What would you like next from Colt/CZ

What new revolver product would you like to see from Colt/CZ. Check all that would entice you.

  • .45LC Anaconda

    Votes: 22 37.9%

  • .41 Mag. Anaconda

    Votes: 9 15.5%

  • 8-shot .357 Anaconda

    Votes: 15 25.9%

  • New Trooper, based on Python frame with half-lug barrel

    Votes: 9 15.5%

  • Python in black DLC finish

    Votes: 9 15.5%

  • 10mm Python

    Votes: 5 8.6%

  • 10mm King Cobra

    Votes: 3 5.2%

  • 9mm Cobra/ New Detective Special

    Votes: 16 27.6%
  • Total voters
    58
Interchangeable barrels are interesting in concept but to me, it's less interesting in practice. I'd rather just have another gun. This damned thing is 9oz heavier than a 7.5" SRH and not even as strong.

004b_2.jpg
 
454 Casull. That’d be better than 45 Colt only. You know, multitasking. Anaconda frames are supposedly strong, 300gr at 60,000psi would prove it.

The Dan Wesson silhouette revolvers in supermag varieties would be sweet, but not enough interest from what I see.
 
I'd like to see Dan Wesson revolvers re-introduced but not with the 1970's model 15 design again. The 1980's Super Mags introduced more innovation to what was already the most innovative revolver in a long time. They could adapt those features to the medium frame size (being side-plateless for example), and then surprise us with more innovation still.

The interchangeable barrel length feature is sort of gimmicky, but it's also a result of important features that many current production revolvers lack. Dan Wesson never have a problem with barrels being distorted where they are screwed into the frame. That can't be said for any other maker. Ruger even had the barrels break off, which is why the SRH has a huge frame extension. And what's to be done when the b/c gap erodes to too many thou? With a Dan Wesson, the gap can be reset in a few minutes with no gunsmithing.

As for Colt, the Python and new Anaconda are too bling. The Python has always been the prettiest double-action revolver since it was introduced. I can remember admiring it as a kid. As a grown-up, I can still admire pretty guns:

left.jpg

but I'm about as likely to own a gun like that as I am to wear a diamond-studded tiara.
 
westernrover said:
The interchangeable barrel length feature is sort of gimmicky, but it's also a result of important features that many current production revolvers lack. Dan Wesson never have a problem with barrels being distorted where they are screwed into the frame. That can't be said for any other maker. Ruger even had the barrels break off, which is why the SRH has a huge frame extension. And what's to be done when the b/c gap erodes to too many thou? With a Dan Wesson, the gap can be reset in a few minutes with no gunsmithing.
Click to expand...
The barrels breaking off Redhawks was a one time thing, in one small batch of guns due to a manufacturing error. Barrel/cylinder gaps do not change over time from erosion.
 
CraigC said:
The barrels breaking off Redhawks was a one time thing, in one small batch of guns due to a manufacturing error. Barrel/cylinder gaps do not change over time from erosion.
Click to expand...
The broken barrels were the result of using a chlorinated solvent on the threads, but the solvent alone would not have broken the barrels. The other part of the cause is the stress induced by the "crush" fit. The only way current makers are using to keep a barrel on the frame is by torquing that one end of the barrel's threads into the frame threads. Those threads keep tight as a result of elastic deformation. Without this deformation, the barrels would just unscrew from the frame like a loose bolt. How much this deformation affects the bore varies from gun to gun. Some guns suffer from little deformation in the bore and are probably very accurate. Others are badly tweaked, but still "within specs" even when a land-diameter range rod cannot be pushed through the deformed section. Most revolvers are deformed. A few are made without mangling the barrel, but only by chance. The Karl Lewis/Dan Wesson design stretches the barrel across its entire length so the elastic deformation in any one section is minimized. There is no deformation concentrated where the barrel screws into the frame. The gun press in the Dan Wesson revolver era attributed the revolvers' accuracy to the harmonics of a barrel held in tension, but this is incorrect. It was simply a consistent lack of mangling the frame-end of the barrel.
 
Westernrover, very interesting posting. In light of what you
wrote, do you have any technical knowledge or opinion as
to the worth of S&W's two-piece barrels?

I've seen postings that owners of the new S&Ws believe
the guns are more accurate than the older ones.
 
Am I the only one that would like to see the King Cobra Target .22 with the 6 inch barrel announced a year and a half ago?
www.americanrifleman.org

An Official Journal Of The NRA | New For 2022: Colt King Cobra Target .22 LR

Colt added its first rimfire-chambered option in its new "snake gun" lineup in 2022, and the King Cobra Target in .22 Long Rifle packs plenty of capacity inside its traditionally configured frame.
www.americanrifleman.org www.americanrifleman.org
The 4.25 inch barrel models are finally showing up, but I have yet to even see a picture of the promised 6 inch version. I would love to see a 6 inch stainless 10 shot Colt to keep this company:
IMG_20170321_225923292.jpeg
 
westernrover said:
The broken barrels were the result of using a chlorinated solvent on the threads, but the solvent alone would not have broken the barrels. The other part of the cause is the stress induced by the "crush" fit. The only way current makers are using to keep a barrel on the frame is by torquing that one end of the barrel's threads into the frame threads. Those threads keep tight as a result of elastic deformation. Without this deformation, the barrels would just unscrew from the frame like a loose bolt. How much this deformation affects the bore varies from gun to gun. Some guns suffer from little deformation in the bore and are probably very accurate. Others are badly tweaked, but still "within specs" even when a land-diameter range rod cannot be pushed through the deformed section. Most revolvers are deformed. A few are made without mangling the barrel, but only by chance. The Karl Lewis/Dan Wesson design stretches the barrel across its entire length so the elastic deformation in any one section is minimized. There is no deformation concentrated where the barrel screws into the frame. The gun press in the Dan Wesson revolver era attributed the revolvers' accuracy to the harmonics of a barrel held in tension, but this is incorrect. It was simply a consistent lack of mangling the frame-end of the barrel.
Click to expand...
As I said, the broken barrels were a small batch, decades ago.

Every single action revolver from the beginning of time has had a torqued barrel, not pinned in place. Not a big deal, as long as they don't over-torque it.
 
UncleEd said:
Westernrover, very interesting posting. In light of what you
wrote, do you have any technical knowledge or opinion as
to the worth of S&W's two-piece barrels?

I've seen postings that owners of the new S&Ws believe
the guns are more accurate than the older ones.
Click to expand...

S&W's two-piece barrels offer the advantage of allowing S&W to torque the barrel and clock the barrel shroud with the sight independently -- they eliminate "canted" barrels. To install a one-piece barrel properly requires the threading to be precisely clocked. If insufficient thread is cut, the barrel will need to be over-torqued to bring the top to dead-center. That could increase the deformity in the bore. If the threads are excessively cut, torquing the barrel enough to make it tight will result in a cant. After shipping out too many canted barrels, S&W likely resorted to cutting less threads and over-torquing the barrels because the bore deformity is harder for customers to detect than the canting.

The S&W two-piece barrels do not use a nut on the muzzle end like DW. Instead, they use a flange.
415130000.jpg

The flange compresses the outer barrel sleeve against the frame, so the barrel is held in tension. It is less likely to result in bore deformities. Because there is no other way to torque or unscrew the barrel, S&W uses an in-bore tool that grabs the rifling to turn the barrel. S&W uses an ECM (chemical) process to form the grooves in their revolver barrels that seems to me to work very well. S&W has an outstanding design and some wonderful production processes, but they consistently fumble on quality. By "quality" I mean the conformity of the products they deliver to customers to the standards of their products' designs is low. They have over their long history accumulated a design that amounts to a great product, but what they actually build is often riddled with flaws.

I have one S&W with a two-piece barrel and it is not deformed. That is the only personal experience I have with them. I do believe it is a superior design in terms of enabling the manufacturer to produce more consistent quality. For the consumer, they are more likely to get a better product with a two-piece barrel, but if a one-piece barrel happens by chance to have been assembled without a problem, then the consumer receives a product that is not inferior in any way.
 
ColtPythonElite said:
2.5" Python with service stocks and nice engraving.
Click to expand...
I saw one today, well, without the engraving. New production- it was gorgeous and the service grips were hand-filling without sacrificing control. Im glad I waited on a new Python, this model is the One for me. 😍 PYTHON-SP2WCTS-3QUARTER-LEFT-2.5-1__95166.1694017029.jpg
 
Last edited:
From what Westernrover said about installation of current S&W two-piece
barrels, I can see that many pistolsmiths might hate the process. I think
that they would be required to have the proper "wrench" for each individual
caliber, i.e. .38, 9mm, .40, .41, .44, and on.
 
I voted python DLC finish but what I really mean is royal blued finish. Colt: Please please make something blued before you make a different length barrel of yet another stainless python/anaconda. I have a new production python and king cobra but not interested in anything else stainless. I keep talking myself out of buying an older blued python thinking/hoping colt will eventually make a new blued model. Sadly I think a DLC finish is gonna be as close as we get…

Oh, and a 357 SAA would also be on my list
 
I’d like to compare the new 44 frames to my existing 45 Anaconda.
Becuase there is a slight flat on the forcing cone to accommodate the crane on my Anaconda, I have to wonder if the new 44s are the same size frame? (and the same size frame of the first run of 44s)?
 
Looks like my dream true. I saw several videos today announcing the python in a blued finish.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Terry G
  • Locked
Colt/CZ or CZ/Colt?
2
Replies
28
Views
3K
Tenncvol
T
Mr.Revolverguy
  • Locked
Dan Wesson -- Sign The Petition -- A Message To CZ
2 3
Replies
50
Views
3K
hemiram
hemiram
J
  • Locked
A great Colt clone, really.
Replies
4
Views
766
targetshootr
T
C
  • Locked
45 Colt or 44 Magnum for my next?
2
Replies
37
Views
2K
Kruff
K
B
  • Locked
What revolver would you get????
2 3 4
Replies
82
Views
4K
Phil DeGraves
P
Back
Top