The Firearms Forum banner

Need Info about Mitchell/High Standard

17K views 15 replies 7 participants last post by  Xracer 
#1 ·
Looking for information about the Mitchell copies of the High Standard Line of 22 Target Pistols.

There was a hierarch of Models in the Original High Standard Line.
Citation/Trophy/Challenger?/Etc.

What was the relative quality (Degree of Niceness) of the various Models?
What popular variations were available?
What was the ~ Retail Price of each near when production was stopped?

Looking for the same data on the Mitchells!

Same for the Mitchell Clones

Anyone remember ???

renaissance needs to know
renman@concentric.net
 
#3 ·
I have handled a Mitchell when they were new and they were not of the same fit and finish of real older High Standards. I do not know the relationship between the Mitchells and the "NEW" High Standard Co. in Texas but I was unfortunate enough to buy the Texas gun. I ordered it and it took months getting it. They lied to me repeatedly about the delivery date and eventually refused to answer their phone to anyone. When my dealer pulled some strings to get them to act responsibly I finally got the gun. But it wasn't over! The gun jammed repeatedly and always, it was assembled using a belt sanded to make the non-standardized parts fit, it was not an exact clone of the original although they advertised it as that (after market Volquartsen barrel would not fit and Volquartsen started advertising that nothing they produced for it fit after Volquartsen saw my gun). The problem was 0.040 inch difference between the top of the seated magazine and the barrel centerline based on original High Standard (whose magazine the gun was supose to be able to use). I raised the position of the magazine in the frame and it started to feed. This gun was made by plumbers or auto mechanics, not gun technicians. The owners were flakes that did a poor job of copying the original Hi Std design.

I am told that the guns have improved since my five year old experience but I'd never buy another. For you I'd suggest that you just keep looking and buy the best example of the original gun that you can find. Pay the money as the originals are great guns. My mere Field King original is made better than the Texas Hi Std that I bought five years ago.

For information on the original Hi Std's see the book "High Standard" by Tom Dance. The latter models of the originals are less well made than the earlier ones. Tom lays it all out with pictures.

LDBennett
 
#4 ·
Hi Stndard > GOOD ... Mitchell > BAD ?

Does not ANYONE have anything good
(at least not BAD)
To say about the Mitchells??

at any rate:

How about the Genuine High Standards
What was the general relationship between
"Supermatics" re:
Trophy / Trophy II / Citation / Victor / Olympian / Military

Which were the higher quality vs less features/fine tuning
 
#6 ·
I take exception to these words as describing the capabilities of myself and others:
"This gun was made by plumbers or auto mechanics, not gun technicians."
The best assembly man (technician? In the past,the were called gunsmiths)can't correct a problem when the parts aren't made right to start with.
I can't speak for plumbers,But this Auto Machinist/Mechanic (that is what the guys turning levers on a production transfer line in the past and now pushing a button on a cnc machine call us) can do quality work to closer tolerences than needed on 99.9% of gun parts.I have reground crankshafts that had a tolerence of +/- .0002". That's tighter than usual,but it was on a 40 year old Porsche 356C.

You sir are a bigot,and I hope your daughter marries a plumber or mechanic!Except I wouldn't wish you on any hardworking man as a father in law.

Regards,Robert.
 
#7 ·
Robert:

Sorry to offend you but the context of the remark was that the task required at a minimum a gun technician. A gunsmith is trained extensively in the craft of gun maintenance and repair and gun customization. A gun technician is a person hired to put parts together on what happens to be a gun. Only specific training for the task at hand is required. A plumber or an auto technician/mechanic are trained to do plumbing and auto repair not gun building.

My comments were to illustrate that the High Standard mangement failed to train people to do the assembly work correctly. Grinding parts to fit with a sander is not gunsmithing or even acceptable for a gun technician. It is acceptable in some aspects of plumbing and auto mechanics tasks.

I hold no gudge for either plumbers or auto technicians. In fact my son was college trained as an auto technician/mechanic by Ford and worked for several years as one. Some of the best paid people I know are plumbers. The point of my comment was that the task at hand, gun assembly, required something more than Junior High shop class.

Remember that these Texas Hi Stds were expensive guns touted to be a continuation of the originals. They even hired a renowned Hi Std gunsmith to offer tuned versions. The result of the off-the-line models was a nice blue job on a bodged gun whose makers could not even copy the original Hi Std correctly or use good morals in their business conduct.

Again, I am sorry to have offended you. The intent was to show the wrong choice of skills.

LDBennett
 
#8 · (Edited)
Sorry I unloaded on you like that LDBennett,

I've been more than a little touchy lately.

That said,I must agree with you on some of the points you made.
Like I said,the parts should have been made right to start with.

And in my shop,sanding things to fit is not the way it's done.The exception would be the final .0002" removed in crankshaft polishing.
But I'm more machinist than mechanic (and a darn pickey one at that).

In the past,gunsmiths made guns,but that has been steadily changing. The lack of training and assembly line fashion of "building" guns could be partly to blame for some of the quality control problems many gun companies have had in the last few years.

And you were correct about the Texas built High Standards,they were touted as equal to the original guns.
I never fired one as I have a Supermatic Citation,Trophy,and Victor so I never felt the need to try one.

I do have a Plinker with a lot of the mismatched problems that were described by someone.But that was a cheapie intended to compete with the Ruger (and a failure at that task).One dayI will make it work right just for the personal satisfaction.

Regards,Robert.
 
#9 ·
Robert:

You are absolutely correct in saying that not even a gunsmith could make badly made parts fit correctly. The Texas High Standard apparently used internal parts and pieces that were compatible with real Hi Std's but not their own bodge of a copy of the Hi Std frame and slide.

I looked for a couple of years to try to find a real Trophy Hi Std at gun shows and in dealers used guns but never found an adequate one. I thought that the Mitchell might work but was put off when I saw a new one at a dealer back then by the lower quality of fit and finish and the poor trigger. So I mistakenly thought that the Texas Hi Std would be as good as an origninal. What a mistake! You are lucky to own three real Hi Std's. I occassionaly look for them at gun shows but when I find them anymore the prices have skyrocketed. Buying a 40 year old gun at a gun show is very risky. A real dealer at least will usually stand behind the gun he sells. Then California killed the used gun market by stopping all pistol sales unless the the gun passed the Calif. Safety Test. Since the real High Standard company went out of business decades ago who is going to pay for a safety test of an obsolete gun? So unless you are buying a current model (on th elist) used, forget about buying a classic like the Hi Std in Calif. I did get a Colt Match Target, a Hi Std Field King, and a Browning Challenger before the law changed. I picked up a new S&W Model 41, a CZ Kadet, a Sig Trailside and one of the EEA imported Russian Baikal target pistols to go along with my Ruger MkII Gov't Model. 22 pistols are an obsession with me I guess.

Nice chatting with you.

LDBennett@linkline.com
 
#10 ·
Guns in general are an obsession with me!
And as someone said,"only accurate guns are interesting".Maybe one reason an AK doesn't do anything for me....

I'd like to have a match target Woodsman.
I have a M41 and have had 2 Rugers,a bull MK2 and a long barrel target MK1. Niether of those came close to the old Citation I have.

Also on the want list:
An International Medalist, a Walther Olympic, A 10X High Std,An Olympic High Std,one of the Baikals,and a Hamerli of some sort.

But as you noted,the price has gotten so high on the original High Std's,it may be a while before I stumble on one I can buy.

Plus,I like 22 rifles too.I've got several US marked "trainers",one on hold by one of the other members here,and several foreign trainers (2 Romanians,a German ,and a French built MAS 45).

Plus a bunch of non US marked Savages,a Mossberg 144 LSB,two Win 75's,and a few more!

And let's not forget the lever td Sport King and Plinker I have also.
And a 8 & 3/8" M17 S & W ,and a 6" Diamondback.

Man it looks like I'm braggin'don't it?!:D
And no time to go shoot the things.:mad:

I handled one of the Walther 22's with the built in comp on it.It looked like a nice gun to shoot,but even my average sized hands fell right off the bottom of it.I guess it would make a great gun to teach a child or woman with very small hands,but I couldn't get a good enough grip on it.It's a shame too,I probably would have bought it otherwise.....

How do you like the Baikal?Does it compare to the M41?

And which model Woodsman M/T do you have?I have a spare pair of long grips (elephant ear grips)for a first model I can part with if yours is a first model.

Regards,Robert.
 
#11 ·
Robert:

The Colt is a third generation (1955 Manufacture) with a 4 1/2 inch barrel. The blue is about a foot deep but it won't shoot quite as well as the S&W Mod. 41. The Russian gun also doesn't quite meet the Mod 41 accuracy but it sure feels different to shoot. I think I'll slip a red dot on it to see if that helps. The sights on the Mod 41 are a little better for picture than the Biakal and that may be the difference.

It is all academic for accuracy as my old eyes limit my shooting anymore as well as not enough practice. I just like knowing I own accurate guns.

As I stated above my M/T is 3rd gen so the grips you have won't fit. It came with terrible looking and very rough stag horn grips (actually plastic) that I made the dealer change out for repro wood stocks. The way the M/T is made is so beautiful with the extensively machined surfaces that are so superbly finished and fit. Whenever I look at modern guns like the Browning Buckmark I almost throw up at the crudeness. The Browning Challenger is from the same era and has the same fit and feel. I am disgusted with CALIF. laws.They absolutely made finding classic pistol like the M/T. the Hi Std and the Challenger impossible.

LDBennett
 
#12 ·
Hi LD,
As much as I like Colts,everyone I've talked to that knew first hand tells me the Colt just won't shoot with the High Std's or the 41.
Don't know why Colt couldn't build a gun to shoot with them,but they are second string.
That said,I'd still like to have one!
Have you ever handled a Medalist?
I still want one of those (an International) but haven't come across one and had the money at the same time!

Good chatting with you,
Regards,Robert.
 
#13 ·
If'n you old guys would move to Texas, you'd find prices a bit lower, and NONE of the BS California provides as protection for it's citizenry.
As to the auto mechanic thing, just name me a firearm- even a GE Vulcan- that has as many parts, and systems, as many different but, interacting disciplines, involved in it's operation,and I'll kiss any part of your anatomy, and allow you time to draw a crowd; with the understanding, of course, that if you cannot provide said example, the roles will be reversed.
As to the Mitchell/Houston High Standard thing, consider this: Had they gunsmiths building their wares, they would have functioned, regardless of the cost to the company. Only when the guns begin to be assembled by laborers, a/la McDonalds, with no idea except what they were told to do, this morning, to the problems crop up.
My education was originally toward an engineering degree, ended up taking a degree in business, and work in a garage.
Still, my rifles shoot reliably, and to point of aim, and consistantly so, or I would not have a reason to continue to build them. But ,then, I'm first, a shooter.
 
#14 ·
If'n you old guys would move to Texas, you'd find prices a bit lower, and NONE of the BS California provides as protection for it's citizenry.
As to the auto mechanic thing, just name me a firearm- even a GE Vulcan- that has as many parts, and systems, as many different but, interacting disciplines, involved in it's operation,and I'll kiss any part of your anatomy, and allow you time to draw a crowd; with the understanding, of course, that if you cannot provide said example, the roles will be reversed.
As to the Mitchell/Houston High Standard thing, consider this: Had they gunsmiths building their wares, they would have functioned, regardless of the cost to the company. Only when the guns begin to be assembled by laborers, a/la McDonalds, with no idea except what they were told to do, this morning, to the problems crop up.
My education was originally toward an engineering degree, ended up taking a degree in business, and work in a garage.
Still, my rifles shoot reliably, and to point of aim, and consistantly so, or I would not have a reason to continue to build them. But ,then, I'm first, a shooter.
 
#16 ·
The original High Standards were made in Hamden, CT from the early '30's to the mid-'70. Most of their employees were old-timers, and real craftsmen (and women). The guns were beautifully made, and a joy to shoot.

In the mid-70's, the company moved into a new facility in East Hartford, CT. Very few, if any, of the old employees went with them (it would've meant moving, or facing a hundred mile round trip commute each day)....so they hired a bunch of $6 an hour "assemblers" (mostly housewives and kids right out of high school)......I knew several people who worked there.

They still turned out a decent product, but nothing like the fit and finish of the original Hamden guns.

As to the quality of the guns after they left CT, I have no knowledge......but if I were in the market for a High Standard, I'd look for a pre-'70's gun.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top