Why Not A Colt?

[Flexmoney]

...for games in which a quick reload might NOT be needed?

Carmoney said in another thread, "Years ago I noticed you could get a Python DA noticeably lighter than a Smith and still get reliable ignition".

[XRe]

Quite simply....??? Because it doesn't spin "Smith-wise".........

:lol: :lol:

Honestly, I don't know.... Just remembering a conversation I had w/ an early shooting sports mentor, whom I remember quite fondly (he was also a CS prof at GA Tech, which was where I met him). He had a fetish for revolvers, and spent several hours with me one day showing me all the particulars, how the work, how to handle them, etc, etc - also introduced me to reloading... good 'ol gus.....

[AzShooter]

...for games will a quick reload might not be needed? 

Carmoney said in another thread, "Years ago I noticed you could get a Python DA noticeably lighter than a Smith and still get reliable ignition".

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Funny how you don't see many Colts on the firing line. Knew one local guy that could shoot his Python faster than anyone I've ever seen. I think he also won the Steel Challenge once in Revo Division.

Mike Henry is his name.... gone on to better things and we don't see him shooting anymore but I'll always remember his speed.

[revchuck]

...for games will a quick reload might not be needed? 

Carmoney said in another thread, "Years ago I noticed you could get a Python DA noticeably lighter than a Smith and still get reliable ignition".

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Among non-moonclip guns, one would probably be competitive. I know I don't shoot my Official Police much slower than my S&Ws...but we're still talking glacially slow either way. Smiths are easier to work on, more commonly found, and there are some trick parts available for them, as well as gunsmiths who know how to tune them. Any smithing for a Colt costs the extortion from UPS plus the price of the 'smith's work - the only gunsmith I know of who will work on Colt DA revolvers is Cylinder & Slide. Most won't touch them with a ten foot pole. Still, my OP is just about the right weight for an IDPA gun, and not too bad for a carry gun, and puts the bullets just about where the front sight is.

[Bubber]

I think Rev Chuck hit it. The safariland comp III's and Jet loaders once cut down would not fit the Colt cylinder. Colt used a V leaf spring for the main spring and were finicky. I know of two shooters that used the Colt. One was Ralph Arbogast who just would not give up on the Colt. Shot pretty well in the Bianchi Cup one year. B.C. Champlin still uses his Colt.

AZ Shooter, I am almost positive that Mike Henry used the S&W cause I have some of his radically cut down Jets. You remember them set up so if you did not reload from them in 3 minutes after setting them up they would go off anyway,,,

One other item was the cost S$W used to be so much less expensive and easy to work on. Just what I could remember o from the old days. Gotta go take my Geritol.

[Carmoney]

I never liked the way the Colt DA stacks up. I've heard Reeves Jungkind figured out how to take out the stack, but I've never handled one of his guns personally.

I have an old Trooper (same action as the Python, but different barrel) that I bought at a gun show for $175 maybe 10 years ago--I use it for a "car gun."

Mike

[Ross Carter]

Colts are nice revolvers but it takes a lot more work to get the stack out of the action, smiths don't have it to start with usually. Also Colt uses a double hand, that's why when a Colt is cocked there is no cylinder movement. This is supposed to help accuracy but if you shoot a Colt fast double action that hand wears out quick. I shot a Python for years and put many hands in it before I got it figured out. Then there is the cylinder latch that works backward. The smoothest Python I ever pulled the trigger on was a Moran, don't know if he's still around but his action was astounding.

[Carmoney]

I think I heard that Jerry Moran sorta dropped off the radar a number of years ago. Anybody else know?

[spook]

For me the big downside of a Colt revolver is the way it opens and closes the cylinder. Nothing wrong with the trigger IMO (but I'm a sloth on the trigger anyways)

[Flexmoney]

For me the big downside of a Colt revolver is the way it opens and closes the cylinder.

How so? You mean for speedy reloads, or is it some issue with fit?

(disclaimer: asking about non-speedy applications)

[robomanusa]

For me the big downside of a Colt revolver is the way it opens and closes the cylinder.

How so? You mean for speedy reloads, or is it some issue with fit?

(disclaimer: asking about non-speedy applications)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The cylinder latch on colts works reverse of the smiths, you have to pull it to the rear to unlock cylinder, not push it forward.

[Flexmoney]

Right. (I shoot a lot thru a Python while growning up.)

I am talking about for games that don't require a speedy reload on the clock (NRA/Bianchi, Steel Challenge, etc.).

[spook]

OK, I thought you meant for speedy reloads. For non-speedy reload games, I'd say Colt revolvers could do very well. I would not hesitate to use one. The only downside is that those games are usually very accuracy oriented. I don't know how many gunsmiths can turn a Colt into a gun with Bianchi accuracy (if it doesn't have that accuracy already)

[Flexmoney]

I just re-read my first post. With the spelling errors and such, I can see the confusion. Sorry about that. I've edited it now.

[Ron Ankeny]

I've heard Reeves Jungkind figured out how to take out the stack, but I've never handled one of his guns personally.

Oh man, flash back time. I tried a couple of Pythons back in my PPC days. I had two with Junkind actions. I believe he took most of the stacking out by tweaking the bend of the leaf spring. Still, the Python action was just not as fluid and smooth as the Ron Power Smiths that I shot. I developed a preference for Smiths and eventually gave up on Colts altogether.

Having said all of that, I routinely lost my butt to an incredible shooter and friend (Sam has seen him shoot) who just rocks with a Python. Oddly enough, when he shoots the Bianchi Cup, he uses a Smith. Go figure.

[Wap wap]

Your looking at from the present chronology. Most guns during that era were SW Mod 10 K frames that could be gotten for nothing. The barrels were then replaces with Douglas blanks then something like a Ron Power rib or Clark topped the gun off and you were ready for PPC- pre IPSC pre Bianchi etc. Then Bianchi came up and the most likely candidate were PPC type guns, because nobody counted on the realiability of autos. SW parts were very easy to get, Colt parts usually envolved knowing a Saudi oil minister, and the while Colt praised the accuracy of their laser sighted Pythons, the fact is they weren't that great. Additionally any twist rate could be had for Douglass barrels which made the slow twist rate of commercial SW way to slow for heavy bullet combinations. The heavy barreled Douglas blanks were one of the main reason Colt went to the heavy underlug and the "magnum" look. --they would hang better on the target as the saying used to go. In those days 44 mags were king and anything else was a "target"gun. Something like the top dog now the 625, are still a joke among people who use wheelguns for hunting. As far as tuning a Python the leaf spring used was a hold over from the early 44 they built, but updated the larger frame for the 357. this spring doubled as a hammer and trigger return spring as I recall and was very difficult to get both the springs rates on each leaf simaltaneously correct. -But you can't beat the blue job.

[TMC]

I heard Jerry M once say that he uses S&W because the trigger return is the faster than all the others and that was most improtant to him when shooting fast.

[George D]

I owned a Python and a Smith 686 with the firing pin on the hammer. The Python's DA tended to stack and I could never get it as smooth or as reliably light as the Smith. I eventually traded the Python for one of the new Smith 629C's with the firing pin in the frame. I could never get as good a trigger performance on this as my 686 or as my Smith 29C with the firing pin on the hammer.

If I were buying another 357 revolver for use DA I'd still buy a Smith.

[BigBoar]

"Years ago I noticed you could get a Python DA noticeably lighter than a Smith and still get reliable ignition".

The Python and some of the other old Colts have about the largest hammer arc and leverage of double action revolvers. Reeves Jungkind, Jerry Moran, Austin Behlert and Walt Sherman are some of the old masters of the action. Reeves normally could get his down to about a 7 pound action but had a 4 pound single. Walt had some that down around 5 pounds (I assume) that would work on Federal primers as did Austin.

There are a number of ways to remove the stacking. The traditional way as used by Jungkind was to heat and bend the ledge on the trigger (double action sear contact surface) to remove the stacking and retime the gun. Behlert milled a groove in this same area wide enough for the hammer strut or double action sear to remove the stacking ahd he claimed this did not need retiming. Some other 'smiths welded a metal piece on the same area underneath and cut an arc. The benefit of this as with Behler'ts was that the single action could be relatively low compared to the heat and bend methold. Sherman uses a roller action hammer strut that removes the stacking and RETAINS the single action (he also does this on K, L and N S&Ws). Another 'smith has told me he might be able to reduce the stacking by changing the shape of the hammer strut.