Colt vs. Smith & Wesson?

A

Ala Dan

Member in memoriam
O.K. revolver shooter's hang on to your hat,

cuz we are going in depth on this one!!! First of all, put all
collector value and personal seniment's aside and tell me in your
honest opinion which one of these .357 magnums is capeable of
the smallest group; shot two hand standing from the 25 yard line.
Here are the contestant's: a) Colt Python, b) Smith & Wesson 686, and the barrel length will be established at 6" from both
weapons. Total number of rounds fired not to exceed three (3).
Please base all response's on your personal experience's only;
not on what someone else said, or what you heard.
Thanks in advance to each and to all who wish to repond.

Respectfully,
Ala Dan, N.R.A. Life Member
 
From what I've seen I would say the Python would be more accurate. Any given 686 might be more accurate than any given Python, but taking any 2 examples at random I'd bet on the Python.

I would also bet that either one will shoot more accuratly than 99% of shooters I've seen at the ranges over the years.
 
JohnK,

Thanks for the link; looks like some real good
stuff.

Best Wishes,
Ala Dan, Life Member N.R.A.
 
colt look better andf imho are just as good a quality as any smith n wesson.the only thing i do not caree for with colts is how the cylinder release is operated.i prefere the smiths and ruger and taurus in that respect.
 
just from the mechanical specs you gotta go with the python in stock form:
1 in 14" twist
choked muzzel
"hand" rising to lock cylinder at ignition
cylinder rotating "into" the frame
offset bolt notches

from personal experience, shooting PPC, the python even matches up well with, shooters of equal experience/skill, bull barreled match guns
 
Personal experience says Colt. The most accurate handgun I've ever had or seen is my 6" stainless. Remember, the Python was designed to be Colt's ultimate target revolver, the S&W was designed to be a police duty gun.
Yes, you will find 686's that will turn in fantistic groups, but the Python tops the list in virtually every actual shooting test.
 
I don't disagree with any of the above, but (and this is coming from a Python fan) the 686 will probably shoot .357 Mag loads at the top of its capabilities longer than the Python, even if the Python starts out more accurate.
 
I think Jnewell has the right idea.....

My experience with Colts in general, and Pythons in particular, is that accuracy is a function of how many times it has been fired. My Pythons all tend to exhibit loosening screws after 1000 rounds and the tendency to loosening does effect accuracy. Of course periodic inspections and tightening works wonders.

My S & Ws, on the other hand, have tended to shoot for several thousand rounds without noticeable loss of accuracy. Periodic inspection usually results in nothing (except cleaning of course) needing to be done and good accuracy is maintained. Just personal observations FWIW.
 
And to recap from my personal experience's,

Back in the early 70's, when I was somewhat of a novice
to handguns in general; I acquired a rather nice collection
of Python's, four to be exact. Also, I have several Smith's
ranging from two 19's, a 28, and I think two 27's. It may
have just been me; but I could not get any of the Python's
to group nearly as well as I could the Smith's, the 6-1/2"
27 and the 6" model 28. Later on, I acquired a 4" model
28, that I could shoot equally as well?

Seems to me, the very long double action of the Python
causes a small handicap to some shooter's; as opposed
to the usually, very smooth short double action of the
Smith's. For duty use, I choose the 19; like most other
LEO's that are required to wear a gun all day long. I
never really carried the L-frame 686; as I switched to
semi-auto's for both duty use and as a personal CCW.

As I have grown older, and wiser (I hope) I think I would
like to reaquire at least one Python to conduct further
test. I don't care for the newer one's; as I much would
prefer a 70's model. Maybe, one day soon my dream
will come true!!!

Thanks for Listening, and all the Response's-
Ala Dan, N.R.A. Life Member
 
I have a 686 in 6" that is as accurate as the Python I bought in 1985.
But when I was still big time into bullseye competition, my S&W M 14 was the first choice.

A friend has borrowed it and the Python -and won many club and local and state bullseye championships with the M14.
 
Although I love S&W wheelguns, the Colts that I have handled did have a sweet trigger pull to them. I think the trigger pull is one of the major players in accuracy so I'll have to go with the Colt.
 
the 'Ks'

PzGren stuck in a reference to the K-38. ALL of the pre '60s ones that I have shot have been one-
hole-groupers whereas some of the Pythons were
not. I'm not sure why AlaDan was comparing them to 686s as they are NOT target guns but the Colt
was designed for competition.

Come on DAN--- apples to apples !. :rolleyes: ...
best....dewey
 
dewey-
the l-frame and the python comparasion IS apples to apples
smith introduced the l-frame, at least in part, as and answer to the python's domination in nra/ppc "leg matches".
the underlug makes up for the k-frames lighter barrel and there was even a optional taller front sight available so that ppc competitors could use a "neck hold" out at the 50-yard line... i think that qualifies the 586/686 at a target gun
 
To pick up from Dairycreek...

One of the things, noted earlier here, that makes the Python (and a few similar Colt locks, not including the D-frame or any of the Trooper variants such as the King Cobra and Anaconda) somewhat unique is that the hand locks the cylinder in place against the bolt when the revolver fires.

But the hand inevitably wears, and it can wear pretty fast with full-house loads. Many of the internal parts in these guns are relatively small and delicate. The S&W L-frame is simply going to give more service at the peak of its performance.

Has it got the soul of the Python? Naaaahhh...
 
The Python...

developed it's reputation for accuracy as a one-handed single action bullseye pistol. Firing 38 Wadcutters.

The Python I remember from the late '50s/early '60s was a heck of a target revolver.

However, the M14 Smith would do just as well, and as mentioned, didn't (doesn't) wear as much. The lockwork on a Python is marvelously fitted, and when one thing wears, the rest of it gets "funny".

As the question between the Python and a 686:
Single action with wadcutters, the Python by a bit.
Double action with magnum ammo, the 686 at a walk.
 
Dan--I'm obliged to go with the S&W 686.They all vary of course but a good one is excellent.Not much wrong with the Python except they can't match the S&W trigger and don't last well.
It is worth remembering that a S&W still holds the World Centrefire record (K 38) with a standard gun.
Regards
Alex
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top