One of my childhood friends had a pet python. Occasionally it would somehow slither out of its terrarium and wrap itself around his arm while he was sleeping. Eery.
Colt revolvers do the same to me. My Pythons and Anaconda wrap themselves around my hand and don’t let go. I don’t mind this particular affectation.
As to Colt no longer being Colt now that it’s owned by CZ, hhhmmmf. Why is this curious logic applied to Colt and not to the hundreds of thousands of companies that are owned by other companies? Do you say “don’t squeeze the Proctor and Gamble” or do you say “don’t squeeze the Charmin?” It’s genuinely befuddling and sometimes humorous but I do wish it would stop - it’s incorrect, misleading and has the intention of defaming the company, which it doesn’t deserve.
As to Colt not being the “same” company it “was,” again, how many companies are the “same” (however that’s defined) as they once were? The new Python in the gun store today wasn’t personally inspected by Sam Colt himself, true. But it’s a damn good revolver that can, at least in my case, shoot with the best of ‘em (Korth).
Regarding Colt’s lack of innovation, I would posit that their market analysis strongly reflects the more traditional tastes of their customers. Witness the success of their “retro” 1911s; like them or not, they sell them all pretty damn quickly. Some of the appeal of the new Python is precisely because it harkens back to the older one, but is made of modern steel with a strengthened frame and more durable internals. That IS innovation while sustaining and even enhancing the product’s appeal to its customers.
