Maybe I can explain.......Back in the 70s and 80s I bought two pythons, one 6in blue and one 6in stainless. blue one I gave $389.00 the stainless I gave $759.00 two years ago sold em both, blue one sold for $2,500.00 and the stainless one sold for $3,000.00 both new in the box unfired......thats the reason...................................M*
Python Vs. Your Favorite S&W?
- Thread starter BryanJ
- Start date
Maybe I can explain.......Back in the 70s and 80s I bought two pythons, one 6in blue and one 6in stainless. blue one I gave $389.00 the stainless I gave $759.00 two years ago sold em both, blue one sold for $2,500.00 and the stainless one sold for $3,000.00 both new in the box unfired......thats the reason...................................M*
Art Doc
SWCA Member, Absent Comrade
This debate flares up every so often and more S&W owners so more guys swear this or that model of S&W is superior to the Python. To prove how much brand loyalty affects thinking I have seen folks argue that the Model 28 and Model 686 were better than the Python. That is nothing short of insane.
The only S&W that can even compete with a Python (not including the new issue Python as I have no experience) is the 27. I have multiple examples of both 27s and Pythons and in my opinion the Python has the finest fit and finish of any production revolver ever made. The RM may edge it, but the RM was a semi custom revolver.
Two of my Pythons.
I shoot them better than I do any S&W except a 25-2 I sold because I hated the clips.
6" group
The only S&W that can even compete with a Python (not including the new issue Python as I have no experience) is the 27. I have multiple examples of both 27s and Pythons and in my opinion the Python has the finest fit and finish of any production revolver ever made. The RM may edge it, but the RM was a semi custom revolver.
Two of my Pythons.
I shoot them better than I do any S&W except a 25-2 I sold because I hated the clips.
6" group
Pythons are pretty, but the grip ia all wrong for Me. I've had early and middle Pythons and diamond backs. The grip is tough to hold so the front sight is there. No longer have any, just Smiths.
Rpg
Member
I traded a Ruger Blackhawk for a used Python in about 1972. I enjoyed the Python but traded it for a better Colt: a Gold Cup.
The Python is the most beautiful revolver I've ever owned (including a bunch of Smiths) but wasn't a noticeably better or worse shooter than the Smiths.
The Gold Cup, on the other hand, was a better shooter than either the Smiths or the Python. It also had the superior Colt blue as did the Python.
The Python is the most beautiful revolver I've ever owned (including a bunch of Smiths) but wasn't a noticeably better or worse shooter than the Smiths.
The Gold Cup, on the other hand, was a better shooter than either the Smiths or the Python. It also had the superior Colt blue as did the Python.
Last edited:
Protocall_Design
Vendor
I have been shooting pistol matches since 1979 to the present time, all with revolvers. I have owned 4 Colt Pythons when the were current production in the 80s. They are the best looking revolver ever made, to my eyes. They did not hold up to firing a lot of rounds, 30,000 to 50,000 a year. The actions stack up as you pull the trigger, similar to a coil spring revo. If you tune the action, it can be better, but not nearly as good as a tuned K,L, or N S&W. I had a Trooper I didn't like at all.
Since the mid 80s, I have shot all S&W revos with good success. All the Colts are long gone now, but I still enjoy looking at them. My 686 PPC gun probably has close to 200,000 rounds through it (2nd barrel) and is doing fine. It will outlast me. I have several 686s in various configurations, plus others. They all have very good triggers except for the carry guns which remain stock. Some of them are cut for moon clips, the best and fastest way to recharge a revolver.
Bottom line, I will take a Smith over a Colt every time, because of the much better DA trigger pull, especially since you can get 2 to 4 S&Ws for the price of one Colt. Not even the Manhurin, Korth, Janz, or any other revo can have the DA trigger of a tuned Smith & Wesson.
Since the mid 80s, I have shot all S&W revos with good success. All the Colts are long gone now, but I still enjoy looking at them. My 686 PPC gun probably has close to 200,000 rounds through it (2nd barrel) and is doing fine. It will outlast me. I have several 686s in various configurations, plus others. They all have very good triggers except for the carry guns which remain stock. Some of them are cut for moon clips, the best and fastest way to recharge a revolver.
Bottom line, I will take a Smith over a Colt every time, because of the much better DA trigger pull, especially since you can get 2 to 4 S&Ws for the price of one Colt. Not even the Manhurin, Korth, Janz, or any other revo can have the DA trigger of a tuned Smith & Wesson.
rkittine
Member
I still have my 1978 6" Royal Blue Python, in the original box and unfired. Right now it is going to stay that way. I do love my 6.5" model 27 also from the 70s.
Hard to compare the finish on the original Royal Blue Pythons to anything else, but they go out of time with hard use.
Bob
Hard to compare the finish on the original Royal Blue Pythons to anything else, but they go out of time with hard use.
Bob
Last edited:
This
vs this
Tough decision
vs this
Tough decision
Protocall_Design
Vendor
Get both of them!
sigp220.45
US Veteran
Its all about the cost.
If a Python and a 586 cost the same, very few people would pick the 586.
I have two Pythons and 20 or 30 Smiths, because I run across sub-$500 Smiths all the time and I can usually swing it. Not so with a Python.
Is a new Python worth twice what you'd pay for a similar 586? Or is an older one worth 3 - 4 times? To me, yup. I recognize its not rational.
If a Python and a 586 cost the same, very few people would pick the 586.
I have two Pythons and 20 or 30 Smiths, because I run across sub-$500 Smiths all the time and I can usually swing it. Not so with a Python.
Is a new Python worth twice what you'd pay for a similar 586? Or is an older one worth 3 - 4 times? To me, yup. I recognize its not rational.
Attachments
Pisgah
Member
I owned a Python for a short while. Make no mistake, it is a fine revolver. It's looks cannot be denied, nor can it's accuracy. Two reasons, one real, one more theoretical, made me trade it off. Most important, it just was not comfortable in my hands. Grips wrong, balance wrong. Yet, other people loved it, so it was not the gun but me. Second, the S&W action is more durable than the Python's under heavy usage. I doubt I'd ever have shot it enough for that to be a factor, but...
Of course, if I were a collector and not a shooter, I'd probably still have it.
Of course, if I were a collector and not a shooter, I'd probably still have it.
Bob... Do you remember what you payed for the python in 1978?....................................M*
Should have tried a set of Hogue grips like I did on my 4'' python made a world of difference.........................M*
As I've stated here before. I've owned a Python for 40 years. Bought NIB from Colt's custom shop in 1980 for $480.00. I haven't shot it in a couple of years. It went out of time twice and I had to peen(lengthen) the top leg of the hand both times to get it back right. Had to replace the V-spring because it started snapping. Haven't shot it in years. Much prefering my more reliable Smith's. Only reason it's still here it was gift from my wife for building her a house.
Bill Bates
Member
I've never owned a Python, never wanted too. I never could get use too the way the trigger stacks up shooting double action.
I really don't like the cylinder release on Colts. I prefer the S&W release that relaeases by pushing and not pulling like the Colts. The grip on the Python doesn't fit my paw and looks funny.
Esthetically I don't like full lug barrels Smith & Wesson or Colt. Between the full lug barrel and the shape of the grip the Python just isn't balanced to my eye. The lines don't flow well. The Python just isn't pleasing to look at. Of course different strokes for different folks.
Now to the Python finish. It is shinny, deep and bright. Big but here. But I've never liked how the Python was polished. by that I mean they used a soft buffing wheel. Surfaces that should be flat are often aren't. Edges that should be sharp can be rounded. Some of the later Pythons often look like a bad bubba over buffed blue job. Of course those are just how they look to my eye. Look at a Model 19, 27 or 29 and the surface on the frame and side plate are dead flat. It is the difference between using a firm and hard buffing wheel (wood I suspect at Smith & Wesson) and a soft felt wheel.
Oh, and gosh darn, the cylinders on Pythons rotate the wrong direction.
I really don't like the cylinder release on Colts. I prefer the S&W release that relaeases by pushing and not pulling like the Colts. The grip on the Python doesn't fit my paw and looks funny.
Esthetically I don't like full lug barrels Smith & Wesson or Colt. Between the full lug barrel and the shape of the grip the Python just isn't balanced to my eye. The lines don't flow well. The Python just isn't pleasing to look at. Of course different strokes for different folks.
Now to the Python finish. It is shinny, deep and bright. Big but here. But I've never liked how the Python was polished. by that I mean they used a soft buffing wheel. Surfaces that should be flat are often aren't. Edges that should be sharp can be rounded. Some of the later Pythons often look like a bad bubba over buffed blue job. Of course those are just how they look to my eye. Look at a Model 19, 27 or 29 and the surface on the frame and side plate are dead flat. It is the difference between using a firm and hard buffing wheel (wood I suspect at Smith & Wesson) and a soft felt wheel.
Oh, and gosh darn, the cylinders on Pythons rotate the wrong direction.
Over the years I've owned four Pythons and umpteen M-27, 28, 586, 686, 19, 66 revolvers. The single most accurate .38/357 revolver that I have ever owned was a six inch Python. Firing from a rest, one particular lot of Rem. .38 Special ammo produced consistent 1 inch six shot groups. At one time I had a sheet w/ six bullseyes that I shot six shots each. Everyone at the range signed it. Wish I could find it.
The next most accurate revolver was any of the 585/686 revolvers ... all w/ six inch barrels, fired with good quality .38 Special ammo firing from a solid rest. Just not hard to keep these revolvers at or under 1.5 inches. If I were 23 years old, I think I could take my current 686 and fire from a rest to produce groups that would be very likely as good as I did that day with the Python. The other three Pythons shot 1.5 inches or so at the same distance.
I've had better results from the L-frame revolvers than the N-frame revolvers. It must have something to do with the lugged barrel. I have a 625-2 in .45 ACP that has a lugged barrel. It is the single most accurate N-frame revolver I've ever fired. It is simply outstanding in every respect.
The new Pythons have certainly gotten my attention. However, if by some trading/etc., I were able to come up with one, I would not expect it be more accurate than the 686 that I already own. I think the DA and SA of the 686 would be superior. JMHO. Sincerely. bruce.
The next most accurate revolver was any of the 585/686 revolvers ... all w/ six inch barrels, fired with good quality .38 Special ammo firing from a solid rest. Just not hard to keep these revolvers at or under 1.5 inches. If I were 23 years old, I think I could take my current 686 and fire from a rest to produce groups that would be very likely as good as I did that day with the Python. The other three Pythons shot 1.5 inches or so at the same distance.
I've had better results from the L-frame revolvers than the N-frame revolvers. It must have something to do with the lugged barrel. I have a 625-2 in .45 ACP that has a lugged barrel. It is the single most accurate N-frame revolver I've ever fired. It is simply outstanding in every respect.
The new Pythons have certainly gotten my attention. However, if by some trading/etc., I were able to come up with one, I would not expect it be more accurate than the 686 that I already own. I think the DA and SA of the 686 would be superior. JMHO. Sincerely. bruce.
One thing with the new Python........ALL the "innards" are different from the old one. Possibly making it a better gun.
Well folks,everybody's anecdote is valid and insightful because it reflects the variables of "individual differences".
My anecdote is as follows. I bought my Python new from the factory ( not custom shop) in 1983. Price was around $550 for this blue 6 incher. This was my first revolver.
Although I was not versed on the S&W revolvers , I had compatible thoughts about the Dan Wesson revolver pack. More bang for the buck rather than shooter expertise consideration.
One point. The Python is built on the medium I frame and the S&W L frame seems to be dimensionally similar as opposed to the K and N frames.
In 1983 the 586 retailed for $270.
I have physically compared both Python and Smith K frame target stocks and they appear dimensionally similar with the Smith's having a longer flared butt end.
About one year ago I was lucky to buy a like new in box 1984 no dash 586, 6 inch w partridge front sight.
I do not shoot competition and only shoot revolvers single action free standing. 12 and 25 yards outdoors.
I shot for recreation..
Since new the Python has had about 2000 rounds of 158 g S&W Nyclad put through it compared to freshly about 500 rounds of factory 158g .38 so for the 586. The Python single action comes in an average of six electronic measurements to 1 lb 15 oz. The 586 under same conditions comes in at 3 lb 8.8 oz. The blue finish of the Colt is at least a step and a half superior to the 586. The 586 btw has a very nice blue finish. Accuracy comparisons at 12 yards free hand gave the edge to the Colt. Includes precision. But that of course is an anecdotal sampling.
So the point is to share these two comparable frame size revolvers that are unaltered as they came from factory. The side plates never removed.
Now my 66_1 is a smaller K frame and I bought it well used. The five pull single action is at 2lb 5 oz. My very well used prewar Colt OMT,medium frame, 6 pull average is 3lb 12 oz. These latter two dissimilar revolvers have no records of what if any action work received other than being well used shooters.
I personally concur based on reading that the Smith action of the 586 is probably more robust for severe double action usage. Another variable is ammo.
I never shoot .357 mag. Only factory 158g .38
All manufacturers during all periods of production turn out 'lemons' for one reason or another.
In 1984 was the Python worth the extra average $200? Generally,I would opine yes on extra workmanship merits.
I paid $850 last year for the 586.
Which is better? Irrelevant to me personally because I appreciate the privilege of owning and enjoying both.
BTW at 12 yards I can split a playing card by one or two fewer shots with the Python compared to the 586 on average.
My anecdote is as follows. I bought my Python new from the factory ( not custom shop) in 1983. Price was around $550 for this blue 6 incher. This was my first revolver.
Although I was not versed on the S&W revolvers , I had compatible thoughts about the Dan Wesson revolver pack. More bang for the buck rather than shooter expertise consideration.
One point. The Python is built on the medium I frame and the S&W L frame seems to be dimensionally similar as opposed to the K and N frames.
In 1983 the 586 retailed for $270.
I have physically compared both Python and Smith K frame target stocks and they appear dimensionally similar with the Smith's having a longer flared butt end.
About one year ago I was lucky to buy a like new in box 1984 no dash 586, 6 inch w partridge front sight.
I do not shoot competition and only shoot revolvers single action free standing. 12 and 25 yards outdoors.
I shot for recreation..
Since new the Python has had about 2000 rounds of 158 g S&W Nyclad put through it compared to freshly about 500 rounds of factory 158g .38 so for the 586. The Python single action comes in an average of six electronic measurements to 1 lb 15 oz. The 586 under same conditions comes in at 3 lb 8.8 oz. The blue finish of the Colt is at least a step and a half superior to the 586. The 586 btw has a very nice blue finish. Accuracy comparisons at 12 yards free hand gave the edge to the Colt. Includes precision. But that of course is an anecdotal sampling.
So the point is to share these two comparable frame size revolvers that are unaltered as they came from factory. The side plates never removed.
Now my 66_1 is a smaller K frame and I bought it well used. The five pull single action is at 2lb 5 oz. My very well used prewar Colt OMT,medium frame, 6 pull average is 3lb 12 oz. These latter two dissimilar revolvers have no records of what if any action work received other than being well used shooters.
I personally concur based on reading that the Smith action of the 586 is probably more robust for severe double action usage. Another variable is ammo.
I never shoot .357 mag. Only factory 158g .38
All manufacturers during all periods of production turn out 'lemons' for one reason or another.
In 1984 was the Python worth the extra average $200? Generally,I would opine yes on extra workmanship merits.
I paid $850 last year for the 586.
Which is better? Irrelevant to me personally because I appreciate the privilege of owning and enjoying both.
BTW at 12 yards I can split a playing card by one or two fewer shots with the Python compared to the 586 on average.
I have a number of S&W revolvers in various flavors, and two Pythons. I like them both for different reasons.
The fit and finish on the Pythons is terrific, and the Royal Blue color is beautiful...but it's that buttery-smooth action that really gets me...it's so easy to shoot well, and it's very accurate.
Having said that, I am amazed at what Pythons are selling for these days...I really can't see them being worth the money they're bringing...JMO...
The fit and finish on the Pythons is terrific, and the Royal Blue color is beautiful...but it's that buttery-smooth action that really gets me...it's so easy to shoot well, and it's very accurate.
Having said that, I am amazed at what Pythons are selling for these days...I really can't see them being worth the money they're bringing...JMO...
I do own both but can't decide which I like best
Similar threads
- Locked
