good point, do you think a trigger job on the new python can get to that pull of 3-4 lbs without compromising the gun???
Yes, absolutely. Out of the box, my new Python's SA pull was 5.5 lbs. After about 15 minutes of careful stoning with medium, fine, and extra fine stones, using Dykem blue to show me where and how much metal I was removing, mine now has a 2.5 lb SA pull. Out of the box, mine had an 8.5lb DA pull, which is dang near perfect. I polished the trigger sear ledge where it contacts the hammer DA strut lightly, and polished the side of the transfer bar and the contact points of the rebound lever. This further reduced the DA pull on mine down to 7.5 lbs. If you have done trigger jobs before, it is SUPER easy; you just remove the little "hook" Colt machined into the SA notch on the hammer that was put there to pass the stupid drop safety test the commie states require to sell guns there.
Opinions vary, but to me and most who own the new Python, the consensus is that the DA pull is better on the new Python than the legacy Python because it is about the same pull weight, but lacks the stacking at the end of the pull found in the legacy Python. However, some shooters like to stage their DA trigger pulls, so it's a matter of what you like. But, the DA pull out of the box is much lighter than S&W double action out of the box... although changing the pull weight is much easier to correct on a S&W, with the availability of aftermarket springs.
The legacy Python is a beautifully made revolver, but is overly complex internally and gets out of time if you do a lot of rapid DA shooting because the hand is length-dependent and eventually gets peened on the end after repeatedly slamming into the ratchets, unlike a S&W hand which is width-dependent for timing. I've been told that installing an overtravel screw onto the trigger solves this. The new style Python still has a length-dependent dual-nose hand just like the original to achieve the so-called "bank vault lockup." The other issue is the more complex cylinder stop bolt arrangement on the legacy Python and how it interacts with the rebound bar, and the complex hammer stop safety linkage assy.
The lockwork on the new Python is much more simplified with fewer parts that are less dependent on the interaction of other parts, easier to work on, and the parts are made of better, stronger materials. For example, on the stainless version, the hammer and trigger on the new Python is made of machined from bar stock, 420HC through-hardened stainless. It's the same material often used for knife blades. The frame, barrel, cylinder, and yoke are made of 17-4 PH, so the new Python is WAY stronger and more corrosion-resistant than the old Python. I'm assuming the blued version is made of 4140 or similar chrome moly steel in order to take the bluing. The new Python uses a simpler S&W style cylinder stop (or in Colt language, "bolt"), which is much less likely to get out of time than the legacy Python's "seesaw" lever-style bolt that is actuated by the rebound lever. The old style had a hammer block safety, the new style has a rebound bar. There are MIM parts in the new Python - the rebound bar, hammer stirrup, transfer bar, and cylinder latch are MIM. The hammer and trigger are again machined from bar stock.
The new Python has a recessed crown unlike the old Python. The front sight on the new is a quick change style with a simple set screw, vs the pinned front sight on the old Python. The barrel on the new Python is 1-piece, same as the old Python. The old Python had a slightly longer, knurled hammer spur, the new has a simpler serrated spur. Old Python had a serrated backstrap, and it's smooth on the new. The old one had a cylinder stop lug on the lower corner of the cylinder window, the new doesn't have it and doesn't require it. The new trigger has a more open curve to it vs the old. The new Pytnon has a thicker top strap than the old. The new Python's finish isn't quite as polished as the old, but it is still way more polished than any other competing revolver except for a Manurhin MR73. It is quite nice, in fact. The new blued Pythons are almost but not quite at the same level as the legacy "royal blue," but the newer blue formulas produce a darker, blacker hue than the old finish with more bluish hue.
The rear sight sucks swamp water. But an outstanding Wilson Combat rear sight is only $114, and is easy to install. You simply drive out the existing roll pin and unscrew the elevation screw on the factory sight, position the new sight in place with the elevation spring captured underneath it and start the elevation screw just enough to contain the spring. Then drive the roll pin back in to hold it in place and turn the elevation screw down where you need it. The Wilson sight is much more robust and has click-adjust elevation and windage.
All considered, as a pure shooter, I think the new Python is a much better revolver. It's stronger, less problematic, out of superior materials, and on average, shooters report at least equal if not superior accuracy levels as the old Python. The new Python looks almost identical to the old, having essentially the same overall design. Bottom line, if you want a shooter, the new Python is better in almost every way. If you're a collector, the old Python is your huckleberry.
Dan then spent some time in the nervous hospital and while away, his brother hid his guns. The Python sat in a cardboard box on a shelf in an old abandoned barn for maybe 20 years. When my friend, Joe, was given it by Dans brother, it looked like this:
