Colt Python vs S&W 686/Ruger GP100
- Thread starter Mr. Mosin
- Start date
- Status
mcb
Member
LOL, I agree but you missed the, "tongue-in-cheek" part. That said (again tongue in cheek) I would get killed on the street, three times, before the rearward motion of a Colt cylinder release became as natural as the forward motion of a S&W is to me currently. I have been competing with a S&W too long to make that transition easy. And since I have no use for a 357 Magnum I don't have much motivation to do so with this new Colt.
IMO, the original Pythons are pretty over-rated. I think they are nice guns, but not deserving of the mythic regard in which some people hold them. I don't think they are as good a gun as the pre-lock Smith 686, for example. It'll be interesting to see how the new Pythons turn out, though. I'm happy to see them on the market as any new gun is welcomed (even the ones that I have no interest in owning), and a new revolver especially so.
Obturation
Member
I agree they're currently over rated . I can't think of any regular production guns by any maker that had the blueing of the old colts though, that's worth something. Fit and finish are reserved for high end & customs. Most makers like to use stainless cause they run it on a buffer for 30 seconds and they're done.
Then why doesn't it have 7 chambers?
Smith sticking with 6 chambers on their blued 586 (except the L comp) makes some sense - Tradition.
It's evident that Colt has absolutely appealed to tradition with this new Python, both through the name and the feature set. So it is absolutely fair to compare it to old style Pythons -- the same as I would compare a "Model 27 Classic" to the old ones.
Colt could have introduced a truly new Python with new lockwork and a new feature set, a gun vastly different but with the same name. It doesn't appear they have. Have they just made a cheaper vent-ribbed barrel revolver without doing the kind of things people have come to expect from S&W and Taurus over the last 20 years? Is it cut for moon-clips? Are the chambers chamfered? Does it have tritium night sights? Trigger over-travel stop? Compensator? Ball detent on the crane? I do understand those kind of things would be "sacrilege" to a traditional Python, but is this new or traditional?
MidRoad
Member
Seems like the same things that makes a K and L frame different. Or an sp101 or gp100. With addition of the shape of the grip frame trigger guard,the hammer,the trigger etc. They're completely different guns externally. Not sure about the internals, if it's just a slight upscaling or what.
ColtPythonElite
Member
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2011
- Messages
- 10,471
I really dislike the trigger guard on the new KC. It looks like the gun was dropped and it bent.
Buying a Python is like buying a Dan Wesson 715. There is some status to owning either one. They are nice looking revolvers. The ones I've seen are decent shooters in the right hands. After that it's just a 357 revolver that you will want to clean more often and will have trouble finding local service.
All this being said by a guy that owns and shoots a Chiappa Rhino...........
Last edited:
The original pythons just weren't that good. S&W put out the 586 to go head to head with the pythons & it did just that, gave them all they could handle.
I hope they changed the original triggers & lock works. They were only good for 30,000 rounds, by the time you got to 40,000 the pythons were spitting lead everywhere. I also hated the short cylinders on the pythons, same with the s&w 27/28's.
I hope they changed the original triggers & lock works. They were only good for 30,000 rounds, by the time you got to 40,000 the pythons were spitting lead everywhere. I also hated the short cylinders on the pythons, same with the s&w 27/28's.
ColtPythonElite
Member
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2011
- Messages
- 10,471
So, it took Smith 25 years to come up with a revolver to compete with a Python?
Sorry, ain't buying it....A Python was a premium grade gun. A 586 was a service grade gun....More like a MK III.
I've carried a 4" Python, a 4" M-66 and a 4" 686, both as duty guns and as competition guns; I even owned an early GP100...so I feel like I have a fairly unbiased opinion. The 586/686 was introduced so that S&W had a revolver that could keep up with the Python...as the K-frame S&W models in stock form could not. In fit and finish the Python had always been compared to the S&W M27. The new Python appears to have been priced to compete with the Performance Center 627
The first thing that struck me when reading about the reintroduction of the Python was how it was priced at a point that made it practical to shoot regularly as opposed to being a Safe Queen. I've had three pythons and recently sold two of them because the going price of them just became so high that I'd be silly not to sell them...I paid $475 (retail) for one and $369 (used) for the other. The one I kept, paid $275 for it, has been slicked up by a master, but more importantly has saved my life.
What I'm really interested in seeing are the internals of the new Python. The old Python action had many parts doing double duty already, so it will be interesting to see how CNC machining has reengineered the internals.
The original Python was usually more accurate than a comparable S&W or Ruger. A lot of this had to do with the different twist rate of the barrel and the secondary lockup of the cylinder just before hammer fall. Unfortunately this tighter lock up is what has lead to the Pythons reputation of "shooting loose" earlier...luckily this isn't a difficult matter to address
OP
OP
Mr. Mosin
Member
- Joined
- Jun 26, 2019
- Messages
- 2,109
This is all I've found.
The 7-shot cylinder was an answer looking for a question that was never asked.
Chambering a Python for 7 rounds would compromise one of it's advantages over the S&W/Ruger...off-set bolt notches
I think that is enough to justify it's MSRP and comparison to the Performance Center 627
I'm thinking folks who paid $2500-$4000 for a Python would be happy to pay $1500 for a one they'd be willing to shoot
Old Dog
Member
Gotta love all this revisionist history when the topic turns to Pythons. Nowadays all these folks with absolutely zero experience shooting them feel compelled to state that Pythons have always been overrated.
Some of you guys crack me up.
Some of you guys crack me up.
OP
OP
Mr. Mosin
Member
- Joined
- Jun 26, 2019
- Messages
- 2,109
There's *supposed* to be a file attached there....
Oh it really is simplified. I'm glad they kept the leaf spring as opposed to going with a coil spring. Looks like the cylinder still rotates into the frame.
Here's hoping they optimized the leverage of the hammer, but not too confident that would happen as S&W has chosen not to in their latest offerings
Last edited:
OP
OP
Mr. Mosin
Member
- Joined
- Jun 26, 2019
- Messages
- 2,109
Ok. May I ask what "optimism" of the hammer leverage does ? I've dealt with a multitude of revolvers, both DA and SA, and in my experience, if I need to cock the hammer, I either do so with my left hand, or as part of the draw stroke w/ my right.
CraigC
Sixgun Nut
There is no way to answer this question as none of us have handled or shot the new Python.
I can speak to price and once you have paid shipping both ways and the tariff on an action job, you've eaten into a lot of that price difference. I mean, the new Super GP100 has a comparable MSRP so it's just not as sky-high as people make it seem.
Nothing that I know of as:
Optimism is a mental attitude reflecting a belief or hope that the outcome of some specific endeavor, or outcomes in general, will be positive, favorable, and desirable. So I'm not quite sure what you are asking
If you meant optimization. : an act, process, or methodology of making something (such as a design, system, or decision) as fully perfect, functional, or effective as possible .
How it applies to hammer leverage, is to maximize the mechanical efficiency of the leverage as the hammer is drawn to full travel in DA by the trigger
The easiest example would be to roll back the hammer of a tuned S&W revolver and note the difference in force required compared to a similar revolver equipped with an Apex Tactical Specialties Evolution 4 hammer...which has been optimized.
I haven't thumb cocked a revolver hammer in years, maybe because none of my everyday use revolvers have hammer spurs, but then I seldom shoot beyond 50 yards with them...even at 100 yards during fun matches I've found shooting DA acceptably accurate (it was a 3'x 1' metal gong)
1KPerDay
Member
Have one. Really nice. It’d be cool if someone made a new one that I could shoot a lot and use at matches and stuff. Oh wait
1KPerDay
Member
- Status
