SW 686 versus COLT Python?

[Ed Fowler]

I used to shoot PPC and bull eye, earned my life time PPC master. I wore out my Highway Patrolman, had S&W rebuild my K 38. I heard a lot about the Pythons and tried a few, never found one to shoot to the quality of the S&W's. Did see there were quite a few Pythons with the new guys, but as you moved up in class the Pythons were pretty few and far between in favor of the S&W's.

 

[Jaymo]

I love the Python, but not the price.
That said, I don't have any plans to sell my 586. It's a fantastic .357.
Silky smooth DA.
SA that feels barely there (but no push-off).

I love the look of the factory Python stocks, but the S&W target stocks feel a lot better in my hands.

My 586 is my favorite .357 that I own.

 

[Drm50]

I never owned a 686, but have had 586 & Python. Python is a finely built
revolver but a little on the fragile side of feeding it 357mgs. The 586s shot
as well but weren't as slick but more durable. I would rather have a S&W M-27 than either one if it was for shooting purposes. No doubt the Python is worth more just because of collectors market.

 

[cowboy4evr]

I can admire a Python , but I probably never own one . Beyond the price issue , I have to say that I'm probably not able to appreciate it enough as I really like to shot my guns , a lot . I don't need a " safe queen " . I have only read about the mechanism , delicate -- or not . I will stick with my S&W's . I just have purchased my dream gun , a model 27 , 5" barrel that I could afford . I have a 686 , 4" barrel that I got from a retired LEO , did off shore boat patrol in Florida , narcotics . I am very satisfied with what I have . I enjoy looking at Python ads and always look for the seller saying that the timing is " spot on " . A fact rarely mentioned . Regards, Paul

 

[The Gila Bender]

This just in

Just acquired this old 686 dash 4 for steel games.

 

[RKmesa]

Not a 686 or a Python, but the best of both the Smith and Colt worlds... a Smolt Highway Papython









A fun combo.

 

[dmn57]

In the past, I've had both a 686 (my first 'big boy gun in '91) and a 586, and wish I hadn't traded them away. A Python has always been on the wish list mainly because it is a Python. Fine, fine weapon, but now way above what I consider to be my comfortable price range. As much as I'd like to have one 'just because', I'm more than happy with my 27, my 28, and all the K-frames in my safe. I seriously don't see the need for a $2000 safe queen. I'd rather enhance my collection with 3 or 4 classic Smiths.

 

[runscott]

Not a 686 or a Python, but the best of both the Smith and Colt worlds... a Smolt Highway Papython

A fun combo.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think this is the combination that Sweeney described in 'The Gun Digest Book of Smith & Wesson' that he felt led to S&W creating the 586/686. Beautiful gun!

Since I revived this 'Necro' thread, I feel like I should at least post my thoughts now that I have in hand all revolvers related to the topic that I am likely to possess in the near future: 1955 s&w .357, 1958 Highway Patrolman, 1970 Python, 1954 Colt 3-5-7 and a 686-6+. I wanted to also get a Ruger and a Model 19, but funds are depleted.

I can't speak to long-term funtionality of any of these revolvers, and even if I can someday, I only have one example of each to compare, so still not a valid test compared to what many of you can conduct; however, here are my thoughts:

To me the 1955 s&w and the Python actually are the closest comparison, as opposed to the Python & 686 - both have incredible workmanship and blueing. I would give the nod to the s&w on blueing and design - I just prefer the larger frame and the larger cylinder. The N-frame is more comfortable to shoot for me, personally, but I love both guns. It's obvious that each is the best that their respective companies had to offer.

Everyone here knows the Highway Patrolman is a less-expensive version of the .357, so, as expected, they handle the same. I really love the 2-toned blueing on the HP, but it doesn't compare to the S&W .357, which is just a work of art. I want more early S&W .357s. Richard's photos are encouraging that need.

The Colt 3-5-7 also has the two-toned blueing - same quality as the Highway Patrolman. I like the HP better - mine needs some work on the action (I think it sat in a closet for 50 years), but it still feels fantastic and I'm accurate with it. The 4" Colt 3-5-7 has a really amazing trigger job, but just doesn't feel quite as good in my hands as the HP. I prefer the larger N-frame.

I bought my 686+ first, and I loved it. Now that I have the four older revolvers, I find that each feels better to hold, each is easier to shoot and I like the workmanship on each better as well. It's probable that the SS is throwing me off, as well as grips that are too small and the gun just hasn't had enough rounds put through it.

 

[muddocktor]

Nice thoughts, runscott. If you don't mind me suggesting, get yourself a set of Culina "Coke" Target stocks for your 686 and see how it feels. They will also fit K frame revolvers too. I don't own any L frames or K frames but I have 5 pairs of the Culina Targets on my N frames and they look great and also feel fantastic, even on my 44's with stout loads. They should make the K/L frames feel great too.

BTW, it seems like I told you that the Python would more properly compare to the Model 27 (or Pre 27 in your case) than to the 686 or 586. Both are the top of the line revolvers from each company, so should be compared to each other. I had a buddy in the 70's and 80's that had a Python and it was a great gun, but I still preferred my Model 27.

 

[Engineer1911]

The Colt owners swear that theirs is the best revolver, but they don't shoot them. S&W owners are at the range shooting their favorite revolvers because they won't wear out or go out of time.

An old guy with his S&W revolver will out shoot the plastic wonders every day. The only Colt's at the range are 1911s, also outshooting the plastic wonders.

There are more S&W guns than Colt guns. Roy told me so in Columbus, OH.

 

[runscott]

Nice thoughts, runscott. If you don't mind me suggesting, get yourself a set of Culina "Coke" Target stocks for your 686 and see how it feels. They will also fit K frame revolvers too. I don't own any L frames or K frames but I have 5 pairs of the Culina Targets on my N frames and they look great and also feel fantastic, even on my 44's with stout loads. They should make the K/L frames feel great too.

BTW, it seems like I told you that the Python would more properly compare to the Model 27 (or Pre 27 in your case) than to the 686 or 586. Both are the top of the line revolvers from each company, so should be compared to each other. I had a buddy in the 70's and 80's that had a Python and it was a great gun, but I still preferred my Model 27.

Thanks for the suggestions.

Yes, you did say the 27 would compare more favorably to the Python. After handling, firing and examining the revolvers I described, I agree with you. But I still believe that the 686 was created to compete with the Python, which is why they are compared with one another, even if that comparison seems unfair. I wasn't familiar with these revolvers back then, so I only have to go on what I've read - Sweeney's 'Gun Digest' S&W book discusses the fact that some S&W owners wanted something like the Python and were having hybrid guns built, like the one Richard described. I believe Sweeney mentioned a hybrid of the 27 and Python, but it's the same idea. According to him, this 'need' of S&W owners led to the 686. It could very well be that many S&W owners saw no comparison between the two and saw the N-frame S&W's as their alternative to a Python. Those of you who were making such decisions back then would have to speak about this, as I wasn't in the market.

 

[Tom_R]

Python Elite Barrel on a 686-3 Frame.

Some John Culina Combat Targets to top off the goodness.

 

[OttoLoader]

Around the year 1981 I compared (by shooting outdoors) a python and a 686.
Chose the 686.

 

[CH4]

The Smolt was the answer to most of the above contentions. Sounds very superficial, but I can’t stand the anorexic Colt ejector rod.

 

[OLDSTER]

I own both, and both are "world class" ( the Python is from 1983, not the new one). They just have a different feel. I would not hesitate to buy a 686 over the new Python. And would not pay a premium for an old Python over a 686.

 

[malph]

From a purely shooting perspective, I much prefer the 586 or 686.

For looking at or collecting, the Colt is an obvious choice.

The Colt is a wonderful gun but the Smith is better at actually being a gun.

For me it's about the action. The Smith DA stroke is just better in my opinion. Its not about the weight of pull so much as it is about feel and trigger return.

 

[kbm6893]

The obnoxious prices of Pythons have always turned me off to them. MAYBE the mystique of them (and I still don’t know where that mystique came from) earned a higher price on the classic ones, but $2000 for a new one is just stupid. I have shot them and wasn’t overwhelmed. Nice gun, sure. Twice as nice as a S&W to justify their twice the price tag? No way.

Look back at the price difference between a Python and. New Model 19. Something like $35. Not double the price!

If somebody GAVE me a Python, I’d sell it to some sucker and buy a used 686 or 27 and pocket the difference. Or I’d buy two guns and break even.

They’re not magical. They do nothing better than a 686 does. They accurately (depending on the shooter) launch a bullet at a target, just like a Smith. And the product support for them is far inferior to a Smith.

 

[Neversink n Klapperthal]

Python = status symbol. Havent seen a blued one under $2200,or a nickeled one under $3500.personally I dont care for their grip frame. I prefer the feel of a Smith

 

[cowboy4evr]

As close as I will probably ever come to owning a Python is the OLd Model Trooper I bought last yr for less than $500 . It had been shoot very little if any . It has the same frame as a python and same internals . It lacks the vented / ribbed barrel and the lustrous finish . The single action is great , the double action really " stacks . It's probably the only Colt I will ever buy . Regards Paul

 

[garbler]

I think you are WRONG in your thinking, the "L" frame was made to handle the loads that the "K" frame was having trouble with, not to copy a colt. Everything that colt ever made was a copy of something. The colt ranks #2 and when out because they couldn't be #1, I can take the action of a new S&W and have it slicker and better than any over price colt. So if what you say is true, then why don't they make any more "K" frames in the 357?

This information is correct. S&W created the L frame not to compete with any Colt but to answer a design shortcoming. The K frame was unable to handle sustained full power 357 loads. Frames actually stretched or distended creating excessive end-shake and related problems. The trick for S&W was to bolster the frame and yet maintain the very popular K frame grip size. The L frame 586/686 answered the problem very nicely.

Rick