New production Colt Python Elites -- what's the scoop?

[P. Plainsman]

Just acquired a modestly used '80s Python in 6" barrel and really like it. Wouldn't mind getting more Colt DAs someday, perhaps a Diamondback, a 4" Python ...

But what about the new production Python Elites? They look pretty awesome on the Internet. Does anyone here own one of these guns, or have experience with them? What are they like? How do they shoot? How do they compare to the older Pythons? To other good .357s?

Very curious about these guns.

PS: For all the obsessing the gun rags do over small-production, super-$$ cult 1911s, you'd think they could get their hands on a Python Elite and do a run-down. It's the inheritor of a classic sixgun tradition, for Pete's sake.

But no. At least I haven't seen any such articles.

 

[Marshall]

Wish I could help you out, the gun rags piss me of too with all the 1911 crap. However, American Handgunner did a full layout on a new Smith this month.

I have no reason to believe the new ones are any worse than the 80-90's Pythons. Might even be better?

 

[stans]

I have handled a few new Python Elites, for the money, I would buy a lightly used older Python. I cannot justify $1000 to $1100 for a revolver when I can get the same thing for less and a better trigger to boot in an older Python.

 

[mattz357]

I read somewhere that the Python "Elite" is just the new version of the old Python. I don't know what has changed, but apparently it's not much. I know when I got my King Cobra (in 1996) there was a production Python and Python Elite, but no more.

 

[HankB]

I wonder if they're calling it the "Python Elite" because people would catch on to the motivation behind "Python Tactical."

(Explanation: Adding "Tactical" to a label is a marketing move which lets the manufacturer jack up the price by 30 to 50 percent, with no additional production expense.)

 

[OldLawman]

"Tactical" Python

Ah, but you forget :

In the Python's case, a Tactical designation will allow them to spend far less time on the metal prep and polish to give it that special, no-glare, tactical matte finsih - just what all Python owner want !

 

[DMK]

In the Python's case, a Tactical designation will allow them to spend far less time on the metal prep and polish to give it that special, no-glare, tactical matte finsih - just what all Python owner want !

Hmm, kinda sounds like the S&W "Highway Patrolman".

 

[Standing Wolf]

I've been a Python afficionado quite a few years, and though I doubt I qualify as a collector of Pythons, I certainly seem to be acquiring them.

The Python Élite is a garden variety Python with a new name. All the dimensions are identical. All the parts are identical. The stocks are new, but like all Colt factory stocks, they're as close to anti-ergonomic as you could get without casting them in concrete.

I've looked at several current production Python Élites during the past year, including both six- and four-inch models. All were priced at $1,059 at my friendly local gun shop. All had truly terrible (six-pound) single action trigger pulls. All but one had rough, uneven double action pulls. Nota bene: the Python's double action trigger pull is designed to stack. Always has. Always will. If you don't like it, don't buy one. Stacking is one thing; roughness is another—and all but one of these expensive revolvers had rough, gritty pulls probably even Ruger wouldn't have let out of the factory.

Without exception, all the new Python Élites I've looked at in recent months have been unevenly finished. One of the old Python's claims to fame was its beauty: glass-smooth polishing and the deepest, roundest, richest blue you could find anywhere, plus perfect parts fitting. What's coming out of the Colt factory these days shows tool marks, brush marks, and misaligned parts. If you can't even put the front sight in the center of the ventilated rib, you should get out of the business.

I recently bought a late 1980s stainless steel Python. It looks like a Python. Its trigger is a true Python trigger: it breaks at two pounds, nine ounces with no perceptible creep. It locks up solidly as a bank vault. It shoots like a Python. It's an admittedly over-priced class act revolver from the years Colt's quality control was in decline. I'll post pictures of it once it's been returned from the good folks at http://www.magnaport.com

In sum: current production Python Élites are sorry substitutes for the Pythons of days gone by, and in my opinion, a waste of money.

 

[pakmcc]

Python and/Diamondbacks

Thirty years ago or so, I had a "friend" who picked up a case of Colt diamomdbacks and who sold them to me for a song. These were all in .22 LR.
These are all in four or six inch, six shot revolvers. I've never seen bigger pieces of crap. There was no actcuricy at all. I think I tried about 6 of these pistols and it was like shooting a shotgun at the targets. I had a model H&R 999 that shot better than the colts.
And after I got out of shooting (I'm back in again) I kept a model 80 Beridelli in .22LR . it would and still does, out shoot most .22's at the range when I take it out. The model 80 even outshot my Walther's(in .22LR) and I had the PP, and the PPKS in .22LR.
Yes, the old colt Python's had a trigger that was to die for, but most of the rest of the line needs help.

That's my story and I'm sticking to it
pakmcc

 

[tex_n_cal]

I have heard that the new Python Elites lack the two-step hand that the Python originally featured.

This step on the hand ensured that the cylinder was actually locked up hard against the bolt, as the trigger was pulled all the way to the rear. Part of the Python's accuracy was due to this solid lockup of the cylinder.

Any word on this issue? Do the new Elites lock up tight when the trigger is held to the rear?

 

[Tony Mig]

It's really quite sad what has happened with Colt over the last several years. Their over all quality has gone down the toilet, and their prices have reached a level that only the wealthy can afford.
So many other American manufactureers mave pulled themselves up by the boot straps, and recovered from their poor quality of the 70's and 80's...
Harley-Davidson, both Fender & Gibson Musical Instruments....heck, I remember when a Dodge truck was the biggest POS on the highway, and now I own one. So why can't Colt turn things around, and start producing quality that matches their prices......?

I have two older Colt firearms, a single action Frontier Scout (.22Lr), and a Targetsman made in 1959, both are very well made guns considering that they were both inexpensive items at the time of production. The polishing & bluing on this Targetsman is every bit as smooth, and deep as the old Pythons were. I also had a Colt 1911 Series 70, if I shook the gun, you could hear the slide rattle. I've handled and fired several Kimbers since then, and not one of them were that sloppy......

Makes me wonder if time is running out on America's oldest firearms maker.....

 

[tex_n_cal]

Tony, your comments are about ten years out of date.

The newest Colt 1911s are very good, and in fact are now a better buy than Kimbers. With their MIM parts and funky safety systems lots of Kimber owners are reporting reliability problems, including parts breakage.

Colt did have some inconsistent - no, poor quality in the late 80's. Starting in the mid 90's they began getting better. Buy a new production Government model or Commander, and the overwhelming majority of folks find them to be excellent pistols.

The revolvers? Even 30 years ago Colt said that polishing a Python was the most skilled, toughest job in the plant, reserved for their most talented and experienced employees. My guess is that's why their revolver finish isn't as good as it used to be.

 

[dfariswheel]

The Python mechanism and design hasn't changed since 1955 when it was introduced.
It still has the original hand, and the "bank vault" lockup.

In fact the Colt Python action is still the ORIGINAL Colt action.

A new 2004 Python has most parts interchangeability with a 1908 Army Special.

The reason other gun companies "pulled themselves up by their bootstraps" is FUNDING.
Their "bootstraps" were actually wealth buyers who spent the money to modernize equipment, and upgrade operations.

Colt's funding is small, and they're perilously near the "edge". One slip, and they're gone, so they have to be very careful what they make, and how. Much of their equipment is aging, and isn't up to todays standards.

Polishing has slipped, and this is due to the lack of the old master polishers.
Colt was running what amounted to a polisher's "farm" years ago.

A new polisher was taught by master's, then started out on the bottom of the line Official Police. He worked with a master literally looking over his shoulder until he was competent to be on his own.

As his skills and experience improved, he moved up to polishing the more expensive guns.

Finally, after MANY years, the very best of them were allowed to work on the Python, or Custom Shop guns.
By NO means did every Colt polisher make the Python grade.

Colt lost all these experts, and it takes many years to "grow" new ones. Until they do, the quality of bluing isn't going to equal the old Python finish.

The old finish was nothing BUT polishing, done by a master of the art.
The actual bluing process was the same for all Colt pistols.

These people were at a level, that only about 100 people in the entire world were capable of the same quality of work.

You don't train people to this level in a couple of years.

For all the problems, the Python is STILL the finest production DA revolver in the world, and you're still getting what amounts to a custom fitted revolver.

 

[L-Frame]

The finest in the world? I think the people at Korth would take exception there. Of course, it does cost $5000. I would agree that the Python is the most beautiful revolver, heck, gun, in the world, but for me, for the price, give me a 686 or gp100 any day. I've owned multiples of each, and I like the 686 trigger better (don't like the stacking). I don't like the way the 100 year old lockwork goes out of time much sooner in fast double action shooting than either the S&W or Ruger, and I don't like the price. To me, it is like putting a Yugo engine in a Deusenberg chassis. (alright, maybe not a Yugo)

 

[Snake Eyes]

Standing Wolf--What you said. Well.
Dfariswheel--As usual, I learned from your post. Thank you.

The only thing I can add is this: I'm now up to 6 Pythons, none younger than the hideous red front sight abomination, and haven't paid more than $750 for any one*. In fact, I've paid less than $700 for 3 of the 6. All were purchased within the last 3 years. All are 95% or better and two were NIB.

Why in the world would I pay $1000 for a new one (that I can't get in Royal Python Blue)?!?!


*--I fibbed. The 2 1/2 bright stainless limited edition "Snake Eyes" (hence my handle) cost me $1500. Way too much. But I had to have it. Then I shot it. Now I carry it!

 

[dfariswheel]

The Korth was never a production revolver.

In their best year, they never made 100 pistols.

The Korth was a true non-production custom revolver.

 

[Tony Mig]

Tony, your comments are about ten years out of date.

I guess they are since I owned that Colt series 70 back in the early 80's..

I haven't handled one since, so my comments were some what dated.
I wasn't aware of the problems you mentioned about Kimber, they seem to be the most popular 1911 at my range, and I've fired a few of them. They were all very tight, and very well made guns.

As for the experianced polishers, didn't Colt have a union problem several years ago, and they ened up loosing all, or most of their employees....?

 

[Blueduck]

They might be better nowdays, and maybe they do have more problems than other firearms companies but honestly every 2 years since 1980 the the "Colts making a big comeback!" cry rings forth. After the tenth time or so buyers get bored and move on.

Went to 3 gun shops this afternoon, not one single colt pistol in any of them

 

[dfariswheel]

"didn't Colt have a union problem several years ago, and they ened up loosing all, or most of their employees....?"

That's like saying Chicago had a small fire once.

The infamous Colt strike was billed as one of the longest and most bitter strikes in American history.

During the strike, most of Colt's best employee's just moved on, and were lost to Colt forever.

Colt is trying to come back, but their financial situation is so precarious that one slip and their gone.

Right now they're concentrating on their big money-maker, the 1911 pistols, and trying to buy new equipment as the money flow allows.

Unlike S&W, Colt wasn't bought out by a money bags willing to flood them with the loot to upgrade all at once.

 

[asa]

Pythons

I have three Pythons-a 1969 six in., a 2 1/2 blue 70's gun, and, for last Christmas, a 4 in. Elite. The grips are some kind of Hogue-inspired abomination which I replaced with pre-war service grips from an official Police. I like the looks, and with stubby fingers these grips work well for me. The single action breaks nicely, but at about 5 1/2 lbs. Double is the same story; heavy, but smooth. I was hoping with use the pulls would get better, but I guess I'm going to send it back and have it lightened. I also decided I didn't like the looks of the matte finish. So, with judicious use of my Dremel (I've done this before), and various small pieces of wood covered with soft cloths, I Flitzed the dickens out of it. About 50 hours later I had a beautifully polished bright stainless Python Elite. It's now a stunning gun with a polished finish that (I think) almost rivals my earlier blued models. Despite the heavy trigger pulls ( sa & da) it's very accurate. Fit, lockup, and timing are impeccable. I know a Python shouldn't have to be worked on like I did, but I enjoyed every minute and love the results. Would I get another? Probably-and this one I'd leave matte just to have one of those too. -Asa

 

[Standing Wolf]

I have heard that the new Python Elites lack the two-step hand that the Python originally featured.

Not so. Pythons still lock up the way they're supposed to.

Their triggers are abominable, and their fit and finish are below Ruger's standards; the mechanism itself, however, remains unchanged. A competent action job—good luck finding a gunsmith who can do one!—turns a current production Python Élite into a shooter every bit as good as the best Pythons of yore.

It's my understanding blued Python Élites are no longer available: your choices are stainless steel, stainless steel, and stainless steel.

Colt's funding problem is a result, not a cause. If the company wanted to be a serious player in the firearms industry, it could do so, or at least, could have done so several years ago.

My old pal Jim put it this way: "It's hard to achieve goals if you don't have them."

 

[BluesBear]

The catalogue I recieved from the Colt factory rep last month (as well as their web site) still lists the blued Python Elite available in 4" (cat# I3640CS) & 6" (cat# I3660CS) barrel lengths.

The 6" model I held at that time has the grips ASA referred to. I personally found them to be nice looking but they felt horrible in my hands. P14Enfield however found them to feel nice. Sadly he has never seen, much less held a real 1950s-1970s Python. The blue job is comparable to a late 1980s-1990s finish. It's very nice but it ain't classic.

I won't even attampt to compare the action of a new vs old one. That would be like trying to compare Cheryl Tiegs and Pamela Anderson. Suffice to say if you can't tell the difference then a Python Elite will make you very happy.

I was surprised to learn that the bright stainless is no longer available. Only the brushed finish remains on the stainless Python Elite.

 

[Tony Mig]

Unlike S&W, Colt wasn't bought out by a money bags willing to flood them with the loot to upgrade all at once.

Harley-Davidson wasn't bought out by a money bags either. The investment group that did buy them from AMF barely got the funds together to make the deal. They went into it with empty pockets, turned the whole company around, and brought them back from the dead to become one of America's strongest manufacturing companies. Colt doesn't need money, they need leadership with brains and balls to make the neccessary changes, introduce a few new products, treat their employees with dignity, and pay them a decent wage. Had they done that in the past, there wouldn't have been a strike like the Chicago fire, and they would still be a player in the firearms industry like S&W, and Ruger are.

It's the same story with many of the once big companies of old.....Packard Motors, Indian Motorcycles, and Pirsch Fire Apparatus are just three I can think of right now that died from poor leadership that was more interseted in filling their own personal bank accounts, and not re-investing the neccessary capitol back into the company to leep it current, and at the top.

Colt needs a man like Lee Ioccoa to turn them around.......

 

[tex_n_cal]

This ain't a 1911 thread, but I do own 7 Colt 1911's. Five of them were made in the past 5 years, and all five are excellent pistols. The other two date to the early 90's, or late 80's, and they did have issues. My stainless 1991A1 NRM I liked so much, I went back and bought another one.

I had a Kimber stainless gold match, Series I, which had issues. I traded it for a Gold Cup that cost $500 less, and is a better pistol. My brother has 3 custom shop Kimbers, and one of those three is a dog. I think Colt has made significant improvements over the past few years, and deserve a fresh look.

S&W is making interesting new revolvers...if you don't mind the idiot lock in the side. If the Python Elite has the classic action, but just needs a little tuning, that may be worth a look.

 

[Standing Wolf]

Colt doesn't need money, they need leadership with brains and balls to make the neccessary changes, introduce a few new products, treat their employees with dignity, and pay them a decent wage.

All that, and establish some high quality control standards, too.

I doubt it's going to happen.