I picked up a very nice Colt Python today for $650, excellent condition. I wasn't looking for another revolver at the time, but a friend offered it to me. It has to be the smoothest firearm I have yet handled. I got a Ruger GP100 a short while back for Distinguished Revolver matches and it shoots good. Now I don't know which gun I want for match shooting. I heard the Colt is not as robust as the Ruger and I don't want to wear out the Python. Suggestions?

Jim

You don't say what ammo you'll use in the matches. If it's .38 spl, you won't wear out either one.

.

For match shooting, you shoot the gun that suits you best. The gun that you feel most comfortable with. Match shooting is based on points/hits using normal pressure loads. The Colt Python is a "robust" gun, it is highly unlikely that you will ever wear one out unless you abuse it. The Ruger is a "very robust" gun. There is simply no substitute for more steel when it comes to working with hot (high pressure) loads. Just my take on this subject, other opinions may differ.

The .357 Magnum loads that the gun was designed for are a little trying in the rapid fire phase shooting offhand, so you'll want .38 Special level target loads. Those, for all practical purposes, will be unable to wear the gun out. 50,000 rounds minimum, and even then the gun can be tightened up and keep going. You may find you do best to load your wadcutter target loads into .357 cases, which worked better in my Dan Wesson. It puts the bullet a little closer to the throat and stops lead from caking up that extra eighth of an inch behind the throats. The Lee tumble lube wadcutters way out shoot any other wadcutter I've put into that gun or into my Smith K-38, by the way. The 6-cavity mold is well-worth the investment if you cast?

The .357 Magnum loads that the gun was designed for are a little trying in the rapid fire phase shooting offhand, so you'll want .38 Special level target loads. . . . The Lee tumble lube wadcutters way out shoot any other wadcutter I've put into that gun or into my Smith K-38, . . .
Being equipped with short thumbs, shooting a revolver in the rapid fire phase of a bullseye match is out of the question. For sustained fire, the use of a Chow accurized Colt 1911A1 is far more suitable. I have not tried the Lee tumble lube wadcutter, however, I have tried the Remington, Hornady, and Speer swaged WC which perform well in my S&W model 15. Your recommendation of the Lee cast over the factory swaged leaves me a little depressed inasmuch as I have stockpiled almost 5K rounds of factory swaged.:D

For years I have always thought that the Python was THE only decent gun Colt ever made, the flagship revolver.
Congrats on a fine piece. :D

The Lee tumble lube wadcutters way out shoot any other wadcutter I've put into that gun or into my Smith K-38, by the way. The 6-cavity mold is well-worth the investment if you cast?

The 148 gr WC on this page:

http://www.leeprecision.com/cgi/catalog/browse.cgi?1215607081.5702=/html/catalog/bullmol2.html

is this the mold?

Jim

The 148 gr WC on this page:

http://www.leeprecision.com/cgi/catalog/browse.cgi?1215607081.5702=/html/catalog/bullmol2.html

is this the mold?

Jim

The #90294 Mold is the 6-cavity that I have. It groups half the size of commercial wadcutters in my gun. I am casting it with the rough equivalent of Lyman #2 alloy, and using the Lee liquid Alox lube.

When you hear about the problems Colt is having and you consider that they discontinued the Python, it is no wonder they are hurting; they deserve to hurt after doing something as dumb as that.
Just my honest opinion.

Kudu40

I AGREE KUDU !.........I LOVE my (1980) 6" Blue Python.......(Showroom Condition).

If anyone's interested, I paid $1150 for it.....and I'll bet it hasn't had a hundred rounds through it !

I think I'll leave instructions to have it placed in my coffin when I'm let down for the last time !

Marko...

Both the Python and Diamondback used to be favorites of revolver smiths who tuned them for competition. The market for medium size DA revolvers seems to have been reduced to where it just can't support as many manufacturers. Even Korth, the Rolls Royce of .357's quit. Almost nobody uses these guns in standard Bullseye matches anymore, and in other competitions their 6 round capacity is just too much disadvantage, unless the match is limited to revolvers. With law enforcement having gone pretty much entirely semi-auto, I think they lost the main market basis for sales of revolvers too big to conveniently conceal, but too small to take elephants.

It is too bad, from the standpoint of what well-developed designs there are. Seems like such a waste of know-how. Being a DA revolver smith may not yet be quite as lonely as being an expert carburetor rebuilder, but it is probably heading in that direction unless some new virtue is discovered in those guns. You'd think the fact the sights are fixed with respect to the barrel should give them enough inherent accuracy edge over many semi-auto designs that the advantage would be built-in? It just requires too much attention to chamber dimensions and cylinder timing to realize that advantage, I suppose, so the makers would really have to get them right for that to become part of the market lore. Japanese-style quality control could maybe breath some life back into that market if it could be done at a reasonable cost?

. . . I think I'll leave instructions to have it placed in my coffin when I'm let down for the last time !

Marko...
Uh, WHERE did you say you were going to be buried? :D:D:D

. . . so the makers would really have to get them right for that to become part of the market lore. Japanese-style quality control could maybe breath some life back into that market if it could be done at a reasonable cost?
Can we expect to see a Maruku Python in the near future?

Colt's big problem for years was to charge a premium price for their name and finish only. When Ruger and other makers came in with stronger, safer guns, Colt never made any changes to keep up. Look at the SAA, still the same with a price that we can't afford.

. . . Look at the SAA, still the same with a price that we can't afford.
Look at the bright side of it. With that kind of business mentality, Colt single-handedly established the SA clone industry and made millionaires out of the Italians. So now I shoot clones while the unfired Colt resides in my gunsafe appreciating in value with each passing day. In retrospect, Italy should establish a Colt Industries national holiday where they celebrate by getting drunk and firing their clones into the air.;)

python has to have a tuneup about every 2000 rounds to keep it in time

Is that mainly the end of the hand wearing out, or does the crane shoot loose?

The hand has to be adjusted

it will start spitting lead when it is time

interesting views on Colt revolvers. I spent a bunch of time tuning Smiths and Colts. Found that tomcat's view is pretty much correct. Problem with the Python and Colt double action revolvers is basically each spring does two things where Smith's springs do only one. When you get a Colt Python and similar Colt actions out of time it's much more of a job getting them back in time than most other double action revolvers. I got to the point that I really hated to see one come into the shop.

Had one Python I put way more hours into getting back in time that I could ever charge for. Knew the guy knew I hated working on them. I had an extra set of Python grips that I painted white then put a nice diagonal red stripe on them. Put a lead plug in the end of the bore and a big screw eye and a big treble hook on it. Put a screw eye in one of the grips and hung it up on the rack behind the counter on a piece of heavy nylon line.

When the guy came in for his gun I just pointed to the rack. When he ask what the heck happened to his gun I just said that it couldn't be fixed, but did make a great salmon lure. He never did bring another Colt back in to me.

I really don't have anything against Colt double action guns, I just don't like to work on them. Best I can suggest is if you do have any problems with it be sure to get someone whom really knows how to work on them to fix it.

I have worked on guns part time all of my life and never knew that about Colt DA's. I never knew anyone that had one that shot it enough to wear it. I just never worked on any except to clean them for someone.
Now the SAA always needed parts.
I wonder if keeping the DA's lubed would help? Even my shooting friends come over with dry guns after I tell them it is not good.
I use STP on all of my cylinder pins and ratchets. My SBH is getting real close to 58,000 heavy rounds with zero wear. It is as tight as the day I bought it. I never cock the hammers fast either, only CA shooters and speed shooters do that, need a lot of money to replace cylinders and locks all the time. I have seen some real beat up cylinder notches. I always had the guy send it to the factory.
Funny that a guy will baby his car and use the best oils, change it every 10,000 miles but will shoot a dry gun! :confused:

I always loved working on the Smiths DA's and Colt 1911's, but just didn't care for the Pythons and the rest of the Colt family that used that lockwork. They are a beautiful gun as far as feel and shootability though.

I've always thought they were pretty, but the lockwork can be a bummer if they get out of time. Perhaps it was just me being frustrated working on them. It's one gun that takes some real skills to make function correctly when broken.

I sure agree about the Rugers BFR. I shot a beautiful early Smith 29 to death and both the Super Redhawk and the two Redhawks I used for years simply were tougher than anvils. With some work the Ruger triggers can be made pretty durn good. I've always used a good moly lube on the insides and one of the teflon lubes for cold weather.

The Python is ok if you shoot it single action. Extensive DA shooting will get it out of time quickly. There was a shop called "300 Gunsmiths" or something like that. If you can find them, they can put a reliable action on the gun for you. I had worked on the Colts before buying my 6 ich blued in the 70ties. Only fired it SA and it lasted for a long time, never had to work on it. The action dates to the late 19th century and its built like a watch. Just my .02.

In dfense of Colt revolvers I must state that the mcolt police positive is a gun that I believe could go a hundred years without seeing a gunsmigth It has ifferent innards than the Python