Colt Python

Still Shootin said:
I like both, but the Python finish is a tad better. Here is a pic of mine 2 nickel 586-3, 8" nickel Python, and 2 6" blued.
_2033-1.jpg
[/IMG]
Click to expand...

If you go with a 686 a good rubdown with Flitz will give you an amazing looking finish.
 
I own a couple of Pythons, and have had L frame Smiths in the past. Python trigger is better, and they are usually more accurate (tapered bore). If you really want to compare use an N frame 27 Smith, which was their flagship model for decades. As to the duribility comments, Smith copied the Python with the L frame when their K frame 357 wouldn't stand up up to continuous pounding of full power magnum loads in service revolvers . I don't find the Colts anymore delicate the the L frames, but there is no one in Canada who can/will repair them, whereas there are lots of Smith options. - dan
 
OP: Don't forget the S&W 625. Runs on .45 ACP with moonclips. It will have to be used and most likely a 5" barrel.
It is an awesome speed machine.

Food for thought.
 
Luke.ronca said:
Thanks , In all honesty am I going to notice a difference between a python or a s&w686? I know they are both great revolvers.
Click to expand...

A better comparison is the Ruger Security Six, which was made for a few years in the 70s or 80s.
One difference is if you load the very popular cast Keith bullet in regular magnum brass, and crimp it in the proper crimping groove, it is too long to work in a Python.
However, it works fine and is a great shooter in a Ruger Security Six.
I think, but not sure, that the S&W 686 also has the shorter action, which will not accomodate the famous Keith bullet, when crimped in the crimping groove.
 
H4831 said:
A better comparison is the Ruger Security Six, which was made for a few years in the 70s or 80s.
One difference is if you load the very popular cast Keith bullet in regular magnum brass, and crimp it in the proper crimping groove, it is too long to work in a Python.
However, it works fine and is a great shooter in a Ruger Security Six.
I think, but not sure, that the S&W 686 also has the shorter action, which will not accomodate the famous Keith bullet, when crimped in the crimping groove.
Click to expand...

That brings back early reloading memories:). The same holds true for the N frame Smiths such as the model 27 and 28. Using the 173gr Keith SW in 357 Mag cases you had to use a slightly reduced load and crimp over the forward driving band. Keith makes mention of this in his book Six Guns by Keith. With the cylinder length of the Smith model 19 and 66 you could crimp in the proper crimping groove.
 
Last edited:
Yes Johnn, I found that out, also.
I had the N frame 357 before it was given the Model number of 29. It was just marked "357 MAGNUM." And it would not take the Keith SW bullet, unless it was crimped over the shoulder.
At the time I was experimenting with these things, Skeeter Skelton, Sherrif of Deaf Smith County Texas, and pistol shooting editor of Guns and Ammo, was the most popular revolver writer of them all. He was a great believer in Smith & Wesson 357 revolvers and had a tremendous following of revolver shooters, who virtually hung on his every written word.
He advocated using 38 Special brass and crimping the Keith bullet in its regular crimping groove, using the same powder charge as used in magnum brass and crimping over the shoulder.
I was an ardent follower of him and had to try these things out.
On January 2, 1991, I went to the range with my S&W 357 and an Oehler chronograph. I brought cartridges loaded with the 168 grain Keith bullet in two groups, those loaded in 38 Special brass, crimped in the proper crimping groove and those loaded in 357 magnum brass and crimped over the shoulder.

5 shot average, 13 grains of 2400 in 38 Special brass--------1247 fps with es of 28.
5 shot average, 13 grains of 2400 in 357 magnum brass-----1335 fps with es of 59.

I have no idea why the strange difference in velocity, but I repeated the test with 11 grains of 2400 in each case and the readings were as follows:
38 Special brass--1107 fps
magnum brass ---1223 fps.
There was a much larger extreme spread with each case, indicating the pressure was too low for proper powder burning with 11 grains of 2400.
My conclusion would be to use whatever turns your crank, either 38 Special or 357 magnum brass in your Python with the famous Keith bullet and shoot away.
 
H4831 said:
Yes Johnn, I found that out, also.
I had the N frame 357 before it was given the Model number of 29. It was just marked "357 MAGNUM." And it would not take the Keith SW bullet, unless it was crimped over the shoulder.
At the time I was experimenting with these things, Skeeter Skelton, Sherrif of Deaf Smith County Texas, and pistol shooting editor of Guns and Ammo, was the most popular revolver writer of them all. He was a great believer in Smith & Wesson 357 revolvers and had a tremendous following of revolver shooters, who virtually hung on his every written word.
He advocated using 38 Special brass and crimping the Keith bullet in its regular crimping groove, using the same powder charge as used in magnum brass and crimping over the shoulder.
I was an ardent follower of him and had to try these things out.
On January 2, 1991, I went to the range with my S&W 357 and an Oehler chronograph. I brought cartridges loaded with the 168 grain Keith bullet in two groups, those loaded in 38 Special brass, crimped in the proper crimping groove and those loaded in 357 magnum brass and crimped over the shoulder.

5 shot average, 13 grains of 2400 in 38 Special brass--------1247 fps with es of 28.
5 shot average, 13 grains of 2400 in 357 magnum brass-----1335 fps with es of 59.

I have no idea why the strange difference in velocity, but I repeated the test with 11 grains of 2400 in each case and the readings were as follows:
38 Special brass--1107 fps
magnum brass ---1223 fps.
There was a much larger extreme spread with each case, indicating the pressure was too low for proper powder burning with 11 grains of 2400.
My conclusion would be to use whatever turns your crank, either 38 Special or 357 magnum brass in your Python with the famous Keith bullet and shoot away.
Click to expand...

:)Your post prompted me to dig through my:p 'archives' for some applicable info you may find interesting. I scanned three letter resopnses to my inquiries from my early days of handgun shooting and e-mailed them to you. Let me know if they come through okay. :DOne from Skeeter during his tenure at Shooting Times and two from Elmer Keith who was at Guns & Ammo at that time. When I started in with handguns & reloading, I had a great mentor but info like what I've scanned for you was invaluable also:).
 
Last edited:
H4831 said:
A better comparison is the Ruger Security Six, which was made for a few years in the 70s or 80s.
One difference is if you load the very popular cast Keith bullet in regular magnum brass, and crimp it in the proper crimping groove, it is too long to work in a Python.
However, it works fine and is a great shooter in a Ruger Security Six.
I think, but not sure, that the S&W 686 also has the shorter action, which will not accomodate the famous Keith bullet, when crimped in the crimping groove.
Click to expand...

Recently I was offered a 4" Ruger GP 100 for a decent price and;) being somewhat weak willed:redface:, I picked it up.

IMG_1329.jpg


I nolonger have a supply of the Keith bullet #358429 or the HP version #358439 but a quick measurement of the GP 100 cylinder shows it to be longer than that of my python. I did have the #358439 in a single cavity mold but sole it to a friend in Ladysmith. I 'believe' production of the GP 100 took over when the Security-Six was supposedly discontinued:confused:??
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom