ROBARIZED G22 9mm

With the Glock platform pistol set to surpass the M1911 as the most prevalent pistol in circulation, it is only natural that an entire aftermarket and custom industry surrounds the design. Robbie Barrkman and Robar Companies have been making Glock pistols “fit” and “feel” differently for many years now.

I know this fact may be sacrilege for many in the audience, but the Glock platform pistol is set to surpass the M1911 as the most prevalent pistol in circulation here in the U.S. Hundreds of thousands of Glock pistols are in the hands of citizens nationwide.

This being the case it is only natural that an entire aftermarket and custom industry surrounds the design. Numerous companies are offering parts and accessories to modify, customize, and enhance the Glock. Custom gunsmiths across the nation have been applying their own unique grip patterns and reconfigurations for many years now.

All the steel components—slide, slide stop, slide lock, etc.—were coated with Robar’s NP3 finish. One of the most striking changes was the fabrication of a beavertail tang where there was none. Meanwhile, both the front- and backstraps were reduced and textured on the frame.

The primary subject for this review would be a standard Glock 22 chambered in .40 S&W. For this piece I would take the stock pistol and have several modifications made, both practical and cosmetic.
Robbie Barrkman, through Robar Companies, has been making Glock pistols “fit” and “feel” differently for many years now. They have an entire menu of choices. These include a grip reduction, to include removal of finger grooves if the owner desires, removing the triggerguard hook, and fabricating a high beavertail.

Their slide work includes forward cocking serrations, beveling/rounding the forward slide face, and custom engraving to name a few. Robar’s custom shop is the place where all of the new/additional parts for this pistol package would be installed and where the transformation would take place.

Custom Upgrades

Ghost, Inc. offers a number of drop in parts for the Glock including back plate covers, mag releases, spring kits, firing pin stops, slide locks, firing pins, recoil springs/guides, etc.

I wanted the pistol to look good and shoot well. In addition to the custom shop work, I shipped a number of aftermarket parts for the Glock along with the pistol. Having previous experience with multi-caliber Glocks, I knew that I could safety and effectively fire 9mm ammunition from the G22 or G23 platform.

KKM Precision offers numerous aftermarket barrels for Glock pistols with fully supported chambers. I’ve used its barrels in the past and been impressed by the inherent accuracy they provided. For this particular project I ordered a G22 barrel chambered in 9mm. KKM catalogs four different barrel options for the G22, as well as dozens of others for various Glock models.

Nighthawk TALON 45 - Best 45 Cal - Collector Special / Functional

This gun is currently out of stock but can be back ordered with 8 week wait (popular)

FireStorm 380 Matte Finish 7 Rd

Price: $269.99

BERSA T9MP10 9MM ULTCMP 10RD MT

Price: $320.99

Phoenix HP22A Black

Price: $129.99

Gun Collections-Glock 20 10mm

Price: $587.99

Gun Collections-Seecamp 32ACP Pistol

Gun Collections-COM CR30000 357 3IN AS BL COMANCHE III

COM CR30000 357 3IN AS BL COMANCHE III

FireStorm 45 MINI Compact Matte Finish 7 Rd

Price: $339.99

HK USP Tactical 45ACP

Snub 38 Special or 380 Automatic?

Despite there being more potent handguns available in similar size packages, these two calibers continue to take a significant portion of the defensive handgun market share. As both remain popular, we see debate on a regular basis concerning which is the "best."

Neither of these cartridges are without their detractors and while newer defense rounds have come along, these two remain popular, with new loads being made for each. It would appear that folks still like these two calibers.

Rightly or wrongly, both calibers seem to remain popular. Which is best between these two calibers?

The answer depends primarily on a couple of things:

1. Which caliber do you think is the more potent "stopper"?

2. Which type handgun do you prefer, revolver or automatic?

As I see it, the .380 might be a little short on penetration when JHP ammunition is used and it expands. It seems that the average penetration depth for most JHP's in this caliber is about 7 to 9 inches in ballistic gelatin. For a frontal, face-to-face shot, this might very well be sufficient, but for an angled shot or one passing through an arm first, it very well might not. It seems that there's just not enough bullet weight at .380 velocities to push the expanded slug deeply enough. While there certainly are felons who'll "stop" simply because they are shot, there are also those who will not unless they're physically unable to continue.

In conventional JHP, .380 bullets weigh from 85 to 102 grains.


The .380 ACP remains popular to this day. Even when compact 9mm and .40's exist that rival their small size, the round continues to sell. Shown are .380 ACP rounds as loaded by Corbon (left) with their 80-gr. DPX next to Remington's 102-gr. Golden Saber. Both of these rounds' bullets have expanded nicely for me when fired into water or super-saturated newsprint but neither penetrates deeply enough for me.

From a snub .38 Special, HP bullets weigh from about 95 to 158 grains. These can be had with gilding metal jackets or pure lead in some cases. Where the .380, depending upon barrel length, will throw 90-grain JHP's at about 950 to 1100 ft/sec, the .38 will hit similar velocity levels with 110 grain bullets and approximately 800 ft/sec + with the 158-gr +P loads. These do offer more penetration in 10% ballistic gelatin when they expand. Both are capable of through-and-through penetration in a human torso if they do not.

This Model 642 fired these three 38 +P rounds into super-saturated newsprint. All penetrated deeper than any of the expandning 380 loads. From left to right: Corbon 110-gr. DPX +P, Speer 135-gr. GDHP +P and Remington's 158-gr. LSWCHP +P.

Neither is a powerhouse ballistically and most opine that either is about as low on the ladder as one should go for a viable defensive handgun. I agree. Unless there's some compelling special reason, I personally will not go below either .380 or .38 Special for self-protection.

Those favoring the automatic will cite that it holds more rounds and that today's pistols are reliable. Reloading via loaded magazines is also both easier and quicker with the automatic. The fact that the .38 will have more recoil is also mentioned. The revolver team cites round-to-round performance and the historical reliability of the revolver, particularly when compared to the small automatics.

If limited to the choice of the .38 vs.380, I prefer the snub revolver. This is simply because I believe the thirty-eight offers a little more ballistically than does the little automatic round. I do agree that with some pistols, the .380 is easier to shoot well and it is quicker to reload, but I try and make up for this in frequent practice, including reloads.

Neither is optimal and both might be considered at least adequate for self-protection, but either must be shot accurately to stop an aggressor.

If you're pondering this choice and simply cannot get the hits with the snub and cannot find the time for instruction and practice, you might find the .380 an easier pistol to shoot. (I'm not speaking of the really small ones, but those the size of the Walther, Bersa, or even CZ .380's.) If you go this route, I believe that you're at the absolute lower limit of "protection power."

Frankly, either is probably best as a back up gun, but like so many, my orbits are tame and I find the snub .38 my primary defensive handgun. If you opt for this too, I strongly suggest practice.

Either gun can serve, but I'll cast my lot with the .38 Special.

My First Hi Power...

Just before the '70's got here, I saw my very first Browning HP, a fixed sight "T-series" pistol in plain blue with the checkered walnut stocks. Not only was I surprised at its petite size compared to the old GI 1911 a friend had, but also it was not double-action! Though it would be a couple of years before I got my hands on my very own Hi Power, the pistol struck a chord with me and the Hi Power pistol remains my favorite general purpose automatic handgun to this day.

My first HP was a 1971 commercial model with adjustable sights and was bright blue with walnut stocks. Immediately I learned that it would bite the hand that shot it, but didn't have enough sense to have the hammer spur shortened. Range sessions almost always ended up with the web of my right hand bleeding at least a little!

Eventually, I grew weary of constantly having to reset the high adjustable sights. At that time the rear sight was screw adjustable (no clicks) for elevation and windage was set by loosening one screw and tightening an opposing one. I'd used Loctite, but just was not happy with the very high adjustable sights. As I'd read everything Jeff Cooper had written on single-action automatics and their carrying, I was not pleased with the tiny thumb safety, either.

I took the pistol to Lou Williamson, a gunsmith at Knight's Gun Shop in Ft. Worth, Texas to be customized. Lou bobbed the hammer spur, made an extension for the small thumb safety and machined the slide to accept S&W K-frame adjustable revolver sights which was just the thing back then. I really liked having them on there, as they were much lower and looked like something Armand Swenson would do. Even though I couldn't outshoot the gun with the existing barrel, I had Lou fit a then-new Bar-sto stainless steel match barrel to that pistol and hard chrome the whole thing, guts and all. Only the stainless steel barrel was not refinished. I still don't know why, but Bar-sto barrels for the Hi powers at that time were a full 5" long so to this day, that Hi Power has sort of a "Beretta look." I've been meaning to get it cut to proper length and recrowned for about 30 years now. These early Hi Power Bar-sto match barrels were also made from one piece of steel rather than two. (I've noted no improvement in it over the more conventional two-piece barrels.) Lou also made and silver soldered a serrated ramp front sight to the slide, complete with a red, plastic insert like some of the Smith & Wesson revolvers.

Shown with the stocks that came on it, this is my first Hi Power and one that's still used today. This one has been with me for over half the time I've been alive. It's affectionately known as "Number 1."

The gun came with a very nice trigger so no trigger work was done and the removal of the magazine disconnect only made it better, but all was not paradise.

At that time, all Hi Power barrels had the humped feed ramp and these could be problematic with the very few JHP rounds on the market. Failures to feed were common, particularly with the old 90-grain Super Vel JHP. If handloading, the situation was a little better in that LOA could be changed to help a specific pistol's reliability, but choices were few. Speer made a 125-grain JSP that didn't expand while Hornady and Sierra offered JHPs that wouldn't feed, particularly off of full magazines! My only consolation during this time was that the 1911 guys were having the same problems with "expanding" ammunition!

About the time that I was fighting the feed reliability problem, a dangerous thing happened; I bought a Dremel tool! Fortunately, I used it only to polish the feed ramp to a high shine and that helped a bit more, particularly since I was handloading Sierra's 115-grain "Jacketed Hollow Cavity" to a longer than recommend LOA. This combination gave me a fairly reliable Hi Power with expanding ammo. Download the magazine by one or two rounds and it was nearly 100% reliable!

Eventually, I learned how to remove the hump without eliminating case support and problems went away, at least with certain magazines (Inglis) and JHPs having a fairly normal LOA. It's my observation that magazines made back then gave no particular emphasis on holding the rounds at a slightly upward angle as they'd feed the common ball rounds even if they held the top cartridge with no upward angle! (The transition of police in this country in the '80's has resulted in better magazines in this regard.)

For the better part of two decades, Number 1 was fired almost exclusively handloaded ammo. 9mm ammunition was not found at the bargain prices it is today and I just wouldn't shoot ball. I foolishly used a stiff handload with Sierra's 115-grain JHC for everything from paper punching and small game hunting to personal defense!

Some of the best shots I've ever lucked into were made with Number 1. One was a running jackrabbit, shot at night at about 75 yards while holding a spotlight! Why, I don't know, but I knew I'd hit the thing before the shot was fired. My uncle and best friend were there and amazed. I was darned sure proud of the shot, but somehow knew it would be "right" before I fired it! A few other times, this same "knowledge" has been there before the shot was touched off, though not always with this same handgun. I cannot explain it.

Though it took several years to do, as I'd not take anything but "perfect" shots, this gun cleanly took three Texas whitetail deer with one shot each. All of the animals presented themselves in ideal conditions and no farther than 30 yards and were not aware that I was there. It's been used on bullfrogs, snakes, armadillo, jackrabbits, coyotes, fox, raccoons and other animals as well. PETA would put a bounty on this Hi Power if they knew the number of animals I've shot with it!

In the late '70's, I was able to buy a small house and wound up sleeping there before the air-conditioning was in as there was a delay, yet all my possessions were there. As luck would have it, that night was a very hot one and you could drop a feather and it'd go straight down; no breeze. I was on a pallet in a front bedroom as close to an open window as I could get when I heard a bumping noise at the back porch area of the house. Sure enough, a dude was pulling and yanking at the sliding glass door. There were no curtains in the house and I think he believed he'd just relieve the unoccupied dwelling of its contents. Anyway, I headed for the sliding door and promptly tripped over a coffee table and cursed. The trespasser and would-be burglar took off on foot through the open fields behind the house. It was a moonlit night that you could read a newspaper with so … I fired one shot at the ground right behind his right foot, spattering his calves with dirt! He just thought he could run!

The pistol was Number 1.

Some years later, I had access to a trailer house on 400 acres of wooded area and would go there on my days off to varmint call or just get away. Usually, my best friend would go, too, but on this occasion, no one could go but me. The trailer was 7 miles down a dirt road and about 3/4 mile from the road when you got to the property. I'd called some canyons and shot a few fox with my Ithaca Model 37 shotgun, but Number 1 was on my right hip as well. Eventually, in the wee hours of the morning, things slowed down and it was starting to mist. I began the trek back to my truck to head in for some sleep. I'd estimate that I'd been asleep a couple of hours when I hear a loud crash at the trailer's front door. Without thinking, I found myself sitting up in the bed with Number 1 in a two-hand hold aimed at the open bedroom door. I heard the crash again and quietly rolled off the bed so that it was between the door and me and went prone, aiming upward from the foot of the bed, but at the bedroom door. Nothing happened. I don't know how long I waited, but eventually I eased out barefooted into the trailer to find the intruder or intruders. Turned out that the crash was the wind whipping the combination glass-and-screen wire door outside the wooden one. A violent thunderstorm, just like in the werewolf movies had blown in and the glass in the "screen door." I was relieved. Even though no bugger was there in the dark, lonely place, such events tend to foster a bonding between one and a trusted handgun, particularly if it's "special" in the first place.

I have no idea how many rounds have been fired through this pistol, but it is considerable. I still shoot it these days and it still performs although in later years, the pistol has a Wolff conventional 18.5-lb. recoil spring and a Buffer Technology buff in it. It's not been hunting in several years and generally just gets limbered up at the firing range on occasion.
Over the years, I've had a few offers to buy it, some quite high, but I just won't sell this pistol. It really taught me many things and was there when I thought I might need it for serious purposes. Much of my "teething" as a fledgling shooter was done using Number 1. It served briefly as a police service sidearm, but I replaced it with handguns not having as much sentimental value, a silly thing I know, but something I just had to do.

It can still "cut it" today.

I hope to use this pistol another 30 years.

JSP or JHP in Handgun Ammunition?

"Is JSP ammo better for defense than JHP? It looks like it could be."

No, it appears that it is not.

Here we see an expanded .44 Special solid copper alloy DPX bullet from Corbon. It was fired into water. Note that none of the "new technology" handgun bullets are soft points but continue to be based on the jacketed hollow point.

While JSP rounds expand or deform in some mediums like ductseal or clay, when fired into animals I've personally shot or seen shot with them, it appears that they act just like ball. Apparently, most handgun velocities in the 800 to 1200 ft/sec range just are not enough to cause reliable deformation of jacketed soft points. (This most definitely is not the case with the myriad of "tweaked" jacketed hollow points now on the market; they normally work both well and consistently at realistic velocities for caliber.)

I've not seen a human that has been hit with jacketed soft points that I can recall. The folks who study terminal ballistics and "stopping power" seem to pretty well agree that the JSP ammo does NOT expand reliably in tissue. Oddly enough, there are some soft points in rifle cartridges that seem to expand better than the hollow point designs, but such does not appear to be the case in most handgun cartridges.

It appears then that if we want maximum tissue damage and penetration we need to go with a quality JHP. If we seek deeper penetration, some sort of solid is called for. That may wind up being a SWC, WC or simply FMJ round nose. Unless reliability is an issue, I'd go with either SWC, WC or a flat-nosed bullet having a large meplat before going with the old round nose. While some opine that the shape of non-expanding bullets plays no role in "stopping" that which is shot, I've just not seen it. Round-nosed bullets have generally performed at the bottom of the pile in my experience. Those hunting larger animals with handguns almost always use a hardcast SWC or flatnose with a very healthy "flat" or meplat.

If a JSP is to help any at all in this regard, I suspect it might be because of its flatnose shape rather than its expansion characteristics...which are probably nil.

Why the 9mm Hi Power Remains a Favorite of Mine...

Hello. It is a safe bet that the choices in 9mm pistols has never been greater than today. They can be had from diminutive little things about the size of the traditional .380 ACP (and smaller) to the 1911 platform in standard 5" guns to 6" long slides.

The Hi Power, P-35 or by whatever name it is known is definitely a classic of proven, tested design. Some do consider it "obsolete" and "outdated". I consider it a favorite and expect to for years to come.

The choice is there in action types, too! We can still find purely single-action autos from a number of makers including FN, CZ, and a number of 1911 makers who chamber it in 9mm. Traditional DA/SA automatics can be found from S&W, HK, SIG-Sauer, CZ, and more. Want a "plastic pistol"? You can sure find in from Glock, SA with their XD9, S&W, and others. Some such as CZ and HK offer selective single-action, meaning that their DA/SA pistols can be carried cocked-and-locked.

For me, the Hi Power continues to remain my favorite overall.

Part of this is admittedly subjective but some valid arguments for the "mature" Hi Power design can be made. So let's take a gander at why this classic design continues to be popular with folks interested in something to take to the range to those most assured that they will go in harm's way.

Simplicity & Reliability: The Hi Power consists of very few internal parts compared to many of today's handguns, but it is not alone. Others include the aging Makarov, the 1911, and the considerably younger Glock. All of these pistols share a common trait and one that is frequently espoused by their devotees: reliability. Each of these guns has proven itself capable of functioning under adverse conditions. The ultra-fine sand of Iraq may affect one more than another, but that pistol may do better in arctic climates. The Hi Power has been doing this decade after bloodletting decade. I am not saying that more internally complex handguns are doomed to be unreliable; I am saying that the potential is there.

With older classic Hi Powers pre-dating the Mk II which arrived in the '80's, the Hi Power's legendary reliability was primarily with FMJ or ball ammunition. It is very true that many of these guns simply would not run reliably with other than jacketed round nose ammunition. Their humped feed ramps worked great with military-style ammunition but could be very selective about which JHP ammo they would feed. With some work on the feed ramp this could be changed and I've done that very thing with a couple of my older Hi Powers. They handle any JHP I've put in them since. With the Mk II and it progeny, the Mk III, there is no such problem. FN finally went with a feed ramp capable of slickly feeding about any JHP.

Today it seems that the few reliability complaints with the Mk II or Mk III pistols are not feeding, but extraction. With enough ammunition fired, it is possible for crud to build up under the extractor to the point that the claw does not move inward enough to get a complete "bite" on the cartridge rim. A failure to extract can be the result. Simply removing the extractor and cleaning out the mess usually solves the problem and it is not chronic; it occurs after many rounds have been fired, assuming that parts are in spec…and they usually are.

The other "problem" with the Hi Power is that the extractor spring must be a strong one. Pushing inward at the rear of the extractor should require pretty good effort to move the extractor. If it doesn't, the spring needs to be replaced. (I've had really good luck with Wolff extra strength extractor springs.)

That's about it. Clean under the extractor every case or two of ammunition and you should be good to go and check the extractor spring. If you unexpectedly begin experiencing failures to extract and the extractor claw is in good shape; I'll bet the problems either crud under the extractor or a weak spring.

Reliability is desirable at the range. It is essential for self-defense whether fending off felonious assault as a private citizen, shooting it out with a criminal as a peace officer, or dishing out defeat to enemies in war.

The Hi Power will reliably pop any primer I've tried. This includes the very hard-primed Greek ammunition sold in droves here a few years ago. Glock 9mm's simply did not get 100% detonation. Neither did S&W 9mm pistols. The reason is that the Hi Power has a hell for stout mainspring. I am not aware of another handgun mainspring rated at 32-lbs. The striker on the Glock and the S&W with it's lighter mainspring simply couldn't overcome each and every single one of the hard Greek primers. A few months after its debut, ads for the Greek surplus stated, "Not For Use in Glock Pistols". At this point I should mention that this stuff was probably excessively hard primed, possibly for use in open bolt submachine guns. (Glocks and most other quality 9mm automatics have reliably fired most every other military round I've tried or seen shot. I know they've been reliable with any and all US-manufactured ammo I've tried.) Still, this speaks well of the Hi Power. The change to the heavier mainspring took place in the '70's with the "C-series" Hi Powers. I was told at the time that this was not necessarily to increase reliable primer detonation but to help the pistols withstand some hot-loaded SMG ammunition being used in the unending unpleasantness in the Middle East. The heavier mainspring works similar to a heavier recoil spring in delaying the slide's rearward movement and slows slide velocity to avoid rounding locking lugs on the barrel. Still, it is a good thing to know that the pistol is capable of reliably firing most any 9mm cartridge made in the world. (The only primers I've seen fail to fire in the Hi Power 9mm and .45 1911 have been in factory Sellier & Bellot ammunition. In these cases I believe that the primers were defective. Both pistols had full-strength mainsprings and the same rounds failed in other pistols as well. I have not seen this repeated in several years but still have a hard time trusting S&B for anything other than the range.)

Accuracy: This is a relative term. To a formal match pistol shooter, the Hi Power is an inaccurate handgun. To the less-than-stellar shot, that the gun will keep its shots on a piece of typing paper at 10 yards might mean that it is very accurate in his estimation. To me the Hi Power is a very accurate handgun considering that its original intent was not to wallow out a single hole at 25 meters. Having shot lots of Hi Powers over the decades, I submit that most will put 10 shots inside about 2 to 2 1/2" with ammunition that groups in that gun. I've seen it consistently group better than what some gun scribes euphemistically call "acceptable combat accuracy." A Hi Power capable of but 3" @ 25 yards would be dropping any shot no farther than 1 1/2" from the POA, assuming zero error on the shooter's part…which is rare.

For those wanting greater intrinsic accuracy in their Hi Power, a fitted BarSto barrel will usually reduce group size by 15 to 20% with most jacketed rounds and more with cast bullet loads, at least in my experience. The 1:10" twist of the factory barrel works with some cast loads, but the 1:16" does better in my experience and with a wider variety of cast/plated bullets. The majority of my Hi Powers use their standard factory barrel, as they're plenty accurate enough for my purposes. For a general-purpose sidearm, if I can hit a target the size of an orange at about 25 yards that's all I require. This does not mean that the Hi Power platform is incapable of better accuracy. The target version of the gun, the FN Competition, is capable of very small groups, but the gun is no longer produced; no demand. It appears that fans of the Hi Power find it accurate enough in standard trim for their intended needs.

Here we see two 15-yard, slow-fire groups fired with a Mk III Hi Power using the standard barrel w/o any "accurizing" other than a good trigger-pull. These were fired from a seated position with my wrists braced and bagged. No effort was made at speed. For me, this is plenty accurate enough since I cannot match these groups off-hand. Thus, I cannot shoot beyond the intrinsic accuracy level "built" into the gun. Others might but I cannot.

The thing that really contributes to the Hi Power's accuracy for me is its practical accuracy. In other words, I find it extremely easy to shoot well in both slow and rapid-fire. This is akin to how "good" a gun feels and is subjective but it would appear that from the gun's long service history and relative popularity among 9mm shooters, a great many folks feel the same way.

No other 9mm pistol feels quite as "right" to me as the Hi Power. For me, this pistol groups plenty tight enough for my purposes and is easy to shoot accurately at speed as well as in slow-fire.

It has been reported that some 9mm pistols suffer reliability problems when using 147-gr. JHP ammunition. While I admit not being a user of this weight bullet in 9mm, I have had no problems with the limited amounts that I've tried in a couple of Mk III pistols. Ammunition used was Speer Gold Dot, Remington Golden Sabers, Winchester Silvertip, and Winchester Ranger. These loads ran smoothly and w/o malfunction using either the standard factory 17-lb. recoil spring or the Wolff 18.5-lb. All of this ammunition grouped well with ejection being positive. People considering the Hi Power but preferring the "heavy bullet" approach should have no reliability problems based on what I've seen. (This does not mean that the ammo to be used shouldn't be tested in the individual pistol.)

Spare & Aftermarket Parts: Parts remain plentiful for the Hi Power from the manufacturer as well as from Cylinder & Slide and a few other places. There will probably never be as many aftermarket parts and choices as exist for the Hi Power and Glock pistols, but spare parts are available and should be for years to come even if FN does eventually cease production of the Hi Power.

9mm Cartridge: I like it and consider it the "perfect" cartridge for the sleek Hi Power. There are other articles on this site focusing on various standard velocity and +P rated 9mm loads for the Hi Power so I won't dwell deeply on it here other than to say that the choice is wide for people interested in high-performance loads in this caliber. With the advent of some of today's bullet designs I think the "gap" between standard velocity performance and that from some +P has considerably narrowed. I do not consider the 9mm wanting in terms of performance when loaded with such ammunition as Winchester's 127-gr. +P+, Corbon DPX 115-gr. +P, Remington's 124-gr. Golden Sabers in either standard velocity or +P or Speer's 124-gr. Gold Dots in either pressure range. The old Federal 115-gr. JHP isn't bad, either! While I do believe that in its better loadings .45 ACP edges higher performance-wise than 9mm, I am not convinced that the difference is significant. I am sure that it is not if the larger caliber cannot be shot as accurately as the 9mm. In short, I'm quite happy if armed with a 9mm Hi Power and what I consider good defensive ammunition.

Conclusion: The FN Hi Power, GP, P-35, or by whatever name it is known has served people going into dangerous situations very well for many decades. Though its popularity is declining in current times, the pistol remains a favorite of many handgun enthusiasts and will for decades to come. I think I might have written many of the reasons why. Born in a different era, some consider it a relic. Others simply see it as continuing to do what a pistol should: function reliably and allow the shooter to put the holes where he wants them. I see it as something a little different. To me it is a reliable design but one that is also a work of art, combining function with graceful lines and deadly beauty.

For those desiring to do so the Hi Power lends itself to custom touches and a number of famous gunsmiths specialize in Hi Power customization.

I have no quarrels with those opting for a different 9mm. Each of us must "work out our own salvation" so to speak, but for myself, no other 9mm satisfies so completely as the Hi Power.

Browning Hi Power or 1911 for Defense?

It's not unusual to find fans of the single-action automatic at this crossroad somewhere down the shooting trail. Folks who are wedded to one or the other of these classic designs wouldn't change …and that's fine. There are some for whom it presents a "dilemma". Note that I did not say a serious dilemma. That doesn't mean that it's not worthy of discussion.

I'll present some long-term observations on carrying and defensive use of these two pistols.

Reliability: Contrary to the experiences cited by some, the 1911 and Hi Power are both capable of extreme reliability. The designs are time-proven to be grand. Unfortunately, execution frequently is not. Every manufacturer will have a gun slip by quality control and results in a dissatisfied customer. Out of the box, it's been my observation that the Hi Power runs more reliably than the 1911. In other words, if we get 100 new Hi Power's and the same number of 1911 pistols, I believe a greater number of the Hi Powers will operate reliably.

That said, it often doesn't take much to turn a jamming 1911 into a paragon of virtue. Either pistol can run without stuttering when set up correctly. It is not true that hundreds of dollars are required to make the 1911 operate correctly. These guns often run fine right out of the box and when they don't the fix may cost nothing or but a few bucks. Fans often spend great amounts having their 1911's customized, but this is to obtain precisely what they want and not necessarily to make the gun "work."

If you have had reliability problems with either pistol and just cannot fully trust that design again, go with the one you trust. Faith in one's equipment is an overlooked quantity in my opinion.

Caliber: If you are absolutely convinced that 9mm is just not enough for self-defense, Hi Power options are limited to forty-caliber unless you opt for a .357 SIG conversion. Obviously you can with .40, 10mm, or .45 ACP in the 1911 pattern pistol. I purposely omitted .38 Super on the caliber discussion, as it offers no more than 9mm +P in most (but not all) factory loads. That's sad as it's capable of considerably more. (There is a detailed article on 9mm vs. 38 Super via this

If you are confident in 9mm power levels and prefer the 1911 platform, the pistol can be had in either 9mm or .38 Super. (Ammunition for the latter will be considerably more expensive.)

Size: The Hi Power is smaller than the 5" 1911, being about the same as the Commander. Weight is less unless one goes with an aluminum alloy frame 1911 or one of the 3" compacts. I do not care for the compact versions of the 1911 that are smaller than the Commander. This is probably a minority opinion as the little guns are quite popular. Options for compact Hi Power's are extremely limited. FM offers the "Detective" and some gunsmiths will convert a full-size into one for a hefty fee. Frankly, I don't see the point as the butt on the standard Hi Power is not all that difficult to conceal and the gun's handle is usually the hard part to hide. Folks using the cut-down Hi Powers are well advised to replace the recoil springs every few hundred rounds. It seems that these things go through recoil springs far more quickly than the regular size Hi Powers.

Tangentially related to "size" is thickness. The Hi Power slide is thinner than the 1911, but the grip is thicker. Using an IWB holster for either gun, I find either easy to conceal under a loose fitting shirt, jacket or sports coat. I do find the 1911 more comfortable when pressed against my side. The Hi Power magazine floor plate is not flush and the rear corners are at 90 degrees and sharp. This may not be a problem for you, but it has been a minor one for me over the years. Using an OWB holster, no such inconvenience has been noticed. I find spare 1911 single-stack magazines more comfortable in concealed carry also.

Safety: Probably the two "safety" concerns most discussed in Hi Power/1911 comparisons is the lack of the grip safety and seemingly less positive thumb safety engagement on the Hi Power. The classic Hi Powers with the small thumb safety are not a concern, but on some people using some IWB holsters, it is possible to inadvertently wipe the larger thumb safeties into the "off" position. In a proper holster, the trigger is covered so the gun is almost certainly not going to be fired inadvertently but this can be disconcerting. I have not noticed it happening nearly so much in OWB holsters.

The Hi Power and 1911 thumb safeties are tensioned in exactly opposite ways:

A spring-loaded plunger on the 1911 fits into a detent on the 1911 safety with tension being applied from the frame-mounted plunger tube to the safety.

The Hi Power safety has a spring-loaded plunger within the safety itself. The frame has a dimple at both the "on" and "off" positions.

More positive thumb safety engagement can be had on the Hi Power. The frame detents can be made a tiny bit deeper and reshaped or one can use a safety from Cylinder & Slide. The spring-loaded plunger in the safety itself is more pointed than that on the factory version.

If you really prefer having the additional grip safety, the 1911 is the only choice between the two guns. There is no such conversion made for the Hi Power.

The thumb safety on the Hi Power contains the plunger and spring that tensions the safety either "on" or "off." In the frame "ledge" immediately in front of the thumb safety are the two detents in which the plunger rides. In most instances this is not as positive an arrangement as the 1911 thumb safety. Most report that disengaging the Hi Power safety is more "mushy" than with the 1911. The Hi Power safety blocks sear movement.

The 1911 incorporates two external safeties. The thumb safety blocks the sear while the grip safety blocks rearward movement of the trigger until depressed. The tension for the 1911 safety is via a spring within the plunger tube that is attached to the frame just above the grip and forward of the safety.

Depending on the particular version of either pistol, there may or may not be an internal firing pin safety present.

Accuracy: In the vast majority of instances, either design is capable of greater intrinsic accuracy than the shooter, particularly under the stress of a life-or-death deadly force scenario. Either pistol will usually be capable of dropping their shots at least into a 3" circle at 25 yards. For more on "Hi Power Accuracy", here is a link that might be of interest:

Either gun can be accurized, but in most cases, this is simply not necessary. Match barrels are available and can be fitted by competent hands for a tighter shooting gun. Done correctly, this does not reduce reliability.

More aftermarket match barrels and accuracy work is done on the 1911 than the Hi Power. Most agree that when taken to the extreme, the 1911 can be made more mechanically accurate than the Hi Power.

The 1911 pattern pistol has been refined over decades and is capable of extremely fine accuracy. It can have far more than we can use in a terror-filled life or death situation when adrenaline is flowing and we realize that we will be dead or injured in the next few seconds unless we prevail. Where the Hi Power has a non-removable barrel bushing, the 1911 often comes with a loose one. These can be replaced with fitted bushings. Used in conjunction with a fitted match barrel and a slide that is mated to the frame, the 1911 will almost always have greater mechanical accuracy than the Hi Power. How much can actually be used is another question.

If concerns about either gun's potential accuracy are a problem, dismiss it. Either is has more than enough.

Trigger Pull: Conventional wisdom has it that the defensive pistol's trigger pull should be no lighter than about 4.5 pounds. I agree and have no problem with slightly heavier trigger pulls for such purposes. Either design can be adjusted by a competent pistolsmith to clean-breaking pulls in this range.

There is one area in which the 1911 trigger is clearly superior to the Hi Power: reset. The Hi Power trigger simply cannot be made to reset in as short a distance, as can the 1911; it just ain't in the design geometry. In slow-fire one will never notice the difference. In rapid-fire where at least a "flash sight picture" is obtained (as in shooting "controlled pairs"), the same holds true. The problem shows up with really quick 1911 shooters doing "double taps" or "hammers". In this shooting, one sight picture is obtained and the second shot is fired from muscle memory. Practiced shooters can fire extremely fast this way and the good ones can get pretty darned good "practical accuracy." When these folks try it with a Hi Power, they frequently do not release the trigger quite far enough and don't fire the second shot. I've observed this numerous times but only with really fast 1911 fans. This is not saying that extremely fast and accurate shooting cannot be done with the Hi Power, only that the required reset is slightly longer.

Magazine Capacity: Here the 9mm wins when compared to the "normal" single-stack 1911 magazine. The Hi Power's double-stack magazine simply holds more ammunition and is compact compared to many of the "high capacity" 9mm pistols. Even the forty-caliber version holds ten shots compared to the 1911's 7 or 8 in .45 ACP. Extended 1911 magazines are available, but I've experienced varying levels of reliability with them and they're a bit hard to conceal for me if carried in the pistol. I prefer 7-round .45 1911 magazines as these work in all my 1911 pistols. The 8-round magazines work in many of them.

Frankly, I believe that under the vast majority of circumstances both guns hold sufficient ammo. It's been my observation that the first few shots are the most important ones and that we will run out of time before ammunition unless our "problem" is quickly "solved."

The 9mm Hi Power holds a total of 14 rounds with standard capacity13-shot magazines. Some are available holding 15, 17, or more shots.

Sights: A pretty fair crop of aftermarket fixed and adjustable sights exists for the Hi Power and the 1911. I see no advantage here. Sights intended for use primarily on 1911 pistols often work fine on the more petite Hi Power. There are plenty of choices available in plain black-on-black, or three-dot, and most are available with tritium inserts as night sights.

Customization: Both designs lend themselves to "personalization" if desired. There will be more gunsmiths specializing in the 1911 custom work than for the Hi Power, but owners should have little problem finding a competent 'smith to work over the pistol of their choice. For defensive arms I have found that "less is better". What I'm suggesting is that we go with only that we need:

· Reliability
· Sights that are useable at speed and set up so that POA = POI at a desired distance
· Clean trigger at 4 1/2 to 5 pounds
· Acceptable accuracy (Usually nothing need be done here.)
· A gun that is comfortable to use (This may mean new grips or a wide grip safety tang on the 1911, etc. Grip straps may be checkered or stippled, or skateboard tape can be used if desired.)

For most of us factory guns in near stock condition will serve about as well as high-dollar custom guns. I like to keep my carry guns (1911 or Hi Power) relatively close to factory trim, having every feature I think I need and none that I don't. Over the long term, these have been the ones I've kept.

Conclusion: The Hi Power and the 1911 are THE choices for single-action defensive handguns. Both have legions of fans, but in the US the 1911 is still most popular. Make your decision on which one you shoot better or trust most. Don't go with the Hi Power strictly for magazine capacity unless you have a specific need; go with it because it fits you better or you can get quick, accurate hits with it more easily than the 1911. Likewise, if carrying cocked-and-locked presents a problem without a grip safety, the 1911 is the obvious choice. If a shooter simply doesn't trust anything less than .45, the decision is made by default for the 1911 pattern gun.

This magazine holds "only" 7 shots. I suggest that for most of us this will be more than enough. We will be able to deal with our adversary effectively or be out of time before ammunition runs out. The 9mm Hi Power does hold more shots between reloads, but is this a marked advantage in the real world? Sometimes, yes, but a majority of the time I don't believe it really matters.

For strictly self-defense, I prefer the 1911 in .45 ACP…but only by a very slight margin to the 9mm Hi Power. In my situation the extra shots available from the Hi Power are nice but not a major factor. I like the feel of the Hi Power and the way it shoots for me. The 9mm Hi Power remains my favorite all around, general purpose automatic. The 1911 is ever so slightly easier for me to conceal. I believe that when using the best 9mm ammunition, difference in terminal effect will be very slight if any compared to the .45 using most loads. I also believe that in its best loads, .45 ACP is more potent than the best 9mm loads. I do not believe that there is much difference at all and that it's probably not going to make any real difference on the street.

I do not see using the 1911 or the Hi Power as an "either-or" situation. I use both and appreciate these fine handguns for their abilities to deliver quick and accurate shots. Each has its weaknesses as well as its strengths. Each of us places different priorities on these and thus, our decisions will differ as to which is best. If possible try both and make your decision on what works best for you.

Either gun is capable of serving very, very well as a defensive pistol.

Best.

The Effective Defense Gun

Forests have been felled to provide paper for this debate; numerous handguns have been created to provide it; new calibers have been spawned and bullet design refined in its name:

Effectiveness!

But have we really gained anything?

I think that the answer is a qualified "yes". Unlike the ammunition of years gone by, bullets now actually do expand at less than a thousand feet per second and do so more reliably. Consistency shot-to-shot is remarkably uniform with the better stuff and so is accuracy. Most of today's ammunition can be expected to feed reliably and in several calibers, we have a choice as to how powerful a load to choose. For example, a person with a .357 magnum can have anything from the light target .38 Special 148-gr. wadcutter cruising along at around 700 ft/sec from a 4" gun to a full-house magnum kicking out hot JHP's at nearly twice that velocity. The choices don't end there. If the magnum's too much a +P .38 load that pleases is bound to be available and there are some attenuated magnum loads that ballistically rank just a bit higher. With the automatics we find standard velocity and +P loads and a myriad of designer ammunition intended to meet the majority of perceived needs.

So while I think we can say, "Yes, there have been improvements in defensive handgun capabilities," I also think that these improvements will never be realized by many.

Today's expanding bullet designs do work more reliably than those from years past. These can increase the effectiveness of a given handgun, but are they going to? Are they the most critical part of the handgun effectiveness equation?

We now have a plethora of downsized automatics in more potent calibers ranging from 9mm to .45 ACP and newer rounds like the .357 SIG and .40 S&W have their devotees by the thousands. Revolver fans can now purchase more compact magnums than ever before, but does increasing numbers of guns, calibers, and loads significantly increase our individual chances should we ever be in the "dark place"?

The effective defense gun may or may not be of the latest design or newest caliber. Its effectiveness depends upon its shooter, something that is woefully overlooked in my experience as a firearm instructor to both police and private citizens. It has been said that the mind is the weapon and the gun but the tool and I tend to agree…strongly.

So how does one get an effective defense handgun?
I humbly submit that going with what works for the individual and being competent with it attains this more surely than simply owning the latest gun or newest ammunition for it.

The CZ-75 is considered a top choice by a great many shooters. Is it necessarily going to be effective in the hands of someone who does not trust automatics or who has never shot other than a revolver? If the gun cannot be made to accurately fire in an instant, magazine capacity and ammunition simply do not matter.

Owning a defense handgun is the first step, but being competent with it is a more important one. I believe that the caliber and action-type should be that which the shooter is most comfortable with and trusts, but think it should be at least a .38 Special. Solid, sure hits with a properly loaded .38 will have more effectiveness than misses and peripheral hits with a .45 or .357 magnum in my observations.

In the trained hands, a 1911 .45 makes a very fine defensive arm as could this custom-built one, but for someone used to neither the action nor how to operate it under stress it could be a liability.

Thus, the effective defense gun is one with which the owner is willing to practice and become extremely familiar. He or she absolutely must be able to operate without having to remember how it works. It should be of at least sufficient power to do what's required but must not have recoil so intimidating as to make practice unpleasant. If this happens, practice is forsaken and we're back to less than effective. I believe an overlooked fact of life is that some people do perceive the need for a defense gun but are not shooting enthusiasts. This must be kept in mind as shooting enthusiasts have already made their choices or can do so independently or with but minimal suggestions. Very often I fear that we overlook this aspect of recommending an appropriate defensive handgun for others.

This S&W Model 10 represents what might be a very good choice for the non-enthusiasts. It's simple to operate, has modest recoil, is capable of extreme accuracy, and possesses very, very good reliability. For those not really into shooting, it might be a very fine defense gun. The gun chosen by an IPSC competitor, IDPA martial artist, SWAT team member, or Special Operations soldier would probably be something quite different.

So let us assume that our new owner has purchased the "right" defense gun and has put forth at least minimal effort toward understanding his weapon. He has practiced and is at least able to repeatedly hit his target pretty quickly at close range. He's bought "effective" ammunition of one type or the other and knows that his gun works fine with it.

Does he have an effective defense gun?

Maybe, but maybe not.

It is my opinion that unless the individual is actually willing to use the gun against another living being if no reasonable alternative exists, the gun is not effective. In fact it becomes a threat to its owner. It can be loaded with "nuclear" expanding ammo, but that will matter not one wit if he cannot use the weapon to save his own life and do so quickly.

The effective defense gun that's right for me may not be the best choice for another. Caliber, make of weapon, action type, etc. may vary quite a bit between serious users, but the following will be present:

· Understanding of the gun chosen
· Competence in its use
· Willingness to use it if there's no other way

When all of these are combined with a weapon of at least adequate power and proven reliability, we find someone with an effective defense gun.

Shooting an Old Classic: Walther PP .380 ACP

Hello. Despite many compact "pocket automatics" of more potent caliber like 9mm and .40 S&W, we continue to see pistols chambered in .380 ACP gracing dealer's shelves. Apparently they're selling, too! Most are pretty small and lightweight, a notable exception being the Beretta 84 family as well as the CZ-83. I thought it might be interesting to do a range report on the classic pistol that probably contributed at least as much to the longevity of the .380 as any and possibly the most.

The Pistol: I bought this .380 Walther PP NIB in June of '89. It is stock save for the checkered Sile stocks I added years ago. The gun has not been shot much and has probably had less than 400 rnds through it since I bought it. The PP has never been made in the US as has the PPK and PPK/S, its more petite bretheren. It has never been offered in stainless steel, but it sired this successful line of conventional DA/SA pocket autos. Originally brought out in .32 ACP, it rode with many of Europe's police forces for decades and was considered adequate for the task. I personally do not but do find the .32 version much more pleasent to shoot. This Walther PP is essentially new and is stock except for the wooden grips. It has a 3.86" barrel and the pistol's 6.7" long. All steel, it weighs 23.5 ounces, empty. Magazine capacity is 7 rounds in .380 for an 8-shot pistol if fully loaded.

This Walther PP represents handguns of a different era in my opinion. Though they may have fallen out of favor with some, they did serve handgunners well in decades gone by and their popularity possibly contributed to later, less-expensive versions of the pocket automatic.

The Bersa 380 is a less-expensive 380 that outwardly remembles Walther's PP series of pocket pistols. Like the Walther, it has a fixed barrel and like the Walther, it is capable of better mechanical accuracy than might originally be thought.

Ammunition: Several types of ammo were fired through the pistol. Included are two ball rounds, standard velocity and +P JHP's, 1 JSP load, and the Glaser 70-gr. +P (Silver) Safety Slug. Eleven loads were chronongraphed with average velocities listed being based on 10-shot strings. Each shot was fired approximately 10' from the chronograph screens. I used the two magazines that came standard with the pistol for all shooting. The pistol showed no preference for either magazine. Shooting: Today I fired groups at only 10 yards and did so in slow-fire, but started with a double-action first shot. The Walther was not picky as to which loads it would group...and group well.

Average Velocities:

Glaser 70-gr. Silver Safety Slug +P: 1369 ft/sec

Magtech 85-gr. Guardian Gold JHP +P: 1062

Remington 88-gr. JHP: 1056

Federal 90-gr. Classic JHP: 1038

Federal 90-gr. Hydrashok: 1048

Corbon 90-gr. JHP: 1118 (These are sometimes marked +P, but Corbon advised they're not.)

Winchester USA 95-gr. FMJ: 961

Winchester Ranger 95-gr. JHP: 966

Magtech 95-gr. FMJ: 945

Empresa Nacional Santa Barbara 95-gr. JSP: 1161

Remington 102-gr. Golden Saber: 953

Observations: First, there were no failures to feed or eject and the slide never failed to lock back after the last shot. It did not lock open prematurely with rounds still in the magazine. The highest velocity went to the load using the lightest bullet, the Glaser, but the most impressive load was the Santa Barbara 95-gr. JSP. It is not marked +P anywhere that I can find, but it must be and frankly, I will not shoot it in any aluminum-framed .380 from now on. I cannot prove it, but I think it's loaded too hot. This Walther performed fine, but still has the same trait each and every PP, PPK, or PPK/S in .380 has for me; it hits high. I suspect strongly that the sights for the .32 and those for the .380 are the same. An old Walther .32 PP I have hits dead-bang "on" for me. By being careful, I was able to avoid another nasty tendency I find when shooting Walther PP-series pistols: slide bite. The slide rides so llow that folks with fleshy hands sometimes get sliced when the slide moves rearward in firing. Others report no problems at all, but I'm not one of them. Finish was an impeccable bright blue on the complete pistol except for the breech area of the barrel which was left in the white. The trigger is grooved and the DA trigger-pull, heavy. In fact, on this pistol it is VERY heavy. The SA pull was light with just the least touch of creep. My .32 PP has a very nice DA trigger pull, both lighter and smoother than my .380. I don't know, but have wondered if this is done in conjunction with a slightly heavier recoil spring to lessen the slide's rearward velocity with the .380 having more momentum than the .32. Again, that's just supposition and could very easily be wrong. With the popularity of some of the newer pistols that clearly mimic the PP-series, an obvious question is how do they compare? Based solely on this one gun tested today, the Bersa, SIG-Sauer P230 both have much better double-action trigger pulls. So why pay more for a "German Walther" over the others? Well, it's up to the individual's preferences. Some simply like the old classics and admire the fit, finish, and the fact that there are zero MIM parts or castings. The gun's frame is forged, a strong point for many. Were I asked today if I'd fork over the $700 I spent back then for the gun, the answer would be "No". Nothing against the gun at all, but it's just not comfortable for me to shoot. This is why no rapid-fire work was done. The recoil is negligible; the slide bite is not. Also, I just do not shoot all that much .380! Since I already have the little thing, I'm going to keep it and admire it for what it is: a product of a time gone by and a classic that fathered a succession of guns still used today. It will be taken out and shot now and again, but mainly I just like the old thing. I have a like new Colt Agent that fills much the same role. Neither are my "users" and neither are my favorites in any catagory. I just like having them. I see nothing wrong with that.

For me, the Walther PP can still serve about as well as any similar sized 380 Auto, but might best represent this classic genre of handgun.

Does My Hi Power Have the Internal Firing Pin Safety

FN's internal firing pin safeties were introduced with late runs of the Mk II circa 1987-1988. (Initially runs of the Mk II did not have it nor did the "classic" style of Hi Power.) Some of the Mk III pistols didn't have them but the majority, actually desginated Mk IIIs, did. This would be around 1989.

One can tell for sure if his/her Hi Power has the internal firing pin safety by removing the slide and looking to see if a hole has been milled in bottom of it for the "paddle" on the rear of the spring-loaded sear lever to extend through and block the firing pin's forward movement until the trigger's pressed.

This is what the bottom of the slide looks like if it does have the internal firing pin safety. If it doesn't have the milled opening at the rear with the end of the sear lever being a "paddle", it does not have an internal firing pin safety.

Shooting the Beretta Model 85F .380 ACP

With the proliferation of very compact 9mm (and up) caliber pistols, some of the .380's former "glory" as perhaps a "light but adequate" backup gun has faded. I've made it no secret that I personally prefer to go no "lighter" than a .38 snub loaded with 158-gr. LSWCHP +P ammunition. More than a few other shooters feel the same way while there are some who steadfastly refuse to tote any defensive caliber that doesn't start with a "4".

At the same time, some shooters cannot or will not "dress around the gun" as is sometimes suggested and/or find the recoil of the Airweight (and lighter) ilk of snubs to simply recoil too sharply. Thus, some gravitate toward the compact "service caliber" automatics, some to light- loaded 38 Special snubs and others to the .380 ACP genre of pistols.

Caliber preference aside, I personally think that there are some pretty neat .380 ACP pistols and decided to wring one out for those folks who might be interested in a handgun of this type.

(This article's focus will not be on "stopping power" concerns but on how the particular pistol handled as well as what I liked and disliked. There are plenty of sites on which endless debate and pontification on "stopping power" can be found. In some instances, the discussions get rude, something I've never quite understood. Anyway, here I will focus on the pistol and offer observations. The individual reader can decide what does or doesn't equate to adequate "stopping power" for them.)

I recently obtained a like-new Beretta Model 85F .380 ACP pistol at a reasonable price. It is certainly not the most miniscule handgun in this caliber and probably not a current favorite, but it is a relatively compact shooter that offers an 8-round single-stack magazine for a total max capacity of 9 shots before the pistol is emptied.

This is a factory stock Model 85F Beretta. It is a DA/SA pistol having fixed sights, a magazine "safety", a grooved trigger dull black, checkered synthetic stocks. Both the front and rear grip straps are grooved for improved purchase with sweaty, wet or perhaps bloody hands. Finish is a combination of matte blue and "Bruniton". It has convenient ambidextrous thumb safety levers but unlike earlier versions of the pistol, Condition One Carry is not possible. When the safety lever is pushed all the way upward, it acts as a decocker, dropping the hammer to sort of a "half-cock" position. The pistol can be carried hammer down with the safety engaged or not. There is an internal firing pin safety such that the pin is not free to move unless the trigger is in the rearward position. Barrel length is 3.81". The gun weighs just under 22-ounces, empty. Barrel pitch is approximately 1:10".

At this point, some will suggest that this is just too large-for-caliber pistol. I suggest that this actually depends upon just the how-easily-concealed vs. how-easy-to-get-hits factor plays into things, something that will likely be different for different shooters. As is the case in many aspects of life, there trades and compromises to be frequently made. For some, this pistol might just be nearly perfect while others wouldn't own one on a bet!

Shooting: I shot 220 95-gr. FMJ rounds from Georgia Arms in today's test. I'd previously tested the pistol for reliability with other than ball ammo and it worked flawless with 3 magazines each of Federal 90-gr. JHP, Federal 90-gr. HydraShok, Corbon 90-gr. JHP, along with Winchester's flat point FMJ and Silvertip hollow points. The pistol functioned flawlessly in today's shooting along with the previous test-firings of the above-listed rounds.

Today's shooting was done at 5, 7, and 15 yards.

The two overlapping groups here were fired in slow-fire and using single-action only. No effort was made at speed and I fired from a sitting position with wrists braced. Note that at 7 yards and closer, a dead-on hold appears satisfactory but at 15-yards, a six o' clock hold was needed to avoid being a bit high on POI. Single marks indicate those shots fired at 7-yards while those bullet holes that are circled indicate firing at the longer distance.

Next on the agenda was Jim Higginbotham's standard "controllability drill" for defensive hanguns. Essentially, it is 5 shots at 5 yards in under 2 seconds from a low-ready position. His suggested target is a piece of folded notebook paper measuring about 4 1/4" x 11", with the latter being the vertical measurement. I fired 5 shots but at a dotted circle measuring roughly 6" or so in diameter. This was repeated 6 times for a total of 30 rounds being fired.

Each set of 5-shots began with the timer's beep and from a low-ready position. The first shot was double-action and the pistol's thumb safety was engaged. Like shooting a single-action automatic, the frame-mounted thumb safety did not appear to cause in lag in shooting times. This pistol's safety works just like those on the familiar 1911 or Hi Power pistols: up for "safe" and down for "fire".

Average time for 5-shots was 1.71 seconds. That is not particularly quick. There are plenty of folks who can beat that but I do think it shows that the double-action first-shot is not necessarily the oh-so-hard-to-master feat described by some...at least at this distance. I am not convinced that the average shooter gives up much if anything at close range with the DA/SA autopistol so long as the double-action is smooth and the reach is not too long for his hand size.

Next up was the classic "Failure to Stop" drill. In today's session, I started from a low-ready at 7-yards and fired two to the center chest area of the target and then one to the nose/eye area of the head.

The FTS drill was repeated 10 times. Average time was 2.54 seconds. I attribute the longer times for fewer shots fired on the Higginbotham exercise to having to obtain two sight pictures and taking slightly longer for the more precise head shot. First rounds in the "controlled pair" to the chest were fired double-action. I did get one round outside the target area. I flat don't know if I did it firing double or single-action. I didn't fire "double taps" or "hammers", ie: two shots with one sight picture. I fired "controlled pairs". Col. Jeff Cooper's "flash sight picture" was obtained for each shot.











Observations: The pistol had no malfunctions whatsoever. Reliability is an absolute must in any firearm intended for serious purposes. Ejection was positive, with fired cases landing approximately 10 to 12 feet to my right.
The slide locked rearward after firing the last shot and there were no instances of its either failing to do so or locking open with rounds still in the magazine.
Firing pin indentions were adequate and well-centered.

Like the vast majority of .380 ACP pistols, this one is of straight blowback design. Unlike many, the barrel is not fixed. It is removeable for cleaning and comes off with the slide and recoil spring assembly during routine field-stripping and cleaning. I did not find recoil to be sharp with today's 925 ft/sec load nor any other ammunition tried in this gun. To be sure, felt-recoil is a very subjective entity but for me it was a non-issue in this "standard size" .380 auto. Neither did this pistol chew up my shooting hand. The generous tang (and rounded edges) along with the compact ring hammer resulted in there being absolutely no abrasions to my hand between the thumb and shooting finger, something I definitely cannot about my Walther PP in this same caliber!
My hands were more than a little sweaty in today's near 100-degree weather. The pistol was easy to handle and it didn't slip at all. I attribute this to both the checkered grips and the well-serrated front and rear grip straps. I really appreciate this in a protection pistol.
The sights were easy enough to use and should be pretty well snag-free. Sight picture was adequate, but I do prefer the fixed sights on the SIG-Sauer P232 to these. That said, it is not difficult to obtain a quick sight picture with the Beretta's vertical white bar rear sight and white dot front. The tang prevented any dreaded "hammer bite" at all during today's 200 + round session. The extended ambidextrous thumb safety was never inadvertently engaged during my "low thumb" shooting. The safety is sprung to remain positively engaged or disengaged and it moves quitely from the "on" to "off" position. At the end of the day's session, the pistol's action had not become "sluggish" or indicative that cleaning was immediately necessary to prevent malfunctions. It was still running faultlessly and without hesitation.

The pistol's magazine well is not beveled but there was no problem inserting magazines. I suspect that this will not be an issue with most owners of this type pistol.

Though I detest magazine safeties, the 85F has one. It caused no problems today and contributed to positive ejection of the magazine when released.

While the .380 ACP will probably never be a favorite of mine, I do enjoy this pistol. It appears to be of very fine quality and from what I've seen over the years personally and gleaned from others, they're usually reliable as homemade sin.

I may just hang on to this one.

Para-USA Nite Hawg 45 Caliber

Please Follow this Blog.
Join my BlogFrog Community.
Be my Friend on Facebook.
Join me on Twitter and follow my Tweets.
Rate this Blog.
Please post a comment, no spam or ads permitted.


Share a photo of your own gun or weapon with our readers, send it to me by email, and I will post them.