Hi Power

[Ivan the Butcher]

Picked up a nice condition Belgian Browning Hi-Power from 1954 with adjustable sights. I got a family discount that made it about 1/3 of Gun Broker asking price for a shooter grade. No box or papers, came with the Browning rug and holster.

My only question would be: 115, 124. or 147 ammo?

Ivan

See post #20 for corrected date.

 

[Bullet Bob]

I'll give you the answer to your question in trade for a picture of your new gun.

 

[squidsix]

124.
I have several BHPs and they all seem to shoot 147 and 115 slightly less well

 

[minconrevo]

If your BHP has the stock barrel, with the skinny rifling, it may well prefer 115 FMJ's. Likely won't shoot well with 147's or even 135's. Also likely it won't like lead/plastic coated lead bullets. Still, every gun will have it's own preferences.

 

[gwpercle]

Picked up a nice condition Belgian Browning Hi-Power from 1954 with adjustable sights. I got a family discount that made it about 1/3 of Gun Broker asking price for a shooter grade. No box or papers, came with the Browning rug and holster.

My only question would be: 115, 124. or 147 ammo?

Ivan

I have come to prefer the 124 grain Truncated Cone loads .

I reload a lot of cast bullet ammo and had NOE make a 124 gr. TC mould with a gas check for driving the cast lead 124 gr. TC bullets to 1000 fps ...or a little more ... good balance of bullet weight and velocity with the 124 gr. weight !
But thay's just me ... they all have a place !
Gary

 

[Ivan the Butcher]

I'll give you the answer to your question in trade for a picture of your new gun.

I don't post pics. My Luddite ways won't conform to new-fangled things like online photos.

Ivan

 

[BLACKHAWKNJ]

Had good results with lead bullets in my 1966 HP.

 

[zeke]

Mostly warm Win 115 fmjhb through mine, with occasional plus p 124 jhp. If shooting lead, might want to slug the barrel. The only luck i had ( (Browning version) was with 125 gn rnfp .357 dia lead. Am of belief the hollow base on the win 115 fmj's expand a little with with quick warm loads to improve the accuracy.

Don't have any actual experience with that era, but have read they can be picky with hp's.

 

[minconrevo]

. . .If shooting lead, might want to slug the barrel. The only luck i had ( (Browning version) was with 125 gn rnfp .357 dia lead. . . .

I had a late 1960's BHP whose stock barrel shot well with 125 gr hard lead H&G #7 cone nose bullets, sized .358. I think that the "hard lead" and the "sized to .001 over bore was what made things work. The cone nose fed perfectly 100% to boot.

Slug your bore is a fine suggestion if you plan to run lead or coated lead.

 

[robvious]

my father always used 124 truncated cone in his 1976 BHP.. over all length mattered most for his...

 

[bobsguns]

Regardless of brand or model, all my nines shoot best with 124gr ammo.

My HP is one of the Springfields, which doesn't relate to your question at all. I just like bragging............

 

[Narragansett]

I would use 124 gr, which I believe is the nato standard.

 

[alwslate]

My 1977 vintage BHP shoots best with 115gr ammo but requires fairly warm ammo to always cycle the action with it's original springs.

 

[gwpercle]

I don't post pics. My Luddite ways won't conform to new-fangled things like online photos.

Ivan

Me Too ... Luddite's United , we don't/can't do photo's !
Gary

 

[stansdds]

Every firearm is a rule unto itself and the only way to find out what your newly acquired Hi-Power likes is to test the various bullet weights and ammo from different manufacturers. Not all 9mm pistols like 115 grain bullets and those that do may be more accurate with loads from one or two specific manufacturers.

 

[Muley Gil]

Me Too ... Luddite's United , we don't/can't do photo's !
Gary

Assuming you are using a laptop and have your pictures stored on said laptop, posting pictures is easy-peasy. Just go down to the "Manage Attachments" block and follow the prompts.

 

[zeke]

Assuming you are using a laptop and have your pictures stored on said laptop, posting pictures is easy-peasy. Just go down to the "Manage Attachments" block and follow the prompts.

Please believe if i can do it ANYONE can!

 

[Drm50]

I've only got one HP at present and it's the Comp.model. Normally for 9mm I don't bother to load. For this gun I did the whole meal deal. I tried a dozen cast bullets, sized 355, 356, 357. Also several Jacketed bullets and powders. The gun shoots excellent but not any better than 115 FMJ. Other HPs I've had all shot 115fmj the best. Once in 70s had brand new HP, M39
& Commander and shot them off rest with Remington 115FMJ. The HP was most accurate but off hand the 39 was easier to shoot because of the sights. The Commander was a lemon no matter what you fed it.

 

[collectordude]

Can we see a picture ?

 

[Ivan the Butcher]

Date update: My brother told me it was from 1954 (and the incomplete SN would be, but with the date code adjusted SN, it's from 1972. 18 years younger than I thought. Real paper book beat out the internet again. That makes is 53 instead of 71. Not a deal beaker in any way.

The oldest S&W I own is and 1896 Lemon Squeezer (38 S&W), the oldest functional gun I own is a 1886 Spanish Reformado rolling block in 43 Reformado. The oldest gun in partial form I have is an 1855 Colt Root Revolver. These are all modern compared to my best friend that has owned "French & Indian War" guns and worked on much older Brown Bess Muskets. Things made from "Blue Steel and Black Walnut" will be here long after the polymer guns return to the earth, as I will too. We don't really own any truly durable thing. We are just the caretakers! I am at least the third caretaker plus at least two dealers for this gun, my nephew had no interest in it. I raised my kids to prize older technology. If I still have this when I return to the dust, I'm sure they will all desire for it to reside with them! Since I have a S&W M&P9c for carry, I doubt I'll carry this much (just like I seldom carry the Colt Commanders I own).

Ivan

 

[ruger 22]

I carried a BHP for a bit over 40 years and my ammo of choice was the 147. Plenty accurate enough for what was needed. I just like heavier bullets. Today being long retired I still shoot the gun every now and then and use whatever I can get for the least money. They all work and give reasonable close range accuracy but for business use I liked the 147.

 

[Kp321]

1972 with adjustable sights is ok, 1954 with adjustable ones is a no-go.

 

[Ivan the Butcher]

1972 with adjustable sights is ok, 1954 with adjustable ones is a no-go.

I was wondering about that too. But I wouldn't worry until I looked the date up myself.

Ivan

 

[SGT ROCK 11B]

Date update: My brother told me it was from 1954 (and the incomplete SN would be, but with the date code adjusted SN, it's from 1972. 18 years younger than I thought. Real paper book beat out the internet again. That makes is 53 instead of 71. Not a deal beaker in any way.

Ivan

Ivan a 71 is great because it has an exterior extractor instead of an interior extractor that was discontinued in 62 and is obsolete and is a hard-to-find part if it breaks. Sarge

 

[SGT ROCK 11B]

I had a late 1960's BHP whose stock barrel shot well with 125 gr hard lead H&G #7 cone nose bullets, sized .358. I think that the "hard lead" and the "sized to .001 over bore was what made things work. The cone nose fed perfectly 100% to boot.

Slug your bore is a fine suggestion if you plan to run lead or coated lead.

Great bullet choice there. For 125 grain LRN I go with 3.5 grains of Bullseye and that is about 2000 rounds for a pound of Bullseye powder.

 

[Rock185]

I've owned a number of Hi Powers since the '60s. I wondered too about a 1954 Hi Power with adjustable sights. I admire you guys who were able to develop cast bullet loads that gave good accuracy. I tried all manner of cast bullets in some of mine. Never did find a cast bullet load that grouped as well as jacketed bullets in my Hi Powers. Tried all kinds of weights, diameters, profiles, etc. No luck. My Hi Powers with BarSto barrels handled cast bullets just fine, but the factory barrels; not so much..

Over a period of 30+ years, I owned three of the GP Comp models. The previous owner of one favored cast bullets, loaded them for the GP, and said it would not shoot. I acquired it anyway. The barrel was leaded up worse than any I'd ever seen. Much elbow grease later, a clean barrel with jacketed bullets shot about as well as any pistol I owned. FWIW, most accurate 9mm bullet I ever used in the Hi Power and others was the old Sierra 115 grain JHC. Don't know if that exact bullet configuration is still available. In factory ammo, the Federal 9BP 115 grain JHP has proven to be excellent as to reliability and accuracy in my guns..

 

[M29since14]

I too have had much good luck with 9BP over the years, but I haven't bought it for quite some time now.

Generally, with any 9mm handgun I start with 124 grain and branch out from there. Nothing seems to be a given with 9mm handguns.

My S&W 1911 Pro 9mm will shoot rings around any other ammo with Federal AE 147 grain FMJ. Another exceptional round has been Federal's 124 gr. Hydra-Shok, and later the HST, but you have to be pretty spendy to shoot that stuff regularly. My 3913 shoots like a target pistol with it.

 

[sjmjax]

My experience with both HiPower and other 9mm pistols is 125 & 147 grain bullets are generally more accurate and consistent.

My theory for this is it's due to the longer bearing surface of the heavier bullets.
Comparing same design and same manufacturer, the true diameter bearing area is longer in the heavier bullets.

The very short bearing surface on the 115 grain bullet allows random rounds to not have their natural center of rotation aligned with the bore axis. Causing the bullet to leave the muzzle slightly out of rotational balance.

I believe that this principle is at least partially responsible why bullets like the 38 wad cutter is so accurate. That huge bearing area makes it virtually impossible to travel the bore without perfect alignment of both axis.

 

[Darkenfast]

I would use 124 gr, which I believe is the nato standard.

NATO does not specify the weight for a 9mm bullet but gives a range of 108-128 grains. It specifies dimensions and pressures. The previous U.S. version was the M882 (124-grain bullet at close to 1200 fps from an M9 Beretta and still available from Winchester), and the current M1152 (115 grains at just over 1300 fps from an M17 Sig).

Pressures and velocity do not always correlate, but I would estimate that in American civilian terms the M882 is between regular and +p, and the M1152 is definitely in +p territory.

 

[Darkenfast]

A completely off-topic piece of trivia to add to my above post: You have to go back to the full blackpowder .45 Colt loads in 7 1/2 inch barreled SAAs to beat the foot-pound energy of the M1152 loads!

I do sometimes use the M882 rounds in my old Hi Power, but I won't be using the M1152 rounds.