Opinions on Browning Hi-Power 9mm
- Thread starter Rogervzv
- Start date
I own a number of handguns, both revolver and pistol. Of these, the four I probably enjoy the most are a Ruger Single Six .22/.22Mag., a S&W model 66 in .38/357, a Colt Officer's model .45, and a Belgium-made Browning Hi-Power. Of these four, I suspect the Browning is the last I would willingly relinquish. At 72, for whatever reason, I find I can shoot the BHP more accurately than any of my other handguns.
HisSoldier
New member
I bought one, finally managed to get the trigger down to an almost reasonable pull weight and got rid of it.
I lost a lot of respect for one of my heroes, John Browning, when I saw the convoluted design of the trigger, teeter totter bar and sear.
I lost a lot of respect for one of my heroes, John Browning, when I saw the convoluted design of the trigger, teeter totter bar and sear.
kilimanjaro
New member
Just about the last classic military pistol design.
Never been sorry to have one. Certainly not under-gunned with one of these.
Never been sorry to have one. Certainly not under-gunned with one of these.
)...Sorry but that statement shows your ignorance about the design and development of the BHP. It is much more a Dieudonné Saive design then a JMB design. JMB was long dead by the time what we know as the BHP was put into production.
If you don't know your past you don't know your future.
Not to pile on but...
If he is or was a hero of mine and I saw something that my hero did that looked funny to me, I'd look into it. I'd want to know if there was more to the story. I'd want to know how and why he was wrong and if he actually was wrong. I'd want to know more. It's an obligation I have to folks living and dead I look up to.
But on the design of the gun it has worked very well, in a whole lot of places and has carried a heavy load since 1935 for a teeter totter thingamajig.
tipoc
If he is or was a hero of mine and I saw something that my hero did that looked funny to me, I'd look into it. I'd want to know if there was more to the story. I'd want to know how and why he was wrong and if he actually was wrong. I'd want to know more. It's an obligation I have to folks living and dead I look up to.
But on the design of the gun it has worked very well, in a whole lot of places and has carried a heavy load since 1935 for a teeter totter thingamajig.
tipoc
Man I'm glad I have better things to complain about other than the trigger on one of best 9mm pistols ever built.Seems like we have no shortage of soft handed men that like to wine a little.Here's a idea MAN UP the trigger aint that big a deal.
My BHP is just fine the way it is.
My BHP is just fine the way it is.HisSoldier
New member
You might try to assume that the other guy is at least as knowledgeable as you are. That way you won't make assumptions. You may even be more knowledgeable about HP's than I am, which does not mean my opinion is not valid. And remember, knowledge puffs up, Grace comes to the humble.
I studied the gun because I made an invalid assumption, that Browning's designs were all good.
I bought an HP gunsmithing DVD, an Ebook on it too. I've read about the HP because I revere John Moses Browning so much, and assumed the design would have genius in it too.
Then I bought one and took it apart.
Compared to the 1911, which I consider to be the work of a true genius, the HP is a very poor design.
The trigger of a HP will never be as crisp as a 1911's, although there may be one somewhere, the lopsided lever will make sure wear will change that. The ignition system is asymmetrical, while the 1911's is symmetrical, all forces are equal on both sides. So trigger forces in a 1911 are equal on both sides, all the way to the firing pin. What that means is that wear will not cause the sear to "twist" in it's nest in the hammer hooks. Studying the 1911 has caused me to believe Browning was aware of that.
The cartridge is, in my opinion, not a man stopper, you may believe it is, I don't care. Yes there are .40 S&W chambered HP's, but not in JMB's time. I'm aware that the HP was designed to specifications, a wish list set forth by France's military I believe, and Europeans have always accepted smaller calibers. It has a magazine safety, another stupid European idea, but a real deal killer for me. OTH easy enough to remove.
Do you think the teeter totter is a good design feature? Really? Aw come on, be honest, it is awful.
I don't know who designed the ignition system, Saive and Vervier or JMB, maybe if he hadn't died Browning would have disavowed all input, or maybe he was having health problems already that affected his output. Maybe it would have been a better pistol had he lived.
If you think it is a great design all I can say is that you must be easy to please.
I went looking for a pic of Browning's model of 1922 which made it to the first French trials for the hi capacity 9mm they wanted but though I have plenty of pics and diagrams in books I did not find much on the internet after a quick search. So I did find this which does show the gun...
http://www.gunsandammo.com/historical/evolution-browning-hi-power/
The early designs from Browning were for a striker fired pistol.
A bit more...
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/20...0-contest-entry-gun-review-browning-hi-power/
Because Colt held the patents for many of Brownings designs (including for the 1911 and it's predecessors) he had to find ways to work around those while working for FN on the new gun. So Browning did some new things. The first gun had a slide that ran inside the rails, a design later seen in the Sig P210 and the CZ75. As I mentioned it was a striker fired gun which had a firing group that disassembled as a group, a concept later seen in the Makarov and Tokarov Soviet guns. It had a 13 round magazine which was designed by a young FN engineer Dieudonne Saive.
Browning died in 1926, 3 months before the first patents for the French gun were granted. Saive continued work on the project. It went through many other revisions demanded by the French and that Saive and his team thought best until it became the gun we know as the Hi-Power. The gun was lightened and streamlined from the original design. The French wanted a hammer. They wanted a magazine disconnect, etc.
Now HisSoldier, when you're speaking of the "teeter-totter" are you talking about the hammer strut? Or another part?
tipoc
http://www.gunsandammo.com/historical/evolution-browning-hi-power/
The early designs from Browning were for a striker fired pistol.
A bit more...
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/20...0-contest-entry-gun-review-browning-hi-power/
Because Colt held the patents for many of Brownings designs (including for the 1911 and it's predecessors) he had to find ways to work around those while working for FN on the new gun. So Browning did some new things. The first gun had a slide that ran inside the rails, a design later seen in the Sig P210 and the CZ75. As I mentioned it was a striker fired gun which had a firing group that disassembled as a group, a concept later seen in the Makarov and Tokarov Soviet guns. It had a 13 round magazine which was designed by a young FN engineer Dieudonne Saive.
Browning died in 1926, 3 months before the first patents for the French gun were granted. Saive continued work on the project. It went through many other revisions demanded by the French and that Saive and his team thought best until it became the gun we know as the Hi-Power. The gun was lightened and streamlined from the original design. The French wanted a hammer. They wanted a magazine disconnect, etc.
Now HisSoldier, when you're speaking of the "teeter-totter" are you talking about the hammer strut? Or another part?
tipoc
HisSoldier
I suggest you get your hands on a copy of "The Browning High Power Automatic Pistol" By Blake Stevens. It is the gold standard reference for the early development of the BHP. Its info on later guns and its extra info in 2nd and 3rd additions are not a great but the research and work on the origins of what became the Hi Power is excellent.
I am sorry my comment offended you but be ignorant on a particular subject like the origins of the BHP does not make one ignorant. My intent was not to call you ignorant but instead attack the words which you had written. Please accept my apology for my choice of words.
Now lets focus on your words....
The Hi-Power was a contract gun just like the 1911. It was a contract spec created by and for the French military. They wanted a new service pistol which they described as, the Grand Rendement High Yield in French, or alternatively Grande Puissance = "high power". The French Govt approached FN with this concept/contract. The French contract required that the gun be compact, have a capacity of at least 15 rounds in 9mm or higher caliber. Like all contract guns the designers like JMB put into the gun what ever the contract required. If they had wanted it chambered in 45 he would have done it. If they wanted it to have adjustable sights it would have had that. If they wanted pink grips pink grips would have been on the gun. On this project just like the 1911 JMB was working within a contract spec. There was also the issue of avoiding Colt patents because at the time Colt and FN had basically divided up the small arms world into 2 markets which one of each respectively dominated.
The original magazine design wall all Savie. He is the inverter of the staggered pistol magazine not JMB. JMB thought that a 7 or so round capacity was enough for a side arm but the French wanted 15. JMB produced 2 protoypes for FN built around Savie's 15 round mag. One was a straight blow back IIRC similar to other JMB designs the second had a tilt barrel.
This guns breech tilted up or down relative to the slide to lock into an aperture in the slide and tilt downwards to unlock after rearward movement. The locking and unlocking was preformed with the use of a lug which has a cam in contact with a lug. This functioned just like the 1911 which he designed for Colt but was going to be less costly to manufacture. It eliminated the 1911s expensive barrel link and pin.
FN not JMB chose the second model with the tilting barrel!!!! This was the locked breech version of the pistol. The pistol had a striker firing group which JMB designed. This gun became was known as the Grand Rendement. You can see it design specs below.
Here is another pic:
All of this info can be found in Blakes book within the first 20 pages. So if you are going to bash the BHP because of its trigger group then bash Saive not JMB. It is as I stated more his design then JMBs. It was Saive not JMB who was tasked to modify the striker design. The French wanted a visible hammer and as a result the striker mech was replaced with a hammer designed by Saive which can be seen in the 1923 model which was submitted to the French by FN.
This is why I took issue about your statement. IMHO the trigger group on the BHP is ok. I prefer the 1911 to the BHP in terms of pure trigger but the BHP can be more than serviceable. I have quiet a few which would IMHO fall easily into that group. So I have now in more detail refuted and demonstrated the inaccuracy of your original statement which was my original intention.
I suggest you get your hands on a copy of "The Browning High Power Automatic Pistol" By Blake Stevens. It is the gold standard reference for the early development of the BHP. Its info on later guns and its extra info in 2nd and 3rd additions are not a great but the research and work on the origins of what became the Hi Power is excellent.
I am sorry my comment offended you but be ignorant on a particular subject like the origins of the BHP does not make one ignorant. My intent was not to call you ignorant but instead attack the words which you had written. Please accept my apology for my choice of words.
Now lets focus on your words....
The Hi-Power was a contract gun just like the 1911. It was a contract spec created by and for the French military. They wanted a new service pistol which they described as, the Grand Rendement High Yield in French, or alternatively Grande Puissance = "high power". The French Govt approached FN with this concept/contract. The French contract required that the gun be compact, have a capacity of at least 15 rounds in 9mm or higher caliber. Like all contract guns the designers like JMB put into the gun what ever the contract required. If they had wanted it chambered in 45 he would have done it. If they wanted it to have adjustable sights it would have had that. If they wanted pink grips pink grips would have been on the gun. On this project just like the 1911 JMB was working within a contract spec. There was also the issue of avoiding Colt patents because at the time Colt and FN had basically divided up the small arms world into 2 markets which one of each respectively dominated.
The original magazine design wall all Savie. He is the inverter of the staggered pistol magazine not JMB. JMB thought that a 7 or so round capacity was enough for a side arm but the French wanted 15. JMB produced 2 protoypes for FN built around Savie's 15 round mag. One was a straight blow back IIRC similar to other JMB designs the second had a tilt barrel.
This guns breech tilted up or down relative to the slide to lock into an aperture in the slide and tilt downwards to unlock after rearward movement. The locking and unlocking was preformed with the use of a lug which has a cam in contact with a lug. This functioned just like the 1911 which he designed for Colt but was going to be less costly to manufacture. It eliminated the 1911s expensive barrel link and pin. FN not JMB chose the second model with the tilting barrel!!!! This was the locked breech version of the pistol. The pistol had a striker firing group which JMB designed. This gun became was known as the Grand Rendement. You can see it design specs below.
Here is another pic:
All of this info can be found in Blakes book within the first 20 pages. So if you are going to bash the BHP because of its trigger group then bash Saive not JMB. It is as I stated more his design then JMBs. It was Saive not JMB who was tasked to modify the striker design. The French wanted a visible hammer and as a result the striker mech was replaced with a hammer designed by Saive which can be seen in the 1923 model which was submitted to the French by FN.
This is why I took issue about your statement. IMHO the trigger group on the BHP is ok. I prefer the 1911 to the BHP in terms of pure trigger but the BHP can be more than serviceable. I have quiet a few which would IMHO fall easily into that group. So I have now in more detail refuted and demonstrated the inaccuracy of your original statement which was my original intention.
Last edited:
Now that I have addressed the first comment lets look a little closer at your others....
Here we are in agreement. The 1911 trigger is superior IMHO but you have to know the history of the FN/Colt relationship to understand why that type of trigger was not used in the BHP.
Colt and FN basically had a 5 year renewable contract to divide up the world of small arms in terms of Browning designs. While this agreement was in force the patents for each company were respected and IIRC enforced by the other within their half of the world. Each company had to have permission of the other in order to use specific Browning designs in new pistols.
Again IIRC FN could not use the trigger group that you and I love so much because of this agreement. In the early stages of the BHPs development the contract was enforce. By the end I believe it was not which allowed for some aspects of the 1911 to become part of the BHP but the trigger group was not one of them. I might be wrong on the actual end of the contract date but I think the point still stands.
This objection was already addressed in my other post and you even address it here. The caliber was part of the contract. If the French had asked for .32 ACP that is what he would have designed. Faulting him for the French contract specs is wrong. JMB did contract work for FN and Colt he built what was in the contract. If they has wanted a grip safety they would have gotten one etc...
Also the concept that pistol calibers are "man stoppers" is an antiquated one IHMO. 40 S&W or 45 ACP is not going to one shot stop people any more than 9mm. Pistol calibers require lots or little holes in the right places to create enough blood loss and enough tissue trauma to put a person down. It is not about "stopping power." YMMV and clearly it does.
And we come full circle to my original point. If you are going to bash JMB for the trigger group then you are misplacing blame. Even worse you admit you do not know who designed the trigger controls yet you still assert it is JMBs fault. LOL
In the as I stated before the design is not a 1911 like trigger but I have demonstrated and illustrated why. It however is not as bad as you make it out to be. It has been proved to be reliable and up to the task. With the right knowledge, parts and skill the trigger can be made into a very nice trigger. It is not a 1911 but please show me another pistol that is the equal of the 1911 in that respect. There are very few if any. Maybe it is your expectations which have lead you to such disappointment which IHMO is a shame because you are dismissing one of the best 9mm guns out there IMHO YMMV.
Here we are in agreement. The 1911 trigger is superior IMHO but you have to know the history of the FN/Colt relationship to understand why that type of trigger was not used in the BHP.
Colt and FN basically had a 5 year renewable contract to divide up the world of small arms in terms of Browning designs. While this agreement was in force the patents for each company were respected and IIRC enforced by the other within their half of the world. Each company had to have permission of the other in order to use specific Browning designs in new pistols.
Again IIRC FN could not use the trigger group that you and I love so much because of this agreement. In the early stages of the BHPs development the contract was enforce. By the end I believe it was not which allowed for some aspects of the 1911 to become part of the BHP but the trigger group was not one of them. I might be wrong on the actual end of the contract date but I think the point still stands.
This objection was already addressed in my other post and you even address it here. The caliber was part of the contract. If the French had asked for .32 ACP that is what he would have designed. Faulting him for the French contract specs is wrong. JMB did contract work for FN and Colt he built what was in the contract. If they has wanted a grip safety they would have gotten one etc...
Also the concept that pistol calibers are "man stoppers" is an antiquated one IHMO. 40 S&W or 45 ACP is not going to one shot stop people any more than 9mm. Pistol calibers require lots or little holes in the right places to create enough blood loss and enough tissue trauma to put a person down. It is not about "stopping power." YMMV and clearly it does.
And we come full circle to my original point. If you are going to bash JMB for the trigger group then you are misplacing blame. Even worse you admit you do not know who designed the trigger controls yet you still assert it is JMBs fault. LOL
In the as I stated before the design is not a 1911 like trigger but I have demonstrated and illustrated why. It however is not as bad as you make it out to be. It has been proved to be reliable and up to the task. With the right knowledge, parts and skill the trigger can be made into a very nice trigger. It is not a 1911 but please show me another pistol that is the equal of the 1911 in that respect. There are very few if any. Maybe it is your expectations which have lead you to such disappointment which IHMO is a shame because you are dismissing one of the best 9mm guns out there IMHO YMMV.
Last edited:
In Ca. and a few other states, mag capacity is limited to 10 rounds in a new gun. Ca. does allow the 13 and 15 round mags if they were purchased prior to the beginning of the ban.
13 round magazines are available for the hi-power in the states that do not ban them.
The only difference is the capacity of the magazine.
tipoc
13 round magazines are available for the hi-power in the states that do not ban them.
The only difference is the capacity of the magazine.
tipoc
Walt Sherrill
New member
SpareMag said:
If you go to the Browning website you'll see that the current BHP comes with 13 round mags in states that allow more than 10 rounds.
If you find a BHP with more than 13 rounds, it probably has after-market mags. I've got some factory mags 10 and 13 round mags for mine, and some Mec-Gar 15 rounders.
Last edited: