First Hi-Power

[bannockburn]

Charlie98

I share your frustration as I was in the same boat with my first Hi-Power, a T Series made in the late '60s. On the outside it was all peaches and cream; a beautiful, pristine blued finish and perfectly fitted checkered walnut stocks, all neatly ensconced in that classic black pouch.

I bought it at a gun show and it wasn't til I got it home did I start to find it's faults. First off the slide to frame fit was very loose and rattled if you shook it a little bit. Okay not good but not so bad either, that is until I tried the trigger. It was nearly into double figures, somewhere around 9 to 10 pounds! Combined with those teeny tiny sights I had a very difficult time just getting on paper at 25 feet! The topper was the safety; again too small for easy use and nearly required a plastic mallet to put it on or take it off.

I had no problem selling it to a Hi-Power collector for more than what I originally paid for it.

 

[Waveski]

This may be wandering a wee bit ... This Israeli surplus has treated me quite well. To help put the various generations of High Powers into context , could someone state the approximate build year of this one?
I think it might be a MkII / MkIII transitional , rib and hog snout present.

 

[WVsig]

This may be wandering a wee bit ... This Israeli surplus has treated me quite well. To help put the various generations of High Powers into context , could someone state the approximate build year of this one?
I think it might be a MkII / MkIII transitional , rib and hog snout present.

View attachment 934293

The gun was produced in 1985. PV in the serial number tells you that. It is a MKII. Integrated front sight and smaller MKII dovetail rear sight are correct for this timeframe. The ambi is also correct.

 

[bannockburn]

Waveski

Howdy my fellow Mk.II owner!

 

[Waveski]

Better than average HP trigger, stock.
‘85 , thank you.

 

[Gordon]

I started with a T series 1966 HP in the early 80s with the Tangent rear sight. It never fed HP bullets , ever. I put it in a Browning Gun Set Case with my Lightweight Baby .25 I got in mid 80s and a as new Model 1955 I bought from a local sheriff friend who was passing from lung cancer in early 90s . I sold the cased set, each with a Browning Vinyl rug for $2500 three years ago to a friend who lusted after it, I also have a C series .30 Luger HP it is my "fun " HP and a joy to shoot, even with cast lead bullets . An early forged frame parkerized Browning Nato MKII as new when I got it ,is my favorite fighting HP . I put C&S matched trigger , no bite Hammer and sear in it with a C&S spring kit and and extended slide stop. It wears olive drab thin Aluma Grips (since discontinued) and recently I had Novaks put on big dot Tritium sights. The Mark II is very difficult to mill for sights, Novak has it down, they do a perfect job quickly and reasonably and the guns are pretty much sighted in . I also have a very Nice MKIII "Practical" and I replaced the rear sight with a low LPA Adjustable and put a complete spring kit and hone job on it from Spring Solutions and Burl Esmaralda grips. It is my "target " HP . I also have an early FEG HP clone with the weird ventilated rib. It shoots well with just the mag safety removed. I also have a FN marked HP that was made in early 80s.in Argentina that I had a friend put plain Heine straight 8 sights on , a Spring solution package and Esmaralda grips and I polished the feed ramp. It has C series characteristics and is very well made but has a epoxy coated finish. Lastly have a Chinese Contract HP with correct Canadian stock that came back to US in very early 90s and I paid for "select" from Keng Firearms importers. It shoots very well !

 

[Gordon]

Thank you all for your answers. I definitely think I will look at a MKII or MKIII. I like the sound of the better sights over the old style and never thought about the ambi thumb safety, but my wife shoots lefty so that will make it easier for her.

The Mark ii are very difficult to up grade the sights. For that reason I recommend the Mark 3 .

 

[WVsig]

The Mark ii are very difficult to up grade the sights. For that reason I recommend the Mark 3 .

I don’t think that they are hard to upgrade but the slide does have to be milled with the proper dimensions and the sights fitted to the frame as there really no direct aftermarket replacements for MKII sights. Really if someone can milk Novak cuts properly they should be able to install sight on a MKII IMHO.

 

[Gordon]

I don’t think that they are hard to upgrade but the slide does have to be killed with the proper dimensions and the sights fitted to the frame as there really no direct aftermarket replacements for MKII sights. Really if someone can milk Novak cuts properly they should be able to install sight on a MKII IMHO.

The "if" factor, I could not get a set of Heine Straight 8s I bought put on that MK II by anyone as the rib scared them off and the integral front sight . Novaks did it perfectly (with their sights) and they shoot to aim with 124 grain Nato loads at 15 yards ! Dead on !
I had the Heine straight 8s put on the Argi after I removed the staked on frontsight and bought the right mill cutters for the Heine sights. They are a little low shooting but closer with 115 grain loads , I'll file the front a little, maybe. Now on the Mark III I pushed in the LPA low mount rear sight myself.

 

[Kevin Rohrer]

IMHO the BHP in 40 is the worst of the breed. The balance, shootability and longevity of the gun are all greatly compromised. It is slow back to the target. The caliber was shoehorned into the design because of the growth of the caliber in the US. Really it turns an elegant shooting handgun into something that batters and shooter and the gun needlessly.

Everyone is entitled to an informed opinion, just not an uninformed one. In my informed opinion, the balance is fine, it is very shootable and I have no problem getting back on-target, all-of-which are merely training issues. As I do not have a low PF (Pussification Factor) compared to many, the recoil is negligible. And it is in a Major caliber, which is also a plus. I shoot mine all the time, and it will outlast me.

 

[WVsig]

Everyone is entitled to an informed opinion, just not an uninformed one. In my informed opinion, the balance is fine, it is very shootable and I have no problem getting back on-target, all-of-which are merely training issues. As I do not have a low PF (Pussification Factor) compared to many, the recoil is negligible. And it is in a Major caliber, which is also a plus. I shoot mine all the time, and it will outlast me.

View attachment 934894

Are you trying to make the case that my opinion is uniformed? I am glad you enjoy the Hi Power in 40. Many people do not think it is a good gun in that caliber. It is not that the recoil is too harsh it is just not well managed by the design. You are certainly entitled to your opinion but can you check the false machismo. It really is unnecessary. It makes you look immature and petty. If you think that my opinion is uninformed I will offer up the same opinion which was voiced to me by this individual. As a Gunsite Orange member you might recognize him. He and I talked extensively about the BHP at a training class a few years ago. He basically echoed exactly what I stated before. I guess your next move is to claim KH in uninformed.

It is a shame when some members here turn everything into a pissing match. Ruins a good discussion.

 

[bannockburn]

Gordon

No complaints here with the factory sights on my MK.II. They're easy to pick up and are fine out to around 30 yards or so. Of course anything would have been an improvement over those tiny sights on my T Series! Would definitely be nice with a set of Novaks on it but at this stage of the game not really worth it.

 

[Waveski]

Novak ...I went that route on one of my surplus MkIIs.

 

[WVsig]

Gordon

No complaints here with the factory sights on my MK.II. They're easy to pick up and are fine out to around 30 yards or so. Of course anything would have been an improvement over those tiny sights on my T Series! Would definitely be nice with a set of Novaks on it but at this stage of the game not really worth it.

Novak ...I went that route on one of my surplus MkIIs.
I went that route on one of my surplus MkIIs.View attachment 934962

Novak does great sight work. I have been to the shop in Parkersburg, WV. They have it down to a science. If I was still partial to Novak sights I would still use them. These days I am on decent enough terms with Mr. Don Williams that he will mill as slide for me and install whatever sights I am interested in. I count myself lucky. He has always done amazing work for me.

 

[Kevin Rohrer]

Are you trying to make the case that my opinion is uniformed? I am glad you enjoy the Hi Power in 40. Many people do not think it is a good gun in that caliber. It is not that the recoil is too harsh it is just not well managed by the design. You are certainly entitled to your opinion but can you check the false machismo. It really is unnecessary. It makes you look immature and petty. If you think that my opinion is uninformed I will offer up the same opinion which was voiced to me by this individual. As a Gunsite Orange member you might recognize him. He and I talked extensively about the BHP at a training class a few years ago. He basically echoed exactly what I stated before. I guess your next move is to claim KH in uninformed.

It is a shame when some members here turn everything into a pissing match. Ruins a good discussion.

Not meant to be a pissing match. Anyone who has owned a BHP in .40 and has found valid reasons why it is not good certainly has an informed opinion. As I am not familiar w/ every other Family Member, don't recognize that picture. Sorry.

 

[WVsig]

Not meant to be a pissing match. Anyone who has owned a BHP in .40 and has found valid reasons why it is not good certainly has an informed opinion. As I am not familiar w/ every other Family Member, don't recognize that picture. Sorry.

That is Ken Hackathorn....

 

[SSN Vet]

IMHO, they improved the BHP with each change.... thus a newer MkIII would be my pick.

Be prepared for your wallet to become much lighter.

 

[a2x4bbl]

Modified heavily . My apologies to the purists . 9 lb. factory trigger is not an exaggeration. But now it’s 4lbs. Heavy triggers can be fixed . Changed the safety also . Novak sights , Bar Sto barrel . Shot very well with the factory barrel , I just wanted a threaded barrel .Pistol is an absolute joy to shoot . Bought it new a few years before discontinued. Wish I had bought 2 now . My point is if your willing to spend a little time and money with a Hi-Power ,what your rewarded with is a pistol that is easy to shoot well . Cylinder and Slide has an excellent selection of parts for it .

 

[Gordon]

Everyone is entitled to an informed opinion, just not an uninformed one. In my informed opinion, the balance is fine, it is very shootable and I have no problem getting back on-target, all-of-which are merely training issues. As I do not have a low PF (Pussification Factor) compared to many, the recoil is negligible. And it is in a Major caliber, which is also a plus. I shoot mine all the time, and it will outlast me.

View attachment 934894

The slide on the .40 HP is beefed up making it not just another rebarreled 9mm like the rest of the crowd and IMHO a very stout .40 S&W

 

[Gordon]

Novak ...I went that route on one of my surplus MkIIs.
View attachment 934962

You got the same ones as I did ! Where does yours hit as received from Novaks ?

 

[FIVETWOSEVEN]

A FM90 Hi Power was my first ever pistol. It's not the most reliable but probably just needs a refresh at this point.

 

[I6turbo]

Charlie98

I share your frustration as I was in the same boat with my first Hi-Power, a T Series made in the late '60s. On the outside it was all peaches and cream; a beautiful, pristine blued finish and perfectly fitted checkered walnut stocks, all neatly ensconced in that classic black pouch.

I bought it at a gun show and it wasn't til I got it home did I start to find it's faults. First off the slide to frame fit was very loose and rattled if you shook it a little bit. Okay not good but not so bad either, that is until I tried the trigger. It was nearly into double figures, somewhere around 9 to 10 pounds! Combined with those teeny tiny sights I had a very difficult time just getting on paper at 25 feet! The topper was the safety; again too small for easy use and nearly required a plastic mallet to put it on or take it off.

I had no problem selling it to a Hi-Power collector for more than what I originally paid for it.

A friend/acquaintance of mine has a pristine T-series from the '60s. I didn't know he had it until I got my Mk III. He brought it out one day to show me, nice Browning case and all, looked like new, beautiful bluing, nice grips. I thought for a minute there I was about to see why the old T-series guns tend to bring good money, and why I might want to try to score one for me. Then I checked it out more closely and found that the beauty was, for me, only skin deep. The trigger was gritty, heavy, and one of the worst I've ever felt on any gun. The slide and barrel fitment was very loose, much more so than my Mk III (which is not that tight). The safety lever and sights were tiny. I didn't have a chance to fire it, but I wouldn't expect that I could do very well with it. Perhaps this friend's gun is the worst example ever of a T-series, but I was disappointed in that particular one.

 

[bannockburn]

I6turbo

I still believe that I had one of the worst T Series Hi-Powers but mine was only a sampling of one (though I have to say my brother's later C Series also possessed some of problem features that my Hi-Power did).

 

[tark]

Interesting, hearing about the sloppy frame to slide fit on two different T- series pistols. I have one, made in 68, that has never been fired. I posted in a thread a couple of weeks ago, and WVsig was kind enough to teach me a lot about the gun. I think maybe he has forgotten more about Hi-Powers than some of us will ever know. But getting to the point of my post, I pulled out my T-series and checked the frame to slide fit.

It was almost as tight as the F/S fit on my avatar. I was very impressed.

 

[Master Blaster]

Long ago I bought my first hi-power, it was a cai imported Argentine surplus pistol made in Belgium. They were available for $250 at the time. Mine was the old internal extractor model. The tiny sights made it hard to shoot. It didn't really compare to my 1911s. I sold it for $300 around 2002. This past year I decided I wanted 1 hi-power in my collection. After some research I decided on a MKIII with target sights. A couple months later I found one lnib for sale at a reasonable price. Its silver chrome finish, target sights. It is well fitted and nicely finished in Portugal. Trigger is 6.75 lbs average on my Lyman gage. []