S&W vs Colt Double Action Revolvers

[tinygnat219]

I chose S&W for one reason and one reason only. They care about selling handguns to the plebian citizen and don't just care about military contracts. Sorry, Colt lost my respect and my business when they ceased to care about us, the customers.

COLT = Elegance.

Sorry, but to me:

COLT = Not getting my money since they gave up on the civilian market.

 

[HammerBite]

The purpose of a business is to make money, and pleasing customers is only a means to that end. S&W is making money from the civilian sector and Colt is making money from the government sector. They are both making money and that is what they are supposed to do.

 

[Aquaman]

I've always wondered who the genius was that decided to name some of the revolvers after serpents...considered by many people to be the lowest of life forms.

It would seem to me that horse types would have been a little more fitting.

The Colt Clydesdale, Mustang, Pony, etc.

just my opinion...

 

[JesseL]

The purpose of a business is to make money, and pleasing customers is only a means to that end. S&W is making money from the civilian sector and Colt is making money from the government sector. They are both making money and that is what they are supposed to do.

Obviously. But you can hardly fault a member of the general public for not wanting to business with a company that evidently doesn't want to do business with the general public.

 

[ironvic]

Voted Smith

I really like the S&Ws. I have a Colt Trooper Mk-III that's a superb weapon in looks and accuracy, but its double action trigger pull is much stiffer than my 686 Plus. I have owned three Colt revolvers (Diamondback, Trooper and Officer's Model revolver) and a Colt enhanced 1911. In Smith & Wesson, I have had many more examples than the Colt and tend to favor the S&W, primarily because they feel more natural in my hand and I just like their styling.

Still, my Trooper is a keeper and my current revolvers are the 6" Colt and a 2.5" S&W Model 686 Plus. Both are about equal in respect to accuracy and each one has its place depending on my mood on any given range day.

ironvic

 

[Savage92]

ironvic, So your 2.5" S&W shoots just as good as your 6" Colt Trooper, what kind of accuracy do you get out of them?

 

[HammerBite]

But you can hardly fault a member of the general public for not wanting to business with a company that evidently doesn't want to do business with the general public.

Getting ticked off at Colt for not making double-action revolvers is akin to getting ticked off at McDonalds for not selling pizza. McD's does burgers and fries. Colt does SAAs and 1911s. Why the hostility?

 

[orionengnr]

However, there's something I've wondered about. Smiths, and some other revolvers have a reputation for having their extractor rods work loose and bind up the action (although this has not yet happened to me).

I am not an expert, but S&W resolved this many, many years ago by changing from a right-hand to a left-hand ejector rod thread. I've never experienced it, but I have read of it. My oldest S&W was made in the early 70s, and is too new to suffer from this issue.

Again, it is only an issue with older S&W revolvers, and (if you are lucky enough to own one) it is easily resolved by one drop of blue loctite.

 

[Savage92]

HammerBite, that would be a better comparison if McDonalds used to make pizza and then discontinued it. It's more comparable to people getting pissed off at Winchester (or Browning/FN) for Winchester going under.
Well... not quite the same. Discontinuing is better than moving production to Russia.

 

[JesseL]

Getting ticked off at Colt for not making double-action revolvers is akin to getting ticked off at McDonalds for not selling pizza. McD's does burgers and fries. Colt does SAAs and 1911s. Why the hostility?

I don't see anyone getting particularly ticked off or hostile. I just see people choosing to do business with the company that shows an interest in serving their market.

To stretch the analogy; people hungry for pizza are going to Pizza Hut, since they know McDonald's has no interest in serving them what they want.

 

[glockman19]

Another S&W fan here.

 

[mavracer]

I prefer smiths simply because the cylinder latch works properly.I own rugers,tauris and smith DAs you push the cylinder latch.JMHOYMMV.

 

[Hawk]

I am not an expert, but S&W resolved this many, many years ago by changing from a right-hand to a left-hand ejector rod thread. I've never experienced it, but I have read of it. My oldest S&W was made in the early 70s, and is too new to suffer from this issue.

Again, it is only an issue with older S&W revolvers, and (if you are lucky enough to own one) it is easily resolved by one drop of blue loctite.

My 640 backed out with the newer configuration. It didn't seem to care it was rotating clockwise to perform the feat.

Caveat: Mine was used - the extractor rod may have suffered indignity before I got it. Since I started with these older wheel guns, I'm glad I had an accumulation of blue thread-locker. I may start buying it by the quart.

 

[Tom Servo]

I'll stick with Smith. I've had one Colt (a Python) and handled several others.

I won't go into what I think of Colt's treatment of the civilian market; that's well enough known.

My Python, and two others I know of, would beat themselves out of timing every 300-500 rounds and need a trip to the gunsmith. This gave me a bad feeling towards revolvers for awhile.

While I liked it at the time, I no longer consider the Colt triggers to be (as the young people say) all that. They are smooth, and they feel a bit lighter, but there's that "hangup" near the rear of the pull that I no longer care for. It's that "spot" where the pressure increases just a bit so the shooter can "stage" the rest of the shot like it's a single-action.

It's well and nice, but S&W revolvers (and Sigs) taught me to just pull the thing smoothly to the rear in one stroke. That's how I'll react in a pressure situation, and that's what I'll stick with. Smith triggers are good enough to consistently bullseye in DA, even if they "feel" just a bit less refined.

Of course, I've never handled a new Colt, so my experience may be colored. If I were to win the lottery, I'd buy the company and start producing nice revolvers again.

 

[Jim K]

It is a bit of an academic question, since Colt has little interest in selling to the civilian market and has reportedly said so. MD and NY have "fired shell" laws - a useless nuisance that adds to the cost, but other makers manage to comply and continue to sell guns in those states. Colt simply says they won't bother. I think I know what happens to companies that don't give a da*n about a huge market.

To answer, though, S&W has a clever little gimmick in their trigger-hammer interface that results in a constant DA pull weight all the way through. Colt, like some other revolvers, "stacks" that is the DA trigger pull starts out light but gets harder as the hammer comes back. So I prefer S&W. And I can get them.

Jim

 

[Flame Red]

Both are excellent revolvers and I have many fine examples of both. My statements are:

Colt Python is the Cadallac of 357 Revolvers.
S&W Trail Boss is my favorite 44 Mag
S&W 500 4" comp is my favorite Watermelon blaster
Colt Magnum Carry is my daily carry. Got to love the 6 shots of 357!
Gone are the days of the fine blue finishes
No more Colts and all the new S&W have that confounded lock

 

[Timthinker]

In its day, the Colt Python was a very coveted revolver, and also something of a status symbol. But that was then. Today, Smith & Wesson rules the revolver market if you compare it to Colt only. Certainly, other quality double-action revolvers exist, but in a comparison between these two companies, S&W wins.

On a personal note, I truly wish Colt still manufactured both the Python and Anaconda, but sheer economics will prevent this from occuring. Now that the Python has been discontinued, myths about it will start to develop. This sort of mythmaking has occurred in the past and will continue into the future.


Timthinker

 

[ak-kev]

Its not that I dont like Smiths, I have one 586, and am currently looking for a 642/442. I've looked at 2 and just wasnt impressed. The 586 trigger is horrible, and the 2 J-frames were better, but I'm just used to the Colts. They're just so smooth and easy to pull, no sandpaper feeling ect. Im still looking for a good 442 and will buy one if I can find a good example. I simply hate the idea of locks, but I guess thats just the sign of the times. At one time not too long ago I had 1 Smith, and 1 Colt. Now its 1 Smith, and 8 Colts. So my taste leads me to Colt, but I can still appreciate a Smith & Wesson.

 

[Gustav]

I voted Smith & Wesson I have fired numerous models of both but the older Smith & Wesson's to me just feel balance point and shoot better in my hands.

Both make top quality pistols even though an occaisional lemon gets by either one will do if properly taken care of and maintained.

It comes down to preferences of each individual sorta like which is better the Camaro or the Mustang.

 

[GaryP]

I like either but if I have to pick one, Oh Well - Make mine a COLT.

 

[CU74]

I agree with Saxon Pig - you need a "like them both" category. I also have more older S&Ws because they made more models than Colt did. Given the price escalation on the better-condition Colts, I tend to shoot my S&Ws more than I do my Colts, (might have to sell some guns someday to buy beans).