I have a High Standard - Military Grip - 5 1/2" brl w/ comp that is the Trophy-Citation model with Gold Trigger - Safety - Mag.release. I purchased it in 1981 and it remains the most accurate handgun that I have ever used. The trigger is ajusted down to 1.5-2.0 lb. range and is 100% crisp at letoff.
I must admit that I have never handled a S&W 41 but viewed many photos on the forum and read many glowing reviews from happy owners.
For those who have shot - or owned - both how do you compare them in accuracy - trigger - sights etc? My H.S has a rear sight that is mounted on a permanemt mount that does not move with the slide. It has a very large - wide - high rear blade which I like. I also like the tall undercut fron sight. The H.S. is magazine sensitive. I bought a back-up and twice had to exchange it before finding one that worked 100%.The original that came with the gun was always 100% functioning. I feel sure that the 41 is as good - or better although the grip shape is totaly different from my Military model. I once removed the barrel which was a total bitch and might never try that again although I have read that the 41 can be tricky to disssemble and re-assemble?

Back in the late 70's I owned a Citation-Trophy, and my wife had a Victor. Our son currently owns a Victor, so I'm very familiar with the High Standard line of 22's. They are great guns, and super accurate. I currently own a model 41 which I use for local steel challenge type matches. I would rate the accuracy of the model 41 comparable to the High Standard pistols, or at least what I can remember of their accuracy. The only drawback to the High Standard pistols, is the difficulty with finding good magazines. One of the steel league members has told us about a local shop that does carry a better brand of magazines for the High Standard, and he swears that they work as well as the original factory magazines. My son has plans on buying a few, and trying them.

The sights and trigger on the Model 41 are on a par with the High Standard.

As far as dis-assembly of the model 41, nothing could be easier. Pull down on the front of the trigger guard, and lift off the barrel. Pull the slide back and out of the rails, then allow it to move forward and off the frame. That's it, you're ready to clean, and reassemble.

Hello Bob96,

I'm actually a revolver guy but I dabble in simis enough to have formed an opnion that shouldn't be taken as gospel.

As you probably know, 41s and High standards were used by a large majority of bullseye shooters from before I first shot bullseye in the 70s until the wide availabilty of after market parts for Rugers made them a viable option. I hate alabis so I prefer 41s because mine have been more reliable than the High Standards I've owned. To be enthusiastic about High Standards you first have to master the art of tweeking their magazine lips. Also, you run the risk of learning that a High Standard magazine needs to be retweeked by its starting to give you alabis. However, a couple people who are competeing in a league with me are having jams with their 41s and other than on a S&W forum, preference between the two pistols is split about 50/50.

Both have good triggers. In my experience with a small number of High Standards and 41s I've felt both better, mostly meaning lighter, but also a wee bit crisper triggers on High Standards than 41s and also heavier and creepier triggers than I've felt on 41s. NRA bullseye rules have a 2 lb. min. trigger limit so 41s leave S&W set to not run afoul of that rule and I don't see anyone fiddling with theirs. Your High Standard is too light for a match where triggers are weighed.

Both guns are exceptionally easy to take apart to clean or change barrels on. Both are also so accurate that I can not choose one brand over the other based on accuracy. Some like the High Standard primarily to match the grip of their 1911 but they spend a higher percentage of their range time with 1911s than I do and I like the feel of standard 41 stocks better.

I prefer 41s partly because S&W is my favorite brand but more importantly on reliability but remember, I'm a revolver competitor who is accustomed to never stepping foward when they call "alabi shooters to the line".

I think you'll enjoy owning both pistols and forming your own preference or discovering you love them both.

Best Regards,

Gil

Great info above. I am not a very good pistol shot - expert at best, BUT I collect S&W 41/46/52s but shoot the HS Victor (Hamden only in my book) 5.5" military grip because I prefer that grip. I also shoot a Kart .22 on Colt frame and a pre70 Colt NM for the other two legs - when I shoot.

For carry, my favorites are a S&W 46 5" (USAF electroless nickle) and a Para P-13 also nickle.

In summary, any one of them that are well maintained and possibly tuned (if needed) will be great - find which one you feel best with.

__________________
TOMBECK

I shoot both HS and SW's with regularity and enjoy both. The both seem about equal in terms of accuracy. A few observations on the differences:

The 41 is easier to take apart for cleaning, the pushbutton take-down on some of the HS's has a very strong spring and I usually have to push the button on a wooden surface to get it moving. Earlier guns may have a lever take-down and later ones an Allen screw take-down.

Hi Standard magazines seem rather finicky and may require adjustment to run right, I made a tool and followed the instructions here to adjust them. J. Barta Other page

Both guns are a bit finicky about ammo and you should experiment with different brands to see which is most accurate and offer reliable functioning of the gun.

I shoot both slant and military grip HS's and find them both comfortable. I also find the 41 has a very comfortable grip configuration also.

The slide release on the HS is on the right side of the gun, a bit of an advantage for the left-handed shooter.

I shoot both older and newer model guns of both brands and find my older 41's seem to run a bit better. This may be a function of the older 41's being more "broken-in" with many more rounds fired. I have found no difference between the models of my HS's. Although I don't own any, I have read many horror stories about the Mitchell and Texas High Standards. Google both and reach your own conclusions. I have found no difference in terms of function and accuracy between the Hamden and East Hartford HS's. I shoot a later E Hartford gun made when HS was in big trouble and taking shortcuts such as eliminating the push-button take down but my gun works great and is a favorite. Every bit the equal as a Hamden gun. Perhaps that debate is the same as the one regarding early and late 41's and which is the better gun in terms of function.

Parts that work are more readily available for the 41 as it is currently manufactured and can also be returned to SW for repair if needed, older HS parts can be found but a bit of a challenge.

I shoot standard velocity ammo in my guns as I feel it is easier on the guns. I have been told that the HS guns are prone to frame cracks at the rear of the mag well if used with weak springs and high velocity ammo so I also change out the springs on my guns as needed. SW's also had issues such as the cracking in the slides of the early 46 because the corner was improperly radiused.

As I mentioned in the beginning I like both brands and have not really developed a clear preference of one over the other but I almost always have one or both with me on every range trip as they are both a joy to shoot. Hope this helps a bit.

__________________
John. SWCA #1586

Great Link!

I own a Mitchel/High Standard Citation that was manufactured in Texas. It is stamped with both names. I runs perfect but like all High Standards, only with a magazine it likes. I've only shot Federal bulk pack 36 gr. high speed ctg. through it. It has the worst trigger I've felt on a target grade High Standard but is still better than every trigger I've felt on new Rugers and is a target gun's trigger that is suitable for bullseye. My biggest complaint is that the front sight is too wide leaving narrow light bars. I wanted an economy stainless auto that is a step above plinker class and due to all those internet horror stories beating down the price, it was the best buy.

Gil

From what i have read on the Rimfire .com forum the owner of High Standard has finally got his act together and is now making a good firearm . He is servicing the older High standards and is finally making a magazine that will work well. True that they recommend that standard velocity ammo.be used and that recoil springs be changed as needed . One gentleman who had an early texas made pistol that would not feed just contacted the owner of H.S. and he replaced the frame of the free .My older Hamden H.S. has not given me any trouble and it seems to fit my hand like a glove.At the present time I can't afford a S&W 41 but would like to have one.

I owned (and foolishly sold) a Model #41 bought new in 1978, and a High Standard Victor (Hamden model) that I still have. Put a lot of rounds thru both, mostly informal target shooting, plinking, and a lot of small game hunting.

Reliability slightly favored the #41

Accuracy was about the same with preferred loads

Fit and finish slightly favored the #41

The Victor just felt better in my hand, allowing better off hand performance compared to the #41.

Ease of take-down was about the same.

Larry

Attached Images

	IMG_0605.JPG (67.0 KB, 352 views)
	IMG_0606.JPG (69.5 KB, 327 views)

I was shooting a High Standard Supermatic 101 when I first saw the model 41. I picked up the Smith and it felt fantastic; I had to have one. I've had both the heavy barrel and the compensated, neither one ever shot as well FOR ME as a slant-grip High Standard. I prefer the take-down and reliability of the Smith, but it's easier to go back and forth between a .45 and the High Standard. It comes down to what works for you. For me, in the end, nothing came close to a Walther GSP.

Bob

My Hamden Victor developed second and third frame cracks last winter, so with a lot of trepidation, I sent it to Texas for a new frame.

In order to have something to shoot while it was being repaired (and to get a new gun) I bought a new M41. The trigger was really atrocious: heavy and creepy. The cost of shipping it to Clark for a trigger job was prohibitive on top of the price of a new one, so I decided to do it myself. I eventually got it down to just over two pounds with no noticeable creep. With a lot of shooting, it has smoothed out some more, and now I notice a little creep again.

The Victor came back with a stainless frame, which makes it look rather striking. The magazines that came with it function perfectly, and I have no complaints at all. The trigger is vastly better than even my improved trigger on the M41. However, there is no way it would pick up two pounds, so if I were shooting official matches, I would use the 41.

I find that I shoot slow fire better with the 41 for some reason, but my timed and rapid fire scores still lag behind the Victor's. The reliability of the 41 is definitely better, because the chamber of the old Victor is getting pretty eroded. I think if I oiled the top round in the magazine, that problem would go away.

So I like them both and shoot them both pretty well. The last I looked, the Texas High Standards were a little lower priced than a new 41, and do not need a trigger job. If I were starting from scratch, that might be a decisive factor.