Browning HP questions?

[Slips73]

Hey everyone, always been a revolver guy, but always wanted a browning hi power and picked up a NIB one that came through our shop from 1987, though it appears to be a MKIII model. Put some altamont grips on it and absolutely love it. I have some questions though about the recoil spring, and the guide rod.

I have shot 100 rounds through the gun of 115 blazer brass, but did notice before i shot it a small divot/ contact area on the the frame and now noticed that it matches up to the underside of the guide rod. Should I be concerned or is this pretty normal for BHP?

My other question is about recoil springs, should they be aligned correctly, I ordered a wilson 18.5# spring and it was a bear to install, possibly kinked? My standard 17# spring isn't perfectly centered.

Underside of guide rod

Frame contact area

recoil spring 18.5#

Some miscellaneous photos of the gun.

thank you in advance

Adam

 

[2agunner]

The only thing I can think of is someone installed the guide rod incorrectly before you got the gun and damaged it. Because, if everything was installed correctly it would have not put those divots there.

As far as the recoil spring being misaligned, my FM hi-power is not perfectly aligned, but the stock spring on my Browning hi-power is perfectly aligned. Therefore, I would not worry about that.

 

[Lonestar57]

Yes, I think what you were seeing on the frame initially is normal initial/ break-in/ wear strikes on the frame. Regarding the spring kink; the heavier spring the more kink. All that matters is that whatever load/ round you're shooting it is functioning properly; feeding, firing, extracting, and ejecting without beating the hell out of the gun frame. 17lb spring is standard correct for the Browning Hi Power. Good luck.

 

[Slips73]

Yes, I think what you were seeing on the frame initially is normal initial/ break-in/ wear strikes on the frame. Regarding the spring kink; the heavier spring the more kink. All that matters is that whatever load/ round you're shooting it is functioning properly; feeding, firing, extracting, and ejecting without beating the hell out of the gun frame. 17lb spring is standard correct for the Browning Hi Power. Good luck.

Thank you, thats what I would imagine, just wanted to make sure the recoil spring being off to the left or right when installed didnt put undue pressure onto either side of the frame while the slide moves out of battery. And thats what I imagined as well about the strike spot on the frame.

-Adam

 

[sub-moa]

It's pretty common wear Adam, not to worry.


FWIW, while your BHP WAS manufactured in '87 (PR), it's NOT a MkIII...your BHP is a typical "Type 73" Vigilante Model.


The MkIII didn't see series production until '89 and can easily be recognized externally...even if the SN isn't visible, by the larger dovetailed rear AND front sights. In addition; the Type 73 extended "Hognose" barrel bushing was deleted, the ejection port was re-shaped at the extractor cut and the ambi-safety and straight...hollowpoint friendly, feed ramp of the MkII were all incorporated in the MkIII.


Hope that helps

 

[OLDSTER]

Congrats on a great purchase. As others have advised. Remember, when installing the recoil spring and guide rod the "flat" surface is up--your photo shows it correctly installed.

 

[OLDSTER]

It's pretty common wear Adam, not to worry.


FWIW, while your BHP WAS manufactured in '87 (PR), it's NOT a MkIII...your BHP is a typical "Type 73" Vigilante Model.


The MkIII didn't see series production until '89 and can easily be recognized externally...even if the SN isn't visible, by the larger dovetailed rear AND front sights. In addition; the Type 73 extended "Hognose" barrel bushing was deleted, the ejection port was re-shaped at the extractor cut and the ambi-safety and straight...hollowpoint friendly, feed ramp of the MkII were all incorporated in the MkIII.


Hope that helps

Correct. Your Hi Power is what Stephen Camp refers to as the "Vigilante" or "Standard Classic" model. Filling the gap of the transition from MKII to MKIII ( ca. 1987-1989). If I'm reading your SN correctly, yours is from 1987.

 

[Slips73]

It's pretty common wear Adam, not to worry.


FWIW, while your BHP WAS manufactured in '87 (PR), it's NOT a MkIII...your BHP is a typical "Type 73" Vigilante Model.


The MkIII didn't see series production until '89 and can easily be recognized externally...even if the SN isn't visible, by the larger dovetailed rear AND front sights. In addition; the Type 73 extended "Hognose" barrel bushing was deleted, the ejection port was re-shaped at the extractor cut and the ambi-safety and straight...hollowpoint friendly, feed ramp of the MkII were all incorporated in the MkIII.


Hope that helps

Thats interesting, I assumed it was a MKIII because it had no drain hole in the dust cover, was not aware of a gap year of models, are the vigilante models generally considered good?

 

[jdlii]

Great looking BHP! Enjoy!

Everything looks absolutely normal to me.

 

[Xfuzz]

Nice HP...as stated normal wear.
I had this 1995 vintage MKIII show today.
Appears to be a very low round count.
Minimal wear.
I like packin a HP. But my T series and 70's
vintage have jumped in price.
I will swap out the grips and dump the ambi-safety
and this will be a good carry HP.

 

[Qc Pistolero]

There is not many ways that you can put back together any of Mr John M.Browning's guns and have it functionning.And a SA handgun being what it is,it is normal that there will be some contact points showing wear.
This being said,your HP(or GP as France names it)looks supergood with them white grips!Congrats for a very nice looking gun.

 

[Gregor]

Stephen Camp's guide still available

New Page 1

Helpful information, and you get to help his widow too.

Gregor

 

[JayFramer]

I love the "noine milly Brownin" as the Brits do say.

Had a minty Mk III that I bought for a song but sold it last year. Still kicking myself in the patooty over that one!