[Foolsgold39]

Evening team,

I just wanted to quickly double check myself before proceeding. To the best of my knowledge the HP 380 acp and HP c9 have a ton of part interchangeability. I believe the main differences are the barrel and the recoil spring. I'm looking at grabbing a spare c9 slide for a project and the cheapest option I've found are 380acp slides. Any reason this wouldn't work for c9 slide? Any other major parts that dont interchange that I'm forgetting?

Did a search but the threads were quite old so thought I would ask here.

Thanks for the help!

Regards,
Foolsgold39

 

[ajole]

I’m still not convinced that the tiny difference in weight between the two slides isn’t just the amount of coating and material scrubbed off to make that silver stripe down the side of the .380. Not sure that it’s a design decision, rather than the accidental result of cosmetic surgery.

I have a chrome .380, I should weigh the slide. I’d bet money it’s not the same weight as the base model, which means the weight isn’t a thing.

 

[adam01364]

Think about it for a second. If Hi-Point had one casting design for CF and C slides, their costs for the slides would be mold less than having two distinct slides. Production planning would be far simpler as well. If a casting fails on C production for some reason, you'd simply redirect your CF WIP over to cover.

I'm surmising that slide WIP doesn't get designated as a CF/C until the very end of slide production (roll mark/paint); which means I'm guessing there is very little difference between the two slides. I'd focus on the barrel and the recoil spring.

Oh- I almost forgot... I used a CF slide in place of a C9 slide for a couple of years with no issues. I swapped it out when I acquired a C9 slide - not because the CF wasn't working well, but because I personally feel the caliber designations on the slide should match the caliber of the pistol.

 

[moona11]

Think about it for a second. If Hi-Point had one casting design for CF and C slides, their costs for the slides would be mold less than having two distinct slides. Production planning would be far simpler as well. If a casting fails on C production for some reason, you'd simply redirect your CF WIP over to cover.

I'm surmising that slide WIP doesn't get designated as a CF/C until the very end of slide production (roll mark/paint); which means I'm guessing there is very little difference between the two slides. I'd focus on the barrel and the recoil spring.

Oh- I almost forgot... I used a CF slide in place of a C9 slide for a couple of years with no issues. I swapped it out when I acquired a C9 slide - not because the CF wasn't working well, but because I personally feel the caliber designations on the slide should match the caliber of the pistol.

I know of 1 guy that feels these things are that picky. Yet you can change springs all the time or mill out a slide with not that much difference. Like you said you can use the other slide just fine

 

[undeRGRound]

I know of 1 guy that feels these things are that picky. Yet you can change springs all the time or mill out a slide with not that much difference. Like you said you can use the other slide just fine

Who. "Mach-0 Mel-Vin"??? :rotfl:

 

[Foolsgold39]

Thanks guys!

Appreciate the info a lot.

Regards,
Foolsgold39

 

[moona11]

Who. "Mach-0 Mel-Vin"??? :rotfl:

Not that DS. The other one that was just recently sent home early.