-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Sidearms & Scatterguns The real Highpower is back
- Thread starter 308pirate
- Start date
They changed the overall lines of it or something. It looks too “boxy” compared to the original…
That being said, the checkering is a useful upgrade, and the ambi controls will be appreciated by many. I’ll keep my eye on this one, I still need to get a High Power back in the safe after foolishly letting two very nice MKIIs go several years back.
That being said, the checkering is a useful upgrade, and the ambi controls will be appreciated by many. I’ll keep my eye on this one, I still need to get a High Power back in the safe after foolishly letting two very nice MKIIs go several years back.
Anyone saying they will buy one when they could buy one for the last 90 years except they didn't.
L O L
L O L
Is it made in either Turkey or Brazil?
Looks like one version has a shorter barrel so you don't see the classic "Hi Power" cut look at the barrel forward of the dust cover.
Looks like one version has a shorter barrel so you don't see the classic "Hi Power" cut look at the barrel forward of the dust cover.
All three in the picture have a slide that is thinner in front of the dust cover. Where do you see the one without that cut?
No they all have the High Power cut so different from the 1911 with its ball milled cut under the barrel. It actually looks pretty cool to see a 1911 with Hi Power cuts.
The thing is the pistol to the right has a shorter than typical barrel length and it lessens the impact of the milling that gives the Hi Power that "svelte" long front end appearance.
I think that is why the other poster claimed they look "boxy" or different than classic Hi Powers.
Im guessing all offerings will be from the same manufacturer.....just different roll marks.
Its all about capitalizing on the profit.
I'm guessing not, since FN probably has all of its own tooling intact.
SA buys the big forgings from someone in South Korea. You can bet they're not shit.
I didn’t stutter.
See the additional images in this article:New FN preview
The slide serrations are thicker/fewer lines per inch. The newer lockup has given the slide and barrel hood a boxy/square look, the slide looks thicker, the dust cover looks thicker, the rear sights are kind of oddly square/tall looking, and the beavertail almost like it has a safety or has changeable inserts. It has an obvious HP influence, but to ME, it looks kind of like an FN HP, FN509, Sig P226, and a Ruger P89 all got put into a blender and this is what came out. It’ll have to grow on me. It’s not the same svelte gun the original HP was, IMO.
I didn’t stutter.
New FN preview
The slide serrations are thicker/fewer lines per inch. The newer lockup has given the slide and barrel hood a boxy/square look, the slide looks thicker, the dust cover looks thicker, the rear sights are kind of oddly square/tall looking, and the beavertail almost like it has a safety or has changeable inserts. It has an obvious HP influence, but to ME, it looks kind of like an FN HP, FN509, Sig P226, and a Ruger P89 all got put into a blender and this is what came out. It’ll have to grow on me. It’s not the same svelte gun the original HP was, IMO.
Well, it's FN's design so a Highpower is whatever they say it is.
Doesn’t change the fact that it looks funny, IMO. Not bad, but just not pure Highpower. Updating it for the 21st Century obviously means some changes. Based on classic looks alone though, the SA-35 looks more like a true Highpower. We’ll see how FN’s new offering pans out.
Same. I run several Glocks, but my most recent handgun purchases have been a few Sig P-series and an LTT RDO. I could use another HP to keep my 1911 some company in the SAO corner.
If you think this is the real Hi Power you’re in for a treat when you realize it’s about 25% bigger than the real thing. I’ve had one in my hands and it’s probably a good gun, but if you’re looking for a real FN HP you’re straight up not gonna have a good time.
It's FN's design. If they say this is the real Highpower, then it is.
This line of thinking is the same as saying an Explorer isn't a real Ford because it isn't a Model T
The CZ 75 and SP-01 never left.
The P-09 and P-07 are my all time favorite polymer handguns. I also have a pair of P-10s and no matter how good you can get their triggers they still aren't as good as those with a real hammer. Glocks are at the bottom of the list.
No SAO anything in my safe. Can't stand manual safeties.
No, it’s not. The Explorer isn’t a Model T. It’s right there in the name. “Explorer.”
Now, if they’d named the Explorer the Model T instead, and marketed it as just an improved version of the classic Model T we all know and love, like FN is doing with this HP, then sure.
A larger, less attractive, and less svelte HP is an HP in name and somewhat overall appearance only.
Companies abandon lines all the time once tooling gets to the end of its life.
The Smith and Wesson 52 is a grail gun for many and the reason it went away was because the tooling was worn and replacing it was cost prohibitive in light of sales.....guessing people are happy with the 8 ring and were not willing to spend the money to consistently hit the X ring with those 52 objects of magic.
Maybe FN will bring its Hi Power tooling up to speed but I think they will just be capitalizing on their roll mark and using subs to increase profit.
Gun people seem to be less discerning.
While I love steel and walnut just about everyone else craves plastic and the capacity to miss alot.
Last edited:
Why? I found the one gun I have with the u-notch to work pretty well for quick sight allignment. Going to try and get same sights on some other guns.
I didn’t stutter.
New FN preview
The slide serrations are thicker/fewer lines per inch. The newer lockup has given the slide and barrel hood a boxy/square look, the slide looks thicker, the dust cover looks thicker, the rear sights are kind of oddly square/tall looking, and the beavertail almost like it has a safety or has changeable inserts. It has an obvious HP influence, but to ME, it looks kind of like an FN HP, FN509, Sig P226, and a Ruger P89 all got put into a blender and this is what came out. It’ll have to grow on me. It’s not the same svelte gun the original HP was, IMO.
Wow that really indicates this is a different pistol than the P-35.
My pictured HP is a svelte, refined weapon of an earlier time
except for the fact mine was made by slave labor and probably pried from the dead hand of a German Waffen SS animal, it is all that.
I guarantee that FN, like most all mfg business, subcontracts some operations and processes. There is nothing wrong with that.
Well, they own it so they get to decide what it is.
I'm not sure how that's so hard to understand.
In any case, it looks like they've brought the pistol closer to the 21st century to keep it relevant. Nobody gives a shit about relics of the past except collectors.
All it really seems to need to truly make it relevant is an optics plate system.
Substitute Mustang for Explorer, same point.
Today's Mustang shares very little with the original. But Ford says that's what a Mustang is and no one argues.
At least GM has the common courtesy to refer to various iterations of its pushrod V8 with generation numbers.
Seems like this should be a High Power MkII or something similar (almost suggested “High Power 2.0“ and then realized that it's no longer 2001).
I'm still interested and look forward to the opportunity to handle one in person.
This just in: FN releases a 1911. Keeps the core components that makes the JMB design great…
They did. The original was "HI Power", the new one is "High Power".
The take down lever is so they could copy the glock barrel lock up, lol.
The real Hi Power has an actual take down notch. Rack slide, push safety into takedown notch, removed slide release lever, remove slide and components.
I can’t lol enough at this one.
The real Hi Power has an actual take down notch. Rack slide, push safety into takedown notch, removed slide release lever, remove slide and components.
I can’t lol enough at this one.
I had one for many years and can't remember why I sold it. It was a good gun with a lousy trigger and not all that popular in the eighties and nineties. It's funny after waiting all these years they walk it back out and everyone is like Oh Wow a classic is back. Yeah right.
Last edited:
According to some of you
Mustang
Not a Mustang
Mustang
Not a Mustang
Like I said before, Ford decides what a Mustang is.
They should have rebirthed the original name.....
Grande Puissance
So we could say "Im getting some Great Pussy!"
Grande Puissance
So we could say "Im getting some Great Pussy!"
According to some of you
Mustang
Not a Mustang
As the owner of a 5th gen Camaro, I consider myself to be a leading expert in the category of "new models that look vaguely like the decades-old original but share absolutely no components and really don't even perform the same way".
$1200 for this thing? You know the market is fucked up when my first thought is "that's less than I expected".
The only way I'd be interested in one is if it
With the above changes it could be a USPSA carry optics contender
- Came with a DA/SA trigger and decocker and
- Came with the optic plate system of the FN 509
With the above changes it could be a USPSA carry optics contender
Why DA with a decocker?
Seems like extra weight and complexity with no return on investment.
A decocker adds an imperceptible amount of weight. Decockers add no measurable complexity to a handgun.
A decocker is infintely safer in the transition from cocked to decocked than doing so by pressing the trigger with a finger on the hammer.
USPSA rules do not allow cocked and locked starts in Production or Carry Optics. If your DA/SA pistol doesn't have a decocker you have to lower the hammer by pinching it between two fingers and lowering while the trigger is pressed back.
The 92 is seeing a resurgence in USPSA, particularly the optics capable versions from Langdon and Beretta
