S&W 686....Colt Python

[Empe]

I have been considering the purchase of a new revolver . It would be used for informal target shooting nothing too serious.
The two at present I am considering are the S&W 686 357 series with 5" barrel and the new Colt Python.
The Colt is about $500 more than the S&W . I have not seen either one of these models in person in order to compare.
From what I've seen in pictures and read it would appear that the Colt is a little fancier and perhaps a little nicer finished than the S&W 686 ...but perhaps not and is it worth the extra $$$ ?
Any forum members own either one or both of these models ?
If so I would appreciate your observations.

 

[BKLooney]

I'd go for the 686!

 

[OKFC05]

Do you want to shoot it or just look at it? Being a PPC, USPSA, IDPA shooter, I know that the colt needs a very expensive action job to perform as well in action pistol as the 686 does with only a "standard" tuning up. Don't take my word for it, look up Jerry Miculek's video on the subject. The colt's reputation was made when slower paced bullseye competition was king, using 700fps hbwc loads that were more accurate in the Python's faster twist compared to the smiths of the day.
Yes, as a new 2Lt I was shooting bullseye with the USAF in 1970 using their Model 15 S&W.
I have a 686 of every length (-3 and -4s), and have shot a buddy's Pythons that he bought 30 years ago and has kept.

 

[SGT ROCK 11B]

40 years ago I owned both the 686 and Python. They were comparable and great for Police work.

Now in 2023 the 686 Plus is a much better value. The reissued Python has a poor quality rear sight, IMHO. I have the four inch (nostalgic reason) but the three inch and five inch are good choices too.

 

[Nightowl]

I would find a 686-4 or earlier on the used market for less money and a better gun!!

 

[Marshal Tom]

I have not personally handled a new Python but have read and heard that they are better than the original ones. Wilson Combat makes a replacement rear sight for it that is supposed to make a large improvmet over the stock one. I think I would still prefer the 686.

 

[malph]

If the OP likes to shoot DA, the Smith is the better option.

The Smith's DA mechanism is better for anything requiring speed.

The Colts are prettier and just fine for single-action target shooting.

 

[Mike SC Hunter]

I have not personally handled a new Python but have read and heard that they are better than the original ones. Wilson Combat makes a replacement rear sight for it that is supposed to make a large improvmet over the stock one. I think I would still prefer the 686.

Sad to pay $1500.00 for a pistola and then have to spend an additional $200.00 for decent rear sight for it........They should have stuck with the original Python rear sight.

 

[329]

Well you're on the Smith-Wesson forum so I think we are all a bit biased but when Smith introduced the 686 the game changed. Most here would argue the 686 is better...myself included. My only caveat is that I would buy from a brick and mortar store. There are surprising differences from gun to gun with the same manufacture. Gone are the days when you could order a Smith revolver (or colt, Ruger, etc) and get a near perfect gun. Inspect it, pull the trigger(if the store lets you, always ask first. If not find another store). If you have a buddy that knows his revolvers take him/her with you. Check out videos on what to look for. These are mass produced guns that have a lot of moving parts. How they work together will determine how well they will shoot. Let us know how you do., even if you get the Python. Lots of Python owners here��.

 

[F224]

I love my 2-3-4” Colt King Cobras, but not sure I’d buy a Python.
Possibly the best ever 686 are the 3&4” CS1 versions. The few I had were sub 1.5” shooters at 25 yards.

 

[ZGrand]

I have both, but the 686+ has a 6" barrel and the Python is a 4.25". I love them both. The fit and finish is a little better on the Colt, and it balances better (but again they are different barrel lengths). The double action on the Colt is slightly better, and the single action on the Smith is slightly better. They seem equally accurate.

 

[malph]

Well you're on the Smith-Wesson forum so I think we are all a bit biased but when Smith introduced the 686 the game changed. Most here would argue the 686 is better...myself included. My only caveat is that I would buy from a brick and mortar store. There are surprising differences from gun to gun with the same manufacture. Gone are the days when you could order a Smith revolver (or colt, Ruger, etc) and get a near perfect gun. Inspect it, pull the trigger(if the store lets you, always ask first. If not find another store). If you have a buddy that knows his revolvers take him/her with you. Check out videos on what to look for. These are mass produced guns that have a lot of moving parts. How they work together will determine how well they will shoot. Let us know how you do., even if you get the Python. Lots of Python owners here��.

You raise excellent points.

Unfortunately, Smith's QA is not what it should be.

I think I'd buy the Smith anyway and then send it to someone like Tk Customs for an action tune.

The Smith would still probably be cheaper than the Colt. Once tuned up, the Smith's action would be far superior to the Python.

The Colt's are pretty though. I give them that.

 

[CheyenneBodie]

The Smith 686 has the greatest array of parts and enhancements available. For a new 686 (the one with the lock) IMO the best enhancement is the trigger parts available from Rev-Up-Action. Very light double action with reliability.

IMO The new Python is better than the old ones. Simpler design with less moving parts. Stronger frame and superior Double Action over the old models. It looks better and all the parts are better finished than the S&W. Don't like the sights but better ones are available and they are easily installed.

 

[.38SuperMan]

Go to the Colt forum and ask the same question. You ask smith owners and they’ll tell you to buy a Smith. Colt owners will tell you to buy a colt.

I own a 1977 Highway Patrolman and considered buying a 686 but was very disappointed in the finishing and fit of the Smith compared to my vintage Smiths. In addition I really dislike the internal lock so I never bought one.

I owned a late 70’s 6” Python for 30 years or so and foolishly sold it but when the new ones came out I bought one to replace it. I’m so pleased with it I bought a 3”, 4.25” and 6” and have no regrets. Fit, finish and double action trigger are excellent and there’s no internal lock. Some people complain about the rear sight but I’ve not had any issues with it. The complaint a few people have is the set screw to hold the blade in place and the lack of click adjustments on windage. I don’t have any complaints, it’s just a little different.

Ask the colt folks for the other perspective and then go to a store and compare them for yourself. I personally felt the Colt was worth the difference in price. If Smith were building them to the same standard as they built revolvers 40 and more years ago it would be a tough choice.

 

[Steve wood]

I have both. Both bought in the last 30 days. 6 inch Python,has a butter smooth tigger,very well made,no flaws whatsoever. Bought new altamount finger groove grips for better purchase. 4 inch 686+,bought used at gun show,very,very little use,maybe 1 box ammo. Looked over very well,again no flaws, no barrel cant,no sight cant,crane fits tight,cylinder gap perfect and straight,finish duller than Python,polished with rag and glitz to nice shine.686 came with rubber grips,which would be better for recoil,but ugly.bought new hogue finger groove checkered 1 piece grips,which feel wonderfull,but have not shot this 1 yet.also added hogue short extended cylinder release to make it easier(old fingers). Paid $1350 for Python at grand opening at gun shop +$90 for grips. Paid $775 for 686+. Paid little over$300 for grips and lever for smith. Smith had hammer spring that almost takes skin off thumb,but single action is very light. Both lock up cylinder very well but python seems slightly tighter,and also has tight gap.
I like ‘‘em both and will shoot both,but smith feels better in my hand,and python is made better,with much smoother trigger by far.pay your money and Make your choice,just look them over carefully. Did replace python rear sight with Wilson combat,about $100

 

[balin]

I have a 686 and a new Python. The finish on the python is superior. And the double action is better inmy opinion. For the money the 686 is probably a better value. The python probably has more bragging rights and flash to it. I am not a fan of the rear sight on the python ot the grips but others may feel different

 

[Beemerguy53]

I own a 4" 686-4, a 4" Python (about 1990 vintage) and a new 3" Python.

I love the action on the older Python. The new Python is good too. And they're both very accurate. But for just regular shooting, I'll take the 686...

 

[stansdds]

My advice, handle and inspect both. See what fits your hand better, which trigger pull you prefer. With current production revolvers, look for which one is without manufacturing flaws. Now if it comes down to a 586/686 vs an older Python, then the 586/686 will win the durability contest. With the new version of the Python, I do not expect there to be any difference in durability as Colt changed the lockwork, sacrificing a little trigger smoothness for a far more durable action.

 

[CajunBass]

Look at both and see which you like best. You won't go wrong either way.

 

[AmStaff64]

I have both, but the 686+ has a 6" barrel and the Python is a 4.25". I love them both. The fit and finish is a little better on the Colt, and it balances better (but again they are different barrel lengths). The double action on the Colt is slightly better, and the single action on the Smith is slightly better. They seem equally accurate.

You sound like me. I have both too 6" 686+ and the shorter Python. They are very comparable and I gave the edge to the Python UNTIL I took them both to the range the same day. The 686+ is better. The double action trigger pull on mine is a bit better than the Colt when I compare them back-to-back. I only shoot double action.

Python finish is a bit better. But I shoot them first, look at them second.