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

[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/pi...&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.
[IMG][/IMG]

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. 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.