new run Colt Python

[white eagle]

I am thinking of getting one of these new run Pythons
Anyone have one that wants to share their impressions of it
I was looking at the 3" model for daily carry and working in the woods, tractor and logging that sort of thing :holysheep

[cwtebay]

I have not purchased one...yet. I certainly hope it's better than the SAA that I got for my father last year!

Sent from my Pixel 5 using Tapatalk

[steve urquell]

A guy on another forum I used to be on bought one and had problems with it. Sent it back and Colt made a mess of the repairs. When he tried to contact them on the bad work they started ignoring him.
https://www.glocktalk.com/threads/picked-up-my-new-colt-python-today.1989761/page-2?nested_view=1&sortby=oldest

[rintinglen]

I bought a 3 inch and am very pleased with mine. I have to confess that the round count is not very high--I have had too many other toys to play with in the last year or so, but the little I have managed to shoot were pleasingly accurate. Be aware that holsters are or were a bit hard to find, but I have found no faults with mine, save for the cost. I have not fired any 357's out of it yet, I need to dig some out and give it a proper introduction to the big time. Thought I had a picture, but I guess not. I'll have to correct that later this weekend.

[dverna]

A gun is meant to be used, but I could not carry a Python in the woods.

[Forrest r]

Not exactually what you want to hear:

When the "new" pythons came out I went to a indoor range 30+ miles away and tried them. Was looking at the 2.5" & 3" versions and they had a 3" example there. I rented it along with buying a couple different boxes of ammo. The python was impressive but there was something about it I couldn't put my finger on. They also had a s&w 586 l-comp there so I was able to do head to head testing.

At the end of the day I ended up with an l-comp.
https://i.imgur.com/5vi2mrE.jpg

The 586 was:
lighter 37.5oz vs 40oz
Holds 7 rounds vs 6 rounds
Has a comped bbl which is huge for reducing recoil (try shooting both 1 handed or weak handed)
the 586 is cut for moon clips
$100+ cheaper

Both had quality triggers an what I consider exceptional accuracy.

Either revolver will serve you well.

[Three44s]

If one wants a carry gun for the woods under work conditions and fancies a Python, be it for me to tell that person no.

But I can say that for me, I would give my Ruger SP101 3" the nod. Or my 4" Ruger Security Six.

I say that with no Python experience what so ever, just the work environment knowledge as a rancher and economics.

Best regards

Three44s

[Electrod47]

If one wants a carry gun for the woods under work conditions and fancies a Python, be it for me to tell that person no.

But I can say that for me, I would give my Ruger SP101 3" the nod. Or my 4" Ruger Security Six.

I say that with no Python experience what so ever, just the work environment knowledge as a rancher and economics.

Best regards

Three44s

Like button pushed.....

[Bigslug]

My understanding is they had some early teething issues that have since been resolved. Supposedly a stronger gun than the originals. Maybe not quite as hand-fit smooth, but probably less trouble prone over a really long haul.

The 3" does not appear to be available in the new blue, so I'm guessing you aren't after the "classic Python" look. I would then compare it against the competing Smiths and Rugers as follows:

Is Colt's pull-back-to-open cylinder latch a problem for you compared to the Smith's push-forward or the Ruger's push-in?

At least compared to the old Colts, the Smith and Ruger DA triggers are easier to "stage" by feel of the cylinder stop engaging, whereas the Colts were more of an even pull straight through. Not good or bad - just preference, and worth seeing how the new Colts feel to you.

The Colt cylinder rotates clockwise. The old (really old) argument that this arrangement causes the hand to push the cylinder into the frame thereby making the gun harder to get out of time was engineered around in the Nineteen-Oh's and Nineteen-teens with front cylinder locking by S&W and with Ruger's crane lock much later, but if you're into elegant engineering, the Colt didn't need that work-around. However, if you have a lot of prior programming on Smith or Ruger with starting the first round of a partial reload in the 1:00 position, you need to start thinking 11:00 for a Colt.

While the vent rib barrel is one of the trademarks of the Python look, and the 3" only has the one cut into it, I personally view such styling points as "debris collectors" that add to the time spent cleaning the gun. I'd rather "drag a rag" than "poke a pipe cleaner".

Seems like a sweet enough gun in its own right from my minimal handling of a couple specimens - just conflicts with my pre-established programming on the above points.

[Rockindaddy]

I have my 6" Colt stainless Python for 2 years now. The gun is a thing of beauty! The action is smooth, the double action is great and the single action trigger breaks at 3 1/2 lbs. Have probably 400 rounds through it now. I reload both 38 Special and 357 Mag. My 357 Mag loads are hot! The action is still timed. I shoot it at 50 yards a lot. Have the sights set to hit dead on at 50 yards. Sold my S&W 686 stainless 6" after I got the Python. Loved the 686. Just could not justify keeping both of them. Shot it from the bench with sand bags to adjust the sights. I would entertain a 4" Python for a carry gun. 326997 Here is my 25 yard target shot from the bench with handloads just adjusting the sights. Would like to bang Bambi this fall with it.

[shooting on a shoestring]

I have a 3” New King Cobra and a 4” New Anaconda.

I don’t like the Colt system of locking the cylinder at hammer fall by jamming the hand into the cylinder and forcing the cylinder against the bolt (cylinder stop if you prefer). Because on firing, the rearward force of the cylinder hits the hand. This peens the hand shorter over several thousand rounds until the timing suffers. The pre MIM hands could be stretched back into spec by peening on each of the 4 sides of the stem. I’ve done that on my Police Positve. But I wouldn’t try that with the MIM hands in the New Colts. But…the major point of the redesign of the “New” Colts was to eliminate the fitting parts by hand by using MIM and CNC. And in that Colt has done well. Colt (CZ) doesn’t or hasn’t yet, let any parts, such as hands, get outside of the Colt shop. You can’t buy hands (or springs or any parts) for the “New” Colts. When you need a part, it’s a trip back to Colt.

I’m very pleased with my New King Cobra. I bought the first one I handled. The finish on the stainless steel has a very pleasing feel to it. I liked the DA pull and the SA pull was acceptable for my use as a carry gun. It’s certainly not on par with the average 1970’s S&W SA trigger, but still fine. The brass bead front sight is good and the front and rear sights are wide and bold for fixed sights. It’s a very good carry gun. Time will tell how long it takes the hand to need replacing. I’ll hope it’s a least 5k rounds.

The Anaconda was a disappointment. It’s super light DA pull made light primer strikes from the get-go. After 3 outings and various hand loads, primers and some factory, all of which fired fine in my S&W’s, the Anaconda earned a trip back to Colt. About a month later it came back with the work invoice stating “Remove End Shake and replace hammer link”. I think the hammer link was the real key bc the DA pull is noticeably heavier now, but it works!

The new Colts I have both possess smooth, well cut forcing cones which S&W and Ruger have not done in decades. I like that faster twist Colt uses in their 357s. It’s 1:14”. Both the New King Cobra and the New Anaconda shoot cast very well and did not need any correcting, fire lapping or such.

My worry is how long it’ll take them to go out of time. Consequently, I don’t feel like shooting them more than I have to. That’s a bummer. I shoot my S&W’s and Rugers with no thought as to shooting them loose or out of time. But, I did shoot a J-frame enough it had to have the barrel set back and a new hand installed. But that was (I’ll have to guess here) probably north of 20k rounds of 38 in a no dash Model 60.

Life is short. If the Python intrigues you. Get one.

[cwtebay]

My understanding is they had some early teething issues that have since been resolved. Supposedly a stronger gun than the originals. Maybe not quite as hand-fit smooth, but probably less trouble prone over a really long haul.

The 3" does not appear to be available in the new blue, so I'm guessing you aren't after the "classic Python" look. I would then compare it against the competing Smiths and Rugers as follows:

Is Colt's pull-back-to-open cylinder latch a problem for you compared to the Smith's push-forward or the Ruger's push-in?

At least compared to the old Colts, the Smith and Ruger DA triggers are easier to "stage" by feel of the cylinder stop engaging, whereas the Colts were more of an even pull straight through. Not good or bad - just preference, and worth seeing how the new Colts feel to you.

The Colt cylinder rotates clockwise. The old (really old) argument that this arrangement causes the hand to push the cylinder into the frame thereby making the gun harder to get out of time was engineered around in the Nineteen-Oh's and Nineteen-teens with front cylinder locking by S&W and with Ruger's crane lock much later, but if you're into elegant engineering, the Colt didn't need that work-around. However, if you have a lot of prior programming on Smith or Ruger with starting the first round of a partial reload in the 1:00 position, you need to start thinking 11:00 for a Colt.

While the vent rib barrel is one of the trademarks of the Python look, and the 3" only has the one cut into it, I personally view such styling points as "debris collectors" that add to the time spent cleaning the gun. I'd rather "drag a rag" than "poke a pipe cleaner".

Seems like a sweet enough gun in its own right from my minimal handling of a couple specimens - just conflicts with my pre-established programming on the above points.Very fair assessment. Thank you.

Sent from my Pixel 5 using Tapatalk

[trapper9260]

If one wants a carry gun for the woods under work conditions and fancies a Python, be it for me to tell that person no.

But I can say that for me, I would give my Ruger SP101 3" the nod. Or my 4" Ruger Security Six.

I say that with no Python experience what so ever, just the work environment knowledge as a rancher and economics.

Best regards

Three44s

In your Ruger SP101 what was the ammo you used in it ? I have the 4 "

[Three44s]

My SP handles everything but as mine is a fixed sight revolver, I find it shoots best to its sights with reasonably stiff loads pushing 150 t0 160 gr bullets, either cast or j-words. I killed a ground squirrel at 29 yds with it loaded that way.

Three44s

[white eagle]

A gun is meant to be used, but I could not carry a Python in the woods.

so if I can ask why would you not carry it in the woods?

[Targa]

I wont try to answer for dverna but as for me, any gun with that price tag is for range fun and that is it. Id also rather carry something with less weight like the 3” King Cobra.

[charlie b]

I agree with that. I did take my older Python out in the woods decades ago, but, when the prices jumped the first time back in the 80's I quit doing that. I also used it in a couple IPSC type shoots, but, it went out of time when running it fast so required frequent trips to a good gunsmith. He since retired and I have yet to find someone local who I would trust to do the work. So, it comes out for a shoot every now and then, and goes back in the safe.

I am also a fan of the SP101 and carried mine everywhere for a while. Fishing, hunting, motorcycle riding, etc. I had the shorter barrel and it shot to aimpoint with 125gn JHP's at 20yd. Just a little high at 10yd. I even liked the Ruger grips. They did a good job with recoil and worked well in a jacket pocket. It is one of the few guns I really regret selling.

If not for the sentimental value of mine I'd sell it in a heartbeat. I don't like having guns that I don't use.

[justindad]

If you’re never going to sell it - use it!

[6string]

At this point in time, it's really not so much a "new Python" vs "old Python" thing. Colt has five decades of bad, or at best inconsistent, customer service. From the Vietnam war era onward, Colt has made it clear that their preferred customer base consists of government contracts, not the American citizenry.
Yes, they'll take your money. But, don't hold your breathe that they'll be there when you need them.
They don't service their older guns. They don't even stock parts for them.

I've had some nice old Colts over the years, Officer's Target, Woodsman Match, etc.
All long gone. When I needed a sear for the Woodsman (many years ago!), not only did Colt not have parts, they wouldn't even offer me a parts diagram! I had to pay a gunsmith to machine a sear from bar stock.
I wouldn't want the headache of having to get parts or service for a Colt ever again.

If you want one to show off to friends, or as a collector, fine. But, for actual use? Forget it!

[dogdoc]

I have 2 of the newer pythons so far they are excellent. Great fit and finish. No bullcrap locks. Much better than most of my smiths. I likely have a thousand or more rounds through my 6 inch. Single action pull too heavy at 5 to 6 pounds but double action feels great. Colt is doing a great job in my opinion. Who would think in 2020s a maker would be making high end revolvers again. Colts king cobra 22 is competing for my favorite 22 with my smith k22. Best of times notwithstanding all the negative naysayers.

[murf205]

I went to my LGS to buy a new Python and came away with a Sig P 365 Tac Pac. Go figure. One of my good friends works there and he was extolling the virtues of the Sig and he is not just a salesman but a shooter with a ton of experience as well as a security member at his church. It is not a Python and not intended to be but I am very impressed with the accuracy using my 147 gr cast boolits. Probably wont scratch a Python itch but food for thought. BTW, it carries like a dream.

[murf205]

Not exactually what you want to hear:

When the "new" pythons came out I went to a indoor range 30+ miles away and tried them. Was looking at the 2.5" & 3" versions and they had a 3" example there. I rented it along with buying a couple different boxes of ammo. The python was impressive but there was something about it I couldn't put my finger on. They also had a s&w 586 l-comp there so I was able to do head to head testing.

At the end of the day I ended up with an l-comp.
https://i.imgur.com/5vi2mrE.jpg

The 586 was:
lighter 37.5oz vs 40oz
Holds 7 rounds vs 6 rounds
Has a comped bbl which is huge for reducing recoil (try shooting both 1 handed or weak handed)
the 586 is cut for moon clips
$100+ cheaper

Both had quality triggers an what I consider exceptional accuracy.

Either revolver will serve you well.

Forrest r, I am confused about the "cut for moon clips" part of the description. It's a 357, right. How does the moon clip work since it already has a rim on the case?

[white eagle]

So from what I have gathered they are either junk or to nice to carry in the woods, which to be honest makes no sense to me.
Looks like it's a preference thing, again. I was under the impression Colt made good stuff, well it's like the old saying "ya can't please everyone".

[cwtebay]

Forrest r, I am confused about the "cut for moon clips" part of the description. It's a 357, right. How does the moon clip work since it already has a rim on the case?Perhaps to accept 9mm ammunition?

Sent from my Pixel 5 using Tapatalk

[murf205]

I guess, but I didn't know they made a 586 in 9mm. Just 1 more thing I learned today!

[Mauser88]

I was going to buy one but after handling one at a gun show I decided not to. I just didn't like the feel. Not like the one I had back in the 70's.

[charlie b]

So from what I have gathered they are either junk or to nice to carry in the woods, which to be honest makes no sense to me.
Looks like it's a preference thing, again. I was under the impression Colt made good stuff, well it's like the old saying "ya can't please everyone".

The original is too nice to carry in the woods. I consider it too 'finicky' for hard use, like IPSC matches. For casual use, bullseye or self defense it is a good choice.

FYI, the original Python was basically a custom fitted gun you could buy off the shelf :) Has a glass smooth trigger that is perfect for target use. If you took a Colt Trooper or S&W to a good gunsmith you could get just as good or better gun. Cost of those two plus the services of a good gunsmith would be more than the Python at the time (yes, in those days I did cost it out). I suspect you could do the same these days. Take a standard Ruger or Smith to a good pistol smith and you'd come away with a better gun (ask Miculek :) ).

The other aspect of the older Pythons is the design and the bluing. Both were equal to some of the better custom guns of the day. The modern version? Up to you and your taste in guns.

[Forrest r]

Forrest r, I am confused about the "cut for moon clips" part of the description. It's a 357, right. How does the moon clip work since it already has a rim on the case?

Nothing to be confused about. S&W has been doing this on several different models for years. No need for speed loaders.

Used to have to send revolvers out to be worked on to custom shops like this.
https://www.bing.com/ck/a?!&&p=83693538c7424f60JmltdHM9MTcxNzExMzYwMCZpZ3VpZD0w NWM4ODIzNS0xZjJlLTY0YjUtMWY4My05NjAyMWU5MDY1ZWYmaW 5zaWQ9NTIxOA&ptn=3&ver=2&hsh=3&fclid=05c88235-1f2e-64b5-1f83-96021e9065ef&psq=who+cuts+cylinders+for+moon+clips&u=a1aHR0cHM6Ly90a2N1c3RvbS5jb20vcGFnZXMvbWFjaGluaW 5nLXN3&ntb=1

[dverna]

so if I can ask why would you not carry it in the woods?

For me, a "woods" or "truck" gun should be something that does not have a lot of value. There is a good chance the gun will take a few bumps and nicks. I don't want to worry about it.

I had a very nice M70 Coyote that I hunted with. There was a sale on T/C Compass rifles a few years ago and I got two...one to hunt with and one for my son. Figured how could I go wrong for $225 each. The plan was I would only hunt with the M70 when hunting from a blind (or impress people) so I would have less chance of dinging it up in the swamps and woods. Well, the Compass was more accurate than the M70, and I stopped using the Winchester. When I sold it, it brought a premium price as it was LNIB.

I do not see what a Python does that a gun at 1/2 the money does not do. I shot an "old" Python and it was an awesome gun. Just too nice to be a beater. I would buy a used .357 that is tight but looks like it has been rode hard and put away wet. Might be 1/3 the price of a Python and still gets the job done.

[charlie b]

I agree. I've been considering another .357 to carry when out in the woods. My short list includes the Charter Arms and Taurus. If a Smith or Ruger weren't so expensive I'd consider one of them as well. Did I say I regret selling my SP101? :)

[cwtebay]

I guess, but I didn't know they made a 586 in 9mm. Just 1 more thing I learned today!I didn't say that has been an offering. But using moon clips in a 38/357 chamber with 9mm ammunition is a viable possibility.

Sent from my Pixel 5 using Tapatalk

[Duckiller]

Have an old python that is too expensive to shoot. Safe Queen that #2 son will probably get. In 2022 I bought a new python 4.25". Took almost 2 months to get Oregon to approve sale. Went shopping last Sunday just to look. Smiths had real heavy triggers. 3" python got my attention. May get my carry permit and then see if I can get a gun faster in Oregon. Think it will be a nice carry gun while fishing.

[white eagle]

the only reason I buy guns is to shoot them and being a hunter I use them for that as well
can't see buying any gun for an investment or something purdy to look at, just not my thing
I ask about the gun because I wanted to hear what you all thought so thank you all for your thoughts

[gc45]

Handled one, liked it then passed. Nice gun I did not need and not wanting to set up for another cartridge to reload for although I have dies still from my earlier Pythons I had sold. Now days I prefer carrying the skeeter load in 44 Specials both around the farm or in the woods because cougars have become an issue to be aware of especially seeing them clase by. My neighbor just lost two more cows, another lost 3 sheep. My three 44's are perfect for my needs, ruger flat top for fun, smith 696 and 624 for carry, all shooting very close to POA at 25 yds with the Skeeter load or Power Pistol load. Powerful enough without the magnum blast...Many thanks to posts and photos by Thumbcocker concerning the 44 Special as he sparked my interest.

[snowwolfe]

Decent revolvers. I own one, as well as Anaconda. Both had triggers that sucked compared to the price they sold for. After sending them both off to Heffron for action jobs they are now perfect.

[Ed K]

Wikiarms shows a street price of about $1300 and that's not too expensive if it's what you want for your woods gun. Other have pointed out life is short. We all have differing views on this sort of use with some viewing as a "beater gun". My equivalent tractor/woods use firearm is a Ruger 45 flattop convertible which I do not consider a beater although maybe more durable. My tractor gets scratched up in the woods and it's worth 40 Pythons...

Now on the other hand I fell into a 50 year old Colt SAA with strapped hammer and presentation box that just sat in the safe not being used until eventually I sold it. I suppose adopting an unfired 50 year old original Python you could possible sell for $3-5K as a woods gun would be something similar. It's also a matter of financial perspective as some here may be scraping by on SS checks while others have net worth into the millions and aren't getting any younger.

[xtriggerman]

So a guy buys 2 brand new Pythons. A 3 inch and a 6 inch. Hes a meticulous sort that loads his own lead in the cases and finds 2 cylinders on the 6"are tighter bored at the forward end than the other 4. Sends it back to Colt and it comes back as "In Spec". I get a look at it and careful measuring shows the 4 cylinders are .3595 at the mouth while the other "tight ones are .3590 OK so I can understand the slightly less polished cylinder mouths but the story gets worse as we go along. The guy hates the trigger face and the single action pull hurts the finger pad after a few shots. I have to agree here. The single action pull runs a solid 6 lbs any way you pull on the gauge or even a oz or 2 more. The flat sides trigger has 3 very deep cut serrations giving you 4 rather sharp raised edges with relatively squared off side edges. So the work request is to do what I can with the trigger pull and polish out the bulk of the trigger face grooves. Taking the gun apart, I see some good improvements mainly in the transfer bar that should have been done eons ago. The funny thing in the picture is they use a 1/16th roll pin to be the stud on the cylinder latch pin! A roll pin on a $1600 revolver. I guess the original pressed in solid pins of old are a no-no in the NEW bean counter list. Whats worse is the sear geometry. To break the hammer free from single action cocked position, the trigger must over cock the hammer by a good 1/16th of an inch if measured at the tip of the hammer spur. No wonder this thing stacks up 6 pounds to get a hammer drop! The trigger seer edge is far from a knife edge in a fine hair groove hammer notch. In the end the Python gets a 4 lb Single action pull while the DBL pull goes from 9 to 8.5. The down side is there is now a tad more hammer to free cock beyond its fully cocked position. Pretty much unavoidable with the new design dimensions.

The 3 inch guns trigger pull is similar to the 6 inch aside from the single being 5.75 lbs. He sent that one back to Colt a couple days ago because some monkey at the factory (according to the owner) got the barrel cylinder gap all screwed up. So I measured it out for him and the gap was .007 on the right side of the bore and a whopping .017 on the left side! The 6 inch gun was a perfect .005 all the way around. Can you imagine the fire ball that would rip out the left side of the gun at firing! Clearly, the gun should get a new barrel. I'm curious if Colt will contest the claim this came out of the factory like this. I'v never seen anything like it on ANY revolver. The owner had owned a Python many decades ago and while the guns look very nice, hes not impressed with how they handle or group on paper for that matter. I think they consulted an Attorney about how light a trigger pull should be on a revolver when they papered the seer dimensions out. Oh, the pic doesn't show it but the inside of the frame where the grip touches is absolutely the most horrible machined surface I'v ever seen on the inner frame machined surface. Its like the CNC machine went at it with a butter knife edge.....
Rampant Colt?......... Hell no..... IMHO, dont walk...run.
https://i.imgur.com/H705Xusl.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/oI1qz5ml.jpg

[DMC707]

Had one in 3" -- HAD - beautiful firearm , heavy trigger (for me)

"downgraded" to a 66-8 w/ 2.75" barrel and havent really looked back

https://i.imgur.com/9K4fYeel.jpg?1


Heck - i like my old Dan Wesson better than the new Colt -- have zero issues with the original Pythons and occasionally you can pick one up for 2k or so --

https://i.imgur.com/hbIMrj3l.jpg

[trapper9260]

My SP handles everything but as mine is a fixed sight revolver, I find it shoots best to its sights with reasonably stiff loads pushing 150 t0 160 gr bullets, either cast or j-words. I killed a ground squirrel at 29 yds with it loaded that way.

Three44s

Thanks that will help .

[Duckiller]

Got two new ones. Took 11/2 months for the State of Oregon to let me have a 4 1/4" python. Shoots good . Then #2 son said we should go gun shopping. LGS had a 3" python. Got it for a carry gun while fishing in the mountains. !0 days for state to do background check. Might as well have stayed in California. Haven't shot it yet. Got too many big kitties in the Cascades. Will get carry permit soon. Whilr shopping DA Smiths had terrible triggers. Python may not be as nice as my 1990 Python, but it is reasonably smooth and will be a light carry gun.