|
|
|
Showing posts with label pistol. Show all posts
Showing posts with label pistol. Show all posts
Friday, April 23, 2010
Tuesday, April 20, 2010
Sunday, April 18, 2010
Sunday, April 11, 2010
Tuesday, April 6, 2010
Sunday, April 4, 2010
Monday, March 22, 2010
Monday, February 22, 2010
Which Grip Safety for the 1911-Pattern Pistol?
"Which is the Best 1911 Grip Safety, GI or Beavertail?"
This is a question that is discussed repeatedly on various shooting forums and the answers usually fall into those listed below:
Answer 1: The standard GI grip safety is the best. If it weren't, John Browning wouldn't have put it on the gun in the first place.
Answer 2: The beavertail is best. It allows for a higher hold on the gun and more control in rapid fire.
Answer 3: The beavertail prevents hammer bite and I find it more comfortable.
Answer 4: People do it just for looks.
Usually these are the "standard" answers but are often followed with discussions concerning whether the beavertail grip safety is more appropriately called a duck tail safety due to the way that most turn up at the end.
The first answer is fairly common and one that turns a lot of people off, none more than myself.
The truth of the matter is that John Browning did change the grip safety from the near Commander-like design to what is now commonly called the "traditional" or "GI grip safety." With the greatest respect for John M. Browning, that does not necessarily have to mean that he had achieved perfection in this component of the 1911 pattern pistol. Answer 1's "pontification factor" not only doesn't help the person asking the question, but possibly keeps him from asking any others, and that's a pity in my view. I pretty much ignore folks giving this "high" caliber advice.
Answer 2 is true in that a slightly higher grip is allowed on the pistol. Others may very well be able to decrease split times and gain increased accurate rapid-fire ability with the gun, but I'm just not one of them. Sometimes I've been faster with the GI grip safety and other times, the wide grip safety. For me, the addition of a wide grip safety does not significantly or consistently allow me to accurately shoot any faster than the standard GI. Perhaps it would were I shooting extremely hot .45 ACP ammunition. On that possibility, I cannot say because I've not tried it, but with ball equivalent loads, no differences for me. I suspect that some people might think that it does; I did too until I saw the timer's results on more than one occasion. That there was no improvement in my particular case doesn't have to automatically translate into there being none for others. I do not have enough wisdom to speak for all people. I mention only what has been true in my case.
The third answer is true for me as well and is the reason that the bulk of my 1911 pattern pistols are fitted with wide grip safeties, usually from Ed Brown.
When a person answers similarly on the forums, he is usually told that he's "not holding the gun correctly". I guess that could be true enough in some instances, but after shooting for over thirty years and being a certified police firearm instructor, tactical team handgun trainer, CHL instructor, and taught in my earlier years by some champion shooters, I think I know pretty much how to grip a 1911 pistol. I strongly suspect that the majority of people holding the 1911 are probably doing so correctly…or very close.
I find the wide "duck tail" grip safety to be the most comfortable. That's why I spent the time to fit them to two Caspian 1911's "built" at home. For me, a gun that is comfortable to shoot in both long individual sessions as well as for the long term is highly desirable. The wide grip safety just "works" for me. Some are fortunate enough not to get bitten by the original GI hammer/grip safety combination. Good for them! That does not mean that the same is true for everyone else. It damned sure isn't for me!
Here is why I use the wide grip safety by choice: It keeps me from bleeding. It is that simple. I have fleshy hands and get nipped by the spur hammer that almost always accompanies the GI grip safety. Depending upon the specific grip safety's edges, it too can abrade the skin between my thumb and trigger finger. I have friends who do not suffer this problem and one who can shoot hundreds of rounds through his Commander with its original short GI grip safety with nary a problem. That's great for them, but to assume that since it works for some, it should work for all is simply incorrect. It definitely does not work for me.
This is a question that is discussed repeatedly on various shooting forums and the answers usually fall into those listed below:
Answer 1: The standard GI grip safety is the best. If it weren't, John Browning wouldn't have put it on the gun in the first place.
Answer 2: The beavertail is best. It allows for a higher hold on the gun and more control in rapid fire.
Answer 3: The beavertail prevents hammer bite and I find it more comfortable.
Answer 4: People do it just for looks.
Usually these are the "standard" answers but are often followed with discussions concerning whether the beavertail grip safety is more appropriately called a duck tail safety due to the way that most turn up at the end.
The first answer is fairly common and one that turns a lot of people off, none more than myself.
The truth of the matter is that John Browning did change the grip safety from the near Commander-like design to what is now commonly called the "traditional" or "GI grip safety." With the greatest respect for John M. Browning, that does not necessarily have to mean that he had achieved perfection in this component of the 1911 pattern pistol. Answer 1's "pontification factor" not only doesn't help the person asking the question, but possibly keeps him from asking any others, and that's a pity in my view. I pretty much ignore folks giving this "high" caliber advice.
Answer 2 is true in that a slightly higher grip is allowed on the pistol. Others may very well be able to decrease split times and gain increased accurate rapid-fire ability with the gun, but I'm just not one of them. Sometimes I've been faster with the GI grip safety and other times, the wide grip safety. For me, the addition of a wide grip safety does not significantly or consistently allow me to accurately shoot any faster than the standard GI. Perhaps it would were I shooting extremely hot .45 ACP ammunition. On that possibility, I cannot say because I've not tried it, but with ball equivalent loads, no differences for me. I suspect that some people might think that it does; I did too until I saw the timer's results on more than one occasion. That there was no improvement in my particular case doesn't have to automatically translate into there being none for others. I do not have enough wisdom to speak for all people. I mention only what has been true in my case.
The third answer is true for me as well and is the reason that the bulk of my 1911 pattern pistols are fitted with wide grip safeties, usually from Ed Brown.
When a person answers similarly on the forums, he is usually told that he's "not holding the gun correctly". I guess that could be true enough in some instances, but after shooting for over thirty years and being a certified police firearm instructor, tactical team handgun trainer, CHL instructor, and taught in my earlier years by some champion shooters, I think I know pretty much how to grip a 1911 pistol. I strongly suspect that the majority of people holding the 1911 are probably doing so correctly…or very close.
I find the wide "duck tail" grip safety to be the most comfortable. That's why I spent the time to fit them to two Caspian 1911's "built" at home. For me, a gun that is comfortable to shoot in both long individual sessions as well as for the long term is highly desirable. The wide grip safety just "works" for me. Some are fortunate enough not to get bitten by the original GI hammer/grip safety combination. Good for them! That does not mean that the same is true for everyone else. It damned sure isn't for me!
Here is why I use the wide grip safety by choice: It keeps me from bleeding. It is that simple. I have fleshy hands and get nipped by the spur hammer that almost always accompanies the GI grip safety. Depending upon the specific grip safety's edges, it too can abrade the skin between my thumb and trigger finger. I have friends who do not suffer this problem and one who can shoot hundreds of rounds through his Commander with its original short GI grip safety with nary a problem. That's great for them, but to assume that since it works for some, it should work for all is simply incorrect. It definitely does not work for me.
For me, the wide grip safety is the best approach to a 1911-pattern pistol that I can shoot lots w/o my hand looking like it was gnawed on by a rabid pirahna.
I have found that by bobbing the hammer spur and rounding the bottom edges of the traditional grip safety, I can shoot roughly 200 to 250 full-power shots without problems, but not quite as comfortably as with the wide grip safety.
The spur hammer on this Springfield Armory Mil-Spec has been bobbed slightly and recontoured to help eliminate hammer bite. The grip safety's lower edges have been radiused to prevent hand abrasions as well. For me, this set up is good for 150 to about 200 full-power shots before my hand starts getting a hole chewed in it. I do not know how true Answer 4 might or might not be. Some people very well could prefer the "look" of the wide grip safety. In this regard, I have no preference, but opine that if a person prefers the beavertail/duck tail "look" and has the money or talent to get one fitted to his gun, have at it. For me, that possible aspect is a non-issue with regard to functionality or "shootability" of the pistol.
Currently I have one 1911 set up with the GI grip safety and spur hammer and the pistol is shot frequently. It is a Springfield Mil-Spec. Trigger specialist, Teddy Jacobson, replaced and upgraded certain internals as well as the hammer for a better trigger pull and I changed the stocks, but otherwise, the gun is stock. I wanted one gun that was set up pretty much in the style of the "old timey" 1911 pistols. It is not as comfortable for me as one equipped with a wide grip safety, but it is comfortable enough that I can shoot it a couple of hundred rounds per session without problems. Were it my only 1911, it would have the wide grip safety.
It might be worth mentioning that some folks report success in eliminating abrasions from hammer bite and cutting from the grip safety by bobbing the hammer and then shortening the grip safety tang. In this configuration it is flush with the rear of the frame, sort of making the rear like that of the Browning Hi Power. I have not tried this approach and cannot speak to it from first-hand experience as I have only shot one such modified 1911. (It did work fine for me the one time I shot the gun, but I only fired a couple of magazines of ammunition so I do not know how it would be long term.)
If you are considering a 1911 or wondering if you "need" the wide grip safety, I submit that you already know the answer. If the gun's biting you each session and you're tired of it, then you do need the wide grip safety. You can try bobbing the hammer spur about 1/8" and reshaping the bottom of the spur as well as "melting" the edges of the safety itself and that might do the trick. If not, I think you'll enjoy your shooting more with a wide grip safety. I cannot speak for others but I bet most folks shoot better when their pistol doesn't mimic a piranha in a feeding frenzy on the web of the shooting hand.
Ask yourself this question when making a decision on grip safeties or other similar "basic" custom touches:
Who does this gun have to please?
If it is you, go with what works for you.
Sunday, February 21, 2010
Hi Power Accuracy
The term "accuracy" doesn't necessarily mean the same thing to all of us. To a competition match bullseye shooter, it means having the most intrinsically accurate pistol he can have. Malfunctions are a secondary issue in most cases, but he must have a competition pistol capable of putting one bullet hole right on top of another. To the IDPA shooter, the gun must be reliable and capable of dropping hits within a more generous scoring area that the bullseye target. If both of these fellows have pistols capable of meeting their requirements, they have accurate pistols in their respective frames of reference.
So where does the Browning Hi Power fit in with regard to accuracy?
So where does the Browning Hi Power fit in with regard to accuracy?
This later production Hi Power should group under 3" @ 25-yards with most loads and perhaps in the 2 1/2" range with loads that the gun "likes". In an old issue of "The Handloader" magazine, I recall a shooter getting 1" groups using handloads with an unaltered factory Browning Hi Power. Bullets used were 115-gr. Sierra JHP's but I do not recall the load other than that the bullet moved in the 1100 to 1150 ft/sec range.
First, we have to remember that the Hi Power was originally designed to be a military service pistol. Emphasis was strong on reliability and accuracy parameters would not be so strict as those for our bullseye shooter previously mentioned. The gun was intended to fire under adverse conditions more than to provide the tightest possible groups. The Hi Power generally will not match the tight groups of pistols designed for competition target shooting including accurized versions of other service pistols such as the Gold Cup or 1911 pistols custom built to provide extreme mechanical accuracy.
This group was fired at 25-yards using Federal 124-gr. FMJ ammunition from a Hi Power sporting its original barrel. While this would win no matches at Camp Perry, it probably is accurate enough to meet most handgunner's needs, be they real or imagined. I know that such is the case for me.
Does that mean that it is inaccurate? The answer depends upon your definition and requirements. It's been my experience with many Hi Powers that almost all of them will drop most brands of ammunition into groups under 3" at 25 yards. Some will do better and most will do surprisingly better with a specific load that the gun "likes." I'm happy with loads that do in the 2 to 2.5" range at that distance as I cannot achieve such groups except from a rest and I'm not involved in Camp Perry competition. If the pistol is capable of dropping its shots onto a tennis ball size target at twenty-five yards (assuming I'm doing my part), the Hi Power is accurate, as least to me.
One of the endearing traits of the Hi Power is that it is usually consistent in accuracy, one gun to another. I've rarely seen one that wouldn't group in the ranges mentioned and the best-grouping is usually not that much better than the worst-grouping Hi Powers I've owned and/or shot. This speaks highly to FN's manufacturing consistency. (I do wish they'd place such an emphasis on trigger pulls!)
Every now and again, I hear from a shooter having trouble with his Hi Power throwing a wild shot without warning that is not the shooter's fault. Assuming that the ammunition is not at fault, it seems that pistols afflicted with this malady are suffering from the barrel not locking up the same way each time a shot is fired. Finding the specific location of improper fitting, be it in the slide or the barrel can be a tedious problem. If you are suffering from such a problem and happen to have a spare barrel, you might try a switch and see if this does it. The problem here is that such swaps can result in a different POI for the same POA. If this works, great, but if not I'd buy an oversize Bar-Sto match Hi Power barrel and have it fitted to the pistol. On two occasions, this has been the cure and is generally not much more expensive than having a qualified gunsmith weld the original barrel and refit it to the pistol.
At this point, it might be appropriate to compare Hi Power accuracy with a fitted Bar-Sto vs. a stock barrel. It has been my experience that perhaps a 10 to 20% tightening of groups with jacketed bullets will be seen, although the favorite load for the factory barrel might very well be different than that preferred by the match barrel. You will see a significant increase in grouping ability with the Bar-Sto if using either cast or plated bullets. I believe that this is due to the difference in pitch between the two barrels. The factory FN barrel has a 1:10 twist while the Bar-Sto is 1:16. It appears that the cast and plated bullets "like" the slower twist. In general, I've noticed about a 40 to 60 ft/sec decrease in velocity from the 1:10 to the 1:16 with most loads. I assume this is due to more complete combustion of the powder in trying to drive the bullet out the faster twist barrel without reaching the point where too much is used and velocity suffers. This has proven true with many loads I've tested, but not all and it can be different from barrel to barrel. The main thing is that if you're shooting a maximum load that's fine in the slower twist Bar-Sto, it might be too hot in the faster twist factory barrel. This is only a potential problem with loads pushing the maximum ballistic envelope for the cartridge and I'm aware of no factory loads, standard, +P, or +P+ in which it can be risky or dangerous.
This Hi Power has a fitted BarSto barrel. It groups about the same with jacketed ammunition using it as it does with the factory barrel but shows significantly tighter groups with either cast or plated ammunition in my observation. With jacketed ammunition, the BarSto will usually show a decrease in group size to the tune of 15 or 20% in my experience.
For most of us, the Browning Hi Power is more accurate than we can actually make use of as it comes from the manufacturer, but it is still essentially a service pistol and should not be expected to group with a target gun. Contrary to some statements I've seen, I've observed no difference overall between Hi Powers having fixed sights vs. those with adjustables with regard to inherent mechanical accuracy. Do not buy an adjustable sighted Hi Power under the false assumption that the pistol is fitted better or held to higher standards in terms of grouping ability. The basic gun is the same with only different sights. (This emphatically does not apply to the FN Competition Model. No longer producted, this longer barreled Hi Power had adjustable sights and a muzzle weight. Additionally an internal leaf spring in the slide tensioned the barrel into a most consistent and repeatable position shot to shot. These guns were capable of better groups than the "normal" Hi Powers bearing either FN or Browning markings.)
The FN Competition Model is almost always capable of better mechanical accuracy than the standard Hi Power, regardless of whether or not the latter has fixed or adjustable sights.
Though I believe that the standard Hi Power is accurate enough to meet the vast majority of shooters' perceived needs, the trigger pull can often inhibit their ability to utilize the gun's accuracy. Unfortunately, poor trigger pulls are not uncommon on the Hi Power pistol. The statement that " a trigger pull need not necessarily be light, but should be crisp" is true, but they do need to be lighter than those common on many Hi Powers. Fortunately, this can be addressed with a number of cures from removing the magazine disconnect to having a gunsmith do a trigger job. The latter will mean more money spent, but for many of us, the result is worth it.
While the Browning Hi Power remains a service pistol with service accuracy, I believe that it falls in the better range of this rating and with but a little help can be a very accurate pistol for all but the very best shots or those in formal competition.
Friday, February 19, 2010
Shooting the SIG-Sauer P220 w/DAK Trigger System
Hello. It is no secret that my handgun preferences are single-action autoloaders followed by DA revolvers, but not to the complete exclusion of other action types. One "glaring" exception to my "single-action-only" bias remains the CZ-75 Pre-B; another has been SIG-Sauer single-stack semiautomatics. In that family, I've been most pleased with the SIG-Sauer P220.
This P220 was bought in the '90's though I just recently added the Hogue checkered grips. It came with the "green" recoil spring intended for warmer loads. I bought the gun after attending a firearms instructor school at DPS Austin and saw now retired Lt. Reeves Jungkind (of Jungkind Python fame) shooting one at 50 yards. It was an out of the box P220 and his accuracy was exceptional ... to say the least. This one's been stone cold reliable with any and all JHP's. It will not feed handloaded SWC's with over 5 in the magazine, but anything else feeds, extracts and ejects flawlessly. The 3-dot fixed sights were dead-bang "on" for me and the gun has a very nice single-action albeit with quite a bit of slack initially.
While at DPS Austin a decade later recertifying as a state CHL instructor, I struck up a conversation with one of the rangemasters there, a very nice, very Pro-Second DPS Sergeant and asked how the 357 SIG was doing. (No complaints from this man, who is a very proficient shooter and police firearm instructor.) He mentioned that their SIG-Sauers were not DAO or DA/SA, but DAK or "Double Action Kellerman" in honor of the fellow who came up with the system. Essentially, you wind up with a DAO pistol, but one with about a 6.5-lb pull.
I didn't think much more about it.
Recently I handled a few SIG-Sauer P220 .45's in various forms of the gun now offered to the shooting public. One was a DAK action on SIG-Sauer's "SAS" (SIG Anti Snag) model.
I kind of liked it so eventually I coughed up the tariff.
The pistol came with two stainless 8-shot magazines vs. the blued 7-shot magazines I'm more familiar with.
The P220 SAS shown here is stock, just as it comes from the factory. The trigger is of a different contour than my original P220 and quite smooth and short...for a double-action. The "SAS" part amounts to its having no sharp edges, ie: the gun's been "melted" like Ikey Stark's famous "well used bar of soap." I'd have preferred a bit less rounding of the slide's edges, but it is comfortable.
As luck would have it, it drizzled and rained all day. Still I was able to get to the range and shoot at about 10 or 12 yards while standing under a cover.
Ammunition fired included handloaded 230-gr. Remington Golden Saber handloads, as well as factory, Speer 230-gr. Gold Dots, Corbon 185-gr. +P DPX, S&B 230-gr. FMJ, Winchester USA 230-gr. FMJ, Remington UMC 230-gr. FMJ, a 230-gr. CRN handload, Federal 230-gr. Classic JHP, Federal 230-gr. HydraShok, and a few Corbon 185-gr. +P JHP's. I used both of the new magazines (dimpled at the top rear as compared to the plain) as well as an old 7-shot.
There were no failures to feed, extract, or eject. The slide locked back only after the last round had been fired. Magazines dropped freely when released.
Cases were ejected approximately 8 to 10' to my right. After a few shots, it was no problem to get the gun to group well enough, but my shots were consistently 3" to the left. I had noticed that for whatever reason, the rear sight blade appeared off-centered well to the left. Elevation was fine.
Upon returning home, I contacted a local 'smith who has a SIG-Sauer sight pusher and moved the sight to center. I have not shot the gun since doing this but strongly suspect that the "problem" is solved. I'll find out soon.
I sort of like the DAK system for folks not wanting to use single-action for whatever reason. Though not as smooth as a nicely tuned DA revolver, it ain't bad; it ain't bad at all.
There's little doubt (as in none) that I couldn't "double tap" so quickly with this pistol was with a 1911-pattern gun, but in controlled pairs, I honestly don't think there will be any loss of speed. No doubt part of this is from decades of double-action revolver shooting, but I absolutely believethat the DAK is a viable action for quick and accurate emergency shooting.
It is my understanding that some folks have reported problems with some of the newer SIG-Sauer P220 magazines with regard to some cartridges being too long to fit. While the ammunition used today wasn't excessively long, some of it has been mentioned in the posts concerning this problem. I didn't experience it at all. I have no idea if the problem was a single run of magazines or if some lots of ammunition had been loaded longer. In any event, the above-mentioned ammunition worked fine in all three magazines.
In the near future, I'll see how accurately I can shoot this pistol and will chronograph several different loads but I don't expect any significant differences in bullet speeds when compared to my older P220.
So far I'm pleased with the pistol and the DAK action. I fired something less than 300 rounds today, but will get serious with the pistol in the near future.
This P220 was bought in the '90's though I just recently added the Hogue checkered grips. It came with the "green" recoil spring intended for warmer loads. I bought the gun after attending a firearms instructor school at DPS Austin and saw now retired Lt. Reeves Jungkind (of Jungkind Python fame) shooting one at 50 yards. It was an out of the box P220 and his accuracy was exceptional ... to say the least. This one's been stone cold reliable with any and all JHP's. It will not feed handloaded SWC's with over 5 in the magazine, but anything else feeds, extracts and ejects flawlessly. The 3-dot fixed sights were dead-bang "on" for me and the gun has a very nice single-action albeit with quite a bit of slack initially.While at DPS Austin a decade later recertifying as a state CHL instructor, I struck up a conversation with one of the rangemasters there, a very nice, very Pro-Second DPS Sergeant and asked how the 357 SIG was doing. (No complaints from this man, who is a very proficient shooter and police firearm instructor.) He mentioned that their SIG-Sauers were not DAO or DA/SA, but DAK or "Double Action Kellerman" in honor of the fellow who came up with the system. Essentially, you wind up with a DAO pistol, but one with about a 6.5-lb pull.
I didn't think much more about it.
Recently I handled a few SIG-Sauer P220 .45's in various forms of the gun now offered to the shooting public. One was a DAK action on SIG-Sauer's "SAS" (SIG Anti Snag) model.
I kind of liked it so eventually I coughed up the tariff.
The pistol came with two stainless 8-shot magazines vs. the blued 7-shot magazines I'm more familiar with.
The P220 SAS shown here is stock, just as it comes from the factory. The trigger is of a different contour than my original P220 and quite smooth and short...for a double-action. The "SAS" part amounts to its having no sharp edges, ie: the gun's been "melted" like Ikey Stark's famous "well used bar of soap." I'd have preferred a bit less rounding of the slide's edges, but it is comfortable.As luck would have it, it drizzled and rained all day. Still I was able to get to the range and shoot at about 10 or 12 yards while standing under a cover.
Ammunition fired included handloaded 230-gr. Remington Golden Saber handloads, as well as factory, Speer 230-gr. Gold Dots, Corbon 185-gr. +P DPX, S&B 230-gr. FMJ, Winchester USA 230-gr. FMJ, Remington UMC 230-gr. FMJ, a 230-gr. CRN handload, Federal 230-gr. Classic JHP, Federal 230-gr. HydraShok, and a few Corbon 185-gr. +P JHP's. I used both of the new magazines (dimpled at the top rear as compared to the plain) as well as an old 7-shot.
There were no failures to feed, extract, or eject. The slide locked back only after the last round had been fired. Magazines dropped freely when released.
Cases were ejected approximately 8 to 10' to my right. After a few shots, it was no problem to get the gun to group well enough, but my shots were consistently 3" to the left. I had noticed that for whatever reason, the rear sight blade appeared off-centered well to the left. Elevation was fine.
Upon returning home, I contacted a local 'smith who has a SIG-Sauer sight pusher and moved the sight to center. I have not shot the gun since doing this but strongly suspect that the "problem" is solved. I'll find out soon.
I sort of like the DAK system for folks not wanting to use single-action for whatever reason. Though not as smooth as a nicely tuned DA revolver, it ain't bad; it ain't bad at all.
There's little doubt (as in none) that I couldn't "double tap" so quickly with this pistol was with a 1911-pattern gun, but in controlled pairs, I honestly don't think there will be any loss of speed. No doubt part of this is from decades of double-action revolver shooting, but I absolutely believethat the DAK is a viable action for quick and accurate emergency shooting.
It is my understanding that some folks have reported problems with some of the newer SIG-Sauer P220 magazines with regard to some cartridges being too long to fit. While the ammunition used today wasn't excessively long, some of it has been mentioned in the posts concerning this problem. I didn't experience it at all. I have no idea if the problem was a single run of magazines or if some lots of ammunition had been loaded longer. In any event, the above-mentioned ammunition worked fine in all three magazines.
In the near future, I'll see how accurately I can shoot this pistol and will chronograph several different loads but I don't expect any significant differences in bullet speeds when compared to my older P220.
So far I'm pleased with the pistol and the DAK action. I fired something less than 300 rounds today, but will get serious with the pistol in the near future.
Wednesday, February 17, 2010
Why Should I Buy a Hi Power Pistol?
Why should I buy a Browning Hi Power? There are more modern designs available and everybody says that they have terrible trigger pulls.
Whether or not you buy a Hi Power is really up to you and what you like. There are more modern designs, but if you still prefer the single-action automatic for use at the range, small game hunting, or personal protection, there's really very little competition and most still rate the Hi Power as the single-action 9mm.
For some us, the initial attraction remains looks, feel, or both. Speaking only for myself, I don't think any other semiautomatic pistol feels as good in the hand as the Browning Hi Power and I think it's one of the best looking pistols around. It is not perfect out of the box and most serious users buy them expecting to do a trigger job and some remove the magazine disconnect. Some have fairly extensive customization done and wind up with very elegant pistols.
This is a Mk III 9mm that has been very lightly customized, mostly by me. I bobbed and reshaped the hammer spur and blued it. The Spegel checkered delrin stocks replaced the factory nylon thumb rest stocks and I did a trigger job on the gun. When the factory matte finish eventually became pretty dinged up, I had the frame matte blued while the slide is bright blue. It has the factory barrel and has not been accurized. This Hi Power hits spot on at 15 yards and will normally group well under 3" with most ammunition and considerably less than that with particular loads. The eagle-eyed will have noticed that the right side factory extended thumb safety lever is gone and that the shaft has been rounded on the end. I had the gunsmith do that as the ambidextrous thumb safety gets in my way. Most folks do prefer them. This is a lightly customized pistol that's equally at home for informal target work, self-protection, or on my person when hunting. It is fitted with a Wolff conventional 18.5 lb. recoil spring and has a buffer as well. Other pistols can shoot tighter groups, but being able to hit a tennis ball size target at around 25 yards or a bowling pin at 100 yards (not every shot, though) is plenty good enough for my needs.
In recent years, the trigger pulls are not usually as good as those on other pistols like the CZ-75 and the 1911. Part of this is due to the way the magazine disconnect operates and trigger pull on the Hi Power can actually vary depending upon which magazine you happen to be using at the time. The exact dimensions of the magazine as well as the smoothness on the front of the magazine in the gun at the time all play a part in this. For this reason and others, I routinely remove the magazine "safety." Others counsel against it. You do what you want. For what it's worth, there are a number of Hi Power gunsmiths who can do a darned good trigger job with or without the magazine disconnect in place.
Hi Powers in the past usually did have better trigger pulls. I think that some reasons this might have gone downhill might include the liability issue here in the sue-happy United States as well as the fact that the Hi Power's just not as big a seller for FN as in decades past. While there still are military forces that use the Hi Power, it's probably not the 65 or so nations that were 20 years ago. Though many, including me, still believe that the single-action automatic is the most efficient fighting handgun extant, it's day is probably passing. That does not mean that among its fans, the Hi Power won't remain a popular, viable tool and it will still be used by many if they have a choice. Still, production is down, liability issues up, and with the bottom line being profit, FN most likely does not spend the time and attention to trigger pulls it once did. I suspect that military contracts for the gun specify a trigger pull of not more than so much or less than a certain amount. FN cranks out the pistols knowing that most will fall within that range and if some don't and complaints made, they'll take care of it. Otherwise, the guns are sold and profits made without the extra expense of a pristine trigger out of the box.
At one time, both Browning Arms Company and FN-USA were importing Hi Powers. For the most part, the imported pistols are in 9mm and are the Mk III with the internal firing pin safety. This model is sometimes listed as the Mk III S. In the US, the most popular single-action automatic remains the 1911 as is witnessed by the numerous makers of the gun and the multitude of models and the caliber of choice, .45 ACP. Browning and FN were suffering in this market and this is why future importation of the pistol was in doubt. Currently, Browning imports a relatively small number of guns and when they're sold, imports more. FN is no longer importing Hi Powers into the US under its name though Browning Arms Co. does indeed do so.
Even if production stopped tomorrow, spare parts would remain available for decades and it wouldn't surprise me at all to see more aftermarket parts makers begin cranking out parts for the gun. What I'm getting at is that if you're holding off on one as you think it may cease to be made, don't. The gun's everywhere in its original form and even the supply of Pre-Ban 13 round magazines has not dried up yet.
I think I've seen a ray of hope in three NIB Browning Hi Powers of late; all had surprisingly good trigger pulls and none allowed any sear movement when the safety was engaged. Can it be that FN is finally getting enough complaints to try and improve the trigger to more acceptable levels? I sure hope so.
If you actually do like the feel of the Hi Power after comparing it to other guns, it might be a very fine choice for you. If you don't mind single-action-only in a handgun, the Hi Power is a viable possibility.
If having a design that has been used all over the globe with proven performance in less friendly environments is important the Hi Power qualifies. If you don't require competition grade match accuracy, the Hi Power could be on your short list and might just surprise you in what it can do.
In recent times, I've been hearing from a few folks that their Hi Power groups OK, but then will throw a flyer for no apparent reason. Some report this happening about 1 time out of 5 and are adamant that it is the gun and not them. If this is the case, it's a pretty sure bet that the Hi Power's factory barrel is just not locking up properly for each and every shot. As one gentleman's noted on a gun board, the problem could probably be remedied with a gunsmith's welding up the barrel and refitting. This might be a good option, but I think it might be better in the long run to have a Bar-Sto oversized match barrel fitted to the pistol. If the gunsmith's competent, there's plenty of material in these barrels to provide for a perfect fit. I strongly believe that this will eliminate the flyer problem. The problem is that it does cost money. What you have to keep in mind is that with the exception of the FN Competition Model, the Hi Power has never been intended to be anything other than a military combat arm. Better than "combat accuracy" has never really been a major concern for either FN or most of its customers. That it is often capable of better intrinsic accuracy is a good thing, but not necessarily one originally given as high of a priority as many US shooters might have preferred. While there's not a big chance that this will happen to you if you buy a Hi Power, there's always the possibility. (Of course, the chance of getting a "lemon" exists with any and all makers.)
The Mk III Hi Power that fired these groups had no accuracy work done. I suggest that these groups, fired from a seated position with wrists braced at 15 yards, are accurate enough for 99.99% of most of our needs, be they real or imagined.
If you want a gun with as light a trigger pull as can be had on a tuned 1911, the Hi Power is not for you. The best trigger pull I've ever seen measured right at 3.5 lbs. and the gun worked fine, long term. What you can expect is that a gunsmith who knows Hi Powers can get you a crisp, clean trigger pull of about 4 to 4.5 lbs. The Hi Power reset will never be as short as that of the 1911; it's mechanically not "in the chips."
Should you want match accuracy and are actually capable of shooting well enough to take advantage of it, there are better choices than an out of the box Hi Power. (I'd personally go with the STI Trojan in that case.)
The Hi Power hammer, spur or factory ring, very often bites the shooter's hand. It does me. I simply bob the factory hammer spur if I have a good trigger already and the problem goes away. I've also had good luck with Cylinder & Slide's abbreviated Type I ring hammer, but be advised that changing the hammer means a trigger job in most cases and I recommend going ahead and buying the same company's sear to use with their hammer. That means more expense so this might be an important part of your decision in buying a Hi Power or not.
Frankly, I think that they are worth the extra money and time invested to get a relatively compact single-action pistol that fits like a glove, is extremely reliable, and more accurate that I can shoot under most conditions.
American shooters demand much from their handguns and the Hi Power can meet most of those needs, but sadly, not out of the box. For those who can and do enjoy the Hi Power out of the box, it is a good thing, but frequently, the gun does need a little help in being the best it can be.
Best.
Whether or not you buy a Hi Power is really up to you and what you like. There are more modern designs, but if you still prefer the single-action automatic for use at the range, small game hunting, or personal protection, there's really very little competition and most still rate the Hi Power as the single-action 9mm.
For some us, the initial attraction remains looks, feel, or both. Speaking only for myself, I don't think any other semiautomatic pistol feels as good in the hand as the Browning Hi Power and I think it's one of the best looking pistols around. It is not perfect out of the box and most serious users buy them expecting to do a trigger job and some remove the magazine disconnect. Some have fairly extensive customization done and wind up with very elegant pistols.
This is a Mk III 9mm that has been very lightly customized, mostly by me. I bobbed and reshaped the hammer spur and blued it. The Spegel checkered delrin stocks replaced the factory nylon thumb rest stocks and I did a trigger job on the gun. When the factory matte finish eventually became pretty dinged up, I had the frame matte blued while the slide is bright blue. It has the factory barrel and has not been accurized. This Hi Power hits spot on at 15 yards and will normally group well under 3" with most ammunition and considerably less than that with particular loads. The eagle-eyed will have noticed that the right side factory extended thumb safety lever is gone and that the shaft has been rounded on the end. I had the gunsmith do that as the ambidextrous thumb safety gets in my way. Most folks do prefer them. This is a lightly customized pistol that's equally at home for informal target work, self-protection, or on my person when hunting. It is fitted with a Wolff conventional 18.5 lb. recoil spring and has a buffer as well. Other pistols can shoot tighter groups, but being able to hit a tennis ball size target at around 25 yards or a bowling pin at 100 yards (not every shot, though) is plenty good enough for my needs.In recent years, the trigger pulls are not usually as good as those on other pistols like the CZ-75 and the 1911. Part of this is due to the way the magazine disconnect operates and trigger pull on the Hi Power can actually vary depending upon which magazine you happen to be using at the time. The exact dimensions of the magazine as well as the smoothness on the front of the magazine in the gun at the time all play a part in this. For this reason and others, I routinely remove the magazine "safety." Others counsel against it. You do what you want. For what it's worth, there are a number of Hi Power gunsmiths who can do a darned good trigger job with or without the magazine disconnect in place.
Hi Powers in the past usually did have better trigger pulls. I think that some reasons this might have gone downhill might include the liability issue here in the sue-happy United States as well as the fact that the Hi Power's just not as big a seller for FN as in decades past. While there still are military forces that use the Hi Power, it's probably not the 65 or so nations that were 20 years ago. Though many, including me, still believe that the single-action automatic is the most efficient fighting handgun extant, it's day is probably passing. That does not mean that among its fans, the Hi Power won't remain a popular, viable tool and it will still be used by many if they have a choice. Still, production is down, liability issues up, and with the bottom line being profit, FN most likely does not spend the time and attention to trigger pulls it once did. I suspect that military contracts for the gun specify a trigger pull of not more than so much or less than a certain amount. FN cranks out the pistols knowing that most will fall within that range and if some don't and complaints made, they'll take care of it. Otherwise, the guns are sold and profits made without the extra expense of a pristine trigger out of the box.
At one time, both Browning Arms Company and FN-USA were importing Hi Powers. For the most part, the imported pistols are in 9mm and are the Mk III with the internal firing pin safety. This model is sometimes listed as the Mk III S. In the US, the most popular single-action automatic remains the 1911 as is witnessed by the numerous makers of the gun and the multitude of models and the caliber of choice, .45 ACP. Browning and FN were suffering in this market and this is why future importation of the pistol was in doubt. Currently, Browning imports a relatively small number of guns and when they're sold, imports more. FN is no longer importing Hi Powers into the US under its name though Browning Arms Co. does indeed do so.
Even if production stopped tomorrow, spare parts would remain available for decades and it wouldn't surprise me at all to see more aftermarket parts makers begin cranking out parts for the gun. What I'm getting at is that if you're holding off on one as you think it may cease to be made, don't. The gun's everywhere in its original form and even the supply of Pre-Ban 13 round magazines has not dried up yet.
I think I've seen a ray of hope in three NIB Browning Hi Powers of late; all had surprisingly good trigger pulls and none allowed any sear movement when the safety was engaged. Can it be that FN is finally getting enough complaints to try and improve the trigger to more acceptable levels? I sure hope so.
If you actually do like the feel of the Hi Power after comparing it to other guns, it might be a very fine choice for you. If you don't mind single-action-only in a handgun, the Hi Power is a viable possibility.
If having a design that has been used all over the globe with proven performance in less friendly environments is important the Hi Power qualifies. If you don't require competition grade match accuracy, the Hi Power could be on your short list and might just surprise you in what it can do.
In recent times, I've been hearing from a few folks that their Hi Power groups OK, but then will throw a flyer for no apparent reason. Some report this happening about 1 time out of 5 and are adamant that it is the gun and not them. If this is the case, it's a pretty sure bet that the Hi Power's factory barrel is just not locking up properly for each and every shot. As one gentleman's noted on a gun board, the problem could probably be remedied with a gunsmith's welding up the barrel and refitting. This might be a good option, but I think it might be better in the long run to have a Bar-Sto oversized match barrel fitted to the pistol. If the gunsmith's competent, there's plenty of material in these barrels to provide for a perfect fit. I strongly believe that this will eliminate the flyer problem. The problem is that it does cost money. What you have to keep in mind is that with the exception of the FN Competition Model, the Hi Power has never been intended to be anything other than a military combat arm. Better than "combat accuracy" has never really been a major concern for either FN or most of its customers. That it is often capable of better intrinsic accuracy is a good thing, but not necessarily one originally given as high of a priority as many US shooters might have preferred. While there's not a big chance that this will happen to you if you buy a Hi Power, there's always the possibility. (Of course, the chance of getting a "lemon" exists with any and all makers.)
The Mk III Hi Power that fired these groups had no accuracy work done. I suggest that these groups, fired from a seated position with wrists braced at 15 yards, are accurate enough for 99.99% of most of our needs, be they real or imagined.If you want a gun with as light a trigger pull as can be had on a tuned 1911, the Hi Power is not for you. The best trigger pull I've ever seen measured right at 3.5 lbs. and the gun worked fine, long term. What you can expect is that a gunsmith who knows Hi Powers can get you a crisp, clean trigger pull of about 4 to 4.5 lbs. The Hi Power reset will never be as short as that of the 1911; it's mechanically not "in the chips."
Should you want match accuracy and are actually capable of shooting well enough to take advantage of it, there are better choices than an out of the box Hi Power. (I'd personally go with the STI Trojan in that case.)
The Hi Power hammer, spur or factory ring, very often bites the shooter's hand. It does me. I simply bob the factory hammer spur if I have a good trigger already and the problem goes away. I've also had good luck with Cylinder & Slide's abbreviated Type I ring hammer, but be advised that changing the hammer means a trigger job in most cases and I recommend going ahead and buying the same company's sear to use with their hammer. That means more expense so this might be an important part of your decision in buying a Hi Power or not.
Frankly, I think that they are worth the extra money and time invested to get a relatively compact single-action pistol that fits like a glove, is extremely reliable, and more accurate that I can shoot under most conditions.
American shooters demand much from their handguns and the Hi Power can meet most of those needs, but sadly, not out of the box. For those who can and do enjoy the Hi Power out of the box, it is a good thing, but frequently, the gun does need a little help in being the best it can be.
Best.
Tuesday, February 16, 2010
Hi Power Pistols: 9mm vs. 40
I receive frequent questions concerning differences between Hi Powers in these two calibers. My opinions on the merit of forty versus nine millimeter is already posted under the Frequently Asked Question section in "Is the forty-caliber Hi Power a better gun for protection than the 9mm Hi Power?"
Here we'll look at the following questions:
1. Which is more accurate?
2. Which has the better long-term durability?
3. Is there any difference in reliability?
4. How is recoil?
The basic differences in the two pistols is in the width of the slide and the forty-caliber version of the Hi Power is the reason that we now have cast frames on all Hi Powers made by FN. Prior to the release of the forty, all Hi Power frames were forged, but the frame rails reportedly warped or cracked after approximately 2500 rounds. I tend to believe this explanation as Hi Power guru, Wayne Novak, converted some of the FBI HRT 9mm Hi Powers to forty several years ago, but problems in durability were experienced as these had forged frames and the standard weight 9mm slide. Some folks simply hate the cast frames. I have noted zero problems in using them heavily although one downside is that there appear to be some slight dimensional differences from the forged frame upon which aftermarket grips were designed. As the result, some grips don't fit quite as well on the cast frames as on the forged. This may be worse with some production runs of the Hi Power than others. More than one gunsmith I've spoken with has said that both the slides and frames are harder on the cast-frame pistols than the forged. Contrary to what some are saying, the Hi Power slides are not cast. Also, the 32-lb. mainspring did not come as a result of the forty Hi Powers. I don't remember the exact year, but this occurred in the mid to late '70's. Originally, the word was that this was to make sure the pistol reliably fired some makes of foreign ammunition having hard primers. I believe that the change was due to ammunition considerations, but not hard primers as the firing pin springs were made heavier in conjunction with the mainspring power change. During this time, there was much unpleasantness in the Middle East and some 9mm ammo intended for use only in submachine guns was being used in Hi Powers on both sides. Reportedly, the result was rounded locking lugs and cracked barrel cams. The heavier mainspring slows the unlocking process and helps prevent these problems. On today's .40 Hi Power, the barrel has not two, but three locking lugs as opposed to the nine's two in addition to its heavier 20-lb. recoil spring as opposed to the nine's factory standard 17-lb. The additional weight of the forty's slide also slows unlocking and the rearward velocity of the slide.
Most parts are interchangeable, but the most obvious one that is not is the slide release lever. As you know, there is a circular "plate" at the front of the 9mm Hi Power's slide release. The top of this is removed on the forty to allow passage of the thicker slide and there is a relieved area in the slide so that the altered part does not come in contact with the moving slide. A slide stop from a forty Hi Power can be used in a nine millimeter Hi Power, but the reverse is not true unless the top-half of the slide stop "plate" is removed. It also appears that the ejectors are a little thicker on the forty than the nine, at least in earlier guns. I'm not sure if FN has simply started using the same ejector on both pistols or not. While I think either extractor will work in either gun, I could be wrong and have noted that the extractor for the forty has a flat milled on it where the nine's is rounded. Again, I've not tried switching to see for sure if they can be interchanged.
Recoil spring guides, hammers, sears, triggers, and grips are the same for both pistols.
Accuracy: When the .40 S&W was first released and various makers began filling the market with pistols for it numerous complaints concerning a lack of accuracy surfaced. I noted that some of the pistol/load combinations did give less than stellar groups and did so consistently. I no longer see this as an issue. Ammunition makers have had enough time that they've improved and tweaked their products such that the forty is capable of very good accuracy and to levels that most of us cannot shoot to. One major ammunition maker had a premium line of ammunition that did blow cases, but this was limited to a few lot numbers and has long since been corrected. I did personally witness two "kabooms" with their ammo in unaltered handguns, though none were Brownings. Those of you who purchased early forty Hi Powers might remember Browning wanting you to send your gun in for a new barrel. The reason was the ammunition mentioned above. FWIW, the load in question was Federal 180-grain Hydrashok, but this is no longer a problem and hasn't been in years.
In my personal forty, I found that it would group moderately well with some loads, but very well with others. Mine seemed to prefer 180-grain bullets, but an exception was Remington's 165-grain Golden Saber as well as Winchester 155-grain Silvertips. With most 180-grain loads, my forty Hi Power was capable of extremely tight groups. I suspect that this situation has improved as mine was an early gun and the ammo makers had not yet refined their loads to today's levels.
With factory load or handloads that my particular Hi Power liked, it was every bit as accurate as my nine millimeter Hi Powers. From a rest, two-and-one-half inch groups at 25 yards were not uncommon when I did my part shooting from a rest.
Today, I think there is no accuracy issue with either caliber.
Durability: I do not care for forty caliber and wound up selling both my forty Hi Power and a CZ-75B in the same caliber. For that reason I cannot give you first-hand observations on the forty Hi Power's long term durability. I can tell you what I've observed in other folks' forties and what I've been told as well as what I believe.
I estimate that I fired around 3,000 full-power rounds through my Hi Power. Most were handloads, but probably 30% were factory. I noted neither small parts breakage nor undue wear. There was no rounding of the locking lugs.
The Hi Power in forty does appear to be holding up well with continued use as there are few reports of either small parts giving up or catastrophic slide or frame failure. Folks I know who use them report no problems in this regard.
Unlike some gun manufacturers, FN did not just rechamber the 9mm Hi Power and stick in a stronger recoil spring in their forty caliber pistols. They made significant changes in the pistol so that it would withstand the more powerful caliber's use in their gun without beating itself to death.
So long as the forty Hi Power is used with at least a twenty-pound recoil spring and the factory mainspring, I think it will hold up fine for long-term users. I believe that the forty Hi Power will hold up at least as well as the 9mm Hi Power. What I think FN has done in their changes is to make the stresses received to the frame, slide, etc, the equivalent to those found in the nine-millimeter version, which has withstood the test of decades.
Reliability: As most know, Mec-Gar is the maker of the "Browning magazines." This has been the case for quite a few years and has always been so for the forty Hi Power. With my 9mm Hi Powers, either the factory magazine or the Mec-Gar has worked perfectly in quite a few pistols. With my particular forty Hi Power, such was not the case. It showed a strong preference for the factory magazine. Other folks' Hi Powers worked fine with either.
Even though Mec-Gar makes the magazines that come with the Browning guns, the followers are not the same. At least this was the case when I owned my .40 Hi Power. The Browning magazine follower had a "skirt" type arrangement around the bottom of the follower while the Mec-Gar used the traditional "two fingers" protruding or a single oblong post in the middle that the recoil spring attached to. As best as I could observe, the latter two allowed for some tipping forward of the cartridge when the slide hit it from the rear. My pistol would frequently fail to feed on the first shot with a full magazine when using the Mec-Gar magazine, but worked fine with the Browning. I changed the followers in the two magazines and the Browning magazine would cause problems while the Mec-Gar worked perfectly. I've not seen any current Mec-Gar forty caliber followers, so I do not know if this has been changed or not. It should be noted that the Mec-Gar magazines causing me problems in my forty worked perfectly in two other forty Hi Powers with the same ammunition.
Other than that, I've noted no reliability issues with the .40 Hi Power. Extraction and ejection have never been a problem in any .40 Hi Power I've seen or shot personally.
While it may have changed and my main observations are based on but one .40 Hi Power, I did find that the 9mm was more reliable with Mec-Gar magazines. From the Browning-marked ones, there was zero problem with either.
Recoil: As I've stated on more than one occasion, felt recoil is very subjective. What "kicks" to me might not to you! While the forty caliber Hi Power does have more felt recoil than the 9mm, it is not "bad." To me, it is very similar to a nine using hot +P or +P+ ammo, but with more muzzle flip. The rearward "push" seems about like a 230-grain .45 ACP round from a steel 5" gun, but "sharper." If you can handle the great .45 ACP 1911, I don't believe you'll have any problem at all with the Hi Power in .40 S&W.
I'm also asked why I'm not a fan of the forty Hi Power. The reason is that I don't care for the feel of the forty-caliber version. That is subjective and others may very well feel just the opposite. Do not let my feelings on this influence yours; this is a decision you must make, as there is no "right" or "wrong" answer in my opinion.
Were I going to get back into shooting forty-caliber pistols, my first choice would be a Browning.
Best.
Monday, February 15, 2010
My Personal "Carry" Hi Power
I am frequently asked by other Hi Power fans, "What is your personal carry Hi Power?"
Variations on this theme often include, "What modifications have you made?" Finally, ammunition choice is requested.First, let me assure you that I do not claim to know all things and would not presume to try and "tell" anyone what is "right." This can vary with the individual and their personal needs, be they real or perceived.
The one thing that I do feel most adamantly about is reliability. With a defense handgun, be it a Hi Power or any other pistol, I put this quality at the head of the list and by a wide margin. Fortunately, the Hi Power is almost always reliable out of the box. Will it be with JHP ammunition? If it is a Mk II or Mk III, probably so. If it is an older classic Hi Power, it might balk with some JHP ammunition. This is due to a difference in the feed ramps. While the Hi Power uses a one-piece ramp, the newer guns do not have the "humped" ramp common to the older ones. The humped ramp works fine with ball and some JHP's having more rounded bullet profiles. (The older ramps can be made to mimic the newer ones by a competent gunsmith and not all of the older guns will require it; some work just fine.)
Next, I prefer a trigger pull that's neither below about 4 1/2-lbs nor more than a pound more. Speaking only for myself, I find no difference in group size nor the ability to make quicker (accurate) shots with either if the trigger breaks cleanly. Unfortunately, many Hi Powers come with triggers that are considerably heavier and gritty, a sad and needless situation in my opinion. It is my observation that most detractors of the Hi Power address both the trigger pull (out of the box) as well as hammer bite.
A competent pistolsmith or trigger specialist who understands and is familiar with the Hi Power design can correct the trigger pull and very serviceable trigger pulls can be had with or without the magazine disconnect in place.
The Hi Power that I carry the most is a Mk III 9mm that I bought used. I believe that the magazine disconnect may have already been removed…which save me from doing it. The gun had not been shot very much and the bluing on the breech face was barely scuffed. The gun locked up tight and while it had a small ding or two, it was overall sound and the price was very right.
This is the 9mm Hi Power I am most apt to carry for self-protection. Here are the changes that
have been made: The hammer spur was bobbed and reshaped at home. The factory trigger is in the gun. The right-side factory extended thumb safety was removed and the shaft reshaped. There is no magazine disconnect in this pistol and the trigger was good when I got the gun, right at 5-lbs. I have a Wolff conventional 18.5-lb recoil spring in this gun and it works just fine with standard pressure rounds as well as +P. The barrel is stock and the mainspring was left at 32-lbs. The finish is the factory "matte" and the grips are from Altamont. This pistol has proven itself reliable with every conventional JHP I've tried that weighed 100 to 147-gr.This Hi Power is no different than many, many others in the hands of Hi Power fans and I've been pleased with the "wearability" of the factory matte finish. The Altamont stocks didn't seem comfortable to me at first, but sort of "grew" to fit my hand and I like them on this pistol. FWIW…if anything, I also have an extreme fondness for grips from both Craig Spegel and Hakan Pek.
My primary carry Hi Power uses the factory fixed Mk III sights. They are dead bang "on" for me with this gun and I've found no good reason to change them. A couple of my Mk III pistols have had Novak fixed sights installed. They are elegant sights to be sure and offer a good sight picture for my eye, but I find no advantage to them over the factory sights in group size, be they fired slow and precisely or at speed. This may or may not hold true for others and is one more decision that is best made by the individual user.
Some folks have asked why I routinely remove the right-side ambidextrous thumb safety lever. The reason is that it gets in my way. With my hand and my grip on the pistol, I have accidentally engaged the ambidextrous thumb safety and have decades of practice in reaching around the rear of the gun with my off-hand thumb and engaging the left-side lever. (When I first started shooting Hi Powers and 1911's, ambidextrous safeties were practically non-existent.) They just don't work for me; they might work fine for you.
I use only Mec-Gar magazines for serious purposes be they sold under Mec-Gar's name or as Browning "factory" magazines. I have found none better in the long run. Though I own and have had no problem with the Mec-Gar 15-shot 9mm magazines, I usually just use the standard 13-shot version.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)