S&W Model 27 versus Colt Python
- Thread starter jdickson397
- Start date
Art Doc
SWCA Member, Absent Comrade
I shot this group with that same Colt. It shoots good for anybody.
lonegunman762x51
US Veteran
That group is in the "8" ring. If you buy a Smith and Wesson the group will be smaller and centered in the "X" ring.
Colt makes a nice gun for people who like looking at guns, S&W makes a great gun for people who shoot guns. I've shot both and nothing about a Python ever made me want to own one.
Colt makes a nice gun for people who like looking at guns, S&W makes a great gun for people who shoot guns. I've shot both and nothing about a Python ever made me want to own one.
nightshade2x
Member
I used to have a Python many years ago, along with a Diamonback in .22 LR, but regrettably I sold both of them. After reading this thread I decided it was time to get another Python, so I bid on this package on GunBroker and won it. It was made in 1978.
Very similar to my 99%+ NIB 1978 Python. Bill, for reference what is the serial of your Python?
Have fun and be safe.
Nightshade2x
Art Doc
SWCA Member, Absent Comrade
The group was low because the sights had not been centered, not because the gun can't hit the X ring.
All I can say is the during heyday of "Bullseye" matches the Colt revolvers ruled. They simply shot better than the Smiths.
All I can say is the during heyday of "Bullseye" matches the Colt revolvers ruled. They simply shot better than the Smiths.
feralmerril
Absent Comrade
I havent shot as much lately as I did years ago. However I still own two pythons, two old model troopers, and a 27-2, plus I had a few more years back. I used to experiment and reload quite a bit. I shot off the bench with the competeing guns side by side. From a good rest shooting single acton I belive colts more accurate. I understand the barrels are tapered rifled and they used laser beams in fitting them up. Now in the real world shooting off hand and being used to one or the other action the above probley doesnt make much differance. We all are going to buy and shoot what we like. I have a bunch of both.
Colt vs. Smith & Wesson
I have always admired the Colt Python for it's workmanship, and always wished that Colt could make Smith & Wesson's. Colt never cut corners on the Python. It's construction was the same as made in 1908, and workmanship was always top notch, whereas Smith continually tried to find ways to cut costs. If the Python was introduced in 1930, it would have been just another fine revolver. But alas, now all the old masterpieces are gone, even the Python. Today's new guns still make you feel good, but none of them take your breath away!
I have always admired the Colt Python for it's workmanship, and always wished that Colt could make Smith & Wesson's. Colt never cut corners on the Python. It's construction was the same as made in 1908, and workmanship was always top notch, whereas Smith continually tried to find ways to cut costs. If the Python was introduced in 1930, it would have been just another fine revolver. But alas, now all the old masterpieces are gone, even the Python. Today's new guns still make you feel good, but none of them take your breath away!
Mtwoodson
Member
Blondes or Brunettes? Same difference. Something for everyone. And don't forget redheads. And unlike women, it's socially acceptable to have a couple of each.
Budnjax
Absent Comrade
I'll take a K or L S&W any day over a Python
while some old Pythons are beautiful, they are not the gun a S&W is, IMHO. I have owned a dozen or so Pythons over the years and haven't kept any of them. For one thing, you need large hands for a Python....long reach to the trigger. The last Python I bought new was a 6 inch nickel in 1980. The cylinders were so tight that even using factory wadcutters it required a wooden dowel and hammer to get the cases out of the cylinder, it also was not very accurate. When I sent it back to Colt I found out that their accuracy standards for a Python were 3 inch group at 15 yards....mine wouldn't do that good. After they reamed out the cylinder and reset the barrel/cylinder gap (the cylinder had almost no clearance) I put only about 2500 rounds of mostly wadcutters through it til it needed a new hand! Back to Colt.....never had a S&W this flimsy. I used to wholesale S&W and Colt. I once got a shipment of 12 Pythons....the cylinders would not open on any of them. So much for a supposedly hand-fitted gun. Yes, there have also been some awful S&Ws, but almost any defective Smith can be fixed.....Pythons are poorly under-engineered from the gitgo and that can't be fixed. Let me say, though that I haven't found the same problems with the Colt D frame revolvers: Detective Special, Agent, Cobra, Diamondback even though their lockwork is quite similar to the Python.....can't explain it but that's been my experience with a dozen or so D frames I currently have in the safe.
while some old Pythons are beautiful, they are not the gun a S&W is, IMHO. I have owned a dozen or so Pythons over the years and haven't kept any of them. For one thing, you need large hands for a Python....long reach to the trigger. The last Python I bought new was a 6 inch nickel in 1980. The cylinders were so tight that even using factory wadcutters it required a wooden dowel and hammer to get the cases out of the cylinder, it also was not very accurate. When I sent it back to Colt I found out that their accuracy standards for a Python were 3 inch group at 15 yards....mine wouldn't do that good. After they reamed out the cylinder and reset the barrel/cylinder gap (the cylinder had almost no clearance) I put only about 2500 rounds of mostly wadcutters through it til it needed a new hand! Back to Colt.....never had a S&W this flimsy. I used to wholesale S&W and Colt. I once got a shipment of 12 Pythons....the cylinders would not open on any of them. So much for a supposedly hand-fitted gun. Yes, there have also been some awful S&Ws, but almost any defective Smith can be fixed.....Pythons are poorly under-engineered from the gitgo and that can't be fixed. Let me say, though that I haven't found the same problems with the Colt D frame revolvers: Detective Special, Agent, Cobra, Diamondback even though their lockwork is quite similar to the Python.....can't explain it but that's been my experience with a dozen or so D frames I currently have in the safe.
I like and appreciate the Colts (Pythons especially) but do prefer the Smiths.
bmcgilvray
Member
6-inch Smith & Wesson Model 27 and a 6-inch Colt Python both reside here and the Model 27 is favored. It's also favored over all other Smith & Wesson .357 Magnums.
The Model 27's single-action trigger gives up nothing to the Python and its double-action trigger is superior to the Python's double-action flavor of "yuck." The tapered barrel Model 27 is one of the most attractive revolvers ever built. The Python an exercise in wretched excess with its full-lugged barrel, vent rib, and "melt" looking polish job. The front heavy barrel makes the Python ill-balanced compared with the way the Model 27 sits in the hand. I don't care for L-Frames for the same reason.
The Model 27 is "the" way to do .357 Magnum over all other revolvers.
I picked up an alternative to the Python's excess earlier this year in the form of the premium Colt .357 predecessor to the Python, a 3 5 7. This model was only produced for a couple of years before Colt jerked the rug out from under it as the top-of-the-line gun by introducing the Python. The 3 5 7 isn't seen all that often. It shares the I-Frame with the Python and is very nice without the vent rib and the full-lugged barrel. Internals are identical. This Python from 1978 is shown with a first-year 3 5 7 produced in 1953.
The Model 27's single-action trigger gives up nothing to the Python and its double-action trigger is superior to the Python's double-action flavor of "yuck." The tapered barrel Model 27 is one of the most attractive revolvers ever built. The Python an exercise in wretched excess with its full-lugged barrel, vent rib, and "melt" looking polish job. The front heavy barrel makes the Python ill-balanced compared with the way the Model 27 sits in the hand. I don't care for L-Frames for the same reason.
The Model 27 is "the" way to do .357 Magnum over all other revolvers.
I picked up an alternative to the Python's excess earlier this year in the form of the premium Colt .357 predecessor to the Python, a 3 5 7. This model was only produced for a couple of years before Colt jerked the rug out from under it as the top-of-the-line gun by introducing the Python. The 3 5 7 isn't seen all that often. It shares the I-Frame with the Python and is very nice without the vent rib and the full-lugged barrel. Internals are identical. This Python from 1978 is shown with a first-year 3 5 7 produced in 1953.
66snub
Member
I've said it before, the Colts always looked rather cartoon-ish to me. A lot of the features are accentuated to almost an absurd level. The hammers are really long, the grip frame comes back really far, the grips are enormous. I'm not trying to bag on Colts, because I'm not going to badmouth a gun that another person adores, and the stuff above is merely my opinion. Colt makes a first-rate firearm and I will always think so.
However, I will say that I have heard more first hand accounts from people that I personally know, of their own Colts having timing and durability issues than those that I know who own Smiths. I don't want to start a flame war or offend anyone, this is merely the things that I hear from people that I know who own both. (BTW, put me on the list for a Model 27 in nickel. Thanks!)
However, I will say that I have heard more first hand accounts from people that I personally know, of their own Colts having timing and durability issues than those that I know who own Smiths. I don't want to start a flame war or offend anyone, this is merely the things that I hear from people that I know who own both. (BTW, put me on the list for a Model 27 in nickel. Thanks!)
If I had to pick one and only one, and they were both NIB, I would take the Python.
Why, because it's the best shooting .357 DA revolver made. In my, not so humble opinion.
To be honest, I'd rather have the Python AND the 27.
Throw in a Dan Wesson, too. I like them a lot.
Since I can't afford a Python, I'm more likely to get a 27.
Although a tuned 586 would be a closer competitor to a Python, since it doesn't weigh a metric ton.
Hell, I just want all of them.
I'm a lifelong Colt fan.
But, I'm also a Charter Arms, Dan Wesson, Ruger, Astra, Smith & Wesson, Taurus, Freedom Arms, and Rossi revolver fan.
I realized I didn't have to like one brand OR the other. I can like them all, except Block.
I have GM, Mopar, Ford, and Honda vehicles.
I don't like to limit myself.
BTW, my buddy had a Llama Comanche 3 .357 that was a sweet shooter. He sold it and regretted it. I wish I'd been in a position to have bought it from him.
Now, for an everyday .357, I'd love to have my old 4" Ruger Speed Six back. The, unknown to me, previous owner had an action job done on it and it was one helluva good shooter.
It had a better/smoother trigger than any other revolver I've ever shot.
Not quite sure how that was accomplished.
Must have been a damn good gunsmith. Must have cost a pretty penny.
I was stupid to let it go, but needed the money for car repairs.
Aesthetics are definitely a subjective thing. I like the looks of Colts, but never liked the looks of an adjustable sight K frame.
Always preferred the 13 to the 19.
Not like that would stop me from buying a 19, but target sights on a combat revolver look silly to me.
On the opposite side of the coin, I don't like the look of fixed sight Ruger Single Sixes, unless it's the 4-5/8" .32 Mag.
See? Very subjective.
But, I'm right and you're all wrong.
Come over to my way of thinking or stop breathing my air, dammit!!
Just kidding, of course.
Buy what you like and shoot the hell out of it.
BTW, the ONLY Colt DA I've ever shot or handled that had timing problems or loose lockup was an old Numrich-converted New Service in .357 Mag. And, to be honest, that gun was designed for and metallurgically suited for 15,000 psi, not 35,000 psi+ loads.
Can't blame the gun.
Much like K and N frames shooting loose from a steady diet of full power magnum loads.
Can't blame the gun for wearing out, due to abuse.
Why, because it's the best shooting .357 DA revolver made. In my, not so humble opinion.
To be honest, I'd rather have the Python AND the 27.
Throw in a Dan Wesson, too. I like them a lot.
Since I can't afford a Python, I'm more likely to get a 27.
Although a tuned 586 would be a closer competitor to a Python, since it doesn't weigh a metric ton.
Hell, I just want all of them.
I'm a lifelong Colt fan.
But, I'm also a Charter Arms, Dan Wesson, Ruger, Astra, Smith & Wesson, Taurus, Freedom Arms, and Rossi revolver fan.
I realized I didn't have to like one brand OR the other. I can like them all, except Block.
I have GM, Mopar, Ford, and Honda vehicles.
I don't like to limit myself.
BTW, my buddy had a Llama Comanche 3 .357 that was a sweet shooter. He sold it and regretted it. I wish I'd been in a position to have bought it from him.
Now, for an everyday .357, I'd love to have my old 4" Ruger Speed Six back. The, unknown to me, previous owner had an action job done on it and it was one helluva good shooter.
It had a better/smoother trigger than any other revolver I've ever shot.
Not quite sure how that was accomplished.
Must have been a damn good gunsmith. Must have cost a pretty penny.
I was stupid to let it go, but needed the money for car repairs.
Aesthetics are definitely a subjective thing. I like the looks of Colts, but never liked the looks of an adjustable sight K frame.
Always preferred the 13 to the 19.
Not like that would stop me from buying a 19, but target sights on a combat revolver look silly to me.
On the opposite side of the coin, I don't like the look of fixed sight Ruger Single Sixes, unless it's the 4-5/8" .32 Mag.
See? Very subjective.
But, I'm right and you're all wrong.
Come over to my way of thinking or stop breathing my air, dammit!!
Just kidding, of course.
Buy what you like and shoot the hell out of it.
BTW, the ONLY Colt DA I've ever shot or handled that had timing problems or loose lockup was an old Numrich-converted New Service in .357 Mag. And, to be honest, that gun was designed for and metallurgically suited for 15,000 psi, not 35,000 psi+ loads.
Can't blame the gun.
Much like K and N frames shooting loose from a steady diet of full power magnum loads.
Can't blame the gun for wearing out, due to abuse.
Last edited:
71firebird400
Member
Nowhere else on the internet (or real life) is the Python as belittled as right here on the Smith & Wesson forum- imagine that! Must be jealousy when they see that a run of the mill Python brings 2-3 times what the equivalent 27 does.
I'm lucky that I'm a fan of all of them.
I'd like one of each revolver made by every good gun company ever.
The reality is that nobody could beat the Python for it's intended purpose.
Not even the overrated, and butt-ugly Korth.
I wouldn't give you one S&W 27 for TWO Korths.
Unless I was going to sell the glorified Arminius and buy a few more Smiths AND a couple of Pythons.
Funny thing. My 1994 Taurus Model 44, .44 mag has a much better trigger and shoots better than my buddy's 1996 629.
Taurus gets a lot of hate from gun snobs, but I've never had a bad one.
Don't get me wrong, my buddy's 629 is a damn nice gun and a damn good shooter. But, my M44 beats it in accuracy and absolutely spanks it in DA/SA trigger pull.
It has a factory hand fitted action.
Of course, a Performance Center tuned N frame has a little better trigger pull. That may have something to do with leaf vs coil spring and the skill of the smiths as Smith.
It also costs a whole lot more than my M44.
I'd like one of each revolver made by every good gun company ever.
The reality is that nobody could beat the Python for it's intended purpose.
Not even the overrated, and butt-ugly Korth.
I wouldn't give you one S&W 27 for TWO Korths.
Unless I was going to sell the glorified Arminius and buy a few more Smiths AND a couple of Pythons.
Funny thing. My 1994 Taurus Model 44, .44 mag has a much better trigger and shoots better than my buddy's 1996 629.
Taurus gets a lot of hate from gun snobs, but I've never had a bad one.
Don't get me wrong, my buddy's 629 is a damn nice gun and a damn good shooter. But, my M44 beats it in accuracy and absolutely spanks it in DA/SA trigger pull.
It has a factory hand fitted action.
Of course, a Performance Center tuned N frame has a little better trigger pull. That may have something to do with leaf vs coil spring and the skill of the smiths as Smith.
It also costs a whole lot more than my M44.
N-Frame vs Python
Have had and carried a, 6" model 24 (duty gun) 25-5 and a 25-2. Two, Model 29's and a couple of mod 19's. I regret to this day ever selling my 6" python. A guy forced me to sell it by offering me what I wanted for it.
There is just no other lock-up like a Colt. For mass and reliability the N-frame rocks.
Have had and carried a, 6" model 24 (duty gun) 25-5 and a 25-2. Two, Model 29's and a couple of mod 19's. I regret to this day ever selling my 6" python. A guy forced me to sell it by offering me what I wanted for it.
There is just no other lock-up like a Colt. For mass and reliability the N-frame rocks.Attachments
Nlmadog
US Veteran
I enjoy this thread, most of the posters own both pistols, I have 4" blue in both models. Like most of the comments in thread I love both pistols they are different but similar. I am not a long time expert on these pistols but I can not call out one as a particular winner.
