Page 8 of 132 FirstFirst ... 6789101858108 ... LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 1317

Thread: Colt Resurrecting the Python?

  1. #71
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    TEXAS !
    Quote Originally Posted by Gadfly View Post
    The two "red gun" rifles I had a FLETC to train guys with?? An HK-416D, and a COLT M-16 (not an A1, a no fence, no Forward assist, three pin, early 60s M-16). They were tossed around quite a bit. absolutely tragic.

    THere is a post somewhere archived on here, where i document being on a "gun destruction detail" for the feds. Two UHaul trucks full. It was tragic.
    Don’t forget all the CS-1 686 3” converted to red handles, and blank fire white handles.

  2. #72
    Quote Originally Posted by entropy View Post
    Farm and Fleet Rantoul, IL 1982. In the case sat a Dan Wesson 15-2 and a Colt Python. I had to make a decision. Being a poor college kid, I chose the DW,
    My late friend the crack shot said the Python was more accurate with Specials but the Dan Wesson was the most accurate Magnum he had seen. Which made them popular for IHMSA Revolver division. A sixgun at 200 meters is a challenge.

    Quote Originally Posted by Matt Helm View Post
    There was talk of Uberti toying with the startup of a Python clone. .
    I saw a picture of the Pietta clone of Python. As best as could be told, it was to the original design.

    Uberti made copies of D frame Colts at one time, including one pretty close to a Diamondback. Jan Stevenson said they were not the equal of a good Colt, but were better than a "Friday Afternoon" Colt. Decent quality, more consistent than Colt.
    Code Name: JET STREAM

  3. #73
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    TEXAS !
    Alleged photo of the new Python

    Name:  12E8D3DF-6EDA-459C-8207-F42F838C636A.jpeg
Views: 545
Size:  39.5 KB

  4. #74
    Grip fit is typical of outsourced revolver grips; they’re likely made by Altamont for Colt. The rest of the gun looks OK but I’d love to see closeups of the frame/crane fit, barrel/cylinder gap and the amount of space between the sides of the hammer and the hammer channel in the frame. All are places where inferior quality control will be evident.
    Last edited by oregon45; 01-01-2020 at 12:17 AM.

  5. #75
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    TEXAS !

  6. #76

    Ken Hackathorn’s Take



    Comparing it to the old Python, “In my opinion, this is a much better gun.”
    Last edited by FPS; 01-01-2020 at 01:39 AM.

  7. #77
    Site Supporter Totem Polar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    PacNW
    ”But in the end all of these ideas just manufacture new criminals when the problem isn't a lack of criminals.” -JRB

  8. #78
    Site Supporter HeavyDuty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Location
    Not very bright but does lack ambition
    Definitely interested.
    Ken

    BBI: ...”you better not forget the safe word because shit's about to get weird”...
    revchuck38: ...”mo' ammo is mo' betta' unless you're swimming or on fire.”

  9. #79
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Location
    South Louisiana
    Quote Originally Posted by HeavyDuty View Post
    Definitely interested.
    Me too. It sounds like they've actually listened to shooters on this one. I'll wait until reports from users come in, especially since $1500 means something(s) would have to go.

  10. #80
    Me three. There’s a 4” local to me (70s era I’m told), but I want a shooter

User Tag List

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •