I’m more of a semi-auto guy than a revolver guy, and when it comes to revolvers I’m more of a Smith & Wesson or Ruger guy than a Colt guy, but I’d been intrigued by the re-introduced Python that originally came out in 2020 and decided to find out what all the fuss was about. I’d heard that Colt had improved the action to make it sturdier and less failure-prone while still maintaining the classic Python feel. I can’t attest to that one way or the other as I’ve never shot an original Python, and actually haven’t seen one in person since the 1980s. This one is absolutely beautiful. The finish is not quite mirror polished, but close—I actually prefer it to a full mirror finish.
I actually received my first Python the Friday before the new proposed handgun legislation was announced and unfortunately I soon discovered it had a significant flaw from the factory that was not immediately apparent (but probably should have been caught by Colt QC). Even with all the extra workload the new proposals have likely caused, the folks at Tillsonburg Gun Shop worked hard to get me a replacement as quickly as possible. I was more than happy with their efforts. And now, onto the details.
When I saw photos of the new Python online I thought at first that Colt was using a two-piece barrel, but it’s actually a recessed muzzle—that’s a nice touch. You can also see the hex head screw that allows for super-simple front sight replacement. I’ll be replacing my front sight with a green fibre optic one, as I’m not fond of red-ramp sights. While it might not have the classic Python look, I find them much easier to see.
The top of the frame and barrel are matte finished, ostensibly to cut glare. The rear sight is a plain black blade.
The hammer is grooved versus the checkering on the original model. Its shape makes cocking easier than other S&W revolvers I’ve had, and it feels like it requires less effort. Very nice!
The trigger is narrow and deeply grooved…to the point when it’s a just bit uncomfortable to be honest. I’d prefer a wider or smoother trigger. And speaking of the trigger, I was surprised that the single action trigger pull is 5 pounds, compared to 3.5 pounds on my S&W Model 28-2, with a bit more overtravel, too. I was expecting it to be a bit better. TI'm mostly a DA guy, so it's not as big deal for me. The double action pull is a pleasure, though. The pull starts at about 8 pounds and stacks a bit compared to a typical S&W pull but is very smooth. It feels a bit shorter, too. The shape of the trigger is less curved than the original.
The grips look to be laminated wood, and are lightly checkered—I find them very comfortable. They’re apparently a little thinner side-to-side than the originals, which helps with trigger reach but not with felt recoil. I’ll see how it feels at the range. The shape of the front of the grips is changed from the original. Whereas the original had a pronounced forward curve at the bottom of the front the new one is more vertical. I’m not sure of the reason for the change, but I’m thinking that the original may have been more intended for one-handed shooting?
The ejector rod is a little short—I’ve heard that it’s not long enough to fully eject magnum cases (not without a sharp stroke at least).
Ok—the initial impressions are mostly favourable with just a few minor annoyances. I’m looking forward to taking this out to the range.
p.s. I'm disappointed (to say the least) that this will be one of my last handgun write-ups, unless there are unexpected legislative developments. I'm still hoping to squeeze one more in while I can.
Last edited:
