Colt Python: Best .357Mag ever?

Whether it is the "best ever" is somewhat subjective. It is notable and desirable to collectors because of its striking styling and craftsmanship, its action in particular requiring careful hand fitting. I hated to have to part with my own (a 1982 six-inch satin stainless), but this was somewhat mitigated by its bringing nearly three times what I originally paid for it.

rscalzo said:

Carried a 686 for a few years and shot several 70's era Pythons. the Colts was heads and shoulders above the 686. The 686 was a utility tool where the Colt was a fine instrument. Smith never achieved the level of bluing that the Colt Royal Blue attained. Not in the 60's and 70's. That's what you paid for when buying a Colt at a higher price point.

Click to expand...

You think a gunmaker has to "achieve" a certain level of bluing? Have you ever seen a "S" numbered N-frame? I would say that S&W "achieved" the same level of bluing and even surpassed it.

well... much as I respect the Python and the old Dan Wessons, and love my k-frame S&Ws
I vote for the S&W 27 as #1

some part of the Python mystique being Colt advertising
some part of the Python mystique being "collectible"
mighty nice guns, though

PS
Korth... get real... for those kind of dollars, you could turn any handgun into the world's finest ever revolver
(if you have to ask the price... don't)

Best is subjective, I own Dan Wesson's in 357 and 44. I have the 2, 4, 6 and 8 inch for the 357. (2 and 4 inch for the 44)

I can run heavy loads through it, Dan Wesson was the big name in silhouette shooting (Power and accuracy) when that became the big sport. When we moved into semi autos sales in revolvers hurt DW. (We are seeing a resurgance in them, but we will prob never see DW make revolvers again)

But put the 2.5 inch barrel on it and its not a cute little conceal carry gun. The frame is big, the size of a S&W model 29 44 mag.

My 44 is a big gun.

So when you say the best, what criteria are you using?

(BTW, I would love to own one and will add it to my collection)

I think the python is the Cadillac of large-frame revolvers. Yes, they are expensive, and aren't made anymore, but one could still get one.

Collectable, accurate, smooth, from a company that 1st patented the revolver.
If you've never shot one, you don't know what your missing!

python is a very pretty gun but as covered allready can be a bit fragil side. Strongest, N frame s&w 357 , ruger redhawk 357 when made and dan wessons for overall abillity for accuracy and strength.

How does one define "best"? If you're talking about hunting or target shooting, that's one thing. If you're talking about combat and survival, that's another.

Durability & Design: The durability of the Pythons is is hampered by the gun's fussy timing. The Python's design is old, and Colt made no effort to beef up critical areas like the skinny ejector rod, the smallish pawl and ratchet. The pawls wear quickly because they're undersized. The grips also are very 1930s-era-ish, and are thick where they should be thin.

Accuracy: Although this is one of the Python's greatest strengths, S&W's 686 is most likely the Python's equal.

Beauty & Craftsmanship: Although a matter of opinion, this is where the Python shines. The bluing is astounding and it's almost too beautiful to shoot. But though the craftsmanship is top-notch, it doesn't necessarily make the gun the "best".

If I were looking for an overall great defense or survival gun, I'm going to end up with a S&W 686. For strict competitive use, the Python certainly is in its element; however, the 686 may be its equal, it has better grips, is better designed and doesn't go out of time as often as the Pyhon. It's also less expensive. On the other hand, the crafsmanship and accuracy are the strong points. If that's how you define "best," well, there you go.

I'd love to have a Python. They're gorgeous, they're accurate, they have an old-style look about them, and the frames are strong. But the grip design is similar to that of single action revolvers (thick where they should be thin and vice versa). Pachmayr and other companies tried to remedy it, but I like the beautiful wood grips that come with guns, especially those that came with the S&Ws.

As much as I like my Ruger Security-Sixes, I have to say the S&W 686 is the "best.

One of the prettiest. But that's pretty much it over the others IMO.

Depends on what the user finds most important in a gun.

I value reliability and durability the most.

Colt python is the third best double action revolver ever made........followed by the model 27....... followed by the GP100. Of course I am partial to Rugers

Hi again,

Again I think a Colt Python is pretty and I like to look at them. But I have some everyday shooting 357s that I feel will go longer with out need of "tuneup". Both of these my not catch the eye as much as a Colt but in the right shooters hands can be as accurate as a Python. They don't cost as much and won't go up in value as a Python but work just as well. Plus if you get a nick or scratch it won't be the end of the world. Below are my two all around revolvers plus two revolvers that will get the job done too.

Regards,
roaddog28
Ruger GP100 & Ruger Police Service Six

S&W 66-4

S&W 19-4

With the advent of the S&W 686, everyone and their brothers were doing accuracy comparisons between them and the Colt Python and Rugers. The Rugers tossed the 158gr bullets very well, but the Pythons and 686s were pretty much dead even with all ammo, and both did better than the Ruger with the lighter 125gr bullets.

The gun hacks went on about how 125gr JHPs were the best manstoppers and all, but I figured that hunters tend to use the heavier bullets, and Ruger always had a method to his madness.

I've never heard that Dan Wessons were particularly accurate -- they weren't inaccurate -- but I'm not aware of them being in the Python's league. I used to compare the reviews and the group sizes in the various magazines I trusted, and I did note that reviewers who reduced the B/C gaps in the Dan Wessons weren't able to get much improvement on their velocities. The various barrel lengths/frames also didn't tend to produce velocities up to par with handguns of other makes with the same barrel lengths.

Colt Python: Best .357Mag ever?

Click to expand...

No. For the simple reason you cannot field strip it. Anything that goes wrong must force a trip to a gun smith.

Best .357? Ruger Security Six. At least if you want to carry it often and far afield.

I do.

Deaf

Yes. Period. The end.

Deaf feels the Ruger Security-Six is the "best" gun because he places disassembly/reassembly as the chief aspects of magnumability. Again, it depends on what your own views are, but I agree with his choice for a few more reasons. Because of the Security-Six's 1) great strength; 2) moderate size; 3) ability to pick up quickly on moving targets; and 4) fieldstripping ability.

In short, if by "best" one means that if given a choice of which .357 one would personally choose if dumped out in the wilderness with 15,000 rounds of hot magnum ammo and had to depend on it all for the rest of his life. Not many, in my view, would pick a Colt Python or even a 686. Having said that, I think the Python is a bit more accurate, but I could hit clay pigeons at 100 yards with my Security-Six, and though cosmetically I preferred my 686 and probably would love a Python, I'd have to say that the 686 is a better gun than the Python in almost every respect except cosmetically, and even that is only a matter of taste.

If dropped into the wilderness with 15,000 hot magnum rounds of ammo, I don't think you would ever make it past 5,000 rounds without a Python going out of time. The frame would take the pounding just fine, but as that tiny pawl, or hand, began wearing, things would degrade rapidly. The cylinder would loosen considerably and the ratchet also would wear, making the problem worse.

In fact, if one person took a Ruger Security-Six and another person took two or even three Pythons, I suspect all three Pythons would not last as long as one Ruger. Now what some people have done is this: they have the pawls of their Pythons, as well as the ratchets, hard chromed. By doing this, neither the pawls or the ratchets wear significantly.

You don't have to hard chrome the entire gun, just these two parts; however, if your Python is showing some wear and you need to have it retimed anyway, you may as well consider hard chroming the entire gun. It does give the gun a nice, brushed stainless look, while making the gun tough as nails. In fact, a nail can't even scratch the surface.

Here's a chromed S&W Highway Patrolman. A hard chrome has a surface Rockwell hardness of about 61, IIRC:




And here's a stainless Ruger Security-Six, plus take down...:




...just follow the dots and reassembly is so easy a child could do it (note the massive size of the pawl/hand):





.

I like Ford over Chevy. The Vette is the exception.
I like S&W over Colt. The Python is the exception.

The real pity is that when Colt came back from the dead, they could have had some sort of meeting and improved the design. They could have beefed up the ejector rod and made the hand oversize. They might also have redesigned the ratchet. All this could have been done with very little effort.

Forty years ago, it was no big deal to get a Python retimed. Twenty bucks, tops. Now gunsmiths want $$$$ for jobs that used to be routine maintenance. The part is inserted into the gun, then it has to be fitted. Sometimes users would remove the pawl and then use a punch to ping the pawl tip on both sides. This would move the remaining steel upwards and the gun would go back into time. But as it wore, it would quickly go back out of time, so it wasn't a permanent fix.

They could have fixed these problems and produced a first-rate gun, but like many manufacturers, they were lazy.

I think Confederate said it best:

Beauty & Craftsmanship: Although a matter of opinion, this is where the Python shines. The bluing is astounding and it's almost too beautiful to shoot. But though the craftsmanship is top-notch, it doesn't necessarily make the gun the "best".

Click to expand...

Pythons look like they should be on display in a museum, they are easthetically VERY pleasing to my eye...

While I think the pythons have a nice trigger feel, the Smiths are just more to my liking.

If I had a Python it would ride safely in my safe (I know thats a sin, but could not afford to replace it, even if I could find another lol).

Bflobill69

Of course its personal preference, but I think not; the Python has fragile lock work and uncomfortable, un-ergonomic grips.

The Best? Smith 'Registered' Magnum.

Again, all personal preference. The Smith is the best because it is the best tool, and that is what a weapon is; is tool. The Python is simply a work of art (albeit a beautiful one), which makes it completely unsuitable as a true tool. And I happen to think the Smith R-M is more beautiful as well.

Pythons look like they should be on display in a museum

Click to expand...

A relic of uglier times? I realize I'm somewhat out of step regarding this but I always felt the Python was one of the most ungainly looking designs to achieve popularity. I suspect it's the combination of a full underlug and a sight rib that offendeth my sense of proportion, especially on longer barrels.

Perhaps someone could make a polymer version of the Python. The tough plastic could retain the shape, but a steel barrel could be inserted and a cylinder with a Glock-type finish baked onto it. It would retain the overall looks of the Python, and it could go for around a grand or so.

All Colt would have to do is follow Ruger's and S&W's leads.




Make the gun out of steel and polymer with a "monolithic frame," like Ruger does, and cut corners and pass the savings on to the board of directors, like S&W does!

It would be too big to fail!

.

Now, if they could just make plastic that had that deep, rich, high polish blued finish!

I have a 1959 Colt Python 6" royal blue given to me by my father in-law who bought it brand new, and fired a mere 12 rounds through it.

The thing is an absolute and true work of art.

I pull it out every once in a while just to admire the amazing quality and workmanship.

Of all my firearms, that's the one I will never part with.