Colt python vs s&w 686.

Status
Not open for further replies.
4v50 Gary said:
Not at all surprising and you're right Ruger Redhawk. As the older gun assemblers died off, there were fewer employees at Colt who could assemble and time the older D, E or I frame action. Many of us "kids" remember how in the late '70s the quality was slipping. First it was the finish (like the face of the cylinder) which wasn't so high polish and then other less noticeable parts weren't as well polished. The timing became an issue in the late '70s and '80s as the old timers retired. Newer Pythons of the '80s were rarely of the quality and fit as the older ones. Colt developed the Trooper MK III action to simplify the lockwork and to simplify things for its less skilled workforce. Recall that the older Troopers had a Python type lockwork and but for the finish and a slight difference in the frame (it was stepped down where the frame met the muzzle), could if rebarrelled pass itself off as a Python.

My teacher, Rob Dunlap, used to refer to the newer lockwork as something blind high school drop outs on drugs could work on.
Click to expand...
Yeah it's sad the way all the old Craftmen have long since gone. I used to be a S&W fan back in the mid to late 70's. Little by little you could see a change in their quality.

I wouldn't mind finding a old Python but not for what they are asking for them today. I have a few older Colts. I have a NIB unfired 6" Diamondback in 22 LR and NIB Unfired Trooper in 22mag. Then I have a couple of the older Detective Spls. One is unfired NIB and the other looks to be unfired with the non shouded ejector rod in 32 New Police.
 
I doub't you'll notice much difference beyond what is personal preference. Both have their subtle strengths and weaknesses, but both are top shelf revolvers. I personally prefer the S&W's slightly smoother action (that does depend on vintage) and more intuitive forward cylinder release.
 
The Combat Masterpeice is a .38 (M15/67) or a .22 (M18). The Combat Magnum (M19/66) evolved from the Combat Masterpiece. These are all K frames.

The Distinguished Service Magnum (M586/686) is different frame (L) and along with the Service Magnum (M581/681) were the first to use this frame.

As to the original post, congrats. That's one awesome brother you have.
I would guess in a shootoff, the Colt would have a slight advantage, assuming both guns are stock of course.
 
Python wins hands down in my book!

I have owned both ,and love both colt & smiths, but to this day the Colt Python is the KING of 357 Revolvers!!! great balance, feels good in hand,very accurate,know one touches its smooth action and its just plain pretty.
 
timing issue on Colt

hey also read on these post about timing issues with the Colt Pythons,I bought a 6" blue python new in 1979 ,and to this day never had any timing issues with it. My Colt is the only revolver out of many i have owned that you could rapid fire all 6 and hold true to target down range.
 
Guillermo said:
I have both living at my house.

My current wife has a 3inch 686 (the 7 shot) that is a nice enough gun.

She works from home and is not incredibly security minded so I picked up a 4 inch 686 police trade in to live on her desk. (she would hate to have a burglar get her 3inch but would not cry if the old Victoria Police revolver were lost)

I also have a 4 inch LN Python. While I have never put them in a Ransom Rest to see, I can tell you that the Python is easier to shoot accurately.

As to the Python's timing issues there is a lot of garbage floating around the net. Some folks that have never seen a Python claim to have knowledge on the subject.

Be careful as to who you listen to.

Grant Cunningham explains it
http://www.grantcunningham.com/blog_files/colt_python_delicate.html
Click to expand...

Let me see if I understand this correctly. According to GC, the Colts are NOT delicate compared to the Smiths, it's a problem with some Colt owners not understanding the following:

1) Colts have wearable parts (that don't wear in the Smith design) that must be replaced at regular intervals.

2) Colt actions will beat themselves completely out of time operating w/ 1/2 the slop that Smiths will operate day in and day out with.

3) Colt actions are "refined" and cannot be set up properly by gunsmiths that have not had in depth training in Colt's precision mechanism (unlike the S&W design).


Right........................

If you want to argue that your Colt has a better trigger, fits your hand better or provides a higher level of fit/finish, well, you may be right. But you Colt owners that want to believe your Colts aren't delicate and point to that blog entry as proof? He basically proves just the opposite with his blog entry - the Colts are not as robust, require regular maintenance that Smiths don't and are difficult to repair.

Somebody please explain what I've missed....

David
 
Grand Cunningham did not say that which you assert.

It seems that you are too much of a smith fanboy to have an open mind.

Enjoy your Smiths. Until the wheels fell off the bus in the late 1990's they produced some very good revolvers.
 
Well I just read your Grant Cunningham thread and that's exactly what he says. He states that regular maintenance of the python is necessary to keep it in good working order, unlike a Smith, and if there is any slop at all it will beat itself out of time if you continue to shoot it. In other words, it's a very tough gun as long as you replace the delicate parts regularly.

It's no shame to say that the Python has a more delicate lockwork than a S&W or Ruger. The fact is that it does. Even Grant says so.
 
Guillermo said:
Grand Cunningham did not say that which you assert.

It seems that you are too much of a smith fanboy to have an open mind.

Enjoy your Smiths. Until the wheels fell off the bus in the late 1990's they produced some very good revolvers.
Click to expand...

Smith STILL produces some very good revolvers, I have some recent production models and they work well, as expected, right out of the box.

Conversely Colt produces what exactly?

There is nothing wrong with my reading comprehension. I conceded that there are some aspects of the python that may be superior.

I think that perhaps you may want to reflect inwardly and examine exactly who in this discussion is too much of a "fanboy to have an open mind".

David
 
Colt is just a name that people like to pat themselves on the back for believing they have a superior product. In truth, it's just another gun that some mythologize and gloss over their flaws. I know there are guns that are worth four digits and the Python is not of them.
 
Theres always going to be a differing opinion. I've shot a 7shot 686 4" and I own a 4" 1981 blue python, aswell as a 4" king cobra. I don't think you can compare the 686 to the python.

I think its fair to compare it to the King Cobra, and I've heard of the stories of the colt factory strikes and the gradual slip of quality as america became more about profit and less about quality as the 20th century wound down, that being said Ill take the KC over the 686 any day. I'd put my KC up against a GP100 as well. and I'd damn sure take the Python above any others.

I shoot my Python. it was a LEO's duty gun before being mine, it's seen years of use, it has flaws in its finish, and thus far it has never had a single issue.

and to the fellow arguing about S&Ws being more durable than Colts based on what someone on the internet said, someone else on the internet also said the King Cobra was the strongest double action revolver ever made, if I cared enough about how you feel regarding Colts I might google the quote and post it here, but I'm about as interested in changing your mind as I am about having teeth pulled. I'm fully aware of all the accusations about Colt's DA revolvers, and with the two I own, I can tell you there is no issue.
 
Last edited:
...the Python is not of them.
Click to expand...

I disagree.

Back in the day there was nothing from a factory as smooth as a Colt Custom Shop Python. Even the "standard" Python had a feel to it when new that others did not have. While the looks sold most of them, the Python with that 14" twist barrel and the underlug was very good at the .38 wadcutter games in play at the time.

People bought Smiths when they needed a solid working tool to use every day. If Smith had a Performance Center 686 40 years ago there would be a lot less Pythons in the world, but I do not recall them offering any factory tuning to the general public as an option and the L frame didn't exist at all. True or not, the impression at the time was, for .357s, the N frames were too heavy and the K frames weren't durable enough.

Given what $1000 buys new these days, I think a nice Python is still a good buy on the used market. The only problem I see is the loss of gunsmith knowledge necessary to renew one thats buggered up.
 
@ Guillermo , then again , Taurus has been around a long time producing the same garbage year after year! Im not saying all of there guns are junk , it just seems there more complaints about there firearms than any other manufacturer !

Since this Python was a gift , enjoy it , its really hard to compare two great weapons, because unfortunately your gonna have fan boys of both , I usually look at the reviews that the guys who have both, talk about!
 
it just seems there more complaints about there firearms than any other manufacturer
Click to expand...

not sure that such is real scientific.

in my experience, Smith's revolvers are hit and miss...as are Taurus'.

That seems to be backed up on this board.

My point was that I don't think that Smith is producing, these days, decent revolvers. I opine that they are trash. In my experience with a Taurus Tracker and a ul snubby Taurus is producing better revolvers than Smith. Even if they were equal, the price factor goes to the Brazilian.

The last 3 new Smith revolvers that I shot had factory defects. (2 related to the barrel, one had a crane so poorly fitted it would almost cut your finger)

Add the lock which may be the most idiotic design ever conceived since the nuclear rifle (that would not shoot past its blast zone.) Seriously, what kind of a moron would design the movement of the lock to work on the same, the OPPOSITE, axis to the recoil of the weapon? That a company is willing to continue that speaks volumes.

I am NOT in the market for a new revolver. Old Smiths and Colts are what I want. But if I were I would look to Ruger and Taurus.
 
Lock and blast zone???? I find myself lost over that one.

If I was pushed in a corner over a revolver. DW hands down. As a past colt, ruger, dw and current new production smith owner. I can't fault the smith. Yeah the lock sucks. But the over all design is solid, mim and all. The lock work is simple as can be and tunes up very well. Smith also puts out some great bores. And also have the best cylinder release system ever made.

There is a reason colt does not produce a revolver any more. :)
 
Smith also puts out some great bores
Click to expand...

I agree. Their current S&W line up sure inspires boredom. ;)


And also have the best cylinder release system ever made.
Click to expand...
You mean the one with the screw that constantly backs itself out?

There is a reason colt does not produce a revolver any more
Click to expand...

Colt still makes revolvers, and sells every one they build.
 
As others have suggested both are very well built revolvers, but the Python was a semi-custom produced handgun and the 686 is a mass produced handgun. So all other things being even I believe that Python should win any reasonable comparison. Now if you want an apples to apples comparison test the Python Vs. the S&W M-27.
 
No matter what it still comes down to personal preference. I've owned 2 pythons in my life, both with very nice action jobs, and many S&W's. I currently own a 686-5 tuned by S&W and I've always liked a good tuned S&W over a Python action. And, concerning "winning any reasonable comparison" a Python may group 1/2 inch better at 25 yards than my 686, and considering that it will cost 2-3 times what my S&W costs, that's not much of a win in my book.

There is a reason people experimented with the Smython/Smolt revolver in the 60's. Smith action and Python barrel. The best of both worlds, in my opinion.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

S
  • Locked
Python vs 686
2
Replies
37
Views
7K
JPM70535
J
Confederate
  • Locked
S&W 686 v. Colt Python
2
Replies
44
Views
6K
Confederate
Confederate
ms6852
  • Locked
Colt Python save it or shoot it.
2
Replies
36
Views
3K
gmh1013
G
N
  • Locked
S&W 686 or Colt Python
Replies
20
Views
1K
valnar
V
Mr. Mosin
  • Locked
Colt Python vs S&W 686/Ruger GP100
2 3 4 5
Replies
101
Views
15K
labnoti
L
Back
Top