It's Great To See Colt's Response To Issues With The New Python

[JimT]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vSBuhMC5JLA

When a company follows through it speaks well of what they are trying to do.

[octagon]

Looks like they are trying to stand tall on these problems. Would like to have a new six inch, but soon will have a third kid in college yeah, three at once . While I have a nice blue 8 in, I have become more of a .44 mag guy, hell I mostly shoot mesquite trees anyway, though I did recently threaten some pigs with it.

[Bill in Oregon]

Well, I am impressed.

[Old No7]

Well, I am impressed.

Count me as NOT impressed...

There should have been NO ISSUES AT ALL with the introduction of a gun that was in their line for many years. They should have tested a wider variety of ammo and worked all the bugs out on prototypes -- not on guns sold over the counter.

In school, a C is average while a D is below average.

So you change the "C" at the start of Colt to a D and you get -- DOLT. (aka "stupid person")

It's unforgivable that they'd scr*w up the Python. Unexcusable.

Old No7

[oldcolt357]

I'm not in the market for a new Python, I've owned an old one, 6" blue,(the way they're supposed to be), for more than 40 years. That said, it warms my heart to see them being made again. Truly a joy that brings me back to my teen years when I went back and forth trying to decide between the Python or a Smith model 27 for my first handgun. I've always been glad I decided on the Colt but have regretted not buying them both. I have to admit it bugs me when I hear the Colt reps talk about how the new gun has 30% more steel in the top strap under the rear site. The frame strength was never an issue with the Python. There's more steel in the Python top strap than in the N frame Smith. The Python issue was always wear on the cylinder advancing hand because it would push and lock up the cylinder real tight at the time of discharge. Like I said, I've owned mine for over 40 years and it's in perfect timing.

[Bill in Oregon]

No7, I'd like to see Ruger own up to its many mistakes this way.
I agree a "new" product should not have issues, but that has become a fantasy, I fear.

[coyote nose]

In my 46 years of gun collecting I have seen people harder on Colt than any other brand. "Because they cost more" is often cited as to why, yet its still not an excuse for me. Ive seen gun owners IGNORE frame/triggerguard mismatch on Ruger Single Actions, that were misaligned by almost 0.050" (!), yet gripe loudly about how, when they take the grips off a Colt and look at the internals, they can see machining marks. It amazes me. I hear people who refuse to buy a Colt because they say they catered to the government, yet they buy Smith and Wessons, a company who saddled up to Bill Clinton during the 90s, and they buy Rugers, who was one of the driving companies in pressuring Congress to pass the 1968 Gun Control Act. I just dont get it. In any case Kudos for Colt for coming back from the brink, and for listening to their customers and bringing the Python back, and for stepping up to the plate regarding correcting any issues.

[kaschi]

Good for Colt for acknowledging the problems which should translate to them fixing the problems or face losing a lot of business. True, Colt made Pythons in the past, but I'll bet most of the people involved in the earlier production are no longer with the company. I'm willing to give them a break and a second chance.

[buckeyeshooter]

Well, I am impressed.

Count me as NOT impressed...

There should have been NO ISSUES AT ALL with the introduction of a gun that was in their line for many years. They should have tested a wider variety of ammo and worked all the bugs out on prototypes -- not on guns sold over the counter.

In school, a C is average while a D is below average.

So you change the "C" at the start of Colt to a D and you get -- DOLT. (aka "stupid person")

It's unforgivable that they'd scr*w up the Python. Unexcusable.

Old No7

This!

[OldWin]

Good for Colt for acknowledging the problems which should translate to them fixing the problems or face losing a lot of business. True, Colt made Pythons in the past, but I'll bet most of the people involved in the earlier production are no longer with the company. I'm willing to give them a break and a second chance.

In my 46 years of gun collecting I have seen people harder on Colt than any other brand. "Because they cost more" is often cited as to why, yet its still not an excuse for me. Ive seen gun owners IGNORE frame/triggerguard mismatch on Ruger Single Actions, that were misaligned by almost 0.050" (!), yet gripe loudly about how, when they take the grips off a Colt and look at the internals, they can see machining marks. It amazes me. I hear people who refuse to buy a Colt because they say they catered to the government, yet they buy Smith and Wessons, a company who saddled up to Bill Clinton during the 90s, and they buy Rugers, who was one of the driving companies in pressuring Congress to pass the 1968 Gun Control Act. I just dont get it. In any case Kudos for Colt for coming back from the brink, and for listening to their customers and bringing the Python back, and for stepping up to the plate regarding correcting any issues.

This.
And that.
The new Python is not the same gun. The way of manufacturing it is completely different than before. A production line is a living organism. When it is stopped or drastically changed, it's not a matter of just "doing it again". Look at the trouble Remington had with the Marlin lever actions. This was after going from a vitual 1950's production line to "state of the art". I'm sure there were plenty of problems with lots of great old guns. There just wasn't an internet to make a huge thing about it.
Ultimately, I want Colt to do well.

[oldcolt357]

Agreed, I want Colt to do well with the Python, hoping for a revived Anaconda next year. On another note, does anyone know if the new Python locks up the cylinder when the trigger is pulled like the old does?