What say ye, Smith or Colt ?

[Patrick L]

I posted on this very subject last summer. As a long time Smith guy, I felt like I needed to experience the Colt sensation so I could speak with some actual experience and not just repeat what we read on the forums. Sooooo...

I bought an old style Colt Trooper . 357 (aka a "poor man's Python"). Has the Python action, just not the barrel. You know what? I like it! Its a quality piece for sure. Im trying my best to prove the internet commandos right and wear it out, have it go of time (because those Colts do that, you know) but so far have been unsuccessful.

Now I will say, they are different from a Smith. Not better, not worse, but different. We have all heard about the Colt DA "stack" and thats real unless tuned, but even 1 hand SA "bullseye" style just has a different sensation in a Colt.

I am glad I have both.

 

[BigBill]

I'm a longtime ruger guy for 45 years, I did buy a python in the beginning. Today my older s&w k series feel as good action wise as my python. I own s&w revolvers besides colts too.

 

[AJ]

When I first started shooting revolvers I had a Colt Cobra (2nd Issue) and a Colt Trooper (about 1960 vintage), both did me well. Sold them for something else I thought I needed. Then went to a Model 29-2 4 inch, loved it until I broke my wrist. Then the 29 was a bit much with full house loads. Then I bought a Python with a 6 inch barrel. This felt to muzzle heavy to be comfortable to shoot for long periods. Sold it and bought a Model 27-2 3.5 inch and loved it and still have it. I only own one Colt revolver as of now, it is a Model 1909 U.S.Army in .45 Colt, it is not going anywhere. I own five S&W revolvers and one Colt revolver, not many is it? However, I own three Colt autos and one S&W auto, so I guess it balances out.............

 

[teletech]

If Smith revolvers were good enough for Ed McGivern, they are plenty good enough for me. My experience is the Smith revolvers run for longer with less service than the Colt revolvers. I do prefer the fit and feel of Colt (read Browning) autos over Smiths.

 

[SLT223]

I'd take a 686 over pretty much every handgun but 629.

 

[sportbikeco]

A bit frustrated with my 2020 Python trigger weight and not being able to just lighten it up like you could with literally any S&W with a $15 spring kit.

Also the cylinder release goes the wrong way.

Quality is great as you should expect with the price and name on it, maybe i'll warm up...

 

[usmc2427765]

I still go with the advise I received as a young LEO many years ago. An old grizzled Range Master told me that " he would rather have a mother in a cat house as a partner with a Colt revolver".

 

[Neversink n Klapperthal]

I have been shooting Smiths since 1967. I also have an older Colt Python. Always preferred the Smiths. Occasionally I shoot the Python,but I dont doubt it may be going on the auction block to my LGS in the future

 

[AJ]

I have been shooting Smiths since 1967. I also have an older Colt Python. Always preferred the Smiths. Occasionally I shoot the Python,but I dont doubt it may be going on the auction block to my LGS in the future

Going to take it here? Huge Liquidation Auction - Ploss Auction - Corry PA

 

[CH4]

For older guns (90's and earlier), it's a toss up between Colt and Smith; depends on what I am looking for at the moment. However, of the current production Smiths and Colts, I am 100% Colt.

 

[xfarfuldog]

Smith or Colt? Yes

 

[Green Frog]

Smith for wheel guns, Colt for 1911's.

For years I went by the mantra, "Smith builds revolvers, Colt builds automatics." Then the folks at Springfield built their 3 generations of alloy or steel frame autos, and the wall came down a bit. Since this forum is about Guns made in the last 41 years, I have to admit that other than the aforementioned semiautos and a Model 60-4, I currently don't have anything from either company and am not likely to buy any.

Froggie

 

[Llance]

I have Smiths because Colts are too rich for my wallet, plain and simple. I have Colts because they were given to me or I got them at a very good price. I believe those days are long gone.

 

[ImprovedModel56Fan]

They are just different guns (talking about the revolvers, although it is also true of the automatics).

They are different sizes (.32, .38 & .44 from Springfield, .38, .41 & .45 from Hartford), the firstest with the mostest has the cylinder revolving into the frame for better lockup, the imitator without the patent has to revolve the other way with added locking (and works at least as well). Both have pretty good SA pulls, especially on their top models, but I believe that the Smiths have the same great SA letoff on almost all models. The superiority of the Smith DA is obvious to all paper punchers, but what is the relevance of DA to paper punchers? If I were a cop, I believe that I would seriously consider the Colt, where discharge is never a surprise.

Both reload quickly if you know how to operate them.

Both are top-notch pistols, with personal preference being the main difference between them.

 

[sodacan]

I bought my first brand new Colt in 1972, a 6" Python. Still have it. Still shoot it. I have accumulated a sizable number of S&W revolver over the years, but started to acquire some Colts when ones I wanted became available in the right condition at the right price. Pictured are of three of them. The top one is an Officers Model Special, 4th issue in 22lr. It is the most accurate gun I own. I also have its sibling in 38 Special. The middle one is a 357. It is a very early production example. It checks off all of the boxes in terms of features, and is fairly rare in its configuration. It took me several years to find it. It is the immediate progenitor of the Python.The bottom one is a 1917. Great gun with a tractor pull double action, and built like a tank. The S&W version of this gun is much more refined, even for a service revolver. Most of my revolvers are older models. I have zero interest in any current production guns from either company. They shouldn't even be mentioned in the same breath. Which ones do I prefer? They all stand on their own merits, and I like them all. Shoot what you like and like what you shoot.

 

[crazyphil]

I have several Colts and I like them as well as my Smith Revolvers.
Well, almost as much. I particularly like my 1911 .45 ACP Gold Cup.

 

[MarkAlt]

Interesting that Colt wheelguns used to be considered pricey. If you compare new models, Colts have gotten more affordable, while S&Ws are (just my opinion) going for much more than they should.

I immensely enjoy them both.

Although, the marketing award of the year goes to Ruger for their little Wrangler, taking the market by storm with a very functional sixgun that I have bought new, retail for $149. Those have allowed a lot of new, responsible owners to enter the shooting sports. They've also kept the respectable GP100s on the market for many hundreds less than S&W and Colt.

In the end, the market is plenty strong enough to support them all. Even in this over-inflated market, we still have some great choices.

 

[jcs266]

I've just always been a huge S&W fanboy. I like the old ones, I like the new ones, I just love Smiths. My 3" 686+ is almost all I carry anymore for the past year since I got it. It's PERFECTION in my book. Size, heft, function, fit and finish are all outstanding.

 

[Miami_JBT]

Current S&W?

Nothing they makes catches my interest. Their revolvers are in no way appealing with the lock, frame mounted firing pin, and two pieces barrels. The M&P line is just another in a long line of pistols attempting to overtake GLOCK and not really succeeding. They stopped making their fantastic 3rd Gens and shuttered their Performance Center to make 1911s.

Something that Colt has been doing since 1911. Big Blue had a viable competitor to it with their 4506-1, 4566, and 945. But they caved and went with the crowd.

I like Colt, I like S&W, and I even like Ruger.

Right now, the current production D-Frame wheel guns from the Prancing Pony are the perfect revolver on the market.

If S&W decided to ever get back in the game, they'd have to beat that.

 

[transit]

I've owned revolvers from each of the big three.

For construction? It's Ruger. Disassemble an SP101 for cleaning and see what joy is. Simple, rugged, just about as idiot-proof as can be.

For performance? It's Smith & Wesson. Size, form, and function.

I prefer the S&W trigger to both Ruger and Colt.

Smiths are the goldilocks of revolvers for me.

Just right.

 

[CH4]

Current S&W?

Nothing they makes catches my interest. Their revolvers are in no way appealing with the lock, frame mounted firing pin, and two pieces barrels. The M&P line is just another in a long line of pistols attempting to overtake GLOCK and not really succeeding. They stopped making their fantastic 3rd Gens and shuttered their Performance Center to make 1911s.

Something that Colt has been doing since 1911. Big Blue had a viable competitor to it with their 4506-1, 4566, and 945. But they caved and went with the crowd.

I like Colt, I like S&W, and I even like Ruger.


Right now, the current production D-Frame wheel guns from the Prancing Pony are the perfect revolver on the market.

If S&W decided to ever get back in the game, they'd have to beat that.

Couldn't have said it better myself!