brockgl
Member
- Joined
- Apr 16, 2008
- Messages
- 169
Has this topic ever been posted before? =P Lol, I imagine it has many times in the past, but I wasn't able to find much from a search, so I figured I would give it a shot.
I've heard a lot of great things about Colt revolvers (such as the Python). But Colt frustrates me. They discontinued pretty much every gun that I would ever be interested in. So, unless you want a SA cowboy gun, your pretty much out of luck finding a new Colt. This being the case, I have pretty much forsaken the idea of buying any more Colt revolvers. It isn't because I think their guns are of poor quality; it's because I don't want to have to buy a used gun that parts are no longer made for. Why would I pay $700-$1100 for a Python when parts may become very hard to find in the next decade (since the model has been discontinued)?
So, last week I bought a brand new Smith & Wesson 686-6 .357 with a 6" barrel. I've put almost 300 rounds through it in less than a week, and this gun is fun to shoot!
But my real question and reason for the post is this: Is there a noticeable difference in quality between certain aspects of a Colt vs a Smith? I know these companies are probably the oldest rivals in the handgun manufacturing world, but how does that translate where their modern firearms are concerned?
I hate Smith's ILS, but they are easy to remove, so I removed it the same day I bought my 686. I wasn't into revolvers during the pre-ILS days, so I never got use to the way Smiths looked without the pimple, thus the pimple doesn't bother me in the slightest. I also already had a 642, which I carry everywhere, so I was use to the Smith & Wesson-style cylinder release.
I also bought a 1968 Colt Trooper .357 with a 6" barrel last week as well. It is a very well-made firearm, but this particular model has an exposed (not shrouded) ejector rod, and to me this and other facts make this gun pretty ugly. Please spare me the "If you don't like it, I'll buy it from you" comments, because I already promised my Dad he gets first dibs if I ever let it go. =) (But, I did get a phenomenal deal on it--$200 in excellent condition! Sorry, no good pics, my father-in-law is using it as a nightstand guard at the moment.)
Nonetheless, I am looking any comments at all concerning Colt revolvers vs. their Smith & Wesson counterparts.
Here is a pic of my Smith 686-6 though and a pretty poor quality cell-phone picture of the Colt Trooper:
I've heard a lot of great things about Colt revolvers (such as the Python). But Colt frustrates me. They discontinued pretty much every gun that I would ever be interested in. So, unless you want a SA cowboy gun, your pretty much out of luck finding a new Colt. This being the case, I have pretty much forsaken the idea of buying any more Colt revolvers. It isn't because I think their guns are of poor quality; it's because I don't want to have to buy a used gun that parts are no longer made for. Why would I pay $700-$1100 for a Python when parts may become very hard to find in the next decade (since the model has been discontinued)?
So, last week I bought a brand new Smith & Wesson 686-6 .357 with a 6" barrel. I've put almost 300 rounds through it in less than a week, and this gun is fun to shoot!
But my real question and reason for the post is this: Is there a noticeable difference in quality between certain aspects of a Colt vs a Smith? I know these companies are probably the oldest rivals in the handgun manufacturing world, but how does that translate where their modern firearms are concerned?
I hate Smith's ILS, but they are easy to remove, so I removed it the same day I bought my 686. I wasn't into revolvers during the pre-ILS days, so I never got use to the way Smiths looked without the pimple, thus the pimple doesn't bother me in the slightest. I also already had a 642, which I carry everywhere, so I was use to the Smith & Wesson-style cylinder release.
I also bought a 1968 Colt Trooper .357 with a 6" barrel last week as well. It is a very well-made firearm, but this particular model has an exposed (not shrouded) ejector rod, and to me this and other facts make this gun pretty ugly. Please spare me the "If you don't like it, I'll buy it from you" comments, because I already promised my Dad he gets first dibs if I ever let it go. =) (But, I did get a phenomenal deal on it--$200 in excellent condition! Sorry, no good pics, my father-in-law is using it as a nightstand guard at the moment.)
Nonetheless, I am looking any comments at all concerning Colt revolvers vs. their Smith & Wesson counterparts.
Here is a pic of my Smith 686-6 though and a pretty poor quality cell-phone picture of the Colt Trooper: