Pre27 v. Pre28: Case Closed (AFAIAC)
- Thread starter Art Doc
- Start date
SP isn't hard to figure out. He posts stuff like this to "stir the pot". This test most certainly lacked substance.
No sense in further discussion...SP says "case closed"....he's taking his ball and bat and going home. Game over.
Texas Star
US Veteran
Will you accept a six-inch Python (two of them) against several M-27's and three M-28's? One pre-27 had a 6.5-inch barrel; all the rest had six-inchers.
Ammo varied, but consisted of Speer 140 grain JHP, 145 grain Silvertip, and some 125 grain stuff from Remington, Winchester, and Federal. Quite a lot was Remington's 158 grain SP and JHP stuff. And I shot various .38 Special loads, too.
I'd read that Colts outshot S&W's and Rugers and were the darlings of the PPC crowd. I expected the Pythons to do better.
Honestly, I couldn't see any difference by brand. Results overlapped so much that I concluded that there was no practical difference between the S&W's and the Colts. Both shot VERY tight groups at 25 yards and if I hadn't marked the targets, I probably couldn't have told which guns shot which targets. I should probably note that I was then a very good handgun shooter and hit the range several times a month. My groups were SUBSTANTIALLY better than almost any that I've seen posted on the Net. I also handled Magnum recoil better than most do. If I shot like some men who post pics of their targets, I wouldn't put them on the Net. I'd be too ashamed and I certainly wouldn't claim to have conducted any meaningful testing. These guys who get their first .357 and fire a lousy group at just 10 yards and claim to have tested the gun are an embarrassment to all gun owners. They do a disservice to newcomers who then think that revolvers are inaccurate!
If you can't put all six holes touching closely in a pretty tight ragged hole at 25 yards from "offhand" at least fairly often, you aren't a very good pistol shot, and need to keep your results to yourself. And you shouldn't hunt live animals with a handgun.
BTW, I also owned a Colt Trooper .357, the old model, not a MK III. It shot pretty much on par with my Combat Magnums, several examples, including those marked as M-19's. One was a pre-19. It was, with an early M-29, as fine a revolver as I've owned. Later, I bought my M-66-3, which is among the most accurate four-inch .357's I've shot.
The Trooper and those M-19's were all with four-inch barrels. I have owned a couple of six-inch M-19's, but will not incude them here, as they were easier to shoot well and gave exceptional results, about on par with the N-frame guns.
It is possible that extremely skilled shooters who routinely win tough matches can detect that Colts shoot better. Most of us are not able to establish that. I make no claim to be a master marksman.
For what it may be worth, I do believe that Ruger's GP-100 averages better accuracy than did their previous Security-Six series. This is subjective and I've owned only a couple of them. But present GP-100's probably overlap S&W accuracy.
Some revolvers do prefer certain ammo, so should be fired with several brands to see what they like best.
Last edited:
Rick_A
Member
I see this is where the ultimate internet theoretical shooting match is occurring.
Rick_A
Member
...and according to the interwebs Dan Wesson's were the best shooting double action revolvers.
Nicksterdemus
Member
Sax,
So what you're ssentially saying is that if the M27 and HP were cars, the M27 would be the Chrysler Fifth Avenue while the HP would be the Plymouth Gran Fury?
How 'bout Hyundai Sonata LTD 2.0T vs. Chrysler 300 LTD/200S?
You gotta fight, for your right, to par-tay, but evahbooty git to press thar minions. That thar is in yor daily constitushun.
Last edited:
OP
Art Doc
SWCA Member, Absent Comrade
Again, this was never intended to be a scientific test. It was just a quick exercise to demonstrate what I already believed to be true.
Looking at the internals will reveal nothing. I think it quite plausible to think that as a 27 came into the fitting room the tech took just a bit more time to make sure things were as near perfect as they could be. The 28 was a cost cutting gun and the guys on the line knew it. A brief visual examination will not show this.
On the pre-war Magnum comparison, I have only shot one RM and I cannot discern any substantial difference between it and the 27s. But mine has a replacement hammer so it may no longer be as fine tuned as it was when it left Springfield.
Throwing the Python into the mix will really stir things up. I have stated many times in the past that I love the 27s, own more of them than any other gun, but I think the Python is slightly superior in fit, finish, and action smoothness. I am in the minority on this one and I know it.
Looking at the internals will reveal nothing. I think it quite plausible to think that as a 27 came into the fitting room the tech took just a bit more time to make sure things were as near perfect as they could be. The 28 was a cost cutting gun and the guys on the line knew it. A brief visual examination will not show this.
On the pre-war Magnum comparison, I have only shot one RM and I cannot discern any substantial difference between it and the 27s. But mine has a replacement hammer so it may no longer be as fine tuned as it was when it left Springfield.
Throwing the Python into the mix will really stir things up. I have stated many times in the past that I love the 27s, own more of them than any other gun, but I think the Python is slightly superior in fit, finish, and action smoothness. I am in the minority on this one and I know it.
Nicksterdemus
Member
"I think the Python is slightly superior in fit, finish, and action smoothness."
Snake luvin' scoundrel.
Snake luvin' scoundrel.
Worth repeating, particularly because there may be some beginners reading these posts who don't already know the above. I thought that mosr of us did, but even that may not be the case.
Anyway, thanks for posting.
The Python is "superior" until you own a Registered Magnum (or pre war "non- registered" magnum)!!! The Python is IMO vastly over-rated. The Python is no better than a S&W "357" or Combat Magnum made before Bangor Punta and as time went on, Python quality declined anyways. One of the reasons the Pythons get so much hype is the internet, and the fact they are not made anymore. At one time, they were like having a Ford Mustang or something, pretty common, and so many people had experience with them, that their "legend" err MYTH grew to astronomical proportions. Their lockwork was a vintage design, the sights left something to be desired, the factory grips were terrible (1st gen full checkered Python grips do feel ok in your hand) and the DA pull stacked. On top of that, the cylinder release is vastly inferior to that of a S&W. So whats left? A pretty blue and a vent rib? Pre war S&Ws have a pretty blue, and the vent rib itself was more for looks than anything. Does anyone here really think that if Pythons were HALF as great as people claim, that Colt would not still be making them? Get real! Many people don't have RMs, or never heard of them, some don't have the coin, etc. and so the RM vs X comparisons are not common. Pythons were made much later and are way more common than even post war 5 screw model of 1950 357s, hence more people yak about them.
As far as the OP's topic, there are far too many variables to consider to put forth anything of the such with any degree of certainty. As others have stated, I would think a wide sample size is a requirement before trying to suggest anything to this effect on the S&W 27 vs 28 for function.
I wouldn't trade these 3 RMs for 8 Pythons! If you want to pay big money for the "best revolver of all time" that Colt mysteriously completely stopped producing on their own, you be my guest!
As far as the OP's topic, there are far too many variables to consider to put forth anything of the such with any degree of certainty. As others have stated, I would think a wide sample size is a requirement before trying to suggest anything to this effect on the S&W 27 vs 28 for function.
I wouldn't trade these 3 RMs for 8 Pythons! If you want to pay big money for the "best revolver of all time" that Colt mysteriously completely stopped producing on their own, you be my guest!
Last edited:
If a M28 and a M27 cost the same I am pretty sure most people would pick the M27. That leads me to believe that people that buy M28s buy them because they are cheaper. Riding a mule will get you where you are going but it ain't no thoroughbred. Boy o boy, didn't I step on a bunch of toes. Larry
Python quality declined anyways. One of the reasons the Pythons get so much hype is the internet, and the fact they are not made anymore. Does anyone here really think that if Pythons were HALF as great as people claim, that Colt would not still be making them? Get real! Many people don't have RMs, or never heard of them, some don't have the coin, etc. and so the RM vs X comparisons are not common. Pythons were made much later and are way more common than even post war 5 screw model of 1950 357s, hence more people yak about them.
I wouldn't trade these 3 RMs for 8 Pythons! If you want to pay big money for a model that Colt completely stopped producing on their own, you be my guest!
S&W quality also declined over the years. If RMs were as great as people claim wouldn't S&W still be making them? Couldn't it be possible that the reason so many Pythons were made during their time is that many people recognized they were the best and were willing to pay for it. Gun Digest 1965: Python blue $125., nickel $137.50. M27 blue or nickel $120. During their time period the Python was higher priced than the M27. If you want to pay big money for a model (RM) that S&W quit producing be my quest. Just comparing S&W to what you said about Colt.
Larry
I think your analogy leaves a lot to be desired. The model 27 is a descendant of the pre war 357 magnum, of which some were "registered" in the pre war years 1935 to 1939. The design of the N frame 357 was updated many times, but still is and always was a N frame 357 magnum. Any wise company does updates for any successful product or model. Ironically, the Python was not updated very much during its life which probably contributed to its downfall. The Python sales were not significantly higher than model 27 sales, so thats not a good point either. In fact, I bet that the model 27 handedly outsold the Python. The MSRP point is also irrelevant since that can be related to S&W having a superior manufacturing process, which they did. The proof of that? That they made DA revolvers longer, and their revolvers made S&W enough money for the DA model line to stay in continous production. If the Colt DAs were as great as people like you say, they would still be manufactured by Colt. Believe me, Colt didn't quit making the so called "best revolver of all time" because it made them tons of profit. Of course, one would have to think that the "best revolver ever made" would make the company who produces it tons of money, right? When the Pythons were at the sporting goods stores, there wasn't enough kool aid drinkers for Colt to keep making the Python. Funny how the "legend" of a Python was kept secret somehow when they were in production, and now when the prices have gotten high, and production ceased, now there is this legend. Now people are paying $1000s for the same damn revolver that Colt discontinued for many reasons and when they pay $2500 for a plain jane 1970s Python, they say they paid that cause its the best revolver ever made. I have never met an experienced knowledgable revolver shooter or collector who said that Pythons were the top dog, and IMO I never will.
The RMs are worth much more than Pythons, and they should be. The RM is a different class of a revolver. RMs are more historically significant, better made, better designed, they are more rare and often times their history is more interesting. On top of all that, RMs were first! Who here ever had to have a RM re-timed by the factory? The first year guns will be 80 next year, still going strong too!
I'm not sure what response you expected when you present this superficial analysis of the Colt Python vs S&W N frame 357 ON THE S&W FORUM!
Last edited:
Nicksterdemus
Member
be my quest. .
You're scaring me Larry.
Hello Larry, from an old Virginia boy to a NC native, I take offense to your comment about my old mule, Ruth. She was the best four legged mode of transportation I ever owned. I had a horse training facility for show horses and jumpers. No saddle and a rope halter, she would walk me right to my favorite dove spot every time, stand in the shade without a flinch. I would appreciate a re-traction and come up with another comparison. Mike 2796
If the SHTF I'd take my Ruger GP-100 over any of the above.
71firebird400
Member
It doesn't take much to redirect a thread on the S&W forum into a Python bashing fest.....we're really showing our maturity on this one.
For the record I do not see the Colt forum threads bashing S&W's. Perhaps they are a more refined group of individuals
For the record I do not see the Colt forum threads bashing S&W's. Perhaps they are a more refined group of individuals
Perhaps its because S&Ws are that nice
Last edited:
Rick_A
Member
Not a bad idea. My Smiths are too pretty and valuable to beat up.If the SHTF I'd take my Ruger GP-100 over any of the above.
Page 2 ....." And now for the rest of the story......."
Boy this thread took a hard right turn.......LOL
RM and it's decedents Vs. Colt's Python..........
Python is the "cool gun" like the Model 29 (70s), Beretta 92 (80s) and Glocks (21st century) due to TV and Movie exposure........today the Python still plays a big roll on TV in shows like "The Walking Dead"!!!!
The Python is a sexy looking gun.... with a great screen presence!
The RM and Model 27 are understudies to the 29 ........ if a producer/director wants to use a Smith he/she will cast the Model 29 and make a big deal about it being a .44magnum...... Thanks to Clint!
My Dad loved and carried his Colt New Service in .357 magnum from 1939 until about the mid 60s ....... and it was his house gun until the 90s.
Me.... give me a S&W ....... size wise I prefer a K or L frame over the N.....but I do have a RM and a 4" Model 28
So to each their own..........but I would except a Python as a gift>>>>LOL
Boy this thread took a hard right turn.......LOL
RM and it's decedents Vs. Colt's Python..........
Python is the "cool gun" like the Model 29 (70s), Beretta 92 (80s) and Glocks (21st century) due to TV and Movie exposure........today the Python still plays a big roll on TV in shows like "The Walking Dead"!!!!
The Python is a sexy looking gun.... with a great screen presence!
The RM and Model 27 are understudies to the 29 ........ if a producer/director wants to use a Smith he/she will cast the Model 29 and make a big deal about it being a .44magnum...... Thanks to Clint!
My Dad loved and carried his Colt New Service in .357 magnum from 1939 until about the mid 60s ....... and it was his house gun until the 90s.
Me.... give me a S&W ....... size wise I prefer a K or L frame over the N.....but I do have a RM and a 4" Model 28
So to each their own..........but I would except a Python as a gift>>>>LOL
Last edited:
hardscrabble
Member
Bam Bam said it all so I erased my post.
Last edited:
Nicksterdemus
Member
If the SHTF I'd take my Ruger GP-100 over any of the above.
I'm more of a CCW guy, but in my opinion six well placed shots from a D frame 2" Colt Detective Special is of more value than five well placed shots from a J magnum frame 3" S&W model 60.
But if I only had two pistolas to hide on me for close social work those wouldn't be the ones.
They would be the early '70s 3" tapered barrel Bridgeport, Conneticut 5 shot Charter Arms .44 special & the 5 round bobbed hammer 3" full lug SS DAO M720 .44 spl Rossi.
Because life is too short to protect yourself w/anything starting less than four.
gmborkovic;138062520 No saddle and a rope halter said:Even though you didn't use a smiley or sarcastic face I am going to play like you were making a joke. I could say an ugly woman can cook as well a pretty woman can but a pretty woman looks better cooking but then somebody with an ugly wife will get upset. In this PC world any analogy I use will upset somebody. Even if you don't get to town very often you should know that riding a mule bareback with a rope halter ain't got no class.Larry
44wheelman
Member
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2006
- Messages
- 1,709
- Reaction score
- 999
Okay, I'll argue.... just because I've got a late 1970's 27, and a mid 1960's 28-2.
The action on my "S" s/n 28 is way more consistent/smoother than my 27. But that is why I bought that 28; I owned both a 6" pre-28, and a 4" 28 and sold both for being "sub-par".
As far as Pythons... my Dan Wesson 15-2 shot half the group size of the Python at less than half the price. This was a brand new bright stainless 1993 Python, and was promptly sold. So more recently, wishing I still had my Python (for monetary gain only) I bought a 1960 mfg Python as prices were beginning to climb. Much different Python than what I had previously owned.
As for Dan Wessons, all of my Dan Wessons have a mediocre at best da trigger pull.... essentially they are super accurate single action target guns in my opinion.
So, in conclusion, I think SP's assessment is correct most of the time, but one can find an exception if one tries.
The action on my "S" s/n 28 is way more consistent/smoother than my 27. But that is why I bought that 28; I owned both a 6" pre-28, and a 4" 28 and sold both for being "sub-par".
As far as Pythons... my Dan Wesson 15-2 shot half the group size of the Python at less than half the price. This was a brand new bright stainless 1993 Python, and was promptly sold. So more recently, wishing I still had my Python (for monetary gain only) I bought a 1960 mfg Python as prices were beginning to climb. Much different Python than what I had previously owned.
As for Dan Wessons, all of my Dan Wessons have a mediocre at best da trigger pull.... essentially they are super accurate single action target guns in my opinion.
So, in conclusion, I think SP's assessment is correct most of the time, but one can find an exception if one tries.
Looks like I was responsible for this drift 
What I didn't say was I had a Python years ago that cheated on me, and so I have been bitter ever since 
We need to get back on track (27 vs 28), because as 71firebird400 said, the elites over at the Colt forum are too civilized to say anything negative about a S&W. They are more refined and cultured than anyone who would dare say something negative about a Python. Obviously it is my "maturity level" that caused me to discuss why I don't like Pythons, and why I think they are a tad over-rated. I should be ashamed of myself, and quite frankly, I am
So, I didn't say, but I had a 28-2 and a pre 28, and the trigger pulls were ok for both, both ways. I cannot remember which out of those 2 was better. I've owned 3 27-2s and 2 pre 27s and the pulls were generally good but the difference IMO were not significant. Perhaps a little lube and cleaning would have made the difference. As others and myself have stated, a large sample size is needed before drawing any type of valid conclusion on this subject.
What I didn't say was I had a Python years ago that cheated on me, and so I have been bitter ever since We need to get back on track (27 vs 28), because as 71firebird400 said, the elites over at the Colt forum are too civilized to say anything negative about a S&W. They are more refined and cultured than anyone who would dare say something negative about a Python. Obviously it is my "maturity level" that caused me to discuss why I don't like Pythons, and why I think they are a tad over-rated. I should be ashamed of myself, and quite frankly, I am
So, I didn't say, but I had a 28-2 and a pre 28, and the trigger pulls were ok for both, both ways. I cannot remember which out of those 2 was better. I've owned 3 27-2s and 2 pre 27s and the pulls were generally good but the difference IMO were not significant. Perhaps a little lube and cleaning would have made the difference. As others and myself have stated, a large sample size is needed before drawing any type of valid conclusion on this subject.
Last edited:
"Even if you don't get to town very often you should know that riding a mule bareback with a rope halter ain't got no class."
No, it just means you're po'!
I was at a mule show in Shelbyville TN back in the late '90s and there was a lady there who was riding her mule bareback, with just a piece of haybale string tied over her lower jaw. Now THAT was a well trained mule!
No, it just means you're po'!
I was at a mule show in Shelbyville TN back in the late '90s and there was a lady there who was riding her mule bareback, with just a piece of haybale string tied over her lower jaw. Now THAT was a well trained mule!
Why was the woman wearing "just a string tied over her lower jaw"????
Surprised you noticed the mule!!!!
LOL
Surprised you noticed the mule!!!!
LOL
Last edited:
OP
Art Doc
SWCA Member, Absent Comrade
By Texas Star-
"If you can't put all six holes touching closely in a pretty tight ragged hole at 25 yards from "offhand" at least fairly often, you aren't a very good pistol shot, and need to keep your results to yourself. " (Speaking of shooting a 357 Magnum revolver.)
I guess I'm not a very good pistol shot.
Really? A one hole group offhand at 25 yards is a measurement of mundane performance? Seriously, how many shooters can actually do that?
"If you can't put all six holes touching closely in a pretty tight ragged hole at 25 yards from "offhand" at least fairly often, you aren't a very good pistol shot, and need to keep your results to yourself. " (Speaking of shooting a 357 Magnum revolver.)
I guess I'm not a very good pistol shot.
Really? A one hole group offhand at 25 yards is a measurement of mundane performance? Seriously, how many shooters can actually do that?
Leatherhead23
Member
Smooth or not, I think both of those guns need a set of target stocks. Probably make you shoot better...
Last edited:
Similar threads
