Return of the Colt Python

[Grayfox54]

There's been a whole lot of discussion on other boards about the new Python for a while now. A couple of surprises for me here. First it was said to have a solid barrel similar to S&Ws L-frame. Glad to see that it is indeed to classic vent rib. Second, the MSRP is considerably lower than rumored. Estimates had put it at a bit over $2000. Very happy to see they were wrong about that too.  

I have no doubt that it'll be an excellent gun. However, much like the Cobra and King Cobra, its a completely different lock work trying to cash in on an old, recognized name. So it ain't really a Python. It just looks kinda like one.  Very disappointed they aren't making it in blue. That always was the true classic Python.  

I have a few Colt Revolvers including a 6" Blue Python. Its a great gun and I've always wanted a 4" to go with it.  But S&W has always been my go to brand. They shoot great and are much more affordable. I just don't shoot my Python much. IDK, maybe if they come out with a blue one I might get interested.   But I really do want to get one in my hands just to check it out. 

If Colt wants to start bringing back the snake guns. My vote is for the Diamondback in both .38 and .22. I absolutely love the old "D" frames. 

 

[swim615]

Had a diamondback 22. The D thing cost so much I never shot it. Hoping the new pythons are less than expected. Also hoping they lead to other calibers. I would really like a Anaconda 6in for hunting!!!

 

[Ronald_55]

1 hour ago, KahrMan said:

I have an itch for a 4” as well. 

The doc can give you a creme for that.

I am very pessimistic on reboots  of beloved gun lines. I feel today's large scale manufacturing environment is 10% the quality it used to be. At least from a fit and finish stand point. 

[JeffL]

Probably still out of my price range. I hope they're awesome though, craftsmanship is rare these days.

[DaveTN]

1 hour ago, Ronald_55 said:

The doc can give you a creme for that.

I am very pessimistic on reboots  of beloved gun lines. I feel today's large scale manufacturing environment is 10% the quality it used to be. At least from a fit and finish stand point. 

 

25 minutes ago, JeffL said:

Probably still out of my price range. I hope they're awesome though, craftsmanship is rare these days.

Manufacturing today is far beyond any capabilities we had in the past. I am absolutely sure of that because I have been in it most all my life. If you are on top on the game, you don’t need “Hand fitting” you only need assembly.

If you are making guns to sell at the lowest price possible; you won’t be as concerned about, or judged on, your quality. Folks are happy to buy bottom feeder guns if they are cheap. But that will be very different if you are claiming a comeback of one of the most iconic revolvers in the firearms market. I expect to see plenty of whining and crying about this gun regardless of the quality. I wish the new snake luck. 

You get what you pay for and that hasn’t changed fully yet; but it’s on its way. Look at the Ruger Wrangler. From most everyone’s first impressions (That I have seen), the finish is Cerakote and nothing to brag about, but the quality and accuracy is far beyond any of those other cheap revolvers out there. And its under $200.

 

[JeffL]

1 hour ago, DaveTN said:

 

Manufacturing today is far beyond any capabilities we had in the past. I am absolutely sure of that because I have been in it most all my life. If you are on top on the game, you don’t need “Hand fitting” you only need assembly.

If you are making guns to sell at the lowest price possible; you won’t be as concerned about, or judged on, your quality. Folks are happy to buy bottom feeder guns if they are cheap. But that will be very different if you are claiming a comeback of one of the most iconic revolvers in the firearms market. I expect to see plenty of whining and crying about this gun regardless of the quality. I wish the new snake luck. 

You get what you pay for and that hasn’t changed fully yet; but it’s on its way. Look at the Ruger Wrangler. From most everyone’s first impressions (That I have seen), the finish is Cerakote and nothing to brag about, but the quality and accuracy is far beyond any of those other cheap revolvers out there. And its under $200.

 

I am fully aware the capabilities exist, but how much quality we lose to corporate greed is my concern.

[Grayfox54]

Its occurred to me that everybody is looking at this from the wrong angle. The name may be Python, but its a completely separate and totally new gun. Rather than judging it against the older classic python, we should look at it as a totally new gun and judge it for its own merits. I'm guessing that its probably a better gun. Its just not what you would expect a Python to be. 

[Ray Z]

Oh no! The first time Colt quit offering it's AR-15 for civilian ownership I refused to buy a Colt. When they saw just how wrong they were to involve themselves in politics they had lost my attention as a gun buyer. Now they've done it again. with they're lips firmly planted on butt cheeks  of the politicians I have a hard time even considering offering of the Python.

[Trekbike]

On 1/2/2020 at 8:54 PM, DaveTN said:

 

Manufacturing today is far beyond any capabilities we had in the past. I am absolutely sure of that because I have been in it most all my life. If you are on top on the game, you don’t need “Hand fitting” you only need assembly.

Yep.    I ran across a video, linked below, on that subject regarding the Python.    It echoes what you said.    While guns aren't obviously cars, there are some similarities to the improvements over time.    Most of us are old enough to remember muscle cars of the 60's to early 70's and how fast they were and the good handling.   Not sure any can hold a candle to what's available today.   Yes, the higher price reflects that to some degree.   

Back to guns, semi-autos in the beginning weren't near as reliable and ergonomic, etc as they are today.    We need to remember, while the good ole days can apply to many things, I think cars and guns are better today setting aside the nostalgic value of the older stuff IMO. 

https://youtu.be/I1bB8upFLdU

[DaveTN]

Uh-Oh...

 

[TomInMN]

Uh-oh is about right. He also mentioned (about 31:39) having seen that behavior in other videos...

[swim615]

That doesn't look so good. I sure hope they get it worked out soon. I'd really like to have one someday.

[Garufa]

3 hours ago, TomInMN said:

Uh-oh is about right. He also mentioned (about 31:39) having seen that behavior in other videos...

There is another video out there showing the behavior.  It’s being dismissed by many snobs who won’t watch it cause the guy has horrible trigger discipline, regardless it shows the same behavior.

A revolver from the factory either works or it doesn’t.  No excuses, but specially for one that costs as much as it does.

Edited January 13, 2020 by Garufa

[TomInMN]

45 minutes ago, Garufa said:

There is another video out there showing the behavior.  It’s being dismissed by many snobs who won’t watch it cause the guy has horrible trigger discipline, regardless it shows the same behavior.

A revolver from the factory either works or it doesn’t.  No excuses, but specially for one that costs as much as it does.

And it seems that two of these revolvers are exhibiting the same behavior. Maybe the same sample piece that's making the rounds, maybe a bigger issue...

[Garufa]

8 minutes ago, TomInMN said:

Maybe the same sample piece that's making the rounds

I doubt that.

[Trekbike]

2 hours ago, Garufa said:

A revolver from the factory either works or it doesn’t.  No excuses, but specially for one that costs as much as it does.

It works until it breaks.    My S&W 642's hammer pivot pin broke off the frame after a couple of years, so yes even quality revolvers break.    

[deerslayer]

On 1/2/2020 at 8:54 PM, DaveTN said:

 

Manufacturing today is far beyond any capabilities we had in the past. I am absolutely sure of that because I have been in it most all my life. If you are on top on the game, you don’t need “Hand fitting” you only need assembly.

 

I have no doubt that manufacturing is better than ever, but nothing touches hand-fitted by an expert.  I've seen too many big dollar 1911s that had to be fine tuned by a 'smith before they would run.  

[mikegideon]

33 minutes ago, Trekbike said:

It works until it breaks.    My S&W 642's hammer pivot pin broke off the frame after a couple of years, so yes even quality revolvers break.    

Since it happened (at least) twice, it could be a design flaw, being a brand new gun and all. I figure Colt probably stands a better chance of making a Python than anybody else  

[Grayfox54]

A guy on the S&W forum got one of the new Pythons. His has problems too. The rear sight has too much play and the cylinder release is hard, sticky and sometimes doesn't work. Its on its way back to the factory. 

Brand new anything usually has some teething pains. But a Python should be good out of the box every time. I'm still waiting for a blue one. Maybe they'll have the bugs out by then.  

[Erik88]

12 hours ago, mikegideon said:

I figure Colt probably stands a better chance of making a Python than anybody else  

Apparently they stand a great chance of screwing it up also. A revolver that doesn't revolve....Rick is going to be pissed.

Edited January 14, 2020 by Erik88

[TomInMN]

12 hours ago, deerslayer said:

I have no doubt that manufacturing is better than ever, but nothing touches hand-fitted by an expert.  I've seen too many big dollar 1911s that had to be fine tuned by a 'smith before they would run.  

I'd say current manufacturing CAN BE better than ever. But if we seek to keep costs as low as possible in order to maximize profit margin, we're still perfectly capable of turning out some real turds.

[E4 No More]

18 minutes ago, TomInMN said:

I'd say current manufacturing CAN BE better than ever. But if we seek to keep costs as low as possible in order to maximize profit margin, we're still perfectly capable of turning out some real turds.

Bean-counters F-up most good products. 

[mikegideon]

50 minutes ago, Erik88 said:

Apparently they stand a great chance of screwing it up also. A revolver that doesn't revolve....Rick is going to be pissed.

My money says they will fix it. 

[jarhead]

Regardless; I want one.

[billt]

Here is the thing. Remakes are usually always disappointing. And most NEVER live up to the quality and performance of the original. I don't care what type of gun, or who the manufacturer is. The reasons are really quite simple. You have to look at WHY the original was discontinued in the first place.

In most all cases it was due to the cost of manufacturing them. The original Colt Python was so desirable, because it's lockwork was hand fit by people who were all but of gunsmith level talent. Colt could no longer charge what was required at the time, in order to turn a profit by keeping it on the market. So, like many original firearms, it was discontinued.

Then, like clockwork, once discontinued the value of the originals began to skyrocket. Colt saw this and immediately wanted to capitalize on it. So the first thing they looked to accomplish is how to make them, and still turn a profit on them. They then redesigned the lockwork to be simpler, faster, easier, and above all, cheaper, to produce. And in the process eliminate all the hand fitting that made the gun so desirable in the first place. This is NOT a Colt Python. It is a redesigned facsimile to look like a Colt Python.

And there are obviously problems with it. Reports are coming in left and right about the gun locking up, cylinders not turning, or else going out of time. And in general not operating correctly. Hickok .45 has confirmed this. As have others. 

Colt would have done their customers a much better service by doing what they did with the Single Action Army, and what Marlin did with the Original Marlin Golden 39-A. Make it a special order gun, and price it to match the same quality level it had before they discontinued it. But instead they chose to cheapen the gun up enough for mass production. By changing it's design in order to make it profitable enough to warrant mass production in the first place. Much like Browning did with the "new" Auto V.

It is nothing like the original. It has an Aluminum receiver, and operates totally differently than the original did. No parts interchange between the 2..... Only the name. And it still costs a ton. This "new" Python is no different. I'm not saying it was wrong for Colt to do this. It makes complete sense from a marketing standpoint. Just as it does for Browning to reintroduce the Auto V. But it's not the same gun, and it never will be the same gun. But it will satisfy a market for these guns that has developed. And at the same time, most likely increase the value of the originals...... Assuming they ever get the thing to work correctly.

 

Edited January 17, 2020 by billt