Colt Python - Differences throughout the years??

[gottarollwithit]

So i'm thinkin about buying a Python b/c they're arguably one of the strongest, most accurate, and well fitted production 357's ever built. Granted, that statement is a bit subjective, but it's for the most part true, right?

These things have been in production since the 50's and just recently became unavailable brand new. Is there any difference between the ones built 50 yrs ago and the ones build 15 years ago? I'm trying to figure out if there are any significant/functional differences between the old and new.

I'd assume that the original design and fitting is the same, but what about the metallurgy, manufacture method, barrel/cylinder strength, internal parts? Did Colt source all of the internals in house or they outsource them? Any changes like going from cast or MIM to forged stuff?

Thanks!

[Mickey D]

You just opened a can of worms.

[gottarollwithit]

Are there really that many significant differences?
Changes in grips, sights, and small stuff don't really mean much. I'm lookin for BIG differences. As in, differences that might affect safety or longevity of the pistol.

I like to reload and would like to be able to safely and reliably run some firey hot loads.

[razr]

Post it on the Colt Forum, revolver section. You'll probably get a better respone.

[9mmepiphany]

There was a time when their fitting was more lax. I'm thinking the 90s, just before they stopped regular production...their machinery was wearing out...the ones out of the Custom Shop are quite good.

This one is from the early 70s and is LNIB because of it's serial number



then I have one from the late-60s, which is pretty beat as a duty gun with two agencies which is actually better fitted...but then with all the use it's seen has an action like glass.

if you'd like to shoot it, drop me a PM

[AEW]

I don't know much about the differences over the years, but have heard from many Python owners back in the late 1980's that told me some of the best Pythons made were from the 1960's. Not sure if that's true or not, but when I sold Pythons for a Colt Distributor during the late 1980's and early 1990's, every one I opened and examined, brand new from the factory, were very well made and consistent in fit, finish, and detailing. I did get to compare a few from the 1960's and the only thing I noticed was that the bluing was more of a lighter shade, but both polished to a mirror Royal Blue finish. All of the actions worked very smoothly out of the box, regardless of vintage. However, from my experience the stainless Pythons I saw did not have as smooth actions out of the box, which led me to buy a blued one. All of the new Pythons I handled were from 1988 to around 1992 or so. I haven't handled a new one since then so I can't comment on those.

With all this said, mine is from the late 70's vintage, and I believe it's a superb revolver. It looks unique, is very accurate, and locks up very tight. I wouldn't say that it is a heavy duty revolver from the standpoint that there is a very small pawl that latches down onto the cylinder when the trigger is at the rearmost position, which effectively locks the cylinder bore with the barrel at the moment of ignition. I was told by a Colt trained gunsmith that this mechanism isn't the strongest, and takes some skill to time correctly. The design is a carryover from the earlier Colt revolvers, but works well in allowing precision alignment of the cylinder bore and barrel, which is critical to accuracy. However, a steady diet of full charge loads will eventually require tuning of this mechanism. I'm not aware of any other revolver that uses this cylinder lock. Even all of Colt's subsequent revolver designs such as the King Cobra, Trooper, Anaconda, do not use such a system, and I'm going to take a wild guess that the cost of skilled labor and whether such a system could hold up in a 44 Mag design of the Anaconda pretty much eliminated use of this system. If you get a chance to handle a Python, cock the hammer back and while holding the hammer with your thumb to prevent it from dropping, pull the trigger all they way back firmly. Take the other hand and see check to see if the cylinder will rotate....it should be rock solid. Now take a Smith, Ruger, newer Colts, Rossi, Taurus, and try the same thing and you'll notice slight movement, even with modern precision CNC manufacturing.

If you like revolvers, this is a great one to have in your collection. It's worth the price of admission just to have it and stare at it, and even better when you shoot it. With this said, if I were looking for a 357 Mag revolver that will absorb lots of shooting, I'd probably get a large frame Smith or Ruger instead. If you like accurate single actions, my preference would be a Freedom Arms Model 83 or 97.....those are in a whole 'nother level. Try that cylinder fit and you'll notice that it is rock solid, regardless of the position of the hammer!

[gottarollwithit]

Most interesting... I'm glad i posted! (I posted up on the Colt forum too)
This info is exactly the kinda stuff i was lookin for.
9mmepiphany - thx for the offer. I've actually had quite a bit of trigger time with snake guns, but have never really been in the market for one.

[macey109]

be careful- one cannot buy only one snake gun...... addiciton on the horizon

[BGY]

I have a number of them and AEW is spot on...My personal observation of all NIB Pythons I've examined or owned (never had one second hand) is in general terms: Examples mfg in the 60's through the mid 70's were for the lack of a better description "Assembly line perfect". Past that, though finish may be consistent, internal fit had me seeking a "V spring Colt" proficient gunsmith to address trigger pull or other miscellaneous function/fit issues. Overall, if you can find an original non adulterated example at a reasonable price, you will have something very special.

[wu_dot_com]

one of the main difference is in the barrel thd. apparently colt implemented 2 different barrel thd patterns.

the old thd pattern can be identify by having 2 sight pins, while the new thd pattern have only 1 pin for the sights.

the two thd patterns are not interchangeable.

[redcliff]

one of the main difference is in the barrel thd. apparently colt implemented 2 different barrel thd patterns.

the old thd pattern can be identify by having 2 sight pins, while the new thd pattern have only 1 pin for the sights.

the two thd patterns are not interchangeable.

For those wonderring, "thd" is being used as an abbreviation for "thread" in the above post.

[BGY]

Yup; staring at a couple of "two pin" guns...

[wu_dot_com]

For those wonderring, "thd" is being used as an abbreviation for "thread" in the above post.

opps, thanks for the clarification.

also if you want to change the barrel, send it back to colt. do not attempted to change it at home or at a local smith.

there are way too many history where a local smith bend or cracked the frame when they try to unscrew the barrel.

[J-cat]

The older the better.

You should see a Shooting Master from the 30's and compare it to a Python from the 50's. Then compare that Python to one from the 70's, and then to another from the 80's. You'd immediately see a decline in quality.

[BGY]

The older the better.

You should see a Shooting Master from the 30's and compare it to a Python from the 50's. Then compare that Python to one from the 70's, and then to another from the 80's. You'd immediately see a decline in quality.

Hard to refute this...You should see how well finished my lowly Police Positive Special manufactured in 1926 is. Simply amazing...even the hammer back is polished to a mirroe finish and beautifully blued. Short of custom third party work, this ain't going to happen on the production line ever again. The only company that has seemingly gone full circle from great to bad and seemingly great again is S&W...save for the MIM parts and the disfiguring (in my opinion...) lock.