[intimidator]

In looking at a possible .44mag purchase, I have been looking at the Colt Anaconda since I was always impressed with the old .357 Colt Python even tho I never owned one. I find this board hardly acknowledges the existance of the Colt Anaconda. Is this due to sky high prices or is it a quality issue?

[BigG]

I don't think so. For one thing, Colt has never sold the volume of revos that S&W has. The Python is one of the best 357 Magnums made, imho. I believe the Anaconda has later model lockwork like a Mark III Trooper. Supposed to be more robust than the older clockwork lockwork in the Colt DA revos.

Another reason might be the price. How many posts do you see about the best ____ available? Then they qualify it by saying less than $3-400. Those are the R____ and T_____ customers. Many more of those than Python or other snake buyers!

[Jim March]

The other thing hurting the Anaconda sales is that the 44Mag is now mostly considered a "woods gun" caliber, as projectile quality has made "lesser" calibers very viable for self defense.

So if it's a woods gun, why not go SA? Seriously - which is more practical, a Ruger Hunter model or better yet, a Freedom Arms 5-shooter versus an Anaconda? Hmmm, just checked prices, sure enough it's the same ballpark as a lower-end FA in 44Mag or even 454. Which is gonna be more accurate? (Hint: I'll bet on the FA any day of the week, and a Hunter with a $30 Belt Mountain base pin would be in the chase too.)

[caz223]

My feeling is that ruger makes a fine weapon in .44 magnum.
If you want double action the more robust guns available are also Rugers, and Dan Wessons.
S&W (6)29s and Colt anacondas are as delicate in .44 mag as I want to get.
While the Anaconda feels better to me (Both SA, and DA) than the smith, and will prolly handle the same loads as a S&W, but they are not to be man-handled.
Anacondas are very precision guns, and a .44 mag woods or trail gun gets bumped, jostled, and beat up in a holster.
They simply aren't designed to be as abuse friendly as a Ruger.
If you can handle treating a .44 magnum with "kid gloves" then anacondas are very fine weapons.
But currrent anacondas are either used and expensive, or $1000.00 custom shop weapons, and I just can't let a gun like that get abused.
Net result: safe queen. Shot once a year, or less.
That's my take on it.

[caz223]

Pythons are in the same class, except a little stronger for their size.
Excellent lockwork, excellent trigger in SA and DA, and excellent accuracy potential, but still expensive guns, and still a little more fragile than a smith 686.
About the same accuracy as a Dan Wesson, just somewhat more fragile.

[Standing Wolf]

I've looked closely at three new stainless steel Pythons in the past few weeks. All three had truly terrible single and double action pulls. Two were badly finished, and one was finished about as well as the average Ruger. To judge by those three, the Python of today is not up to Python standards.

The Anaconda isn't, never was, nor ever will be a Python. Its action is much more modern, but no improvement upon the Smith & Wesson N frame. I've looked at three or four, and none was worth the asking price.

Current production Colt revolvers aren't worth my money; older Pythons are another story altogether.

[Jack T.]

The Anaconda in my safe is alive and kicking! I take it out on a pretty regular basis and run pretty light handloads through it. They are simply gorgeous guns. . .

[Vern Humphrey]

The Anaconda isn't all that delicate -- it will handle loads in .45 Colt as stiff as those the Ruger Blackhawk will handle.

I have a Blackhawk and a Colt New Service. If I ever run across an Anaconda in .45 Colt at a decent price, I'll jump on it.

I think the Anaconda's "problem" is that it isn't a production gun anymore, and wasn't in production very long -- there are few of them out there, compared to Smiths, and consequently, few people have any real experience with them.

[Jeff OTMG]

I had an Anaconda and there was a quality problem. I had to crank the rear sight all the way to one side to get it to shoot straight. Come to find out, Bill Laughridge consulted to Colt and found out that in the cost cutting they had gotten rid of the millrights. If you don't know what a millright is they are the guys who insure the mills and lathes are set up correctly before a machining operation. The mill table that Colt made the Anaconda frames on was found to be 2 degrees off. When a barrel was screwed in it was pointing off to one side. It was obvious when Bill dropped a 3 ft wooden dowel down the barrel and the dowel was pointing off to the side.

[Jim K]

Colt has been on a roller coaster for years, usually being owned by people who cared nothing about guns and just wanted to bleed the company to line their own pockets. The company has not been a player in the revolver market since the 1960's, when their prices went up and police turned to S&W.

Then they made a series of mistakes. They declared the SAA dead and scrapped the machinery. Then they tried to revive the gun, too late for first "cowboy gun" craze. They wouldn't spend bucks to design a .44 Magnum, so they missed the"Dirty Harry" craze. They missed the second "cowboy action" craze. They let quality drop on the GM and missed the Model 1911 craze, etc.
And for years, their revolvers worked on an obsolete and tricky system that would not stay in time and had to be hand fitted at an enormous production cost.

They blew it all the way around, with the result that they have about ceased any revolver production and have little left except the Cowboy and versions of the Government Model. A sad comedown for an old company. But the slide is downhill. They sell fewer guns so they raise the unit cost so they sell fewer guns, so they raise.... You see where that goes.

But the gun business is both conservative and faddish. Colt has not been able to produce traditional guns for conservatives at a reasonable price. And they have not been able to produce new idea guns for the faddists; their efforts have consistently failed.

A sad state for an old company.

Jim

[Watchman]

I guess I'm one fo the lucky ones.

I got it when they first came out, mine was 400 bucks.

It shoots like a dream and I shoot it alot, mostly at targets and steel plates.

I have a load developed for it that is extremely accurate, its a 245 LSWC moving right at 1000 fps . I can hit a ballcap all day long at 100 yards with it.

The trigger is exellent. I have been trying to whack a deer with it, but so far have been unsucessfull.

I think I'll keep it...:D

[Majic]

A Anaconda is every bit as strong as the Rugers. I have one in .45Colt and it can take a beating with heavy loads. Some have said that the .44mag version is one of the most accurate .44mag on the market.
By the way, a millwright does set up metal machining. A specialized millwright known as a machinist. This is the same man who runs the mills and lathes. A true millwright is no more than a mechanic who works on machines. The term originated when a man could build a pump to use water as his work force to operate the wood mill he built. There are many specialized millwrights known by various names, but they all have common knowledge of machinery.
Colt's problem was money. No capital was invested in the machinery and tooling. Time constraints forced the workers to cut out the exra work put in the more complex actions of their handguns to try and compete with everything else on the market. Plus Colt's management kept most of their attention on their military contracts.

[munk]

This is the first I've heard the Anaconda should be handled delicately. It was available in 45 colt, and as one poster said, fully capable of Ruger loads. The ones I've handled and fired have seemed stout.

The lockwork is the last dirivative of the Trooper line and is not Python in any way. It is not delicate, nor is it Python like in trigger. I've read pretty much the same lockwork was in the Cobra.

IMHO, the reason the gun failed was because the 44 market was already taken by excellent models from two major companies. Colt did not have what it took to stay with the project.


I'm just sorry the detective special is gone.
If I had a colt I'd keep it if it shot but I sure as heck wouldn't pay a premium for a pony on the side of the gun. I think people are crazy. For all the romance and cult of the Python, I've read a knowledgable person can destroy the timing and other features in five minutes of deliberate misuse. A great gun, not my style.

munk

[Leaky Waders]

Intimidator et alia...I find that on internet forums like these...the more expensive an item is...the less practical experience in actually handling the item.

That's why you find many posts concerning taurus/ruger/used smith's/remington 870's etc...all great tools.

But, if you're looking at a high dollar item - a colt saa, aya shotguns, etc...you'll find few people can (or are willing) to afford batteries of these kind of weapons.

As for the anaconda - I saw a used one the other day in very good shape. I preferred a S&W mountain gun to it though - no real reason, mainly personal preference.

v/r,
L.W.

[caz223]

I didn't say they couldn't handle fairly heavy loads, I just wouldn't want to drop them down the steps, or smack the crane around too much.
Examine the crane of your anaconda next to an N-frame smith, and you'll see the N-frame has more metal than the colt.
And rugers are tougher yet.
But the problem is-the action feels so good, and the triggers are so nice, that you get spoiled after a while, and don't want to shoot your rugers any more...
I would guess that a new crane for an anaconda wouldn't be cheap, and a local smith wouldn't take the job or couldn't get the parts...

Also, the last time I shot my friends' anaconda side-by-side with my bisley-vaquero, I noticed that with the exact same loads, the ruger had about half the recoil.
That, in itself is not good or bad, just different.
It leads me to believe that if I were handloading for the anaconda, I wouldn't shoot really hot loads through it, and would save them for the ruger.

[munk]

Also, the last time I shot my friends' anaconda side-by-side with my bisley-vaquero, I noticed that with the exact same loads, the ruger had about half the recoil.
That, in itself is not good or bad, just different>> caz


I fired the anaconda next to Ruger Superredhawk 44. I noticed the recoil was much worse in the Anaconda. Another friend, though, thought the Anaconda was fine, so I chalked it up to different grip and body types liking different things.


munk

[intimidator]

With the same loads and Revolver weight, why would there be a significant difference in recoil between the Ruger and Colt?

[BigG]

A single action revolver due to its shape has less apparent recoil than a saw handle DA revo in the same chmabering. That's why a lot of guys like to shoot heavy loads in SAs, not so many like it in DAs. Think of the 454 Casull. Now think of it in a saw handled DA. :eek:

[Majic]

Like Munk replied, felt recoil is subjective to peoples taste, and grip design is a major player in the factor. Take the same load you fired in the side by side comparison of the Anaconda and the Bisley Vaquero, then fire it in a Ruger Blackhawk and a Ruger Super Blackhawk. I'll bet you will have different felt recoil with each gun.

As far as strength of the cranes, they both use differnt action styles. Smiths have always had the lock at the end of the ejector rod to help the crane because the cylinder rotated counter-clockwise. Colt's rotate clockwise and the crane is under less stress compared to a Smith. Remeber the older Colt's had the ejector rod that just hung under the barrel unsupported.

[caz223]

For the third time, I'm not talking about the strength of the loads they can handle, I'm talking about rough handling. :rolleyes:
Since you want to bring it up...

Anyway, in the reloading manuals, for high power loads, why do they have the disclaimer: For ruger, freedom arms, and thompson/center contender only.
They are not to be used in any other make or model of firearm!!
They even mention freedom arms specifically.
A different manual includes marlin and winchester rifles, T/c contenders, and rugers.
Why don't they include anacondas?
I know...

Here's a link to an article which underlines the dangers:
http://www.chuckhawks.com/high-pressure45.htm

snip
The authors of the major reloading manuals were aware that there are modern guns other than the Blackhawk and Contender that are chambered for the .45 Colt cartridge. These include not only the Colt Single Action Army, Colt Cowboy, and the various replicas thereof, but the DA Colt Anaconda, Ruger Redhawk, aforementioned "N" frame S&W, and others. But no exception is made for any of these guns, not even the excellent Anaconda and Redhawk. Clearly, FOR BLACKHAWK AND CONTENDER ONLY means just that!
snip

[WebHobbit]

Are Colt Revolvers DEAD?

Pretty much...yeah.

:D

[Dave T]

Are Colt Revolvers DEAD?

Recent and current production probably should be if they aren't already.

Older Colts, from a generation or more back, will live forever. There is nothing like an First Generation SAA, a New Service, or any of the earlier DAs (Official Police, Police Positive, Detective Special, Officer's Models, etc).

[munk]

The authors of the major reloading manuals were aware that there are modern guns other than the Blackhawk and Contender that are chambered for the .45 Colt cartridge. These include not only the Colt Single Action Army, Colt Cowboy, and the various replicas thereof, but the DA Colt Anaconda, Ruger Redhawk, aforementioned "N" frame S&W, and others. But no exception is made for any of these guns, not even the excellent Anaconda and Redhawk. Clearly, FOR BLACKHAWK AND CONTENDER ONLY means just that!
snip>>

Actually, no, it does not mean just that. Most data was compiled when the only alternatives where the Thompson and the Ruger single action. Colt chambered 45's were uncommon, and Ruger didn't release one in 45 until years after that. Component companies do not always go back and retest quickly as the market changes.

The exclusion of the N Frame .45 Smith does mean something, because it was available prior to the stronger guns, and was not deemed in that category.


munk

[Vern Humphrey]

The Colt New Service was chambered for the .45 ACP, among other rounds. That gives just about the same chamber wall thickness as a .45 Colt chambering, and the .45 ACP is rated about 5,000 CUP higher than the .45 Colt.

Many experts (such as Brian Pierce) conclude the Colt New Service can handle loads a bit stiffer than the traditional loads, and there are publised loads that push a 250/255 grain bullet over 1,100 fps.

[caz223]

Even the new manuals that I have don't list the redhawk, dan wesson, anaconda, or smith.
And nothing specifically lists the anaconda...

[Vern Humphrey]

Try the June, 2002, edition of "Handloader" (Number 217). Brian Pierce's article, "Understanding the .45 Colt," discusses the Colt SAA, the Colt New Service, the N-frame Smith and Wessons and the Ruger Redhawk, as well the Blackhawk, Bisley, Vaquero and Freedom Arms Models 97 and 83.

He lists loads at five different pressure levels; 14,000 psi, 16,000 to 19,000 psi, 23,000 psi, 32,000 cup, and 50,000 psi. He specifically says the Ruger Redhawk can handle loads up to 50,000 psi -- which just about duplicates the .454 Casul in a shorter case

[caz223]

Which makes sense, because they chamber the super redhawk in .454 casull...
Where was the anaconda, if I may ask?

[Gerald McDonald]

Well my experience with millwrights has been that they are the guys who show up on the job and all their toolbox contains is 5 different sizes of hammers.

Caz223, corbon list the Anaconda as the same category as the Blackhawk when handling their 45+P magnum Colt.

Gerald

[Majic]

As a millwright, I have to add:

It ain't in the hammer........it's knowing where to hit. :neener:

[Jim March]

Cor-Bon's 45LC+P are a bit milder than the Buffallo Bores or some of the "Ruger ONLY!" loading data out there. That might make a bit of difference...?

[Vern Humphrey]

The Anaconda wasn't listed in Pierce's article -- which makes it a fruitful subject for someone else to write about.

[munk]

I will repeat that reloading companies, component companies, do not always go back and retest cartridge data immediately when new models are available for the cartridge. That costs money.

The watershed event was the Ruger Blackhawk. TC followed. Even this was met with resistance by many companies, (Speer comes to mind) said the brass wasn't strong enough anyway. With modern brass, like Federal or Starline, this was not a valid caution.

That "Blackhawk or TC only" became a mantra does not mean in the slightest that other fine firearms are not capable of the enhanced loads. Hornady specifically mentions not using older Colt SA or replicas: that is was the real concern of the component companies. When the first folks started using the hot loads in Winchester and Marlin levers, the companies would not back that right away either.

The N frame Smith was excluded even though it was available, That means something.

I've read the New Service Colts can be warmed, though not as hot as a Ruger.

I am getting a Marlin Cowboy in 38/55 I am going to reload to 375 Big Bore velocities. In another forum, I was attacked for this heresy, and everyone trotted out the reloading manuals as 'proof' it could not be done, despite virtually the same case in the EXACT same action. ( I noticed Layne Simpson loaded his Marlin 38/55 hot in the May ShootingTimes.)

It takes a while for new products to gain understanding in the community.

If Ruger sells enough of them, eventually a reloading company will include them in their hot data for the 45 Colt, and would have included the Anaconda had it remained upon the scene.

Does anyone doubt for a moment that a Dan Wesson, FRreedom ARms, Ruger, BFG or Anaconda couldn't handle the relatively moderate published loads for 'hot' 45's??

Please.


munk

[munk]

I guess the bottom line is if you explore a new cartridge/weapon combo before the major companies legitimize it, you're on your own. You'll either see your progress reported faithfully in print later or see mention of 'incautious reloaders who sometimes destroyed weapons or injured themselves."

Judgement is called for. Not all guns are created equal, any more than people.




munk

[Gerald McDonald]

Majic, when I razzed a millwright buddy about this one time he said "thats why plants have tool rooms, to supply us with what we need at home,er work" I think he was jokin.
Gerald

[Majic]

Gerald,
We get the butt end on alot of jokes. I've been called em all, hammer mechanic, millrat, grease monkey, etc. etc.
You want to know how to tell the age of a millwright? Count the number of rings on his butt (from sitting on upside down buckets). It's all in fun, besides when I get calls to fix something and the jokes start I just remind them I'm just there to fix what somebody else broke.
If it wan't for humor in life it would be too dull to endure.

P.S.
That's how we make sure the toolrooms keep up to date equipment. :evil:

[munk]

Majic,

What, exactly, is a Mill wright?

I know. I'm pretty ignorant. How is a millwright distinquished from others who operate equipment? (besides the rings on his butt)




munk

[Majic]

A millwright installs equipment, repairs it, and perform maintence on it. We also fabricate vessels, structures, most anything metal. We are better known as mechanics, but we can specialize in certain fields. There's not much in life that you will touch that did not first go thru the hands of a millwright.
Take your car to the shop, call someone to fix your clothes washer, call somebody to repair the pump for your well. All those people are millwrights to some degree.

[Jim March]

S&W uses different metallurgy (mainly heat-treat) on the N-frame 45s versus 44Mags.

Ruger on the other hand finds it cheaper to use exactly the same metallurgy on all the cylinders of the same model gun, and the same type and size of ratchet (the "steps" at the rear of the SA cylinders). So a Ruger 45LC cylinder is based on the very same part for the 44. For that matter, you can take a Blackhawk cylinder in something like 38-40 or 357 and ream it to 44Mag with no problems.

That's why N-frame 45LCs can't take the "hot stuff".

I don't know what Colt does on the Anaconda, in terms of varying metallurgy.

[munk]

Jim March: Interesting. I would still be afraid of the thin cylinder walls in the Smith. Bill Ruger stated his cast metal was stronger than an equal amount of forged. One wonders what is meant by 'stronger' and how 'equal amount' is measured, (volume or weight?) But anyone who has ever had reason to cut through Ruger revolver material just might take the Late Bill at his word.
Opinion?

Majic; "Millwright' sounds old english. I'm fascinated. I can't put up a shingle saying I'm a 'millright'. What are the steps? is there a formal licensure or apprenticeship?

Are millwrights specialized now, as are everyone else?
Are there millwrights in computerland?

What are engineers then? Design not application?


munk

[Majic]

Munk,
millwright originated before the industial revolution, so yes it is old european.
There is a four year apprentice program to become a skilled journeyman. You have to take math classes thru trigonometry, metalurgy, blueprint reading, machine repair, welding, hydraulics, and 1500 hours of on-the-job training. When you complete all of your training and pass all the evaluations you become certified with credentials that are accepted everywhere.
The auto mechanic who has to attend all the seminars to keep current can be called specialized, so can the diesel mechanic. Anyone who works on just one type of machine can be called a specialist. The most highly skilled and trained millwrights are machinist and tool & die makers. Riggers are millwrights, and since most crane operators started off as riggers they too are generally millwrights.
Millwrights are in the computer world (and the world of most everything else), but not as most people would see them. The millwright built the machines used to make the parts to assemble a computer.
An engineer takes an idea and transfers it to paper (blueprints). The millwright takes the blueprint and turns the idea into a product by building it.

There is alot of info about millwrights on the web. Here is one with a brief description:

http://www.careersconstruction.com/Jobs/mill/millprint.html