The Pietta Python?

How many who have posted their opinions about the Python actually have one? Or seven? Just curious, as those that have them seem to have a different opinion of them. And many of us who have them, have a variety of Smiths and Rugers as well to compare them with....though we probably don't have Alpha projects or Taurus revolvers to compare them too.
 
Twisted Canuck said:
How many who have posted their opinions about the Python actually have one? Or seven? Just curious, as those that have them seem to have a different opinion of them. And many of us who have them, have a variety of Smiths and Rugers as well to compare them with....though we probably don't have Alpha projects or Taurus revolvers to compare them too.
Click to expand...

Well sir I don't have a Python. But I do own a Colt Model 357. The guts of which are identical to the Python, including the trigger. I also own several Smiths from circa 1937 to 1993 manufacture and one Monson made Dan Wesson. A lonely Anaconda as well. I will not include my SA revolvers (Rugers & Colts) as I feel these fall a bit outside the present discussion.

Cheers
 
Last edited:
I don't have a Python, never have even fired one.

If I did want one though, there is no substitute.

We can't fool ourselves on this, just because it looks like one doesn't mean it IS one.

OTOH if somebody just likes the looks and profile, fine, but it's still not a Python and no matter how much tuning and upgrading you do it will never be the same gun or worth anything but less than someone paid for it.
 
Last edited:
Marcel B. said:
If I personally want a Python I'll save my money and buy a PYTHON.

Looks aren't everything.
Click to expand...

+1

It isn't even the current cost that keeps me away. I didn't want one when they were $750 brand new.

1CanadaFlag.gif

-------------
NAA.
 
NVShooter said:
I shot a Python for about 20 minutes or so, really focusing on the feel, etc. And I was thinking the same. Then immediately after, I picked up my Performance Center S&W, which is the cream of my crop, and I immediately could tell how much nicer the Python was in SA. Had I shot them at seperate times, I likely would not have come to the same conclusions. So I guess the key for me is, never shoot them back to back, and the S&W will be just fine. Unfortunately, the genie is now out of the bottle and I'm on my second Python. Still love the Smiths though, better DA and faster trigger return IMO.
Click to expand...

Good points, with an hour or day between shooting each differences are harder to discern, side by side there are no questions. Was just in the safe playing with the Python and brand new Smith, every aspect of the Python is tighter, smoother, and crisper despite being several decades older. Cylinder play, trigger feel, lock up both cocked and hammer down, etc etc. I love and trust my life to smiths, but they're not pythons. Pythons are also impossible to "short cycle" like a smith, that is to rotate the cylinder but not raise and drop the hammer in DA as when the smith's trigger isn't fully let out after firing. Smiths are great guns, Pythons were just better, and appropriately twice the price.
 
Ardent said:
Have to disagree. In 1955, hand fitting was normal, and how everything was built. It still continued to exist in Colt's shop, but at every increasing costs... to the point they were being sold at a loss for a long time. Of course that's not sound business, and it didn't last. Now try and assemble, train, and retain a group of hand fitters willing to sit at the bench and fiddle with Pythons day in day out. Times have changed, people are training for much different vocations, and time costs far, far more- the cost to "rewind" to old techniques and retrain skills that barely exist today would be astronomical. I own a Holland & Holland Royal double rifle from the early 20th century, replacement cost today? $210,000 Canadian base. This is one of the few examples of hand fitted guns still available today. The Python always has contained far more machine operations than a H&H, hence why I don't throw out a figure of $20,000. How many Pythons do you own I have to ask, and ever done any firearm finishing? Just the polish and "Royal Blue" bluing job on a Python can run $1,000 at a small hand down shop today. The costs stack up fast, and Colt or others would be turning to small shops with the skills intact to make these hypothetical hand fit Pythons. The P210 is a much simpler design to manufacture well.
Click to expand...

Sorry but just because replacement cost on your H&H rifle is 210,000$ does NOT mean it costs them that much. I would be willing to bet my left nut it costs them under 10k to build, and probably even less. With those rifles, you are paying for the quality sure, but you are mainly paying for the brand name and legacy.
 
Matty308 said:
Sorry but just because replacement cost on your H&H rifle is 210,000$ does NOT mean it costs them that much. I would be willing to bet my left nut it costs them under 10k to build, and probably even less. With those rifles, you are paying for the quality sure, but you are mainly paying for the brand name and legacy.
Click to expand...

None of this is meant to be mean, but a lot of things just came into perspective. Unfortunately you have just thrown the credibility of your previous opinions into pretty glaring light, and well outlined your grasp of the costs, time, and effort involved. It takes an H&H gunmaker (smith) up to a year to make a Royal, and they make about $90,000-$100,000 a year. Then there's maintaining the forges, tools, heavy machines, the factory, marketing, and so on. H&H quite to the contrary of turning 2,100% profits as you suggest has actually struggled with profitability in recent times. I'm afraid you aren't qualified to put numbers on build costs for hand fitting in modern times, I'd love some of these $10k at cost Holland & Holland Royals! Hell my machine made German double rifle was more than that new, and cost about that for the factory to make.

To see why, watch this video for a bit, you might learn something you didn't expect to. Building a Python today the way they were fit in the past by hand would be prohibitively expensive, folks of your line of thinking would immediately assume it's a rip off, not understanding the challenges. And no, Browning HPs don't equal Colt Royal Blue if it was you who suggested this but I enjoyed the laugh- owned them too.

 
And Matty sorry, my reply came across as terse on reading it, not meant to be that way. Folks are very out of touch with the cost of making things by hand today however. How do I know? I make things by hand! :) Including hand fitting Colts, just finished an 1891 SAA full action refit and tune to tighter than new for instance last week. So to be fair I have an unfair insight into the subject. That pipe, charged for my man hours? $1500. The custom Ruger No.1? $4500+. The Greener Empire based .470 Nitro double rifle coming together there? Astronomical- and I'm not 1% of what H&H is.







[URL=http://smg.photobucket.com/user/angusmo/media/89D76979-A5D3-4239-8346-446E3FBDD172_zpsyzhy0a9e.jpg.html]
32D6D96A-E01B-40E2-966A-85F1824AFC2F_zps2apsfjtt.jpg
[/URL]
 
Python dreams on a Pietta budget ;)

Sometimes, for myself, it is more enjoyable to simply look at pictures and dream. Dreaming is free.

Ardent - do you have experience working on the new made Colt SAA revolvers? I'm wondering if the value for money is there, or whether there is a whole lot of brand name premium being paid for them.
 
Thanks NV, spend a lot of time at the bench with wood and steel, and old Colts so have a bit of an unfair insight into the debate. To get fully on track my estimation they would have to charge $5,000 to produce legacy quality Colt Pythons properly would be dead on for today. That is $5,000 to be profitable and have a hope of production continuing- reality is everybody would judge them to be overpriced boutique items and folks would buy machine made Smiths. I personally cannot blame them, though I can appreciate how different Pythons are even compared to Performance Center Smiths. The fellow who I've forgotten exactly who said it touting premium HPs as having equal to Royal blue also clearly hasn't hasn't polished and blued many guns. One job on an auto and one on a revolver with as many sculpted undulations as the Python will quickly bring this into perspective. I'm rambling... The general community cannot be expected to appreciate the level of detail that makes the guns we're discussing expensive, I can't blame them. But to ignore it and insist they are overpriced or that H&H can make double rifles for $10,000 and sell them for a couple hundred grand is good comedy. :) We're very out of touch today with what hand fitted means. You can buy a Zastava Mauser for $600, but to have one hand fitted by Ralf Martini in Cranbrook BC? $15,000- and that's not a rip off, he's not living like a king. That's the price of hand fitting.
 
Mark-II said:
Python dreams on a Pietta budget ;)

Sometimes, for myself, it is more enjoyable to simply look at pictures and dream. Dreaming is free.

Ardent - do you have experience working on the new made Colt SAA revolvers? I'm wondering if the value for money is there, or whether there is a whole lot of brand name premium being paid for them.
Click to expand...

Only a little, have worked on many first gens and a couple seconds, just one third. The SAA is such a simple design and the first gens often incredibly crude to be truthful, especially if you've owned German guns of the same era. Both the below were mine and both were made the same year- 1897. The German gun is a relatively advanced steel (for 1897), in a high pressure, modern chambering who's velocity wasn't surpassed from a handgun until the .357 Magnum. The SAA is black powder, healed lead bullet, soft ductile iron, case hardened by cooking in a box with charcoal- literally Iron Age tech compared to manufacturing still admirable today in the German pistol. This all said to illustrate SAAs are like classic British sports cars, you love them because they're Colt SAAs. They have fragile sears, frames, and cylinders and crude sights... Ruger even has honestly done a. better build of the single action. The Python is different, it wins on its actual merits.

This all said, the SAA is my favourite revolver and admirably simple in its crudeness. They are simple to tune and fix, and despite the soft iron all the first gens still shooting say a lot about the gun. I actually feel my lone third gen was my best SAA. By no means my most collectible, and quality of the SAA has risen and fallen dramatically over the years even within generations so there are poor third gens too. But my experience was very favourable, I would avoid the "Cowboy" model however.

 
Thanks. My interest would likely be in a New Frontier model, as I am practical enough to want adjustable sights. I have a Pietta 1873, and a few Uberti clones of various Colt and Remington models, plus a few Blackhawks.

The Blackhawks are without a doubt the ones that I feel most comfortable with in regards to their durability, and Uberti makes a fine gun for the casual target shooting that I do. I just wonder whether a "real" Colt should be on my Someday list, given that I have a soft spot for single actions in general.


(a Red 9 c-96 is relegated to the dream-only list)
 
I have a Red 9 C96 on the bench right now... We have very similar tastes. :)

I would definitely get a Colt SAA at some point, I hate to be wooed by a brand but that's one I'm soft for. I have the SAA, the Python, and the M1911 (WWI vintage, original)- see that as the best of Colt and for me, a complete collection despite its tiny size.

This is the rarest Colt I've owned speaking of SAAs with sights, legal antique Flat Top Target Bisley .455, one of 200 or less made,

 
Last edited:
Nice!

There are a few Colts that I want - a new production "series 70" because I always loved the government models, growing up, but never got closer to one than a pane of glass. I do have a 1911-2011 reproduction of the WWI model - probably the closest I'll get to having a nice and shootable M1911 that hasn't been modded for Bullseye or something in years past. I keep a casual eye out for the Remington Rand A1's floating around, but have yet to see one that sits in the right place on the condition/affordability/originality matrix.

I'm still ambivalent towards the Python - I've never developed feelings or nostalgia towards it one way or the other, though I appreciate the art of it. Being as I like old service pistols I might instead look for a New Service at some point, though I do believe that a 45ACP S&W M22/1917 would top that on the list
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom