With all the new pistols made in the last 100 years, I'm still quite amazed that no one has improved on the 1911 or Hi Power in any meaningful way. Take my LW Commander... It's an improved upon 1911, but it's all Browning. It weighs 28 ounces and holds 9 rounds of .45 (I carry 8, I don't top off). The ergonomics are outstanding and all the controls are exactly where they should be. The pistol is abbreviated from the original design, but in my book, still qualifies as a full size pistol. But most importantly, it's slim, like all Browning designs. Almost all other 9mm's are thicker than the 1911, and I've yet to see a .45 that even comes close to being as thin as the 1911. For me, the LW Commander is just plain perfect.

The Hi Power's much the same story. All steel, it's only a few oz heavier than my LW Commander and it holds 13 rounds. As for packability, it's actually interchangable with a Commander holster, so anything you say about the 1911 applies to the Hi Power in that department. What's more, I've yet to see any pistol "out-reliable" the Hi Power, specifically the post 1982 Hi Powers with the flat style feed ramp.

Anyone see it different?

Agree completely with your assessment of the LW Commander. I have four of them now (two real, two homebuilt clones) and love them all.

As to the P.35, I really want to like it, but it has some annoying flaws. Here's what I posted on another board when it came up a couple weeks ago:

The P.35 feels great in the hand and looks hella cool but it has some mechanical issues:

1. That annoying mag disconnect, which also stiffens the trigger pull and prevents clean mag ejection. (It can be removed, or reworked to much friendlier function.)

2. Very difficult to get a good trigger pull on a P.35, and it's got nothing to do with the "complicated" trigger linkage (which isn't really complicated at all, it's actually ingeniously simple). It's because the mainspring is an important part of the recoil-absorbing system for that wonderfully slim, light slide. The factory spec on the mainspring is a stunning 32 pounds. By comparison, a stiff USGI 1911 mainspring is 24 pounds, and "target" mainsprings of 18 pounds (or even less) will reliably run the gun. The stronger the mainspring, the more pressure on the hammer/sear interface, and hence the heavier the trigger pull. You can put a lighter mainspring in a P.35, but it will be at the expense of the gun's life. The lighter you go, the faster you'll crack either the slide or the frame.

3. Thumb safety isn't as well placed on P.35 as on 1911, and it doesn't work as well, and it's much more complicated to fit or alter (although it has been done).

4. P.35 is MUCH more difficult to disassemble and/or work on than 1911. While a 1911 can be taken down to the bare frame with NO tools, and reassembled with nothing more than a pencil or ballpoint pen or paper clip, you almost need three hands and a bench vise to strip a P.35 (not really, but you'll WISH you had them), and a tool or two (such as a narrow drift punch or equivalent).

As soon as Ciener announced his .22 conversion for P.35 back in early 2004, I ordered one and put it on mine, and it's worked so well that I haven't had the 9mm top half back on it since. It makes an absolutely delightful range/plinking gun (I replaced the mainspring with a much lighter one--no idea the poundage on it but I got the trigger down to a crisp 5 or so pounds instead of the horrendous, gritty 12 or 14 pounds it came out of the box with; but then power/recoil isn't an issue with .22). But for social work, IMHO the 1911 is still superior.

For a social 9mm, I still haven't seen, shot, or handled anything I like any better than the (now sadly discontinued) S&W third generation 39/59 series guns. Wonderful stuff.

I'm basically a wheelgunner so I may be speaking out of turn but:

• Isn't the SIG-style locking system, used by just about everyone else these days, a significant improvement over the lug-and-groove system?
• Reportedly, the rotating barrel of pistols such as the full-size Beretta PX4 help reduce felt recoil. No significant improvement?
• Kahr's patented offset feed ramp allows a slightly lower bore axis, reducing muzzle flip. No significant improvement?

Forgive me if this was only intended to be a thread about personal preference but, objectively, I think there have been some significant advances.

I have really tried to like the P-35 but just can't do it. Snake's comments are right on.

I also freely admit that I am hardwired to favor the 1911. I even had one before the USAF taught me to love them.

I disagree- mildly Kevin- because I think there have been big improvements in the 1911- beavertails and ambi safties are good examples but the guns made today are vastly improved over those made 15-20 years ago. I credit Kimber with a lot of that with advances both in features and manufacture.

It used to take several hours and a big hammer to get a good slide to frame fit but new guns today have little or no play in the slide. Stock guns today almost always function reliably and many have accuracy that is not far below what we used to get with full blown accuracy jobs. Sights are better and usually put bullets where they should go.

I was especially fond of the S&W 3913 but if I had to go to a 9mm today it would be the M&P.

It would be possible to set up a P.35 into what I'd consider a suitable carry gun (and at that point, it would be darn close to perfect), but it far exceeds my skillset. I'd have to send one off to Novak or C&S or someone of that caliber, and it would prolly cost me between $500 and $1000 to have what I'd want done to it. (And I would NOT want it coming back with somebody's moustache engraved on the damn slide, either!) And then I (knowing me) would have so damn much money in it that I wouldn't want to actually carry it.

I've put a recorded 6000 troublefree rounds of .22 through my Ciener-converted one in the last three years, though, and loved every single one of them. A delightful gun to actually shoot!

I prefer the P35 over all others with the exception of an L-Frame revolver.

I replaced the hammer spring with a 26lb'er, left the recoil spring alone, removed the mag disconnect, now reinstalled for IDPA and no problem with the mags as the new ones have the rat trap spring to bury them into the ground. This BHP in 9mm is 1995 vintage.

Well, there's only one true combat gun, the 1911. all the others are 'wannabes'. I think what Kevin is trying to say is that while there have been modification improvements, the basic design is unchanged in over 100 years. While it works much better, an Ambi-safety still works the same way as the original. As does the Beavertail. And the others are still playing catch-up!

The Sig-style lockup isn't really an improvement, just different. Were it an improvement Sigs would be more accurate than equally-priced 1911s. Such is, on the whole, not the case.

As for the P-35, there are only two 9mms I'd carry. One is the original CZ-75. The other is the P-35.

I agree with Snakes comment about the original BHP safety. It's simply unworkable.

The issues with the mainspring and takedown are somewhat related, being ammo induced. When the BHP was developed, most military 9mm was being loaded for submachine guns/machine pistols. To say their primers were hard is an understatement. Remember the firing pin of most WWII era machine pistols were projections machined on the bolt face and they slam fired.

I think the slide removal on the BHP is the most elegant thing I've ever seen. Detail stripping the slide is more complex than with the 1911, but the changes in ammunition in the intervening years made it unnecessary to pull the slide down that far in the field.

Agreed, but it can be removed in about 15 minutes.

This is a common misconception, once the magazine disconnect is removed, the Hi Power is no more difficult to do a trigger job on than a 1911. You can get lighter trigger pulls with the 1911, but once you get under about 2.5lbs I think your gun is a range toy.


Okay, some truth here and some non-truths. The P-35 does NOT need a 32lb mainspring, and for the first half of the P-35's life, it didn't have the 32lb mainspring. IIRC, the 32lb mainspring was added at the request of the British who encountered some Egyptian SMG ammo that wouldnt reliably work in their P-35's because the primers were so hard. Since the Hi Power has always been a military pistol first and foremost, the engineers at FN decided to just make the 32lb mainspring standard (IIRC, beginning with the 1965 model). True, it does help slow the slide some and will add to a longer life. But if you take it down to 28 or 25, I can guarantee you that the P-35 will out-last you and probably your child provided you stick with standard pressure ammunition.

I agree, and with the exception of the very short lived Novak thumb stafety, there have been few good replacements. The C&S is an exact copy of the one that Sarco made back in the '70's, and I wouldn't be surprised if it actually IS the same one. I have welded up a couple to make them right, but it's a lot of work. The factory Browning ambi-safety is just shy of an abomination. If you hold a pistol with a high thumb hold, the factory ambi will tear you up. Since I'm lazy these days, I just substitute the C&S, which is good, but not great. As for fitting, I find that the P-35 fitting procedure is just about the same as the 1911; it's a piece of cake.

Now I've worked on nearly 10,000 Hi Powers. In the early '80's I worked for the importer of most of the Inglis Hi Powers from WW II, and I had to disassemble and reassemble just about all of them, because we re-Parked them all. Taking them apart is not hard at all, but yes, you do need one pin punch. Putting them back together is rough though because it takes some serious finesse to get the sear and ejector back in the gun. When working at Pacific International, we fashioned a metal clothes pin (for lack of a better term), to hold the hammer while putting the gun back together; this made it a snap.

From a manufacturing standpoint, you bet. Since it's inception, most every other pistol has copied it because it vastly simplifies manufacture and drives cost down. I don't know that it's any "stronger' per-se.

Still, I've yet to encounter a Sig that is nearly as slim as the Hi Power, nor have I encountered one that was as reliable.

I think we're in agreement; like I said, Browning can be improved upon, but I don't think he's been beat.

The 32lb mainspring is a post-WW II change. The original mainspring was 28lbs IIRC. Pick up a Pre-War Hi Power and you'll feel the difference.

I agree that it shouldn't be harder to do a trigger job on than a 1911, and in fact it should theoretically be easier, because the sear breaks perpendicular to the axis of recoil instead of parallel to it, meaning that no amount of slide jolt should knock it off. Agreed about that light of a trigger pull. I'm not interested in anything under 3-3.5 pounds even for a range toy, and for an actual social gun, I prefer 4-5 pounds. 4-5 pounds is very easy to get with a 1911, but takes some REAL work to get down to with P.35. IME, anyway.



I seem to recall that the original spec on the hammer spring was 26 or 27 pounds before they went to 32, which is still a couple pounds over a full-strength GI 1911 spring, which almost no one uses anymore. Agreed you don't need that much spring to set off modern commercial ammo. I think you can buy reduced power P.35 springs down to 22 pounds, (IIRC), but the same spring maker offers them for 1911 down to 16 (again, IIRC). I have NO idea what the rating is on the spring in my .22 right now because I started with something else and cut it. Haven't shot it with 9mm since I got the Ciener unit but my impression is that .22LR ammo is actually HARDER to set off reliably than CF so I should still be okay, at least as regards ignition.


Sarco made P.35 thumb safeties? Interesting. Never heard of that. I have one from Fed-Ord I bought on a blister pack. I think I had to buy it in combo with an extended slide stop, which I've never used. Unfortunately, it doesn't work on my gun--it goes in, but when it's on, you can pull the trigger and the hammer will drop, which I deem to be Not A Good Thing.

You must know some trick I don't. At least with a 1911, you can assemble it without the grip safety and look in there and see what the thumb safety is interfering with--can't do that with a P.35.


True, taking anything apart isn't that difficult, it's putting it back together. I CAN strip and reassemble a P.35; I just dread it every time I have to do it. I can do a 1911 in my favorite TV chair while watching TV. The P.35 I have to do upstairs, on the kitchen table, with plenty of room and good light. It's not a casual operation.

Well, I haven’t found it to be any different from a 1911 (or most any other pistol for that matter), you’re just stoning to get the sear engagement to the desired breaking point…maybe I just haven’t been looking at it the same way as you, but it just has never been difficult for me.


I’ll bet you’re right…I’m thinking 27lbs sounds better than 28, but that’s just splitting hairs. The Hi Power does have a weak point that a heavier than normal mainspring helps. The Hi Power’s sear spring isn’t the greatest design in the world. They work fine, but they get weak as time goes by and you’ll notice that a well used Hi Power will often drop to half cock if you drop the slide on an empty chamber. It’s exceedingly rare to find one that will be so worn that it will drop to half cock while shooting; I’ve never seen that happen.

Again, you’re right, it was Fed-Ord (hey, I haven’t slept for two days, so I’m definitely not on my “A” game today, so go easy on the handicapped).


You can look inside the frame through the hole for the right grip panel and see the engagement.

If you're referring to the ambi safety that's on the Mk III version, I disagree - I have no problem riding it with my thumb when firing the pistol. In fact, a few years back when I took a high-round-count pistol class, it was the 1911 shooters who had band-aids all over their hands by the second day of class, not the Hi-Power shooters.

Removal of the factory mag disconnect improves the trigger and overall handling - you can clear the gun without inserting an empty magazine. You have to put that cr@p IN for IDPA now? They actually WANT you to use a dummy mag when you're clearing your pistol at the end of a stage? That's exactly opposite to the situation when I was participating. Gee, get away from something for a couple of years, and it goes to . . . heck. (Either that, or Bill Wilson is making more 1911s in 9mm and would much rather you used one of his pistols rather than a HiPower. )

Anyway, I often carry a Mk III BHP. I installed an 18.5lb recoil spring, upgraded the pistol to modern specs by removing the mag disconnect, polished the feed ramp a bit, and added Spegel grips . . . the only real criticism I have is that the trigger reset is longer than ideal. But overall, I like the pistol a lot.