The new Colt revolvers don't do it for me

[Targa]

Am I the only one who finds the new Python and Cobra models ugly?

I just wish more people felt this way, then I could afford more of them..

 

[4v50 Gary]

The QR code on the side is a big turn off for me. What does it even scan to?!?! Why do I want to scan my revolver?!?!?!

There's QR codes on revolvers now? Ewwwwwwww! I'd sand that off.

 

[.308 Norma]

I miss those times, can't fix anything on the new cars today. For me, its just pump gas, change the air filter, and drive.

Ha! Ha! Do you mean my 2018 Dodge Ram has an air filter?

Yes, I fix my cars with a checkbook these days.

Yeah, me too. And sometimes my credit card.

Fortunately, my firearms have been quite reliable over the decades that I have been shooting.

Over the years, I've had a few firearms that weren't all that reliable, but generally speaking, I've had a lot better luck with firearms than I've had with automobiles when it comes to reliability. AND, I've had a lot more reliability issues with computers than I've ever had with firearms, and automobiles are all computerized these days!

 

[Styx]

Twice now it has been stated that the cylinder release is awkward.
Although I can shoot fairly well with either hand, I'm primarily a
lefty. As result I don't find the Colt cylinder release awkward at
all nor the S&W or Ruger releases.

But then lefties are superior people without being handicapped by
a right hand only domination.

I can understand someone who has primarily used S&W relovers all their life and who still carries them having a issue switching the part of the brain off that wants to push the cylinder release (I get it and it makes sense), but what I don’t understand is those who talk about and bash the Colt design like it's a design flaw. It's just different, and nothing is wrong with that. S&W is push, Ruger is more of a press, and Colt is a pull. All different but all still great functional revolvers platforms.

Funny that people can transition from the mechanics of a striker fired semiautos to a SAO 1911 with a thumb safety that needs to be swiped off to a DA revolver to a SAO revolver to a to shooting a DA/SA pistol to a shotgun to a semiauto rifle (AR15, AK47, etc) to a bolt hunting rifle, but for whatever reason, they can not handle and get befuddled by the the pull of a Colt cylinder release.

I primarily carry Taurus and S&W revolvers, but that hasn't stopped me from being able to operate and enjoy Ruger and Colt revolvers. I primarily preference is DA/SA triggers with decockers (so no thumb safety), but I still carry, can shoot, enjoy, and don't feel the need to bash 1911s and striker fired handguns because they're different.

 

[crestoncowboy]

The QR code on the side is a big turn off for me. What does it even scan to?!?! Why do I want to scan my revolver?!?!?!

Only think I don't care for are the QR code and the crap rubber grips. They should send a set of checkered wood with them as well.

Colt doesn't use lined barrels.... that's a S&W thing.
The Colt barrel is counterbored to protect the muzzle which may look like a liner.

As for the blued versus stainless revolver.......
Back in the 1980's the American gun buyer decided they liked stainless revolvers, but liked blue or black autos.
The gun makers responded by making mostly stainless revolvers, but it's harder to find a stainless auto.

The new Colt small frame revolvers have the odd shaped trigger guard to prevent pinching the trigger finger.
Notice how the new models have much less curved triggers. They have a redesigned lock work to give a much nicer DA trigger pull and that required a straighter trigger.
If the guard was like the older guns you'd get serious pinching.

When I bought my blued 44 Redhawk around 2002 the stainless gun was over 100 dollars higher

I know right? I guess I'm the only member on the forum who's a fanboy of them all, and own multiple revolvers from S&W, Colt, Ruger, Taurus, and Kimber. Others seem to perfer one platform only or the most, and will hate on the competition. I personally like them all for different reasons.

I have colt, Smith, Ruger, freedom and Taurus. And some older revolvers from others.

For current production id put colt well above smith. Ive sent back more smith revolvers that didn't work new or with low round counts than all other brands combined.

All came back in 2-3 weeks working fine. But that's still pretty sorry manufacturing.

Us boys born in the 1930s, 30s, 50s, 60s and 70s, maybe a few from the 80s, sure have a lot of stories about fixing our cars ourselves. I miss those times, can't fix anything on the new cars today. For me, its just pump gas, change the air filter, and drive.

I work on both new and old and restore older ones. Id 10:1 rather work on anything 2000 and up over any of the old ones. Sure small and big block chevy, FE, Cleveland, 335 Ford and LA Mopar have fewer parts but far less feedback too. And parts you get now suck too. Late 80s and early 90s domestics are particularly bad because you had the electronic parts.... but no obd2 interface to communicate with it. Lol have to backprobe wires and jump this out and unhook this and watch resistance and such.

Ive said a million times....Most of the old guys who always told me as a kid how they kept their old cars running with a matchbook and pliers but can't work on the new stuff......once they got their old midlife crisis cars off their youth back......still bring me those to fix as well.

 

[CraigC]

When I was a wee lad, I learned to shoot revolvers with a Colt Army Special. So to me, the S&W and Ruger releases took some getting used to.

 

[film495]

I'm sure they are very good. Don't own any Colts myself, but you know what I wouldn't mind - it is more of a gee you know those things are prices kind of thing for me more than not liking them.

 

[doubleh]

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I saw some new Anacondas and one Python at our last local gunshow. I beheld them as very nice looking guns. I saw an old Python also and it was showing some finish wear. $3400 tag hanging off it.

At least 40 years ago I bought a 4" Diamondback 22 for a Christmas present for our son. It's a very nice gun with less that great grips. They look good but don't feel all that good in use. Later I purchased a Python and already owned a S&W model 19 with all the factory bells and whistles. The Python never really flipped my switch and I sold to a guy I worked with for exactly what I gave for it. He liked it. It's just different strokes for different folks.

 

[dfariswheel]

Colt invented the modern swing-out cylinder double action revolver in 1889 as the Colt New Army & Navy.
When it was designed the standard method of shooting was the classic duelist one arm stance with the thumb resting high on the frame.
The Colt latch was ideally placed to give a rest for the thumb and that also prevented the cylinder latch from moving back and opening the cylinder.
This was so common, in the early 1900's Colt began checkering the latch to improve the thumb grip.

To prevent conflicting with Colt's patents, S&W made their latch to move forward. In the early S&W's you had to be careful not to unlatch the cylinder if you had your thumb on it.

 

[dickydalton]

Styx said "With that said and irregardless of some of the hate the new Colts are receiving, it seems that Colt are selling more King Cobras and Pythons vs S&W or Ruger 357 offerings according to the annual ATF report. " That statement should chill all of you to the bone!

 

[Boom Vang]

I don't care for the new grip frame, there is not enough of an abutment on the top. Handling the new Python and King Cobra, you get the impression Colt was tyring to put SAA type grips on it. Your shooting hand wants to roll up the grip frame. Not right for DA firing.

 

[jdc1244]

I guess I'm the only member on the forum who's a fanboy of them all

You're not.

 

[.38 Special]

For whatever it is worth, I'm not sure I've seen any "hate" for Colt on this thread. I mean, I don't think they are as attractive as S&W's best efforts, but that's not exactly "hate". Hell, I think Ruger makes some of the ugliest revolvers on the planet, and there is hardly a bigger Ruger fan than me!

 

[Styx]

For whatever it is worth, I'm not sure I've seen any "hate" for Colt on this thread. I mean, I don't think they are as attractive as S&W's best efforts, but that's not exactly "hate". Hell, I think Ruger makes some of the ugliest revolvers on the planet, and there is hardly a bigger Ruger fan than me!

I feel the same way about Rugers. I use to think they were hideous from their LCR to the GP100. Now I still think they look funny but find them attractive and really like the way they look at the same time if that makes any sense. Maybe with time the new Colts will grown on the naysayers with time. As farvas Colt vs S&W goes, IMHO, they really don't look much different. Colt, Taurus, and S&W all look simular to me personally with minor differences.

 

[Mark_Mark]

anybody ever scan the QR code on the Python! I wound run the gun though RF id detection too, call me paranoid but I don’t care

 

[UncleEd]

.... Ruger makes some of the ugliest revolvers on the planet, and there is hardly a bigger Ruger fan than me!

Ruger fans and buyers learned that functionality/performance beats out "pretty" every time. Ruger
revolvers are workhorses in the extreme and they are easy to maintain. Simply put, they are not safe
queens nor just weekend range toys; owners never hesitate using them even under terrible conditions.

 

[Mark_Mark]

For whatever it is worth, I'm not sure I've seen any "hate" for Colt on this thread. I mean, I don't think they are as attractive as S&W's best efforts, but that's not exactly "hate". Hell, I think Ruger makes some of the ugliest revolvers on the planet, and there is hardly a bigger Ruger fan than me!

I love all Revolvers Equals!

Ruger do make some Mud Duck revolvers. I want to get a beat up 3-Screw and have it factory refinish and refurbished.

 

[CraigC]

When I was young and closed minded, I turned up my nose at the SRH. Thought it was hideous compared to the S&W N-frames I knew and loved. Then I started using one and totally changed my mind. No, it's not as sexy as an N-frame......

.....but it's beautiful in what it does and how it does it. For slaying critters of all sizes, there are plain few that compare. They're simply different tools for different jobs.

 

[mcb]

I think I am the only "Colt hater" in the thread. I have been accused of being a Colt hater a fair number of times here and simply embraced the title. My "hate" for Colt stems more from the company and the way it is run and treated the civilian market than any particular product. The Colt fan boys that thinks gun X is better simply because it has the prancing pony on it does not help any.

As for my first comment in the thread that the cylinder release goes the wrong way that is only partially joking. I have good reason to prefer the S&W over the Colt having tried all three (Colt, Ruger and S&W) Try to hit that sub 2-second reload with a Colt revolver, even if it's cut for moonclips that is significantly harder to do than a S&W or even a Ruger. The reward action of the Colt is not conducive to the rest of a fast reload. If you are just a hunting or woods carrying your Colt it's probably not an issue. It might make a difference in a self defense or duty setting but those reloads appear to be pretty rare. At a USPSA or IDPA match, especially USPSA, its going to be a game changer. You see vanishingly few Colts at these matches and the cylinder release (and the S&W fast trigger reset) makes them significantly better gamer guns. Given that I bought my first double action revolver specifically to compete in USPSA revolver division I have been a S&W fanboy since, because if you where going to excel in that division it was going to be with a S&W revolver. And once you have invested the training and practice to get good in the competitive setting it never made sense to change platforms for other settings. I have S&W revolvers that cover any thing I would want to do with a revolver from competition, to CCW, to hunting and they all use the same manual of arms.

And for some icing on the Colt hate-cake between this and the Colt AR thread I have been over to Colt's website several times in the past few days and to be honest there is just not much interesting over there. They only do AR in 223/556 (snore) they have very limited revolver cartridge options (not a single rimless cartridge) and a single stack 1911 has very little draw.

 

[CraigC]

I think I am the only "Colt hater" in the thread. I have been accused of being a Colt hater a fair number of times here and simply embraced the title. My "hate" for Colt stems more from the company and the way it is run and treated the civilian market than any particular product. The Colt fan boys that thinks gun X is better simply because it has the prancing pony on it does not help any.

As for my first comment in the thread that the cylinder release goes the wrong way that is only partially joking. I have good reason to prefer the S&W over the Colt having tried all three (Colt, Ruger and S&W) Try to hit that sub 2-second reload with a Colt revolver, even if it's cut for moonclips that is significantly harder to do than a S&W or even a Ruger. The reward action of the Colt is not conducive to the rest of a fast reload. If you are just a hunting or woods carrying your Colt it's probably not an issue. It might make a difference in a self defense or duty setting but those reloads appear to be pretty rare. At a USPSA or IDPA match, especially USPSA, its going to be a game changer. You see vanishingly few Colts at these matches and the cylinder release (and the S&W fast trigger reset) makes them significantly better gamer guns. Given that I bought my first double action revolver specifically to compete in USPSA revolver division I have been a S&W fanboy since, because if you where going to excel in that division it was going to be with a S&W revolver. And once you have invested the training and practice to get good in the competitive setting it never made sense to change platforms for other settings. I have S&W revolvers that cover any thing I would want to do with a revolver from competition, to CCW, to hunting and they all use the same manual of arms.

And for some icing on the Colt hate-cake between this and the Colt AR thread I have been over to Colt's website several times in the past few days and to be honest there is just not much interesting over there. They only do AR in 223/556 (snore) they have very limited revolver cartridge options (not a single rimless cartridge) and a single stack 1911 has very little draw.

I'm not a Colt hater but I've been accused of such, simply for being what I thought was objective about them and their guns. Even though I have literally dozens upon dozens of Colt-pattern guns and the three walls of books right here in my office has more Colt-related books than any other subject. Literally ALL of my favorite firearm designs at one time wore the Colt name. From percussion guns and cartridge conversions to the SAA, New Service and others. I've wanted a particular model of Woodsman since before I had hair down there. I just can't overlook the over-polished crap they've foisted on the American public in the past. I would just rather have a properly built replica than an over-polished turd with the famous name. So some of my rhetoric goes over like a turd in the punch bowl over on Colt Forum. I can't help it. I've been red-pilled and can't unsee it or unknow it.

It's the rhetoric from the Kool Aid drinkers that grates on my nerves. I can't imagine being so blind to the quality of the firearm, just because it has that stupid horse on it. Or the nonsense about "buying history". Far be it from me to interfere with someone else's romantic n otions, God knows I have enough of my own but I can't take that foolishness seriously. I default to the adage, "buy the gun, not the story". There is NO story behind a new gun. Whether it just shipped from the factory, probably built by someone who doesn't give a rat's ass about guns and will go on strike anytime the UAW says so, or one you've kept stashed in your closet for 30yrs and only take it out to wipe it down with a diaper.

No, Colt has to earn my business based solely on merit. Which is why I want a new Anaconda. I'm very impressed with what they've done with their new DA's and would buy a Python if I had more affection for the .357 cartridge. The older guns that go for thousands of dollars, no friggin' way. I'd rather buy a Korth.

 

[.308 Norma]

Ruger fans and buyers learned that functionality/performance beats out "pretty" every time. Ruger
revolvers are workhorses in the extreme and they are easy to maintain. Simply put, they are not safe
queens nor just weekend range toys; owners never hesitate using them even under terrible conditions.

Exactly!
If you've seen many of my other posts, you know I'm in the camp of "ugly is as ugly does" (to a point) when it comes to firearms. What I mean by "to a point" is, I don't care how well a Korth revolver works, or doesn't work, I won't own one - they're just too ugly!
On the other hand, I don't mean to upset any Python fanboys here, but as far as I'm concerned, I'd have to know that Colt Pythons work exceptionally well before I'd ever buy one - because IMO, Colt Pythons are just too pretty!

 

[Mark_Mark]

When I was young and closed minded, I turned up my nose at the SRH. Thought it was hideous compared to the S&W N-frames I knew and loved. Then I started using one and totally changed my mind. No, it's not as sexy as an N-frame......

.....but it's beautiful in what it does and how it does it. For slaying critters of all sizes, there are plain few that compare. They're simply different tools for different jobs.

I’m starting to like stainless more & more. But they are too dam shinny

 

[CraigC]

I’m starting to like stainless more & more. But they are too dam shinny

As time goes by, I like it less and less. If they had a blued SRH, I'd be all over it.

 

[Styx]

As time goes by, I like it less and less. If they had a blued SRH, I'd be all over it.

I prefer stainless and all my revolvers are stainless because of maintenance, increased corrosion resistance, and I can easily keep them looking brand new even after being scratched and being taken in and out of holsters thousands of times. Just not worth it to me to lose all the pros of stainless exclusively just for vanity reasons.

Other than that, if I only purchased blued revolvers, all that would basically available for me to purchase would older, expensive out of warranty and no longer supported revolvers from yesteryear. Other the that the S&W Model 19 and 586 Classic, both of which I'm not interested in, most manufacturers are putting the jet black finish on their revolvers nowadays Smith and Ruger included.

 

[Old Dog]

t's the rhetoric from the Kool Aid drinkers that grates on my nerves. I can't imagine being so blind to the quality of the firearm, just because it has that stupid horse on it.

Gosh, Craig, if you could please give us some examples of this that you've read on this forum, please. Seems to me that most here (at least in the threads that I've bothered to read through) who've owned say, a Colt, that hasn't proven worthy, had issues or was just a confirmed lemon, have been pretty honest and forthcoming about the problems they've experienced.

And simply by virtue of someone (who claims to be an owner of a specific brand) chiming into a particular thread saying they've not experienced issues with their personally owned specimens, or otherwise had nothing but reliable performance from their guns, doesn't make them a "Kool Aid drinker."

Far be it from me to interfere with someone else's romantic n otions, God knows I have enough of my own but I can't take that foolishness seriously. I default to the adage, "buy the gun, not the story".

Boy, you're no fun. For many of us at our age(s), all we have left is our romantic notions, nostalgia, and our foolishness. And some of us like buying "the story." Why else would someone buy an SAA or a 1911, anyway?