Where would you rate a King Cobra?

Status
Not open for further replies.
J

JeffC

Member
Joined
Dec 1, 2003
Messages
270
Location
Northern Va.
I've never owned one, but I've had several Smiths, Taurus', a Python, and a GP-100. I saw one used for I think around $500.... any input?

TIA,
Jeff
 
It's main competitors were the S&W 686 and Ruger GP100. I'd say it's the best of the three (by a considerable margin). I know they're appreciating, but $500 for a used one sounds a little steep to me (but then they aren't making them anymore).

Hopefully, dfariswheel will pop here on this thread and add his comments. If not, I'd recommend you do a search for keyword "Cobra" and username "dfariswheel" on this forum, TFL and the Colt forum (show results as posts). You'll find a wealth of information on the KIng Cobra.

(And since there's nothing better 686 and GP100 fans like to do than fight over which is better, things could get interesting here.)
 
Dfariswheel will have the definitive answer in due time.

It's my understanding the King Cobra is a direct descendant of the Trooper Mark III, which, never minding its sintered steel parts, was an excellent revolver and a very straight shooter.

King Cobra prices seem to be hot on the heels of Python prices, sad to say. They're not that good!
 
Even at $500 it doesn't seem to be too "hot on the heels" of they Python (but I don't think I'd pay that for used King Cobra either). Pythons seem to be going for an easy $300 to $500 more than that. Colt revolver prices, in general, seem to going up, up, up lately. It makes me I held on to two or three I traded off (like a Magnum Carry) through the years.
 
Don't look now, but As New or Like New in the box King Cobra's are bringing $500. Depending on barrel (2.5,4,6 or 8 inch) & finish (blue, brushed SS or Bright polished SS), I've seen them bring in the $600-$700 range for the harder to find variations.
They are NOT seeing the $800-$1100 Python prices, but a lot of people want a Colt, so they will PONY up the dough for the King Cobra.
The Python's insides are like a fine watch and the parts are all hand fitted.
The King Cobra's insides are not, that's why you see the difference in price and feel the difference in the trigger.
They (King Cobra's) have not been in production since 1998. You probably won't be seeing those prices do anything but go up, not down in the future.

kingcobrass.jpg


Jeff (GUNKWAZY)
 
Thanks for all the replies..... even the funny ones :evil:

I prefer the Mustang Cobra but a Torino with a 427 Cobra Jet would be awesome too :cool:
 
For me, shooting a revolver is ALL about the action. Out of the 686, GP, and the King Cobra, for me, the 686 is clearly above the other two. I would pick it, without hesitating, above the Python. Ruger's triggers are heavier and rougher, while Colt triggers, while smooth, have that stacking feel which I don't like,(and you have to pull the cylinder release backwards, which I could never get used to). It all depends on what you like, since all three are very strong, well made, accurate, good looking guns. If you like one, or all of them, you can't go wrong.
 
I had one for a while...but for some dumb reason I traded it :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: It was a great gun though...I wish I still had it. :(
 
:confused: HHHHHMMMMM----if it was soooooo good it would still be in production----the Smith and Rugers are still being made----so clearly the Colt rates 3rd in this contest.
 
Don't confuse Colt's (mis)management with Colt's products. There is a big difference.

To use your logic, Omaha, and put it in S&W terms:

If the Triple-Lock "was soooooo good it would still be in production."

Or, if pinned barrels and recessed cylinders "[were] soooooo good [they] would still be in production."

Do you see the flaw in your logic, Omaha?

I've shot all three (686, GP100 and King Cobra) extensively, and for me, the pick of the litter is King Cobra.
 
Last edited:
My King Cobra was my first revolver, it has been a great shooter, everything on it is as smooth as glass and it is more accurate than I can shoot. I like it as much as I do my other 357's :D
4" S&W 586-4
6" S&W 686-5 (+, 7 shot)
5.5" S&W 627-0

KingCobraL.jpg

KingCobraR.jpg

KingCobraopen.jpg
 
Last edited:
Colt has (somehow?) survived for all these years on a (mostly undeserved) reputation and the mindless loyalty of a bunch of sycophants. Since the 1880s they have been producing handguns that were far inferior to those made by the likes of S&W and Webley. Since 1907, S&W has made a superior product in every way and but it still took Colt toadies almost six decades to realize it. Today the Hatford firm is a joke in the gun industry. If it wasn't for government M16 contracts they would have folded up a decade ago - and deserved it! :neener:

And don't get me started on their 1911 pistols! :cuss:
 
Actually, the King Cobra is much newer (and arguably better) design than the 686 (and so is the GP100 for that matter). You're right, though, the S&W design is roughly 98 years old. Colt made some major, and very innovative, changes to their revolver line before mismanagement problems made them stop production of their revolvers.

The KC uses simpler, stronger, more massive parts than the S&W. As dfariswheel likes to point out Master Gunsmith Jerry Kuhnhausen has the opinion that the King Cobra may well be the strongest mid-frame revolver ever made. He attributed this strength to Colt's Superior forged and heat treated frames and cylinders.
 
Last edited:
I no longer have the King Cobra that I owned from 1986-88. What a mistake selling it. The Colt was accurate as hell. And a TANK! I'm no pistolero, but I was shooting at bowling pins, jugs of water and more one-handed from 15-35 yards and pickin' 'em off with ease. Best shootin' .357 I ever owned. One man's experience.
 
I started this response to be in defense of Colt and my personal preferences. Deleted all of my comments.... why bother. There are fans of every handgun make including Taurus. Heck, some folks even prefer Rossi revolvers.
 
Since the 1880s they have been producing handguns that were far inferior to those made by the likes of S&W and Webley. Since 1907, S&W has made a superior product in every way and but it still took Colt toadies almost six decades to realize it.
Click to expand...
During WWI the US Government used the Colt New Service. Bullseye shooting in the 1930s and 40s saw many champions using the Colt OMT. LEOs up until the 1950s had SAAs, OPs, and DSs riding in their holsters. In the 1970s many gunsmiths installed Python barrels on S&Ws and Rugers for competitions. And let's not talk about the 1911 which was the US Government's service pistol till the 1980s.
Don't sound to bad for such an inferior line of handguns.
 
Majic - During WWI the US Government used the S&W M1917 (in greater numbers than the New Service). If you will check Charles Pate's book on US military revolvers, you will see that from the WW1 period onward the army purchased S&W revolvers specificially for use by target shooters. During WW2 they purchased 300,000 M&P revolvers. S&W revolvers (..22/32 Bekeart Model, 22/32 Target, K22, K32, K38, etc.) dominated competitive shooting from the 1920s until semiauto pistols became the preferred gun. Many LEOs (all around the world) carry S&W Model 10, 13, 15, 19, 60, 65, 66 and 686 revolvers to the PRESENT day. Installing Python barrels on S&Ws and Rugers was a fad that did not provide any real advantage to competitors. Go to a PPC match and compare how many shooters use Smiths to those using Colts (if you can find any of the latter on the shooting line).

I agree that mismanagement has hurt Colt but their insistance upon sticking with obsolete designs, very poor quality control and non-existant customer support hurt them even worse. The only shooters I know who still use Colt products are the aforementioned sycophants. Those with any common sense have moved on to other brands. It's not my fault - it's just the facts.

Like I said, Colt is a joke in the current firearms market.
 
I agree that mismanagement has hurt Colt but their insistance upon sticking with obsolete designs, very poor quality control and non-existant customer support hurt them even worse.
Click to expand...
The thread is specifically about the King Cobra, and the King Cobra is a long way from an "obsolete design." It is a more modern (and better) design than that used by S&W (of course, the same is true for Ruger as well).

Colt has suffered from pure quality control off and on (due largely to its management). The same is true for S&W--they have had periods where their quality control has left a lot to be desired.

Unfortunately, customer service does suffer when a company is mismanaged, but I haven't had any bad experiences with Colt customer service though I guess others have.

BTW, the military purchased quite a few Colt revolvers during WW2 as well--Colt Commandos are very common.
 
Last edited:
Well other than the King Cobra I own two COLT 1911's, one Colt M4 and one Colt 20" H-BAR.

So Krag, are you calling me a sycophant with no common sense?
 
Krag, pointing out that S&Ws were also used means nothing as the 2 companies were in competition in all the handgun markets. My point was showing that your statement of the Colt being "far inferior" was incorrect. If they were so inferior then they wouldn't have been used in such great numbers by different markets.
What hurt Colt on the market was price, not QC or customer support. S&W offered a less expensive product of equal quality and in any market working on a budget that is a no brainer. You can support your favorite brand all you want, but don't overlook facts.

Back to the thread, those who have used the King Cobra have found it equal to it's competition. Some have found it superior. As so many shooters will follow what the government agencies use then any S&W will have the advantage in sales. That doesn't mean the S&W has any advantage as a superior product. Just a larger advertising base.
 
Actually, it was probably the mid-50s before S&W overtook Colt in the LE market--and then, as you noted, it was largely a matter of price.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top