I'm not seeing insecurity here; I'm seeing people who are just expressing a preference. Pythons are nice revolvers, but I can't see dropping $2,500 for a general production revolver. I don't own safe queens, and since Colt dropped them from the lineup, I'd hate to break a Python. I've always liked the Model 27 variety of Smiths, but I do have a 6" 686. I just like N Frames, and a Model 27 is just right.
S&W 586/686 Versus Python
- Thread starter mjolnir2
- Start date
I'm not seeing insecurity here; I'm seeing people who are just expressing a preference. Pythons are nice revolvers, but I can't see dropping $2,500 for a general production revolver. I don't own safe queens, and since Colt dropped them from the lineup, I'd hate to break a Python. I've always liked the Model 27 variety of Smiths, but I do have a 6" 686. I just like N Frames, and a Model 27 is just right.
I don't shoot either one of these but I would have to agree that for appearance the python wins.
Oh, I beg to differ...I'd take that beautiful Model 27 over that "nickel plated sissy pistol" any day of the week!
thardgrave
Member
I am one of those who just has to have both....I have a 1960 M27 8 3/8" and many years ago decided I needed a similar Python. They are very different guns, but I really like them both.........especially the way the Python is finished, close to the epitome of the gun makers art to me.
Biginge
SWCA Member, Absent Comrade
Don't want to drift the thread away from Pythons, but this Shooting Master is way more than enough to leave my Python at home. Never have been a big fan of the full underlugs by either Colt or S&W. They just seem to be too muzzle heavy.
Attachments
It's been an interesting read since I posted this thread last night and of course S&W brand loyalty runs high as expected. To me the Python is, wether true or not, the standard to where all the rest are measured (e.g., Building a Python Fighter).
With Pythons showing up in video games, notoriety at the range, etc. I don't see demand waning any time soon.
Thanks everyone for your contribution!
Thardgrave - Gorgeous Python!
With Pythons showing up in video games, notoriety at the range, etc. I don't see demand waning any time soon.
Thanks everyone for your contribution!
Thardgrave - Gorgeous Python!
Last edited:
colt could no longer build pythons even if they wanted to. they no longer have the personnel to do so. it's a vastly different situation from just repair of existing guns to actual production. btw, like all the colt haters on here. that just leaves more for me. I started out with smiths and stayed with them for years, but I now own more colts than smiths. learned to shoot bullseye with an officers match that was borrowed and liked them ever since.
jeffrey
Member
I admit that I seldom shoot my Python, but when I saw it for what then seemed a "reasonable" price, I just couldn't pass it up. A stainless (not the bright stainless) 6-inch without box or papers for $850 about three years ago at my LGS. In perfect condition and with a wonderful action. That said, I shoot my 686-4 and 586-3 a whole lot and enjoy them enormously. But there is just something about the lockup of that Python that has kept me from selling it.
Waldo
Member
I have Pythons and S&W J,K L,& N frame 357s. I like them all. I think that all of them are fine guns.
Harkrader
Member
Love my Python, and my King Cobra and I do carry them - rarely. Since I got a 686+ I think it is superior for carry. Yeah, the Python action is butter smooth with that "bank vault" lockup, and the finish is glorious.
However, the 686 is not lacking when comparing the actions in my ham fists, even if not so smooth, and I shoot it as well as I can shoot the Python or KC. Maybe if I was focused on slow-fire bullseye, it might make a difference, but for self-defense, the 686 is fine and I want that extra round.
However, the 686 is not lacking when comparing the actions in my ham fists, even if not so smooth, and I shoot it as well as I can shoot the Python or KC. Maybe if I was focused on slow-fire bullseye, it might make a difference, but for self-defense, the 686 is fine and I want that extra round.
attn sac gunslinger
Hi Bruce, appreciate your many likes of my posts. Incredible, the prices now on Diamondbacks which, as you point out, is nothing but a decked out DS.
I clearly remember buying my first revolver. It was a choice between the Model 67 and a nickel 4" Diamondback, which people now heavily over-value, IMO. No contest, the 67 won hands down. And, by the way, I've never really loved that 67 because it isn't a 66. I do use it when I have to re-qualify for my CCW.
At a show yesterday, saw an LNIB 67 offered by a private seller for $700. A search on GB shows that to be about the going price. But it wasn't a 66.
Hi Bruce, appreciate your many likes of my posts. Incredible, the prices now on Diamondbacks which, as you point out, is nothing but a decked out DS.
I clearly remember buying my first revolver. It was a choice between the Model 67 and a nickel 4" Diamondback, which people now heavily over-value, IMO. No contest, the 67 won hands down. And, by the way, I've never really loved that 67 because it isn't a 66. I do use it when I have to re-qualify for my CCW.
At a show yesterday, saw an LNIB 67 offered by a private seller for $700. A search on GB shows that to be about the going price. But it wasn't a 66.
Rock185
US Veteran
I'm a S&W guy but admit the Pythons have a beautiful finish. Much finer than on my 586. While I have not owned Pythons, friends did, so I did get to shoot more than one. Very smooth trigger pull but, just personal preference, I didn't care for the stacking during the last ~25%? of the trigger pull. The actions appeared fragile to me. What is that part that snaps sideways every time the trigger is pulled? I guess the thing I really didn't care for on the Python was the little thin, S&W K-Framed sized, forcing cone, in spite of the big heavy barrel and lug. The forcing cone was the weak point in continuous use of .357 ammo in S&W K-Frames, leading to development of the L-Framed smiths. Anyone notice how much thicker the L-Frame forcing cone is than that of the K-Frame Smiths, Pythons and Troopers (both early and MKIII versions)? I did see both Model 19 Smiths and Pythons with damaged forcing cones from use of .357 ammo years ago. Though I didn't personally see this one, another Python owner told me that the forcing cone on his Python also cracked with .357 ammo. Now the thing that bothered me the most about the Pythons, was the fact that the Pythons, and my pre MKIII Trooper, were all more accurate than any of my S&W revolvers;-) Anyway, the Pythons are beautiful guns, and their build and finish quality are something special I think.
With current Python prices, I realize that I should have bought one back when they sold at a price I'd have been willing to pay. I just didn't want one. Now, I'm just going to have to get along with my beater N-Frame .357 ;-D
With current Python prices, I realize that I should have bought one back when they sold at a price I'd have been willing to pay. I just didn't want one. Now, I'm just going to have to get along with my beater N-Frame .357 ;-D
Attachments
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2008
- Messages
- 6,619
- Reaction score
- 1,209
pricey to buy pythons these days and i'm glad I have the few that I do...beautiful guns that have never given me any problems at all.....586/686...excellent guns as well
PA Guns & Ammo
Member
This summer I recently ran across a blued 6" Python. I always wanted a 6" Colt Python mainly because of the looks. I have yet to shoot it but I usually do not put many rounds on my firearms unless they are 22's. I could not beat the price so I grabbed it. I do own a 586 and a 686 and the trigger feels smoother and lighter on the Smith than the Colt. I do like how smooth and light the cocking action of the Colt has but that is about it when it comes to functionality. I never understood the cylinder latch, it is awkward. The trigger is on the skinny side and I wish it was a tad bit wider. The Smith does seem to be built a little better and feels a little heftier too. I love revolvers that have a full underlug and the added weight.
James
James
BCDWYO
Member
This was pretty much my experience exactly (except the Air Force part!). I learned to shoot DA on Smith triggers and just never liked my Python triggers as well. Also I was always worried that I'd mess up the timing on the Pythons so I didn't want to shoot them much. They were pretty, but I sold them at a decent profit and bought more Smiths! No regrets really.
You can feed the Python .357 Mag all day long. It's designed for it.
I'm "muzzle heavy liking guy" but the Shooting Master just has to be the ultimate DA Colt. Just not enough of 'em around for most folk to have ever experienced the craftmanship. Puts any Post WWII Colt to shame. Colt probably lost money on every sale, but it might have been a huge reputation builder had not the slight distraction of the world conflict been just around the corner..
BTW, who thinks a significant portion of the recent Python price escalation has something to do with that "Walking Dead" show?
Last edited:
66snub
Member
I would agree. It would seem that Mr. Hawkes has a more deeply-seated issue with Smith and Wesson than just the production quality or designs of their guns. Another thing that Mr. Hawkes seems upset about, is that he believes that Smith and Wesson simply copied everyone else every time that they built a new gun. History has shown that, on more that one occasion, Smith and Wesson have been innovators when bringing new firearms to market. And for the record, all gun manufacturers copy each other to some extent.
66Park
Member
Python, schmython. I bought one new in 1980. Nice gun. Never liked the stacking on the Colt trigger. I preferred the action on the M64 I had at the time. I sold the Python in 1983. Whoever said no Smith and Wesson ever compared to a Python, well, you're entitled to your opinion, but I'll take any number of S&Ws over a Python (and have). The action on my 1933 38/44 Outdoorsman puts the action on a Python to shame, and I'm not just going by memory here. I handled a Python a couple weeks ago, and the stacking was exactly like I remembered it. I was always worried about cleaning in that damned rib and keeping it oiled, so it wouldn't rust. It was a pain in the neck. I chose between the Python and an M27 at the gun store. I guess I watched too many episodes of Starsky and Hutch. Now, I kind of sound like I really don't like Pythons. That isn't the case. I think they are fine guns, but totally unworthy of the hype and current price.
66Park
Member
The cylinder latch is that way because in the old days when bullseye was an extremely popular sport, a common way to hold the gun was with your thumb right there at the cylinder latch. With the latch opening with a pull instead of a push, the thumb could rest there without possibility of opening the cylinder.
Similar threads
