What's wrong w/ BHPs?

J

JNewell

New member
Came across the followed (somewhat snipped) in the "Worst Handguns/II" thread. I'm wondering how much of this other folks agree with? I'm leaving aside issues like the trigger pull and just looking at the comments about reliability:

<quoting>
Although it was the first of the "wondernines" it is also the least mechanically reliable <snip>
-Out of box reliability is not %100 <snip>
-Usually requires signifigant gunsmithing to get into carry-ready condition.
<end quote>

So, what gives? <g>
 
Hello,JNewell. I've been shooting HPs since 1971. Back then, getting them to feed all manner of the then-new JHPs with their blunt ogives was problematic. In some cases, it was necessary to download the magazine by a round or two and or "throat" the feed ramp by removing the hump that used to be there. Since the MKII HP and currently in the MKIIIs, that problem's been well corrected.
I owned a MKII which I've since sold to a close friend who wanted it and kept 3 MKIIIs.
All of these 9mms are reliable with full magazines to the bottom with each and every JHP round I've tried. These include the blunt Cor*Bon JHPs using Sierra bullets to the very long Remington 124 gr Golden Saber.
Zero malfunctions. It is true that the HP is not known for its crisp trigger pull. That said, I've removed the magazine safties on all of my guns although many counsel against it insofar as civil liability in the event of a defensive shooting is concerned. I've also replaced sears and hammers with those from C&S with extremely good luck and now have 1 .40 cal HP that has a less than 3.5lb trigger pull and other 9mm HPs that are but a tad heavier. All are crisp and very usuable. The HP in 9mm remains my favorite general use handgun. Parts are plentious should they be needed and in my experience, the newer MkIIIs are very accurate such that BarSto bbls are no longer a necessity for the accurate shooter. (If you want to shoot cast bullets and want truly fine groups, they do still help as their 1:16 rifling works better with cast than Browning's 1:10.) Aftermarket ProMag 13 round magazines work fine in my guns and are readily available at a cheap price. Original magazines can still be found at prices less than many other types of high caps. I think the HP is a classic that gives up little to any of the newer breed, if any!
Since '71, I've replaced no parts on any of my HPs including those made in the 70s of the "softer steel." The MkIIIs have quality cast frames and are said to hold up forever. I routinely replace all my recoil springs with Wolff conventional 18.5lb recoil springs as I shoot warmer loads. If you like the gun and appreciate its balance, reliability, simplicity and few number of total parts, go for it. It'll last you and not let you down.
Best.
 
Well, it just goes to show ya. No matter what the subject is, someone will always be willing to step up and bitch about it. There are a lot of gunshop commandos in this world who've never even handled an FN HiPower, much less had enough experience with one to form even a modest opinion.

I guess we need to call John Browning and Duiedonne Saive back from the dead so they can get the proper design from the genius who derided one of the top ten pistol designs of all time, IMO.
 
I shot my first BHP around 1970 and have been a big fan of them ever since. The only notable BHP problem I've ever experienced was a weak extractor on a pistol made in the early 1980s. Browning repaired it at no charge.

IMHO, today's BHP Standard is one of the few new guns that's as well made as its predecessors of many years ago. :)
 
I shot a HP for the first time last weekend. Trigger pull and pointability are the thing of legends! The only thing I found was the the gun disliked low-power reloads or weak commercial stuff. It seemed to like the ammo full-power and cycled flawlessly with FMJ, +P JHP (Cor-Bon), and 124 grain LRN.
 
Well I'll be damned, the HP-35 was one of the first automatics that I "truly" handled and even had it "loaned" to me by a friend. I thought as I think now, that it shot like a "laserbeam", was extremely accurate, reliable with all of the four different types of ammo I used (Fiochi, Winchester, S&B and Federal). The pistols only real failing (not really a failing, MY FAULT!) was putting my left thumb BEHIND the slide (Hey I was and am still a newbie to pistols, learned better after the first "bleeding" and LFI :D)
The Browning MK III is truly a work of art!
I even knew of a vet who swore by it in Vietnam; I believe he was in the Air Force, but occassionally found himself in somewhat hostile surroundings. Still has his Browning and after seeing him using it to great effect at the range...Well lets just say its hard to improve upon perfection!

Jon
 
The BHP is a great gun if you are a full time gunsmith or a gunragazine writer, because it is going to end up in the hands of several gunsmiths and makes for a good article. The fact is the BHP is notoriously unreliable and has a horible trigger pull. Then there is that magazine safety.

All in all, I think the BHP was the forerunning to the S&W Sigma, both pistol designs are hyped up, but don't deliver.
 
G50AE, you'd better break out the hipwaders, you're shovelling it awful deep. NEVER EVER EVER had any of my or my friends' Hi Powers need ANY gunsmithing. Some older Hi Powers won't feed agressive hollowpoint profiles, but have no trouble with round-nosed HPs. You sound like either someone who had a bad experience with one Hi Power and then universalized it someone who has never owned one.
 
Hey G50 let me guess your not a 1911 fan neither. All the HP's I came across are reliable and accurate. The old ones may have had problems with JHP's but so did alot of guns. The only thing i would like to see to revive the BHP is a light weight version and a compact version(shortened slide). No problem with the BHP.
 
I don't know what G50AE is talking about. I have never seen one have a problem. I've only shot five or six of them though. I have shot them and have a friend who shoots them like crazy (has five or more) and has never had a problem. If the Hi-Power is so unreliable why are all of us raving about them? We must be stupid I guess.

Perhaps in your wisdom, oh great G50AE, you could explain to us just what it is the Hi-Power does not deliver? Accuracy? Reliablilty? Longivity? What?

As far as putting it in the same category as the Sigma, what can I say? If you want to destroy any credibility you have (had), what better way to do it?

Shake

[This message has been edited by Shake (edited April 27, 2000).]
 
Let me put it like this. Over the years I've owned several 9mm pistols. Today I have one. My MKIII Hi-power. I don't need any other 9mm.

------------------
TFL's official "Curmudgeon Member" and damned proud of it!
 
heh. I was wondering how long it would take for this to cap off.

The BHP is fine. Some people don't like it, and actually most of those that I've heard dissing it have been rabid M1911 fans, who are convinced that the good ole m1911 was the pinnacle of pistol development and everything else since has been trash.

Whichever way you cut it, it certainly doesn't deserve to be listed on the 'worlds worst' list, even if its reliability was questionable (which it isn't) or its trigger pull was horrid (which its not). That sounded like a flame-bait, and I ignored it.

This isn't to say that you can't dislike the HP- you can. Its all personal preference. I'm not a big M1911 fan, for various reasons...but I'd never say it was a bad design or a bad gun.

Mike


------------------
"A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects." -Robert Heinlein
 
As I sit here stroking my HP, I was reflecting on the fact that it has never had a missfire or choke of any kind with any ammo. True, it doesn't have the 1911 trigger, which is arguably the best there is, but it ain't bad either. It is just different. It is a natural pointer and feels good in just about everyones hand. Like a Glock, but different. I'm sure there are things about it I would change, but right now I just can't think of anything other then putting a 1911 trigger on it or slimming it down for better concealed carry. Maybe offer it in .45, but then again there is the .40 liberty. Hard to argue with success and the HP has more then it's share of devotees.
 
The first BHP I owned was pre-war. Shot hard ball without a hitch. The second was made about 1956. No hitch with hard ball. Neither was 100% reliable with hollow points, but that was all right as they were made for hard ball so that's what I use in them.

I have a good friend who really liked the BHP while he was in the Navy. He was a SEAL and carried it with him during two tours in Viet Nam. It worked for him. In fact, he told me that most of his team mates carried the BHP. They used ball ammo and had no problem with them.

FWIW. J.B.
 
I got to fly bunches of SAS types (in Hueys) around the Dhofar region in Oman during the South Yemenese sponsored commie insurgency in the 70's. We all carried and swore by P-35s (Hi-Powers) as our sidearm. These guys did a lot of serious close in combat where reliblity as well as accuracy was paramount.
I just got myself another one, an Israeli contract gun, made in Belgium by FN.
Except for one CZ-75b, it's the only 9mm I'll ever own.
 
The stock grips. Spiegle(sp) are a vast improvement. Maybe a stainless version? Other than that I think they are pretty much perfect.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top