The problem is, they require skilled workmen to fabricate them, and people with those skills cost money to employ. British Best shotguns customarily use V springs, and some of those shotguns have recorded hundreds of thousands of rounds without a fault. Properly made, these will last almost forever. If they don’t have it yet, every firearm you buy soon will. One of the details of modern manufacturing is the 2D punch code. Colt kept the dual-action leaf spring, but it updated it. Colt managed to keep the basics of the Python action, but it dropped the parts number of the lockwork by over a dozen. ![]() However, you can change this one on your own. The front is a red ramp, just like the old ones. That’s a very good thing, because the rear sight on Pythons (and also used in old Gold Cups) was known to be fragile. It changed the frame at the rear sight to give it a bit more cross-section and to accommodate the new rear sight. We will, for a long time forward, have to go through the “Who’s on first?” routine of “a new Python or a New Python” to distinguish the new stainless ones made in the 21st century from an unfired one made “back in the day.” The New Colt PythonĬolt selected a new and improved stainless steel and took advantage of the advances in metallurgy since the Chevy Bel Air was the hottest thing from Detroit. I wish Colt had called it that-the “New Python,” I mean. The company fired up the AutoCAD and set about making a new Python. The new frame shape and rear sight: The sight has to be tougher than the old one, because that sight was fragile. ![]() I mean, when you could sell a NIB Python for enough to purchase a well-equipped small car, the 21st century was not turning out the way I’d expected. Unfired Pythons, new in the box, started selling for stupid-high prices. 38s cost less and also hammered your hantds less.Ĭolt being Colt-that is, a wholly owned subsidiary of one mega-corporation or another-it simply kept on making Pythons and charging what it could … until it just couldn’t do it anymore. If they shot more, it was more likely that the revolver in question saw mostly. Most shooters would put a box of magnums through their revolvers once a year. 357 magnum-level ammo through any handgun. Even well into the IPSC competition era, not many people who owned. Nevertheless, the price put off a lot of shooters that, and the reputation for being a bit fragile. After that, it was quite the popular option. It was first offered by Colt back in the mid-1950s, but the earliest movie reference I can find is from 1969. Part of that was due to the cost, because the Python typically cost twice as much as any other DA revolver of its time. The Colt Python was lusted after by many. More cross-section at the rear of the frame for a more resiliant sight base.Improved stainless steel used in the frame and barrel.So what's the story: is this the second coming or a troubled handgun? How Does The New Python Differ From The Old: ![]() The re-introduction of the Colt Python has been a rollercoaster of excitement and disappointment. Any post-sale modifications to Smith & Wesson products are not authorized or approved by, or otherwise associated with Smith & Wesson.The Colt Python is back-and it’s badder than ever! Well, in most respects, it’s actually “gooder” than ever. The engraving services offered by Altamont are not affiliated or associated with Smith & Wesson. Unless otherwise stated, no affiliation between ALTAMONT® and any trademark holder is suggested or implied. References to non-ALTAMONT® products and trademarks are an aid to identification and suitability for use. Altamont products are not intended for use by minors in the state of California or anyone who may identify as such. Altamont products are not edible, nutritious, or tasty. Please do not ingest, burn and inhale, or absorb Altamont products, while pregnant or otherwise. For more information go to P65Warnings.ca.gov. WARNING: Altamont products can expose you to chemicals including formaldehyde, which is known to the State of California to cause cancer and birth defects or other reproductive harm.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |