Considering the new Colt Cobra
- Thread starter Drodney
- Start date
FWIW, at the NRA show in Dallas, I was talking to a rep in the Colt booth, registering my desire for a 3" Cobra, when he dropped some hints about plans for the Cobra being up-sized to .357 and branded with a name that "may start with a 'P'".
Asked whether they'd stretch that into a larger framed .44/.45 model that starts with an "A", he wouldn't speculate.
Especially if the new ones are just a wee bit less tuned than the originals
Areoflyer09
New member
This why I determined after looking over both in the store. I’m not a revolver expert, but the trigger on the Kimber felt better and it had real sights.
Areoflyer09
New member
Is there a difference between the branding on the Kimber & Colt than what S&W & Ruger do?
StihlKicking
New member
My colt cobra has a big ugly barcode etched into then side of it. I like the gun and have carried it everyday for about six months. I have ran around 500 rounds through it at this point. Shoots well enough, very smooth but extremely long trigger pull in my opinion. Again I like the gun well enough but don’t feel like it was worth the $750 it cost me. Unless the night cobra shows drastic improvement in fit and finish I will not be investing in one.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Areoflyer09
New member
Interesting. I had to go google image the Cobra again, but it does have what looks like a QR code etched in the frame. I didn’t notice it either time that I’ve looked at them. That would have been nice to leave off.
All the brands mentioned have produced guns with garish logos and extraneous barrel lettering, safety warnings and other nonsense. But in the case of Kimber and Colt, you have no other choice. With Ruger and S&W, there are enough choices this can be avoided.
The Kimber is relatively classy, but there's nothing that can easily be done about the deeply machined barrel and frame logos. Including the grips, the Kimber has 2 logos on each side and on one side it says "Kimber" twice. The Colt has a similar, even less tasteful logo on the barrel, and it has logos on the frame and the grips. In the case of the G10 grips, the logo is huge. Three logos on one side of a gun is over the top.
S&W has produced some guns with just as much graphic garbage, but consider the 640 Pro Series, which has a lot of similarities to the Colt and Kimber. It is relatively clean. The logo on the cheap rubber grips is redundant, but those can easily be changed out.
Look at the Model 19 Carry Comp or the Model 66 Combat Magnum, also in a similar category. In the case of the Model 19 CC, there's only one logo on the entire gun. The 66 has the redundant logo on the grips. Both have unfortunate excess of barrel lettering though. The Ruger SP101 comes with a totally clean left side and the logo and lettering on the right is relatively discrete. The LCR is not nearly so tasteful though.
Consider that a ~ $1000 compact revolver is more than just a duty gun. These also aren't bought just to be kept in a night stand or glove box or for plinking. For many buyers they are personal accessories. They're not polymer like a plastic watch, and people buying them should demand something more refined. In the case of particular models like the K6S DCR, they are (factory production) "gentlemen's" guns. Performance Center and Pro Series guns in this size are similar. The Colt is there just by virtue of its price, but it has none of the other qualities.
The Kimber is relatively classy, but there's nothing that can easily be done about the deeply machined barrel and frame logos. Including the grips, the Kimber has 2 logos on each side and on one side it says "Kimber" twice. The Colt has a similar, even less tasteful logo on the barrel, and it has logos on the frame and the grips. In the case of the G10 grips, the logo is huge. Three logos on one side of a gun is over the top.
S&W has produced some guns with just as much graphic garbage, but consider the 640 Pro Series, which has a lot of similarities to the Colt and Kimber. It is relatively clean. The logo on the cheap rubber grips is redundant, but those can easily be changed out.
Look at the Model 19 Carry Comp or the Model 66 Combat Magnum, also in a similar category. In the case of the Model 19 CC, there's only one logo on the entire gun. The 66 has the redundant logo on the grips. Both have unfortunate excess of barrel lettering though. The Ruger SP101 comes with a totally clean left side and the logo and lettering on the right is relatively discrete. The LCR is not nearly so tasteful though.
Consider that a ~ $1000 compact revolver is more than just a duty gun. These also aren't bought just to be kept in a night stand or glove box or for plinking. For many buyers they are personal accessories. They're not polymer like a plastic watch, and people buying them should demand something more refined. In the case of particular models like the K6S DCR, they are (factory production) "gentlemen's" guns. Performance Center and Pro Series guns in this size are similar. The Colt is there just by virtue of its price, but it has none of the other qualities.
Areoflyer09
New member
I guess I have a different mindset. The QR thing on the Colt is garish, but the logos don’t phase me much. I don’t notice most of them, but I’m not a revolver aficionado or collector. I’d buy a K6S because it’s the only thing it’s size that I’ve liked, not for any statement it makes.
I’ve looked at the Combat 66, I’d still buy the K6S first. The Colt doesn’t make the cut due to it sights, not a perceived lack of quality. I can’t figure out why the channel sights are still a thing. The 2.75” 66 is some 10oz heavier than a K6S, would that be considered the same class? The Kimber seemed more like the size of the air weights. The 66 felt a lot bigger in the hand.
Why does the SP101 have a clean left side and the GP100 says “Read Instruction Manual” on it’s left side?
I’ve looked at the Combat 66, I’d still buy the K6S first. The Colt doesn’t make the cut due to it sights, not a perceived lack of quality. I can’t figure out why the channel sights are still a thing. The 2.75” 66 is some 10oz heavier than a K6S, would that be considered the same class? The Kimber seemed more like the size of the air weights. The 66 felt a lot bigger in the hand.
Why does the SP101 have a clean left side and the GP100 says “Read Instruction Manual” on it’s left side?
about what revolvers are in the same class... I figure it has to do with how they're used. Obviously, an AirLite .357 magnum at 11 oz is half the weight and more than 10 oz less than a steel J frame, but they're still used a lot of the same ways and for similar purposes.
The lightweight J frames are good for pocket and ankle guns. Even a steel J frame is the right size for a pocket gun, although it will weigh a bit more in the pocket. The Kimber is similar in weight, but it's also bigger and it just outgrows most pockets. Because of that, it doesn't really fit in the pocket or ankle gun category.
S&W takes a big step up to the the K frames like the 66. Yes, it could be heavier and it could have a longer barrel. It doesn't have to be so. It could be made with an aluminum alloy frame, and a 2" barrel. Then it wouldn't weigh more than a K6S. S&W makes a N-frame .44 magnum that only weighs 2 oz more than a Kimber. But the short-barreled 66 and the 19CC are more likely to be used in a similar fashion to the Kimber or the new Cobra. The old aluminum Cobras and Agents could have been used the way people use J frames, but the new one and the Kimber are pretty much only belt guns. I can't really compare the Kimber or Colt to a j frame because it can't really be used the same way. Instead, I'd have to compare it to another belt gun like a short-barreled Model 19. In my opinion, the 19 easily outclasses the current Colt. The Kimber? Well, it's nicer for sure, but maybe more like the shaved-hammer SP101.
The lightweight J frames are good for pocket and ankle guns. Even a steel J frame is the right size for a pocket gun, although it will weigh a bit more in the pocket. The Kimber is similar in weight, but it's also bigger and it just outgrows most pockets. Because of that, it doesn't really fit in the pocket or ankle gun category.
S&W takes a big step up to the the K frames like the 66. Yes, it could be heavier and it could have a longer barrel. It doesn't have to be so. It could be made with an aluminum alloy frame, and a 2" barrel. Then it wouldn't weigh more than a K6S. S&W makes a N-frame .44 magnum that only weighs 2 oz more than a Kimber. But the short-barreled 66 and the 19CC are more likely to be used in a similar fashion to the Kimber or the new Cobra. The old aluminum Cobras and Agents could have been used the way people use J frames, but the new one and the Kimber are pretty much only belt guns. I can't really compare the Kimber or Colt to a j frame because it can't really be used the same way. Instead, I'd have to compare it to another belt gun like a short-barreled Model 19. In my opinion, the 19 easily outclasses the current Colt. The Kimber? Well, it's nicer for sure, but maybe more like the shaved-hammer SP101.
Areoflyer09
New member
I misunderstood how you meant they were similar. I was thinking size similarity, not use similarity. In use I’d agree they could overlap depending on the person and their use. In size the Kimber/Colt would be closer to the J frames than the K frames.
The Kimber shares almost the exact footprint of a 640 Pro, but it is shorter (height) than the 640. I’m not I’d agree that the Kimber is moving out of pocket carry for physical size.
Kimber K6S 2”:
Length - 6.62”
Height - 4.46”
Width - 1.36”
Weight - 23oz
SW 640 Pro 2”:
Length - 6.63”
Height - 5.1”
Width - 1.25”
Weight - 22.1oz
The Kimber shares almost the exact footprint of a 640 Pro, but it is shorter (height) than the 640. I’m not I’d agree that the Kimber is moving out of pocket carry for physical size.
Kimber K6S 2”:
Length - 6.62”
Height - 4.46”
Width - 1.36”
Weight - 23oz
SW 640 Pro 2”:
Length - 6.63”
Height - 5.1”
Width - 1.25”
Weight - 22.1oz
Satchmoeddie
New member
I love my 1970s & pre 1986 Detective Specials! The new Cobras have an inferior finish to the old polished & plated or niter blued Colt D Frame watchmaker's action guns, and the action is more robust in the newer guns, but it is nowhere near as smooth, nor will they lockup as tight. Despite that, I still very much like the new Colt Cobras! I have wowed out (reamed out) a few odd D Frame Colts to .357 Magnum, but I doubt the new Cobra is a candidate for that. I don't use .357 in them very often, but it does happen. The new Colt Cobras have a better trigger than the Kimber revolvers, IMHO. It is lighter, but it is bit stacky, and that is just typical of Colt. The Kimber's trigger was smoother, but a little stoning & polishing, and the Cobra will be like butter.
Ah, and there's the rub...not likely IMHO. But you never know...the new Smith's in my safe, (new being defined as later than say 2000), shoot as well, and in some cases better than my pinned and recessed models, some of the latter dating to pre-WWll. Before the flaming gets out of hand, I'll gladly concede that the Hillery IL sell-out, the two piece bbl., and maybe the MIM parts are abominations, but the guns I have shoot extremely well. And that's defined as less than 2" gps at 25 yds, with iron sights.
If Colt can come up with a similar design innovation that allows a new Python to be profitable and shoot as well as these modern S&W's, I'd be interested...short of that, like the Kimber K6, I don't need an expensive wannabee, a Colt in name only.
Rod