Why didn't modernized Hi Powers ever catch on?

D

DMK

New member
1911s with beavertail, commander hammer, skeletonized trigger, large three dot sights, etc are almost ubiquitous today. It seems only the cheaper entry level 1911s don't have any of these features.

Why didn't the Hi Power ever pick up these features in factory production? I've only seen limited production or custom guns fitted with modern features. :confused:
 
I would assume that it has to do with popularity. Everyone and their mom at this point is making a 1911 and putting whatever they want on it, while Hi Powers are still rarely ever seen at gunshops (at least for me).
 
Perhaps because the 1911 was only the 1911, whereas the BHP was one of (albeit the main) wonder-nine so it does perhaps not have such a singular identity the was the 1911 does...
 
I would say that b/c 45 had the pre-built marketing weight of the moniker "America's caliber" with a lot of historical ink documenting its performance.

The BHP had a solid history with other militaries over a similar time frame, but the only place I remember seeing or hearing of one in the US was in the film Serpico.
 
To me, the CZ75B & and it's ubiquitous clones have taken over the HiPower "slot" in popularity. Though they're quite different than the original HiPower, in the consciousness of much of the gun-buying public those differences don't seem to be significant enough to cause a clamor for "true" HiPowers.
 
I have some level of customization on all of my 1911s, but my HP is stock; it doesn't really need any of the mods that are so popular on 1911s, but for the lousy trigger.
Regrettably, current HPs do have three-dot sights. They also have ambi safeties.
Not sure how or why you'd skeletonize the trigger?
A shooting buddy has one of the new HPs from Chuck Warner - with beavertail and other "features", I presume - and I'm waiting to see if it's worth four times as much as I paid for my stock Mk. III
 
Charles Daly made a mild effort that way when they started selling imported FEGs with some commonly sought modifications. For whatever reason, that didn't catch on for them.

Honestly, as much as I like my Hi-Power, I can't think of any reason to chose one for high-volume competition shooting over something like a 9mm double-stack 1911 or a CZ SP-01. The 1911 has almost identical ergos but a better trigger and sight radius. It will also be easier to fix when something breaks due to the larger knowledge base and parts supply.

But I've thought for awhile now that the only way the Hi-Power will survive is to give it the "production custom" treatment like the 1911. Nobody wants to buy a $900 pistol and then spend another $600-700 on gunsmith work. If it weren't for the Israeli surplus Hi-Powers, that pistol would probably disappear.
 
One of the major reasons that custom BHPs didn't catch on is the M1911's popularity in Bullseye shooting, where there is absolutely no need for a 13-round magazine.

Bullseye is arguably the seed from which today's M1911-knockoff industry sprouted.
Bartholomew Roberts said:
[I think that] the only way the Hi-Power will survive is to give it the "production custom" treatment like the 1911. Nobody wants to buy a $900 pistol and then spend another $600-700 on gunsmith work. If it weren't for the Israeli surplus Hi-Powers, that pistol would probably disappear.
Click to expand...
I don't think the BHP will ever totally disappear, but I agree with your basic premise.

IMHO you're correct that the market for truly-custom one-off bespoke pistols is quite small, and it will probably always remain so. The M1911 industry has long since moved far beyond gunsmiths customizing G.I. surplus pistols for individual buyers.
 
Last edited:
Other than making the trigger lighter for some, the usual BHP purchaser isn't interested doing the things suggested by the OP.

The 1911 like the ARs is a natural born Erector Set/Tinker Toy for purchasers to play with.
 
My guess would be because the standard Hi Power never really caught on in the US market. The version you describe would be significantly more expensive than the already expensive standard version.
 
I have one Browning Hi Power MKIII that I bought new in 1994. Since then, I have bought six CZ's which I shoot and enjoy immensely. A 75D PCR is my carry gun. I know the BHP, and the CZ-75 have very little in common other than the Browning short recoil, tilt barrel action that many other semi autos use. I think part of it is Browning's marketing, or lack thereof of the BHP. They have not introduced many innovative models like CZ has.

However, the BHP is still one of my favorite pistols.
 
I also agree that the "Hi-Power" has somewhat morphed into CZ 75B, Tanfoglio Witness and others similar steel frame 9mm's. Plenty popular, just no longer pure Hi-Powers.

The same thing has happened to the 1911. Look at all of the steel frame S&W 39/659/5906 type guns. They are loosely based on the 1911 design. Same goes for the 2011 frame guns.

Then there's Glock and all of the Glock-a-likes.
 
Why didn't the Hi Power ever pick up these features in factory production?
Click to expand...
They did...somewhat. The Browning H.P. I purchased in the ninties came with white vertical bars on the rear and front sights, an ambi safety and a spur hammer instead of "Commander", style rowel...which I promptly changed over to a traditional pierced rowel style. So, they were putting some of those custom touches that the 1911's got.
 
UncleEd said:
The 1911 like the ARs is a natural born Erector Set/Tinker Toy for purchasers to play with.
Click to expand...
I don't agree. The only reason it's that way is that the aftermarket made it so.

For the first 4 decades of its existence, the M1911 was just a basic and reliable military service pistol, full stop. It was gunsmith modifications to enhance its potential as a target pistol that prompted manufacturers to offer "custom" features on production guns. The two groups subsequently fed off each other to get us to where we are today.
MandolinMan said:
...the standard Hi Power never really caught on in the US market. The version you describe would be significantly more expensive than the already expensive standard version.
Click to expand...
I'd argue that there's nothing inherent in the BHP design that makes it more expensive than the M1911, and the main reason it's remained that way is that the pistol isn't popular, so other gunmakers don't make less-expensie knockoffs, which keeps the pistol expensive, which keeps it unpopular. It's a vicious cycle.
Pilot said:
I think part of it is Browning's marketing, or lack thereof of the BHP. They have not introduced many innovative models like CZ has.
Click to expand...
I think that's true, but I also think that the popularity of CZ pistols is also the product of a happy historical accident that wasn't CZ's doing—the fact that knockoffs of the CZ 75 appeared on the U.S. and Western European commercial market before CZ was even able to enter that market, because the CZ 75 was not protected by patents that were found to be valid in the West. (The U.S., Canada, and Western European nations did not respect Warsaw Pact secret patents.) This created ample competition. Just like GM would not be where it is today without Toyota, CZ would not be where it is today without Tanfoglio. :D
 
Part of the reason for the HP not catching on early was the fact that it was in 9mm...at a time when that round had not gained a lot of popularity on this side of the pond. You could go into gun stores all day and might not see a 9mm handgun. And, so many times, the popularity of a product early on...directly correlates to its popularity over time.

But, I think the real reason for it languishing in the market, as compared to the 1911, is that the 1911 was placed in the hand of millions of troops...and they liked it and saw no need to look further when they were ready to buy.
 
Last edited:
Remember that right up until a few years ago, the BHP was being used around the world in more countries by more armies and police than any other pistol.

Its current production still reflects the current market it serves or used to serve.

As for the 1911 vs BHP story, I stick by my earlier post:
The 1911 is more easily a tinkerers' pistol.
 
BHP was almost a mythical pistol when I was growing up, if it wasn't for SERPICO, I probably would never have seen one. My father, my uncles and most of their friends had .45 pistols, mainly of the Colt variety with a few Detonics thrown in for good measure. It wasn't until 1996 that I actually shot one. I would agree that lack of marketing and availability may have hurt it's popularity.
 
As I mentioned on another forum about the BHP, I was turned toward them by some Illinois State Police. This was in the 1970s and I shot at a range run by some troopers.

I was shooting a Colt Combat Commander and also a Smith Model 39, which was the ISP issue pistol The troopers advised I get the BHP. I did.

But by the 1980s, talk emerged that FN was going to drop the BHP. I found some quality issues with them at that time but then FN started having the BHPs assembled in Portugal and the quality and finish of them immediately improved. Portugal still had and apparently still does old-time craftsmen who could finish the pistols in the gun's time-honored tradition.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top