Current state of (your) thinking on .40 in BHP

[gak]

The Browning Hi Power has been out for quite some time now chambered in .40. What do you .40 and/or BHP fans think of this specific chambering pairing by now? Is this a good marriage? Is the chassis fully up to the .40? Early reports of having to watch/replace springs more frequently than the 9, etc.--just rumor or fact? Any other issues--real or perceived? Any changes/improvements over the years in this or other areas? Or none needed? I've always been fond of the BHP (and .40 separately), finding it to have some of the best ergos around--thanks largely to a gripframe that fits my smallish hands--and apparently a lot of other folk (with all sorts of hands)--"just so." So, I've thought--at least on paper, and especially in the SA-only world, the BHP .40 would be the best of all worlds. How close am I in that thought?

I realize there's the search function that'd probably answer most technical questions, but thought getting some fresh perspectives on this classic would be good, especially amidst the polymer craze.

 

[IanS]

I owned one for awhile and I really liked it (just preferred the more svelte classic 9mm version). As far as long term durability I haven't encountered too many people who have put in lots of rounds through them (meaning 20,000+ rounds) like other .40's with larger circulations (Glock, USP, M&P, 4006 etc). Sorry I couldn't be more help.

 

[Mosin44az]

Haven't read any reports. It's not a common gun. I do recall when it came out, Duane Thomas did an article on its development and it sounded like FN put a huge amount of time in making sure it worked right. They even delayed its introduction because a couple of defense loads weren't feeding right, and they waited until it fed EVERYTHING. I would have confidence in buying one, just based on what I read.

 

[Sarge]

This is one of those situations where you must decide if you want a particular pistol, or what a pistol can do.

The Brownings are svelte, functional pistols.

A Glock 23, on the other hand, is a functional pistol period.

 

[zombieslayer]

The gunshop down the road has a BHP in 40 and I've been really tempted. Awesome gun and caliber, imo.

 

[DrBundy]

Love it. Had one, sold it, regretted it ever since. As soon as I find one in really good condition, stainless, I'm grabbing it. The first 9mm I ever shot was a BHP, and nothing yet has ever been as smooth as that one, as far as production guns go. Beretta 92 comes close, but if the Beretta is like butter, then the BHP is like Hollandaise sauce. Since .40 is my preferred caliber, that's what I prefer to have my preferred weapons chambered in.

~A

 

[EdInk]

Stick with the 9mm.

 

[pythagorean]

I had one in 1995 when they first started appearing in the .40. It held 10 rounds and was very nice. Extremely accurate at the shooting range too.
Never had a problem with it. The design is a bit beefier looking and feeling than the slimmer 9mm. Apparently the old milled steel design has problems with the larger caliber when firing many many rounds, but if you buy the newer version that is cast forged instead of milled steel this is not a problem.

If it's made in Belgium "assembled in Portugal" it is the newer version which is rugged as a rock.

This is not to start an argument over which 9mm only is better, all made and assembled in Belgium v made in Belgium and assembled in Portugal. Collectors prefer the T or 69 series as purists in milled and machined steel.

 

[jon_in_wv]

I haven't shot the .40 but I can't imagine that it equals the 9mms smoothness and balance with the heavier slide required for the .40.

A Glock 23, on the other hand, is a functional pistol period.

So are a lot of pistols but since the OP was asking about the Browning it would probably show a lot better manners to answer that question instead.

 

[pythagorean]

Personally I can't understand why Glocks seem to be inserted in posts around here as often as they are.
I hate Glocks and I hate insertions of Glocks when the OP is not even asking about them.
I realize there is quite a following of plastic pistol owners and believers but we should at least keep our lines of discussion related to the topic instead of getting into an argument.

 

[Jimmy10mm]

I just sold a Beretta 96D 40. That is a DAO version of the 92. Beautiful gun but the trigger was way too long of a pull for my comfort level. If the Browning 40 trigger is anything like the HP in 9mm I would pass on it. Read up on doing a trigger job on one of the old HPs and you'll find that due to the design you can never get a smooth clean breaking trigger such as can be had on a 1911. If that is important to you. OTOH, Glocks and Sigs have triggers that suit me very well but everyone is different.

 

[gak]

Thanks for the replies to this point--keep 'em coming! I had started to feel the guilts in another thread where I replied to a "allowed one gun only" scenario that, among autos, I'd be looking at one of the newer, hi cap plastic fantastics in .40. While I'm sure that approach has its many merits, I noticed others replying HP (no specific caliber necessarily), and thought "yeah, how could I have forgotten one of my favorites?" Got caught up in the hi-cap c*** (in a good way ) I guess. To date, I've had--and really enjoyed--for 15 or so years one of the first few years' Daewoo DH40s. 11 capacity (but mostly post-ban 10s out there), but have always felt for my modest paws, it was a bit chunky of grip, especially for "just 11" double stack though it may be. DA reach "ok" for me, but just barely. But I did develop a fondness for the round in the process. I'd been admiring the HP for years for its sveltness and related ergos as mentioned, and overall quality, and have had some range time with a friend's 9 HP.

 

[Sarge]

Personally I can't understand why Glocks seem to be inserted in posts around here as often as they are.
I hate Glocks and I hate insertions of Glocks when the OP is not even asking about them.

And the title to this thread is...Current state of (your) thinking on .40 in BHP

My 'thinking on it' includes evaluating it as a carry gun- against what I am carrying now. If you hate Glocks, don't buy them. But I seriously doubt you are going to read many threads about 40 caliber service pistols which do not mention them.

 

[jon_in_wv]

Right it says BHP not "what YOU are a fanboy of". I have NO hatred of Glocks. This is thread is clearly for the BHP .40, NOT .40s in general. Its been my experience that the Glock fanboys are usually compensating for a general lack of knowledge in firearms and have nothing to add a real conversation other than to parrot what they have heard about Glocks. Thats why they have nothing to add to other discussions other than to try to make it about Glocks.

That being said, there weren't a lot of the .40 BHPs manufactured. And from what I remember of the comments at the time was that people were a little turned off by the cast frame, regardless of if it was stronger or not.

 

[WESHOOT2]

after shooting one

I personally found the cartridge overwhelming the platform.

 

[threegun]

I second the overwhelming the platform comment. I own a BHP 9mm and fired a couple mags through the 40. It was not pleasant.

Its been my experience that the Glock fanboys are usually compensating for a general lack of knowledge in firearms and have nothing to add a real conversation other than to parrot what they have heard about Glocks. Thats why they have nothing to add to other discussions other than to try to make it about Glocks.

And you added SO much having never even fired the gun in question.

 

[velocette]

I've had my BHP Mk III, .40 S&W for 5 years. Bought it used, but barely used. It has was totally reliable but not accurate. A Bar-Sto barrel cured the accuracy shortcoming.
The mag block has been removed and a C & S sear / hammer / trigger has been installed.
It is now very accurate, has a clean crisp trigger of 4# (my choice) maintains it's reliability and is a joy to shoot. Comfortable in the hand, .40 recoil is easily handled. I also have an earlier 9mm BHP that has had all the same mods done to it. The 9mm is a bit trimmer and the recoil is less.
Is the .40 BHP worth it's price? You betcha. I will always be able to get my investment back should I ever (foolishly) decide to sell it. I have put perhaps 3000 rds through it with no problems or any wear marks showing or any loosening.

An interesting aside, is that the .40 BHP will fit all of the 5 different holsters I have for my carry 1911 .45s. Not just fit in, but fit nicely, and hold it properly.

Roger

 

[BLUEZ4U]

I love the BHP 40 and never had any problems with mine. I have the practical.
It's my choice the a 40 and my everyday carry.
I think they did a fine job.

 

[Rembrandt]

Having several Hi-Powers in the stable (2-40's, 3-9's), my least favorite is the 40. Absolutely nothing wrong with it, I just prefer the trimmer slide and softer spring of the 9mm. That evaluation has more to do with owning the 9mm's for so long .....like a comfortable well broken in pair of shoes.

 

[IanS]

This is thread is clearly for the BHP .40, NOT .40s in general. Its been my experience that the Glock fanboys are usually compensating for a general lack of knowledge in firearms and have nothing to add a real conversation other than to parrot what they have heard about Glocks. Thats why they have nothing to add to other discussions other than to try to make it about Glocks.

Its been my experience that when there's a thread about Glocks there's always "those guys" who say "Get a HK" "Get a 1911" "Get a real gun. A steel one". Everyone wants to interject what they think is "better". It happens. Its not a big deal. Most people ignore it when its not germaine to the discussion.