Possible New Colt Pythons?

Good Lord, those are some long bolt leads. Why ?

I conclude that they are part and parcel of an assembly line revolver without fitting or even the selective assembly done by Smith. Long leads, lots of allowable variation in when the bolt rises.

Jim Watson said:

I conclude that they are part and parcel of an assembly line revolver without fitting or even the selective assembly done by Smith. Long leads, lots of allowable variation in when the bolt rises.

Click to expand...

Ah. So they're a way to excuse junk quality and poor craftsmanship ?

There's that word again.

Another yawn here. Many years ago I fell for the Python hype and bought one. It was nice but not as nice as my Smiths IMO and so when I got a chance to sell it without losing any dollars I did. I haven't missed it at all.

CraigC said:

There's that word again.

Click to expand...

What word ? "Junk" ?

gotboostvr said:

I still vote for a 22 "Garter snake"

Click to expand...

The Python as available in 22LR many years back. As 38 Special Just not as common.

Look up a Officers Special model Colt in .38 spl.
You will see that it has very long leads to the bolt stop notches as well.

Python .22s are exceedingly rare. Auction estimate for a prototype was $27500.
A prototype .256 was estimated at $22000.
The only .38 Special Pythons I have seen were the odd 8" guns.

Looking at pictures of Colts, it seems the lead length was quite variable. I have seen none as long as the New Python.

@Mr. Mosin

Mr. Mosin said:

Ah. So they're a way to excuse junk quality and poor craftsmanship ?

Click to expand...

Let me ask you for some clarification here. Are you implying that a photograph of unknown provenance depicting a sole (alleged) sample of a revolver yet to be seen on the market is grounds for accusing Colt of producing "junk quality" while exercising "poor craftsmanship?" A revolver yet to be sold, bought, shot and tested?

If this was not your intended message, kindly in the future strive to use more precise language in your posts. Previous remarks you've made in other threads have already impacted your experience and credibility; I'd hate to see you dig yourself into an even deeper hole.

Many of the members here, including myself, have already documented their positive experiences with the new Colt revolvers. Your trolling by attempting these pseudo-pithy lines does nothing to educate or enlighten anyone, nor does it foster further productive discussion.

"lots of allowable variation in when the bolt rises"

Rings of poor quality, from my knowledge. If you can't make a machine replicate the same action at the same time in the same process, I'd question your need to be producing anything.

Mr. Mosin said:

Rings of poor quality, from my knowledge.

Click to expand...

All this … based on a bad photograph. I also conclude that the manner in which the light reflects on the cylinder makes the leads appear longer in the photo, not that their apparent length would truly affect performance, anyway. But no matter, since an expert has concluded that this revolver is automatically inferior, we shall all sleep better tonight, knowing that it's simply not worth the effort to produce or purchase.

"The confidence of amateurs is the envy of professionals."

As for the new Python, I never thought they would built it. And looking at the one photo we have available, it's not the same gun as before. But then nothing much else is either.

Dave

Balrog said:

I own a couple of Pythons. They are some of the most overrated handguns ever produced, but due to their relative scarcity command very high prices.

Click to expand...

I have always thought the Python was over rated which is why I eventually sold mine years ago. That particular gun was my first center fire handgun. I've had others, but they were generally purchased to sell as soon as I could find a buyer at a price slightly above what I paid. It was mostly for fun and I certainly didn't make any money playing around like this.

Pythons are not SCARCE.

rscalzo said:

The Python as available in 22LR many years back. As 38 Special Just not as common.

Click to expand...

The Python was NEVER available in 22LR. For whatever reason, they had one for a catalog cover shot.

I found the auction listings for them. The .22 LR was clearly converted from centerfire, the .22 Magnum was not even shootable.

I have been in the gun "business" in one form or other since the sixties (when you could buy a new Python for $125 retail, a nice chunk of change even then). We used a six inch for years to test our commercial target loads which we supplied as practice ammo to several police departments. I have owned several, as did my dad and brother. I gave my last one to son #1 about 2000. I owned, sold, traded, and collected Colts for years and have lately, as an employee of a smaller shop, facilitated the buying and selling of quite a few. Presently I only have a few including a Frontier Scout, a New Frontier .22, a 1903 .32, and a second model Sport Model Woodsman. I lost interest in Colt after they quit making almost everything for the sportsman and concealed carrier but a couple of autos.he big bucks M16 money must have convinced them the little revolver and 22 shooters weren't worth worrying about (like Romney, Hillary, and a few other people in another line of work). I've seen, handled and shot the new Cobra (which isn't a Cobra compared to the original alloy framed, lightweight .38). I seriously doubt that a new Python will approach the original in fit, finish, or quality. As much as I've badmouthed Colt in recent years for their treachery, I will rejoice if they get it together for yet another ressurectionfrom financial disaster. We have bought for customers a few custom shop SAAs and can't fault the quality. I'll keep shooting my 6" 686+, my 29-2, and my SP101 and not spend time coveting a new Python, Cobra, or Anaconda. Those that have 'em, enjoy 'em. Just no longer on my wish list.

Dave T said:

"The confidence of amateurs is the envy of professionals."

As for the new Python, I never thought they would built it. And looking at the one photo we have available, it's not the same gun as before. But then nothing much else is either.

Dave[/QUOTE

Click to expand...

Dave T said:

"The confidence of amateurs is the envy of professionals."

As for the new Python, I never thought they would built it. And looking at the one photo we have available, it's not the same gun as before. But then nothing much else is either.

Dave

Click to expand...

Yep! Than again almost nothing stays the same. Designs change, life goes on. MIM parts , locks, no hand fitting and the list goes on. Just how it is these days, and it ain't ever going to go back. So people need to kinda just get over it and enjoy it for what it is, same goes for new Smith's too. Buy and cherish your old revolvers but they ain't ever going to be made like that again unless you pay a super high premium. Buy the new ones ,shoot the hell outta them and take it easy on the old gems and appreciate the for what they are.

It's just like the auto industry. Names live on but that car is not the same . A 2020 mustang is not the same thing as a 1969... And I'd doubt someone would daily drive a 69', or straight up abuse it. Take it out as a treat on the weekend and enjoy it. Now the 2020? Tinker, play and give her hell, she's still fresh. But that's just how I see things.

22-rimfire said:

I have always thought the Python was over rated which is why I eventually sold mine years ago. That particular gun was my first center fire handgun. I've had others, but they were generally purchased to sell as soon as I could find a buyer at a price slightly above what I paid. It was mostly for fun and I certainly didn't make any money playing around like this.

Pythons are not SCARCE.

Click to expand...

The lack of current production has created a relative scarcity, or else they wouldnt be selling for $3K+.

Lets hope for a Trooper model.

Well those photos are a bit compelling aren't they. I’d be happy to fondle one and may even trade a Smith in to own one if I like it enough, assuming someone isn’t playing another joke. I mean I don’t doubt they were in being worked on, but I still find it a silly notion that distributors have them sitting and waiting to sell without any announcement. Seems like weird marketing even if they’re waiting for shot show.

Maybe I’ll be eating crow. Fine with me.

Looks good to me! Dunno if it’s really “better” than the old ones but they got the look right IMO.

Very cool!

Agreed, looks good. Im cautiously optimistic.

With an MSRP of $1500, wait a couple years and we might see $1200 street prices, not too bad.

If nothing else, this might put downward pressure on vintage Python values and make them a tad more affordable too.

The frame doesnt look big enough for a .44 Anaconda version......but perhaps with modern scaleability its not that cost critical to have a common frame platform for a future big bore variant......we shall see. I guess a larger frame would have made the .357 look bulky, and getting the proportions right was more of a priority?