High Power 40 Caliber, why no more?
- Thread starter gringolet
- Start date
- Status
Captcurt
Member
Don't know. I have had a Practical since the early 90's and have put thousands of rounds thru it. Can't believe that it was a frame problem.
The Lone Haranguer
Member
Just plain old lack of sales would be my guess. It was designed from the ground up for the cartridge, including a larger heavier slide and a third locking lug on the barrel, so durability should not have been an issue.
10X
Member
The 40 Hi Power was 3 ounces heavier than the 9mm all in the beefed up slide. That totally changed the balance of the gun. The hammers were very stiff, very difficult to cock one handed. The capacity was ten rounds. The gun was expensive.
There were many other alternatives out there in 40 with less weight, more capacity, better handling and cheaper....more modern for the modern cartridge.
The market place made its statement by not buying the 40 Hi Power.
There were many other alternatives out there in 40 with less weight, more capacity, better handling and cheaper....more modern for the modern cartridge.
The market place made its statement by not buying the 40 Hi Power.
SharpsDressedMan
member
10X nailed it. I tried to like the BHP 40, even had a custom gun by Kurt Wickmann, but the balance sucked compared to the 9mm. They are good guns, and my friend has one that is very accurate, but longevity vs. high round count might be an issue in the long run. Better to have a .40 that is engineered for more durability.
rcmodel
Member in memoriam
My shooting buddy bought one right after they came out.
Neither one of us were strong enough to load it unless we cocked it first!!!
And the added weight just changed it enough to have an un-Hi-Power like feel.
He sold his due to the difficult slide racking reason alone.
rc
Neither one of us were strong enough to load it unless we cocked it first!!!
And the added weight just changed it enough to have an un-Hi-Power like feel.
He sold his due to the difficult slide racking reason alone.
rc
Ash
Member
Early conversions of 9mm pistols to 40S&W often resulted in pistols less satisfactory than the original model.
It's something to note that despite the power a 40 has it seems less interesting than 9mm or 45acp to many (including me). A full-size pistol, say, a CZ-75, does nothing for me in 40 but catches my eye in 40. Ditto for a similar pistol in 45acp such as a Springfield Armory P9.
I have owned many 40's, and currently have an uncommon CZ-85 compact in 40S&W, but for some reason I don't go there often. I know there are fans of the 40, but it does seem to run a distant third to the others. Evidently distant enough that FN dropped it altogether (and apparently in non-military caliber civilian law nations, it never got big either).
It's something to note that despite the power a 40 has it seems less interesting than 9mm or 45acp to many (including me). A full-size pistol, say, a CZ-75, does nothing for me in 40 but catches my eye in 40. Ditto for a similar pistol in 45acp such as a Springfield Armory P9.
I have owned many 40's, and currently have an uncommon CZ-85 compact in 40S&W, but for some reason I don't go there often. I know there are fans of the 40, but it does seem to run a distant third to the others. Evidently distant enough that FN dropped it altogether (and apparently in non-military caliber civilian law nations, it never got big either).
rodinal220
Member
I don't know for sure but common sense would dictate low sales.Most folks want high capacity in a full size duty gun,and the BHP offered 10+1,extremely adequate in my mind,but most want more.
The 40 BHP introduced the Investment cast frame. FN found that the forgings would not hold up to 40 S&W and the investment casting frames were stronger.
Sad that FN stopped these,I love my brushed chrome model.Very reliable and accurate.
The BHP frame in either 9mm or 40 S&W is slimmer than most hi-caps that tend to be fatter and blockier.Yes,less capacity,but better concealability.
The 40 BHP introduced the Investment cast frame. FN found that the forgings would not hold up to 40 S&W and the investment casting frames were stronger.
Sad that FN stopped these,I love my brushed chrome model.Very reliable and accurate.
The BHP frame in either 9mm or 40 S&W is slimmer than most hi-caps that tend to be fatter and blockier.Yes,less capacity,but better concealability.
Ash
Member
The P9 could be had in 9mm, 40, or 45. Yeah, I meant 9mm. I'll pick up one in 9mm or 45acp, but the 40's just don't generally seem to interest me, which is odd considering the 40 is a good round.
browningguy
Member
I've got one Practical and 2 standard MkIII's in .40 and like them just fine. But, they were expensive and had limited capacity compared to newer designs so people didn't buy them. I got all three of mine used for very good prices.
TSH77769
Member
The dropping of the .40 Hi-power was purely an economics and low sales issue. They required a seperate slide. The .40 slide is thicker and heavier (a whole nother 3 oz) and has a special clearance cut for the slide release/take down lever (the easiest visiual distinction).
They are fantastic guns and they were well engineered for the .40 round rahter than simply adapted or shoe horned in.
TED
They are fantastic guns and they were well engineered for the .40 round rahter than simply adapted or shoe horned in.
TED
- Status
