My Colt Python Rant!

[Mike SC Hunter]

Sorry, gotta be that guy who must've 'got a good one', you can call 'manure' on it all you want but 15k so far and going strong - from 1981:
View attachment 795183

It's been mostly target .38, but a fair chunk of .357 as well. It'll go when I go.

Guess you got the only perfect one they made.........Congrats........Continue to enjoy it.

 

[YouveHadYour6]

Guess you got the only perfect one they made.........Congrats........Continue to enjoy it.

Eh I'm an admitted Colt guy. In 25 years of collecting as of this year, I've picked up five S&W revolvers with issues that have required either going back or shop work to fix. I've had one Colt wheelgun go sideways on me.

Colt semi-autos are another story, but there again I'll take the Colt 9 times out of 10 as I won't usually even bother with a Smith semi - they just plain don't like me. Me looking at them seems to make them jam, especially if they're pre-third gen.

Say what you will about'em, new and old, I like my Colts.

 

[rpv-ak]

Always wanted a Python,the blue was what got me hooked on them.then one day at the shop I was working at (late 70's)ordered a python for a state police officer that was retiring,his gift to himself.well we got it ordered and when it came in called him and he unboxed it himself,pulled the hammer back and the hammer spur broke off,he put it back in the box and very politely asked for his money back,that ended my colt fascination

Someone had to have taken that Python out of the box and dropped it. I can’t see any Colt hammer spur being so weak if it were forged and shaped to correct dimensions. Am I wrong thinking this way?

 

[rpv-ak]

Nope Mr know it all. My anaconda is flush as are my 2 pythons and my .22 King Cobra. NO GUN EVER SHOULD HAVE A BARELL THAT'S NOT FLUSH WITH THE SHROUD TOP STRAP WHATEVER. Go buy 6 Colt revolvers like me and then get back to me

Every revolver produced with a barrel/shroud combo requires being secured at both ends. A threaded frame at one end, and a locknut at the muzzle end. The shroud secured with something like a roll pin on the frame face and the shroud internally thread at the muzzle end. Daw Wesson uses a castle-type nut. S&W uses a threaded nut secured with an Allen wrench setup.i see nothing that would suggest Colt uses a barrel/shroud combo. Not that there’s anything wrong with a two-piece combo. DW revolvers are some of the most accurate out of the box revolvers on the planet.

 

[Thaddeus Beauregard]

Every revolver produced with a barrel/shroud combo requires being secured at both ends. A threaded frame at one end, and a locknut at the muzzle end. The shroud secured with something like a roll pin on the frame face and the shroud internally thread at the muzzle end. Daw Wesson uses a castle-type nut. S&W uses a threaded nut secured with an Allen wrench setup.i see nothing that would suggest Colt uses a barrel/shroud combo. Not that there's anything wrong with a two-piece combo. DW revolvers are some of the most accurate out of the box revolvers on the planet.

I agree with everything you said, except that S&W uses a flange on the front of their barrel sleeves rather than a nut. It is secured by a tool that is inserted into the bore and engages the rifling, treating the rifling lands as wrench flats to tighten the sleeve into the shroud. When fully tightened, the flange at the front of the barrel tube torques up against the shroud. Unless you have the special tool S&W uses or make one, you have no way of unscrewing and reinstalling a Smith 2 piece barrel assembly. Maybe there are some S&Ws I'm not aware of that use the allen wrench nut you describe, but if so, none of the new Smiths I have use that system.

 

[Mike SC Hunter]

I agree with everything you said, except that S&W uses a flange on the front of their barrel sleeves rather than a nut. It is secured by a tool that is inserted into the bore and engages the rifling, treating the rifling lands as wrench flats to tighten the sleeve into the shroud. When fully tightened, the flange at the front of the barrel tube torques up against the shroud. Unless you have the special tool S&W uses or make one, you have no way of unscrewing and reinstalling a Smith 2 piece barrel assembly. Maybe there are some S&Ws I'm not aware of that use the allen wrench nut you describe, but if so, none of the new Smiths I have use that system.

You are correct.......I've never saw any other method on 2 pc. bbls.

 

[Mike Griffith]

You mean like a Glock that works right out of the box without having to replace parts. Yeah, at least it wasn't one of those.

The only Glock I ever shot wouldn't keep the shots in a 5" circle from a sandbag rest at 25 feet! It wasn't a good impression, but it was a lasting one! I've never been interested in shooting another one! That's my plastic memory!

 

[LewiRose]

Sorry, gotta be that guy who must've 'got a good one', you can call 'manure' on it all you want but 15k so far and going strong - from 1981:
View attachment 795183

It's been mostly target .38, but a fair chunk of .357 as well. It'll go when I go.

I have a 1992 blue version, first year Colt put those grips on the four in barrel Pythons. I was going to replace them with wood but the longer I held the gun the more I came to the conclusion that they were the best grip on any handgun I ever felt…

 

[LewiRose]

Hence the Smython or Pyth and Wessyon:

View attachment 795466

That is one beautiful revolver! I believe that the main difference in preceved accuracy between a Smith and a Colt is not so much the barrel but the vault like lockup of the Colt action…

 

[Faulkner]

The only Glock I ever shot wouldn't keep the shots in a 5" circle from a sandbag rest at 25 feet! It wasn't a good impression, but it was a lasting one! I've never been interested in shooting another one! That's my plastic memory!

Could it be due to lack of appropriate instruction. I teach Glock handling and sometimes it takes a bit to instruct someone new to Glocks the subtle difference compared to what they're used to shooting. I assure you I can make one do better than 5" at 25 feet off the bench.

 

[65-2x2]

Remington does it too, and I think Smith has the silly stuff on some of their “products.” I’d guess there is some guidance from the generous uncle on this, looking into the future, and if you are a manufacturer maybe you get style points for participating? (Maybe not.) If so, that smacks of registry and should be forbidden by current law. But who cares about laws!

In any case, I see it as a clash of the generations, and we old timers are losing all of those.

The only real constant is change.

 

[Walkin Horse]

The CNC milling machine that makes each barrel exactly the same as the last one is not a union member. It doesn't take vacations, get sick, take breaks, etc. It makes duplicate parts that are exactly like all the other parts, within the achievable tolerances of the machine, tooling, and part fixture because it runs on a program that repeats the same tool paths every time. The person who loads the material blank into the machine and presses the cycle start button may very well be a union member, but that person did not "make" the barrel, the computer programmed machine did.

I’m late to the party but I can tell you this. You can wrestle with a pig but you’re only going to get muddy and the pig enjoys it.

 

[Mike SC Hunter]

Wait until you get on the firing line.

I’d rather 6 for sure than 15 maybe as the old saying goes.

The fact ONE revolver has a factory issue does NOT invalidate the FACT wheelguns are the more dependable option for serious social work.

Made me laugh.............

 

[mwatson007]

Smiths are a better value.

If money is no object, the Colt is a better gun.

Buying guns, then complaining about the cost is like jumping in the pool and complaining that you got wet.

Bill Wilson ? sez it is a great firearm. the new python. and heavier more sturdy

 

[Cartwright Jones]

Recently, I visited a local firearms establishment and was offered a great deal on a polished stainless, Colt Python with 3" barrel. I didn't really need it but I had always wanted another Python, especially the 3". I had not done any research as I had not been looking for one but I soon found out that was a huge mistake. The gun was great but the rear sight is so bad it should be an embarrassment for Colt to put such a junk rear sight on such a nice gun that costs a pretty penny!

The rear sight windage adjustment is done by loosening a very small (0.50") set screw. You can then make adjustments by turning the windage screw and drifting the very loose blade back and forth to where you think might be right, tighten the set screw and shoot a group. After several groups, the set screw may or may not remain tight and thereby allowing the sight to drift and you have the pleasure of trying to sight in all over again. To say I was frustrated is an understatement.

I researched this when I got home and found out the Python rear sight is hated by many and replaced by most. The options are a Wilson Combat Battlesight or Kensight Elliason. While I liked the idea of the Elliason sight, I ordered the Wilson. Hopefully, it will be here sometime next week and I can get the gun up and running like it's supposed to.

Research before you buy. Lesson learned.

Rant complete.

Yep, you're right! Can't argue with your sight assessment one bit! But, in the words of the reporter who interviewed Mary Todd Lincoln after the assassination, "Other than that Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?"

Yeah, Colt put on a rickety rear sight by many standards, but other than THAT, they built a beautiful, extremely well-toleranced, attractive revolver that makes the original look like a sack-o-taters! I know, I own both! My original Python circa "I have no idea" has a terrible DA trigger pull despite all the hoopla I heard for eons about how I just HAD to own a Python, only to get it and discover the DA trigger sucked! SA was clean and crisp of course as were all large revolver triggers "back in the day" when "everybody" shot their revolvers single-action. It does have a sweet, Royal Blue "plated looking" finish, but that's bad in a way because it makes me never want to carry it around! Other than the suctuous DA though it's sweet.
The NEW version...like, WOW! Absolutely GORGEOUS! Ain't technology wonderful! Fit and finish is perfect. The DA pull is around 7 roller-bearing-pounds! It's so sleek, so smooth, so light, so "rolls right on through" one really doesn't feel any urgency to use SA for more precise shots! Not that I'm going to make a lot of precise shots with it, because, well, it's still a PYTHON and the though of doing much more than looking at it causes serious anxiety! I wish I could afford one of EVERY model of the new Python and Anaconda series, they are just that clean and crisp, and sweet!
If you want a gun to actually carry and abuse, buy a Smith & Wesson! Well, maybe not, my 25-15 New Classic .45 Colt is really TOO NICE to take out and "abuse!" It's beautiful, perfectly fitted, the DA pull is super-nice - not even close to the Python, but WAY BETTER than S&W N-frames of yore! The SA is of course S&W perfect, clean, and crisp. The overall "feel" of the gun is something vastly different than the old days of the Goncalo Alves grips. These are slimmer, longer, more organic to the frame's shape making the grip and trigger reach perfect for these size 7-1/2 hands with shorter-than-standard sausage fingers. The long, 6-1/2-inch tapered barrel puts the weight right into the "fist" of the shooting hand, and like the Python, I find it nearly impossible to ever take it far from it's box and shoot it. I've shot the Python - NEVER. I've shot the M25-15 like 12 times - as in, 12 shots!
Make no mistake, I have no problem busting out hundreds of caps from a Glock, or my new fave, Girsan P35, or even my RIA .460R conversion with V2 damper, but these "new design" revolvers are just TOO NICE to soil by shooting!
Below is the beauty queen Python - like a prissy Prima Donna! With her is the mighty, massive, man-hood 500 S&W looming over her like a great protector! Many won't believe this, but this 4-inch 500 kicks LESS than that murderous bastard below!

Had to include the nasty bastard below because it begged me. It kicks SO HARD I've shot it exactly 5 times, as in five shots! That's all I needed! It's built sweet, but the DA trigger isn't even on the same scale as a New Classic N-frame, With that said, if RECOIL could kill a bear, this is the gun!


My favorite bear caliber - 460 Rowland. Recoil from full-house thousand fpe rounds is like a kitty-kat! It holds a solid 10 rounds, has the best SA trigger known to man, slim, compact, it's what the 1911 platform was always destined to become.

This thing below. Around $1,500 WASTED! It's too pretty to carry! It's too nice to shoot! I considered installing a "better" rear sight but why, not like I'll ever shoot it!

 

[Jim Watson]

"Too pretty to shoot" is a sign of mental aberration.
If a gun looks good, I want to show it off, which means on my belt on the range. If it costs more, it ought to shoot better.

The double action of an Original Python stacks like mad. It can be gunsmithed into a thing of beauty but that usually includes a raftered mainspring which requires Federal primers.
The New Python has a quite good DA but the SA is heavy. So the gunsmithing has just swapped ends. If you shoot SA, which I seldom do.
The current Colt adjustable sight is just weird. In olden times we were replacing Accro sights with Elliason, now it is going from the factory to a Wilson or Kensight.

I would like to see something similar for S&W.

 

[prairieviper]

Yep, you're right! Can't argue with your sight assessment one bit! But, in the words of the reporter who interviewed Mary Todd Lincoln after the assassination, "Other than that Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?"

Well, the DA and SA trigger pull are heavier than needs to be. The trigger serrations are too sharp as well, in my opinion. The Wilson sight arrived and it's great.