Python vs GP100

[Q619]

Double post

[FuzzyBrows]

i <3 my 686. but if i'd had to choose, gp100 for the simple fact that its way cheaper than the python.

[Markus]

IMO Ruger makes the toughest revolver around, Colt made the nicest revolver around, Smith is a compromise between the two. You can't go wrong with a revolver from one of these three companies. That being said, due to lack of support and availability of parts on the part of the Python: I'd get a Ruger or a Smith. If you plan on shooting it sparingly, especially if all you shoot is .38's: the Colt will be fine. They tend to go out of timing after lots of hot magnum loads and need it corrected. The other two have a much lesser chance of this. ESPECIALLY the Ruger.

If you're really hot on the Ruger, you might want to hunt down a security six. I believe it to be a nicer gun than the GP100 that is just as durable and can be had for a VERY reasonable price on the used market.

My favorite revolver that I put the most rounds through is my Smith 686 but my Ruger Security Six gets backpacking duty.

Yup Ive been hunting for a blued security six for a while now but just havent found the right price/location ratio yet. I found a blued six inch security six online for 450 NIB but since its not on the roster no shipping.... I still want a python but Im not sure I can afford the 1200 or so price tag.

[bwiese]

Ok here is the deal I know the python is the best revolver ever made however I was wondering if any one out there can give me a little help. I looking to get either a python or a gp100, how much of a difference in handling is there, because as far as price goes there is a huge difference, plus finding one and if I get a python it's not going to just sit in the safe. Is spending to extra money really worth it.

Not so fast, sonny. The best revolver ever made may well be the German Korth revolver in terms of fit & finish.

You're also asking a question with a big gap in it -- namely, you didn't include the Smith & Wesson 686 in your list.

[If the Python is a Rolex, the Korth is a Audemars Pigquet or Blancpain. The S&W is an Omega or Tag Heuer or Luminox, and the Ruger is a Seiko Diver's watch.]

The Colt Python is a fairly rare (esp in CA) gun and is quite expensive. People generally retain them for at best occasional shooting and not 'daily drivers'. Also, despite the wonderful fit/finish and wonderful trigger feel, Pythons have a minor reputation for the lockwork 'getting out of time' and requiring gunsmithing. Good revolver gunsmithing isn't that cheap and its practitioners run on their own schedules (ever see an on-time gunsmith?)

By contrast, S&W 686s and Ruger GP100s are both in current production, with many more in the field over the years than Colt Pythons - Pythons were quite a bit more limited in production.

While the GP100 gives the appearance of beefiness (and undeniably it is) it really is not tougher than a S&W 686. In fact, S&W ran ads in the late 80s/early 90s making fun of the extra/unnecessary bulk of the GP100. Most experienced revolver folks appear to agree the S&W 686 is somewhat more refined in fit, finish & trigger feel than the Ruger GP100.

Since you sound new to guns, I'd suggest you not get a specialty gun that costs $$$, may need a tad of babying, and which is harder to get (not on approved handgun Roster - meaning you'd have to find one via PPT or consignment in CA) than a current production S&W 686 or GP100.

Both the 686 and GP100 will serve you well and will easily save you many hundreds of dollars over the Python - money that can be used for ammo and range time to improve your shooting skills.

For 'bet-your-life' purposes the 686 and GP100 both will serve you fine. I've shot both, and own several S&W revolvers (which are tack drivers I can bet my life on to boot). If you'd like a tad more refinement on your gun - including better fit/finish, better trigger and a likely tad more accuracy [which is likely highly irrelevant in a real-life shooting situation] then I'd lean to the 686.

If you have plenty of money in your pocket, get the 686 for your shooter and get a Python as a safe queen.

If you are really short on cash and want a 100% durable, 100% useful gun, get the GP100.

[Q619]

Not so fast, sonny. The best revolver ever made may well be the German Korth revolver in terms of fit & finish.

You're also asking a question with a big gap in it -- namely, you didn't include the Smith & Wesson 686 in your list.

[If the Python is a Rolex, the Korth is a Audemars Pigquet or Blancpain. The S&W is an Omega or Tag Heuer or Luminox, and the Ruger is a Seiko Diver's watch.]

The Colt Python is a fairly rare (esp in CA) gun and is quite expensive. People generally retain them for at best occasional shooting and not 'daily drivers'. Also, despite the wonderful fit/finish and wonderful trigger feel, Pythons have a minor reputation for the lockwork 'getting out of time' and requiring gunsmithing. Good revolver gunsmithing isn't that cheap and its practitioners run on their own schedules (ever see an on-time gunsmith?)

By contrast, S&W 686s and Ruger GP100s are both in current production, with many more in the field over the years than Colt Pythons - Pythons were quite a bit more limited in production.

While the GP100 gives the appearance of beefiness (and undeniably it is) it really is not tougher than a S&W 686. In fact, S&W ran ads in the late 80s/early 90s making fun of the extra/unnecessary bulk of the GP100. Most experienced revolver folks appear to agree the S&W 686 is somewhat more refined in fit, finish & trigger feel than the Ruger GP100.

Since you sound new to guns, I'd suggest you not get a specialty gun that costs $$$, may need a tad of babying, and which is harder to get (not on approved handgun Roster - meaning you'd have to find one via PPT or consignment in CA) than a current production S&W 686 or GP100.

Both the 686 and GP100 will serve you well and will easily save you many hundreds of dollars over the Python - money that can be used for ammo and range time to improve your shooting skills.

For 'bet-your-life' purposes the 686 and GP100 both will serve you fine. I've shot both, and own several S&W revolvers (which are tack drivers I can bet my life on to boot). If you'd like a tad more refinement on your gun - including better fit/finish, better trigger and a likely tad more accuracy [which is likely highly irrelevant in a real-life shooting situation] then I'd lean to the 686.

If you have plenty of money in your pocket, get the 686 for your shooter and get a Python as a safe queen.

If you are really short on cash and want a 100% durable, 100% useful gun, get the GP100.

If you're on the subject of high end revolvers: you can't forget Freedom Arms! I'll eventually get my mitts on a 5" .357 from them. Sweet guns if you don't mind single action.

[rogervzv]

If you have plenty of money in your pocket, get the 686 for your shooter and get a Python as a safe queen.

If you are really short on cash and want a 100% durable, 100% useful gun, get the GP100.

FWIW, I do all right money-wise (I am in my prime earning years) and can own any gun I want, period. I went with the GP100 based on its ruggedness and feel in my hand and feel of the trigger. And its workmanship.

The Smith may or may not be a prettier firearm (that is what the guys mean when they say "refined.") Personally, I did not think so, but beauty is in the eye of the beholder. A close inspection of the GP100 revealed not one scratch, nick, or burr, and the fit and finish could not have been better.

The GP100 has six shots instead of seven because this means that the cylinder is stronger. More spaces means less metal equals less strength. In this sense, it is the GP100 that is more "refined." If you define "refined" as meaning "built better" as opposed to "prettier." The GP100 can fire 357s all day long. Maybe the Smith can. Or maybe not. A read over at the S&W forum suggests maybe not.

The leaf safety in the GP100 means that the firearm can safely be carried with a round in all six chambers with the hammer down. Some criticize this feature. Personally, I think it is a great feature (read: another refinement.) The mentality that criticizes this safety feature is similar to those who eschew slide safeties on semi-autos. I just don't see it.

There are many of us who believe that the GP100 is the finest revolver in current production. There are many who think that the 686 is. But if you want a beautiful firearm that is overbuilt and very reliable, you cannot do better than the GP100, regardless of price.

[NapaCountyShooter]

I've loved my GP100. It's a tank and will take plenty of whatever load you want to put through it. I just gave mine to my Dad last weekend as he just finished his house up in Butte Co. and could use an HD/Snake gun for his property. I would recommend the 4" stainless that I had to anyone looking for a good back up piece for hunting (as I know that's what you wanted it for). Fill it up with Buffalo Bore or Double Tap 180gr. hard cast.

[Andy Taylor]

If I might give you a third option.
Colt Trooper .357 or Colt Model .357.
Both of these revolvers are Pythons without the full lug/vent rib barrel. The Trooper .357 also has a lower lever of finish. More of a matte blue instead of the Royal Blue. The Model .357 has the same Royal Blue as the Python. At one time I owned a Trooper .357 and a Python, both 4". I paid less than $500 for the Trooper and $1000 for the Python. Shooting them side by side I could not tell a bit of difference. I sold the Python for $1400 and bought another 4" Trooper for under $500. I know of a 6" Model .357 at a local gunshop for under $500.
Oh, and remember if you decide to go this route, It is the Trooper .357 (true full and correct name) The Trooper MKIII and Trooper MKV are different revolvers. They have nothing in common with a Python except caliber.

[Fishslayer]

(For the life of me, I don't get the vent rib for a handgun)

As it was explained to me the rib is for stiffness & the vents are actually for weight reduction.

[tzahoy]

Here's my take, I own a Python, and a bunch of Smiths, J K and N frames, my nephew owns a GP100 that I've shot a bunch. I shoot more revolver than anything, and I shoot exclusively double action, unless I'm developing loads from the bench. I honestly have not shot a single round single action in the last 10,000 rounds that I've shot offhand. In the path to DA mastery (I'm not there but do shoot high 590's in PPC 600) I've experimented with a lot of guns and modified a lot of triggers in search of the easiest to shoot DA trigger. What I've learned is that a trigger that stacks, or gets progressively harder, or has a significant increase in weight at the end of the stroke is a serious hinderance to accurate repeatable double action work. The worst offenders are the Rugers, Charter Arms, and Colts.

I'm more than a hobby gunsmith, and have done many trigger jobs on Smiths, my nephews Ruger, and my Python. The most time consuming was the Python by far, but thanks to some excellent info posted by DRE, I now have an excellent Python DA trigger. I curved the DA sear ala all the old school Python smiths, and succesfully retimed it. It now has a wonderfully light stack free DA trigger, and it's finally as good as my S&W K-frame PPC revolver that I built. Previous to the trigger job, I did not like the Python trigger at all, I think the legend of the Python DA trigger is pure hogwash, and I've shot and handled plenty of others to know it wasn't this individual specimen.

I did a spring swap, and sliding surface stone and polish on my nephew GP100, but the stacky trigger is still there, and it has a fair bit of overtravel. Both could probably be addressed, but I haven't dug into it again yet. That said, for accurate high speed DA work the trigger still sucks, it just sucks less than it used to.

The great thing about Smiths, is any reasonably mechanical person with a good set of screwdrivers can replace the springs, and dry fire the snot out of one and have a great DA and SA trigger. The SA triggers are always free of overtravel and very light and crisp. The stock DA triggers are heavy but smooth, and most importantly completely free of stacking, just a nice smooth consistent trigger that's easy to pull stright though with no hitch at then end to pull you off target. Get rid of the lawyer springs and you're done. Sure you can polish the sliding surfaces and bob the hammer and lighten the springs further and it will be even better, but the average joe can have a very usable DA trigger in minutes.

I won't argue at all that the Ruger is a tough beast, but if that was my criteria I would look for an N-frame 357, either a 27, 28, or 627. They're built on the 44 mag frame and will take anything a Ruger will. I prefer the K-frames as they sit a lot lower in the hand making recoil more manageable, and I don't shoot much 357. K frames are known for cracks in the forcing cones if you shoot a lot of hot 357, but L frames (686) and N frames will shoot full house 357 for a lifetime.

If I was looking for a new 357 that was going to shoot a fair bit of full power loads, no question about it, I would buy a 686.

[CalNRA]

If you have plenty of money in your pocket, get the 686 for your shooter and get a Python as a safe queen.

If you are really short on cash and want a 100% durable, 100% useful gun, get the GP100.

interesting. I had plenty of cash and I didn't go with the S&W.

Reason? The damn lock.

Sure there are a few pre-lock ones floating around out there but I like to walk into a store and buy a new production gun right there. I just don't like locks on my guns. Sure, you can say S&W locks are fine on guns other than titanium framed guns, great. I don't want to get that one that locks up on me.

[JTROKS]

I've held and shot a Python that was supposed to be buttery smooth, but the S&W 586 I had was no doubt about as smooth and it was stock. I have a 2.5" bbl S&W 66 that is was smoother because the action was polished up. It feels like a marble rolling on glass. I did have a GP100 that had a trigger/action that felt like marble rolling on glass, but in that case it was broken glass.

[gorenut]

The Smith may or may not be a prettier firearm (that is what the guys mean when they say "refined.") Personally, I did not think so, but beauty is in the eye of the beholder. A close inspection of the GP100 revealed not one scratch, nick, or burr, and the fit and finish could not have been better.

The GP100 has six shots instead of seven because this means that the cylinder is stronger. More spaces means less metal equals less strength. In this sense, it is the GP100 that is more "refined." If you define "refined" as meaning "built better" as opposed to "prettier." The GP100 can fire 357s all day long. Maybe the Smith can. Or maybe not. A read over at the S&W forum suggests maybe not.

In my mind, the refinement of S&W comes in the form of shootability, balance, and especially the trigger. Ruger makes a gun sturdy by simply adding more metal on the other hand Smith achieves the same goal by using a forged frame. I know Ruger has been investing more on newer casting processes, so I don't know if this has changed in recent years. Shootability and balance is subjective and can differ from person to person, but I know as much as I loved my GP-100, S&Ws felt better. Finally, the trigger.. I don't know the details of how the S&W's trigger system differs from Rugers, but out of the box all the S&Ws I've handled have been better than the GP-100 I owned or the ones I've handled at the range. My GP-100 saw thousands of dry-firing and many many shots down-range and while it was much smoother than the day I bought it new - it was nowhere near as nice as the S&Ws mentioned. I'm not doubting a trigger job on the GP-100 can get you similar results as the S&W though. On a total side note though.. the Ruger LCR has a better trigger than pretty much any of the small-framed Smiths. Wonder if they'll someday work that mojo on future larger revolvers.

As far as the cylinder argument.. I've never heard of anyone have any durability issues with 7 or even 8 shot S&Ws. While, 6 is arguably more durable due to the nature of having more metal, the flip-side is having more holes also means the cylinder doesn't have to travel as much for the next shot. This can help the revolver retain its timing in the long run. I've had times where I've rapid-fired my GP100 and it's temporarily locked-up between shots. With an 8 shotter, I had to purposely try to get the trigger to lock, but couldn't really do it if I shot naturally.

Ultimately, if you take care of your revolver, neither should give you any issues and should last longer than you (as a whole). If not, both have reputable customer service that will take care of you. Really can't go wrong with either, but the Colts open up way more doors on what you have to weigh out.

[ap3572001]

As far as a 357 revolver that I would use all the time, Ruger GP100 3-4 inch is the way to go.

Pre lock/mim Smith and Wesson revolvers do not take a back seat to a Python in any department.

A model 14 with a six inch barrel was always a choice for PPC 600 match.

It did great out to 50 yards.

[scarville]

The leaf safety in the GP100 means that the firearm can safely be carried with a round in all six chambers with the hammer down. Some criticize this feature.

What the FUD? With the possible exception of the $1.98 pot metal crap which was unsafe to fire at all, any double action revolver made since World War II can be carried safely with a round under the hammer.