Colt Python and Anaconda, Coming soon?

[Coal Dragger]

But it still has a V mainspring and has already been noted to have a sluggish trigger return in DA. We also have a couple of videos floating around demonstrating that the guns do not function properly, at least an alarming percentage of them don’t.

Look at it this way, of the thousand or more new 2020 Pythons that have shipped we have two well documented instances where a reviewer procured a revolver independently from Colt’s pool of press guns, and those two samples both had issues in DA. There’s another video of a new Python with the cylinder turning but the hammer not moving. Then there are the damaged barrel crowns.

What are the odds that this was just bad luck and not representative of what to expect? I don’t believe in coincidences very much, so I have to operate on the facts pointing to the new gun being hot garbage right now. I’m sure the gun rags will give glowing reviews because they are shills, and because Colt’s will put in the work to make the press test guns work right. The rest of us get to beta test this for Colt’s and maybe get the revolvers fixed if Colt’s stays in business long enough to fix them.

 

[jdavis123]

When you reduce the human element from the manufacturing process the fine details are not addressed during the process. This seems to be the cause of the problems you have defined. Hopefully Colt will find the solution and make the necessary corrections. I can’t equate Colt’s Python reintroduction with Remington’s R51 because there is so much history, passion and desire for the Python. The gun enthusiasts have a thirst for Pythons and will gladly buy them. The R51 has no such following rather it was just another gun in the eyes of the public.

 

[Coal Dragger]

The R51 comparison is valid, if anything the Python launch failure is even worse because of the expectations. Colt would have been better off charging $2,000 per unit if that is what it took to make the guns right. I’d have gladly paid it if that extra $500 bought me some human inspection and test firing, say 120 rounds of proofing at the factory with a test target signed off by the guy or gal who does the test. Well worth the extra cost to me.

 

[Old Dog]

I'm gonna go out on a limb here and suggest that there's a lot of guys whose recent hand=gunning experience is entirely with autoloaders. Anyone with experience with a Colt revolver knows that one lets the trigger return all the way forward. If you try to "chase the reset" with one of the old or the new Colts (there's no such thing), the cylinder will not turn nor will the trigger pull result in a bang.

Calling the new Python launch a failure is premature ejac … er, speculation.

 

[Coal Dragger]

If the gun is so easily tied up with no way to get it back into operation quickly it is a dumpster fire suitable only for recreational use.

A poor design is a poor design, no point in sugar coating the turd. It’s still a turd.

 

[Old Dog]

Not a revolver guy, eh?

Comments in threads such as this are further proof that many believe everything they see on the internet. But thank the good Lord for YouTube, right? Now no one needs actual personal, real-life experience in anything, just Google it and the YouTubers will tell you what you need to know. Or they'll display what they don't know, and you'll still believe it.

The gun in question has been on the streets for only days, and people are dumping on it. People who've never even seen one in real life, nor shot one.

 

[Coal Dragger]

I like revolvers just fine, and shoot DA revolvers when I have the chance now. I grew up shooting both DA and SA revolvers since my father never owned semiauto pistols at that time. The fact remains that a gun so easily rendered inoperable by what appears to be minor user error is a garbage design.

I have intentionally short stroked S&W revolvers to see what happens and the guns didn’t become inert objects for subsequent use.

 

[Texas10mm]

The R51 comparison is valid, if anything the Python launch failure is even worse because of the expectations. Colt would have been better off charging $2,000 per unit if that is what it took to make the guns right. I’d have gladly paid it if that extra $500 bought me some human inspection and test firing, say 120 rounds of proofing at the factory with a test target signed off by the guy or gal who does the test. Well worth the extra cost to me.

You're never going to get 120 rounds of proof firing, definitely not at the $2,000 price point. I've heard that at least one of the custom 1911 smiths does 75 rounds of firing before shipping, but we're talking about a 1911 that's close to five figures.

 

[Coal Dragger]

Some smiths will do a lot more than that. Chambers Custom set a standard of 500 rounds on his double stack Nightfighter 9mm 2011 he made for Chuck Pressburg, so the few that have been made were vetted pretty thoroughly, and if the customer ordered more magazines those had to be tested as well. Of course that is a $5000+ 2011, and a one man shop doing the proof firing.

Not sure what kind of insane labor rates and ammo costs would preclude more extensive test firing of a revolver. I know that even we’re I to pay myself a high hourly rate it doesn’t cost me $500 to shoot 120 rounds of ammunition.

 

[Paul7]

Some smiths will do a lot more than that. Chambers Custom set a standard of 500 rounds on his double stack Nightfighter 9mm 2011 he made for Chuck Pressburg, so the few that have been made were vetted pretty thoroughly, and if the customer ordered more magazines those had to be tested as well. Of course that is a $5000+ 2011, and a one man shop doing the proof firing.

Not sure what kind of insane labor rates and ammo costs would preclude more extensive test firing of a revolver. I know that even we’re I to pay myself a high hourly rate it doesn’t cost me $500 to shoot 120 rounds of ammunition.

I'd rather pay less and have good customer service.

 

[Huntolive]

But da Boody drop got no time for piddy