Colt revolvers

[CajunBass]

Even if (NOTE the word "IF") Colt did "abandon" the civilian market back then, it was a LONG time ago. Anyone involved in that decision is in all likelyhood, retired or dead. Blaming them now for something that happened then, makes as much sense as blaming Ruger for something old Bill said back then.

But I suppose if you just want an excuse to be mad, that's as good a reason as any.

 

[ArchAngelCD]

I guess I'm done here because this is getting personal. First, no one here knows if I know anything about business or not. Second, I'm not "mad" at anyone. I do however choose where to spend my money and if another company seems to be more responsive to my needs and possible future needs, that's where I will spend my money. No anger or hatred involved.

I wonder how many of the people on forums who talk down to others would do so face to face?

I'm done here...

 

[Driftwood Johnson]

Howdy

Ya know, there are plenty of nice old Colts on the used market. Granted, the Pythons are few and far between, but I pick up used Colts almost as often as I pick up used Smiths. Just last year I picked up a fabulous New Service chambered for 45 Colt,






a terrific little 32 Police Positive with the box,





and a nice old Official Police (sorry no photo yet), and this terrific old Bisley Model in 38-40. And every one of them cost less than a brand new gun probably would, with the possible exception of the Bisley.



There are lots of great old Colts (and Smiths too) out there. I really don't see the need to pine for brand new ones.

 

[Jim K]

Nice old model New Service! Not many of those around in that condition.

Colt pulled out of the DA revolver market because their guns were not selling. They required too much hand fitting and were simply too expensive. As Dpris says, it was not a matter of "abandoning" the market; Colt could not compete using their antiquated design and obviously continuing to lose money was not an option.

Colt underwent a number of reorganizations and changes of management after WWII, but all seemed to have one thing in common - they always seemed to miss the market. They dropped the SAA after WWII, just before the first "cowboy" craze hit. Ruger made money by getting out an advanced design. Colt abandoned plans for a .44 Magnum, just as the "Dirty Harry" movies took off. S&W made tons of money; Colt got nothing. Colt threw money at a 9mm pistol that was just plain no good; they lost, big time. They bought and produced a DA pistol that was at best mediocre; they lost money on that. And they were always a big step behind other companies, domestic and foreign.

Colt knew about polymer frames; they could have had the Glock market, but chose to stick with versions of the 1911.

By the time they did come out with a modern DA lockwork, they had neither the money nor the interest in improving and promoting it. It was simply easier to throw in the DA towel than to try and work out the bugs in the new guns.

Jim

 

[content]

I think these rumors get started by the same folks telling me my old Colts will go down in value once it happens...better sell the old ones now....sure I will lol.

 

[BSA1]

Colt underwent a number of reorganizations and changes of management after WWII, but all seemed to have one thing in common - they always seemed to miss the market. They dropped the SAA after WWII, just before the first "cowboy" craze hit. Ruger made money by getting out an advanced design. Colt abandoned plans for a .44 Magnum, just as the "Dirty Harry" movies took off. S&W made tons of money; Colt got nothing. Colt threw money at a 9mm pistol that was just plain no good; they lost, big time. They bought and produced a DA pistol that was at best mediocre; they lost money on that. And they were always a big step behind other companies, domestic and foreign.

Colt knew about polymer frames; they could have had the Glock market, but chose to stick with versions of the 1911.

By the time they did come out with a modern DA lockwork, they had neither the money nor the interest in improving and promoting it. It was simply easier to throw in the DA towel than to try and work out the bugs in the new guns.

Jim K gives an excellent summary.

Colt was for many years was and still is a poorly managed company. It’s civilian product line is small, lacks innovation in a saturated competitive market.

1911’s – it’s easier to name companies that don’t make them now and the buyer has a large choice of guns in every price range.

AR’s – S&W cornered the low end entry market with the Sport. Like the 1911 the field of manufacturers making AR’s is wide open.

Single Action Army – highly overrated piece of junk. I brought a new one around 1996 for $1,100, The quality control was so poor first all the nickel peeled off. The chamber throats were so large even Bob Munden couldn’t get it shoot well. The throats measureg .456 – 457”. I sent the gun in and Colt returned it untouched with a note saying it was within specs.

I don't have a dog in this fight but the bottom line is Colt abandoned the civilian gun market. They have made feeble attempted to reenter the market. Colt had a couple of duds with the All American 2000 and the Cowboy. I did get to handle a Cowboy and thought it was a well made gun for the growing CAS market. For some reason they never brought it to market.

Then they, along with S&W, further alienated gun owners by jumping on board with Clinton’s smart gun technology program. S&W learned from the anger of gun owners and changed their position.

No company can grow when they ignore R&D and market trends. The concealed carry market has totally passed them by save the Mustang .380. Other than Government contracts Colt is surviving by living off it’s name.

Just for the record I have purchased several Colt handguns over the years in addition to the SAA. I like their revolvers and am always on the lookout for nice used ones.

 

[contender]

Colt. I guess i always sort of put them on a pedestal. The name, quality, and of course the history and lore of the company.

As mentioned, Colt had some union problems, and also suffered under some union strikes.

Colt did bail out on the DA revolver market but at that time the DA auto market was where the money was at. Colt tried with the All American 2000 and the Double Eagle but both failed in the market place.

Colt could not compete. Call it money problems, union problems, labor intensive product design/manufacture, or poor marketing and bad management.

I expect my Colts to be a cut above any S&W in fit and function. It has to do with that name.......Colt....and my own mythical perception of the product and that little pony emblem.

Colt merely cut back the dying limbs to save the tree.

They lost market share. They are not setting the world afire with new innovative designs. They are now a minor player in a very large handgun market.

And Colt is relying on their name recognition and that little pony emblem for a large segment of their sales. Can't blame them for that. Right or wrong, I still put COLT on a pedestal, moan about what was, Cuss the collector prices, and buy Rugers and Smiths instead because of availability, variety, innovation, and price.

 

[CraigC]

I guess I'm done here because this is getting personal. First, no one here knows if I know anything about business or not. Second, I'm not "mad" at anyone. I do however choose where to spend my money and if another company seems to be more responsive to my needs and possible future needs, that's where I will spend my money. No anger or hatred involved.

I wonder how many of the people on forums who talk down to others would do so face to face?

Don't be upset. Nobody is talking down to you. We just think you're taking things personally that you shouldn't.

Single Action Army – highly overrated piece of junk. I brought a new one around 1996 for $1,100...

Well know, I'm brutally honest about Colt and their guns but the SAA's from the last few years are a vast improvement over any prior 3rd generation. I still think USFA was a better gun for less money but they are doing a good job with the new SAA's.

 

[BSA1]

Peeling nickel finish and oversize chamber throats. Slap me silly and call me Shirley.

I love the size and handling of the SAA but before I buy another one it is going to a gunsmith for specs check.

 

[Driftwood Johnson]

They have made feeble attempted to reenter the market. Colt had a couple of duds with the All American 2000 and the Cowboy. I did get to handle a Cowboy and thought it was a well made gun for the growing CAS market. For some reason they never brought it to market.

???

They certainly did bring it to market. The Cowboy was designed to compete with Ruger single actions at about the same price. I got to shoot one once. At first the Cowboy suffered from quality problems, and it gained a bad reputation. Colt eventually cleaned up the problems, but the die was cast and the bad reputation stuck, so it was withdrawn from production.

Oversized chamber throats is nothing new with the SAA, 2nd Gens tended to have oversized chamber throats too. I have a 2nd Gen (45 Colt) with throats around .455 or so. I shoot Black Powder with dread soft, pure lead bullets from it and it does fine. It's the bottom one in this photo.

 

[content]

Driftwood Johnson...I notice you are using BP in a 2nd gen.

I use modern (store bought).45lc rounds in my Original Colt SAA Bisley 4 3/4" with no problems so far.
Should I be more cautious?

My Gun Smith tells me the revolver is sound and in great shape but you are the expert.

Sorry if this is not in line with the thread.

 

[Driftwood Johnson]

I shoot BP in my Colts because that is what I shoot in CAS. No problem with Smokeless in a 2nd Gen.

However................it depends on how old your First Gen is. Colt did not factory warranty the SAA for Smokeless powder until 1900. Colts made prior to 1900 should only be fired with Black Powder. Yes, plenty of folks shoot them with Smokeless, but that is the straight scoop from Jerry Kuhnhausen who wrote the book on working on the Single Action Army.

Do you know when yours was made? Serial Numbers for 1900 started with 192,001. Prior to that time, Colt was not confident in their steel to withstand the pressures of Smokeless powder.

 

[content]

TYVM,,,mine was manufactured in 1907 according to Proof House (ser # 3023XX) and is one of my favorites to shoot.

I don't shoot box after box but do shoot half a dozen cylinders before switching to the Jager Dakota.


I should have realized you were using BP for a task, not because of a lack in confidence in the 2nd gen revolver....dumb...lol

 

[Old Fuff]

I shoot BP in my Colts because that is what I shoot in CAS. No problem with Smokeless in a 2nd Gen.

However................it depends on how old your First Gen is. Colt did not factory warranty the SAA for Smokeless powder until 1900. Colts made prior to 1900 should only be fired with Black Powder. Yes, plenty of folks shoot them with Smokeless, but that is the straight scoop from Jerry Kuhnhausen who wrote the book on working on the Single Action Army.

Do you know when yours was made? Serial Numbers for 1900 started with 192,001. Prior to that time, Colt was not confident in their steel to withstand the pressures of Smokeless powder.

Yes and no. The problem is that those older cylinders were made from softer steel, and the bar stock they were made from often had seams in them.

But after World War Two both the Colt factory and private gunsmiths converted a lot of these older revolvers to .38 Special (usually recommended) or .45 Colt. The guns themselves were not altered unless it was necessary, and could be changed back by switching cylinders. New barrels of course were fitted when required to match the new cylinder.

Colt at least, smokeless proofed any conversion they made.

But for guns still in they're original state, your observations are absolutely correct.

 

[benzy2]

I find it odd, though not totally unbelievable, that Colt couldn't keep up with demand for AR's and 1911's, yet they were on the edge of financial collapse. It's not a typical trend that you are selling more than you can make while losing money. That tends to not be the case, though I suppose stranger things have happened.

I will say Colt doesn't owe me anything, and if they want to change to making typewriters, that's their choice. I'd enjoy (and buy) an SAA that was priced to compete near a Ruger Vaquero. I'm not enough of a single action shooter to pay the premium for a name.

For DA guns, I will stick to skepticism, regardless of what others have heard. It doesn't make sense. Revolver sales/trends are down. For them to retool, retrain a new generation to make a quality piece, and then be competitive is hard to believe. What price point are they planning? The Colt brand commands the upper price range for mass produced factory firearms. That would put them around the $900-$1000 mark with their entry level revolvers, and more for more options. Seems hard to believe they will find a lucrative market there now, when revolver demand hasn't rebounded from the days they found the idea not worth the time and money at the mkIII and mkV days.

The true die hard fans won't buy because it isn't the old ones. The budget/mass produced buyers won't bite because Ruger will offer a cheaper option that is durable and reliable. Maybe some of the S&W buyers will make the bump, but S&W makes so many options today that its hard to see Colt getting much market penetration with only a few introductory models. Even then, I have troubles seeing that crowd jump ship completely, which it seems like they would need.

So who is going to be buying these? Who will buy these in enough volume? If they are priced $1000-$1500 would you buy one? What about $750-$1000 and full of sintered/MIM parts with a lock? What about $500-$750 made out of country? I just don't see it or how a company that's already once decided such an idea wasn't profitable would see things vastly different today to go through the effort/cost to bring it back.

 

[evan price]

Bringing back a COLT DA revolver into production now makes even less sense than it did when they decided to discontinue making them years ago.
Back then DA revolvers were still a viable possibility for some departments but the writing was on the wall that the semi auto was going to replace it.
Today, a DA revolver is really nothing more than a leisure gun for the hobbyist or sports shooter. There's not going to be any massive contract sales to justify production of the tooling and facility and trained personnel. It's going to be more or less the S&W Custom Shop type of product, highly engineered and precision finished, guns for sports events or hunting or for people who have shotguns that cost more than any one of my trucks. (Well, that's not saying much). Kinetic sculptures rather than work-a-day firearms. So any decision comes from a doubly weakened position. Back in the 90s they still had the tooling and the shop and some people who knew how to make them. And they still decided to end production. Now they would have to start over from scratch with new tooling they would have to justify expense for. And without a massive contract of guaranteed sales to offset that outlay I don't see it being financially viable.

 

[HexHead]

A friend of mine was told by a S&W rep just a few years ago at SHOT, that the number one produced handgun they made was still the Model 10, produced for foreign police departments, largely in Asia. Gun forums can be so myopic, only focusing on domestic civilian markets. We don't know what we don't know.

 

[evan price]

@ hexhead: colt couldnt compete with s&w model 10 on a price basis. Again, the sunk costs are long since recouped by s&w on the m&p revolver and they can sell at low cost if need be. Those types of contracts are great for covering expenses but the end product has to be at a price point the customer will accept.

 

[Old Fuff]

... a DA revolver is really nothing more than a leisure gun for the hobbyist or sports shooter. There's not going to be any massive contract sales to justify production of the tooling and facility and trained personnel. It's going to be more or less the S&W Custom Shop type of product, highly engineered and precision finished, guns for sports events or hunting or for people who have shotguns that cost more than any one of my trucks. (Well, that's not saying much). Kinetic sculptures rather than work-a-day firearms.

I agree with you with one exception. They're is still a strong market for small-frame/.38 Special or .357 Magnum snubbies.

However should Colt go in that direction they would be up against Smith & Wesson, Ruger and Taurus who already have extensive lines of product that are fully tooled and in production - and an established customer base. For Colt this is a formidable situation that they'd better look at very carefully before they make any decisions.