated on multiple projects but they certainly both worked on this one. I have corrected my original post to make that clearer.

IMHO one was the lead production manager and a designer at FN, Saive, at the time the other was a contractor who was working for FN, JMB. FN wanted JMB to do the project but he was not interested. They then turned to Saive to help bring JMB into the fold. They had Saive design a double stack magazine which held 15 rounds in a modified 1903 pistol. IIRC Saive delivered the gun and magazine to JMB at Herstal and they convinced JMB to work on the project. He returned to Utah to work on it with his brother Ed. Again this account is documented in direct correspondence from Saive to a personal friend and a letter from Val Browning and published by R Blake Stevens. If JMB was FNs employee they would have simply told JMB to do the work but they couldn't because that was not the relationship he had with FN. He would work on particular projects based on a royalty agreement that was in place. This was an agreement they honored after his death I believe out of respect vs actual contractual obligation because the gun JMB designed was never built.

This is a perfect example of what I am trying to point out. At no point did I say that Saive was JMBs equal. Yet that is the defensive position you immediately took. I am not looking to diminish JMBs contribution to guns in general or his rightful place as one of the greatest if not the greatest gun designers of all time. I am simple starting that the pistol we shoot today was not designed by JMB even though it has his name on it. Just look at the patent. It is not the gun we shoot. It is fundamentally different. Saive did not have to wait to incorporate JMBs 1911 designs as much as the French dragged out the contract until it the 1911 patents expired. At that point he and many other designers incorporated some 1911 features into their designs.

If you have other source materials that refute my thoughts I would love to hear them. As I have stated this my take on the source material I have sighted and studied. These are my conclusions if you can offer up facts that contradict things I have stated I am all for gaining more clarity and accuracy. I will continue to edit the original post to add clarity and make corrections.

mavracer said:

Well since all the handguns they manufactured up until that point m1900, m1903, m1905, m1910 and m1922 were JMB designs and Siave had only been there like 2 years at the start of the contract.

Proof that JMB was in fact the lead on the project doesn't support your narative.

Click to expand...

Yes JMB did a lot of work for FN but to me "chief designer" implies employee. I guess I am asking for factual evidence of that title. Saive was not the chief designer when JMB was there he was the production manager and later became the lead designer.

Yup 100% he was the lead on the project which yielded the Grand Rendement which objective facts tell us is not the pistol we shoot today. So I ask you who took the Grand Rendement and turned it into the pistol we shoot today. Was it JMB? I don't think so unless he did it from the grave. I am not disputing the idea that if JMB had lived long enough to finish the design he would have bee the lead designer. What I am pointing out is that he was dead when the design we shoot today came into existence. How does one design a pistol after they are dead.

mavracer said:

I guess I really don't care what his title was fact is he designed all their pistols up to that point and they paid him to do it.

First you're not going to convince me that JMB wouldn't have been capable of designing a hammer fired gun since he had already accomplished that a few times.
The French contract for the grand rendement specifically specified a striker fired gun.
Second you not going to convince me that Saive didn't learn much of the knowledge he used to finish the P35 from some 15 years working (with,beside,under,over near you choose) JMB.
Heck I could make the argument that the FN FAL might not have been the right ARM of the free world without the influence JMB had on Saive.
Trust me I'm delighted that Saive accomplished what he did and respect it, but he will forever stand in JMB's shadow.

Click to expand...

Yes FN paid JMB but they did not pay him to "design" pistols. They paid him a royalty on they sold which he designed. The difference might be subtle but there is a difference.

No one ever said that JMB couldnt' have designed the gun. The ENTIRE point of the original post is that he did not. Also the original French contract specs for 1922 did not call for a striker fired gun to my knowledge. Please show a citation for that fact. No one said that Saive did not learn from JMB. We also are not talking about the FAL. I do not believe anyone has said Saive was JMBs equal. Unless you are still incorrectly using the word contemporary to mean ones equal. I am not sure why you are reading my post that way. What you are saying here is basically propping up my position because you admit JMB did not design the gun we shoot.

You keep making assertions with no citations, no references and no proof to back up the claims.

Waveski said:

In the interest of keeping this worthwhile discussion factual , implication of employment is irrelevant , and it is a result of subjective interpretation. Also , the absence of an employment arrangement does not in itself nullify the possibility of the status of head designer.


No one is disputing the greatness of JMB , the topic here is who gets design credit for the ... ahem ... Browning High Power.

I sure would like to see this go to "trial" , so to speak ; convincing arguments can be made for both viewpoints. I would be interested to know if the original French criteria did in fact include striker fired. Another interesting point is the incorporation of 1911 design components after the patent expired.

The High Power sure quacks like a duck.

Click to expand...

I will concede the semantic point and agree that JMB was the head or lead designer at FN for pistols at the time of the birth of the Grand Rendement. There is however a reason that I am harping on his "employment status". The relationship JMB had with Winchester has direct influence on JMBs contractual relationship with FN and Colt. Prior to their breakup and in the infamous "Break up Letter" Winchester used to buy and file his patents regardless if they were going to produce them. JMB was not their employee either. He was paid for his designs. After the Break Up letter JMB never sold his patents instead he sold lics to produce his patented designs and was paid a royalty fee. The design which caused the WInchester Browning break up was of course the a shotgun design which became known as the Auto-5 which was accepted and manufactured by ..... FN. Remington under lic produced them for the US market. This was the first royalty based contract that JMB signed and from then on this is how he worked. In my mind this structure directly effected the naming of the BHP.

This is a major part of why the BHP originally bore the rollmark and name Browning’s Patent Depose. This IMHO honored the contractual relationship with the then deceased JMB and his brother to get their lic fee for the work on the Grang Rendement. This is my personal opinion I cannot back it up with source materials but when you look at the literature and the way in which JMB was treated and respected by FN it makes sense.The way JMB partnered but did not work for gun manufacturers helped shape the world of guns as much as some of his designs.

mavracer said:

Bill is that you. I guess it depends on the definition of is is now lol.
Bottom line they paid him for his designs and all the handguns they sold at the time were his designs. Arguing semantics of contractor vs direct employee is just silly he was their chief designer because at the time was the only one to design pistols for them.

And yes I misused the word contemporary should have just used equal or maybe peer you really got me there.

Like I started my original post here
"there's no doubt that Salve had a significant roll in the development of the Hi Power"
But he used JMB's take down design and maybe if JMB had of survived Siave's hammer design wouldn't bite.

Click to expand...

I agree 100% that maybe if JMB has survived he would have made some if not all the design modifications that Saive did. Maybe he would have ended up designing the identical pistol but that is a pure hypothetical. One has to remember JMB did not think more than 8 rounds were necessary. His design aesthetic is very different than Saive's. One of the major appeals to the BHP is its appearance and its ergonomics. It is impossible to say for sure that JMB would have gone from this.



To this....



The one fact we can agree on is that Saive took the design shown in the first pic and that the gun in the second pic was the end result. Clearly he is the one who took it from point A to point B and the differences in the 2 designs are clear and distinct. The 2 pistols are no more related than the BHP is to the CZ75.

mavracer said:

Well except for the 1911 and the various machine guns that he sold the rights to.
I'm really not understanding what difference his employment makes as you point out he was never a direct employee to Colt, Winchester,FN or Remington. I also fail to see why selling or renting the rights to his designs makes any difference they're still his desigms.

Other than the fact that both the CZ75 and BHP use features the JMB designed and were under Colt control until 1928

Click to expand...

Have you read any source material on JMB and how he did business? It is pretty clear that you have not or you did not understand the material presented. Do you know the context of the agreement under which JMB designed the 1911 and the Grand Rendement? The nature of the agreement leads directly to why the gun that was designed long after JMBs death still bears his name and the phrase. "Browning’s Patent Depose"

Under date of Jul 24, 1896 The Browning brothers granted to Colt's the exclusive rights to manufacture, use and sell within the United States and Great Britian and Ireland all models of Automatic Pistols and their improvements.

By the agreement dated July 7, 1897 Browning granted Frabrique Nationale the exclusive right to manufacture, or have manufactured, use and sell all automatic pistols in Belgium, France, Germany, Austria-Hungary and Spain, and in any other countries with the exceptions of the United States and Great Britian in which Fabrique have been granted patentes in the name of Browning.All other countries are free territories for either Colt's or Fabrique to sell in.

*This passage is from R Blake Stevens The Browning High Power Automatic Pistol.

These agreements and one that followed are often referred to the agreements that divided the automatic pistol world into 2 distinct regions and helped build Colt and FN into what they became. They are fundamental to the development of JMB designs and honestly automatic pistols of all kinds. JMB was paid under these agreements by royalty. When he designed the 1911 it was under this agreement. He did not sell the rights to this individual pistol. It fell under his agreement.

I have pointed it out once and I will point it out again. If FN had chosen to declare the P35/BHP a pistol distinct from the Grand Rendement Brownings family would not have received any royalty from its sales because he was not paid for designing he was paid a royalty based on sales. In reality there were no sales of the Grand Rendement but FN out of respect for "Le Maitre" and for marketing purposes they called it the Browning High Power and rollmarked it Browning’s Patent Depose. So the nature of the employment of JMB is essential to the naming of the pistol but at the same time clouded its design origins.

You also do not understand the C75 reference. People incorrectly believe that the CZ75 is a "improved copy" of the BHP. That myth is founded in as much truth as many of the myths around the development of the BHP. The more and more you post the more it becomes clear you do not have an open mind on this subject and that you have accepted much of the internet myth as truth which honestly is a shame. IMHO