Styx
Member
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2014
- Messages
- 3,282
Aren't the serrations on serrated triggers vertical? Not sure I understand what you're referring to when you're talking about the finger not moving
2020 Colt Python update at 1000 rounds
- Thread starter vanfunk
- Start date
Yes, they are vertical serrations. What I think UncleEd is referring to is the rolling of your finger against the trigger face as you pull threw the DA pull. The thinking is with a smooth rounded trigger, the rolling of your finger helps keep the sights on target better. The serrations help keep your finger from any movement against the trigger. The thinking there, I believe is to keep everything steady and locked in position for a short, light SA pull. I, personally shoot both semi autos and revolvers with the pad of my finger. Doesn't matter to me if the trigger has serrations or not. Hope that helps
Gordon
Member
From what I've heard from experienced gunsmiths about the new Pythons is; Colt improved on the old Mark 3 design that is very stout and doesn't go out of time and is much easier to "fit" , they used modern good steel with CNC instead of sintered metal MIM tho. After an internal polishing and fitted as customer requires they are VERY long term units that exhibit no future issues so far as they have seen, and some at Gunsite , for instance have tens of thousands of rounds thru them . They have terrible rear sights as mentioned and there are good aftermarket selections. The great news is : in the old days we sent our Pythons to top notch masters to tune for competition, and repeated the process many times over larger round counts and parts wore out and before that needed meticulus refitting. Also the New Pythons seem to have very good barrels that are well fitted.
No I am too old to buy one , my couple OLD pythons are still good enough if I shoot them . But guys I know who shoot alot of rounds thru revolvers and are in the business sware by them, after being "set up" correctly.
No I am too old to buy one , my couple OLD pythons are still good enough if I shoot them . But guys I know who shoot alot of rounds thru revolvers and are in the business sware by them, after being "set up" correctly.
The Sept 2023 Guns Magazine article I have on the new Colt Pythons claims the trigger and hammer are forged, but the rest of the internal parts are MIM. The author just gushes over the "quality" of the parts, but without objective material analysis and property testing, I am skeptical about the longevity of MIM parts.
Maybe a smart policy would be, buying extra internal parts, so if your 2023 Colt Python breaks after the next bankruptcy and/or closure of Colt, you have a means to keep it running.
STYX,
We will have to agree to disagree.
Because MASS. has legally required a 10 pound trigger, the gun maker is free from liability in MASS. This is not new, GLOCK has had the so-called NEW YORK triggers for a long time for the NYPD. All of these are from state or government required mandate. It is when the company on its own sells inconsistent triggers, that it would be in a liability issue.
Note: RUGER makes a great many GP-100 revolvers and they have mediocre triggers in my experience. They don't to be mediocre, instead RUGER also makes the Match Champion which in the guns I have examined, have very good triggers. So why not offer a better trigger option or just do the job right in the first place and make all their triggers smooth?
I know, it may simply be a money making plan, but REMINGTON got sued for a too easily fired trigger which was claimed to be defctive and we had hunting rifles with heavy triggers for years
until SAVAGE broke the unwritten rule and brought out a good trigger.
Jim
We will have to agree to disagree.
Because MASS. has legally required a 10 pound trigger, the gun maker is free from liability in MASS. This is not new, GLOCK has had the so-called NEW YORK triggers for a long time for the NYPD. All of these are from state or government required mandate. It is when the company on its own sells inconsistent triggers, that it would be in a liability issue.
Note: RUGER makes a great many GP-100 revolvers and they have mediocre triggers in my experience. They don't to be mediocre, instead RUGER also makes the Match Champion which in the guns I have examined, have very good triggers. So why not offer a better trigger option or just do the job right in the first place and make all their triggers smooth?
I know, it may simply be a money making plan, but REMINGTON got sued for a too easily fired trigger which was claimed to be defctive and we had hunting rifles with heavy triggers for years
until SAVAGE broke the unwritten rule and brought out a good trigger.
Jim
Styx
Member
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2014
- Messages
- 3,282
FYI: You name it, a firearm company has been sued at one time or another for it. Remington won that lawsuit that you referenced by the way. I know of no manufacturer that has lost a lawsuit over selling a handgun within a range of weights unless they were truly defective. I have seen Glock, Sig and other manufacturers sued (unsuccessfully) for allegedly having trigger pulls that were allegedly too light.
You kind of moved the goal post from your previous/orginal comment. Manufacturers do offer different weight triggers for states that require them. People are free to move into those states with their firearms that don't meet those standards and current residents of those states are free to change the trigger on their firearms as they deem appropriate. Furthermore, S&W and a bunch of other manufacturers offer different "upgraded" triggers on the same product lines S&W Performance Center triggers being one example.
Other than that, I've seen many post with YouTube videos as conformation that trigger weights do and can often be inconsistent from one example of a make and model to another; however, the trigger is typically within a range of 2lb +/-. I've participated in several threads on different firearm forums over the years where this has been the case, and where members would all have different experiences with the triggers on their examples.
Last, as I pointed out already in a previous post, there is nothing wrong or needs to be fixed with the Python trigger. It's a perfectly fine, usable, and severable trigger. Unlike the Ruger Match Champion and the S&W Performance Center triggers, the standard Python and it's trigger is not designed to be and never claimed to be an out the box competition revolver. How many years have gone by before S&W and Ruger offered a revolver geared towards competition use? Maybe Colt will offer a competition line in the future or maybe not. Give it time as the new Colts have only been out for around 5 or so years now. I typically an NOT a fan of changing springs and messing with the sear, and other components on self defense revolvers anyway, and in my experience with most firearms, the trigger will smooth out and lighten up on it's own with use.
IMHO, the Colt Python and King Cobra stock DA trigger is arguably better than a stock Ruger Match Champion and Performance Center trigger. Most people shoot and compete in DA anyway, so the Python trigger is still superior to the Ruger and Smith triggers. If some needs to upgrade their triggers, it's S&W and Ruger at the top of the list as their DA pull (which is the primary pull) isn't as nice. In any event, it's a non issue, and you're making a mountain out of an ant hill as Ruger, S&W, and Colt triggers can all be improved with minimum cost and elbow grease.
Last edited:
UncleEd
Member
I agree. (Therefor, Styx is a very wise fellow.
)TYX,
FYI, whn a company is sued and wins, it still costs them money. In some cases, that is the who point. S&W was blackmailed by the CLINTON Justice Department and then nearly run out of business because they caved into that blackmail. It was a lesson that many companies have taken notice of.
Jim
FYI, whn a company is sued and wins, it still costs them money. In some cases, that is the who point. S&W was blackmailed by the CLINTON Justice Department and then nearly run out of business because they caved into that blackmail. It was a lesson that many companies have taken notice of.
Jim
Old Dog
Member
Yeah, but ... no. I'm gonna go with what Mike Heffron (of Heffron Precision) says. It was also discussed a while back on the Colt Forum.
https://www.coltforum.com/threads/2020-python-does-not-have-mim-parts.403733/
So, according to Heffron, "the new Python is not made of “MIM” parts. It is made from forged and milled 17-4PH stainless steel. There are only three parts that are not cut or forged, but it is misleading to call them “MIM”. Pratt & Whitney makes these parts for Colt using the same process it uses to make its hollow turbofan military jet engines, a classified process. The parts are the transfer bar, the rebound lever and the cylinder locking bolt. These parts are hard “all the way through” and therefore do not wear differently when cut or polished. These parts also “shred” diamond files."
Here's what Heffron said in his blog:
The New Series Python addressed these issues by redesigning a few parts that simply would not improve with new steel or girth ... All of the other parts have added girth and improved metallurgy. The design between the old and the new is very similar, but with 3 areas of MAJOR redesign: Cylinder locking bolt-the old one was kind of a carry over from the SAA days. Cylinder ratchet-the old one did not completely enclose the cylinder locking pin. It only made contact at 6 points around the pin, plus the ratchet/ejector was threaded and peened to the ratchet stem. The new version completely encloses the locking pin. Also, ratchet stem/ratchet/ejector are a single machined piece. Lastly, the old version used a hammer block that upon trigger reset cammed the hammer rearward then a "hammer blocking device" would slide between the hammer and the frame preventing ignition if the gun was dropped. This required quite a few parts. More parts = more trouble. The new version uses a simple transfer bar. Far fewer parts. Between the frame being thicker in a few areas, heavier internal parts, better designed key parts, and new metallurgy, the new version is substantially stronger. Some stuff may not appear that much more "beefy", but remember: The New Series Python is using steel with tensile strength nearly 2X greater than the Old Series Python. Additionally, when dealing with girth alone, it only takes a 50% increase of mass to double the strength. Between girth, addressing the highly problematic areas, and the new alloy steel? OOOOF!!!!
... The New Series? Where does it fit in? It is a testimonial of double-action revolver execution. Lessons learned that made the old revolver vulnerable led to some redesign. Lessons learned which made the Python the most accurate 357 Magnum revolver in the world were carried forward into the new configuration. To these lessons unpresidented [sic] tolerances have been applied. Compared to any 20th Century double-action revolver, the old Python included, and compared to any double-action revolver produced today, the New Series Python exhibits the tightest specifications and tolerances where it counts. Chambers, throats, chamber spacing, cylinder alignment, headspace, b/c gap, bore specs. The New Series Python runs with it. This is because cutting-edge aerospace grade CNC machines (which are properly applied) make the parts (all of the same can be said of the New Anaconda as well-at their price points, the Cobra and King Cobra as well!) ...
So, there is an debate of which "expert" is correct? Since what we read in Gun magazines is advertising, Gunwriters coordinate and get their talking points on their reviews with the Gun Manufacturer's. And so do web influencers. So whose source of information is correct?
Heck if I know.
And what are the alloys in the New Series Python that give it twice the tensile strength of the bad old Pythons? For that matter, what was the steel used in the bad old Pythons? I would like to know that, these things interest me. Ambiguous statements do not fill me with a lot of confidence one way or another. Every bottle of laundry detergent is labeled new and improved, but how much better are they?
I would prefer that Colt stated the material technologies used in their pistols, than quotes from secondary or tertiary sources.
Styx
Member
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2014
- Messages
- 3,282
If it's any consolation, here's the direct quote from the article:
HandgunMag.com said:
It specifically states that ALL of the "Action Parts" INCLUDING the hammer and trigger are machined and NOT MIM, and not as you incorrectly stated which was ONLY the "trigger and hammer are forged, but the rest of the internal parts are MIM."
This further corroborates @Old Dog's source. I reckon this is another upgrade that makes the Python superior to the current crop of Ruger and Colt offerings that their fanboys will fail to mention when they're brainstorming for reasons to bash the new Pythons in favor of their beloved Smiths and Rugers. It also explains some of the extra cost associated with the Python.
New Smiths and Rugers are chock-full with MIM parts, but shhh it's not to be brought up or mentioned.
I guess it's back to complaining about the S/A trigger pull then???
Last edited:
Styx
Member
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2014
- Messages
- 3,282
Not to bash Ruger or S&W with MIM parts because I haven't heard of any on going or widespread reports of their parts breaking, and they're being used by competition shooters and as well as avid plinkers who have put several thousands of rounds through their examples. Also, Glocks and some of the most used, popular, and well regarded duty, police, and military pistols and rifles also have some MIM parts. HK is the only widely used commercial polymer pistol that I know of that does not use any MIM components, and they, like the Colt Python, are priced accordingly.
That said, it is true that machined parts will be stronger, more durable, and deemed higher quality than MIM parts; however, MIM components have more than proven themselves to be extremely durable and nothing to be concerned about if designed and manufactured correctly for use for non high stress parts.
That said, it is true that machined parts will be stronger, more durable, and deemed higher quality than MIM parts; however, MIM components have more than proven themselves to be extremely durable and nothing to be concerned about if designed and manufactured correctly for use for non high stress parts.
Old Dog
Member
Hah, there's not debate. And for me, I'd never go so far to claim any writers for a firearms periodical are "experts" (although there are a few who could be considered such).
Mike Heffron is a design engineer and master gunsmith with more years of experience as a revolver 'smith than many THR members have been alive. He's not a "web influencer," and one suspects he knows a bit more about revolvers than any gunwriter. He certainly does not get "talking points" for reviews from gun manufacturers.
Additionally, Bill Wilson has expounded on the "new" Python on a couple of his podcasts (along with Mas Ayoob, who knows a thing or two about revolvers himself). I will note that a lot of the YouTube gun guys (web influencers) seem to heap a lot of praise on the new Python. How about Ken Hackathorn?
https://youtu.be/HrLYZruNw_g
UncleEd
Member
How about Hackatorn, indeed. In 2020 he praised the new Python during its introduction.
Then in a November, 2022, video he and Bill Wilson of Wilson Combat discussed how much they
like the new Python (except the rear sight which now has replacements). Hackathorn
showed off his own personal 6-inch new Python along with his now favorite, the
3-inch new Python. It is the 3-inch model he shoots regularly. And as a prelude,
he does explain that he's been a S&W guy all his life.
You serious? Actually they are about $150 as a set. People buy more expensive firearms everyday and make upgrades...
vanfunk
Member
I bought the Wilson sight for $88 on sale, and the gold bead front for $60, I think. The gold bead was back ordered but will be here Monday. Also I didn’t “overhaul” the guts, I took out the hammer and sear and polished them lightly for 10 minutes. It dropped the SA pull by more than a pound. I really don’t consider these modifications to be egregious, nor am I offended that Colt didn’t provide these services for me. My $3000+ SCAR 17S had a horrid trigger (8 lbs of creep) and required a Geissele Suoer SCAR trigger to shoot to it’s potential. My S&W 66 had a 14lb DA pull. A little polishing and a spring change brought that to 10 lbs and its smooooth now. I could go on, but… the point is I have never had a perfect gun from the factory, except my Thomas Bland and Sons .470 nitro double rifle. Yes, it’s perfect.
vanfunk
Member
2000 round update:
I’ve been churning out handloads/reloads on my new Lee Six Pack Pro and burning them up in the Python. Mostly 158 grain coated SWC’s at 1250 fps. I also loaded up some 125 grain JHP’s I got on the cheap and juiced those up to about 1450-1500 fps (I still don’t have a chronograph, weirdly, but I’ll remedy that soon). The trigger continues to smooth out nicely in both DA and SA and, as I get more familiar with it, it’s shooting even better. My Wilson gold bead front sights came in for my Python and Anaconda and those have made a difference too. About the only remaining “issue” I have is that there’s a bit too much overtravel with the single action pull. It’s more than that of my Anaconda, so I’m not sure why it’s happening. A trigger stop would help things, so I may look into that, but it doesn’t appear to hinder it’s accuracy. There’s something really, really satisfying about ringing an 8” steel plate every time at 50 yards, double action. I know many can do that with their eyes closed, or at 200 yards, but for me, that’s really good shootin’. Love it.
I’ve been churning out handloads/reloads on my new Lee Six Pack Pro and burning them up in the Python. Mostly 158 grain coated SWC’s at 1250 fps. I also loaded up some 125 grain JHP’s I got on the cheap and juiced those up to about 1450-1500 fps (I still don’t have a chronograph, weirdly, but I’ll remedy that soon). The trigger continues to smooth out nicely in both DA and SA and, as I get more familiar with it, it’s shooting even better. My Wilson gold bead front sights came in for my Python and Anaconda and those have made a difference too. About the only remaining “issue” I have is that there’s a bit too much overtravel with the single action pull. It’s more than that of my Anaconda, so I’m not sure why it’s happening. A trigger stop would help things, so I may look into that, but it doesn’t appear to hinder it’s accuracy. There’s something really, really satisfying about ringing an 8” steel plate every time at 50 yards, double action. I know many can do that with their eyes closed, or at 200 yards, but for me, that’s really good shootin’. Love it.
UncleEd
Member
This forum and other forums have shooter reports on the
Python 2020. And I'd say all have been positive.
The absence of complaints by actual owners/shooters
is remarkable.
Colt just may be mass producing the best double action revolver.
Python 2020. And I'd say all have been positive.
The absence of complaints by actual owners/shooters
is remarkable.
Colt just may be mass producing the best double action revolver.
CajunBass
Member
UncleEd
Member
Note, back in July, 2022, I commented that I leaned toward
the King Cobra Target but I no longer feel that way. At the
time I found the Python I had gotten was "too heavy" for me.
But now with the 3-inch barreled version, I've found the
ideal Python--for me at least.
the King Cobra Target but I no longer feel that way. At the
time I found the Python I had gotten was "too heavy" for me.
But now with the 3-inch barreled version, I've found the
ideal Python--for me at least.
My only criticism of the new Python is the trigger, aesthetically. Like the profile of the older ones bettter.
Have a blued E series thats got holster wear, shoots fine. Has been shot a lot too.
But am thinking replace it with a new 6". But since I have a 6" blued, maybe "add" a 4" stainless new model.
But then if I get a Delta Elite then I won't need a 2nd .357.
Decisions, decisions.
Have a blued E series thats got holster wear, shoots fine. Has been shot a lot too.
But am thinking replace it with a new 6". But since I have a 6" blued, maybe "add" a 4" stainless new model.
But then if I get a Delta Elite then I won't need a 2nd .357.
Decisions, decisions.
UncleEd
Member
Don't like the grooved/serrated triggers on the Python 2020.
I'll "temper" mine with a Dremel. On the Colt Forum, a Colt
rep mentioned the factory has done some "smoothing" of the
trigger for some customers. But one can't go too far as the
grooves are deep and a risk exists of breaking the trigger.
I'll "temper" mine with a Dremel. On the Colt Forum, a Colt
rep mentioned the factory has done some "smoothing" of the
trigger for some customers. But one can't go too far as the
grooves are deep and a risk exists of breaking the trigger.
The Happy Kaboomer
Member
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2012
- Messages
- 386
Not one of the new ones............I have a 6in blue from the custom shop in 1980. $480.00 . Bought NIB............All it required was ammo.........All it still requires...........Can't beat the Elliason rear sight.
Old Dog
Member
Solely out of curiosity, then why disparage the new models?
