586 or Python?

Bhfromme

Bhfromme

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 17, 2020
Messages
450
Reaction score
538
Location
Maine
While we're on a 586 kick I'd like everyone's opinion on a 586 vs. the vaunted Python. One or the other (maybe even both!) will be in my safe this year and I'd like people that have shot both to weigh in here.

We're not talking about a new 586, I'm hoping to get an old one from the 80s. How does the action on a 586-2 compare to one of the new Pythons?

I'd also like to hear from people that have shot both to tell me how the new 586 Classics compare to an older -2 or -3.
 
As a "mechanic", the underhood configuration of the Python is a deal breaker.....especially the older models. No comparison to the relative simplicity of the S&W design, especially with respect to parts replacement. I'm not a fan of the cylinder release, cylinder assembly design of the Colt, as it inhibits free rotation of the cylinder to some extent. The design of the Colt's "hand" or pawl, is also inferior to the S&W design, which is enclosed in a hand slot that is integrated into the frame, while the Colt's design holds the hand in the action using contact from the attached sideplate.

To me, the difference between the Python and the Smith and Wesson 586 (and other earlier models) has been based on two things. The action and the exterior finish. The Colt Python has admittedly always won the beauty contest. The S&W revolver action is far superior to the Colt in every way, IMO.

Personal preference is the key here though, as either one of these revolver models would serve you well....and your grandchildren, and their children, if properly maintained.

Carter (the old coot)
 
Last edited:
A pre lock 586/686 is SUPERIOR to the 2020 Python. Superior, and I own both. All my Smiths are pre lock, J, K, L & N frames. I have a 3 inch and 4.25 inch 2020 Python’s. I will purchase a 6 inch Python, just because. The 2020 Python’s NEED a lot of work to come even close to the S&W trigger pull, both single and double action. I have had two four inch Python’s from the 70/80’s, a blue and a Nickel, boy do I wish I had them now. Anyway, I didn’t think they were that great back then. Sold them both. Anyway, just my .02, I’m sure I’ve stepped on a lot of toes. Good thing this is the S&W forum.
 
Pythons aren’t rare…you can always find one. I think the 586 in good shape may be a bit tougher to get.

The new Pythons are awesome though…much simpler action than the original and superior steel. They’re in full production so finding a new one much easier.

Now…if you’re patient…Colt likely be adding a new Python with DLC…Diamond Like Carbon finish. It’s like a traditional Royal Blue finish but over stainless steel construction. I’ve seen them and they are spectacular…just whether Colt actually approves them as a catalogued model.
 
Old school 586 vs. old school Python?

No contest, 586 all day and twice on Sunday.

New 586 vs. new Python?

Can't say, but I'm no fan of the "new" S&W wheelguns with the Hillary hole and the firing pin in the frame. And the finish leaves something to be desired.

The new Pythons look good. But not my cuppa.
 
I've had a number of Pythons in my lifetime, 4 to be exact. Although I wish I still had them or any from a financial perspective, I'm far more a S&W fan than a Colt fan. The Pythons always just felt more delicate to me than a S&W .357 of any model.

You really aren't going wrong with either of them. :)
 
Have owned four Pythons. One was a real accurate ... 1.25 six shot groups from bags at 25 yds. The other three were plebian shooters. Have owned four L-Frames ... two 586's and two 686's. Have won a number of local pistol matches using various four inch L-Frames. Have used a six inch 686-1 to do very well at matches as late as 2018. Have just bought a gorgeous four inch 586-2. In every possible way, fit and finish and on target results ... this one is about as close to perfection as possible. Sincerely. bruce.
 
I’m a big Python fan although I don’t have one now. I traded mine for a superior handgun (Colt Gold Cup) about 40 years ago and have no regrets. The 1911 is easier to carry all day and easier to shoot well than the Python, at least for me and the folks I’ve taught to use a 1911.

I’ve considered Smith L frames, but they’re over large and over heavy compared with the 1911 for my purposes. The older M19’s are much superior to L frames. They aren’t overly large or heavy and are better carry guns than the L, N or X frames ever thought to be.

I’ve shot the Python and the 586 - 686 Smiths and much prefer the Python. For me, the Python has a better trigger out of the box than the Smiths and is better balanced than the Smiths. I can shoot the Python better than the L or N framed Smiths in 357.

We all have our preferences for our guns. If you’re shooting exclusively on the range, the larger Smiths (L and N frames) have some advantages and their greater weight and size isn’t a disadvantage since the weight and bulk won’t weigh on you after carrying for a few hours unlike the larger Smith L and N frames.

The Python seems the best frame size for the 357: larger and sturdier than a K frame and smaller than the L or N frames.
 
If you are looking for that size revolver, it is the Python. While I do not doubt that folks have had Pythons go out of time, I have put many tens of thousands (perhaps over a hundred thousand by now) rounds down range through my pythons over the last 42+ years and have not had an issue with timing

FHP%20Python.jpg


Elliason%20Python%20Ls.jpg


py-8b.jpg


As to the NEW vs OLD Python, there is no doubt that the redesigned lock work is MUCH less complicated and easier to work on.

If you dislike the Python action and want a Smith & Wesson for "Greater Durability", then why are you messing with an L-frame? Go all the way and make it the N-frame Model 27. Perhaps the older 6 shot versions

model27s.jpg


Or the more modern 8 shot Model 27s

27-set.jpg


Now to tell the Truth, no matter who gives you a list of Pros and Cons on any of these revolvers, Odds are none of these 357 Magnum Wheel guns would disappoint you

And as ALL of us here on the Forum will tell you . . . If you have trouble making up your Mind Buy them Both :)

.
 
Last edited:
I have a new Python, it is quite a nice looking gun! I can't compare to an older 586, but I can compare to a new 686.


I have some trigger concerns with the Colt. First, the feel of the narrow serrated trigger is uncomfortable for me. I find the wider smooth face of the S&W trigger much more comfortable. The Python double action is fantastic right out of the box, I'm quite happy with it. The single action, unfortunately, is not as good. In fact, the hammer moves back another 1/8th of an inch as you press the trigger in single action. Which, in my mind, really makes it a shorter double action instead of a true single action. My understanding is that this was done intentionally by Colt in order to pass the California drop test.


I shoot the new Python somewhat better in double action compared to the new 686. I shoot the 686 far better than the Python in single action. The new Python is beautiful, the 686 is more functional and less pretty.


I don't have any safe queens, all of my guns are fired a lot! I prefer the S&W at the range over the new Python.


Jim
 
Since op wants an apples to apples comparison of similar vintage guns, specifically 1980's era Python and S&W L frme I want to offer my experience. Back around 1980-81when S&W first came out withthe L frame guns, I placed an order for a model 686 with 8 3/8" barrel and a low patridge front sight. My brother ordered the Colt Python in stainless steel which was just being introduced at this time. His gun arrived with a rough exterior and gritty action. Mind you Colt was going through a strike era during this time frame and galling of stainless steel was a common concern then. We wrote a long letter to Colt, the gun was sent back to be reworked. About two months later gun was returned with an voice in excess of $1,000 for what work was done to gn to correct issues. No charge btw just a listing of work performed. Both guns, Colt and S&W shot well. But for over twice the price my brother felt he would have been happy iwth a 686 also.
The longer sight radius and weight up front of the underlug barrel was definitely an aid in shooting that 686. The only other thing I did was add a white outline rear giving me a similar sight picture as my model 629-1 except for the red ramp front sight, they re both 8 3/8" barrels. Just a great pair of guns. The 686 and Colt Python always seemed to shoot on par. I could not see any distinguishable difference in accuracy between either gun.
 
To quote Hank Williams, Jr.
“ the preacher man says it’s the end of Time”
And there’s no one to do any repairs or parts I’m taken the L frame all the way because the pythons are just like a supermodel they’re awesome to look at but extremely unreliable.
Tom
 
Python or 586? Safe queen or frequent shooter? I, as will most here, tell you that the highlight of the Python is it's impeccable fit and finish. They are beautiful works to behold. After that... meh. I have wanted a Python since I was a teenager in the 80s, but never could justify the cost, so Smiths filled the bill. A couple of years ago,I got the chance to buy a 4" Python at a reasonable price. It was nearly flawless with just a slight blue loss at the edges of the muzzle. I couldn't get to the range fast enough to try it out and see what all of the hype was about. I took my 4" 686, my 4" 66 and my 2 1/2" 19 along so my new Python could teach them a thing or two. Well, the snake and I were the ones learning the lesson. Even the 2 1/2" 19 made the Python look bad. I quickly sold that Python. About 6 months later, I picked up a 6" Python, thinking the first one had to be a fluke. Well, I no longer own any Pythons, and probably never will own another one.
 
Well, I cut my teeth on a new 586-nd back when in LE and shooting PPC. Accurate, smooth, and never an issue thru many thousands of rounds.

Also have a new model Python and Anaconda. They sure are pretty. Fit and finish is impressive. The DA on either feels light and smooth, better than newer S&W's I have shot. About as smooth and light feeling as my well worn in 586, but different, if that makes sense? Certainly not bad as one poster implied.

SA trigger pull is another story, and neither new Colt is as light or crisp as a decent S&W trigger. Not bad, but not what they could be. I have read on line that this is because of a lockwork design that actually puts pressure against the cocked hammer that slightly lifts it before release. Both my new Colts do it, and it is supposedly to help pass CA's drop test.

To me, a much bigger issue is reliability. The gun forums are full of folks who have been having failure to fires in their Pythons, and to a lesser extent, Anacondas, mostly DA, and sometimes SA. Way to many to be just a couple disgruntled customers. Blame has been placed on primers not being seated properly, hard primers, reloads, foreign ammo, ect. Probably partially true, but the problem is this same less than perfect ammo seems to function just fine in other brands of guns.

I personally have not had any issues with either of mine, but the Python only has about 100 rounds thru it so far. My subjective opinion is Colt, in search of a light and smooth trigger, may have gone too light on the hammer spring. There has already been one update to the Python V spring recently due to light hammer strikes. I might add that after after almost 3 years of production, Colt offers zero replacement or aftermarket parts. They don't even so much as sell a replacement front sight for their replaceable front sight models. They refer you to the aftermarket.

I want to be able to pick the new Python, but until reliability issues are addressed, I can't. To me, the early S&W L frames are still the top pick in a .357 revolver.

Larry
 
Last edited:
Jeep 1 said:
To quote Hank Williams, Jr.
“ the preacher man says it’s the end of Time”
And there’s no one to do any repairs or parts I’m taken the L frame all the way because the pythons are just like a supermodel they’re awesome to look at but extremely unreliable.
Tom
Click to expand...

Whoa whoa whoa!!!!!! What experience do you have with a supermodel ?
 
The myth that Pythons are unreliable is just that…a myth. They can go thousands of rounds without issue. What does tend to happen is when someone tries too much to gunsmith one which makes one have either too light a trigger pull or creates a timing issue. The classic Python action is already given a extra cost action job at the factory…some Bubba gunsmith then comes along thinking he can make it better and screws it up.

What Colt calls the hand…the piece that advances the cylinder…is considered a normal service item and when necessary can be stretched…once. Back in the day gunsmiths and armorers knew this and had no issues taking care of it when necessary. Now there are few gunsmiths who understand the classic Colt action and how the parts relate to each other…a few do more than one job.

Now gunsmiths don’t understand the action so it’s easier to badmouth it rather than admit they don’t understand it. To be fair…there’s probably no one at Colt anymore that knows the old revolvers anymore.
 
The short answer is the older 586/686 all the way. Having said that, I've always thought the old Pythons were the absolute best looking revolver ever made. I've never owned one, handled many and came really close once, but the desire has left me now. I always felt the older Smiths had the better action. I know you are gonna laugh at this, but my 2010 5 inch bbl Ruger GP100 with it's new Hogue exotic wood stocks stands pretty high on my list right now.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

M
Which 586 or 686??
2
Replies
32
Views
1K
Harry Callihan
Harry Callihan
M
586…
2
Replies
38
Views
1K
Tanners Owner
Tanners Owner
K
586 no dash
Replies
4
Views
358
ezb57
ezb57
demkofour
586 no-no
Replies
10
Views
1K
BabaBlueJay
BabaBlueJay
O
586 Cylinder Replacement
Replies
7
Views
535
chief38
chief38

Latest posts

Back
Top