Anybody got any opinions on the Colt Python vs. S&W 586/686 debate?

Regards, Marcus.

sir north: i have always thought the python had a look about it...maybe it was the rib on top.. the python was the only colt revolver that i liked the fit in your hand. i had a tropper and it just didnt feel the same as the other. i had a dimound back awhile back and wished i had the python..

  the only other i wish i had would have been was the dimound back .22. i think that would have been the cats ass.

Assuming that you are comparing same barrel lengths and steel.  I'd opt for the Colt Python.  IMO it is their finest pistol.

Now the S&W is also a good revolver.

This is kind of a Chevy or Ford  type of decision.  But the Python has a better finish than the Smith.

BEAR

Sir North;

It depends on the depends.  No finer trigger than a Python, properly done, in good working order.  But they don't tend to stay in good working order all that long.  It is a delicate mechanism.

The S&W will be stone reliable throughout it's stay with you, given that it's also in good working order to begin with.  Although it won't have the silky smoothness of the Python unless it's had the TLC of a competent smith.

So, IMHO, the Python is good for target, enjoyment, and investment.  But I wouldn't carry one daily.  The Smith I would carry.

900F

the interesting thing on the Python is that if you cock the piece it causes the cylinder to firmly seat on one side of the locking mechanism with the cylinder.  So when cocked the cylinder has no slop.  the synchronizing notches in the cylinder have to have some slop to get the thing to be reliable, but the colt design makes it lock much firmer than the Smith and others.  Now that doesn't mean better syn with the barrel cylinder, but it is more consistent.

I always liked that feature.

BEAR

The way you have this comparison set up the Python naturally wins. You are comparing Colts all time best against S&W's average workhorse. Give me a choice of any S&W such as M19, 627 etc and I'd rather have one of those.

DD

I've always thought the Python was one of the nicest looking handguns around.   Kind of big and heavy to carry though.   I have a Diamondback 22 that I like.  Sort of like having a mini-Python.   Bear has it right about the cylinder lockup.  Colt made it better than Smith did.  

Not that I don't like S&W.  I must like 'em, as I've had a few over the years.  I'd still like to get a pre-lock M66 one of these days.   

saddlesore wrote: I haven't had a python in my hand for a few years, but when I had my FFL and orderd some, the finish and wood to metal fit was pretty crappy. Definitely overpriced. I prefer the 686

I think a S&W Model 686 6" might be in my future, too.

Regards, Marcus.

Ash:) wrote: Here's what I shoot but I'd love to get a Python. http://img445.imageshack.us/my.php?image=cyclops3op.jpg"> http://img445.imageshack.us/my.php?image=cyclops3op.jpg">

Ash - Welcome to BSB... Just what the heck is that? And why do you call it "Cyclops"?

I have a 6" Colt 357 - forerunner of the old model Trooper & Python -and have never had any of the above mentioned problems regarding a frail action.  Because the hand pushes up against the extractor star at firing, with alot of use they can come out of time easier than the Smith but this is an easy fix. 

The Python class is really just a variation of the New Service innards used in the military 1917.  It is more difficult to fine tune and more complicated than the Smith, but still very sturdy.  Still, I agree the quality can be spotty.  I guess the days of knowing your new Python is going to have a top quality fit & finish just because it's a Pyhon are gone. 

I think the real difference between the two is that the Colt has a much longer double action pull that tends to stack towards the end of the pull.  I have many Smiths and the pull is much crisper and easier to control.

Pythons had an immaculate finish...once. Pythons had a good fit.....once. Pythons had one of the sweetest triggers in a revolver.......once. This was when Colt was owned by Colt. They are now 1/6th owned by Conneticut. About the only thing they are making out now is substandard EVERYTHING.

The frail parts comment I made is true. Remove the side cover on a S&W and a Colt and compare. S&W parts look like they were taken out of rock crushers. S&W revolvers set the standard for all other revolvers as soon as Colt stopped caring. If this weren't true, then even third world shitholes would be armed with Colt revolvers rather than S&W. Colt once was the "World's right hand" but these days, I'd rather be armed with a blow gun than a Colt revolver...................................Kingpin

I have owned both !

   I prefer the PYTHON. One thing anyone who ownes a python needs to do is to get  a couple of spare mainsprings. If you you taje the grips off you will se where the spring has a Vee in the rear corner of the the grip frame. It is udoubtedly a week point. when its ready to go you will notice that your action is getting lighter and lighter. The same is true on the diamondbacks. I think the detective special has the same spring too. While the smith has a flat spring...tj3006

North Logan....I owned and carried a Colt Python for over 25 years! I bought my first one in 1967, if my memory serves me correct. I do remember the first time, I saw it being taken out of the red and black box it came in, while at the gun store.  It had a beautiful deep luster finish!

I also remember the certified target that was in the same box as the pistol. It was shot at 15 yards and had 5 shots that clover leafed touching each other. The elderly man across the counter, pulled out a buffalo head nickel and covered all the holes in the target. I was impressed at what I saw and listened very closely at the older gentleman told me just how fine this handgun was at the time.

However, Colt did have some problems later down the road but that has already been adressed and no need to wipe a dead horse as they say. I still think the Colt Python is a fine pistol, even if you may have to have a gunsmith tinker some with one, in order to make it top shelf.