Hickok45 announced that he has a new Python for review, and he's having to admit he was wrong. He had always maintained that he doesn't want Colt to start making them again, because to make them right, he had formerly maintained, they'd have to charge something like $3,500.00 for them, and if they made them affordable, they'd be substandard in one way or another. He says that he has to admit he was wrong, since he really likes the new one, and even said he prefers the new trigger action over the original one. He also praised it in terms of fit, finish, quality, etc., and expects it to be more rugged than the originals, in terms of a regular diet of .357 Magnum. He thinks its ruggedness will be on par with the L-Frames of S&W.
He's working on the full review video, which will be out in a few days, but just wanted to let folks know his initial impressions.
I think it is a very nice revolver but it is much too different to actually be a Python
You know that S&W periodically modernized the internal and external designs of their revolvers from the late 19th Century till today. Even the vaunted pre-82 models are pretty different in design from their pre-WWII versions, both externally and internally. Some of the design changes were pretty dramatic between, say, the pre-WWII models and their 1970s versions.
A pre-WWII M&P and a 1968 M&P S&W are mechanically very different. You can even lay them side by side and point out all the obvious differences, let alone the internal design differences, yet both are generally referred to as the S&W M&P revolver. Model 10 became the numerical designation, but they were still generally referred to as the M&P.
I think it is a very nice revolver but it is much too different to actually be a Python
You know that S&W periodically modernized the internal and external designs of their revolvers from the late 19th Century till today. Even the vaunted pre-82 models are pretty different in design from their pre-WWII versions, both externally and internally. Some of the design changes were pretty dramatic between, say, the pre-WWII models and their 1970s versions.
A pre-WWII M&P and a 1968 M&P S&W are mechanically very different. You can even lay them side by side and point out all the obvious differences, let alone the internal design differences, yet both are generally referred to as the S&W M&P revolver. Model 10 became the numerical designation, but they were still generally referred to as the M&P.
Making many older models much more desirable.
Is the lock work of the new Python like a King Cobra or all new, do you know?
I got banned on another web site for a debate that happened on this site. That's a first
Is the lock work of the new Python like a King Cobra or all new, do you know?
Lockwork is not the same as the previous Python.
Everyone knows that. Answer my question if you know the answer
I don't know. I have heard it said that they simplified some of the lockwork of the original Python to make it more amenable to modern manufacturing techniques, require less hand fitting, increase its ruggedness, and to improve the double action trigger pull characteristics.
The King Cobra is a smaller revolver, so it's almost certainly not the same lockwork. How similar it might be, I don't know.
What we're seeing is the romantic notion of the original Python exposed to reality. The Python trigger was never very good - it stacked. The new Python improves it at probably 1/3 the cost.
Colt changed the lock work?
Good.
Forgive me my nonsense, as I also forgive the nonsense of those that think they talk sense. Robert Frost
I don't care about if the lock work is old, new, or improved as long as the trigger pull is smooth and crisp at let off. Looks like this news is going to cost me about $1500!
My biggest fear is when I die my wife will sell my guns for what I told her they cost.
I think it is a very nice revolver but it is much too different to actually be a Python
Colt owns the name and manufacturing rights for the Python. They can make about whatever they wish to and call it by the python name. If colt says it's a Python, it's a Python. Whether the new revolver adds to or detracts from the image of the Colt Python is entirely on them.
The reputation of the model70 Winchester has taken a ride over the years.
Is the model 70 a functional work of art or a clumsy and ill designed dog turd? And that's a matter of perspective.
During the most shunned era of the Model 70, those who bought and used them mostly found them to be completely functional and as accurate or more so than even the pre-war specimens.
The original Python in Royal Blue was a sight. A nickel Python is not my style, but might be handy if a parade broke out that I wanted to join. A stainless Python is bailing out on the primary expense and attraction of the revolver - the polishing and finish.
Eyup, I can hardly wait to see my first 'new' Python in stainless with a set of Pachmayr's proudly carried in Uncle Mike's nylon.
Forgive me my nonsense, as I also forgive the nonsense of those that think they talk sense. Robert Frost
The hand is probably set by a spring on the transfer bar...
There's too much nose on the hammer. My inclination is that it wasnt even touched. The ratchet isnt engaging because the transfer bar sets too far back because the hammer face is too long.
Had a brand new Anaconda that did the same thing.
Of course I've never seen the "new" Python action, but I would bet the hammer is a version of the MKIII/ V and not the old "Positive Lock".
It is, because its setting at the very back of the recess, which is also why the hand function is sporadic at the same time.
The transfer bar, as you know, is a block for the arm on an uncocked gun. With the hammer nose left long, it also acts the same way because the hammer strike isnt allowed to force it out of the way, downward, the way it's designed to. I'm betting a pin protrusion check will illustrate the culprit.
It doesn't seem to make sense, until you check the protrusion AND the contact of the transfer bar. As the hammer face is cleaned up, the travel of the bar drops.
Like I said, I had an Anaconda that did the same thing; the hammer nose was unfinished with the casting seam untouched.
It is, because its setting at the very back of the recess, which is also why the hand function is sporadic at the same time.
The transfer bar, as you know, is a block for the arm on an uncocked gun. With the hammer nose left long, it also acts the same way because the hammer strike isnt allowed to force it out of the way, downward, the way it's designed to. I'm betting a pin protrusion check will illustrate the culprit.
It doesn't seem to make sense, until you check the protrusion AND the contact of the transfer bar. As the hammer face is cleaned up, the travel of the bar drops.
Like I said, I had an Anaconda that did the same thing; the hammer nose was unfinished with the casting seam untouched.
An idea they obviously stole from Ruger LOL. I've seen more than a few GP100 and RedHawks that had firing pin protrusion as low as 0.030", before being sorted out.
Last edited by SargeMO; 01/13/20.
Direct Impingement is the Fart Joke of military rifle operating systems. ⓒ
I have seen it on Rugers once, but it's a similar system. I have heard (never witnessed it) that Freedom had issues with their hammer bar system as well.
If the hammer nose is too long (usually unfinished) the transfer bar will muck things up.
Surprised by this lack of QC. Looks like the lock work isn't improved
That blows, I opened this thread trying to find out if/when Hickok was going to do a shooting video on the new Python, i'll now watch the sad sack videos with head hung low! can't believe Colt would mind fu-k this project!
19 minutes 24 seconds, I tried Hickok, that's NO PYTHON, didn't even try to stomach the other video, I don't want one, will grab an old original should another 1400 dollar clean 6 inch come by.
Hickock's videos are so bad, he has to tell you what happens at the beginning.
Because NOBODY makes it through one.
LOL.
They are youtube torture. If he's shooting something I'm really interested in, I'll run them with the sound off and cursor ahead until I think he's at a point that interests me. I wish someone he knows could convince him that no review should take more than 5-7 minutes. Tell what it is, compare it to something similar if you must, then shoot the fuggin thing and be done with it.
Direct Impingement is the Fart Joke of military rifle operating systems. ⓒ
I spot-check Hickok, too. Unless I am really interested in a gun he is reviewing, I don't watch him load magazines or stand at the table talking unless he has a trigger pull gauge or a scale or some other comparison gun out. Even then, they are too long. (I also don't watch Paul Harrell shoot over chronographs and call out each shot.)
It's a bummer about the gun. It wasn't my cup of tea back in the day when the originals were on store shelves, but I hate to see the reintroduction suffer from glitches.
"Don't believe everything you see on the Internet" - Abraham Lincoln
I used to enjoy Hickok45. He used to offer commentary that was fairly useful--good for small hands; safety is too stiff or poorly located; magazine doesn't drop free, etc.
Now...he's way too tied to his sponsors. I don't need a gun guy to tell me to buy gold and who to buy it from. Also, he never pimped Ballistol until he got paid to do so. (I'm not saying Ballistol is a good/bad product, but when he used to say what he liked when he had no financial motive, it meant something. Now he's just another commercial w/o credibility).
Currently, I suppose if I were interested in an a particular gun, I'd watch him shoot it and talk about it (skipping through his monologues on non-related issues).
Yeah, I don't like the increasing time he spends selling products either. I guess, though, that if you want to make a living at YouTubing, and your topic area is one that YouTube won't allow you to monetize, you have no other choice. If he were reviewing movies, for example, instead of guns, YouTube would sell advertising on his videos, and cut him a percentage of the income from it.
I picked up mine last Friday from a local dealer, serial no. 19XX. I didn't even know until early last week that Colt was making these again. I was paging through a gun magazine at bedtime and saw an advertisement, and having regretted selling my 1978 blued 4" Python, which was unfired in the box with all tags, I had to have one. Called a local dealer the next morning to see if they had gotten any, and was told yes, we got one. I asked that they hold it for a few days, which they did, and I bought it for $1475.
Not being a real big revolver aficionado, I've got to say that the fit and finish on mine is perfect. When I cock it and pull the trigger and keep the trigger pulled back, the cylinder is locked like a bank vault. Everything about it exudes quality. I tested the trigger pull with my Lyman digital and got an average of 8.0 lbs. in DA mode over 7 pulls and 5.25 lbs. in SA mode. It's the best trigger I've ever pulled on a DA revolver, and much better than the Python I sold, which was part of the reason I sold it, as I was not impressed by the DA pull.
I shot it on Saturday and then on Sunday, shooting 150 .357 and 50 .38 +P rounds. Had a lot of fun and had zero issues with its functioning. If you have the chance to get one at or below MSRP, I'd recommend buying with confidence. No doubt a couple of videos showing malfunctions can give one pause, but we have no idea how many of the +2000 they've made have any issues. Worst case, if it doesn't work right, Colt will fix it.
By the way, in case anyone is wondering, the internals are forged, not MIM. I'm not saying that I have read this from Colt or have any other direct knowledge, but this comes from a person that claims to be a Colt employee who posted on another forum. I don't think you can find any other current production revolver that is made this way.
An idea they obviously stole from Ruger LOL. I've seen more than a few GP100 and RedHawks that had firing pin protrusion as low as 0.030", before being sorted out.
Nah, Colt had used it since 1969 in the Trooper MKIII. I dont think Rugers used it until 1972 in anything. The Security Six came out in 1972.
Again, I have no idea what the new Python design is, just a guess, but if the hammer nose is too long, pin protrusion is going to be minimal to misfiring. If the hand is set by a spring on the transfer bar (like the MKIII and V), that too is going to corrupt function if the hammer nose is too long.
Yep, it's a real shame. Colt has been making revolvers since the 1830s. You'd think they would know how to get it right by now.
They let most of their double action revolver people go during the Clinton administration. Hard to get that culture back within a company once you let it go.
19 minutes 24 seconds, I tried Hickok, that's NO PYTHON, didn't even try to stomach the other video, I don't want one, will grab an old original should another 1400 dollar clean 6 inch come by.
Dunno about that Gunner...
DA colts and functional issues are a long standing tradition. If it looks like a Python and acts like a Python, well... There's a reason the original Python went away. Admittedly it was about the best looking revolver ever made.
I like Colt DA revolvers but I'm a fixed-sight guy who prefers the old stuff; New Service/1917, Army Special/OP and skinny barrel Agents and Dick Specials. I've even had a great shooting MKIII or two. Clean examples can be had at for the new Python's price if you shop around a bit.
I'm glad you got a good one BMR and look forward to more range reports.
Direct Impingement is the Fart Joke of military rifle operating systems. ⓒ
Thanks, SargeMO. It will probably be awhile here in WI before I can get back into our land to shoot, as the snow is piling up on the access road and I hate digging out. Anyway, it’ll give me some time to load up some rounds, as factory .357 is not cheap.
I came across this video in which Pythons were tested out at Gunsite and did very well with no reported issues.
19 minutes 24 seconds, I tried Hickok, that's NO PYTHON, didn't even try to stomach the other video, I don't want one, will grab an old original should another 1400 dollar clean 6 inch come by.
Dunno about that Gunner...
DA colts and functional issues are a long standing tradition. If it looks like a Python and acts like a Python, well... There's a reason the original Python went away. Admittedly it was about the best looking revolver ever made.
LOL, I was never aware of longstanding issues, I had a blue 4" back in the day, a beautiful little revolver that functioned and shot a hell of a lot more accurate than I was able to pilot it, I always thought the bean counters killed the Python, and agreed, they remain the best looking DA revolvers I've ever laid a hand or eye on.
I don't want one, will grab an old original should another 1400 dollar clean 6 inch come by.
Let us know how that goes for you
It did, a couple years ago, but it was during a 'giving' time of year that deal came by, was at a local gunshop when a guy came in talking about a 6 inch blue at around 90+% available for 1400 bucks, just a little holster wear, one of the other guys at the shop followed him to the old guys home and bought it.
Apparently Colt didn't change the lock work enough.
why, the original was great
A good principle to guide me through life: “This is all I have come to expect, standard lackluster performance. Trust nothing, believe no one and realize it will only get worse…”
The best trigger pull I ever felt on a Python was one that a local gunsmith Walt Sherman did some work on by adding a ball bearing. It eliminated the stacking and stayed consistent
Very few people on youtube know how to present a firearms test of any kind:
Loud rock music intro. Watch me shoot. Watch me shoot some more tactical style. Talk over loud wind noise and tell you the same stuff you can get from the manufacturer's website. Watch me shoot some more. End with loud rock music.
The Gunblast written reviews are generally informative but the gunblast videos are only there to present the firearm company's advertising announcement spoken aloud.
There are some very good and very experienced reviewers out there who can tell you the info buyers are looking for and know how to use indoor/outdoor lighting and proper camera work, but they are few and far between. And most all of them need to realize that yeah, we know you can shoot but we don't want to watch you do it for 60% of the total video time.
Gunnery, gunnery, gunnery. Hit the target, all else is twaddle!
Mrgunsngear and the Military Arms Channel offer the best straight up gun reviews. Hickok45 videos are about 50% entertainment and 50% gun review. I enjoy all three channels, though.
Yep, it's a real shame. Colt has been making revolvers since the 1830s. You'd think they would know how to get it right by now.
They let most of their double action revolver people go during the Clinton administration. Hard to get that culture back within a company once you let it go.
Well you poor old soul you have no idea about this new action and how it is made and then assembled into the sourced parts. It was employee error. Well intentioned just not going into further detail..
In time you will see that this information is spot on. Carry on!
It was employee error. Well intentioned just not going into further detail..
In time you will see that this information is spot on. Carry on!
Colt has to learn how to survive the Internet. One mistake out of thousands of pistols can result in a viral video that can ruin a reputation for years. If an error is "well intentioned" then it's best to get the facts out rather than let rumor rule.
Forgive me my nonsense, as I also forgive the nonsense of those that think they talk sense. Robert Frost
Yep, it's a real shame. Colt has been making revolvers since the 1830s. You'd think they would know how to get it right by now.
They let most of their double action revolver people go during the Clinton administration. Hard to get that culture back within a company once you let it go.
Well you poor old soul you have no idea about this new action and how it is made and then assembled into the sourced parts. It was employee error. Well intentioned just not going into further detail..
In time you will see that this information is spot on. Carry on!
Near as I can deduce the action is a massaged Trooper. Therefore the revolver is more Trooper than Python. We already new itvwas a QC error, a costly error on a new release $1500 revolver
I got banned on another web site for a debate that happened on this site. That's a first
It would seem to be reasonable to expect that QC would be in complete overkill mode when a new product like this is introduced wherein the initial buzz is going to have a huge impact on success. Or maybe not.
It would seem to be reasonable to expect that QC would be in complete overkill mode when a new product like this is introduced wherein the initial buzz is going to have a huge impact on success. Or maybe not.
Yep, it's a real shame. Colt has been making revolvers since the 1830s. You'd think they would know how to get it right by now.
They let most of their double action revolver people go during the Clinton administration. Hard to get that culture back within a company once you let it go.
Well you poor old soul you have no idea about this new action and how it is made and then assembled into the sourced parts. It was employee error. Well intentioned just not going into further detail..
In time you will see that this information is spot on. Carry on!
A good principle to guide me through life: “This is all I have come to expect, standard lackluster performance. Trust nothing, believe no one and realize it will only get worse…”
Yep, it's a real shame. Colt has been making revolvers since the 1830s. You'd think they would know how to get it right by now.
They let most of their double action revolver people go during the Clinton administration. Hard to get that culture back within a company once you let it go.
Well you poor old soul you have no idea about this new action and how it is made and then assembled into the sourced parts. It was employee error. Well intentioned just not going into further detail..
In time you will see that this information is spot on. Carry on!
QC error=the new Python not being quality.
The original Python's only negative in my opinion was cost. The so called "new Python" is more a trooper than Python and it is expensive and doesn't always work correctly
I got banned on another web site for a debate that happened on this site. That's a first
Yep, it's a real shame. Colt has been making revolvers since the 1830s. You'd think they would know how to get it right by now.
They let most of their double action revolver people go during the Clinton administration. Hard to get that culture back within a company once you let it go.
Well you poor old soul you have no idea about this new action and how it is made and then assembled into the sourced parts. It was employee error. Well intentioned just not going into further detail..
In time you will see that this information is spot on. Carry on!
QC error=the new Python not being quality.
The original Python's only negative in my opinion was cost. The so called "new Python" is more a trooper than Python and it is expensive and doesn't always work correctly
Need to do a little more due diligence. Completely different and better than the original. You see I have both.
I believe the original rotated the cylinder. The new one is totally different as to the point other than the vent rib barrel it isn't a Python at all but a different revolver
Misfires and not rotating the cylinder dam sure isn't better
I got banned on another web site for a debate that happened on this site. That's a first
Perception is reality. Any marketing person at Colt should know that.
As someone noted earlier in this thread, this is a Mustang:
And according to Ford, this is also a Mustang:
But to people who appreciated the first one, the second one is more properly referred to as "a hollow imitation of a Mustang".
Maybe Colt could have been honest and just called this the Python Mark II.
Cars have always changed with each new year, firearms not so much. Traditionally when firearms undergo radical changes they are a of different designation. There are of course a few exceptions
I got banned on another web site for a debate that happened on this site. That's a first
A good principle to guide me through life: “This is all I have come to expect, standard lackluster performance. Trust nothing, believe no one and realize it will only get worse…”
That was simply a visual metaphor, not an attempt to divert this thread into a discussion of vehicle designations.
My point is that Colt either doesn't know their market or if they did, then they blew it.
The Python was the flagship of the Colt line or at least their double action revolver line. The current and upcoming demographic predominantly favors semi-autos by a big margin so this had to appeal to buyers for the same reason the original did. And like blue steel and walnut bolt action rifles, the guys who grew up with and appreciate the original Python are generally older and share some common values.
The high prices on original Colt Pythons are due to its mystique, the mystique of "hand fitting" in a world of CNC and cast parts, not its value as a shooter that if you go by price alone is 3 to 5 times better than anything else. It was an icon for a lot of those traditional values embraced by the older demographic.
If Colt said "this is better than the original", then fine. I think a lot of shooters, not collectors but shooters, are willing to give Colt the benefit of the doubt. And then this happens.
They might still be able pull this out of the fire but they quite literally shot themselves in the foot releasing the (fanfare of trumpets here) "Better Than The Old Python" Python, and then having major quality control issues right out of the gate.
I hope they do manage to recover some face from this, they need to.
Gunnery, gunnery, gunnery. Hit the target, all else is twaddle!
That was simply a visual metaphor, not an attempt to divert this thread into a discussion of vehicle designations.
My point is that Colt either doesn't know their market or if they did, then they blew it.
The Python was the flagship of the Colt line or at least their double action revolver line. The current and upcoming demographic predominantly favors semi-autos by a big margin so this had to appeal to buyers for the same reason the original did. And like blue steel and walnut bolt action rifles, the guys who grew up with and appreciate the original Python are generally older and share some common values.
The high prices on original Colt Pythons are due to its mystique, the mystique of "hand fitting" in a world of CNC and cast parts, not its value as a shooter that if you go by price alone is 3 to 5 times better than anything else. It was an icon for a lot of those traditional values embraced by the older demographic.
If Colt said "this is better than the original", then fine. I think a lot of shooters, not collectors but shooters, are willing to give Colt the benefit of the doubt. And then this happens.
They might still be able pull this out of the fire but they quite literally shot themselves in the foot releasing the (fanfare of trumpets here) "Better Than The Old Python" Python, and then having major quality control issues right out of the gate.
I hope they do manage to recover some face from this, they need to.
Spit on
I got banned on another web site for a debate that happened on this site. That's a first
Again it is a Python. It ain’t the same action as the original much like 1964 brought a change for Winchester designs. At least Colt has the decency to wait a few years and not change midstream. The original may be referred to as a pre-2020 (or whatever year they stopped production) or the new one as a 2020 Python however collectors want to call it but just like a post 64 Winchester Model 70 it will still be a Python even if in name only. I truly hope it is a success and also hope that they will bring out a high polish blued version.
Again it is a Python. It ain’t the same action as the original much like 1964 brought a change for Winchester designs. At least Colt has the decency to wait a few years and not change midstream. The original may be referred to as a pre-2020 (or whatever year they stopped production) or the new one as a 2020 Python however collectors want to call it but just like a post 64 Winchester Model 70 it will still be a Python even if in name only. I truly hope it is a success and also hope that they will bring out a high polish blued version.
It is more s Trooper with a vent ribbed barrel. Winchester sh it the bed calling the post 64 a m70 when the 2 had nothing in common
Winchester never recovered from that disaster
Last edited by jwp475; 01/16/20.
I got banned on another web site for a debate that happened on this site. That's a first
I think Colt is starting from scratch. The old guys who forged the internals and fitted them together aren't around anymore. Taurus, Smith and Ruger know how to make revolvers. Colt forgot.
P.S. I'd like to see someone pop the sideplate and see who they copied.
Again it is a Python. It ain’t the same action as the original much like 1964 brought a change for Winchester designs. At least Colt has the decency to wait a few years and not change midstream. The original may be referred to as a pre-2020 (or whatever year they stopped production) or the new one as a 2020 Python however collectors want to call it but just like a post 64 Winchester Model 70 it will still be a Python even if in name only. I truly hope it is a success and also hope that they will bring out a high polish blued version.
It is more s Trooper with a vent ribbed barrel. Winchester sh it the bed calling the post 64 a m70 when the 2 had nothing in common
Winchester never recovered from that disaster
Maybe Colt will do better? Who knows they may go the Winchester route and introduce a “Classic” Python like They did with the Model 70.
First thing they really need to do is get the hell out of Connecticut
I think Colt is starting from scratch. The old guys who forged the internals and fitted them together aren't around anymore. Taurus, Smith and Ruger know how to make revolvers. Colt forgot.
P.S. I'd like to see someone pop the sideplate and see who they copied.
I think Colt is starting from scratch. The old guys who forged the internals and fitted them together aren't around anymore. Taurus, Smith and Ruger know how to make revolvers. Colt forgot.
P.S. I'd like to see someone pop the sideplate and see who they copied.
Me too.
We have a 32nd level super-secret insider on this thread. Maybe they could enlighten us.
Are you thinking of it as an investment instead of a shooter? Can't blame you.
I don't know. One day I might just get a hankering. I'm primarily a rifle shooter, but I do like the Pythons..
A good principle to guide me through life: “This is all I have come to expect, standard lackluster performance. Trust nothing, believe no one and realize it will only get worse…”
I got my 6 inch Python today. I put 50 rounds through it at the range and I'm really impressed. I've always wanted one, but couldn't pay upwards of $2700. Shoots great, with no issues at all. I'm not well versed on all things Python, so a detailed comparison would have to come from someone else. Bottom line, I love it!
Grew up shooting pythons. Will buy a new version and hunt/ shoot the piss out of it. So it aint the same. Big whoop.
Got an original? Goody. Let the grandkids shoot it on nice sunny days once a yr.
Am not a collector or buy guns as monetary investments. Do think nice guns are an investment in living. The more I pay for something rhe more Im gonna shoot it.
Have fun.
Let others bitch about the dings dents and scratches your car or gun has......wtf will you care when youre dead?
Not against collecting stuff. Id rather collect memories
Hickock's videos are so bad, he has to tell you what happens at the beginning.
Because NOBODY makes it through one.
LOL.
They are youtube torture. If he's shooting something I'm really interested in, I'll run them with the sound off and cursor ahead until I think he's at a point that interests me. I wish someone he knows could convince him that no review should take more than 5-7 minutes. Tell what it is, compare it to something similar if you must, then shoot the fuggin thing and be done with it.
I agree with you but it seems that a lot of "unboxing" videos are longer than that.
He who joyfully marches in rank and file has already earned my contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake, since for him the spinal cord would suffice.
That was simply a visual metaphor, not an attempt to divert this thread into a discussion of vehicle designations.
My point is that Colt either doesn't know their market or if they did, then they blew it.
The Python was the flagship of the Colt line or at least their double action revolver line. The current and upcoming demographic predominantly favors semi-autos by a big margin so this had to appeal to buyers for the same reason the original did. And like blue steel and walnut bolt action rifles, the guys who grew up with and appreciate the original Python are generally older and share some common values.
The high prices on original Colt Pythons are due to its mystique, the mystique of "hand fitting" in a world of CNC and cast parts, not its value as a shooter that if you go by price alone is 3 to 5 times better than anything else. It was an icon for a lot of those traditional values embraced by the older demographic.
If Colt said "this is better than the original", then fine. I think a lot of shooters, not collectors but shooters, are willing to give Colt the benefit of the doubt. And then this happens.
They might still be able pull this out of the fire but they quite literally shot themselves in the foot releasing the (fanfare of trumpets here) "Better Than The Old Python" Python, and then having major quality control issues right out of the gate.
I hope they do manage to recover some face from this, they need to.
Even if they fix the quality control issues, the Python won't be around long. It doesn't hold 15 rounds,come in a 9mm version, or have a $400 plastic version. There aren't enough of us older guys around, who remember the old Python with fondness to sustain a viable market.
Last edited by doubletap; 01/17/20.
He who joyfully marches in rank and file has already earned my contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake, since for him the spinal cord would suffice.
Im a shooter, not a collector, so the new Python, is not much different than the old Python. As a shooter, the Python is not even in the same league as a good S&W pre-lock revolver. Ive pulled on many lower grade revolvers, ie: Rossi and Taurus that have every bit as good double action as a damned Python. I do wish I had bought half a dozen thru the years to help accommodate the collectors, could have made a pretty penny!
I have to finish reading those manuals RJM sent me, are 1955 pre-25 45 ACP and a pre-27 357 mag N frames pre lock revolvers? they both have five screws if that helps.
I have to finish reading those manuals RJM sent me, are 1955 pre-25 45 ACP and a pre-27 357 mag N frames pre lock revolvers? they both have five screws if that helps.
I think they started putting the locks on in the 1990s.
Hickock's videos are so bad, he has to tell you what happens at the beginning.
Because NOBODY makes it through one.
LOL.
They are youtube torture. If he's shooting something I'm really interested in, I'll run them with the sound off and cursor ahead until I think he's at a point that interests me. I wish someone he knows could convince him that no review should take more than 5-7 minutes. Tell what it is, compare it to something similar if you must, then shoot the fuggin thing and be done with it.
I agree with you but it seems that a lot of "unboxing" videos are longer than that.
A sure indicator of mental illness if I ever saw one. Assuming they ever had a need for one, some these retards would do an unboxing video of a condom. By the time they were done , they would forget why they purchased it in the first place.
Direct Impingement is the Fart Joke of military rifle operating systems. ⓒ
I have to finish reading those manuals RJM sent me, are 1955 pre-25 45 ACP and a pre-27 357 mag N frames pre lock revolvers? they both have five screws if that helps.
I think they started putting the locks on in the 1990s.
Ten Fo, Thanks, we've got that whupped by a long shot, that said, and I realize this is a Colt thread, those old S&W's of mine are indeed tight and smooth, not saying much on my part, but they both shot every load I've put in them better than I have the talent to realize.
I have to finish reading those manuals RJM sent me, are 1955 pre-25 45 ACP and a pre-27 357 mag N frames pre lock revolvers? they both have five screws if that helps.
I think they started putting the locks on in the 1990s.
Ten Fo, Thanks, we've got that whupped by a long shot, that said, and I realize this is a Colt thread, those old S&W's of mine are indeed tight and smooth, not saying much on my part, but they both shot every load I've put in them better than I have the talent to realize.
Gen 1 Python vs Gen 2 is like comparing a vintage Corvette vs a 2020 model. If you want performance and durability... Get a 2020 model, if you a piece of art that is beautiful and great attention to detail but takes some extra maintenance at some point... Get an original.
Collectors want the history and work of art... Shooters want durability and bulletproof. Both have their place, hopefully the new one is going to be rock solid.
Gen 1 Python vs Gen 2 is like comparing a vintage Corvette vs a 2020 model. If you want performance and durability... Get a 2020 model, if you a piece of art that is beautiful and great attention to detail but takes some extra maintenance at some point... Get an original.
Collectors want the history and work of art... Shooters want durability and bulletproof. Both have their place, hopefully the new one is going to be rock solid.
BS. If you are going to market a Python then fricken produce a Python. Don't make a glorified Trooper and dress it up like a Python. Firearms are not cars. Everyone wants and expects cars to change every year. Firearms people are traditionalist, winchester made a non M70 yet marketed it as a M70 and they never recovered. Browning wanted to make a less expensive Superposed and they did but, they didn't call it a Superposed, Browning called it the Citori not only did no one care, they loved it.
Colt forgot Winchester's mistake and they repeated it
Last edited by jwp475; 01/17/20.
I got banned on another web site for a debate that happened on this site. That's a first
I think Colt was trying to produce what people were clamoring for in the Python but at a price people would actually buy one for. There was no way to produce the original hand fitted version and keep it affordable. They used modern CNC machines to make parts with close tolerances and take out the hand fitting. From what I have heard the frame is slightly modified to strengthen it and make it more able to withstand a steady diet of full house magnum loads.
There are a lot of guns that priced themselves out of existence that they claim would be too costly to produce today. I would love to see what the CNCs could do with the Winchester 88 (one of the few guns that was actually improved in 1964) and the Savage 99 and maybe the Sako Finnwolf. Would they be the same as the original? No but if they could make them at an affordable price wouldn’t we be all the better for it?
Im a shooter, not a collector, so the new Python, is not much different than the old Python. As a shooter, the Python is not even in the same league as a good S&W pre-lock revolver. Ive pulled on many lower grade revolvers, ie: Rossi and Taurus that have every bit as good double action as a damned Python. I do wish I had bought half a dozen thru the years to help accommodate the collectors, could have made a pretty penny!
the new smith and wessons are not any better than a damn taurus or rossi, actually the taurus might be a better gun now than the current smith and wesson revolvers. I have had 2 44 magnums and 2 22LR go back to the factory and in one case they said they could not fix it. Current SW revolvers look pretty, cost a lot and suck as far as I am concerned.
Im a shooter, not a collector, so the new Python, is not much different than the old Python. As a shooter, the Python is not even in the same league as a good S&W pre-lock revolver. Ive pulled on many lower grade revolvers, ie: Rossi and Taurus that have every bit as good double action as a damned Python. I do wish I had bought half a dozen thru the years to help accommodate the collectors, could have made a pretty penny!
the new smith and wessons are not any better than a damn taurus or rossi, actually the taurus might be a better gun now than the current smith and wesson revolvers. I have had 2 44 magnums and 2 22LR go back to the factory and in one case they said they could not fix it. Current SW revolvers look pretty, cost a lot and suck as far as I am concerned.
I don't like the look of them either. The only really "new" S&W I've got is the Governor and it's fine. I realize it's not everybody's cup of tea though. I've got a 629 Mountain Gun with the "safety". I'd rather it not had the safety, but it has not caused any problems and is unaltered. It is several years old though and doesn't have the look of the really new ones. Anything pre-safety is great.
..anyone else notice a price crash with the older Pythons since the announcement of the new gun...
Was just doing some checking on GB and saw a mint 6" that just sold a few days ago for $2100... An UNFIRED 8" $2300.... These would have been in the $3K range a few months ago...
Was in a shop in Ct. la couple of weeks ago and saw a very clean 6" for only $2100....
If you can not deal with reality, reality will deal with you....
..anyone else notice a price crash with the older Pythons since the announcement of the new gun...
Was just doing some checking on GB and saw a mint 6" that just sold a few days ago for $2100... An UNFIRED 8" $2300.... These would have been in the $3K range a few months ago...
Was in a shop in Ct. la couple of weeks ago and saw a very clean 6" for only $2100....
I have to finish reading those manuals RJM sent me, are 1955 pre-25 45 ACP and a pre-27 357 mag N frames pre lock revolvers? they both have five screws if that helps.
I think they started putting the locks on in the 1990s.
Ten Fo, Thanks, we've got that whupped by a long shot, that said, and I realize this is a Colt thread, those old S&W's of mine are indeed tight and smooth, not saying much on my part, but they both shot every load I've put in them better than I have the talent to realize.
I've got more S&W revolvers than Colts.
I only have two of each, S&W 357 and 45 ACP, Colt 357 and 45 Colt, I love em all!
I just looked on GB and Guns International; prices look the same to me. I guess I'm not looking in the right places.
Prices haven't dropped on original Python's as far as I can tell and I don't expect them to. If you want "a real Python" they are the only option and they work properly
I got banned on another web site for a debate that happened on this site. That's a first
Someone is saying that an inside source (a distributor) has told them that Colt recalled over a hundred of the Pythons they delivered to the distributor. That's just one distributor, so the assumption is that they are recalling all Pythons from all distributors.
![[Linked Image from cdn.rockislandauction.com]](https://cdn.rockislandauction.com/dev_cdn/70/3859.jpg)
![[Linked Image from gunsamerica.com]](https://www.gunsamerica.com/UserImages/167628/924029478/wm_7323474.jpg)
can't believe Colt would mind fu-k this project!
![[Linked Image from i865.photobucket.com]](https://s865.photobucket.com/user/BMR_photos/media/IMG_7234_zpstwag2tpi.jpg.html)
Carry on!
![[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]](https://i.imgur.com/jMJvehp.jpg)
![[Linked Image from img.jamesedition.com]](https://img.jamesedition.com/listing_images/2018/12/20/08/56/44/250a397a-6e66-445e-b88a-fc5e3a0edcdc/je/1040x620xc.jpg)
![[Linked Image from hemmings.com]](https://www.hemmings.com/blog/wp-content/uploads//2012/07/1978FordMustangII_01_700.jpg)
