Why hasn't the Hi Power gone the way of the 1911?
- Thread starter TennJed
- Start date
- Status
That's my carry BHP LW Detective with a standard 2-tone.
Jim Watson
Member
despite their Inglis markings were not built by the John Inglis Co.
Well, darn, another fake. I'll have to mark up my W.H.B. Smith books.
Well, darn, another fake. I'll have to mark up my W.H.B. Smith books.
Walt Sherrill
Member
As a theory, that makes sense, but I think that many MORE 9mms and .40s were sold during the 10-year "ban" period than .45s..., and despite the current influx of big companies making .45s (some very inexpensively), that is probably still the case -- given the recent rush to "pocketable" (or near-pocketable) handguns. It isn't always JUST mag capacity that influences the buying decision.
I honestly never noticed a big rush to .45s during the Clinton-era BAN, just a big rush as folks struggled to build up a personal (household) inventory of hi-cap mags. Gun and mag companies were cranking 15-rounders out prior to the ban, in anticipation. A couple of new guns (CZs) I bought during that period came with one 10-round and one 15-round mag, as CZ spread the "goodness" around.
MagnunJoe
Member
Lets see, spend $999 on a brand new gun and you still have to spend $200 for a professional gunsmith to drill a hole into her so U can have ur magazine disconnect and smooth out the trigger? No thank you!
Why so ma,y 1911 clones & no BHP ones?
Could maybe 1911 pistols be easier / less costly to manufacture ?
Or perhaps the single-action-semi-automatic-pistol-buying-public is heavily prejudiced in favor of the 1911 / .45 ACP , so they sell easier.
Could maybe 1911 pistols be easier / less costly to manufacture ?
Or perhaps the single-action-semi-automatic-pistol-buying-public is heavily prejudiced in favor of the 1911 / .45 ACP , so they sell easier.
dogtown tom
Member
Who the heck pays $200 to a gunsmith to drill a hole in a Hi Power?
You can punch pout the hole yourself for free. Anyone telling you a hole must be drilled already has one to many in their head.
Of course its perfectly fine to pay $1200 or more for a new 1911, and then spend a couple of hundred $$$ to ship it back and forth to Les Baer until it runs..........and still has off center primer strikes.
Will_Power
Member
I tend to agree. The CZ 75 is pretty much the penultimate evolution of the Hi-Power.
And there's plenty of CZ clones floating around out there.
Stevie-Ray
Member
Nor did I. I think the 1911 absolutely the most beautiful firearm ever invented, but the Hi-Power to me rates second place in that regard. I don't yet have one. Still would love to, though, and expect to have a gorgeous specimen, someday.
Walt Sherrill
Member
Will Power said:
Penultimate (i.e., next to last in a series?)
I hear this claim a lot -- about the CZ being an "improved" BHP, but...
Except for a vague similarity in how the two guns look, and the fact that the CZ uses a variation of the Browning Short Recoil system (which about 75% of all other semi-autos also use), almost NOTHING of the CZ design is based on the BHP design. Internally, the two guns couldn't be more different.
Detail strip them both and you'd think their respective designers came from different planets. (Been there, done that.)
That said, I think they're both handsome firearms... and find it hard to favor one over the other on looks alone (or functionality.)
.
Last edited:
Yep. That is BUTT ugly. Also, the trigger pull sucks.There are folks who think the Hi-Power is an ugly firearm? I had no idea......
1911Tuner
Moderator Emeritus
Oh! Sorry YZ. I forgot you were there until this one got bumped up.
I'd never do that. I rather enjoy your posts.
johnmcl
Member
I believe we've touched on the concept elsewhere, but I always felt that the BHP was overshadowed by the 1911 due to the exposure in military service. Our fathers and grandfathers saw the 1.9 million 1911s built for WWII that were in use up to 1985.
This theory also applies to the AR platform. It is not that they are so smokin' hot, but it is what we learned on.
This theory also applies to the AR platform. It is not that they are so smokin' hot, but it is what we learned on.
The bad thing about clone guns,
They are almost always cheaply produced versions of the original design that are overpriced for what you end up getting.
The good thing about clone guns,
The proliferation of clone guns almsot always makes the originals rise in value as they suddenly become more desirable.
They are almost always cheaply produced versions of the original design that are overpriced for what you end up getting.
The good thing about clone guns,
The proliferation of clone guns almsot always makes the originals rise in value as they suddenly become more desirable.
Not true with a whole bunch of CZ-75 clones
Not true with a whole bunch of 1911s not made by Colt
EAA clones of the CZ suck eggs <edited by owen>.
There was a Swiss made copy of the CZ that was pretty good, try finding a bunch in a gun shop.
Foreign copies of the 1911A1 suck eggs <edited by owen> EXCEPT for the ones made on Colt machinery for the internal Military market, i.e. Brazilian, Norwegian, and Argentine made examples.
I have a 1911A1 I built on an Auto Ordnance frame 30 years ago and have rebuilt several times since, still going strong.
The actual assembled pistols from A/O. RIA, whatever you want to call them, suck dog balls.
There are four companies that have built clones of the FN Hi-Power not counting the interesting Asian made workshop clones and the Khyber Pass clones and one of those was made in Indonesia and is considered about as useful as the other Asian guns.
Interesting as a collectible and useless as a serious firearm.
The Inglis, the Argentine Hi-Power, and the FEG are all fairly decent examples of the Hi-Power but NONE of these pistols are true equals of the original FN non war time produced originals.
There was a Swiss made copy of the CZ that was pretty good, try finding a bunch in a gun shop.
Foreign copies of the 1911A1 suck eggs <edited by owen> EXCEPT for the ones made on Colt machinery for the internal Military market, i.e. Brazilian, Norwegian, and Argentine made examples.
I have a 1911A1 I built on an Auto Ordnance frame 30 years ago and have rebuilt several times since, still going strong.
The actual assembled pistols from A/O. RIA, whatever you want to call them, suck dog balls.
There are four companies that have built clones of the FN Hi-Power not counting the interesting Asian made workshop clones and the Khyber Pass clones and one of those was made in Indonesia and is considered about as useful as the other Asian guns.
Interesting as a collectible and useless as a serious firearm.
The Inglis, the Argentine Hi-Power, and the FEG are all fairly decent examples of the Hi-Power but NONE of these pistols are true equals of the original FN non war time produced originals.
Last edited by a moderator:
EAA imports them. Most of them are made by Tanfoglio. I don't think many people would agree with you that they suck.
For a lot of people the BHP is a very good fit and points well, FN makes a quality product, it carries well, it is durable and it is a rare combination in the world of pistols today as an all steel single action. It is a simple pistol with few parts and the trigger can be made to be quite acceptable. Mine have been quite reliable and shown a high degree of practical accuracy.
That said, in a world of cheap and very good poly pistols it just boils down to what you prefer or what you find to fit you best.
In the 50's and 60's there wasn't much in the way of wonder nines and the BHP was clearly the best choice at the time. For some it is still more than adequate.
A newly minted all stainless version might garner some sales, but the competition in the .40/9mm market is chock full of very good pistols and SAO hammer fired pistols are a rarity.
I like the design, fit , finish and feel of the BHP-on the other hand most of my examples were bought for less than the price of a modern plastic fantastic and that makes them a real bargain in my view. Carrying the BHP as an issue pistol for some years may have influenced my opinion.
That said, in a world of cheap and very good poly pistols it just boils down to what you prefer or what you find to fit you best.
In the 50's and 60's there wasn't much in the way of wonder nines and the BHP was clearly the best choice at the time. For some it is still more than adequate.
A newly minted all stainless version might garner some sales, but the competition in the .40/9mm market is chock full of very good pistols and SAO hammer fired pistols are a rarity.
I like the design, fit , finish and feel of the BHP-on the other hand most of my examples were bought for less than the price of a modern plastic fantastic and that makes them a real bargain in my view. Carrying the BHP as an issue pistol for some years may have influenced my opinion.
Last edited:
It is. But, there is a reaon for that prejudice.
Even $500~$800 entry 1911s are easier to shoot than BHP for most people, and does not bite their hand.
Sure, BHP can be tuned, but those are only for few enthusiasts for the most part.
There may have been factory improvements to remove the hammer bite and all, but it was too little too late.
dogtown tom
Member
Not to mention the fact that FN was prohibited from importing the Hi Power (and other Browning handgun designs) to the United States until the 1950's.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
