Hello all, here is today's article posted on TheArmoryLife.com. It is titled “My Long Road to the SA-35” and can be found at https://www.thearmorylife.com/my-long-road-to-the-sa-35/.
Discussion: My Long Road to the SA-35
- Thread starter Mike H.
- Start date
Dobbinsky
Professional
Meaning?
Annihilator
Hellion
Early SA-35’s had lots of issues, anything under #6000 had them, not all but most, feeding, extracting and such
Dobbinsky
Professional
My buddy had a new Belgium made Hi Power way back when. He told me that the thing was a jam-O-matic. That really surprised me after all the good I've heard about them. I would assume it was probably an easy fix, but he never bothered to send it back or take it to a smith. I'd like to have one, but I'd be forking out the big greenbacks for a Belgium model, although FNs I believe run just as well.
The author shouldn’t have waited so long.
When the stock Brownings were all that was available, I carried them anyway. It’s true that details like the lack of high profile sights and a wide and positive thumb safety were a downside, but there was another side to that. The gun had some positive attributes no other gun had. These unique features made it worth dealing with the bad things, in my opinion.
If you study how the HiPower’s grip frame and panels were designed around the magazine well, you’ll see the genius of Browning and Saive. The trigger linkage that gets the trigger stirrup out of the area factors into this also. The grip width is the width of the magazine plus whatever grip panels you use. The frame doesn’t add to the width at all, and you don’t even have the trigger stirrup adding to the width.
The result is a grip as narrow as possible. Combine that with the backstrap shape and it becomes the best feeling gun to my hand.
I can add better sights and thumb safety to any HiPower and all is well.
There is nothing I can do to the frame of another gun to make it feel like a HiPower. The CZ75 come close, as does the Bren Ten, but only close.
That’s only the grip shape.
The slide shape is as good as it gets for concealed carry- slim and trim and tapering at the muzzle. Here again, only the early style CZ75s come close.
I include the trigger and magazine disconnect as HiPower negatives. The trigger can be helped. The truth is, they varied a lot, so if you had the chance to shop around you could find plenty of acceptable ones. The magazine disconnect can be deleted as SA did, or removed by the user if you don’t mind the (alleged?) legal risks.
Most hammers on Brownings bit me, some more than others. That’s another negative, but another thing that could’ve been easily corrected.
I never had trouble with any of mine feeding JHPs, even with the jumped feedramp. Maybe I was lucky. I **** a lot of the Sierra 115 JHPs which aren’t a great shape for feeding, too.
Almost thirty years ago I was saying the HiPower was “almost there” as it came. The late Brownings got better with the sights and safety but both needed more help. Dump the mag disconnect, alter the hammer, give the trigger just a little more care, and it’s a gun that should’ve been way more popular than it was.
The SA-35 checked off most of my list. The first ones I looked at didn’t have much of a trigger pull, but they seem to have gotten better.
When the stock Brownings were all that was available, I carried them anyway. It’s true that details like the lack of high profile sights and a wide and positive thumb safety were a downside, but there was another side to that. The gun had some positive attributes no other gun had. These unique features made it worth dealing with the bad things, in my opinion.
If you study how the HiPower’s grip frame and panels were designed around the magazine well, you’ll see the genius of Browning and Saive. The trigger linkage that gets the trigger stirrup out of the area factors into this also. The grip width is the width of the magazine plus whatever grip panels you use. The frame doesn’t add to the width at all, and you don’t even have the trigger stirrup adding to the width.
The result is a grip as narrow as possible. Combine that with the backstrap shape and it becomes the best feeling gun to my hand.
I can add better sights and thumb safety to any HiPower and all is well.
There is nothing I can do to the frame of another gun to make it feel like a HiPower. The CZ75 come close, as does the Bren Ten, but only close.
That’s only the grip shape.
The slide shape is as good as it gets for concealed carry- slim and trim and tapering at the muzzle. Here again, only the early style CZ75s come close.
I include the trigger and magazine disconnect as HiPower negatives. The trigger can be helped. The truth is, they varied a lot, so if you had the chance to shop around you could find plenty of acceptable ones. The magazine disconnect can be deleted as SA did, or removed by the user if you don’t mind the (alleged?) legal risks.
Most hammers on Brownings bit me, some more than others. That’s another negative, but another thing that could’ve been easily corrected.
I never had trouble with any of mine feeding JHPs, even with the jumped feedramp. Maybe I was lucky. I **** a lot of the Sierra 115 JHPs which aren’t a great shape for feeding, too.
Almost thirty years ago I was saying the HiPower was “almost there” as it came. The late Brownings got better with the sights and safety but both needed more help. Dump the mag disconnect, alter the hammer, give the trigger just a little more care, and it’s a gun that should’ve been way more popular than it was.
The SA-35 checked off most of my list. The first ones I looked at didn’t have much of a trigger pull, but they seem to have gotten better.