A Myth?

[phenson]

Not exactly sure where to put this. I hang out here most of the time, so here goes.
I have been shooting handguns since the '60's. I owned a few Smiths to include a 27-2 and a 29-2 in the '70's. In those times, I was a college student and later a teacher. As you know neither usually has a lot of money. I always wanted a Colt Python. In the days when a Model 29 cost almost $400 a Python cost upwards of $700 and I could never afford one. Well, day before yesterday, I got the deal of a lifetime on the "Rolls Royce" of handguns with an action that is "smooth as glass". A 6" royal blue ventilated ribbed beauty. I had never fired one till then. My first impression was the action was strange. Good, but strange, in that although smooth in double action, it seems to change pull weight as the trigger is depressed. I brought it home and took out my old 4 screw Model 28. When I compared the action, and the trigger break, I have to say, the old 28 seems to have the Python beat both in single and double action. My 1957 Pre 29 has it beat all to you know what. Once again, I think I have been right about what the best revolvers ever made were. Any thoughts?

 

[bagolden]

Smith and Wesson better than a C***?? Like Duh!!

 

[sureshotbob]

I've had a 6"blue ,4"blue and a 4"stainless Python and I got rid of them all I'll take a Smith & Wesson action any time !!!!Tho I do have a soft spot for Colt Detective Special's and Cobra's also Colt 1911's.

 

[kleinkaliber]

I've never owned a Python, but the ones I've handled were very beautifully made guns. It has always been my opinion that Smith has always had Colt beat as far as triggers go. The Pythons have a huge following but when it comes down to it, (this'll rile up the Colt guys!!) a Python is just a glorified Official Police (of which I own several).

 

[Art Doc]

This topic comes up quite often. The Python and the M27 are the top of their respective lines but they are very different revolvers. The Colt action definitely "stacks" and to some it feels as though the trigger pull gets heavier as it is pulled. May be, but in actually checking the weight of the pull on my Pythons (I currently have 3) they are no heavier than my Smiths (indeed, they are lighter than most of my S&Ws). I think it's a matter of perception.

Colt fans swear the Colt action is better and S&W devotees stand by their favorites. I have both, love them all, and would feel naked without at least Python hanging around the farm. Wish I had one more, a 6" nickel version. But I have suspended gun buying for the duration (of paying off the mortgage) and even if I was looking, the current prices put me off. I have a total of $1,200 invested in all three of my Pythons. Can't hardly buy even one for that much today.

Mine:

An alternative to the Python is the early (pre-1970) Trooper. Same action, just lacks the heavy vented barrel. I got the well used one at the bottom for $200 and paid $400 for the better one which was a great deal because those early target stocks in good shape fetch $200+ by themselves.

I'll match the trigger on this worn-looking Colt against any S&W (and bear in mind the guy saying this owns and shoots 7 M27s and 1 Registered Magnum so he knows what a good S&W feels like). Gun looks sad but shoots great.

 

[Smithboomer]

I own both N-frame S&W revolvers and Colt Pythons. I am much more comfortable with a Model 27 than with the Colt . The S&W just feels better in my hand.

I'll admit my 1966 Python with its factory wood is a very pretty gun, and like bob I have a place in my heart for the D-frame Colts.

 

[Joni_Lynn]

I find the actions on S&W's to be more consistent from gun to gun. Pythons are all over the place with some being only so so and not as nice as a S&W and some being very good. The one I keep available to shoot is quite excellent.

 

[29aholic]

I'd put the trigger on my 29-3 (and others) against even a Custom Shop Python any day. Python guts also will not hold up as good for as long as a Smith.

 

[Iggy]

I am like the OP. I always dreamed of owning a Python but couldn't afford one. Well that hasn't changed, but I am perfectly happy with the Smiths I had do learn to love and respect.

I think the Python is a beautiful firearm, but I growed up and old with S&W's so I reckon I'll just be satisfied with them

 

[ditrina]

I was chasing this for 35 years before I was able to replace what I had sold.. no regrets,,

Then suddenly Pythons and Diamond Backs were coming out of the woodwork,...

Once in a while it's good to indulge if you can..

 

[bmcgilvray]

I have a Python with a really fine original, unmolested action but like Model 27s best of all.

I love the balance and the trigger of the Model 27. Perhaps its a matter of long familiarity with Smith & Wesson revolvers that makes it my favorite rather than the Python.

I do think that perhaps the Python is not quite as fragile as is sometimes claimed.

 

[feralmerril]

My experience is almost the same as saxon pigs. I own two pythons, carried a colt trooper many years, also still own two troopers. I have a 27-2 I bought new in the early 70s, plus many other smiths. So I definetly aint prejudice. I will say I belive my pythons or troopers are slightly more accurate than smiths if shot braced off the bench. I feel that is due to a tapered bore and a solid clyinder lockup at hammer fall. The triggers can be argued either way by which ever you were raised on. To me the trigger differance isnt that important as 99.5% of my shooting is single action since I dont have to requalify anymore.
I have a 2 1/2" python that seems to think it is a 6". I also have a 4" that I really havent shot all that much. On that one the front sight seems too wide in relationship to the rear notch.-Can hardly see light on the sides. Both brands are great!

 

[fyimo]

I had a very good friend who passed away and he had a mint Python and I always lusted after it. In the end his family decided to keep it and then I started buying S&W's and I have to say I love the N frames with the Model 27 being the best in looks to me and I've long forgotten the Phyton.

 

[ab4ka]

my father-in-law has a Python that I had in my greedy little hands for a while, and has a fantastic action. It does feel different in DA than a S&W, that's for sure. The SA pull on my 686 is every bit as good (from what I remember). I'd like to take the two of them out together and try them at the same time to compare.

 

[bobbyz]

Well, I've never fired a Colt Python but I did own one about 12 or 15 years ago. It was a 4" barreled, blued finish. I do a lot more collecting than I ever do shooting, but I do know this much. That Python had the tightest lockup of ANY GUN I EVER OWNED. It was like a fine watch built on roller bearings and reminded me of a quality no longer available today at any arms manufacturer. You know how you can test drive a car for the first time and tell the difference between a Yugo and a Mercedes Benz? The Python had that type of quality.

Now, with that said, I can also say I owned a Smith & Wesson Model 27-2 around the same time and it was no slouch itself. But, strictly speaking for myself, that Colt Python was one magnificent handgun. At least in my opinion.

 

[OIF2]

During the 80's and early 90's I shot PPC with the LAPD team. Some of that time I worked the Academy, so I shot daily. I had 2 Pythons that were my 6" service-class revolvers. I was one of the VERY few competitive PPC shooters in Southern Cal who shot a Python in the distinguished matches. At the time I was shooting 35,000 rds in practice a year, of which 10-12,000 was service revolver. Harry Davis, one of the best of the LAPD armorers, worked on my Colts. Both guns needed re-timing yearly. One broke a firing pin 2 years after purchase. Both had "Tedford" $150.00 factory action jobs that removed the famous Colt stacking. Despite these issues, the Python, when equipped with Elliason sights, was a superior target revolver. But just like a hot girlfriend, it was high maintenance. If you have revolversmith close by that knows Colts and will work on them for free (like I did), it's awesome. The 6" 586 or 686 S&W, when equipped with the special-order "tall sights" (for a neck hold), were more rugged and were excellent revolvers. But the Python was exceptionally accurate at 50 yards, especially with good factory wadcutters or ball. I now have one Python (a 6" stainless), set up like my old Colt PPC revolvers, as my target/practice revolver. It will easily shoot 12-shot 2" or less groups at 50 yards (from a Ransom Rest) with selected factory wadcutters. I love Smiths, but I'll always have a Python around.
Bob

 

[Sprefix]

Python vs. S&W ???

Well....,Lets see............,I had a 4" 1968 vintage Python(blue) that I purchased at a gun show here in Alaska for a really good price. I cleaned it (and did it need it!!) then went out and shot it. What a great revolver. The Mark V action is smooth. A year or so later, a guy offered me crazy money for it and I let it go. Kinda wish I held on to it. Some time later that summer, I found my best friends dream gun, a 3 1/2" mod. 27(blue) in the case all original and correct for $400.00. It kicked me in the gut to not keep it for myself, but he is my best friend. This little beast is awesome. Since then, family stuff came up and he had to take cash in a pinch for it so I missed out. So much for his dream gun..., but it is family. I'm still lookin' for a deal right along with the rest of you, but I'll let a Python go if there is a S&W 27 anywhere near. I think I'll agree about the Colt trigger "stacking". Can't say I've had or seen a S&W with that issue. Oh well...............get 'hold of Mythbusters...............Sprefix

 

[Centenniel]

I've owned and heavily used S&W revolvers for over 30 years. However, the Python has always been a gun that I lusted after.. I've shot a few, and they are fine handguns, but then and now, overpriced. I don't know if I'll ever get one, but If I don't, my L-Frames will do nicely.

 

[Combat]

I have one just to say I got one.It's a real pretty gun but all it does is sit in the safe.

 

[tallpaul]

As a 16 year old kid I was allowed to buy - well pay for dad had to "buy it" for me my first real gun. Dad reloaded and we had .22's 357 and 45's He encouraged me to buy a 357 since we reloaded. I had to choose... hmmm S&W 19,28,27 or the Colt Python.

I chose the colt... and I put many thousands of rounds through it. Most of them lead target rounds/SWC

It literally shot knots at 25 yards. I don't beat on her and I do shoot my smiths which came after the big snake over the years but I still like ta shoot it.

The lock up on a well timed colt python is awesome with NO side to side play as with most other revolvers. I contemplate selling her every now n again since they are worth so much but can't "pull the trigger" so to speak...

 

[sigp220.45]

I've owned two, and I still have this one:

I prefer the Smith double action, but this Python has a fantastic single action pull, and has been noted before it locks up like a bank vault. Its very accurate and I think it just looks right. I'd like to find a six inch sometime, but the prices have gotten ludicrous, so this will probably be my only one. My oldest boy will probably jump over my cooling corpse to get that Python before his little brother can snag it out of the safe.

 

[flat top]

The only experience that I ever had with a Python was years ago. It belonged to a buddy who was a real Python/Colt nut. He really new how to rework the trigger mechanisms on a Colt, and I had the chance to compare a "before and after" trigger job that he did on a Python. The before was "ok" but nothing to rave about...the "after" was absolutely splendid!!!! He had done trigger jobs on other revolvers, and he told me, that Smiths are easy to work with...and they are, but, he said that the mechanism of the Colt required much painstaking work and a great deal of time to achieve an ideal trigger. I guess that is why I always preferred Smith revolvers. I had the opportunity to shoot that Python, and while there is no doubt that it was top of the line, and very accurate, I was never that enthused about getting one, when the price of the Smith was more affordable to a young guy with a family.

 

[tjsguns]

I'm an S&W guy but I've owned at least two or three of everything and anything worthwhile over the years.
Here's the BEST Python I've ever seen let alone owned:

It is a 2 1/2" that was made in 1964 and that makes a HUGE difference between it and Pythons of later manufacture.
These early Pythons were miles beyond the later guns as far as fit, finish, the smoothness of the triggers and accuracy.
This one is un-fired except at factory test and it will remain so while in my possession. (Shameless Plug I have this one up for sale on GunBroker right now!)
I have however tested the trigger and double action and it's just like GLASS! Miles beyond even the Combat Python, (EXTREMELY RARE 3 1/2" Barrel), I own, which I have shot and is of later manufacture.
I've also owned and shot many Colt .357's (Pre- Troopers) and they are more in line with the early Pythons.
All of the Troopers and Detective Specials I've owned and shot are more like the later manufacture Pythons.
While the Colts are very smooth and very accurate there is a HUGE difference between the Colts and all of the Model 27's I've ever owned.
Here is one of my favorite Pre-27's that I feel is comparable to the 2 1/2" Python in fit and finish:

The double and single action trigger pulls on the guns are as different as night and day.
ALL Colt double actions "Stack" Even during the first pull. Not only the ALL the Python's but ALL of the .357's, Troopers and Detective Specials I've ever owned exhibit this trait. It's due to the way the gun is constructed and can't be eliminated by even the finest action job.
The Smiths double and single action may not be as "butter' smooth but it is MUCH crisper with NO "Stacking" whatsoever!
The heavy frame of the 27 also gives it a hands down accuracy advantage.
IMHO the Colt action may be smoother than the Smith but it can't compare in crispness and overall accuracy, so the Smith is the better overall of the two!

 

[phenson]

OK, since we have a lot of C*** guys on here, I need help with my Python. This is what the serial # looks like, exactly:

ATF
98800 I-I
289

on the inside of the crane.
Am I looking at only the middle line of numerals to date the gun? Proofhouse has nothing that looks exactly like this, but they only go up to 1978. Another site went to 1985, had nothing that looked like it either and stated that if made after '85, one had to call Colt to get date of manufacture.
So, if I only look at the middle line of numerals, it was made in 1969. If the letters come into play, I guess I have a post 1985 gun and need to call Colt. Any ideas?

Oh, and I will post a pic as soon as I get the grips I bought from another member here. It has rubbers on it right now.

 

[wlmccann]

I own both a number of Smiths , mostly N frames of varying vintage, and Colts, mostly New Services. Both have their place and they are different in feel. I would really hate to have choose just one or the other. I have worked on both and will say the Colt V spring actions are more complicated to do properly than the Smiths. This is the one Python I own after many years of lusting after one. I am a lousy photographer and the picture really doesn't look as good as the gun really is. As originally purchased it was finished in Armaloy, had Pachmayr rubber and a very badly screwed up action. Whatever idiot tried to do a trigger job screwed the hammer notch up so badly it was horribly out of time. This is the end result after getting the Armaloy stripped,replacing and fitting some new parts, making grips and a careful hand polish and reblue.

 

[Aglifter]

I have a 60 something Python (either 67 or 64 -- I forget.) It's a lovely gun -- the grip shape of a colt seems odd to me, but I keep it around. I've dry-fired a Colt Custom shop trigger on a Python, and that was fantastic. But, I prefer the trigger on my Patrolman to the stock Python trigger.

 

[wlmccann]

Phenson. What you apparently have is an ATF issued serial number. Probably the original serial number was damaged and ATF specified a number to replace the original. I have a 600 Remington that came into my possession, overpolished and slightly rusty, that only part of the original serial could be read on. After contacting ATF, they specified a serial number I could restamp on the receiver. The format is what you have posted. I.E. ATF-XXXXX-XXX.

 

[phenson]

Phenson. What you apparently have is an ATF issued serial number. Probably the original serial number was damaged and ATF specified a number to replace the original. I have a 600 Remington that came into my possession, overpolished and slightly rusty, that only part of the original serial could be read on. After contacting ATF, they specified a serial number I could restamp on the receiver. The format is what you have posted. I.E. ATF-XXXXX-XXX.

Interesting. I'm almost certain the gun is not refinished, there is absolutely no damage anywhere else, and it does not look to have been stamped over. I did kinda wonder about the initials ATF when I looked. Now, I am really curious about this gun. I can't find any Colt folks to discuss it with, and not sure it would be appropriate to do so here. Wonder where I could go?

 

[VM]

Pat - join the Colt Forum and post your pic with serial number question

ColtForum - Powered by vBulletin

 

[2152hq]

RE; ATF ser#....I worked on a Colt SAA, an old 1st generation revolver, that had been stolen from the owner 10yrs prior to that. It was recovered with the serial numbers(s) filed on and hacked over. But betw the numerous serial number locations on the gun, L/E was able to put together an entire ser#, run it NCIC and find it was reported stolen and eventually return it to the owner.

Before it was returned, instead of the ATF allowing the original number to be remarked on the gun, they insisted that an 'ATF' ser# as described in the above post be stamped in the gun. That became the legal ser# of the firearm. This was in the '80's.
Don't know if ATF was involved in a criminal case with the gun as evidence, or how they came to insist on the ATF ser# be stamped on the gun. Perhaps the simple fact of the obliterated serial# called them in on it.