Tweet
Until S&W sold to a British outfit in the early-mid-80's, I was a Smith & Wesson loyalist. S&W has yet to replicate handguns it made prior to its sale to a British firm.
I'm in process of purging every S&W handgun I own except my 40+ year old Model 60. If it has a lock on it, it's going. Installing safeties on DA action revolvers and semiautomatics makes as much sense and installing air brakes on jet planes.
My Sig "P" series semis do not have safeties.
Glock does not have external safeties unless you want to consider its trigger safety an external safety.
I've researched to heck out of the new and improved Python. It is a DA revolver sans safeties and designed to shoot .357 Mag rounds.
What is sad is some 40 years ago an extremely prominent So Cal gunsmith (I want to say Terry Tussey, but I can't be sure.) told me to buy an S&W Model 27. He said it was the best quality revolver on the market. He told me that the then Python was plagued with firing mechanism problems. I should have bought a Model 27.
While this might sound harsh, it is my opinion based on my experience with S&W revolvers manufactured after the sale to a British firm. S&W revolvers expensive junk. I would never risk my life to one. I have never relied on any handgun with an external safety to save my life. Furthermore, it's attempts to rationalize a lock on a DA revolver were dandified lies.
I've called Colt to verify its Python does not have a lock or external safety. It has neither. The Colt rep told me that the new Python (Python 2.0) is a superior version of the original. He assured me that it had been .357 Mag round tortured tested to fire thousands of magnum rounds. He assured me that the Python 2.0 passed the torture test with flying colors. He assured me that the Python 2.0 was stronger than the original. Finally, his opinion was that the DA firing system of the Python 2.0 was superior and more smooth than the original. He sold me. I bought a blued copy. He assured me that Colt will warranty my Python against any/all defects.
I've always loved Python's exceptional DA/SA trigger. But I could not pull the trigger on one after I was told some 40 years ago about its reliability problems. Now that those problems have been rectified, I had to pull the trigger on one.
My Python will not be a bipedal self-defense weapon. It will be a wilderness survival handgun when chasing trout in the Rockies. I might buy an Anaconda before CA's 11% handgun purchase tax is implemented. My concern with a .44 Mag out of a fishing-convenient 4" barrel is sight picture retention. I'm not convinced that the meanest griz with designs on my kids could withstand 6 180 grain .357 Mag rounds. But the very soon to be implemented 11% tax could push me in the direction of an Anaconda.
I am truly saddened by the deterioration of S&W quality control and its submission to politicians who wanted S&W to add an unnecessary external lock to its firearms. DA revolvers do not need external safeties. Neither do DA semis with decockers.
Of course, the aforementioned is merely my opinion that's shared by millions of other revolver aficionados.
Had I had been clairvoyant some 40 years ago and bought a Model 27, my post would be moot.
BTW, about a year ago, I saw an approximate 50+ year-old pristine 4" Model 27 with an asking price of $2500. The salesman told me that it was a steal at $2500. I doubt that a box of ammo was fired out of it at a paper target. It's bluing was artistic. It was the quintessential wilderness survival weapon. I probably should have bought it. But I have no remorse arising from dropping Bengies on a new, blued, 4" Python. It will accompany me on all wilderness trips where probability of crossing paths with a carnivorous beast is statistically significant.
I'm in process of purging every S&W handgun I own except my 40+ year old Model 60. If it has a lock on it, it's going. Installing safeties on DA action revolvers and semiautomatics makes as much sense and installing air brakes on jet planes.
My Sig "P" series semis do not have safeties.
Glock does not have external safeties unless you want to consider its trigger safety an external safety.
I've researched to heck out of the new and improved Python. It is a DA revolver sans safeties and designed to shoot .357 Mag rounds.
What is sad is some 40 years ago an extremely prominent So Cal gunsmith (I want to say Terry Tussey, but I can't be sure.) told me to buy an S&W Model 27. He said it was the best quality revolver on the market. He told me that the then Python was plagued with firing mechanism problems. I should have bought a Model 27.
While this might sound harsh, it is my opinion based on my experience with S&W revolvers manufactured after the sale to a British firm. S&W revolvers expensive junk. I would never risk my life to one. I have never relied on any handgun with an external safety to save my life. Furthermore, it's attempts to rationalize a lock on a DA revolver were dandified lies.
I've called Colt to verify its Python does not have a lock or external safety. It has neither. The Colt rep told me that the new Python (Python 2.0) is a superior version of the original. He assured me that it had been .357 Mag round tortured tested to fire thousands of magnum rounds. He assured me that the Python 2.0 passed the torture test with flying colors. He assured me that the Python 2.0 was stronger than the original. Finally, his opinion was that the DA firing system of the Python 2.0 was superior and more smooth than the original. He sold me. I bought a blued copy. He assured me that Colt will warranty my Python against any/all defects.
I've always loved Python's exceptional DA/SA trigger. But I could not pull the trigger on one after I was told some 40 years ago about its reliability problems. Now that those problems have been rectified, I had to pull the trigger on one.
My Python will not be a bipedal self-defense weapon. It will be a wilderness survival handgun when chasing trout in the Rockies. I might buy an Anaconda before CA's 11% handgun purchase tax is implemented. My concern with a .44 Mag out of a fishing-convenient 4" barrel is sight picture retention. I'm not convinced that the meanest griz with designs on my kids could withstand 6 180 grain .357 Mag rounds. But the very soon to be implemented 11% tax could push me in the direction of an Anaconda.
I am truly saddened by the deterioration of S&W quality control and its submission to politicians who wanted S&W to add an unnecessary external lock to its firearms. DA revolvers do not need external safeties. Neither do DA semis with decockers.
Of course, the aforementioned is merely my opinion that's shared by millions of other revolver aficionados.
Had I had been clairvoyant some 40 years ago and bought a Model 27, my post would be moot.
BTW, about a year ago, I saw an approximate 50+ year-old pristine 4" Model 27 with an asking price of $2500. The salesman told me that it was a steal at $2500. I doubt that a box of ammo was fired out of it at a paper target. It's bluing was artistic. It was the quintessential wilderness survival weapon. I probably should have bought it. But I have no remorse arising from dropping Bengies on a new, blued, 4" Python. It will accompany me on all wilderness trips where probability of crossing paths with a carnivorous beast is statistically significant.
Comment