Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Handguns M27 vs. Python?

That was likely meant to be funny. The difference in speed is not recordable in actual use.

The long hammer throw is what makes it so smooth. Pick up a pre-"shot action" S&W and you'll see what I mean.

I once owned a 4" Python. Nice bluing and stock design, but I sold it and never looked back. The S&W double action design is simply better for my large hands. I also like the plain magna stocks better than the magnum style.

Have owned a model 27 in 8-3/8" barrel for many years now. The N frame will do more than any .357 magnum design other than a Contender or Dan Wesson.

If you want to access the full-power of the .357mag ctg, don't settle for a short-barrel. If you want a hideout gun, a Titanium S&W or even 19/66 is a better choice than a Python snubnose.

If I collected weapons as a pasttime, then I would own a Luger, a 6" Python, a Colt Peacemaker, maybe a Browning Hi-Power... Yet, since I own working guns or defensive weapons, I have Colt 1911s, Ruger Super Redhawk .454s, and N frame .44mag 4"... The .357s hardly ever are fired.

For a compact carry, shoved in your jeans back pocket or waistband, home defense, or woods carry handgun, it is hard to beat a 4" N frame .44mag S&W. Load it with 180gr hollowpoints if you want .357mag class performance. All your options with heavier bullets are pure gravy.

The Super Redhawk trigger is almost as good as the N frame S&W. Almost. The standard Ruger grip is the best for handling recoil I've ever experienced.

Lots of fun to shoot cast .38sp loads in our mod 27 or the model 19 or the J frames. In our world the .357 is not pertinent to game gathering or self-defense. Have always owned .357s. My brother owned a Diamondback and it was cute. Yet, since getting my first model 29, the versatility of the .44mag or accuracy of the .45acp has displaced the .357. The big bullets have no peer.

Unless you have need for a "hot .38", as Mel Tappan called the less than full-length barreled .357s, there is no escaping the need for velocity to enable the .357 to do the work it is capable of. Remember that guys used to think the .38/44 Outdoorsman was all the revolver any sane man would need. That was because it would handle those "hot .38s"

The N frame will handle heavier loads than the Colt O frame. I recall bending the V mainspring on my Python to get a better pull. Put the grip screw in the bottom of the V and cock the hammer... I am no Ed McGivern, but the S&W is easier for me to cycle double-action and then squeeze off the last few ounces which is how I shoot a DA Revolver.

I enjoy owning my Model 27. I hang onto it because I have this idea that it makes a good companion piece for a .35 Whelen and can use the same cast bullets. Now if I only had a mold...

I would take a 4" Model 19 over either one. I have a 6" Model 27 and prefer it over the Python.

I have owned a Colt Trooper MkIII since 1975,
a Python since 1976,
a Model 19 since 1988,
a Model 27 for a while,
and two Smith 686s,
as well as some snub nose .357s.

Maybe it is just my trigger tuning, but I have no trouble with speed with any Colt's, and my Trooper has small grips. As a test, I shot the Trooper and a Smith 3-inch snubbie rapid fire at 10 meters, drawing from a holster, factory Federal .357 loads. Both handguns shot all 6 into the X ring ( 3 inches) in 1.6 seconds from the bell to last shot.

That's a little faster than me, except I crap gold bricks at the same time.

Both are great pistols and i have owned a dozen of each over the years and if given the choice it would be the four inch Colt Python as long as i could find a pair of the Old Herrett grips for it.

I've only owned a Model 27-2 but have had a chance to examine my pal's Python. I believe they are both very fine revolvers, and I am hard-pressed to find either one better than the other. It's just individual preference I think.

Unless I am mistaken (entirely possible) the Trooper MKIII does not use the same leaf spring long action as the Python, the older original Troopers, and little Colt D-frames. I've owned a couple of Trooper MKIII's and am going on long memory, but I believe that is correct that they utilize a different, stronger, and shorter action.

You are right. The Trooper MkIII has a much shorter trigger pull than any Python I ever shot. I was able to tune mine to have a really smooth double action at 5 lbs, with a safe and very crisp single action that also above 4 lbs, for safety.

I find the Trooper with its stock small police grips, or a Smith 3 inch with small rubber grips, to sit lower in the hand and be much better for the second shot or any rapid fire, than the heavier full lug Python or 686. When you see someone shooting a 6-inch SW 686 rapidly on TV, it is with .38 loads, not full house .357s.

Mechanically speaking, the Trooper MK III is an excellent design, and it's perhaps the most under-rated of all the .357's. It's as strong as an L frame S&W with a trigger action much like a S&W; yet in overall size, it's much closer to a S&W 19 (although certainly heavier). And it has that typical Colt attention to detail, making it a VERY top quality revolver.

The MK III was created to compete directly with the S&W M28 in Law Enforcement sales.

Now I don't know 'bout no 5lb DA pulls (don't know that I've seen ANY revolver that does that, but Lee is known to throw out some slight exaggerations from time to time), but I will say that the MK III is one of the easier guns to do action work on and end up with excellent results.

I consider the MK III to be a CONSIDERABLY better gun than the S&W K frame Combat Magnums (19/66), but they're just not nearly as aesthetically appealing.

On the down side for the MK III, finding decent aftermarket grips is a bear.

Hrumph...

Broken bottles or chains?

I probably have some MkIII grips lying around.

When I get my CNC router finished, I will be able to duplicate any grips, and produce custom ones like Herrett.

When torn between two great choices buy one of each.