Replies

Browning Hi-Power with custom Coco Bolo grips

Schematic of the Hi-Power

IIRC, Macolm X spoke rhapsodically about the Browning Hi-Power in his so-called autobiography.

My first real pistol was a Browning Hi-power. I bought it while in college. My parents were a little irritated that I spent my money on the pistol but I had an athletic scholarship and thought I deserved to spend a little on myself.

At the time one could order a pistol throught the mail but mine came from the local hardware store. At the time Browning controlled prices so the small town hardware store could sell at the same price as the largest discounter. The prices were pretty reasonale too.

I have owned maybe a dozen over the years including Canadian, Belgian, Argentine and Hungarian clones. One of the real baragins are the Argentine ones. They have a military finish, not bad but not highly polsished. On the inside they are absolutely identical to that first one I bought in college. The Hungarian ones are well finished and function ok too.

The Hi-power has the best grip of any handgun I have ever tried, they also are easy to hit with. About the only gripe is a mediocre trigger. The small safety is not a problem if you get used to it.

Bang

I forgot to mention that you can improve on perfection by adding Hogue rubber grips to the hi-power.

I guess each person's hand is different but I have yet to meet anyone who doesn't like the Hi-power's grip.

On the other hand, I think the Ruger P-89 series of pistols are really fine guns but they have the worst grip one can imagine.

ping! pow! bam!

While the Hi-Power has an exposed hammer and the same slide stop, magazine catch and thumb safety as the 1911, the grip safety is absent. Instead the pistol has a magazine disconnect that disables the action when the magazine is removed.

I guess I'm unclear on why the grip safety was a bad thing or the mag-disconnect a good thing? I can understand there are some circumstances where the mag-disconnect could be good, but the sentence above suggests it's a substitute for a grip-safety.

Perhaps the pistol's most unique feature is its 13-round, double-column magazine.

Was the HP the first pistol to have a detachable two-column mag, or to have a two-column mag in the grip, or what? It certainly wasn't the first pistol to feed from a two-column magazine--watch Star Wars for that.

Oooh! Oooh! That's my gun you're writing about. I've been so pleased to learn that this piece, given to me as a gift, is a true classic. Though I have a woman's small hands, it's amazingly comfortable in the hand--it is so beautifully balanced.

How about its distant cousin the CZ-75B?

All the best parts of the Browning HP plus a lot of improvements as well.

Modern Changes/Updates: Metallurgic changes in recent Hi Powers
This information was recently emailed to me, and I am very grateful for the time it took in assembling it and passing it on to all of us. Many, many thanks. The information posted herein does not originate with me. It has been collected from various magazine articles, conversations with gunsmiths,conversations with Browning/FN, and other sources. It has not been independently verified, and therefore I make no guarantees as to its accuracy. I will not be responsible for any use or misuse of this material. When Browning started to develop the .40 S&W version of the Hi-Power in the middle 1990s, they quickly discovered that significant changes had to be made on that version in order to stand up to the beating of the .40 S&W cartridge. These included a thicker (stronger and heavier) slide, additional slide/barrel locking lug, and other items. Also, the strength of some of the materials was improved. The improved steels are now used on both the 9mm and .40 guns. Thus, any .40 Hi-Power should have the stronger steels, and the newer 9mm guns will also have them. Specifically, the receiver (frame) was changed from a forged steel to a cast steel. Although we tend to think of forged parts as being stronger, machining of the part becomes difficult when really strong steel is used. Practically speaking, cast parts are sometimes stronger than forged ones because a really good steel can be used in the casting, with only minor machining required. One gunsmith has told me that when testing the parts on the Rockwell hardness "C" scale, the forged Hi-Power receivers show a hardness of around 5, while the cast receivers show a hardness of around 26! The cast receivers have the minor disadvantage, sometimes found in cast parts, of being slightly porous in certain areas. This is most common at the bottom of the grip frame, and I am told that the ridges now found around the mag well opening exist to disguise any slight porosity blemishes in that area. These ridges are the quickest way of identifying a cast receiver, but are not foolproof. I have seen a few forged receivers with the ridges, apparently produced during the changeover period. Another clue that a receiver is cast is the existence of a casting-facility ID mark on the inside of the mag well. I have seen an emblem on the inside-right of the mag well near the top (requires removing the slide to see), or just below the mag catch inside the well, in the relieved area (requires removing a grip panel to see). A cast receiver may have a slight texture inside the mag well, instead of showing machining marks. Also, the thin spots at the front corners of the mag well, are not quite as thin on the cast receivers. The newer receivers look like they have a small piece missing from the right-rear slide rail, when compared to old receivers. I was told that on the .40 guns this piece would break off after a while, no matter how hard the receiver. But since it didn't effect functioning, the factory simply machines it off during manufacture of all the receivers now! The slide on the Hi-Power got some minor dimensional changes in the early 1990s to improve durability (compare ejection port shapes). During a phone call to the FN factory in 1994, I was told that an improved heat-treatment of the slide was introduced during the Summer or Fall of 1993. The manufacture year of a slide made during the 1990s is indicated by a hexagon with a single digit inside, stamped on the center rail underneath the slide (where the top cartridge in the mag rubs), near the rear. The hexagon is always missing at least one side- the number of missing sides indicates the quarter of the year that the slide was made. After the first quarter, the hexagon is stamped along the edge of the sear-lever cutout in the slide, to create more "missing" sides. Thus, a hexagon stamped in the fourth quarter may be pretty hard to find because most of it is over the edge of the sear-lever cutout, in order to give the effect of 4 "missing" sides on the hex. Any slide made in the 1990s with a digit of "4" or higher inside the hex should be the new heat-treatment. So should one with a "3", if it has four sides missing. A gunsmith who has Rockwell-tested some slides told me that the "old" slides typically test around 20, the new ones run around 40. If you already have and like one of the so-called "soft" guns made before 1994, don't despair! I have been told by several sources that if you stay with standard-velocity (115 gr/1165fps or 124gr/1075 fps) U.S. ammunition, these guns have a typical service life of 30,000-50,000 rounds. However, using hot loads will drastically reduce that life! For example, I have heard that some British military 9mm loads were around 124gr/1300fps, and the gun would only last a few thousand rounds before breaking. Most NATO fmj is a bit warm (124gr/1170fps) but not as bad. The newer "hard" guns should hold up even better, but I would still avoid extensive use of hot loads. I had one that was starting to show a little peening of the slide/barrel locking lugs after 300 rds of police-only +P+ (115gr/1300fps). That gun would certainly have lasted a lot longer, but I went back to standard ammo. Various gunsmiths have told me that the brazing that hold the barrel/chamber together (look closely, there is a joint-line) sometimes fails at around 15,000 rds. Other eventual failure-points can be a crack starting at the lower-rear corner of the ejection port, slide-barrel locking lugs that peen over or get rounded off, and the unlocking cam in the receiver that can break. Except for the occasional "freak" failure that can happen with any piece of machinery, a nicely-treated Hi Power will usually outlive its owner, but these are areas to watch.

Oh Yeah. The Hi-Power is a better-handling gun than any of the later "wonder-nines" that followed it. Makes the Beretta 92 look like a pipe wrench.

I own a Browning Hi-Power in 9mm, with the Hogue grips. I rarely shoot it and actually have it waiting for my nephew to turn 21 in a few months so I can give it to him. This should drive my antigun sister totally nuts. Well, to be fair, she's only anti HANDGUN. They live in Massachusetts and the kid is attending Georgetown next fall...so I figure he needs somethin' to remind him about life in FREE America. I helped instill in him a love for shooting and the shooting sports as chief babysitter and #1 Uncle. I'll hold the pistol for him until he moves someplace less communistic. But it's HIS nonetheless. I just sent my daughter her Ruger SP101 .357 now that she's out of college and engaged. That and her CCW were her graduation present from me. If I want to carry a 9mm, I'll carry my Beretta M92FS. Otherwise, it's a Glock M27 40 or one of my Colt 45's.

Actually, I think the only real improvement on the venerable 1911 has come from ParaOrdnance, with it's plethora of models and the new LDA action. With two new empty spots (one pending) I guess I'll fill them with a couple of Para's. Maybe a Tac-4 and the new Para Carry.

I own one of these.

It is a sweet-shootin' gun.

The ergonomics (it fits your hand well) are outstanding.

The only drawbacks are the puny 9mm cartridge and the magazine disconnect (remove the magazine and it won't fire).

I understand that nowadays the Browning is also produced in .40 cal.

That is an improvement.

For anyone who ever needs to have a Browning HP worked on, I doubt that there's a better place to send it than to Bill Laughridge at Cylinder and Slide, in Nebraska.

I got a chance to meet Bill many years ago at a USPSA match, and he's a great guy and a top-notch gunsmith. While I didn't have a HP for him to work on, he did tune up my Taurus PT-99 and a Smith & Wesson revolver that needed some work.

Mark

The browning high power isn't the same gun that john moses browning designed.

The pistol that browning designed had an internal hammer. The high power has an external hammer. FN lies when they call it the "browning" high power. It's really a FN pistol, browning had nothing to do with it.

Browning variant manufactored by Inglis Corp for Chinese contract. Toronto Canada. Note shoulder stock/holster.

JOHN BROWNING MACHINE GUN

20th CENTURY: CHOICE OF THE US MILITARY

COLT FRONTIER SIX SHOOTER .44-40 WINCHESTER

19th CENTURY: CHOICE OF TR & autoresponder

CHRISTIAN SHARPS 4 SHOT DERRINGER .22RF SHORT

19th CENTURY: CHOICE OF GRANDPA'S VEST POCKET

MAC 9MM MACHINE PISTOL

20th CENTURY: CHOICE OF TRAVIS McGEE