S & W Model 41 or High Standard Victor?

This is probably how bar fights get started . . .

I've shot a S&W Model 41 with Ultradot for a number of years and shoot consistently in the mid 270's.  The only modification is the addition of Herter Flat Trainer grips to mimic the feel of a 1911.

I've acquired a like new and seemingly very solid Hartford made High Standard Victor.  It feels way better in the hand (at least to me) than the 41, has a better trigger and handles CCI Standard Velocity just fine.  I have one original and one newer, I believe, Mitchell made magazine.

I believe the High Standard is a better quality gun (kind of like a BMW motorcycle compared to a Japanese make.)  The 41 almost seems little a lose, rattling bunch of parts after trying the High Standard.

Is it better to continue working to improve with the 41 or get a red dot mount and extra magazines for the Victor?  Is the complication of moving to another 22 going to distract and greatly slow improvement or is the High Standard so much better I should make the move?

Pretty much a Ford Chevy argument.

go with which one you like.. The high standards were flat known to shoot.. probably better than the 41 overall..( spoken from a 41 shooter)


get a marvel  replacement rib for scopes and find yourself a good red dot

http://www.marvelcustomguns.com/high_standard_victor.htm

I had a Victor that shot better off the bench than my Hammerli 208 but I couldn't shoot it! Floyd Aikman did a trigger job on it plus installed and adjustable trigger. I tried Rink Grips but couldn't shoot it! Sold it and used the money to buy Adam a 208 that he used as a back-up gun. So the Victor is a good gun! the 41s had problems. I was making barrels for Floyd Aikman and leaving 1/16" of material in the lock-up area that Floyd would trim as needed to get the 41 to shoot. I would say if you can find an Aikman 41 it's a good gun!

I have been shooting both for a lot of years. I have never found that I could choose one over the other. I have noticed over the years as I swap around that the actual swapping around makes my scores go up for a little while and then settle back down. I think there must be something about actually having to think about and feel the difference in triggers, grips, etc that makes me think a little more about what I am doing then just being on auto pilot. Sometimes ( a lot lately) I don't make up my mind about which pistol I am taking to a match until just before the match. I shoot some NMC's with each and take the one I shot best with. I shoot to have FUN. I realize that this might not be the best advice to give a new shooter or someone training to be the next Olympic champion. I like the shooting whichever pistol ends up with me. I will be shooting a Browning in this weekends match. Just for the fun of it.


Ford all the way. Some Chevy's ok. Couldn't give me a Dodge

What scope mount do you have on the Victor in your picture?  Do you find standard velocity 22's feed well in it?

I'm a 41 shooter with Herrett nationals grips. Stock barrel, shooting iron sights only. I shoot in the mid to high 280's. A friend of mine hates the balance of it and can't seem to negotiate my grips. Guns are like shoes. There ain't a one size fits all out there. Shoot what you shoot best. And to add one more not - I only fell into the 41 group because my muzzleloader cap lock pistol for match use was built to copy a 41 grip frame. So the 41 proved to be an excellent training pistol for that. Then I got into bullseye and since I had and was used to the 41 I stuck with it.

dsandula wrote:What scope mount do you have on the Victor in your picture?  Do you find standard velocity 22's feed well in it?

It's the Marvel scope base mentioned above.  http://www.marvelcustomguns.com/high_standard_victor.htm  I feed it a steady diet of CCISV and it runs perfectly. I have 2 older mags for it and 2 of the newer. I have never needed the newer ones but had all 4 recently reconditioned.

Len

dsandula wrote:(kind of like a BMW motorcycle compared to a Japanese make.)

Them's fightin' words. With guns, as with motorcycles, don't confuse engineering effort with quality.  My wife's BMW K1200R has been recalled multiple times and required thousands of dollars in repairs for parts that broke long before they should have, and has issues shifting from 1st to 2nd.  My Honda VFR has exactly 1 part that should have been higher quality: the rectifier.  The power of the K1200R is stunning, lusty, and truly addicting, and it definitely has other advantages (heated grips, passenger comfort, locking saddlebags, etc.), but I usually prefer riding the VFR, because it has advantages (lighter, smoother, lower CG) that make it more fun to ride.  So, I'm with OldMaster on this one... unless you're completely focused on winning (in which case neither the 41 nor the High Standard is likely your best choice), choose the gun that you enjoy shooting the most.

Don't discount the older guns for winning! Mario Lozoya won Perry in 92 with 41. Steve Reiter shot 899 aggregate and won 5x at Perry with High Standard. Lot's of high dollar Pardini's out there shooting marksman level scores (no disrespect intended). Fundamentals and mediocre gun will always win!
Jon

I have a friend who began shooting Bullseye as an enlisted sailor in the early 1960's. He was issued a High Standard and a 1911 to put in his hobby shop built gun box. Over the years he would lust after Model 41's, buy one and then watch his scores go down. Other people shot them well, but he couldn't. His best scores were shot with a High Standard Military model and later with a Pardini. In the middle there were model 41's, Unique's, and a couple of others. 

The stock grip that best fit his small hand is the AW93, but that's a different story. That 93 feels good in my hand too, but I have enough 22 target pistols (Victor, MP90, and Pardini SP).

I used to shoot Hi Standards. They were ok, but not the most accurate. They would alibi once in a while, usually at a match. I liked the feel and the trigger. I went to a Hammerli 208s and there was a world of difference in accuracy, trigger and reliability. It was worth the switch, even though the Hammerli was much more expensive. I doubt that a stock 41 has an edge over a Hi Standard in either accuracy, reliability or trigger. Either pistol can be improved with gunsmithing, new or relined barrels, etc. It's your choice, but I wouldn't consider a switch to one or the other an improvement. If you shoot one better than the other, then it might be worth it, but I'd suspect it will take a few hundred rounds for you to notice.

My only issue with the Hi Standard I used for awhile is the magazines. Keeping them tuned can be frustrating. If you get it dialed in and it stays, they are great guns. You may find that the Mitchell magazine is problematic while the originals will stay true. The gun itself should shoot true and give you many more years of good service. I stopped shooting mine due to the magazines and switching to a Marvel conversion to shoot a consistent platform with my Centerfire gun of choice, the 1911.

Weber is right on the mags
 The old ones are great once you get them right.

The new ones are ok but the temper  on the lips doesn't seem as good as the old ones.. forget the triple K mags.


There are excellent instructions on the Web for adjusting them and getting the right tool to adjust them really helps

I adjust my wife's once a year so I don't have to hear her complain to me ( I cleaned that up )

She uses a trophy with an LSP barrel. Great upgrade for $150

I used High Standard starting in 1969.  Original mags are the best.  And once set they stay.  I have two originally set by LtC Miller back then.  Coach Miller learned from Joe Benner, and I learned from Coach Miller.  Also have a bunch of originals since then that are adjusted by me just as good. 

Anyway, HS work great for me with iron sights.  But add a dot and the balance is way off.  Aluma barrels reduce weight, but in the wrong place.  The gun becomes nose light.  It's not so bad with the slant grips as with the Military grip.

And to me a proper Clark, Giles, Jack H trigger on the HS is the best of any semi auto pistol anywhere.  Only good Colt OMM and S&W KandN triggers compare.  OMM are/were usually good off the shelf, but SW often need a little work

I have never met a 41 grip that I like.  That said, the smallest test group I ever hand fired, arm rested, at 50 was with a 41 (1/2 inch).

OldMaster66 wrote:I have been shooting both for a lot of years. I have never found that I could choose one over the other. I have noticed over the years as I swap around that the actual swapping around makes my scores go up for a little while and then settle back down. I think there must be something about actually having to think about and feel the difference in triggers, grips, etc that makes me think a little more about what I am doing then just being on auto pilot. Sometimes ( a lot lately) I don't make up my mind about which pistol I am taking to a match until just before the match. I shoot some NMC's with each and take the one I shot best with. I shoot to have FUN. I realize that this might not be the best advice to give a new shooter or someone training to be the next Olympic champion. I like the shooting whichever pistol ends up with me. I will be shooting a Browning in this weekends match. Just for the fun of it.


Ford all the way. Some Chevy's ok. Couldn't give me a Dodge

Well done, Fun is the key. 

My Dad made master with a victor and swore by it. I had a KC Crawford 41 and it was excellent but I needed the money and the platform was not for me. I had an Xesse and as long as we are comparing to cars it performed like a Porsche but I got a lemon and ran like a yugo. Until recently I have had terrible luck with 22lrs. 

Hands down I like the Nelson and I have two on dedicated lowers. I just shot a 864 with one and in a better hand maybe +890/900 is possible and its the only platform that improved my 2700 scores. 
When I started I had a Benelli and Marvel. After two seasons my top NMC scores for each was 256. Being an analyst I took my league data and Benelli average was about 10 pts higher. An average is not always the best measure of performance. The variance and standard deviation of my Marvel ,mounted on a Kimber with a #4 trigger, scores were much lower. In other words, I had a few very high scores with the Benelli but more high scores with the Marvel. Based on the 67% confidence interval both would shoot , the Benelli 300 and the Marvel 290. So the answer for me was found by studying the not only which I shot better but which I consistently shot better because consistency in this sport leads to improvement. 

So the answer may be whichever you like best is the best because they are both +890/900 potential guns.

Jack H,

   "Anyway, HS work great for me with iron sights.  But add a dot and the balance is way off.  Aluma barrels reduce weight, but in the wrong place.  The gun becomes nose light.  It's not so bad with the slant grips as with the Military grip."

You are correct about being nose light. When I took the steel Bomar rib off of this pistol I couldn't keep the nose down. The barrel weight solved that problem for me.

Len

I got my Victor set up last weekend firing 50 CCI Standard Velocity with 2 magazines and no jams.  I ordered both the High Standard and Al Marvel Scope mounts and installed an Ultradot 30 MM.  The Marvel was by far the better choice in function and appearance.  During my match the following Monday I shot my first clean in timed fire . . . then proceeded to shoot my first clean in rapid fire finishing with a 286!  My best ever.

To be critical, all the shots are in the 10 ring, but there's no circular group telling me I have work to do with grip and trigger press consistency.  I may get away with this on the 25 yard line, but not the 50 yard line.

I won't be selling my S&W Model 41, but I sure like the feel and function of the High Standard!

I tried to upload pictures of the targets but couldn't get them to post.

Between the Model 41 and the Victor the Victor wins easily in my experience. Neither can stand up my Clark Custom High Standard or  Hammerli 208 or 215. Still, if you are determined to get a Victor or an M41, I'd go for the Victor every time and then take it (send it) to a good bullseye smith for a once over or good tuneup.

Nelson conversion for me

I used a M41 for a few years. I liked its feel and balance up until I would shoot it and not get very good scores.  The grips always frustrated me because I could not get a good position on them.  I would typically out shoot it with my Browning Buckmark.  I switched to a Marvel conversion so I could maintain the 1911 platform which works well for me.  I have always loved the Victor's lines and handling qualities so it would be something I would like to try.  One of these days, I'll get around to finding one and see how good they really are. 

John

I started shooting BE in the late 60's. Calling the line during our winter 2700's was a regular duty. When doing so I always counted the .22's on the line by brand. We ran 2 relays and had 12 FP, usually all used. In those days the result was usually :
HS........  10+
SW41....   1+
Mix*......  -1-

Mix*The last pistol was the occasional  Ruger, Browning, or Colt. Hammerli's etc did not make an appearance until after the demise of Hi Standard.

i like High standards(i have one Hamden supermatic trophy military) and i like the 1911 style frame and the soft trigger. i add a lsp aluma barrel,lsp mount and a ultra dot 1". in a competition i saw a person shoot a high standard and other shoot a Feinwerkbaw AW 93 and the winner was the high standard shooter.

The HS has a barrel / chamber that can be considered match quality.. The 41...not so much..