Origin of Hi Power trigger

C

croyance

New member
Why did John M. Browining pick a pivot-type trigger for the P-35? The Hi Power design is said, in many ways, to correct the flaws in the 1911.
I can agree with this in some features. The lack of a bushing is debatable, but the lack of a swinging barrel link is an improvement. Not having a grip safety is another improvement.
Exchanging the straight pull-back trigger for a more common pivoting trigger is no improvement at all. This doesn't even include the gritty triggers caused by the magazine disconnect.
So why change trigger designs? Ease of manufacturing?
 
You got me.

I have so little interest in the highly lauded BHP I have never checked into the reason behind the extremely poor trigger.

I do believe that the trigger works through some sort of lever in the slide eliminating the need for a conventional disconnector. It may be a simpler solution but at the price of an extremely poor trigger it is baffling.

Maybe this atrocity can be laid at the feet of Saive who some have even dared to mention in the same sentence as you know who. I'm sure JMB would not call it one of his best and brightest were he here to comment. His earlier models were hammerless according to Handguns of the World by Ezell (A book I highly recommend).
 
There are a lot of design features in the BHP that are there for one main reason:
The 1911 patents were still in force at the time and Colt had the rights.
Browning had to work around his own designs!

Several of D. Saive's contributions after Browning's death amounted to putting 1911 features on the final gun after the 1911 patents had run out. Things like a barrel bushing (even though permanently installed) and a slide stop that is the key to disassembly. The pivoting trigger and sear bar in the slide were left over from the original striker fired design and they probably did not consider them worth changing for a military weapon where a light trigger pull is not necessarily an advantage.
 
Since a sliding 1911 trigger requires the trigger bow to be centered behind the trigger finger to prevent binding, maybe it was thought that the wide body magazine would make it difficult. The grip would be a wider to accomodate the bow and the backstrap would have to have some sort of access plate and an easy way to remove the mainspring. You end up with ParaOrdnance, rather than a HP.

I think putting the trigger bar in the slide was pretty ingenius. The 1911 grip is not very small for it's mag size. The BHP is small for its mag.

I would be interested to find out why Star and Radom both chose to use pivoting trigger in their very 1911 like pistols.
 
The HP has fewer parts than the 1911 and (some claim) that makes it more reliable. IMO, less is NOT ALWAYS more because the HP trigger on new guns is generally awful. It is good enough to function as a service weapon which was it's intended purpose. The heavy stock trigger (about 7 - 8#) serves as an inherent barrier to accidental discharges, which is an advantage for a duty piece. I don't think the HP fixed what was wrong with the 1911, because there is nothing wrong with the basic design of the 1911. Nearly 100 years of service unchanged says it all.
 
I always wonder where this comes from: "The Hi Power design is said, in many ways, to correct the flaws in the 1911."

Browning was commissioned to design the HP. As was pointed out earlier the 1911 patents hadn't expired yet. It is a totally different gun. Browning was a super genius, but part of his genius was that he could design what the particular customers wanted. The HP is what the European customers wanted.

I've always been kind of curious. What if in the 1920s the Govt. had asked Browning to design an infantry rifle? Man that would have been cool. :D
 
They were really frugal after WWI. McArthur nixed changing the cal from .30 to 276 because of surplus stores of ammo. But it is interesting. What would ol Moses have come up with? :eek:
 
Since militaries seem to have soldiers carry sidearns in condition 3, loaded magazine with empty chamber, a heavier trigger pull does not seem to be advantageous for any reason. Likewise, the weight of the trigger pull of a 1911 can be increased, though few of us would do so.
So it seems like getting around patents that were in force at the time.
I would consider JMB's genius not only that he could design what the customers and buying public wanted, but that he also understood the constraints of the maufacturing process and materials of the time. Many of his designs kept these limits in mind, keeping costs of the time down.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top