4" Python vs. S&W 4" 27/28

[UncleEd]

This is a posting strictly for shooters
with extensive shooting of the Python
vs. Model 27/28 4" barrels. (Also,
consider the Colt ".357" for
consideration though it lacked
the barrel underlug.)

I'd love to know what your experiences
are and impressions of the two "top"
.357s of their day . They weighed
virtually the same but obviously with
different frame sizes and perceived
balance as well as different trigger
reach for DA shooting.

Please, no responses that you can
only address one gun or the other.
I realize this may severely limit or
totally kill this thread with yawning
disinterest.

Note: Not interested in the Python
vs. 586/686.

Being a nostalgia freak with a deep
love of the S&W K-frame, I'd just like
to vicariously "live" through those
days again which may still exist
on a limited basis.

 

[SwampWolf]

Yawn...

 

[lightman]

I have a couple of each. The Pythons have a slight edge in accuracy over the Smiths. Their double action pull feels smoother although the pull weights measure close to the same. The Python and M-27 both have deep rich blueing while the M-28 has less polish. Hope this is what you're wanting?

 

[1KPerDay]

The python has an amazing SA trigger and the DA is very smooth but it stacks near the end which I don’t really like. The S&W is more shootable in a practical environment IMO. You do notice that big chunky cylinder starting and stopping though.

 

[earplug]

The Python was fun to point shoot while driving on my private canyon road. I would put up cans. This was when law enforcement trade ins were $125.00
The four inch N frame needs a large caliber to justify the weight and bulk in my opinion.

 

[UncleEd]

What I'm looking for as addressed by 1KPerDay
are impressions and experiences of those who
have shot the Python vs. the N-frames (27/28)
extensively. What are the reasons for
preferences of one vs. the other, be it
the Python the most or the S&W the most.

They are very different guns yet were direct major
competitors at one time among police and
the general shooting public.

And yes I know the Model 19 is yet another item
that was competing for sales back in the day. But
I am hoping for comments from those who
simply didn't bother with the 19.

 

[1KPerDay]

@UncleEd another thing I didn’t mention is the “push forward” cylinder release method on the smiths is vastly preferable for quick reloads than the “pull back” of the Colt. I haven’t timed it and it probably isn’t actually too much more time consuming but it feels a lot more fiddly when you’re trying to go fast.

 

[Old Dog]

I wish I could say I'd shot the S&W and the Colt side by side, but I sold my old beater 4" Highway Patrolman a few years back for twice as much as I'd paid for it. It had substantial finish wear, the lock-up wasn't the tightest, the cylinder definitely had side-to-side wiggle and end-shake but it wasn't out of time yet. Deep turn-line on the cylinder, no finish on the front sight at all and a lot of holster wear (the last inch of the muzzle was silver). Original stock grips worn almost smooth and replaced with some '90s-era Pachmyr Presentation grips. Nevertheless, it was accurate (and to be fair, I never really shot it for precision) and as one would expect of course, totally reliable.

Do I like the 27 and 28? Very much so, and would love to acquire a pristine old 27 (not the new "Classic" repro); I like the size of the N-frames and it makes shooting full-house magnum not unpleasant.

I've got only a couple hundred rounds through my 4" "New Python" but results have been good. Very, very accurate. Shoots cloverleafs at 10 yards with almost no effort (okay, well, I do have to concentrate). Having shot almost exclusively S&W revolvers over the past forty years until my recent Colt binge of the last couple years, the Python trigger is a different critter altogether. DA pull is quite smooth, but as you know, you have got to let the trigger return almost all the way forward. SA is a delight, although I will state for the record that one of my old S&W 19-3's has the best SA pull of any revolver I've ever own (although my "New King Cobra's" SA pull is close).

As far as the cylinder release, it's simply a non-factor to me. Just different, not worse nor better. Reloads measurably slower? Eh, if I were shooting against Jerry Miculek, maybe I'd be seeking a different option. But I'd have no qualms using the Python in a home-defense role, and I've been carrying both the 4" and 6" out in the woods -- you can shoot 'em fast, despite what the fans of the other two major brands claim.

If I were back on uniformed patrol and could only carry a revolver, I'd have a hard time choosing between a 627 (preferably the 5" PC or 4" Pro) and the 4" New Python. If I had to choose between a vintage 27 in mint condition or a vintage blued Python in same condition, boy, that'd been a tough call...

I'd definitely give the new Colt the overall nod for trigger pull (and least my experience over the years having shot a couple hundred S&Ws) over the average S&W K, L, and N frames.

While the older Colts got nods to their awesome deep bluing, many of the older Smiths had some terrific bluing as well. S&W used to do a very good job on its finishes. I've got an older 19 that would compare really well to an old Python. Basically the reason (besides MIM and The Lock) I don't like the new Smiths is that strange black finish.

 

[Paul7]

@UncleEd another thing I didn’t mention is the “push forward” cylinder release method on the smiths is vastly preferable for quick reloads than the “pull back” of the Colt. I haven’t timed it and it probably isn’t actually too much more time consuming but it feels a lot more fiddly when you’re trying to go fast.

I've never understood this, if the Colt cylinder release was such a handicap Colt wouldn't have been the dominant law enforcement revolver until the 1960s.

 

[1KPerDay]

I've never understood this, if the Colt cylinder release was such a handicap Colt wouldn't have been the dominant law enforcement revolver until the 1960s.

Didn’t say it was “such a handicap.” Said it probably isn’t much more time consuming and it feels a lot more fiddly. In my experience.

 

[NIGHTLORD40K]

Well, I have a 4" I-frame Trooper, which is basically a Python without the fancy barrel, and a 6" M28 Highway Patrolman- so kinda close.
The Trooper is handier, and feels better matched in size and bulk to the .357 round. It has a very crisp action, is accurate and highly controllable with Target grips. Troopers could be ordered with either a narrow hammer or the same Target unit which was standard on the Python. Mine came equipped with the big Python grips, as did most .357 Troopers (though the .38s often had smaller Service grips fitted).

M28s came standard with narrow triggers and Semi-Target hammers, the M27 could be ordered with the full target wide hammer or trigger and were usually so fitted. Overtravel trigger stops were available options on both as well.
AFAIK, Colt never offered a factory wide trigger, though I have seen Pythons with (rather strange looking) over-travel limiting triggers.

This highlights probably THE greatest difference between the Trooper and HP since M28s overwhelming came with Magna grips from the factory. Yes, Target grips could be ordered as an optional extra, and aftermarket grips abound- but shooting a .357 N-Frame with Magnas isn't condusive to control, comfort, accuracy, or quick follow up shots. Except for the 2" snubby version, Pythons of course were always fitted with Target grips.

Side-by-side, and with the proper grips on both, the shooting experience is very similar, IMO. Both are fine revolvers and fun guns- especially when firing .38s, lol.

 

[Hal]

This is a posting strictly for shooters
with extensive shooting of the Python
vs. Model 27/28 4" barrels. (Also,
consider the Colt ".357" for
consideration though it lacked
the barrel underlug.)

I'd love to know what your experiences
are and impressions of the two "top"
.357s of their day . They weighed
virtually the same but obviously with
different frame sizes and perceived
balance as well as different trigger
reach for DA shooting.

Please, no responses that you can
only address one gun or the other.
I realize this may severely limit or
totally kill this thread with yawning
disinterest.

Note: Not interested in the Python
vs. 586/686.

Being a nostalgia freak with a deep
love of the S&W K-frame, I'd just like
to vicariously "live" through those
days again which may still exist
on a limited basis.

K frame is a M19 - not a M27/28 - those are the large frame S&W

 

[CajunBass]

I've owned a few of each, and shot them a fair bit. I've never thought of one being "better" than the other at all. Just different.

 

[UncleEd]

K frame is a M19 - not a M27/28 - those are the large frame S&W

That's why I excluded the Model 19, wanting to
keep the discussion around the heavy weights,
i.e. the 42 ounce 27/28, Python. (The L-frame
586/686 came in at the tail end of general
revolver use among police as did the Ruger
GP100.)

So back to the question of preference around
the "big" Python and the "big" Model 27/28.

 

[Hal]

Sorry - the last paragraph of your original post threw me.

 

[9mmepiphany]

I've owned three Pythons, two 6" and a 6" which was converted to 4" for duty carry. I've also own a 8.375" M-27 and a 4" M-28. I've shot them all extensively and shot the 4" ones side-by-side to determine which I wanted to carry as a duty gun.

Comparing the 4" models, the Python balanced better because of it's medium frame and under lugged barrel...this was with both revolvers wearing the same grips. For that same reason it pointed better when coming out of a holster.

The M-28 seemed centered further back in the hand because of it's tapered barrel. My favorite S&W M-27 was the 5" barrel model.

Both revolvers were just as smooth after they had their actions tuned (not just polished). Back in the 80s, the Python's DA trigger could be tuned lighter while still remaining reliable with magnum primers...with the modern advancements in engineering by Apex Tactical, current M-627 triggers can be made lighter. My M-27, which was tuned by Bob Chow in San Francisco, has a SA that breaks right about 1.5lbs

I has been my experience that the Python was capable of better accuracy. I attribute that to it's 1) fully locked action at ignition, 2) 1-14" twist of the rifling, and 3) the slight taper of the barrel at the muzzle. This was with Winchester and Federal .38Spl 148gr HBWC, Federal 125gr JHP magnums and Speer 140gr Magnums

The M-28 was the first one I sold off because it wasn't as pretty as the M-27...the checkered top strap is really cool. I sold my two 6" Pythons when the prices they would bring were just outrageous. I had my 4" python converted back to a 6" fun gun when I retired from LE. I keep it and my 8.375" M-27 as examples, to newer shooters, of what great revolvers are really like

 

[UncleEd]

9mmepiphany,

Thank you. Just the sort of review I was
looking for.