Wonder what the new Python is going to cost? [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : Wonder what the new Python is going to cost?


Pages : [1] 2

dnuggett
06-29-2012, 19:09
That is when Colt releases that they will indeed make it again. Probably a few months out yet... or less. :cool:

vikingsoftpaw
06-29-2012, 19:15
I would expect it to be on par with the S&W classics, about $1000.

dnuggett
06-29-2012, 19:26
Isn't the New Frontier more than that?

The_Gun_Guru
06-29-2012, 19:27
I will sell three guns to get a Python again!!!!:wow:


Who wants to bet it has a lock?:rofl:


TGG

glock2740
06-29-2012, 19:30
When did Colt say they they were re-releasing the Python? News to me. I'm fine with the two I already have. :)


http://i914.photobucket.com/albums/ac341/OU1911/2snakes.jpg

dnuggett
06-29-2012, 19:31
When did Colt say they they were re-releasing the Python? News to me.

They haven't yet. But they will be.

Jim Watson
06-29-2012, 19:32
I can't imagine Colt bringing back a true Python on the old V spring action. They could not make money on it for much less than $2000 a copy.

They prototyped a Python Mk III on the 1969 coil spring Trooper action. It was really a very handsome gun and would have been hell for stout. But it would not have had the cachet and style of the original and they were probably right not to produce it.

I can't see that anything has changed since.

bac1023
06-29-2012, 19:32
I didn't think it was confirmed either. Frankly, I don't want it to happen.

Sheepdog Scout
06-29-2012, 19:33
I didn't think it was confirmed either. Frankly, I don't want it to happen.

Everyone afraid their old Pythons would lose a bunch of value.:tongueout:

bac1023
06-29-2012, 19:35
I would expect it to be on par with the S&W classics, about $1000.

There's no friggen way a new Python will only be a grand. That's a pipe dream, especially if the action is remotely close to the old Python's.

MarcDW
06-29-2012, 19:37
...Frankly, I don't want it to happen.

Why not??
I don't think it would do anything to the prices of the old ones.
It would be nice getting a new Python.

bac1023
06-29-2012, 19:37
Everyone afraid their old Pythons would lose a bunch of value.:tongueout:

Actually, they won't hurt the value of the old models. They will continue to rise. :cool:

dnuggett
06-29-2012, 19:41
I didn't think it was confirmed either.

I'll confirm it here and now.. well ahead of Colt. :tongueout:

dnuggett
06-29-2012, 19:43
There's no friggen way a new Python will only be a grand. That's a pipe dream, especially if the action is remotely close to the old Python's.

Agreed. I'm somewhere around $1800. And I don't think the action will be exact- meaning not as good.

The_Gun_Guru
06-29-2012, 19:52
Agreed. I'm somewhere around $1800. And I don't think the action will be exact- meaning not as good.

I can get an original LNIB for $1800!

Why would i buy a new one for the same price?

Didn't Colt lose their military contract? If so, THAT IS WHY they would need to start making the classics again! That, or go out of business.


$1000 or LESS is my guess:wavey:


TGG

glock2740
06-29-2012, 19:53
Look what happened when Winchester "went under". You could get a Model 94 at Wal-Mart for $325. Then when they "came back", they are selling for damn near $1000 and quite frankly, aren't anywhere near the quality of the M94's that were put out in the '70's and '80's. The quality was starting to show in the early '90's IMO.

glock2740
06-29-2012, 19:57
I'll confirm it here and now.. well ahead of Colt. :tongueout:
Does this mean that Colt will actually be able to repair the timing issues of some of the older Pythons? If not, then they are opening up a box of **** that will really stink. And they better hope that the "new" Python's don't have any issues. I appreciate Colt trying to make a come back, from the damn near grave, but their new 1911's haven't impressed me in the least bit. The real Pythons were built by true craftsmen.

bac1023
06-29-2012, 19:57
I'll confirm it here and now.. well ahead of Colt. :tongueout:

:rofl::rofl:

dnuggett
06-29-2012, 19:59
I can get an original LNIB for $1800!

Why would i buy a new one for the same price?

Didn't Colt lose their military contract? If so, THAT IS WHY they would need to start making the classics again! That, or go out of business.


$1000 or LESS is my guess:wavey:


TGG

I'm not saying it will be a success. I'm just saying it will happen. As far as price, it's probably somewhere between our guesses. Get closer to your guess and quality will suffer. They can't make half the gun the old Python is for $1000.

bac1023
06-29-2012, 19:59
Why not??
I don't think it would do anything to the prices of the old ones.
It would be nice getting a new Python.

...because there's no way its going to be nearly as good as the old models.

The Python is a legend and, in my opinion, should be left alone.

bac1023
06-29-2012, 20:01
They can't make half the gun the old Python is for $1000.

You've got that right.

Most of my Pythons are from the 70's, but this beauty is a 1965 model and as smooth as they come.


http://i473.photobucket.com/albums/rr97/briancut1023/021-2.jpg

glock2740
06-29-2012, 20:02
...because there's no way its going to be nearly as good as the old models.

The Python is a legend and, in my opinion, should be left alone.
Ditto. :cool:

glock2740
06-29-2012, 20:03
You've got that right.

Most of my Pythons are from the 70's, but this beauty is a 1965 model and as smooth as they come.


http://i473.photobucket.com/albums/rr97/briancut1023/021-2.jpg
Hell, show them all Brian. :cool:

glock2740
06-29-2012, 20:05
I predict this thread is over 5 pages long by morning. :rofl:

MarcDW
06-29-2012, 20:05
...because there's no way its going to be nearly as good as the old models.

The Python is a legend and, in my opinion, should be left alone.

I would wait for the product to make such a statement.
With the CNC you could get quite nice fitting.
Also, the SIG P210 is a legend older then the Python (I think!?) and SIG Sauer now makes them again.
Does not hurt the legend one bit.

bac1023
06-29-2012, 20:11
Does this mean that Colt will actually be able to repair the timing issues of some of the older Pythons? If not, then they are opening up a box of **** that will really stink. And they better hope that the "new" Python's don't have any issues. I appreciate Colt trying to make a come back, from the damn near grave, but their new 1911's haven't impressed me in the least bit. The real Pythons were built by true craftsmen.

Yeah, I don't even want to see a new Python. There is no way Colt could possibly to the name justice with what they have to work with today.

You know damn well all the smiths that used to work on and build them are long gone.

dnuggett
06-29-2012, 20:29
You know damn well all the smiths that used to work on and build them are long gone.

That is true, but there are smiths at Colt working on the old ones right now. Are they messing the old ones up? I honestly don't know, but I'd like to see where they are if they are. :dunno:

countrygun
06-29-2012, 20:40
Yeah, I don't even want to see a new Python. There is no way Colt could possibly to the name justice with what they have to work with today.

You know damn well all the smiths that used to work on and build them are long gone.


You have to give up. Chances are that 90% of the people clamoring for a "New" Python don't even know that most serious collectors consider there were at least 3 generations, and quality levels, of the "Old" Python.
Put a vent rib on somethinghttp://i648.photobucket.com/albums/uu208/countrygun/IM002689.jpg and stamp "Python" on it, most of them have never handled a "classic" Python anyway. The name is good enough,

pizza
06-29-2012, 20:44
When did Colt say they they were re-releasing the Python? News to me. I'm fine with the two I already have. :)


http://i914.photobucket.com/albums/ac341/OU1911/2snakes.jpg

Sweet...I love the 4 inch python. Just like Davis and the bad cops used in Magnum Force...LOL!


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

hogship
06-29-2012, 20:46
That is true, but there are smiths at Colt working on the old ones right now. Are they messing the old ones up? I honestly don't know, but I'd like to see where they are if they are. :dunno:

Sort of what I was thinking, too!

I'd be willing to bet we still do have some gunsmiths that are every bit as good as the old guys.......and, they would drool over the chance to put a thousand new Pythons together! (Of course, I'm talking about the best of the best revolver smiths........not just anyone who calls himself a gunsmith!)

This is a chance for Colt to break back into the market that is "owned" by Smith now-a-days. It's also a chance to take the old weaker Colt lock work and toughen it up a bit.

If they produced a top notch improved Python, it would open the doors to doing the same with.........say, a Detective Special!. :wow:

If Colt did this idea up right......I'd be willing to bet they could compete in today's market.......with today's market prices!

ooc

hogship
06-29-2012, 20:54
Now, just pipe dreaming here...........:wavey:

I'd be willing to bet Colt could produce a new Python every bit as smooth as the older Pythons, by simply improving the action with modern sealed miniature roller bearings.......:shocked:

.......and, they could probably duplicate the old Python action with far less labor time, to boot! :faint:

There is no question that modern CNC equipment will reduce labor time, and improve tolerance specifications in all the machining processes.

ooc

glock2740
06-29-2012, 21:02
Sweet...I love the 4 inch python. Just like Davis and the bad cops used in Magnum Force...LOL!

Was actually a movie that made me fall in love with the blued 4" Python when I was a kid. :cool: Also, a 7.5" Ruger RH .44 Magnum was my very first handgun. Not a Model 29, like Dirty Harry carried, but it was stainless and just as good to me. :cool:

CDR_Glock
06-29-2012, 22:53
I don't think they'd have an Msrp for less than $2500.

Sgt127
06-30-2012, 07:45
They could keep the price down a little by offering only stainless with a vapor honed finish or something. The old Royal blue and nickel would be too labor intensive.

Lots of CNC machines, internals cut with an EDM machine or something to reduce all the hand fitting.

Rubber grips instead of wood.

IF they come out with the Python again, I think they could get it on the market for a retail price of $1600 and you could buy them for around $1300.

We'll see. If they can't clone the original (quality wise) I wish they wouldn't bother.

WiskyT
06-30-2012, 08:28
I would wait for the product to make such a statement.
With the CNC you could get quite nice fitting.
Also, the SIG P210 is a legend older then the Python (I think!?) and SIG Sauer now makes them again.
Does not hurt the legend one bit.

Exactly. CNC and other advances make the most expensive part of the Python, the skilled labor, cheap. People ignore this and think the only way to make a gun like that is to have some guy named Henry who has been with Colt since the 1930's delicately assembling it.

Take engines for example. The engine in my Mustang has variable cam timing, 4 valve DOHC heads, computer controlled fuel injection, meets emission standards and gets 30MPG and makes over 300 BHP. The technology in that engine is stuff that cost F1 teams a hundred grand not long ago and my whole car cost $22,000.00.

Whether Colt will make it, and what it would be marketed for, I have no idea. Colt has gone out of their way to run it's self into the ground for the last few decades and I have no idea if they are getting any smarter or not. Supposedly they are a "New Colt" and are getting back on track.

45caldan
06-30-2012, 08:31
Now, just pipe dreaming here...........:wavey:

I'd be willing to bet Colt could produce a new Python every bit as smooth as the older Pythons, by simply improving the action with modern sealed miniature roller bearings.......:shocked:

.......and, they could probably duplicate the old Python action with far less labor time, to boot! :faint:

There is no question that modern CNC equipment will reduce labor time, and improve tolerance specifications in all the machining processes.

ooc
While CNC maching would make it cheaper and easier to "produce" a Python, it won't make it "better".
The Python was all about laborious hand fitting, polishing and deep blueing. It would be extremely expensive to give one the same level of fit and finish today....
I agree with BAC that the old ones would continue to rise in value do to this....same as the new "Classic" Smiths vs. the older ones....who the hell wants a "Classic" M27 with a freaking lock hole on the side. :puking:

WiskyT
06-30-2012, 08:41
If they produced a top notch improved Python, it would open the doors to doing the same with.........say, a Detective Special!. :wow:

If Colt did this idea up right......I'd be willing to bet they could compete in today's market.......with today's market prices!

ooc

Armscor alrady makes the DS for about $180.00. It aint purdy, but it works. For a couple of hundred more they could easily make it polished and everything the DS was back in the day.

glock2740
06-30-2012, 09:06
Is there any official news or link of this from Colt?

glocksterr
06-30-2012, 09:08
The real Pythons were built by true craftsmen.


does that mean they didnt eat chop suey?

:whistling:

38 Super Fan
06-30-2012, 09:34
Yeah, I don't even want to see a new Python. There is no way Colt could possibly to the name justice with what they have to work with today.

You know damn well all the smiths that used to work on and build them are long gone.
I agree completely. I wasn't even real impressed with the Python Elites I've handled, I hope they're not seriously bringing back the Python again.

Salmoneye
06-30-2012, 09:44
Frankly, I don't want it to happen.

It won't.

Berto
06-30-2012, 10:01
They could do like S&W and apply the name to a friggin polymer pistol.

AngryPanda
06-30-2012, 10:33
I'm with BAC. A modern Python stands a good chance of blemishing the Python name. It wouldn't be a stretch to imagine an internal lock, a rollmark about how you should read the owners manual, etc. If they do come out for around a grand, that will be very telling. I'd rather get a beat up, but fixable old model for a grand than a modern one. That said, I have not seen what they will produce, and I question if they even will produce a new Python. Maybe it will be a fine firearm. Knowing Colt (todays Colt) They will make about 10% of the demand and charge twice what they ought to cost.

countrygun
06-30-2012, 11:44
Exactly. CNC and other advances make the most expensive part of the Python, the skilled labor, cheap. People ignore this and think the only way to make a gun like that is to have some guy named Henry who has been with Colt since the 1930's delicately assembling it.

Take engines for example. The engine in my Mustang has variable cam timing, 4 valve DOHC heads, computer controlled fuel injection, meets emission standards and gets 30MPG and makes over 300 BHP. The technology in that engine is stuff that cost F1 teams a hundred grand not long ago and my whole car cost $22,000.00.

Whether Colt will make it, and what it would be marketed for, I have no idea. Colt has gone out of their way to run it's self into the ground for the last few decades and I have no idea if they are getting any smarter or not. Supposedly they are a "New Colt" and are getting back on track.


A Colt Python isn't a car. What you are describing is more like Ruger's improvements to the Colt SAA. Yet, despite the improvements Ruger has made while keeping the same recognizable form Colt has no trouble with their re introduction of the SAA.

For the sake of the computer generation, the original Python cannot be duplicated by merely putting the right command lines in a program. They were the result of a "balamce" between the, actually few, springs, and the meshing of the other parts. The modern methods can produce very nice guns alright, but we haven't replaced the human hand and it's ability to evaluate pressure or gauge smoothness. Colt had made moves in that direction with the last "generation" of the "Old" Pythons. Dig real deep into the reviews and you will find the difference between those later Pythons, and the ones with the craftsman's initials stamped in them, was noticable.

Berto
06-30-2012, 12:12
I'm not completely sold on the whole majic juju craftsmanship of the early Python vs new. IMO much of that is attributed to newer harder steels, esp going from carbon to SS. The same with newer S&W vs old.
A gun can be crafted with modern steel alloys and CAD/CAM methods with all the handfitting and polishing utilized on the classic era Pythons and people will still insist it's an abomination on some level because it does't have some intangible feel juju of an older gun with softer parts worn in to perfect harmony.

WiskyT
06-30-2012, 12:26
I'm not completely sold on the whole majic juju craftsmanship of the early Python vs new. IMO much of that is attributed to newer harder steels, esp going from carbon to SS. The same with newer S&W vs old.
A gun can be crafted with modern steel alloys and CAD/CAM methods with all the handfitting and polishing utilized on the classic era Pythons and people will still insist it's an abomination on some level because it does't have some intangible feel juju of an older gun with softer parts worn in to perfect harmony.

Yup. The idea that modern manufacturing can't be as good as old manufacturing is nonsense. There was nothing magical about old Pythons. They were very well made, well finished, beautiful guns. Guns like that get made every day. The fact that a CNC machine could do the majority of the work, and then a skilled person finish it, shouldn't be some kind of mystery.

The Python could easily be made, and to the previous standards, if Colt, or anyone else wanted to. We put a man on the Moon over 40 years ago, we make 305hp economy cars, but somehow, the ability to make a simple gun made of steel will elude Mankind for eternity :upeyes:

countrygun
06-30-2012, 12:39
Yup. The idea that modern manufacturing can't be as good as old manufacturing is nonsense. There was nothing magical about old Pythons. They were very well made, well finished, beautiful guns. Guns like that get made every day. The fact that a CNC machine could do the majority of the work, and then a skilled person finish it, shouldn't be some kind of mystery.

The Python could easily be made, and to the previous standards, if Colt, or anyone else wanted to. We put a man on the Moon over 40 years ago, we make 305hp economy cars, but somehow, the ability to make a simple gun made of steel will elude Mankind for eternity :upeyes:


With our modern knowledge of chemistry we should be able to make whiskey without aging it too:upeyes:

BTW as someone who has worked on a whole lot of revolvers made from the 1930's to two years ago, case hardening carbon steel does make for a potentially smoother surface than any stainless steel can acheive on it's own.

There is a 'Ju-ju" to crafting and tuning the Colt action.

Sorry if that infers that modern man and his computers are less than the complete masters of the world.

Sgt127
06-30-2012, 12:50
This is the inside of a couple year old Smith Model 629. Great finish. Well machined...

http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j277/sgt127/IMG_0177.jpg

This is the inside of an old Smith....

http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j277/sgt127/RM.jpg

Specifically, a 1936 Smith & Wesson Registered Magnum. Nicely done, but, nothing like the new version.

Anything today CAN be made as well, or better than it was made years ago. Is it worth the time and energy? Usually not. A very usable product can be manufactured for alot less money. But...if somebody wants to....

25 years ago, I had Wilson build me a Master Grade 130 .45. I sent them a brand new Series 70 Colt. And eight hundred dollars later, I got back one of the finest hand fitted .45's imaginable. Hand checkered. Slide to frame fitted. Macth barrel etc. But, all those parts, with all thier built in tolerences, had to be fitted, by hand.

Now, you can buy an off the shelf gun with those same tolerences because all the parts can be built to within a thousands of an inch, exactly, everytime.

WiskyT
06-30-2012, 12:56
This is the inside of a couple year old Smith Model 629. Great finish. Well machined...

http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j277/sgt127/IMG_0177.jpg

This is the inside of an old Smith....

http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j277/sgt127/RM.jpg

Specifically, a 1936 Smith & Wesson Registered Magnum. Nicely done, but, nothing like the new version.

Anything today CAN be made as well, or better than it was made years ago. Is it worth the time and energy? Usually not. A very usable product can be manufactured for alot less money. But...if somebody wants to....

25 years ago, I had Wilson build me a Master Grade 130 .45. I sent them a brand new Series 70 Colt. And eight hundred dollars later, I got back one of the finest hand fitted .45's imaginable. Hand checkered. Slide to frame fitted. Macth barrel etc. But, all those parts, with all thier built in tolerences, had to be fitted, by hand.

Now, you can buy an off the shelf gun with those same tolerences because all the parts can be built to within a thousands of an inch, exactly, everytime.

No!No! The guy that finished your 1911 is gone and unless someone clones him, and I mean quick, your gun could never be made again:supergrin:

Guys talk about guns like they are some kind of fine wine. Heck, even the wine guys are full of crap half the time.

dnuggett
06-30-2012, 13:56
Is there any official news or link of this from Colt?

No.


The following errors occurred with your submission:
The message you have entered is too short. Please lengthen your message to at least 5 characters.

L Pete
06-30-2012, 14:47
If the Python is reintroduced, the price will be enough to buy two or three 686s or GP-100s.

You would be able to buy one or the other, and have it tuned to a better trigger that the factory Python, and still have mucho dinero left in your pocket.

Besides, I think that probably the workers who made those Pythons of old, are most likely retired. Therefore, the newer workers will not be able to do what was done years ago, and their product will not likely be up to the standards of the old Pythons.

Or,........they would produce something that looks exactly like a King Cobra, and chisel the word "Python" on the barrel.

Personally, I would love the see the return of a high quality revolver to the market, but that is really unlikely, in my eyes.

got2hav1
06-30-2012, 15:01
You've got that right.

Most of my Pythons are from the 70's, but this beauty is a 1965 model and as smooth as they come.


http://i473.photobucket.com/albums/rr97/briancut1023/021-2.jpg

A real drooler right there. Beautiful!:cool:

countrygun
06-30-2012, 16:01
This is the inside of a couple year old Smith Model 629. Great finish. Well machined...

http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j277/sgt127/IMG_0177.jpg

This is the inside of an old Smith....

http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j277/sgt127/RM.jpg

Specifically, a 1936 Smith & Wesson Registered Magnum. Nicely done, but, nothing like the new version.

Anything today CAN be made as well, or better than it was made years ago. Is it worth the time and energy? Usually not. A very usable product can be manufactured for alot less money. But...if somebody wants to....

25 years ago, I had Wilson build me a Master Grade 130 .45. I sent them a brand new Series 70 Colt. And eight hundred dollars later, I got back one of the finest hand fitted .45's imaginable. Hand checkered. Slide to frame fitted. Macth barrel etc. But, all those parts, with all thier built in tolerences, had to be fitted, by hand.

Now, you can buy an off the shelf gun with those same tolerences because all the parts can be built to within a thousands of an inch, exactly, everytime.

You, of course, are aware that the machining marks can be an asset in obtaining a smooth action as the old gunsmiths knew?
The proof that it matters is in the fact that, despite how "pretty" it looks, the new guns still aren't as slick as a tuned older gun. I am glad you brought up the Smiths because it seems like the "modern" methods are still not yeilding the results, off the assembly line, that old fashioned hand work acheives.

WiskyT
06-30-2012, 16:10
You, of course, are aware that the machining marks can be an asset in obtaining a smooth action as the old gunsmiths knew?
The proof that it matters is in the fact that, despite how "pretty" it looks, the new guns still aren't as slick as a tuned older gun. I am glad you brought up the Smiths because it seems like the "modern" methods are still not yeilding the results, off the assembly line, that old fashioned hand work acheives.

Exactly, so you put a pig into the machine on one end, and a rough Python comes out the other. Then you pay a guy named Bob, or even Shirley, who has been trained the same way the original Python assemblers were, a couple of hundred bucks to fit it and finish it. It's not that complicated.

countrygun
06-30-2012, 16:14
Exactly, so you put a pig into the machine on one end, and a rough Python comes out the other. Then you pay a guy named Bob, or even Shirley, who has been trained the same way the original Python assemblers were, a couple of hundred bucks to fit it and finish it. It's not that complicated.

Colt was doing that at in the last stage of the Python. Didn't work.

WiskyT
06-30-2012, 16:18
That's because of human factors like labor disputes, local governments acting as a board of directors, and all around suck business practices. An enterprising person or group could do it right. It's like saying that because third world airplanes crash, that an object that is heavier than air can't fly. Colt, in the 1980's or so was like an African airline.

AngryPanda
06-30-2012, 17:22
Must be built from a solid block of steel by Zombie Sam Colt himself or it may as well be a highpoint.

WiskyT
06-30-2012, 17:24
Must be built from a solid block of steel by Zombie Sam Colt himself or it may as well be a highpoint.

On a mill powdered by the Passaic River in Paterson,NJ.

Spiffums
06-30-2012, 17:28
I'd pay alot for an Official Colt Zombie Killing Rick Model.......with that quick draw holster he rocks.

countrygun
06-30-2012, 17:38
Must be built from a solid block of steel by Zombie Sam Colt himself or it may as well be a highpoint.


If modern techniques and equipment were putting out the quality, we wouldn't be discussing the Python.

A S&W "L" frame can be tuned to be as nice as a Python, but they do not, despite the marvels of this wonderful age, come from the factory that way. S&W has to utilize a "Custom Shop" to get close, and somewhere on this forum I have heard complaints about their work.

AngryPanda
06-30-2012, 17:43
If modern techniques and equipment were putting out the quality, we wouldn't be discussing the Python.

A S&W "L" frame can be tuned to be as nice as a Python, but they do not, despite the marvels of this wonderful age, come from the factory that way. S&W has to utilize a "Custom Shop" to get close, and somewhere on this forum I have heard complaints about their work.

That's why I have a witch doctor sacrifice a chicken over every new gun I purchase.

WiskyT
06-30-2012, 17:49
That's why I have a witch doctor sacrifice a chicken over every new gun I purchase.

:animlol:Stop! Stop it!! :animlol:

countrygun
06-30-2012, 17:57
That's why I have a witch doctor sacrifice a chicken over every new gun I purchase.


I am glad I was taught by an old-school gunsmith (long since passed) The way he taught me is a lot less messy than your method.

rgregoryb
06-30-2012, 18:01
The price of the new Python is supposed to be right at $ 2,000.00

Jade Falcon
06-30-2012, 18:09
You've got that right.

Most of my Pythons are from the 70's, but this beauty is a 1965 model and as smooth as they come.


http://i473.photobucket.com/albums/rr97/briancut1023/021-2.jpg

I like your brushed-stainless 4" version MUCH better. :cool:

I don't believe Colt will reintroduce the Python. IIRC, from the article on the last Python in 2005, the final one Colt ever produced is sitting in the Museum right now with a $50,000 price tag on it.

bac1023
06-30-2012, 18:31
I agree completely. I wasn't even real impressed with the Python Elites I've handled, I hope they're not seriously bringing back the Python again.

I agree, Cody.

I own an Elite and love it as a collector's item and for its beauty, but there's no way its as smooth as my older models.

bac1023
06-30-2012, 18:33
They could do like S&W and apply the name to a friggin polymer pistol.

:rofl::rofl:

ala "M&P"!

bac1023
06-30-2012, 18:37
Exactly. CNC and other advances make the most expensive part of the Python, the skilled labor, cheap. People ignore this and think the only way to make a gun like that is to have some guy named Henry who has been with Colt since the 1930's delicately assembling it.

Take engines for example. The engine in my Mustang has variable cam timing, 4 valve DOHC heads, computer controlled fuel injection, meets emission standards and gets 30MPG and makes over 300 BHP. The technology in that engine is stuff that cost F1 teams a hundred grand not long ago and my whole car cost $22,000.00.



...a totally asinine analogy :upeyes:

bac1023
06-30-2012, 18:42
Anything today CAN be made as well, or better than it was made years ago. Is it worth the time and energy? Usually not.

I don't think anyone is saying it can't be done. Of course it can.

However, it won't be done due to cost. The new methods will not make the same old Python.

bac1023
06-30-2012, 18:46
Exactly, so you put a pig into the machine on one end, and a rough Python comes out the other. Then you pay a guy named Bob, or even Shirley, who has been trained the same way the original Python assemblers were, a couple of hundred bucks to fit it and finish it. It's not that complicated.
That's exactly why the lastest Pythons from the 90's weren't the same as the older models.

bac1023
06-30-2012, 18:47
Must be built from a solid block of steel by Zombie Sam Colt himself or it may as well be a highpoint.

:rofl::rofl:

bac1023
06-30-2012, 18:48
The price of the new Python is supposed to be right at $ 2,000.00

Where did we hear this info?

I've heard nothing offical about the Python's return. :dunno:

bac1023
06-30-2012, 18:54
I like your brushed-stainless 4" version MUCH better. :cool:



They look nice and sell for a small fortune, but they aren't as sooth as the old models.



http://img230.imageshack.us/img230/9290/0001529ip6.jpg

NMGlocker
06-30-2012, 19:07
Old people crack me up (and I'm 42).
It was always uphill both ways in the snow, and the older they get the better they were.

The fitting and tolerances required for an engine turning 10k+ RPM at 250+ degrees for years on end cannot be compared to the lockwork of a revolver... really?
:rofl:

countrygun
06-30-2012, 19:35
Old people crack me up (and I'm 42).
It was always uphill both ways in the snow, and the older they get the better they were.

The fitting and tolerances required for an engine turning 10k+ RPM at 250+ degrees for years on end cannot be compared to the lockwork of a revolver... really?
:rofl:


Are you turning that engine over with your trigger finger?

A few simple questions for you.

How many rounds have you fired from a, say "Pre '65" Python and how many from a "post '80" one?

How many revolvers that have been tuned by a custom 'smith do you own and shoot?

How many untuned ones do you own and shoot to compare them to?

We "Old people (I'm 52)" have some real advantages we have actual experience and some of us still have the items in question.

You speak theoretically about engines. Can you speak from experience about the Python?

38 Super Fan
06-30-2012, 19:46
Exactly. CNC and other advances make the most expensive part of the Python, the skilled labor, cheap. People ignore this and think the only way to make a gun like that is to have some guy named Henry who has been with Colt since the 1930's delicately assembling it.

Take engines for example. The engine in my Mustang has variable cam timing, 4 valve DOHC heads, computer controlled fuel injection, meets emission standards and gets 30MPG and makes over 300 BHP. The technology in that engine is stuff that cost F1 teams a hundred grand not long ago and my whole car cost $22,000.00.

Whether Colt will make it, and what it would be marketed for, I have no idea. Colt has gone out of their way to run it's self into the ground for the last few decades and I have no idea if they are getting any smarter or not. Supposedly they are a "New Colt" and are getting back on track.
Yeah, overhead cams and fuel injection are real cutting edge technology.

Jim Watson
06-30-2012, 19:55
I have been reading about how modern machinery will make affordable high quality guns like double shotguns and double express rifles ever since my first Gun Digest of 1957.
It hasn't happened yet. And I don't think Colt can do it, either.

That said, you may have my Pythons, tuned by experts in the field (Colt Custom Shop under Don Tedford and Reeves Jungkind) for $2000 each, complete with holster wear from actual use, no gun safe rug burns in sight.
I will put part of the money into a well honed S&W and the rest in my pocket, and consider myself ahead of the game.

My first one in 1978 was the state of the art in gunmaking and gunsmithing. My second one ca 1998 was already a nostalgia trip.
I don't think the nostalgia trip industry can support new tooling for gun manufacture.

countrygun
06-30-2012, 19:55
Yeah, overhead cams and fuel injection are real cutting edge technology.


Really funny when you consider that Chevy introduced the fuel injector in the '57 model only two years after the Python was born.

:rofl:

bac1023
06-30-2012, 20:09
I still think of the beautiful 3 digit serial number Python from early 1956 that I passed up a few years ago at my local shop. It was a mint royal blue 6" model in the box. I could have had it for $1900, which is less than half what it would be worth now. :faint:

I regret that move (or lack thereof) more than anything else gun related.

countrygun
06-30-2012, 20:14
I have been reading about how modern machinery will make affordable high quality guns like double shotguns and double express rifles ever since my first Gun Digest of 1957.
It hasn't happened yet. And I don't think Colt can do it, either.

That said, you may have my Pythons, tuned by experts in the field (Colt Custom Shop under Don Tedford and Reeves Jungkind) for $2000 each, complete with holster wear from actual use, no gun safe rug burns in sight.
I will put part of the money into a well honed S&W and the rest in my pocket, and consider myself ahead of the game.

My first one in 1978 was the state of the art in gunmaking and gunsmithing. My second one ca 1998 was already a nostalgia trip.
I don't think the nostalgia trip industry can support new tooling for gun manufacture.


For all the arguments i completely agree with you (if you ever come down on the price of the '78 let me know however)

My wife bought a used 686 off a cop in town and I put what I know to work on the inside. I will be darned if it isn't the nicest "full factory springs" job I have ever done or probably handled. I have never claimed that the Python was the "do all-be all" of .357 revolvers. I have one because the deal was too good. But I will say that, the Python was a jewel that we won't see from Colt again.

What people don't realize about the Python is the balance within the action. I have heard some people claim they needed to be "re tuned" often, and I have heard some claim they have run for thousands of rounds without ever needing anything. I think they are both right and both telling the truth. It is odd that the "Car club" can't grasp the subtleties here. You can't hook a Python up to a dyno and and run a diagnostic on it at different rpms. In perfect balance and in perfect time the Python can run a long time, but they can be slightly out of balance, not noticable to the operator, and be putting stresses and wear where it doesn't need to be.

I find the S&Ws to be a lot easier to work on and less tempermental, not having just a single "V" spring running the whole thing.

Even with this advantage in design, Smith standard production revolvers still have a high MSRP and are not as good as they could be by a long shot.

rgregoryb
06-30-2012, 20:16
Where did we hear this info?

I've heard nothing offical about the Python's return. :dunno:

if I told you, I would have to kill myself...

bac1023
06-30-2012, 20:48
if I told you, I would have to kill myself...

:animlol:

Jim Watson
06-30-2012, 21:47
(if you ever come down on the price of the '78 let me know however)

Bunch of Internet Whiney Butt Cheapskates.
Or Socialists who don't want to pay market price for anything.

Tell you what, you can have it for $2000 or the list price of the 2013 Python, whichever is less.

dnuggett
06-30-2012, 22:08
Bunch of Internet Whiney Butt Cheapskates.
Or Socialists who don't want to pay market price for anything.

Tell you what, you can have it for $2000 or the list price of the 2013 Python, whichever is less.

Smart move saying "list price." I almost said if he doesn't take it for list, I will. Almost.

Jim Watson
06-30-2012, 22:10
Well, I am not going to sell my Significant Historical Artifact and Valuable Collector's Item for the "street price" of a latter day knockoff. I figure the list price of a latter day knockoff will be acceptable... if there ever is one knocked off, that is.

NEOH212
06-30-2012, 22:10
I would expect it to be on par with the S&W classics, about $1000.

Fine by me as long as it doesn't have a crappy internal lock. :supergrin:

dnuggett
06-30-2012, 22:19
Well, I am not going to sell my Significant Historical Artifact and Valuable Collector's Item for the "street price" of a latter day knockoff.

Don't blame you at all.

fnfalman
06-30-2012, 23:18
We "Old people (I'm 52)" have some real advantages we have actual experience and some of us still have the items in question.


Wow, you're a whole TEN YEARS older than NMGlocker. That makes your life experience so much more, eh?

He was crapping in diaper while you were eating sand at the playground.

Neither of you grew up in the halcyon days of hand fitted guns.

countrygun
07-01-2012, 00:02
Wow, you're a whole TEN YEARS older than NMGlocker. That makes your life experience so much more, eh?

He was crapping in diaper while you were eating sand at the playground.

Neither of you grew up in the halcyon days of hand fitted guns.


As a matter of fact I grew up shooting a lot of those hand fitted guns, they were pretty much the norm. By the time I was twenty I already had a customized Colt Series 70 and a 5" S&W 27 in my collection as well as an all matching 2nd issue M-1 carbine (Six digit serial # ), My deer rifle was a pre-war Savage 99 .250/3000 and for fun I had a Winchester 65 in 25/20.


During my teens I hung out in the gunsmithing shop of the man who built the finest PPC revolvers for the local LEO competitors, and I got to know them as well.

I would say I have handled, shot and owned some of the finest of the hand fitted guns.
Search my posts all you like, unless it is absolutely relevant and a quality issue I never respond or post anything about a given gun's qualities unless I own or have owned one or have some reason to have an appreciable amount of experience with one. I don't pass along gossip or mimic magazine articles or what I read on other forums unlike some folks.

I can't sing, juggle, tap dance, I am only a passible guitarist, but I know my guns and have a lot more experience than a lot of folks that post nonsense that is swallowed by folks that don't know any better.

AngryPanda
07-01-2012, 00:19
I actually invented guns.

Gregg702
07-01-2012, 00:21
I actually invented guns.

So would you say what Al Gore is to the Internet, you are to guns?

Wyoming
07-01-2012, 00:26
Actually, they won't hurt the value of the old models. They will continue to rise. :cool:

That is true. It will be like SAA, 1st, 2nd and 3rd generation.

What ever Colt does it will be a small number released. So if they do and you want a Python get while you can.

I don't want to pee in anybodies Wheaties but if the lawyers make Colt put in a trigger lock?:upeyes:

Berto
07-01-2012, 00:56
Whatever lock they use, I can assure you it won't be as finely fitted or smooth in operation as the old locks were.

RON in PA
07-01-2012, 01:56
The new Pythons will be built on an assembly line right next to the Glock carbine assembly line.

WiskyT
07-01-2012, 04:25
Old people crack me up (and I'm 42).
It was always uphill both ways in the snow, and the older they get the better they were.

The fitting and tolerances required for an engine turning 10k+ RPM at 250+ degrees for years on end cannot be compared to the lockwork of a revolver... really?
:rofl:

I don't think it's age, maybe it is. I think it's more about ego, and since BAC decided to loose his cool veneer and call me "assinine", I'd use the term "pigheaded" to describe at least one of them.

They think because a gun has been made by an old man with a fine file and stone, that that is the only way it precision can be achieved. Modern machining has brought the price of precision down. Car engines, gun parts, sophisticated machines, all are becoming more precise and for less money.

The critical parts on an engine that turns 15,000RPM are more precise than the parts on a Python, and there are hundreds more of them in and engine. Think of all the critical dimensions, hundreds of them, that must be exactly right on a motorcycle that costs $5,000.00. How many dimensions like that are on a gun?

These guys spend a lot of money on their guns and the do it because it makes them feel important. They don't want anyone letting the air out of their balloon.

WiskyT
07-01-2012, 04:29
Whatever lock they use, I can assure you it won't be as finely fitted or smooth in operation as the old locks were.

That might just be the best post in this thread,

WiskyT
07-01-2012, 04:40
Yeah, overhead cams and fuel injection are real cutting edge technology.

No, but apparently reading comprehension is. It's the COST and the ability to make these things we are talking about. Fuel injection has been around for nearly a century or so. Why was it so uncommon, reserved for only the more expensive cars? Because it was expensive to produce. The same with 4 valve heads. Now even the cheapest cars have it. Variable cam timing, six speed transmissions, limited slip rear end, anitlock brakes, It goes on and on and this is on a car that is dirt cheap.

The Mustang costs $22,000.00 now. That's $10,700.00 in 1986. In 1986 only cars costing 50-100K had the kind of performance that this car does.

fnfalman
07-01-2012, 04:46
I don't give a damn if the new Python; if there is to be such an animal, is hand fitted or CNC or an pony crap out of its ass. If it's well made, accurate and with a trigger to die for, then it's all good.

However, if pigs could fly and all that, I don't think that Colt would really put out a true effort. Look at the Python Elite. The damn thing is a disgrace to the Python heritage with the poor fit & finish not to mention the atrocious trigger pull. Well, to be fair, atrocious for a Python but damn good comparing to the rest.

WiskyT
07-01-2012, 04:49
Really funny when you consider that Chevy introduced the fuel injector in the '57 model only two years after the Python was born.

:rofl:

Otto Diesel did the FI thing a little earlier, what's your point?

fnfalman
07-01-2012, 04:53
Otto Diesel did the FI thing a little earlier, what's your point?

And Mercedes put it in the Gullwing a few years before the Python was born too.

What's my point? The Germans put fuel injectors into their automobiles before Americans did.

What does that have to do with the Python? I have no idea.

WiskyT
07-01-2012, 04:53
I don't think anyone is saying it can't be done. Of course it can.

However, it won't be done due to cost. The new methods will not make the same old Python.

It took two sentences for you to contradict yourself. Would that be an asinine comment?:dunno:

WiskyT
07-01-2012, 05:01
And Mercedes put it in the Gullwing a few years before the Python was born too.

What's my point? The Germans put fuel injectors into their automobiles before Americans did.

What does that have to do with the Python? I have no idea.

I think you're on to something there. The Chinese invented pasta and gunpowder.

fnfalman
07-01-2012, 05:22
I think you're on to something there. The Chinese invented pasta and gunpowder.

Not to mention the magnetic compass, the abbacus which was the forerunner to the calculator and paper as we know it. Of course the Egyptians for some reasons get the credit for the word "paper". It's too much to ask the Western world to give us Orientals some credits?

bac1023
07-01-2012, 05:52
I don't think it's age, maybe it is. I think it's more about ego, and since BAC decided to loose his cool veneer and call me "assinine", I'd use the term "pigheaded" to describe at least one of them.



I apologize.

I thought the comparison was a little off is all.

Everyone can think what they want. The question will be answered if and when the Python is reintroduced.

bac1023
07-01-2012, 05:54
It took two sentences for you to contradict yourself. Would that be an asinine comment?:dunno:

Not really.

I never said it coudn't be done. I said it won't be done. Its too labor intensive and too costly to build firearms like that these days.

That's why Colt stopped with Python in the first place. The last "Elite" models were far from elite.

WiskyT
07-01-2012, 06:23
I apologize.

I thought the comparison was a little off is all.

Everyone can think what they want. The question will be answered if and when the Python is reintroduced.

That's rare on here. I was a little surprised by the shot, but I'm not surprised by your follow-up.

I think the gun could very easily be made, and for a reasonable price. I don't think Colt will do it because they simply haven't shown any interest in making products that appeal to civilian consumers. I read somewhere, in the American Rifleman I think, that Colt was turning over a new leaf and getting back into the consumer market. It's been a while since I read that and I haven't seen anything to support that.

With the way guns are selling these days, Colt could sell all of their classic guns at appropriate prices. They wouldn't replace the old school ones any more than a new Corvette would replace a '54, but they would be worth owning in their own right and people would buy them.

I've considered getting one of the Armscor DS for $180.00 and paying a couple of hundred to a smith to have it slicked up. For $380.00 I'd have a matte finished, good shooting, DS.

WiskyT
07-01-2012, 06:25
Not to mention the magnetic compass, the abbacus which was the forerunner to the calculator and paper as we know it. Of course the Egyptians for some reasons get the credit for the word "paper". It's too much to ask the Western world to give us Orientals some credits?

You people like to be called "Asians" now.

fnfalman
07-01-2012, 06:34
I've considered getting one of the Armscor DS for $180.00 and paying a couple of hundred to a smith to have it slicked up. For $380.00 I'd have a matte finished, good shooting, DS.

I don't know about that. Those ARMSCOR Colt clones are horribly made. I saw three at Boise Gun Company last year and they made Rossi look like Registered Magnums.

fnfalman
07-01-2012, 06:35
You people like to be called "Asians" now.

See what I mean? White people encompassed us all in with the rest of the Asians in Asia. No respect. No respect at all.

WiskyT
07-01-2012, 06:40
See what I mean? White people encompassed us all in with the rest of the Asians in Asia. No respect. No respect at all.

And California officially being part of Asia, the Mexicans are now Asians too.

fnfalman
07-01-2012, 06:54
And California officially being part of Asia, the Mexicans are now Asians too.

Mexicans have always been Asians. We crossed the Bering Strait back in the days to conquer America.

WiskyT
07-01-2012, 07:00
Mexicans have always been Asians. We crossed the Bering Strait back in the days to conquer America.

Mexican food, chilies and cilantro. Asian food, chilies and cilantro, coincidence? I think not.

dnuggett
07-01-2012, 08:19
Mexicans have always been Asians. We crossed the Bering Strait back in the days to conquer America.

All that walking just to get your ass handed to you at San Jacinto? Don't mess with T

38 Super Fan
07-01-2012, 08:52
No, but apparently reading comprehension is. It's the COST and the ability to make these things we are talking about. Fuel injection has been around for nearly a century or so. Why was it so uncommon, reserved for only the more expensive cars? Because it was expensive to produce. The same with 4 valve heads. Now even the cheapest cars have it. Variable cam timing, six speed transmissions, limited slip rear end, anitlock brakes, It goes on and on and this is on a car that is dirt cheap.

The Mustang costs $22,000.00 now. That's $10,700.00 in 1986. In 1986 only cars costing 50-100K had the kind of performance that this car does.

Your first post was still pretty crazy, comparing an F-1 car to Mustang. Reguardless of technology, a damn F-1 car is gonna be a hell of lot more expensive than your daily driver.

WiskyT
07-01-2012, 08:55
Your first post was still pretty crazy, comparing an F-1 car to Mustang. Reguardless of technology, a damn F-1 car is gonna be a hell of lot more expensive than your daily driver.

The point is what was prohibitively expensive, even in F1, years ago is now standard equipment on a cheap car. Why, because technology makes things cheaper.

HexHead
07-01-2012, 09:05
Over on Colt Forum, one of the members is the manager of the Custom Shop there. Yes, he said Colt was going to be coming out with a new DA revolver. He also said it wasn't going to be a Python.

If they're smart, they'll bring back a snubbie like the DS-II or Agent to cash in on the popularity of concealed revolvers. I'm not even expecting a classic Detective Special, much less a Python. That's almost laughable to consider today. The big deal about the Python was the hand fitting and smoothing of the action. To bring back just the name would simply cheapen their legacy.

38 Super Fan
07-01-2012, 09:15
The point is what was prohibitively expensive, even in F1, years ago is now standard equipment on a cheap car. Why, because technology makes things cheaper.
I hear what you're trying to say, I just thought you're comparison was a little hard to deal with.

HexHead
07-01-2012, 09:16
We put a man on the Moon over 40 years ago.

Not only can we not make a Python like my 1966 one today, we can't even go back to the moon either. Hell, we can't even get the 150 miles to the ISS anymore.

WiskyT
07-01-2012, 09:26
Not only can we not make a Python like my 1966 one today, we can't even go back to the moon either. Hell, we can't even get the 150 miles to the ISS anymore.

We could do all of those things, "we" (not you and I) choose not to.

bac1023
07-01-2012, 09:27
Over on Colt Forum, one of the members is the manager of the Custom Shop there. Yes, he said Colt was going to be coming out with a new DA revolver. He also said it wasn't going to be a Python.



That makes more sense.

bac1023
07-01-2012, 09:30
Your first post was still pretty crazy, comparing an F-1 car to Mustang. Reguardless of technology, a damn F-1 car is gonna be a hell of lot more expensive than your daily driver.

Formula One cars are basically the highest technology land vehicles on earth.

bac1023
07-01-2012, 09:31
That's rare on here. I was a little surprised by the shot, but I'm not surprised by your follow-up.



I was having a bad night after a bad day. :embarassed:

Bruce M
07-01-2012, 10:02
if I told you, I would have to kill myself...:rofl::rofl:

I actually invented guns.:rofl::rofl:

L Pete
07-01-2012, 10:04
If Colt brings back a revolver, I wished it would be the Diamondback 2.5" version in stainless.

I'd be at the LGS the day they are announced with cash in hand for a pair of consecutive serial numbered guns.

I have Smiths and Rugers in .357, but good .38s are hard to come by these days as I'm not a fan of the non-steel framed J-frames. In small .357s, I have that covered already. I consider the Police Positive frame guns to be ideal carry weapons, and don't have any.

FLIPPER 348
07-01-2012, 10:16
wow, 7 pages of discussion on a topic that does not exist.


FWIW- I've shot several Pythons over the years and they did not shoot or 'feel' any better or more accurate than my Dan Wesson fixed barrel 6". And DW is actually in production.

WiskyT
07-01-2012, 10:23
I was having a bad night after a bad day. :embarassed:

Don't make too much of it. I've done worse, much worse, and maybe even to you over the years.:whistling:

bac1023
07-01-2012, 10:27
Don't make too much of it. I've done worse, much worse, and maybe even to you over the years.:whistling:

Yeah, I believe we've had our moments. :wavey:

Hey, its all good. Besides, that's part of what makes these forums so entertaining. :supergrin:

vikingsoftpaw
07-01-2012, 10:31
I don't give a damn if the new Python; if there is to be such an animal, is hand fitted or CNC or an pony crap out of its ass. If it's well made, accurate and with a trigger to die for, then it's all good.

However, if pigs could fly and all that, I don't think that Colt would really put out a true effort. Look at the Python Elite. The damn thing is a disgrace to the Python heritage with the poor fit & finish not to mention the atrocious trigger pull. Well, to be fair, atrocious for a Python but damn good comparing to the rest.

Colt is taking a hard hit financially with the loss of military arms contracts. I think they would like to stay profitable. Getting back in the revolver business would be a good move. S&W and Ruger have no problem moving their wheelguns. I think they would like to capture a share of that market.

I get the fact that Colt cannot build something akin to the old Python with its hand fitted craftsmanship and maintain a reasonable cost structure. In the same way S&W cannot product a true 5-screw K-22. Does this mean the current 617's are crap? No, it doesn't.

Ok... What type of snakes hasn't Colt used in name their DA Revolver? They may/may not call it a Python, Anaconda, Diamondback. ect.

Perhaps a .44 mag Ticonderoga?
Maybe a Black Mamba made in 460 or .500...
The Asp in .38/.357...
Adder a 5 shot .38 for CCW....

countrygun
07-01-2012, 10:34
Not to mention the magnetic compass, the abbacus which was the forerunner to the calculator and paper as we know it. Of course the Egyptians for some reasons get the credit for the word "paper". It's too much to ask the Western world to give us Orientals some credits?


The Koreans had moveable type well before some dude named Guttenberg got the credit.

Zombie Steve
07-01-2012, 10:35
I read that the new python will be in 10mm. I wrote it down and then read it, but I believe everything I read.

bac1023
07-01-2012, 10:37
They may not use a snake name at all, but that is interesting.

bac1023
07-01-2012, 10:37
I read that the new python will be in 10mm. I wrote it down and then read it, but I believe everything I read.

:rofl::rofl:

vikingsoftpaw
07-01-2012, 10:42
The Koreans had moveable type well before some dude named Guttenberg got the credit.

Westerners put many things to practical use that were invented elsewhere.

Koreans may have invented moveable type, but Gutenberg changed the course of Western Civilization with it.

Chinese invented the compass, used it with Feng-Shewy when constructing buildings. Westerners used it to navigate the globe.

countrygun
07-01-2012, 10:53
Otto Diesel did the FI thing a little earlier, what's your point?



Just referring to your point,


"Take engines for example. The engine in my Mustang has variable cam timing, 4 valve DOHC heads, computer controlled fuel injection, meets emission standards and gets 30MPG and makes over 300 BHP. The technology in that engine is stuff that cost F1 teams a hundred grand not long ago and my whole car cost $22,000.00."

What that had to do with the alleged New Python I don't know. I imagine, if the re intorduce the Python it won't have many doo-dads like that on it.

Basic economics as far as price. There was a reason it was the most expensive revolver of it's day. If it comes back the same things that made it expensive then, should surely make it so today. If they can still produce the Colt Royal Blue so more people can actually see what it looked like. computers don't do that part worth a spit.

As far as hand fitting goes, look to the custom knife shops. Even though you can buy a really nice knife today from a factory for less than $100, truly handmade knives are still in demand. The famous Randalls are not even hand forged and yet they have at least a 2 year backlog on orders.

WiskyT
07-01-2012, 11:19
Just referring to your point,


"Take engines for example. The engine in my Mustang has variable cam timing, 4 valve DOHC heads, computer controlled fuel injection, meets emission standards and gets 30MPG and makes over 300 BHP. The technology in that engine is stuff that cost F1 teams a hundred grand not long ago and my whole car cost $22,000.00."

What that had to do with the alleged New Python I don't know. I imagine, if the re intorduce the Python it won't have many doo-dads like that on it.

Basic economics as far as price. There was a reason it was the most expensive revolver of it's day. If it comes back the same things that made it expensive then, should surely make it so today. If they can still produce the Colt Royal Blue so more people can actually see what it looked like. computers don't do that part worth a spit.

As far as hand fitting goes, look to the custom knife shops. Even though you can buy a really nice knife today from a factory for less than $100, truly handmade knives are still in demand. The famous Randalls are not even hand forged and yet they have at least a 2 year backlog on orders.


You're talking about marketing. Randall makes knives the old fashioned way because a small number of people are still willing to buy them. Most are happy with a $100.00 knife that is it's equal in very way. Could an equal knife to a Randall be made for $30..00? Doubtful. But for $100.00, sure, and many people buy them.

The fact is, a good assembler could fit a Python from CNC parts in a day. Let's say the person makes $300.00 a day, that plus a couple of hundred bucks for the parts, and it is easily doable and that is paying the guy $30.00/hour plus benefits. Even if it takes him two days, the gun could easily be made for a grand and sold at whatever the market would bear.

Price doesn't involve the cost of manufacture, only the supply and demand. Since people spend three grand on 1911's, there are people who would pay what it takes to get one.

The problem is, and has always been, Colt's ****ed up way of doing business. Many gun companies had similar problems, reorganized, got a new CEO, got a new board, whatever, and are now successful. Colt hasn't been one of them. Maybe they will be, or maybe they will go the way of so many other gun companies and go out of business.

It wouldn't be for lack of demand, or the inability of Mankind to pull out a set of drawings and make a gun that was made 50 years ago.

JuneyBooney
07-01-2012, 11:39
If it is as sweet shooting as the older model it will be a great revolver. I agree with about a grand for it.

Jim Watson
07-01-2012, 11:55
It wouldn't be for lack of demand, or the inability of Mankind to pull out a set of drawings and make a gun that was made 50 years ago.

I dunno, there are a lot of people convinced that Mankind can't make a satisfactory example of a gun that came out a hundred years ago, either. Main problem there is that they won't go by the drawings.

fnfalman
07-01-2012, 12:08
All that walking just to get your ass handed to you at San Jacinto? Don't mess with T

Texas had to join the Republic of United States of America, otherwise we Mexican would have taken Bejar back.

countrygun
07-01-2012, 12:14
You're talking about marketing. Randall makes knives the old fashioned way because a small number of people are still willing to buy them. Most are happy with a $100.00 knife that is it's equal in very way. Could an equal knife to a Randall be made for $30..00? Doubtful. But for $100.00, sure, and many people buy them.

The fact is, a good assembler could fit a Python from CNC parts in a day. Let's say the person makes $300.00 a day, that plus a couple of hundred bucks for the parts, and it is easily doable and that is paying the guy $30.00/hour plus benefits. Even if it takes him two days, the gun could easily be made for a grand and sold at whatever the market would bear.

Price doesn't involve the cost of manufacture, only the supply and demand. Since people spend three grand on 1911's, there are people who would pay what it takes to get one.

The problem is, and has always been, Colt's ****ed up way of doing business. Many gun companies had similar problems, reorganized, got a new CEO, got a new board, whatever, and are now successful. Colt hasn't been one of them. Maybe they will be, or maybe they will go the way of so many other gun companies and go out of business.

It wouldn't be for lack of demand, or the inability of Mankind to pull out a set of drawings and make a gun that was made 50 years ago.

That explains why The Rolex Submariner goes for $100 bucks these days. As someone pointed out look how cheap car engines with their goodies are now.

The proper Colt Royal Blue with the attendant polishing cannot be sped up by modern means and that is a chunk of the labor.

Colt went through 3 "Phases" in the Python. the first was all hand assembled by one individual, the second was assembled by a line and turned over to an individual craftsman for final tuning, and the third was straight assembly line. Now to someone who just wanted to brag that they owned a gun with "Python" stamped on the barrel, guns made by the third method were good enough.

I too think that Colt has some of the most fouled up policies in the industry. Others S&W notably, went through "bad times" but Colt seems to be clinging to them deliberately. Right now, and for the past 4 years, the Detective special should be available. If you saw the last years of the great gun and what Colt did to them it was shameful. Today's Highpoint is better finished than the last DS series.


I think you are correct that modern methods could speed up the process to acheive a proper Python and still leave room in the cost/profit for the hand work. the porblem is that some do not realize that it wasn't the DESIGN of the Python that made it what it was. You can't just plug "perfect" parts into a frame and call it a Python in good conscience.

In a sense, Pythons were "pre broken in" the polishing and fitting eliminated the "smoothing up" of the action from use. That isn't "wearing out" but fitting together and smoothing through wear. Look at the CZ 75 today. The story from those in the know is that, in the old days, the 75's were mechanicaly cycled in an oil bath 1,000 times to break them in. As the owners about how the DA trigger smoothes up with use. It would be nice if they came from the factory smooth like the Python did but they just assemble the perfect parts today.

If you overlook the hand fitting of the Python and the fine finish, all you will have is a Colt "Trooper" with a vent rib on the barrel. The design wasn't "the thing" to the Python.

bac1023
07-01-2012, 12:23
FWIW- I've shot several Pythons over the years and they did not shoot or 'feel' any better or more accurate than my Dan Wesson fixed barrel 6". And DW is actually in production.
You can't feel a difference between a Dan Wesson and a Colt Python? :headscratch:

I own a couple DW revolvers. They're strong as hell, but I wouldn't exactly call them refined.

ca survivor
07-01-2012, 12:25
sooo Colt is loosing the AR contract with the army AND now the will build guns for the civilian market again? Colt can trust us again? wow, well they can keep them....

Jim Watson
07-01-2012, 12:49
If you overlook the hand fitting of the Python and the fine finish, all you will have is a Colt "Trooper" with a vent rib on the barrel.

Nothing wrong with a Trooper. And the trigger work needed to get the stack out of a Python will work just as well on the standard model gun.
And a Python has nothing BUT the vent rib that a Three Fifty Seven or Officer's Model Match lacks.

You can't feel a difference between a Dan Wesson and a Colt Python? :headscratch:

I own a couple DW revolvers. They're strong as hell, but I wouldn't exactly call them refined.

A friend who could actually work on Colts said that he considered the Dan Wesson to be the most accurate revolver on the market for shooting full charge Magnums, slowfire single action. But he never could figure out how to get a good DA pull on one comparable to what is pretty routine on Colt, Smith, or Ruger.

rgregoryb
07-01-2012, 12:58
You can't feel a difference between a Dan Wesson and a Colt Python? :headscratch:

I own a couple DW revolvers. They're strong as hell, but I wouldn't exactly call them refined.

Well he did vote for Obama, so he's numb from the hairline down.......
plus Fiats are still in production but who's going to buy one of those?

countrygun
07-01-2012, 13:02
Nothing wrong with a Trooper. And the trigger work needed to get the stack out of a Python will work just as well on the standard model gun.
And a Python has nothing BUT the vent rib that a Three Fifty Seven or Officer's Model Match lacks.



.


I know, I have the Python and it's Daddy the OMM.

The OMM was a hand fitted gun as well. That fact has been lost in the focus on the Python. The "stack" of the Python trigger was cosidered to be a good thing at one time because it allowed the shooter to "stage" the trigger. It was due to the two leaves of the V-mainspring contacting each other just before release. S&W shooters generally used the "Pull through" technique, sans staging, and when the S&W PPC shooters started having guns tuned and heavy barrels put on (in some cases Python barrels) they began winning and Colt shooters wanted the same trigger "action". I think it was Reeves Jungkend (sp?) that figured out how to bend the Python mainspring to eliminate the stack. A tricky bit of work if done right and must be done "in the gun" by hand.

glock2740
07-01-2012, 14:04
I still think of the beautiful 3 digit serial number Python from early 1956 that I passed up a few years ago at my local shop. It was a mint royal blue 6" model in the box. I could have had it for $1900, which is less than half what it would be worth now. :faint:

I regret that move (or lack thereof) more than anything else gun related.
:wow: WOW! I bet you :puking:every time you think about that.

Jim Watson
07-01-2012, 14:08
"Raftering" the mainspring does not eliminate the stacking; although it reduces the tension. Reduces hammer fall, too; my Colt Custom demands the soft and sensitive Federal primers.

The full house rebuild includes bending the DA lifting surface on the trigger itself, then retiming everything else.

I don't know who figured it out, though Don Tedford at the Colt Custom Shop and Reeves Jungkind who did my two guns were certainly early in the game. Dan Sadowski got a lot of credit too. Jerry Moran was said to be the best. I was on his waiting list with a gun on the shelf for several years before word got out that he had changed specialties and quit working on revolvers.

glock2740
07-01-2012, 14:13
I actually invented guns.
:rofl:
The new Pythons will be built on an assembly line right next to the Glock carbine assembly line.
You mean the Glock 1911 assembly line.

:rofl:

countrygun
07-01-2012, 14:16
"Raftering" the mainspring does not eliminate the stacking; although it reduces the tension. Reduces hammer fall, too; my Colt Custom demands the soft and sensitive Federal primers.

The full house rebuild includes bending the DA lifting surface on the trigger itself, then retiming everything else.

I don't know who figured it out, though Don Tedford at the Colt Custom Shop and Reeves Jungkind who did my two guns were certainly early in the game. Dan Sadowski got a lot of credit too. Jerry Moran was said to be the best. I was on his waiting list with a gun on the shelf for several years before word got out that he had changed specialties and quit working on revolvers.


That points out the big difference between the Colt and the S&W and why the Colt takes a bit more massaging and finesse to reach it's peak capablility. Most of the Colt operates off that one V-mainspring. It might sound like it makes it more simple than a Smith with it's dediced springs but that is not the case.

At one time, not long ago, wasn't there a guy in West Linn, Oregon that got a nod, from some of the gunrag writers, for his abilities with a Python?

bac1023
07-01-2012, 14:26
:wow: WOW! I bet you :puking:every time you think about that.

I do Joe and I think about it constantly.

This is going back probably five years now. I didn't know what the hell I was doing back then when it came to classic Colts.

It wasn't until a good year afterwards that I started to realize how bad I screwed up. Unfortunately, every passing year, it bothers me more as values keep rising and I see how impossible it is to find a three digit Python for sale. It hurts. It really does.

WiskyT
07-01-2012, 15:09
I dunno, there are a lot of people convinced that Mankind can't make a satisfactory example of a gun that came out a hundred years ago, either. Main problem there is that they won't go by the drawings.

I'm as skeptical as you are regarding the likelihood of a 2013 Python that is indistinguishable from a 1965 Python, but it's not because it can't be done, it's because Colt has not had the gumption to do it. Frankly, I'm surprised someone else hasn't done it. I bet the Turks or Filipinos could do it, but I don't know if their are patent issues since I don't know how that stuff works.

bac1023
07-01-2012, 15:11
I'm as skeptical as you are regarding the likelihood of a 2013 Python that is indistinguishable from a 1965 Python, but it's not because it can't be done, it's because Colt has not had the gumption to do it.

That's exactly what I've been saying. They won't do it. I also highly doubt they still employ the smiths that can build them like the smiths that did 40 years ago.

shadowman024
07-01-2012, 15:12
Colt can go to hell, they forgot about the civillan market a long time ago. But if i had to guess 1200-1500 overpriced like all colt products.

bac1023
07-01-2012, 15:14
Colt can go to hell, they forgot about the civillan market a long time ago. But if i had to guess 1200-1500 overpriced like all colt products.

If Colt could built the Python like they did during the first 20 years of production, that price would be a bargain.

shadowman024
07-01-2012, 15:24
Quite sad once a great company ran into the ground with poor leadership, the company is dead without govt contract's and those seem to be running dry. There so far behind the 8 ball making guns for civ's i bet they don;t have the machines or the smiths anymore to even do it.

dnuggett
07-01-2012, 15:36
Texas had to join the Republic of United States of America, otherwise we Mexican would have taken Bejar back.

:rofl::rofl::rofl:

shadowman024
07-01-2012, 15:41
:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

dnuggett
07-01-2012, 15:45
Over on Colt Forum, one of the members is the manager of the Custom Shop there. Yes, he said Colt was going to be coming out with a new DA revolver. He also said it wasn't going to be a Python.


Hmmmm. We'll see. Maybe it won't be a "Python." But then again, maybe, just maybe it will be. I'm not sayin... I'm just sayin.

MrGlock21
07-01-2012, 15:58
I'm not completely sold on the whole majic juju craftsmanship of the early Python vs new. IMO much of that is attributed to newer harder steels, esp going from carbon to SS. The same with newer S&W vs old.
A gun can be crafted with modern steel alloys and CAD/CAM methods with all the handfitting and polishing utilized on the classic era Pythons and people will still insist it's an abomination on some level because it does't have some intangible feel juju of an older gun with softer parts worn in to perfect harmony.

I'm not sold, either.

But there is such a thing as Nostalgia, a powerful thing, and Colt will factor it in for whatever they happen to release on the market.

countrygun
07-01-2012, 16:29
If Colt could built the Python like they did during the first 20 years of production, that price would be a bargain.


Funny how people would pay that much for a tricked out 1911 from some other maker but consider it overpriced if Colt could truly bring back the Python for that.

:dunno:

AgentM79
07-02-2012, 07:27
If Colt brings back their DA revolver production to any extent, I wouldn't expect it to be "V-spring" based. Far too labor intensive to make to the "old" standard. Rather, I'd expect them to dust-off the MKV action. With some attention to QC, we could see some good guns akin to the Magnum Carry, King Cobra, and Anaconda. These guns fetch well-upwards of $1000 at auction if "NIB". They'd sell if Colt was actually able to put them on the gunstore shelves at a reasonable price. Think about it. S&W and Ruger are still making 5-shooters. Just the fact that the Colt is scarcely larger and holds six will sway some buyers. In terms of a 4" or 6" wheelgun, in either .357Mag or .44Mag, S&W ruined their line with internal locks. Ruger is the only real game in town. Both of the LGS that I frequent have Taurus guns (junk!) in their cases now filling that niche. There was always room for two competitors in this marketplace. It's been S&W and Ruger for far too long. It needs to be Ruger vs. Colt.

I really hate the "trend" of revolver manufacturers calling their semi-auto lines by revolver names. Like Colt calling their overpriced compact .45 the "New Agent", and S&W calling a POS .380 a "Bodyguard", and their current flagship polymer pistol "Military and Police/M&P". This must stop.

Jim Watson
07-02-2012, 08:17
I saw a Trooper Mk III with a very nice trigger pull... once.
It had a nickel hammer and trigger in a blue gun and I figure that the plating leveled out the sintered surface and then burnished smooth with a little use. Seems that could be done on a deluxe model with little extra cost.
I had just as soon have one like that as an un-gunsmithed 1908 V spring action.

I also saw the* prototype Python Mk III. Of course they would not let me handle it but it was a good looking revolver, vent rib and real Royal Blue, not the overbuffed mess you get for the name now.

*Or A prototype, I have seen pictures of others. Not many, though.

pck50
07-02-2012, 08:44
Wow the Python Is coming back who said so how do you know are you certain when How soon Damn its always been on my list when I was younger just couldnt afford it back then I certainly will love to get one at that point that is for sure I would surely expect it to be about $1500.00 - $2000.00

wjv
07-02-2012, 10:13
I'd wait a year or so to see if the new ones are good, or if they are a POS. . .

AgentM79
07-02-2012, 10:54
Colt should do a vent-ribbed King Cobra, with careful attention to CNC machining and quality control. The MKIII/V guns were an attempt to replicate the Python-like trigger in automation. The MKIII's were largely an abomination. MKV was considerably better.

People want these guns. They CAN do this. Another thing to consider in this fraternal discussion - look at revolver history in the late 20th century. The S&W L-Frame stole quite a bit of the Python's thunder - it added Python-like features to a S&W action (ribbed, fully underlugged barrel). It became a best seller for S&W while Colt slowly tanked (granted, the Double Eagle and All-American 2000 helped things along considerably).

Like I said, I'd settle for resurrection of the Colt King Cobra, minus the scalper pricing. There's little you can get in a Python that a S&W 686 can't give you for 1/2 to 1/3 the price. No hate here - just what I see as reality, in light of history.

NeverMore1701
07-02-2012, 11:00
Wow the Python Is coming back who said so how do you know are you certain when How soon Damn its always been on my list when I was younger just couldnt afford it back then I certainly will love to get one at that point that is for sure I would surely expect it to be about $1500.00 - $2000.00

http://i3.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/173/576/Wat8.jpg

fnfalman
07-02-2012, 11:03
I don't see why Colt can't bring back the Python in its full glory and put proper pricing on it. If it costs $3000, then it costs $3000. Then introduce or re-introduce a couple more economical lines. Those that can't afford the Pythons would drool about it then go buy the lesser models. No difference than people going into Nissan to look at the GTR and then buy a Maxima or 370ZX.

Smith&Wesson and Ruger have been selling wheelguns by the boatloads all these years despite the supposed obsolescence of said guns in the face of "modern combat pistols".

SW wheelguns have crept up considerably in price, as are Rugers. Colt would be smart to undercut them both in prices and make up profit in volume sales.

wjv
07-02-2012, 11:13
in october 1999, colt manufacturing co. Announced the termination of its production of python revolvers. In a 2000 follow-up letter to distributors, the company cited changing market conditions and the costs of defending lawsuits, as the reasons for the discontinuation of the python line as well as a number of other models.

. . . . . .

DScottHewitt
07-02-2012, 11:29
When did Colt say they they were re-releasing the Python? News to me. I'm fine with the two I already have. :)


http://i914.photobucket.com/albums/ac341/OU1911/2snakes.jpg

Rick uses one in "The Walking Dead". Has caused a surge in renewed popularity................

DScottHewitt
07-02-2012, 11:31
. . . . . .



What lawsuits? Issues with the design? Malfunctions? Blowed up in someone's hands?


I would think any design issues would be corrected as an early priority......

countrygun
07-02-2012, 12:14
Colt should do a vent-ribbed King Cobra, with careful attention to CNC machining and quality control. The MKIII/V guns were an attempt to replicate the Python-like trigger in automation. The MKIII's were largely an abomination. MKV was considerably better.

People want these guns. They CAN do this. Another thing to consider in this fraternal discussion - look at revolver history in the late 20th century. The S&W L-Frame stole quite a bit of the Python's thunder - it added Python-like features to a S&W action (ribbed, fully underlugged barrel). It became a best seller for S&W while Colt slowly tanked (granted, the Double Eagle and All-American 2000 helped things along considerably).

Like I said, I'd settle for resurrection of the Colt King Cobra, minus the scalper pricing. There's little you can get in a Python that a S&W 686 can't give you for 1/2 to 1/3 the price. No hate here - just what I see as reality, in light of history.


This is pretty much it. A high end "boutique" revolver, is not going to put Colt back in the wheel gun business for very long. Korth and Manhurin have not exactly become household names, nor are they instock at 50% of the neighborhood gunshops.

To be honest, after a re-introduction of the Detective special, I'd like to see them reintroduce the "New Service" in a variety of calibers. Not the later big frame ghosts of the Python, but a well made, well finished, SIMPLE & PLAIN large frame, perhaps on the later lockwork but something for those wanting a servicable large frame with a variety of caliber options and models rather than just one caliber choice with a lot of gingerbread hung on it.

Think about the Old "New Service" with barrels from 3" to 8" round butt, square butt, .357, 10mm/.40, .44 special, .45 acp, .45 Colt. perhaps .41 &.44 mag. Maybe "legitimize" the .41 "special" as a rimmed alternative to the 10mm. Fixed sight, adjustables


Well, I can dream can't I?

fnfalman
07-02-2012, 12:36
This is pretty much it. A high end "boutique" revolver, is not going to put Colt back in the wheel gun business for very long. Korth and Manhurin have not exactly become household names, nor are they instock at 50% of the neighborhood gunshops.

To be honest, after a re-introduction of the Detective special, I'd like to see them reintroduce the "New Service" in a variety of calibers. Not the later big frame ghosts of the Python, but a well made, well finished, SIMPLE & PLAIN large frame, perhaps on the later lockwork but something for those wanting a servicable large frame with a variety of caliber options and models rather than just one caliber choice with a lot of gingerbread hung on it.

Think about the Old "New Service" with barrels from 3" to 8" round butt, square butt, .357, 10mm/.40, .44 special, .45 acp, .45 Colt. perhaps .41 &.44 mag. Maybe "legitimize" the .41 "special" as a rimmed alternative to the 10mm. Fixed sight, adjustables


Well, I can dream can't I?

Why not? SW seems to do OK with their retro line. Imagine Colt puts out a retro/simplified line with no safety holes.

4Baldy
07-02-2012, 13:01
1978 Python a true winner. There is no machine made that can reproduce that trigger and the old gunsmiths that could make that revolver talk to you are just about gone. Even if Colt comes back with it they will probably redesign the firing group and make it like the old Trooper MK-IIIs.:cool:
http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h268/4Baldy/P1000860.jpg

JohnBT
07-02-2012, 13:19
1. A Colt VP said it is NOT coming back.

2. "I don't see why Colt can't bring back the Python in its full glory and put proper pricing on it. If it costs $3000, then it costs $3000. "

The problem is the lack of experienced, skilled people required to make one work. Colt has some, but not enough to do a production run.

People hear "fitting" and all they think of is making one part fit another part and putting them into the gun.

All I know about Pythons I learned from dfariswheel. Here's one of his posts - #12

www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=590862 (http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=590862)

"each part does at least two separate functions usually not related to each other, and few of todays gunsmiths understand them. The action is not intuitive.
For this reason it's not unusual to take a Colt to a gunsmith with one problem and get it back with the original problem not corrected and now with other problems caused by trying to fix a mechanism not understood."

You can fantasize that all this can be resolved with CNC and sharp programmer, but it can't.

Iirc, he was a watchmaker before he was a gunsmith. And he's the one who talked to the Colt VP.

countrygun
07-02-2012, 13:23
1. A Colt VP said it is NOT coming back.

2. "I don't see why Colt can't bring back the Python in its full glory and put proper pricing on it. If it costs $3000, then it costs $3000. "

The problem is the lack of experienced, skilled people required to make one work. Colt has some, but not enough to do a production run.

People hear "fitting" and all they think of is making one part fit another part and putting them into the gun.

All I know about Pythons I learned from dfariswheel. Here's one of his posts - #12

www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=590862 (http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=590862)

"each part does at least two separate functions usually not related to each other, and few of todays gunsmiths understand them. The action is not intuitive.
For this reason it's not unusual to take a Colt to a gunsmith with one problem and get it back with the original problem not corrected and now with other problems caused by trying to fix a mechanism not understood."

You can fantasize that all this can be resolved with CNC and sharp programmer, but it can't.

Iirc, he was a watchmaker before he was a gunsmith. And he's the one who talked to the Colt VP.


Thank you, That is what I tried to tell some people around here but they think computers can do anything:upeyes:

glock2740
07-02-2012, 13:51
wow, 7 pages of discussion on a topic that does not exist.
This part makes sense and is funny to boot. :)

FWIW- I've shot several Pythons over the years and they did not shoot or 'feel' any better or more accurate than my Dan Wesson fixed barrel 6". And DW is actually in production.
This part does not make sense. My DW fixed barrel 4" .357 was the absolute biggest POS gun to ever be made or sold. Also, my Ruger GP100 is a better made revolver than any DW I've ever laid my hands on. And I've shot several.

countrygun
07-02-2012, 14:46
This part does not make sense. My DW fixed barrel 4" .357 was the absolute biggest POS gun to ever be made or sold. Also, my Ruger GP100 is a better made revolver than any DW I've ever laid my hands on. And I've shot several.


i have a 6" stainless DW in .22. It is very accurate and seems to hold up well, but it's trigger is "nothing to write home about"

I can't say "it's the worst" by a long shot, but it's not "the best" by a long shot either.

Berto
07-02-2012, 15:00
Thank you, That is what I tried to tell some people around here but they think computers can do anything:upeyes:

They can't do everything, but they can do much of the work once done by the elfen majic old work craftsman that don't exist anymore (like Hamilton Bowen...wait!!).

glock2740
07-02-2012, 15:30
Colt should do a vent-ribbed King Cobra, with careful attention to CNC machining and quality control....... I'd settle for resurrection of the Colt King Cobra, minus the scalper pricing. There's little you can get in a Python that a S&W 686 can't give you for 1/2 to 1/3 the price. No hate here - just what I see as reality, in light of history.
I gotta agree. A good 686 is a very nice revo. The Python is a little slicker and more accurate, in the one's that I've shot. But not 2-3 times slicker or more accurate. But then again, a S&W 686 ain't a Colt Python either. :cool:

RonS
07-02-2012, 15:42
Bringing back the Python would be like one of those 50's horror movies where the scientist's beautiful wife dies and he spends his life and fortune to bring her back but she just shambles around dripping ichor and mumbling something about "brains".

WiskyT
07-02-2012, 16:17
They can't do everything, but they can do much of the work once done by the elfen majic old work craftsman that don't exist anymore (like Hamilton Bowen...wait!!).

The Fairy Dust!! Where will they get the fairy dust man?

captcurly
07-02-2012, 16:31
I have my doubts about Colt bring back the Python. When I see it I will believe it. I would like Colt to bring back the Detective Special. Good to to everyone that wants the Python to return.

Chris Brines
07-02-2012, 16:43
Idk, but I can say this much. Although the Python is a superb weapon (shot one this past weekend), I can say that the Ruger GP100 is equally supurb, at half the price (shot one of those this past weekend too). I'm not a super experienced revolver shooter, but I can say that the GP100, out of every DA revolver I've shot, has the smoothest DA trigger by far. Love that gun, I just got it this past week and it'll be with me for a lifetime. Maybe there's something better about Colt's Python that I don't know about, that the GP100 doesn't have, but as for just shooting, my review on the GP100 is I like it even better than the Python I shot. Just sayin'..

JohnBT
07-02-2012, 16:50
"Thank you, That is what I tried to tell some people around here but they think computers can do anything"

You are certainly welcome.

If people would stop and think about it, the current manufacturers of modern guns (with relatively simple designs) use CNC and employ sharp programmers and they can't make perfect guns yet. They still have variations from gun to gun and we see the pics of the worst cases on line constantly.

So adapting the same technology to an older, more complicated design is somehow going to improve the overall quality of the product and cut costs? It's wishful thinking.

John

JohnBT
07-02-2012, 16:57
"Also, the SIG P210 is a legend older then the Python (I think!?) and SIG Sauer now makes them again."

It's not the same gun and not the same company. And they changed some things possibly to keep the price just under the price of an entry-level used original. The Legend is a very nice gun though and I might think about buying one if I didn't already have a surplus Swiss Army pistol (P210-2) from around 1970.

John

WiskyT
07-02-2012, 17:08
They had a guy on the news whose company is making artificial hearts the size of a poker chip. We're talking about a human ****ing heart here. And yet some say a Python can't be made. I guess bumble bees can't fly either.

countrygun
07-02-2012, 17:25
They had a guy on the news whose company is making artificial hearts the size of a poker chip. We're talking about a human ****ing heart here. And yet some say a Python can't be made. I guess bumble bees can't fly either.


IF If, you could read, you could go through this thread and find some pretty explanations, that even you should be able to understand, as to, why the "Python" could

1. not be made to the same standards as the old model just because of modern manufacturing techniques.

2. probably not be made with the same internal design due to labor costs, and better designs and therefore not truly be a continuation of the "Python"

3. Not be made at a competitive price point with other .357 revolvers.

Instead of reading and understanding, all you manage to do is post up

"we have new inventions, we don't need craftsmen to do things anymore BRAAACCCK"

like a freaking parrot.


Read JohnBT's post and the link if you still don't get it.

WiskyT
07-02-2012, 17:33
IF If, you could read, you could go through this thread and find some pretty explanations, that even you should be able to understand, as to, why the "Python" could

1. not be made to the same standards as the old model just because of modern manufacturing techniques.

2. probably not be made with the same internal design due to labor costs, and better designs and therefore not truly be a continuation of the "Python"

3. Not be made at a competitive price point with other .357 revolvers.

Instead of reading and understanding, all you manage to do is post up

"we have new inventions, we don't need craftsmen to do things anymore BRAAACCCK"

like a freaking parrot.


Read JohnBT's post and the link if you still don't get it.

You talk about reading, you should look into writing while you're at it.

As far as parroting, that's all you've done. The fact that someone else shares your opinion doesn't make both of you correct.

You have too much emotion involved in this. You think too highly of yourself if you believe that in a country of 330 million people, no one can be trained to do what you do. What is so genetically different about you that you think there is no other person with aptitudes equal or better than yours?

Berto
07-02-2012, 19:35
I'm not sure if it's an element of thread drift or not, but my impression was we were discussing if a Colt Python of the 55-60's era could be reproduced today with the same level of quality.
Yes, it can.
To say it can't be is pure nonsense, not just because of the technology, but because YES there are people capable of building such guns.
USFA puts out SAA's of better quality than Colt's, Freedom Arms makes guns of quality few makers can attain. They don't wheel out some 90yr old man with spectacles and diamond files and magnifying glass strapped to his forehead to whittle out each individual part and spit shine the buffer wheel every two hours until perfection is achieved. They use modern technology and skilled craftsmen, and it enables them to put out the products that compare favorably to olde skool Colts.
It can be done.

countrygun
07-02-2012, 19:49
I'm not sure if it's an element of thread drift or not, but my impression was we were discussing if a Colt Python of the 55-60's era could be reproduced today with the same level of quality.
Yes, it can.
To say it can't be is pure nonsense, not just because of the technology, but because YES there are people capable of building such guns.
USFA puts out SAA's of better quality than Colt's, Freedom Arms makes guns of quality few makers can attain. They don't wheel out some 90yr old man with spectacles and diamond files and magnifying glass strapped to his forehead to whittle out each individual part and spit shine the buffer wheel every two hours until perfection is achieved. They use modern technology and skilled craftsmen, and it enables them to put out the products that compare favorably to olde skool Colts.
It can be done.

I have never "built" a Colt Python or a Smith & Wesson but I have worked on a few Colts and a lot of Smiths. I have also worked on SAAs and clones. without a doubt in that group of pistols, the Python is by far and away THE most difficult to work on, I would say by at least a magnitude of 4 compared to the SAA and the Smith DAs. It is a mechanical tightrope act inside those actions. A single part can be taken out of a Smith or a Colt SA and replaced without disturbing the relationship of the other parts. (with a Smith mybe a little fitment of one other MIGHT be needed) It therefore stands to reason that building one to the level of the Python must also be more difficult. Perhaps not for a skilled craftsman to the same magnitude.

ANYTHING you do in the Python action affects EVERY part in the thing.

IF anyone says that we can make a "Python" today, to the original design, and manage to do so without the craftsmen needed, is talking out their arse.

Have any of you, who think it's possible, ever fixed and/or re timed a Python succesfully?

I don't think so, I think you are just blowing smoke.

bac1023
07-02-2012, 20:00
Wow the Python Is coming back who said so how do you know are you certain when How soon Damn its always been on my list when I was younger just couldnt afford it back then I certainly will love to get one at that point that is for sure I would surely expect it to be about $1500.00 - $2000.00

:headscratch:


...in English next time, please.

bac1023
07-02-2012, 20:01
http://i3.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/173/576/Wat8.jpg

:rofl::rofl:

Berto
07-02-2012, 20:18
I have never "built" a Colt Python or a Smith & Wesson but I have worked on a few Colts and a lot of Smiths. I have also worked on SAAs and clones. without a doubt in that group of pistols, the Python is by far and away THE most difficult to work on, I would say by at least a magnitude of 4 compared to the SAA and the Smith DAs. It is a mechanical tightrope act inside those actions. A single part can be taken out of a Smith or a Colt SA and replaced without disturbing the relationship of the other parts. (with a Smith mybe a little fitment of one other MIGHT be needed) It therefore stands to reason that building one to the level of the Python must also be more difficult. Perhaps not for a skilled craftsman to the same magnitude.

ANYTHING you do in the Python action affects EVERY part in the thing.

IF anyone says that we can make a "Python" today, to the original design, and manage to do so without the craftsmen needed, is talking out their arse.

Have any of you, who think it's possible, ever fixed and/or re timed a Python succesfully?

I don't think so, I think you are just blowing smoke.

Goooot it.:upeyes:

So you are saying USFA or Freedom Arms for example, couldn't make a proper Colt Python? They couldn't handle the complexity or have the craftsmen, correct?

In the interest of full disclosure too, you notice I'm not resorting to insults or baited remarks, not getting emotional here....:wavey:

Honest question.

countrygun
07-02-2012, 20:24
Goooot it.:upeyes:

So you are saying USFA or Freedom Arms for example, couldn't make a proper Colt Python? They couldn't handle the complexity or have the craftsmen, correct?

In the interest of full disclosure too, you notice I'm not resorting to insults or baited remarks, not getting emotional here....:wavey:

Honest question.


Why don't you do the class a favor and share the results from a little research project.

Call USFA and Freedom Arms, and Colt and ask them "if the Python generates so much interest why don't you make one just like they used to?"

let everyone know what they say.

Berto
07-02-2012, 20:28
Why don't you do the class a favor and share the results from a little research project.

Call USFA and Freedom Arms, and Colt and ask them "if the Python generates so much interest why don't you make one just like they used to?"

let everyone know what they say.

I guess I figured you would know the answer, being so knowledgeable and everything. Do you think they are incapable of making such a gun?
It wasn't a market study.:dunno:

countrygun
07-02-2012, 20:35
I guess I figured you would know the answer, being so knowledgeable and everything. Do you think they are incapable of making such a gun?
It wasn't a market study.:dunno:

I am trying not to be insulting even though this question has been answered by myself and several others in this thread.

Here is what I answered previously, please demonstrate your fantastic comprehension skills and give me your impression of what it says,

"the "Python" could

1. not be made to the same standards as the old model just because of modern manufacturing techniques.

2. probably not be made with the same internal design due to labor costs, and better designs and therefore not truly be a continuation of the "Python"

3. Not be made at a competitive price point with other .357 revolvers."

Berto
07-02-2012, 20:56
I am trying not to be insulting even though this question has been answered by myself and several others in this thread.

Here is what I answered previously, please demonstrate your fantastic comprehension skills and give me your impression of what it says,

"the "Python" could

1. not be made to the same standards as the old model just because of modern manufacturing techniques.

2. probably not be made with the same internal design due to labor costs, and better designs and therefore not truly be a continuation of the "Python"

3. Not be made at a competitive price point with other .357 revolvers."

Excellent.
Given I have already named two companies that do EXACTLY the type of work you state (based on above quoted), it seems in my (fantastic) comprehension that you would be
"talking out your arse".

It's nice and validating to sit around spinning yarns about how "they don't make 'em like they used to" and denigrate modern manufacturing as a dismissal of the machine soul inherited by countless hours of hand fitting and blood/sweat/tears.
But the fact is, guns like that can be made because people evolve, machinery evolves and methods evolve- a point missed in the whole sidebar concerning engines.
Korth, Manhurin, FA make such guns. No doubt they are expensive, as would a modern 'retro' Python, I'd never assume it would be priced like a GP100 or 686....or even a PC gun.
People still work on and often correct Colt Pythons, meaning they understand the dynamics of the action and can make the parts if needed (Grant Cunningham is a member here).
Guns are made every day like the Python, don't tell me it can't be done.
You can keep repeating yourself until you're blue in the face, but (IMO) reality doesn't support you.

4Baldy
07-02-2012, 21:21
1. A Colt VP said it is NOT coming back.

2. "I don't see why Colt can't bring back the Python in its full glory and put proper pricing on it. If it costs $3000, then it costs $3000. "

The problem is the lack of experienced, skilled people required to make one work. Colt has some, but not enough to do a production run.

People hear "fitting" and all they think of is making one part fit another part and putting them into the gun.

All I know about Pythons I learned from dfariswheel. Here's one of his posts - #12

www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=590862 (http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=590862)

"each part does at least two separate functions usually not related to each other, and few of todays gunsmiths understand them. The action is not intuitive.
For this reason it's not unusual to take a Colt to a gunsmith with one problem and get it back with the original problem not corrected and now with other problems caused by trying to fix a mechanism not understood."

You can fantasize that all this can be resolved with CNC and sharp programmer, but it can't.

Iirc, he was a watchmaker before he was a gunsmith. And he's the one who talked to the Colt VP.


Here's another man that knows Colt Pythons inside out Mr Grant Cunningham. Here's a page on his bolg that settles the issue of Pythons being weak or easy to get out of time.:supergrin:

http://www.grantcunningham.com/blog_files/colt_python_delicate.html

countrygun
07-02-2012, 21:31
It is hard to know where to start on your high level of wrong.



Excellent.
Given I have already named two companies that do EXACTLY the type of work you state (based on above quoted), it seems in my (fantastic) comprehension that you would be
"talking out your arse".


There are two companies making Pythons, Really? do they have a Luger assembly line too?

It's nice and validating to sit around spinning yarns about how "they don't make 'em like they used to" and denigrate modern manufacturing as a dismissal of the machine soul inherited by countless hours of hand fitting and blood/sweat/tears.

And your experience with the Colt action, i mean actual EXPERIENCE, would be....?

But the fact is, guns like that can be made because people evolve, machinery evolves and methods evolve- a point missed in the whole sidebar concerning engines.

And the designs for the things being manufactured take the strengths and weaknesses of the manufacturing techniques in mind.

Korth, Manhurin, FA make such guns. No doubt they are expensive, as would a modern 'retro' Python, I'd never assume it would be priced like a GP100 or 686....or even a PC gun.
People still work on and often correct Colt Pythons, meaning they understand the dynamics of the action and can make the parts if needed (Grant Cunningham is a member here).


There are fewer each year, but then again I never said that there weren't such people. If you were actually paying attention you will find that I said I have done it.


Guns are made every day like the Python, don't tell me it can't be done.


This is where you are most glaringly wrong and wallowing in a puddle of ignorance. No gun is being made "like the Python" today. Your lack of knowledge about the actual mechanism of the Python is a BIG blind spot in your argument. The Python was not "state of the art" at the time it was designed and throughout its lifetime. It was a design that was outdated, from a technical standpoint, well before the first Python ever went out the door. It was outdated even for production methods in 1955. The very design dated from a time when all parts were hand fitted and hand honed and balanced. Colt themselves moved away from the Pythons action for their service revolvers because it was too labor intensive in the 60's to make it.

The single action that you keep crowing about is very simple by comparison and it;s popularity keeps it going.

I don't hear any experience in working on any of these guns coming out of you. All I hear is theories and "I am sure they could figure it out" fix a few Colts yourself of the Python design and get back to me when you know what you are talking about




You can keep repeating yourself until you're blue in the face, but (IMO) reality doesn't support you.

Again, what "reality" are you talking about? HAVE YOU EVER WORKED ON A PYTHON? If not, you are the one short of reality.

You say some amazing things, "Your experience working on them isn't reality, my theory is"






By the way, you know very well that I have NEVER said "it couldn't be done. I have said that the Python's design requires hand fitting to duplicate, the finish requires a great amount of human attention, and thise factors make it very unlikely that it could be exactly duplicated without it once again being the most expensive factory revolver in the world, like it once was.

countrygun
07-02-2012, 21:54
Here's another man that knows Colt Pythons inside out Mr Grant Cunningham. Here's a page on his bolg that settles the issue of Pythons being weak or easy to get out of time.:supergrin:

http://www.grantcunningham.com/blog_files/colt_python_delicate.html


Yes, and it appears that some people around here either didn't read the last two paragraphs, when it was first posted, or think their theories are better that Cunninghams experience.:upeyes:

bac1023
07-02-2012, 22:02
Man, this thread has really gone the distance.

:faint:

countrygun
07-02-2012, 22:29
Man, this thread has really gone the distance.

:faint:

Yah, I'd rather buy the Glock 1911 in 10mm anyway.

BicycleDay43
07-02-2012, 23:06
Sweet...I love the 4 inch python. Just like Davis and the bad cops used in Magnum Force...LOL!


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

Haha..I actually loved Magnum Force because of all the Python and Model 29 action. :supergrin:

PzGren
07-02-2012, 23:40
I have an original 6" Python and I have an original Swiss made SIG P-210.

I have shot the P210 Legend made by SIG Sauer and I expect a new Python to be the same kind of gun, something that will be well above average - in performance and price - but lack the lively spirit of the handcrafted pistol.

oldjarhead
07-03-2012, 06:28
Mr. Dnugett. How do you know Colt will be making Pythons again? Where's you proof?:dunno:

redbaron007
07-03-2012, 07:30
WOW!! :wow:

205 posts on the rumor of a possible possibility of another rumor! :rofl:

This reminiscent of the announcement of the Glock single stack and carbine! :supergrin:

For the record....I hope they don't and I will keep my older ones.


:wavey:

red

JohnBT
07-03-2012, 08:36
"We're talking about a human ****ing heart here. "

No, we're talking about a mechanical replacement pump. Will this replacement speed up when you exercise?

Will it last 100 years or more like some genuine human hearts do?

Will it raise your blood pressure when you lose your cool and rant foolishly? :)

It's not a human heart and you didn't prove a point.

John

R*E
07-03-2012, 08:38
Here's another man that knows Colt Pythons inside out Mr Grant Cunningham. Here's a page on his bolg that settles the issue of Pythons being weak or easy to get out of time.:supergrin:

http://www.grantcunningham.com/blog_files/colt_python_delicate.html
Thanks for the link. :wavey:

I now understand why there's a mystique around the Python and have no desire to own one. Keeping up with a blued gun is about as much effort as I'm willing to put out. :embarassed:

JohnBT
07-03-2012, 08:48
"So you are saying USFA or Freedom Arms for example, couldn't make a proper Colt Python? They couldn't handle the complexity or have the craftsmen, correct?"

Correct, I don't think they have enough master craftsmen to fit and enough master polishers to achieve to level of polish needed for a Royal Blue finish. Assuming they could even get the exact specs or go to the trouble of reverse-engineering the design. I don't think you understand the complexity of the Python compared to the Single Action Army, FA models, and the other guns they make.

I have to wonder, why hasn't USFA built a Python if it's so easy?

Could they build one or two or ten. Maybe. Training enough gunsmiths and polishers to crank out a run of 1,000 is a tall order.

Do you think the experts who say the same thing are uninformed idiots?

Even the ones who used to build the guns at Colt? They know the challenges and the cost involved because of the time the handwork takes.

John

Fordtough25
07-03-2012, 10:32
I love my old Python from '77, it still looks and functions like new! I don't see Colt making a new Python but if they do so be it. I have and enjoy shooting my old royal blued model. :thumbsup:

Jim Watson
07-03-2012, 12:01
I would not hang my hat on USFA's capabilities.
They turn out a wide range of very nice SAAs, including "reproductions" of guns for which there were no originals made, but they have flopped on everything else. They announced some rather weird 1911 pattern guns and a very nice looking Woodsman copy complete with Maxim Silencer, but you will not find any actually for sale. I can't see them getting out a Python. Or a Shooting Master, which would really be a treat. (They have a thing they CALL a shooting master but it is just another SAA mutant.)

WiskyT
07-03-2012, 14:26
"We're talking about a human ****ing heart here. "

No, we're talking about a mechanical replacement pump. Will this replacement speed up when you exercise?

Will it last 100 years or more like some genuine human hearts do?

Will it raise your blood pressure when you lose your cool and rant foolishly? :)

It's not a human heart and you didn't prove a point.

John


Crazy, just crazy. You missed the point. Precisions small parts reliable enough to bet lives on and small enough to fit in a case the size of a poker chip indicates that small precise mechanisms can still be made despite the belief on here by some that only the sperm of their parents could produce someone smart enough to make such things.

The same attention to detail, genius, and quality control that make an artificial heart the size of a poker chip could certainly be employed to make a Python.

WiskyT
07-03-2012, 14:29
Do you think the experts who say the same thing are uninformed idiots?

Even the ones who used to build the guns at Colt? They know the challenges and the cost involved because of the time the handwork takes.

John

Please show where one recognized expert has said it would not be possible to make a Python?

WiskyT
07-03-2012, 14:34
"We're talking about a human ****ing heart here. "

No, we're talking about a mechanical replacement pump. Will this replacement speed up when you exercise?

Will it last 100 years or more like some genuine human hearts do?

Will it raise your blood pressure when you lose your cool and rant foolishly? :)

It's not a human heart and you didn't prove a point.

John

Since you are looking to pick nits, the heart doesn't speed itself up or raise blood pressure. Those are autonomic functions controlled by the brain. Since other artificial devices have been developed that respond to direction from the brain, then yes, increased heart rate would be a simple thing. It wouldn't even need the brain. Oxygen saturation is simple to determine and the speed of the ppump could respond to changes in it.

As for durability, a mechanical heart would easily be as durable as the human heart. To have a pump running continuously for 100 years would be easy. It would be a lot easier than trying to get a human heart to run for 100 years. Most quit running after 77 or so.

Golddog
07-03-2012, 14:36
Why a Python, anyway, since most any S&W K, L or N frame will have a better out-of-the-box trigger or one that can easily be made better?

WiskyT
07-03-2012, 14:38
Why a Python, anyway, since most any S&W K, L or N frame will have a better out-of-the-box trigger or one that can easily be made better?

It's a matter of taste. There is a certain appeal to them.

R*E
07-03-2012, 14:45
Anyone ever modify a 686 by ventilating the rib?

dnuggett
07-03-2012, 15:00
Mr. Dnugett. How do you know Colt will be making Pythons again? Where's you proof?:dunno:

Why are you asking for proof? I've already said Colt hasn't made an announcement. I'm unofficially pre announcing the official announcement. :rofl:

Doubt away...

dnuggett
07-03-2012, 15:06
Man, this thread has really gone the distance.

:faint:

Indeed.

s&wfan
07-03-2012, 15:19
Honest question, why couldn't modern techniques make guns as intricately as the older guns were made?

Can't a CNC cut stuff really small, and with great precision? Hands get tired, eyesight fades as a long day goes on, a soulless CNC machine keeps cutting until you turn it off. I'm not being snarky, I'm honestly asking.

You don't see people saying, "I wish I could find a 1911 made in 1911 so I could go shoot the hell out of it." Weren't they made with a 6,000 round life span originally?

WiskyT
07-03-2012, 15:24
Honest question, why couldn't modern techniques make guns as intricately as the older guns were made?

Can't a CNC cut stuff really small, and with great precision? Hands get tired, eyesight fades as a long day goes on, a soulless CNC machine keeps cutting until you turn it off. I'm not being snarky, I'm honestly asking.

You don't see people saying, "I wish I could find a 1911 made in 1911 so I could go shoot the hell out of it." Weren't they made with a 6,000 round life span originally?

Your posts corroborates mine. According to a certain poster in this thread, having another poster agree with a prior poster makes the prior poster correct. By that logic, I am correct and he is incorrect:rofl:

s&wfan
07-03-2012, 15:34
Your posts corroborates mine. According to a certain poster in this thread, having another poster agree with a prior poster makes the prior poster correct. By that logic, I am correct and he is incorrect:rofl:

I'm lost as a goose. I should probably go read the whole thread.

WiskyT
07-03-2012, 15:57
Why are you asking for proof? I've already said Colt hasn't made an announcement. I'm unofficially pre announcing the official announcement. :rofl:

Doubt away...

There are two reasons you would start this thread. You are a troll, or you have some info to support the subject. I don't remember you being a troll, so I figure you have some info. How reliable that info is, we won't know until time goes by, or you fill us in.

WiskyT
07-03-2012, 16:00
Now let's guess what the info is. I'll go first. Colts is building a plant in the right to work state of Texas to build Pythons, and Dnugget lives near where the plant will be.

countrygun
07-03-2012, 16:08
Crazy, just crazy. You missed the point. Precisions small parts reliable enough to bet lives on and small enough to fit in a case the size of a poker chip indicates that small precise mechanisms can still be made despite the belief on here by some that only the sperm of their parents could produce someone smart enough to make such things.

The same attention to detail, genius, and quality control that make an artificial heart the size of a poker chip could certainly be employed to make a Python.


You can make parts, and then you have a pile of parts.

Your brilliant "Heart" anology has left the surgeon out of the equatiion hasn't it? Or is he unneccessary these days?

wow, you have made a hammer for a Python and you have made an atrificial heart, now, who is going to install them properly?

WiskyT
07-03-2012, 16:24
You can make parts, and then you have a pile of parts.

Your brilliant "Heart" anology has left the surgeon out of the equatiion hasn't it? Or is he unneccessary these days?

wow, you have made a hammer for a Python and you have made an atrificial heart, now, who is going to install them properly?

Wow, you really have trouble with analogies. I'm sorry, I should have realized this. I'll help you out. The surgeon would be analogous to the shooter. He has nothing to do with the artificial heart's manufacturer and the shooter has nothing to do with the manufacturing of the Python.

The person who fits the hammer to the Python is analogous to the person(s) or machines that assemble the artificial heart.

Is this really that hard for you to understand, or are you just being argumentative? An honest answer to that question would help this discussion greatly. For instance, if you really just can't follow these analogies, I could address that by using more simple comparisons. Perhaps they could involve things like cookies or roller skates would be easier for you to follow?

countrygun
07-03-2012, 16:48
Wow, you really have trouble with analogies. I'm sorry, I should have realized this. I'll help you out. The surgeon would be analogous to the shooter. He has nothing to do with the artificial heart's manufacturer and the shooter has nothing to do with the manufacturing of the Python.

The person who fits the hammer to the Python is analogous to the person(s) or machines that assemble the artificial heart.

Is this really that hard for you to understand, or are you just being argumentative? An honest answer to that question would help this discussion greatly. For instance, if you really just can't follow these analogies, I could address that by using more simple comparisons. Perhaps they could involve things like cookies or roller skates would be easier for you to follow?


What part of,

"you don't know what you are talking about"

don't you understand?

Have you/do you own a Python?

Have you ever worked on a Python?

Do you have any experience with the Pythons action at all?

Have you ever worked on any revolver?

Have you ever polished and blued a firearm?

Did you read the referenced quote from Cunningham and read the info on the link that was provided?


You appear to be a "know it all/know nothing" much like a teenager on a new job telling everyone how it "should" be done.

You really crack me up. Here you are trying to tell people, that actually have experience, that they are wrong, because you can dream how it could be done.

WiskyT
07-03-2012, 16:54
What part of,

"you don't know what you are talking about"

don't you understand?

Have you/do you own a Python?

Have you ever worked on a Python?

Do you have any experience with the Pythons action at all?

Have you ever worked on any revolver?

Have you ever polished and blued a firearm?

Did you read the referenced quote from Cunningham and read the info on the link that was provided?


You appear to be a "know it all/know nothing" much like a teenager on a new job telling everyone how it "should" be done.

You really crack me up. Here you are trying to tell people, that actually have experience, that they are wrong, because you can dream how it could be done.

Why do you keep brining up non sequiturs ?

Please cut and paste the part of Cunningham's article where he says that a Python can't be made? That Cunningham can fit a Python is proof that it can still be done.

dnuggett
07-03-2012, 16:57
I'm lost as a goose. I should probably go read the whole thread.

I wouldn't bother, you will be underwhelmed. There are some nuggets of goodness here and there but overall.. meh.

dnuggett
07-03-2012, 17:09
There are two reasons you would start this thread. You are a troll, or you have some info to support the subject.

And there is the subject line of the thread. In it you will find the reason I started the thread.

I don't remember you being a troll

You remember right. As far as this thread goes, y'all made it what it is. I didn't even pop any popcorn for this one, I've only read about a third of it here and there. That was enough for me.

we won't know until time goes by,

Bingo.

or you fill us in.

I'm not taking the bait. I've already said there is no official word. I don't make the damn things, I'm not in Colt's supply chain and I don't call the shots at Colt. I don't have any proof for you. Believe me or don't.. I don't care. :cool:

dnuggett
07-03-2012, 17:12
Now let's guess what the info is. I'll go first. Colts is building a plant in the right to work state of Texas to build Pythons, and Dnugget lives near where the plant will be.

And you allude to me being a troll? Good grief.

WiskyT
07-03-2012, 17:14
And you allude to me being a troll? Good grief.

Not at all. I specifically said you weren't a troll. You might have a chip on your shoulder though.

dnuggett
07-03-2012, 17:16
Not at all. I specifically said you weren't a troll. You might have a chip on your shoulder though.

Judging from the posts of yours I've read in here if I have a chip you've got a crater. It's all good though. :tongueout:

countrygun
07-03-2012, 17:47
Why do you keep brining up non sequiturs ?

Please cut and paste the part of Cunningham's article where he says that a Python can't be made? That Cunningham can fit a Python is proof that it can still be done.

You just refuse to answer my question about your actual experience in dealing with the topic at hand and you chose to deflect instead. what is worse, you do a terrible job of it.

Your supreme cluelessness is amazing.

Your statement,

"That Cunningham can fit a Python is proof that it can still be done"


is proof of insipid trollism. You are attempting to portray me as saying the Python couldn't be made today. would you please tell me where I said that? No i suspect that request will be answered with about the same alacrity you used in telling me about your experience. I will help you out, since you won't man up.

Here is what I have said on the subject.


Page 6, post 134

Basic economics as far as price. There was a reason it was the most expensive revolver of it's day. If it comes back the same things that made it expensive then, should surely make it so today. If they can still produce the Colt Royal Blue so more people can actually see what it looked like. computers don't do that part worth a spit.

page 7 post 170

This is pretty much it. A high end "boutique" revolver, is not going to put Colt back in the wheel gun business for very long. Korth and Manhurin have not exactly become household names, nor are they instock at 50% of the neighborhood gunshops.

page 8 post 189

IF anyone says that we can make a "Python" today, to the original design, and manage to do so without the craftsmen needed, is talking out their arse.

Have any of you, who think it's possible, ever fixed and/or re timed a Python succesfully?

page 8 post 195

"the "Python" could

1. not be made to the same standards as the old model just because of modern manufacturing techniques.

2. probably not be made with the same internal design due to labor costs, and better designs and therefore not truly be a continuation of the "Python"

3. Not be made at a competitive price point with other .357 revolvers."

post 198

By the way, you know very well that I have NEVER said "it couldn't be done. I have said that the Python's design requires hand fitting to duplicate, the finish requires a great amount of human attention, and thise factors make it very unlikely that it could be exactly duplicated without it once again being the most expensive factory revolver in the world, like it once was.

__________________


Now, Mr, "Non-sequitor", why are you arguing with me about whether it could be done or not?

I never said it couldn't.

I just think you have no clue about the hand work involved and you haven't proved any experience to contradict my opinion.

NeverMore1701
07-03-2012, 18:00
http://ampersandartful.files.wordpress.com/2010/04/butthurt-report-form.jpg

WiskyT
07-03-2012, 18:23
You just refuse to answer my question about your actual experience in dealing with the topic at hand and you chose to deflect instead. what is worse, you do a terrible job of it.

Your supreme cluelessness is amazing.

Your statement,

"That Cunningham can fit a Python is proof that it can still be done"


is proof of insipid trollism. You are attempting to portray me as saying the Python couldn't be made today. would you please tell me where I said that? No i suspect that request will be answered with about the same alacrity you used in telling me about your experience. I will help you out, since you won't man up.

Here is what I have said on the subject.


Page 6, post 134

Basic economics as far as price. There was a reason it was the most expensive revolver of it's day. If it comes back the same things that made it expensive then, should surely make it so today. If they can still produce the Colt Royal Blue so more people can actually see what it looked like. computers don't do that part worth a spit.

page 7 post 170

This is pretty much it. A high end "boutique" revolver, is not going to put Colt back in the wheel gun business for very long. Korth and Manhurin have not exactly become household names, nor are they instock at 50% of the neighborhood gunshops.

page 8 post 189

IF anyone says that we can make a "Python" today, to the original design, and manage to do so without the craftsmen needed, is talking out their arse.

Have any of you, who think it's possible, ever fixed and/or re timed a Python succesfully?

page 8 post 195

"the "Python" could

1. not be made to the same standards as the old model just because of modern manufacturing techniques.

2. probably not be made with the same internal design due to labor costs, and better designs and therefore not truly be a continuation of the "Python"

3. Not be made at a competitive price point with other .357 revolvers."

post 198

By the way, you know very well that I have NEVER said "it couldn't be done. I have said that the Python's design requires hand fitting to duplicate, the finish requires a great amount of human attention, and thise factors make it very unlikely that it could be exactly duplicated without it once again being the most expensive factory revolver in the world, like it once was.

__________________


Now, Mr, "Non-sequitor", why are you arguing with me about whether it could be done or not?

I never said it couldn't.

I just think you have no clue about the hand work involved and you haven't proved any experience to contradict my opinion.


You spent pages arguing that it couldn't be done. Then you say it would be NOT priced comparable to a GP100. No kidding. Everybody has agreed it would be an expensive gun to make. You said it couldn't be done because the craftsmen required to make it somehow didn't exist anymore. You squirm around and change your position.

Then you bring in the non sequitur of whether I can tune a Python or not. Of course I can't, that's why guys like Cunningham make a good living at it.

The fact is, Colt could make a Python. It would be pricey. It would cost more than a Rossi or Ruger. Some people would buy them. Price would be set according to the laws of economics, supply and demand. Most figure that would fall around the $1,500.00 mark, maybe a bit more. People regularly pay that much for plastic guns, so it's not a stretch that in a world where people pay $3,000.00 for 1911's when they already have several $3,000.00 1911's, that there would be interest in a 1.5-2K Python.

In fact, if it were as nice as the old ones, and $2,000.00, I think BAC would consider one on the basis that it would be another chapter in the Python legend.

Edited to add "NOT" in the first paragraph.

bac1023
07-03-2012, 19:24
Hey guys, let's kill this thread, shall we?

Good Lord

Berto
07-03-2012, 19:37
It is hard to know where to start on your high level of wrong.

Let's maybe quit making broad statements in hopes of somehow gaining some kind of intellectual credibilty.

How wrong am I?
And what version of your constantly evolving stance am I wrong about?;

First, it was (post 44)
A Colt Python isn't a car. What you are describing is more like Ruger's improvements to the Colt SAA. Yet, despite the improvements Ruger has made while keeping the same recognizable form Colt has no trouble with their re introduction of the SAA.

For the sake of the computer generation, the original Python cannot be duplicated by merely putting the right command lines in a program. They were the result of a "balamce" between the, actually few, springs, and the meshing of the other parts. The modern methods can produce very nice guns alright, but we haven't replaced the human hand and it's ability to evaluate pressure or gauge smoothness. Colt had made moves in that direction with the last "generation" of the "Old" Pythons. Dig real deep into the reviews and you will find the difference between those later Pythons, and the ones with the craftsman's initials stamped in them, was noticable.


and post 47;

With our modern knowledge of chemistry we should be able to make whiskey without aging it too

BTW as someone who has worked on a whole lot of revolvers made from the 1930's to two years ago, case hardening carbon steel does make for a potentially smoother surface than any stainless steel can acheive on it's own.

There is a 'Ju-ju" to crafting and tuning the Colt action.

Sorry if that infers that modern man and his computers are less than the complete masters of the world.

My fantastic comprehension lead me to the conclusion that

a) we can't make a "1st gen quality" Python because we rely too heavily on machines and CAD/CAM.

b) we don't have the skilled labor to perform the finish work or royal blue level quality.

and

c) modern man can't discern the intricacy of fitting the Python action because only people over 50 know these things.*



....To post 198,

By the way, you know very well that I have NEVER said "it couldn't be done. I have said that the Python's design requires hand fitting to duplicate, the finish requires a great amount of human attention, and thise factors make it very unlikely that it could be exactly duplicated without it once again being the most expensive factory revolver in the world, like it once was.



So maybe we agree, or maybe not, depending on what you stand for.






Quote:




Originally Posted by Berto

Excellent.
Given I have already named two companies that do EXACTLY the type of work you state (based on above quoted), it seems in my (fantastic) comprehension that you would be
"talking out your arse".


There are two companies making Pythons, Really? do they have a Luger assembly line too?

I'm glad you mentioned Lugers. It seems there was a demand for them too, enough for Interarms to collaborate with Mauserwerke to tool up and reproduce them in 1970.
Makes me wonder how many folks swore it was not possible to produce a successful high quality modern replica of this complex pistol, especially given the Oberndorf factory was leveled by the French after WWII?

These were excellent quality guns; hot blued, no less. Strawed parts, the whole works.

I have one.

http://img94.imageshack.us/img94/9480/coltandlugerpicsforahol.jpg

Oh, you missed the point of my reply there too, but I'm guessing you just being a smartass.





It's nice and validating to sit around spinning yarns about how "they don't make 'em like they used to" and denigrate modern manufacturing as a dismissal of the machine soul inherited by countless hours of hand fitting and blood/sweat/tears.

And your experience with the Colt action, i mean actual EXPERIENCE, would be....?

Colt action... like this E/41 frame?
Nothing special, I take my guns apart to clean them, esp after buying them used, because they are often dry as hell, esp really old ones like this one;

It's nice, too

http://img26.imageshack.us/img26/9480/coltandlugerpicsforahol.jpg

Everyone on the internet claims they are experts, I sure as hell won't claim I know everything, but I do own 25 revolvers, maintain them and shoot them often.
Since you're new here, you probably didn't know that. I may not qualify as an expert, but I sure as hell have plenty of experience with them, including that old Colt.:wavey:

But the fact is, guns like that can be made because people evolve, machinery evolves and methods evolve- a point missed in the whole sidebar concerning engines.

And the designs for the things being manufactured take the strengths and weaknesses of the manufacturing techniques in mind.

Korth, Manhurin, FA make such guns. No doubt they are expensive, as would a modern 'retro' Python, I'd never assume it would be priced like a GP100 or 686....or even a PC gun.
People still work on and often correct Colt Pythons, meaning they understand the dynamics of the action and can make the parts if needed (Grant Cunningham is a member here).


There are fewer each year, but then again I never said that there weren't such people. If you were actually paying attention you will find that I said I have done it.

I know what you said, which is why I find it hard to understand what makes you think Colt has no such folks.


Guns are made every day like the Python, don't tell me it can't be done.


This is where you are most glaringly wrong and wallowing in a puddle of ignorance. No gun is being made "like the Python" today. Your lack of knowledge about the actual mechanism of the Python is a BIG blind spot in your argument. The Python was not "state of the art" at the time it was designed and throughout its lifetime. It was a design that was outdated, from a technical standpoint, well before the first Python ever went out the door. It was outdated even for production methods in 1955. The very design dated from a time when all parts were hand fitted and hand honed and balanced. Colt themselves moved away from the Pythons action for their service revolvers because it was too labor intensive in the 60's to make it.

The single action that you keep crowing about is very simple by comparison and it;s popularity keeps it going.

I don't hear any experience in working on any of these guns coming out of you. All I hear is theories and "I am sure they could figure it out" fix a few Colts yourself of the Python design and get back to me when you know what you are talking about

More chickenpoo rhetoric. I understand the Python action. I understand the difference between SA and DA revolver designs, a SA solid frame is obviously simple compared to a DA hand ejector.
Not sure how I crowed about it, I simply used USFA as an example of 'old world' manufacturing with Doug Turnbull's case hardening and charcoal bluing. How you make a retard hail-Mary leap to such conclusions is outside my (fantastic)
comprehension.
I know why Colt went to the MkIII action. Do you think that trumpeting all this crap makes you look like an expert in revolver production that no one else could possibly grasp?








You can keep repeating yourself until you're blue in the face, but (IMO) reality doesn't support you.

Again, what "reality" are you talking about? HAVE YOU EVER WORKED ON A PYTHON? If not, you are the one short of reality.

You say some amazing things, "Your experience working on them isn't reality, my theory is"

You keep saying you worked on a Python.
May the record show, Berto acknowledges countrygun's Python prowess. Millions of satisfied customers, right?

Now, with that out of the way, do you think that going to an ASE certified mechanic for Nissan is going to give you any meaningful insight on Nissan's production capabilities?

Your insight from whatever it is you did with a Python may trump whatever I've done with my Colt (same action), both of our insight doesn't amount to dick about Colt's production capability. Try getting over it.






* I'm most just kidding there.


__________________

Berto
07-03-2012, 19:44
Hey guys, let's kill this thread, shall we?

Good Lord

I promise, I'll stop.













Maybe.

NeverMore1701
07-03-2012, 21:47
Those pics are just great!

:bowdown::bowdown::bowdown::bowdown:

BigJake
07-03-2012, 21:48
I really want Colt to do it, but I know they will be junk compared to what they used to be:crying:

WiskyT
07-04-2012, 04:58
Hey guys, let's kill this thread, shall we?

Good Lord

Toothpaste can not be put back in the tube.

AgentM79
07-04-2012, 08:11
Idk, but I can say this much. Although the Python is a superb weapon (shot one this past weekend), I can say that the Ruger GP100 is equally supurb, at half the price (shot one of those this past weekend too). I'm not a super experienced revolver shooter, but I can say that the GP100, out of every DA revolver I've shot, has the smoothest DA trigger by far. Love that gun, I just got it this past week and it'll be with me for a lifetime. Maybe there's something better about Colt's Python that I don't know about, that the GP100 doesn't have, but as for just shooting, my review on the GP100 is I like it even better than the Python I shot. Just sayin'..

What this man said! My Glock-trained trigger finger finds the Ruger GP100 to be a superb weapon. Not only is it a modern, proven design, but the "click-click-BANG" trigger-pull is easy to shoot well. The Python is a superb mechanism, and well-worth the price to someone who appreciates workmanship and hand-tuned precision. Me? My uncultured trigger finger doesn't care. But, I do hope Colt resurrects the Python, and other revolvers from their historic product line. Like I said, I'd be all over a King Cobra if they'd make them again.

bac1023
07-04-2012, 09:05
In fact, if it were as nice as the old ones, and $2,000.00, I think BAC would consider one on the basis that it would be another chapter in the Python legend.



Maybe so.

That said, I was also considering a new German P210 Legend, but opted to stick with the older Swiss models.

Berto
07-04-2012, 14:24
I'd get a Python if Colt made one. It might be the best thing they ever did for the consumer in the last 50yrs.

WiskyT
07-04-2012, 14:26
I'd get a Python if Colt made one. It might be the best thing they ever did for the consumer in the last 50yrs.

It would be the best thing they ever did for their shareholders.

Shadyscott69
07-04-2012, 14:28
Can Colt make a Python as good as the old ones? Heck yeah.

Are there folks out there who could hand fit them just as well as they used to? Yep

Can Colt achieve the old Royal Blue finish? I would think so.

Will Cold do all of the above? Probably not. Would not be good business IMO Market is too limited(I think).

BTW: I would pay a couple G's for one as nice as the 4" I had for a few days in the 80"s. :wavey:

bac1023
07-04-2012, 14:31
Toothpaste can not be put back in the tube.

It can be thrown out though. ;)

Berto
07-04-2012, 14:50
Come on, Brian. You probably have more posts in this thread than I do.
:supergrin:

bac1023
07-04-2012, 15:28
Come on, Brian. You probably have more posts in this thread than I do.
:supergrin:

:rofl::rofl:

countrygun
07-04-2012, 16:07
Can Colt make a Python as good as the old ones? Heck yeah.

Are there folks out there who could hand fit them just as well as they used to? Yep

Can Colt achieve the old Royal Blue finish? I would think so.

Will Cold do all of the above? Probably not. Would not be good business IMO Market is too limited(I think).

BTW: I would pay a couple G's for one as nice as the 4" I had for a few days in the 80"s. :wavey:

I completely agree with all of that.

I got the stink on me around here by disagreeing with someone who doesn't think it would take the the craftsmen since we have new manufacturing techniques today.