@Stephanie B
Educated Guess: If lockup only require 90% of the trigger’s travel, the extra 10% could easily start distorting the fitment of the parts involved in the process. Over torquing a screw would be a good analogy, assuming my guess is correct.
@fatdog
I really didn’t need a Python, but it was there. My wife was with me, and I had spent the past year talking about the Python. I have to be very careful about suggesting a gun purchase to her.
My opinion is worth what you paid for it but I prefer my King Cobra 3” to my 4” Python. It “feels” better, has a better trigger, and is noticeably less expensive. Just wish the sights were better but they are workable. And of course fix the “dent” in the trigger guard.Originally Posted by Stephanie B
Last edited by Coal Train; 07-15-2022 at 01:51 PM.
My 2” and 3” King Cobras certainly have a different trigger feel compared to the Python. I’m not real trigger picky with revolvers, so it comes down to which is easier to carry. The KC’s win that battle easily, but I’m carrying my 2.5” S&W 686+ this week. The Colt’s and S&W’s triggers couldn’t be more different, and I’d have to say the S&W’s snap in both directions is “better” IMO. I’m MUCH more accurate with the 686+, especially with magnum loads. The 4.25” Python and my 4” 686+ are equally accurate.
Both of mine do not exhibit any overtravel. Ther have been several people (that appear to have ties with the mothership) over on the Colt forum confirm that they fixed that in the 2020 model.
The Harrison sight set seems to be a big improvement but I am holding out to see what Kensight can offer. I have also been diligently working to make my 3-inch snake more like my Willy Clapp GP.
Agree, the KC and Python triggers are a little different. Although not nearly as different as a Colt is from anything else, most of my pre-2019 revolver experience was S&W and it took a few trips to the range to acclimate to the KC.
The two Colts fill different niches. The KC is a functional carry revolver, the Python is a work of industrial art. I carry the KC and it points very naturally for me, is light and easy to conceal, the trigger is well above average, the sights would be better if my eyes were 20 years younger but with a bit of white paint as an outline they're good enough. Almost a thousand rounds in it's been 100% reliable, and I'm probably taking it on a cross-country trip soon.
The Python is a range gun for me. I fully agree that the rear sights are the one thing holding back an otherwise excellent design and have said it here before. Could Colt have done better? Yes. Should they have gotten it right on a $1,500 revolver? Yes. Have I replaced the OEM sights on most of my semi-autos? Yes. It's annoying, but the more Pythons are sold the more incentive there is for folks to build better sights.
Is the Python worth almost twice as much? Each individual needs to answer that for themselves. Personally I'm happy owning both a KC and a Python.
From what Mr Wilson said, it was desirable to have some perceptible free movement of the cylinder to alleviate the wear on the hand. Colt may well have designed it to work under tension, but it may not be optimal for longevity. It sounds like Mr Wilson and whoever did the action work figured that point out, if they last as long as anything else when set up with the trigger stop, as he mentioned. It would appear to be a proper fitment issue with it holding in good alignment, but not under actual tension at the moment of firing. All of this gives me some hope for messing with Colts more. Id love to one day have one of the new Pythons, but I REALLY dont care for stainless guns, certainly not in the price range they represent. I cant imagine paying that much for a gun that Id not be able to simply enjoy looking at and handling it, dry fire and whatever. Im quite unable to do that with stainless guns. If the older ones can be made to last, Id far prefer a blued one.
Perhaps one day.
“Far better it is to dare mighty things, to win glorious triumphs, even though checkered by failure, than to take rank with those poor spirits who neither enjoy much nor suffer much, because they live in the gray twilight that knows neither victory nor defeat.”
― Theodore Roosevelt
I went to bed, and decided to compare triggers on my KC, Python, 686+, and an “Ultra Rare” M60 no dash. The Python’s trigger pull is extremely consistent all the way back. The KC is consistent as well, but I do reach a wall just before it breaks. The Smiths seem to let off half way through the trigger stroke, and I like that. The Smiths have a heavier trigger pull, but most of that weight is in the first 50% of its travel, and it certainly doesn’t stack at the end. They’re all nice, but if I were to just keep one, it would be a 686.
Here’s something I’ve been meaning to try for a while. Using my Lyman digital trigger gauge, I assist in pulling the trigger back halfway on the Python, and the 686+. Once I’m at the halfway point, only the trigger gauge is pulling the trigger. Both brands pull roughly 8lbs 10 Oz after the halfway point. Using the trigger gauge like a person without gun OCD, the Python quickly moves up 8lbs at the halfway point, then 9lbs 3oz. The 686+ quickly moves up to 11lbs 13 Oz, but let’s off very quickly after the halfway point.
Yvonne just joined the testing, and her finger said the Python rules, the 686 is definitely heavier, and the KC has too much trigger travel. I would agree with the KC assessment. Yvonne doesn’t care about the minutia, and just wants to shoot fast!
The discussion of price comes up at 9 minutes, and the Colt rep said the last 2002 Python was $1,082. He then said the new Python is a price reduction.
Last edited by FrankB; 07-15-2022 at 11:12 PM.
You may be in luck. It looks like Numrich has expanded their "new reproduction" hands to include the Python. So you can get parts (or, well, that part, ratchets are perpetually out of stock). I remember they started doing D-frames some years ago. I didn't know they were doing E- and I-frames as well.
Maybe a used-but-not-abused old .38 Army Special or .357 Trooper is in the cards after all...
Of course the Kuhnhausen manual shows that factory installed hands had 8 different inspection surfaces and devotes 5 full pages to describing them (compare to 2 pages for a Smith). I would consider cheating and have one of the handful of people still taking Colt work fit the trigger stop and new hand then keep the original as a spare.
I think the difference is in how the gun is being used. With the 2 stage trigger it's probably "perfect" for a bullseye shooter who is shooting relatively slow but it becomes a liability when running the DA at redline on a regular basis. When they came out I would guess PPC was the main "action pistol" sport and AFAIK it's not very fast at all compared to IPSC or USPSA.
Nothing so needs reforming as other people's habits - Mark Twain
Tact is the knack of making a point without making an enemy / Where is the wisdom we have lost in knowledge?
Anyhoo, if the Canadians do ban new handguns, maybe Colt can trim the barrel to a proper 4" tube.
If we have to march off into the next world, let us walk there on the bodies of our enemies.
Reply With Quote