Looking for advice on a High Standard Duramatic

mainegrw · Feb 23, 2016

I recently picked up a 1955 vintage High Standard Duramatic 101 at my LGS. After a good cleaning and lube, I took it to the range and put about 200 rounds through it, but was dismayed with its accuracy as compared to my Ruger MKI. Right before leaving the range I decided to put a few last rounds through it, and it was during these last 10 rounds that the rear sight fell out. With some assistance from a family member, I was able to get the rear sight back in and tight later that day.

Fast forward a couple weeks to this past Sunday, I took it the the range again with the now tight rear sight, and she shot much better. The only thing now is, where I need to aim to get on target: Typically I use 5 star targets (5 small ovals about 6" in diameter). To hit the center of one of the ovals, I need to aim at the base of the oval, or even a little lower depending on my distance. As the rear sight is fixed in place, I cannot adjust it to compensate.

I am wondering from any of you out there who have had or still have a Duramatic (or any other High Standard .22s) if this is a common thing with this gun? I realize this model was an entry level model, and is not nearly the quality of higher end guns that High Standard made, but I would expect it to be a little more accurate than it currently is.

I would also be interested to know whether or not the adjustable rear sights from an Olympic or Supermatic may be able to be adapted on to the Duramatic to allow me to set the sights to my liking.

s&wchad · Feb 23, 2016

Yours is shooting properly. They were designed for a 6 O'clock hold on an NRA 50' pistol target.

Here's a link to the instruction manual for a model "M" Dura-Matic: http://www.histandard.info/manuals/dura/0245D150R.pdf

Big Cholla · Feb 23, 2016

If you want a 9 to 3 o'clock hold take it to a pistolsmith and have the front sight altered. I have several High Standard M 101s and have altered all of them with fixed sights. An adjustable rear sight can be installed, but it usually involves machining a new dovetail. .........

27 Man · Feb 23, 2016

I have a Supermatic Trophy and had a Duramatic. Two totally different guns. The Duramatic is striker fired, which I could never get used to, and it does shoot really high. In order to get the point of impact down it would necessitate raising the front sight considerably. I really didn't want a gun with a shark fin for a front sight. Sold mine at a gun show to a guy who really wanted it. Want a good economical .22 auto loader? Get a Ruger.

Göring's S&W · Feb 23, 2016

I am wondering from any of you out there who have had or still have a Duramatic (or any other High Standard .22s)

As others have said, the duramatic is very different from High Standard's upper echelon. The duramatic was actually the cheapest model in their lineup. The most deluxe model was the Trophy until the Victor came out, and then the Victor until the much later 10x.

I really have a fondness for High Standard pistols. They were made at 3 factories before going bankrupt in 1984: New Haven, Hamden and East Hartford. They are made again now in TX and for a while I believe Mitchell or some other company manufactured pistols using their name or something. Many of the New Haven guns closely resemble Colt Woodsmans, but at the Hamden factory was when High Standard really came into their own. The Hamden guns came out in the early 1950s. High Standards were made there until the mid 1970s. The 1960 gold medal US pistol shooter used a High Standard. If memory serves, his name was McMillian. Most of the East Hartford guns are not well thought of, and when the quality slipped, people became fed up esp when there are so many other quality 22 target pistols and so ended High Standard.

I have several vintage High Standards currently and I have owned many Woodsmans as well. I still have a Colt 3rd gen match target, and I have fired S&W model 41s. I also used to own a S&W 46, Browning Medalist, challenger, numerous Ruger models: standards, MKIs, MKIIs and I still have my MKIII which was my first pistol. The point is that I would take a high standard over any of them. Yes, they can be fussy with mags, feeding, etc. but there is a mag lip tool that high standard made which I have. Despite the issues that you sometimes come across, usually they can be resolved and I believe they actually are the world's finest .22 caliber autoloader pistol

If anyone is interested in them, further reading, etc. the Tom Dance book on them is excellent. It covers the early post war guns up to the East Hartford lineups.

If I remember, I will post some pics of my High Standards later....

elpac3 · Feb 23, 2016

Correct on the 6 o'clock hold. Same is true with the Sport King. These are designed to shoot high at 50' To get a zero hold you will either need to build up the front sight or lower the rear sight.

Still have my HS model 107 Citation (Hmpt. Conn. made) used for bulls eye shooting. Real tack driver. And yes, magazine tuning for different bullet styles (brands) of ammo is a must and a P.I.A. but once tuned, this is one of the best shooting pistols on the market

dogngun · Feb 23, 2016

High Standard Sentinel .22 revolvers interest me. I have 2, both from the early '50's. Both are excellent shooters. They are alloy frame, heavy barrel 9 shot revolvers with excellent grips and of very interesting design...they were selling cheap when I got mine, but sold for maybe $10 less than a .22 S&W when new, which hurt their sales. Interesting and very different...and NEVER take one apart! NEVER!!!

mainegrw · Feb 24, 2016

Thanks for the advice guys, I am going to leave it alone, and will adjust my shooting style to match. I really like the gun a lot, and despite it being the low end model of High Standard's line-up, I still feel it is a quality gun. I do have a Ruger MK I (late 60s vintage), a well loved family pass-down in my collection, that I have a hard time really enjoying when I go to the range because of feed problems. I have the original magazine and a couple newer ones and none of them can feed reliably without at least one jam per mag. In contrast, I have had no problems with the Duramatic, save for some cycling issues when shooting with subsonic ammo, something I had expected. I have tried a variety of different types of ammo from CCI, Federal, Remington, and Aguila, all with positive results. I also like to the ease of dis-assembly for cleaning as opposed to the Ruger design. I have owned the MKI for several years now, and a 22/45 for a short time as well, and I still have a hard time getting them back together after a cleaning.

Looking for advice on a High Standard Duramatic

mainegrw

Member

s&wchad

Administrator

Big Cholla

Member

27 Man

Member

Göring's S&W

Member

elpac3

Member

dogngun

US Veteran

mainegrw

Member

Similar threads

Latest posts