Possible New Colt Pythons?

Status
Not open for further replies.
You believe everything the Colt reps tell you. You believe everything the gun writers tell you. Who all happen to be paid through advertising by the gun industry...... And then you dismiss a guy who shoots off the shelf guns on video, and reports on what happened. With no other bias. Because you think he is simply, "entertainment".

You're not a liar in the true sense of the word. You just put your faith in the wrong people. And we wonder why it's become so easy to separate people from their money these days. All they have to do is read this thread. They'll understand perfectly why and how.

No, You said all gunwriters are dishonest therefore it’s guilt by association in my case.
 
I suppose you could say that and not be too far off.

Why are so cynical? I know quite a few gunwriters and like all professions, there are some good and some bad, but to characterize them as being dishonest across the board indicates to me you don’t know any of them. So thanks for calling me a liar. I’m out...
 
I've provided far more links to back up what I've said, than all the B.S. you've put forth.
You've provided a handful of links to even fewer actual -- and questionable -- social media sources that are the same people with the same two or three stories.
A bunch of Colt fanboys who attack anything and everyone who doesn't genuflect in front of the prancing pony
Not everybody objecting to your histrionics and hysterical attacks on Colt and its new product are "fanboys." Seems as though it's simply the same few people trying to get you to calm down, do some actual reading, and take a reasonable look at things.

I'm by no means a conspiracy theorist, but it's almost beginning to look as though you, and others, are part of an orchestrated social media attack on Colt, and for whatever reason, attempting to discredit that company's new product when only a couple thousand have hit the marketplace and a relative handful of relatively minor problems are reported.

You've seen the linked video with Mr. Spitale, a respected member of the Colt firm, and apparently disrespected his comments as well.

Also, for those of us who knew -- and respected -- the late Denis Prisbrey, a member of this forum, a fine gunwriter and very ethical man, your comments are at the least insulting, but mostly, shameful. Hopefully Mas Ayoob, another outstanding gunwriter, and member of this forum notices this thread and can chime in -- he's got a lot of experience with Colt and I'm sure some contacts in that company.
 
Last edited:
Pretty sure he's not the one who's been "lumping everyone into the same derogatory category" -- suggest you reread your own posts in this thread (and the one you got closed). Perhaps he didn't need explain his way out of anything; perhaps someone else needed to read more carefully.

And frankly, I share his view of these YouTube guys, who really do no practical testing, but simply shoot a lot of rounds at steel targets at not-so-very-far ranges. They are, in fact, entertainment for people who can't get out themselves and do their own shooting.

Ah, yeah, no. Still have not seen credible documentation regarding numbers of faulty/blemished revolvers other than what the Colt reps have put forth -- publicly, I might add, while still allowing everyone and their brother at SHOT to line up and shoot the actual guns.

There's serious Colt-bashing going on here, of such an extreme nature with so many emotionally-charged comments that one has to start to wonder about the motives of some …

Sorry man, but companies lie all the time about just about everything when it suits them.

Watch or read the news some time. Businesses overwhelmingly lie to cover their butts, avoid bad press, mislead consumers, and try to dodge legal liabilities. It’s what they do!

Colt has no interest in readily admitting that their new baby is defective, they need to sell guns. Telling their customers that the new gun was only half baked doesn’t achieve that short term goal. Long term they might be better off if they did just recall all of the new Pythons and jump through their own butt holes making all of the early guns new owners ridiculously happy, but that is unlikely.

A good long term strategy would be to eat some crow, admit things didn’t go well, and then not only fix the problem Pythons but add some value. Like maybe some action jobs, free Colt swag, maybe a discount coupon. If I had a bad initial Python sent it to Colt, and got back a hand tuned work of art with some free stuff in the way of apology I’d be singing Colt’s praises. Hopefully they do something like that, I really really want to buy a Python when I have a reasonable expectation the guns will work right.

I want Colt to be successful, and one way to do that long term is get ahead of problems and make sure to build a reputation for no BS outstanding customer service.
 
Oh for God's sake, give me a break! Are you serious?
How did you get to be so cynical and angry? Are you completely unable to have a disagreement without getting nasty?

You have some weird ideas about these things and an obvious vendetta against Colt, over a gun you do not even own. There was a time that I would've dissected your entire post and deconstructed it down to its smallest component but life is too short for crap. You'll probably soon be deemed a troll and banned anyway. I will say that I have met quite a few career gun writers and find your comments to be baseless, insulting and factually incorrect. I will leave you with a quote from the late Denis Prisbrey but I doubt you'll bother to read it.

"There are ALWAYS those fail to understand what a gunmag does.

They expect us to spend hundreds of dollars in repetitive lab environments & several weeks in the field, on any gun, and then to tell the reader whether they should buy the gun or not.

Not what we're here for.

My job is to get a gun sample in, shoot it under controlled conditions at generally consistent realistic distances, and then tell the reader:
What the gun is.
What features it has.
How it works (if applicable).
How WELL it works.
How accurate it was, in MY hands, on THAT day, in THAT environment, with THAT ammunition.
And maybe to render some commentary on features I liked or did not like.

In other words, I am:
A competent shooter.
Somebody who knows how various guns are used.
Somebody who knows how well a gun should function.
Somebody who knows how to consistently test for, and evaluate, accuracy.
Somebody who can analyze construction features in terms of mechanical quality, functional reliability, and the user interface.
Somebody who can produce clear, focused, and decently lit illustrative photos to show or explain features.
And finally- somebody who can organize all that into words that make sense, are informative, and sufficiently interesting to keep the reader's attention.

I am not:
Corrupt.
In any manufacturer's pocket.
Anybody's shill.
Making loads of money at this biz.
Getting tons of free guns in trade for sterling reviews.
Gold-plating ANY POS product.
Told by ANY maker how to write up their product. (With the three noted exceptions, resulting in permanently canceled coverage.)
Able to spend thousands of dollars in producing any article I'm going to sell for less than $700.
Here to do YOUR job in researching & deciding whether or not YOU should buy anything.

What I do is:
Borrow a gun from its maker, because I'd go broke if I had to buy every test gun I write up.
Shoot a gun & tell you about what it has, what it does, how it did for me, and toss in a couple of impressions (good AND bad) along the way.
Get a sample of ONE gun, which may or may not be representative, simply because production varies.
Put enough time & effort into evaluating a gun to produce useful basic reporting on it, while making a profit on the article sale.
Shoot a handful of representative load types through a test sample, as very basic performance parameters.
Get "free" ammunition as test samples, for use IN tests (not for personal stashes), necessary to make a profit on any article.
Tell the reader the truth.
Buy the test sample if I want to keep it, or return it if I don't.


What I do not do is:
Make a gun look good to please a maker/advertiser.
Pointless accuracy testing at silly distances (either too close or varying widely from article to article).
Gloss over or ignore deficiencies.
Obtain multiple samples to do multiple-sample testing.
Get "special hand-built writer's test guns".
Spend months in the snow, the mud, the rain, the jungle, and the desert with any gun, to give it a "real" test.
Shoot multiple 10-shot groups with each load tested to create a more "valid" accuracy test.
Run dozens & dozens of different loads through every test sample, so every reader's personal pet favorite is sure to get covered.
Get paid thousands of dollars per article.
Get to keep every sample gun for free (see above).
All your research work for you.
Tell you whether to buy the gun in question or not.
Do your thinking for you.

What you do (or should) is:
Use your own damn brain.
Use multiple sources when looking for info on a particular gun you might be interested in.
Use any mag article as ONE info source.
View any gunmag as a source of general info in expanding your own knowledge base, even on guns you're not planning to buy.
LEARN from gunmags (good ones).
EVALUATE for yourself whether the writer of any particular article seems to know what he's talking about, and/or if that article truly offers you any useful info.
Pay attention to that info, or ignore his byline in future if you decide he never provides anything useful.
Understand it's one guy, one gun.
Realize a second sample off the shelf at your local dealer can easily be better or worse.
Understand that advertising is a necessary evil, and the large-circulation mags CAN'T exist without it.
Comprehend that the gunmags are a for-profit business.
Realize that gunwriters expect a profit on our time & production efforts, like anybody else who's self-employed.

What you should not do is:
Make unfounded assumptions about the character of ALL gunwriters.
Assume ("know") the system is totally rigged & corrupt.
Continue to spout Internet BS about all gunwriters being totally in the pockets of the gunmakers.
Totally dismiss all gunwriters as dishonest shills, and all gunmags as useless.
Expect US to make YOUR decisions for you.
Expect completely unreasonable extended testing from us.
Expect the gun you buy to BE exactly the same and PERFORM exactly the same as the one we wrote up.
Fail to comprehend that a sample of one is a sample of one.
Revere the Internet as God Above All, in the field of providing actual truthful gun info.
Be indignant if a gunmag prints something you already know.

Gunwriting can be a fairly lucrative job, IF you manage to plug yourself into one of the huge publishing conglomerates as a salaried staff writer, used in multiple positions, and backed by their resources.
The rest of us (the majority) are freelancers, NOT on salary, and not even full-time writers.
As a freelancer, you'd have to put out an astonishing volume of material to actually LIVE off article sales, and very few of us are able or willing to do that.

I spent the first ten years establishing myself as a writer while still a career cop.
The last 20 after retiring the writing only made up half of my income.
I know other writers who have or had other income to supplement what they make or made from the gunmags.
It IS something of a labor of love.
We don't get rich, we don't get free guns, we don't get free beer, and we don't even get groupies.

Time after time, year after year, I see this almost regularly spaced gunmag bashing.
They're all shills.
I already know everything they print.
Nothing they print is any good.
I can get everything I need from the Internet.

OK. Fine.
Nobody anywhere is forcing you buy a gunmag, or any other product you don't want, if you feel it doesn't give you anything for your money.

DON'T BUY THE THINGS!
If you already know it all, just don't buy a gunmag.

By all means- Trust every anonymous body on the Internet, get all your detailed info on new models from those faceless people, and enjoy the clear, well-focused & comprehensive photos of new guns & features there.

Just knock off propagating the age-old tiresome myths & lies about the gunmags that seem to have have a life of their own.
If ya gotta spout, at least spout the truth, huh?

Denis"
 
The biggest take on this thread is that crap happens and to give Colt a chance to straighten it out....its really not that big of a deal.
I am surprised that some are so up in arms about these issues, I have always been the type that waits a while for the bugs to get worked out of any new release/design, thats for guns, cars, motorcycles...name your widget, if its new, I am waiting because there always seems to be an issue or two that comes to light and needs to be addressed.
Like I said, not a big deal.
 
Why are so cynical? I know quite a few gunwriters and like all professions, there are some good and some bad, but to characterize them as being dishonest across the board indicates to me you don’t know any of them. So thanks for calling me a liar. I’m out...

I didn't say they are "dishonest". They most likely don't cheat on their taxes. Or siphon gas out of their neighbors gas tank at night. I'm saying their reviews are distorted, because they cannot deliver harsh criticism of any firearm they are accepting advertising money from, who run ads in the same publication. Which is most all of them. This is direct conflict of interest.

Why are you having such a difficult time understanding and accepting this? As I said, Garry James has mentioned this many times in several interviews. Others have said much the same thing. It's nothing more than common sense.

You're not going to get an unbiased review about any product, when the company producing it is indirectly paying you. People do not bite the financial hand that feeds them. They very well might be swell guys. And fun to hang around with and talk guns. And they very well may be somewhat knowledgeable. I'm simply not going to believe what they write about firearms in a paid for advertising gun rag. Simply put they're not a trusted source. Anymore than a Colt rep is, by telling you how wonderful the new Python is.
 
I didn't say they are "dishonest". They most likely don't cheat on their taxes. Or siphon gas out of their neighbors gas tank at night. I'm saying their reviews are distorted, because they cannot deliver harsh criticism of any firearm they are accepting advertising money from, who run ads in the same publication. Which is most all of them. This is direct conflict of interest.

Why are you having such a difficult time understanding and accepting this? As I said, Garry James has mentioned this many times in several interviews. Others have said much the same thing. It's nothing more than common sense.

You're not going to get an unbiased review about any product, when the company producing it is indirectly paying you. People do not bite the financial hand that feeds them. They very well might be swell guys. And fun to hang around with and talk guns. And they very well may be somewhat knowledgeable. I'm simply not going to believe what they write about firearms in a paid for advertising gun rag. Simply put they're not a trusted source. Anymore than a Colt rep is, by telling you how wonderful the new Python is.

Why the difficulty? Because I am a gunwriter and I’m not dishonest. So I think I am qualified to make an assessment that is much more informed than you. You know not of what you speak.
 
I wish this thread would get back a little closer to the topic before it gets closed. One Python thread has already been ran in the ground.
 
How did you get to be so cynical and angry? Are you completely unable to have a disagreement without getting nasty?

You have some weird ideas about these things and an obvious vendetta against Colt, over a gun you do not even own. There was a time that I would've dissected your entire post and deconstructed it down to its smallest component but life is too short for crap. You'll probably soon be deemed a troll and banned anyway. I will say that I have met quite a few career gun writers and find your comments to be baseless, insulting and factually incorrect. I will leave you with a quote from the late Denis Prisbrey but I doubt you'll bother to read it.

"There are ALWAYS those fail to understand what a gunmag does.

They expect us to spend hundreds of dollars in repetitive lab environments & several weeks in the field, on any gun, and then to tell the reader whether they should buy the gun or not.

Not what we're here for.

My job is to get a gun sample in, shoot it under controlled conditions at generally consistent realistic distances, and then tell the reader:
What the gun is.
What features it has.
How it works (if applicable).
How WELL it works.
How accurate it was, in MY hands, on THAT day, in THAT environment, with THAT ammunition.
And maybe to render some commentary on features I liked or did not like.

In other words, I am:
A competent shooter.
Somebody who knows how various guns are used.
Somebody who knows how well a gun should function.
Somebody who knows how to consistently test for, and evaluate, accuracy.
Somebody who can analyze construction features in terms of mechanical quality, functional reliability, and the user interface.
Somebody who can produce clear, focused, and decently lit illustrative photos to show or explain features.
And finally- somebody who can organize all that into words that make sense, are informative, and sufficiently interesting to keep the reader's attention.

I am not:
Corrupt.
In any manufacturer's pocket.
Anybody's shill.
Making loads of money at this biz.
Getting tons of free guns in trade for sterling reviews.
Gold-plating ANY POS product.
Told by ANY maker how to write up their product. (With the three noted exceptions, resulting in permanently canceled coverage.)
Able to spend thousands of dollars in producing any article I'm going to sell for less than $700.
Here to do YOUR job in researching & deciding whether or not YOU should buy anything.

What I do is:
Borrow a gun from its maker, because I'd go broke if I had to buy every test gun I write up.
Shoot a gun & tell you about what it has, what it does, how it did for me, and toss in a couple of impressions (good AND bad) along the way.
Get a sample of ONE gun, which may or may not be representative, simply because production varies.
Put enough time & effort into evaluating a gun to produce useful basic reporting on it, while making a profit on the article sale.
Shoot a handful of representative load types through a test sample, as very basic performance parameters.
Get "free" ammunition as test samples, for use IN tests (not for personal stashes), necessary to make a profit on any article.
Tell the reader the truth.
Buy the test sample if I want to keep it, or return it if I don't.


What I do not do is:
Make a gun look good to please a maker/advertiser.
Pointless accuracy testing at silly distances (either too close or varying widely from article to article).
Gloss over or ignore deficiencies.
Obtain multiple samples to do multiple-sample testing.
Get "special hand-built writer's test guns".
Spend months in the snow, the mud, the rain, the jungle, and the desert with any gun, to give it a "real" test.
Shoot multiple 10-shot groups with each load tested to create a more "valid" accuracy test.
Run dozens & dozens of different loads through every test sample, so every reader's personal pet favorite is sure to get covered.
Get paid thousands of dollars per article.
Get to keep every sample gun for free (see above).
All your research work for you.
Tell you whether to buy the gun in question or not.
Do your thinking for you.

What you do (or should) is:
Use your own damn brain.
Use multiple sources when looking for info on a particular gun you might be interested in.
Use any mag article as ONE info source.
View any gunmag as a source of general info in expanding your own knowledge base, even on guns you're not planning to buy.
LEARN from gunmags (good ones).
EVALUATE for yourself whether the writer of any particular article seems to know what he's talking about, and/or if that article truly offers you any useful info.
Pay attention to that info, or ignore his byline in future if you decide he never provides anything useful.
Understand it's one guy, one gun.
Realize a second sample off the shelf at your local dealer can easily be better or worse.
Understand that advertising is a necessary evil, and the large-circulation mags CAN'T exist without it.
Comprehend that the gunmags are a for-profit business.
Realize that gunwriters expect a profit on our time & production efforts, like anybody else who's self-employed.

What you should not do is:
Make unfounded assumptions about the character of ALL gunwriters.
Assume ("know") the system is totally rigged & corrupt.
Continue to spout Internet BS about all gunwriters being totally in the pockets of the gunmakers.
Totally dismiss all gunwriters as dishonest shills, and all gunmags as useless.
Expect US to make YOUR decisions for you.
Expect completely unreasonable extended testing from us.
Expect the gun you buy to BE exactly the same and PERFORM exactly the same as the one we wrote up.
Fail to comprehend that a sample of one is a sample of one.
Revere the Internet as God Above All, in the field of providing actual truthful gun info.
Be indignant if a gunmag prints something you already know.

Gunwriting can be a fairly lucrative job, IF you manage to plug yourself into one of the huge publishing conglomerates as a salaried staff writer, used in multiple positions, and backed by their resources.
The rest of us (the majority) are freelancers, NOT on salary, and not even full-time writers.
As a freelancer, you'd have to put out an astonishing volume of material to actually LIVE off article sales, and very few of us are able or willing to do that.

I spent the first ten years establishing myself as a writer while still a career cop.
The last 20 after retiring the writing only made up half of my income.
I know other writers who have or had other income to supplement what they make or made from the gunmags.
It IS something of a labor of love.
We don't get rich, we don't get free guns, we don't get free beer, and we don't even get groupies.

Time after time, year after year, I see this almost regularly spaced gunmag bashing.
They're all shills.
I already know everything they print.
Nothing they print is any good.
I can get everything I need from the Internet.

OK. Fine.
Nobody anywhere is forcing you buy a gunmag, or any other product you don't want, if you feel it doesn't give you anything for your money.

DON'T BUY THE THINGS!
If you already know it all, just don't buy a gunmag.

By all means- Trust every anonymous body on the Internet, get all your detailed info on new models from those faceless people, and enjoy the clear, well-focused & comprehensive photos of new guns & features there.

Just knock off propagating the age-old tiresome myths & lies about the gunmags that seem to have have a life of their own.
If ya gotta spout, at least spout the truth, huh?

Denis"

Since you like quotes so much Here is one from Richard Venola, a former editor of Guns & Ammo Magazine. Probably the most widely read store bought monthly gun publication. It's not as long. But more to the point.

“You have to be in cahoots with the manufacturer, in order to make the publication appeal to the readership,” he said. “Say you write about boats. At some point you’re going to end up on the sun deck of a boat, downing sundowners after testing one, with the guy who makes it. It’s just how it happens.”

After Dick Metcalf's big faux pax, it was the advertisers who threatened to end advertising with Guns & Ammo unless Metcalf was fired. He was history just a few days later. It was the same with both Jim Zumbo at Outdoor Life, and Jerry Tsai at Recoil. The advertisers of those magazines they wrote for, demanded their firings..... And got them.

Now, knowing all of this, do you honestly expect to get a down to Earth, honest, unbiased gun review about a Remington, S&W, Ruger, Colt, Glock, or any other gun they test? When these same manufacturers are pulling the purse strings, and possess that kind of power in doing so? Again, this is a common sense answer.
 
Since you like quotes so much Here is one from Richard Venola, a former editor of Guns & Ammo Magazine. Probably the most widely read store bought monthly gun publication. It's not as long. But more to the point.

“You have to be in cahoots with the manufacturer, in order to make the publication appeal to the readership,” he said. “Say you write about boats. At some point you’re going to end up on the sun deck of a boat, downing sundowners after testing one, with the guy who makes it. It’s just how it happens.”

After Dick Metcalf's big faux pax, it was the advertisers who threatened to end advertising with Guns & Ammo unless Metcalf was fired. He was history just a few days later. It was the same with both Jim Zumbo at Outdoor Life, and Jerry Tsai at Recoil. The advertisers of those magazines they wrote for, demanded their firings..... And got them.

Now, knowing all of this, do you honestly expect to get a down to Earth, honest, unbiased gun review about a Remington, S&W, Ruger, Colt, Glock, or any other gun they test? When these same manufacturers are pulling the purse strings, and possess that kind of power in doing so? Again, this is a common sense answer.


What did all of those guys do to get fired?
 
Sorry man, but companies lie all the time about just about everything when it suits them.

Watch or read the news some time. Businesses overwhelmingly lie to cover their butts, avoid bad press, mislead consumers, and try to dodge legal liabilities. It’s what they do!

Colt has no interest in readily admitting that their new baby is defective, they need to sell guns. Telling their customers that the new gun was only half baked doesn’t achieve that short term goal. Long term they might be better off if they did just recall all of the new Pythons and jump through their own butt holes making all of the early guns new owners ridiculously happy, but that is unlikely.

A good long term strategy would be to eat some crow, admit things didn’t go well, and then not only fix the problem Pythons but add some value. Like maybe some action jobs, free Colt swag, maybe a discount coupon. If I had a bad initial Python sent it to Colt, and got back a hand tuned work of art with some free stuff in the way of apology I’d be singing Colt’s praises. Hopefully they do something like that, I really really want to buy a Python when I have a reasonable expectation the guns will work right.

I want Colt to be successful, and one way to do that long term is get ahead of problems and make sure to build a reputation for no BS outstanding customer service.

I don't think that will happen. Even though I believe it would be an excellent way for Colt to clean up this whole mess. I don't think it will happen, because I really don't think Colt has the ability to manufacture a Python revolver the way it's customers expect it to. Colt has simply changed too much as a company. If they were the same company, they would never have shipped out so much bad product in the first place. This is a far more serious condition than most people think or understand.

Colt has always had idiots in the front office making poor business decisions. That's been par for the course at Colt for several decades now. But their product has always been impeccable. ALWAYS. Not any longer. This was no simple screw up. It is reflective of a poor manufacturing mindset. That is not easy to change in the manufacturing world. It just can't be "implemented", like a new milling machine, or inspection procedure. I've seen this before. And I've spent my entire life in metal manufacturing. Some 45 years.

I'm not saying it can't be done. But it's not quick and easy to do. And I sure hope Colt can do it. And it really upsets me they have deteriorated to this point. As I said, I've seen it happen at other companies. And it didn't end well. I sure hope it does for Colt. If it doesn't it will be a sad day in the gun world.
 
Last edited:
I don't think that will happen. Even though I believe it would be an excellent way for Colt to clean up this whole mess. I don't think it will happen, because I really don't think Colt has the ability to manufacture a Python revolver the way it's customers expect it to. Colt has simply changed too much as a company. If they were the same company, they would never have shipped out so much bad product in the first place. This is a far more serious condition than most people think or understand.

Colt has always had idiots in the front office making poor business decisions. That's been par for the course at Colt for several decades now. But their product as always been impeccable. ALWAYS. Not any longer. This was no simple screw up. It is reflective of a poor manufacturing mindset. That is not easy to change in the manufacturing world. It just can't be "implemented", like a new milling machine, or inspection procedure. I've seen this before. And I've spent my entire life in metal manufacturing. Some 45 years.

I'm not saying it can't be done. But it's not quick and easy to do. And I sure hope Colt can do it. And it really upsets me they have deteriorated to this point. As I said, I've seen it happen at other companies. And it didn't end well. I sure hope it does for Colt. If it doesn't it will be a sad day in the gun world.

Their product has not always been impeccable, at least their commercial market offerings have not been.

Colt's Defense on the other hand, yeah those boys know how to develop, refine, and stick to a strict TDP to make functional fighting guns that you can stake your life on. The commercial side of the house.... not so much.

Now that the GWOT is winding down and Uncle Sugar doesn't need as many M4's Colt is gonna be in the hurt locker until they figure out the civvy market, unfortunately as evidenced in this thread and many others most civilian buyers simply will not put out the money for quality products. Imagine the cost of a Python that had to pass govt' inspection processes for function, materials, etc and adhere to a TDP, it would be a $3K gun. Now an argument could be made that it is not necessary to meet that kind of stringent quality level, but for those willing to buy quality at least then you could expect the gun to work right.

There has to be a balance somewhere in between, and maybe some of the QC/QA practices from the Defense side of the house should have a little sit down the the commercial side.
 
Their product has not always been impeccable, at least their commercial market offerings have not been.

I should have been more specific. I meant to say their revolvers and 1911's. But you are correct, they've had some losers along the way. The "All American 2000", or whatever they called that POS that lasted 15 minutes. And let's not forget their, "Smart Gun" lunacy. But overall they made some of the best wheelguns to come down the pike. And as I said, it's going to be a major challenge for them to be able to do it again. I'm rooting for them all the way. But I have to admit, I'm not overly optimistic.
 
Being a guy that no longer owns a .357, I sold my Ruger SP101 because a range gun it is not, well for me anyway, I am thrilled about Colt getting back into the game.
I now have the option of the King Cobras and Pythons which are just beautiful, the 6” GP100’s and S&W 27’s to choose from when I decide to pick up a .357.
I love America and being able to argue about this stuff and which is better...:D
 
So, in the end, a thread that was started for the purpose of enthusiastically discussing new Pythons has been dragged into the dirt by a tag-team of two Colt-haters ...

... who just can't let go and seem to enjoy piling on the hyperbole in an effort to demean an honored name in American firearms who are simply trying to bring a cherished icon in response to the wishes of many of us.
 
So, in the end, a thread that was started for the purpose of enthusiastically discussing new Pythons has been dragged into the dirt by a tag-team of two Colt-haters ...

... who just can't let go and seem to enjoy piling on the hyperbole in an effort to demean an honored name in American firearms who are simply trying to bring a cherished icon in response to the wishes of many of us.
You really need to just stop. Just because we are not having a Colt circle jerk, doesn't mean both sides of an issue cannot be discussed. Grow up and stop acting like a bratty child who is trying to control the room and everyone in it.
 
So, in the end, a thread that was started for the purpose of enthusiastically discussing new Pythons has been dragged into the dirt by a tag-team of two Colt-haters ...

... who just can't let go and seem to enjoy piling on the hyperbole in an effort to demean an honored name in American firearms who are simply trying to bring a cherished icon in response to the wishes of many of us.

Colt hater? Hardly. Disappointed Colt fan and owner of Colt products.
 
Colt hater? Hardly. Disappointed Colt fan and owner of Colt products.

How many new Pythons do you own and how many issues have you had?

I can't even find the muzzle crown scratches they all have and none I've looked at had a locked up cylinder. Can't say about the cylinder rotation because I wasn't going to put turn marks on someone else's gun.
 
You really need to just stop. Just because we are not having a Colt circle jerk, doesn't mean both sides of an issue cannot be discussed. Grow up and stop acting like a bratty child who is trying to control the room and everyone in it.
You're not "discussing" anything. You continue to demean the comments of those who do not agree with you and discount every statement countering your negativity. You are the one who is not being civil. You are spewing unnecessary vitriol. It's apparent that you just cannot stand anyone that doesn't agree with you, no matter how specious your argument may be. You argue that a product is crap, yet you offer nothing in the way of actual proof. Calling another member a "bratty child" is hardly the way to get convince anyone that your arguments have merit.

You disparage long-time members of this forum, gunwriters, and anyone who says that they like the idea of a new Python, but most especially, people who've been around here a long time who actually have some experience. We get it; it's not about Colt or the Python, it's just you throwing a hissy-fit and trying to get the last word in.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top