Losing faith in Colt ?
- Thread starter rebs
- Start date
Colt is in a better position now financially than they've been in many years.
Some time back they invested 5 mil in equipment for the military side, because that was the profit-maker.
In the past year or two they've been able to invest heavily in CNC equipment for the civilian side.
They're actually doing much better than in recent years, but still have somewhat limited resources. R&D funds especially are limited.
They're far from imminent danger of going under.
Look at the new facility they're building in Florida. I take that as a good sign.
Colt hasn't made all their own parts for a long time now.
My comments on the outsourcing were based on conversations with their people going back 20 years.
The All American in 2003 was 90% outsourced.
The Cowboy used major parts cast in Canada.
Forged parts across all models now are & have been obtained from outside the Colt factory for several years.
To the best of my knowledge, Colt has no MIM capability, so MIM sears & other MIM parts are outsourced.
Springs are outsourced.
Anything cast is outsourced.
All grips are outsourced.
All screws are outsourced.
All springs are outsourced.
All magazines are outsourced.
Many parts on the ARs & 16s are outsourced.
Anything plastic or synthetic is outsourced.
Some optional finishes on handguns are outsourced.
I didn't say Colt makes NONE of their parts.
Those made from bar stock are usually done in-house. Most 1911 hammers are done in-house, from extruded stock, last I heard. Colt does their own handgun barrels.
Many others, as Aguila mentions, are still made by Colt.
In many cases Colt does the final machining and finishing, and what makes Colt better than other companies in this area is their parts & materials specs and the overall quality of what goes into the guns & what comes out at the end.
To me, the overall package & end result is more important than the fact the gun contains a percentage of parts made by somebody other than Colt. (You may be quite surprised at the degree of outsourcing across the AR brands, by the way. If you think every company that puts out an AR makes their own lower receivers, for example, you'd be mistaken. )
As long as those outsourced parts meet Colt specs in materials & quality, the gun works for me.
The current size of the company at about 180 employees IS low, compared to the glory days when it was many times that.
Most people still think of Colt as a giant, when it really isn't anymore.
On a side note, Ruger's hiring a hundred new employees on top of what they've already got.
A good part of the market values & appeal with the Python now is due to its out-of-production status.
Many who buy are collectors for that reason, and collectors inherently have the money to pay those prices (have to, or they couldn't collect ).
Many people do shoot the Python.
But, the younger market isn't interested for the most part in a $2000 .357 revolver, new shooters generally don't know or care what makes the gun what it is, concealed carry buyers won't spend the money, like the recoil, or tolerate the weight, hunters won't take it to the field in signficant numbers, range plinkers will gravitate toward plastic in general and cheaper Smiths & Rugers among those who like revolvers, and that pretty much leaves the Python, new or old, to predominantly the collector market.
Yes, there'd be some spillover. Like the dedicated single-action fan who insists on a Colt SAA for concealed carry, the occasional hunter who'd use his Python for deer, the rangebuster who'd enjoy plinking and targeting with a classy gun, and so on. But, those would be statistically insignificant as far as any real market numbers go.
A new Python would most likely drive down used Python pricing at least somewhat, reducing the scarcity factor.
The "insatiable" current market would be affected by both the adjusted pricing levels and the injection of new guns.
The Python has its following, but who knows how long it'd take for new guns to satisfy the bulk of that collector appeal?
For demand to peak?
The necessary and sustainable volume just would not be there.
Denis
Some time back they invested 5 mil in equipment for the military side, because that was the profit-maker.
In the past year or two they've been able to invest heavily in CNC equipment for the civilian side.
They're actually doing much better than in recent years, but still have somewhat limited resources. R&D funds especially are limited.
They're far from imminent danger of going under.
Look at the new facility they're building in Florida. I take that as a good sign.
Colt hasn't made all their own parts for a long time now.
My comments on the outsourcing were based on conversations with their people going back 20 years.
The All American in 2003 was 90% outsourced.
The Cowboy used major parts cast in Canada.
Forged parts across all models now are & have been obtained from outside the Colt factory for several years.
To the best of my knowledge, Colt has no MIM capability, so MIM sears & other MIM parts are outsourced.
Springs are outsourced.
Anything cast is outsourced.
All grips are outsourced.
All screws are outsourced.
All springs are outsourced.
All magazines are outsourced.
Many parts on the ARs & 16s are outsourced.
Anything plastic or synthetic is outsourced.
Some optional finishes on handguns are outsourced.
I didn't say Colt makes NONE of their parts.
Those made from bar stock are usually done in-house. Most 1911 hammers are done in-house, from extruded stock, last I heard. Colt does their own handgun barrels.
Many others, as Aguila mentions, are still made by Colt.
In many cases Colt does the final machining and finishing, and what makes Colt better than other companies in this area is their parts & materials specs and the overall quality of what goes into the guns & what comes out at the end.
To me, the overall package & end result is more important than the fact the gun contains a percentage of parts made by somebody other than Colt. (You may be quite surprised at the degree of outsourcing across the AR brands, by the way. If you think every company that puts out an AR makes their own lower receivers, for example, you'd be mistaken.
)As long as those outsourced parts meet Colt specs in materials & quality, the gun works for me.
The current size of the company at about 180 employees IS low, compared to the glory days when it was many times that.
Most people still think of Colt as a giant, when it really isn't anymore.
On a side note, Ruger's hiring a hundred new employees on top of what they've already got.
A good part of the market values & appeal with the Python now is due to its out-of-production status.
Many who buy are collectors for that reason, and collectors inherently have the money to pay those prices (have to, or they couldn't collect
).Many people do shoot the Python.
But, the younger market isn't interested for the most part in a $2000 .357 revolver, new shooters generally don't know or care what makes the gun what it is, concealed carry buyers won't spend the money, like the recoil, or tolerate the weight, hunters won't take it to the field in signficant numbers, range plinkers will gravitate toward plastic in general and cheaper Smiths & Rugers among those who like revolvers, and that pretty much leaves the Python, new or old, to predominantly the collector market.
Yes, there'd be some spillover. Like the dedicated single-action fan who insists on a Colt SAA for concealed carry, the occasional hunter who'd use his Python for deer, the rangebuster who'd enjoy plinking and targeting with a classy gun, and so on. But, those would be statistically insignificant as far as any real market numbers go.
A new Python would most likely drive down used Python pricing at least somewhat, reducing the scarcity factor.
The "insatiable" current market would be affected by both the adjusted pricing levels and the injection of new guns.
The Python has its following, but who knows how long it'd take for new guns to satisfy the bulk of that collector appeal?
For demand to peak?
The necessary and sustainable volume just would not be there.
Denis
I know Colt has been buoyed by the surge in demand for guns, but I'm wondering exactly what "The 'insatiable' current market" is.
I have a shooting buddy who went and purchased an AR - I have no idea what model, it might even be a Colt. His sole reasoning was "I figured I better get one before they're outlawed."
Are people just snatching up ARs ?
What is the "insatiable" current market ? I see Ruger 357 GP & SP revolvers on the shelves at LGDs as well as S&W 686s and 617s
Did Ruger halt orders because they were behind in every single model that they sell or just overwhelmed with back orders for a few models?
I guess what I'm saying is that the hot gun market may not spill over into things like full sized revolvers.
I have a shooting buddy who went and purchased an AR - I have no idea what model, it might even be a Colt. His sole reasoning was "I figured I better get one before they're outlawed."
Are people just snatching up ARs ?
What is the "insatiable" current market ? I see Ruger 357 GP & SP revolvers on the shelves at LGDs as well as S&W 686s and 617s
Did Ruger halt orders because they were behind in every single model that they sell or just overwhelmed with back orders for a few models?
I guess what I'm saying is that the hot gun market may not spill over into things like full sized revolvers.
Last edited:
Skans,
Another note on the high-end 1911.
Brown is not the only maker of expensive 1911s.
You've got him, Wilson, Nighthawk, STI, Cylinder & Slide, Baer, and others.
Those makers are selling their high-dollar pistols quite well, and there's obviously enough 1911 market to keep all in business & their products in production.
Not the case with a high-end revolver, no matter how good it is.
Added to which, the smaller outfits can do low volume/high price better than Colt can.
Denis
Another note on the high-end 1911.
Brown is not the only maker of expensive 1911s.
You've got him, Wilson, Nighthawk, STI, Cylinder & Slide, Baer, and others.
Those makers are selling their high-dollar pistols quite well, and there's obviously enough 1911 market to keep all in business & their products in production.
Not the case with a high-end revolver, no matter how good it is.
Added to which, the smaller outfits can do low volume/high price better than Colt can.
Denis
Dennis, I have to agree with you. The Python is very special to those of us who can appreciate its quality. But when it comes down to it, its preceived as a large, heavy 6 round .357. S&W offers the same caliber in an 8-shot revolver that is light weight and smaller. Technology will almost always trump craftsmanship - I do recognize this.
I've got 2 early Pythons - 1960 and 1957. The 1960 is a really nice all original finish gun. The '57 I bought because it was priced right and I wanted a '50's Python. It was in rough cosmetic shape, so I sent it back to Colt for refinishing. I've heard good things about the Factory refinish - I'll get to see for myself in a few more months (6-7 months wait if you send one in right now). But, two Pythons is enough for me, and I really have no interest in later models at the current price points.
Aguila Blanca
Staff
Compared to a S&W M-19? No difference. But Colt and S&W were then, as they are today, two different companies run by two different boards of directors. The period when Colt withdrew from the revolver market (and pretty much from the civilian handgun market) was the period when the gun grabbers were flying high and rolling fast. That was the period when cities and coalitions were suing gun manufacturers for "liability" because their gun was used in a murder -- irrespective of the fact that no negligence was claimed, let alone proven. The grabbers were trying to make it the manufacturers' fault that a gun dealer two or three or four distribution tiers removed from the makers and having zero contractual or employment relationship with them might have sold a gun to someone who might have been a prohibited person.SPEMack618 said:
Colt's management simply decided they didn't wish to expend their resources on defending against such lawsuits in court. S&W chose a different route -- and caused their own corporate crisis when their then-English owners decided to sign on to the AWB agreement.
gunsmokeTPF
Moderator
One would have to have a passionate love for revolvers to understand what I'm trying to say. Like the movie Field of Dreams that said in it "If you build it they will come". What I'm saying is "If you manufacture it they will buy". When I refer to they I mean only they who have passion in their gut for the finest revolver that can be built. I'm not including the younger penniless crowd, or even those cheapskates that look at what someone buys and always criticizes for too much money being spent, who thinks a Mossberg, or Taurus are just dandy.
When I hold in my hand a like brand new mint condition colt officer's model target heavy barrel that was manufactured in 1938 with elephant ivory grips and engraved in his own home after suffering a stroke leaving him unable to travel to the factory by Kornbrath, who was the finest master engraver colt had in the 20th century, damn it I get a tingle up my leg like that creep on MSLSD. I also begin to use run on sentences.
There are very many people out there across the world who are more than willing to pay big bucks for the quality revolvers that once were in the colt lineup. The U.S. market is a small part of the world market, which has plenty of cash. I'm talking HQ Pythons built till the early 70's with hand honed actions. Hell, even my little .22 Diamondback makes what's out there today look like turds. SA's built equal to the 2nd generation's specifications would fly off the shelves, but they must be equal in every way including the ability to use parts that work in 1st and 2nd generations. By the way, though I love and collect 1st, the 2nd gens were the finest ever made hands down. It breaks my heart to think how they screwed up the 1911's. I could show you an almost mint black army that you can put up against their new 1911s and I'd love to hear how much better the new one is. By the way the black army 1911's were only mfg in 1918 and had a lack luster black finish in order to speed up production. I'll still pick that one over one of their new ones.
I never owned a 3rd, but seen some nice early ones. Look what that doped up company did. To do what they did they had to be on drugs! The 3rd gen's barrels couldn't be used on the older models unless you had no intention of ever removing it again, cause they changed the thread. Why? The collar on the base pin was eliminated, which is the number 1 sign that lets you know it's a 3rd. It was on there for over 100 years, why remove it? There's more, but the answer is to save money!!!!! They ended up saving me money, cause they lost my business. Guess I missed out on their european made Cowboy model, shiiiiiiiiiiit!
Autos are very popular, but there are plenty old and young handgun enthusiests out there that want quality. Many pay 2 to 3 thousand for all kinds of 1911's, so why not for a fine revolver? I include S&W and for Pete's sake please get rid of the AE winchesters and make them like the pre 64's, though they'll have to search for good quality wood. Hope I didn't go off topic, cause usually the threads are shut down after me and this is a good one.
When I hold in my hand a like brand new mint condition colt officer's model target heavy barrel that was manufactured in 1938 with elephant ivory grips and engraved in his own home after suffering a stroke leaving him unable to travel to the factory by Kornbrath, who was the finest master engraver colt had in the 20th century, damn it I get a tingle up my leg like that creep on MSLSD. I also begin to use run on sentences.
There are very many people out there across the world who are more than willing to pay big bucks for the quality revolvers that once were in the colt lineup. The U.S. market is a small part of the world market, which has plenty of cash. I'm talking HQ Pythons built till the early 70's with hand honed actions. Hell, even my little .22 Diamondback makes what's out there today look like turds. SA's built equal to the 2nd generation's specifications would fly off the shelves, but they must be equal in every way including the ability to use parts that work in 1st and 2nd generations. By the way, though I love and collect 1st, the 2nd gens were the finest ever made hands down. It breaks my heart to think how they screwed up the 1911's. I could show you an almost mint black army that you can put up against their new 1911s and I'd love to hear how much better the new one is. By the way the black army 1911's were only mfg in 1918 and had a lack luster black finish in order to speed up production. I'll still pick that one over one of their new ones.
I never owned a 3rd, but seen some nice early ones. Look what that doped up company did. To do what they did they had to be on drugs! The 3rd gen's barrels couldn't be used on the older models unless you had no intention of ever removing it again, cause they changed the thread. Why? The collar on the base pin was eliminated, which is the number 1 sign that lets you know it's a 3rd. It was on there for over 100 years, why remove it? There's more, but the answer is to save money!!!!! They ended up saving me money, cause they lost my business. Guess I missed out on their european made Cowboy model, shiiiiiiiiiiit!
Autos are very popular, but there are plenty old and young handgun enthusiests out there that want quality. Many pay 2 to 3 thousand for all kinds of 1911's, so why not for a fine revolver? I include S&W and for Pete's sake please get rid of the AE winchesters and make them like the pre 64's, though they'll have to search for good quality wood. Hope I didn't go off topic, cause usually the threads are shut down after me and this is a good one.
I haven't lost "faith" in their ability to produce good firearms. But I don't have a lot of faith that they'll be a major firearms manufacturer 10 years from now unless they change something.
Twenty years ago if a LEA wanted to add a 5.56 rifle to their arsenal, what would have been their top 3 viable choices? Today if a LEA wants to add a 5.56 rifle to their arsenal - can it even be narrowed to just 3 choices? There are at least five manufacturers that make top-notch AR-15 rifles, it would basically come down to pricing.
I know they get five whole dollars for every M4 that the military doesn't buy from them... I just don't see that as a great business plan.
On the other hand, they were on the brink of insolvency, so for a company that was that close to shutting their doors, they aren't doing that bad right now...
Twenty years ago if a LEA wanted to add a 5.56 rifle to their arsenal, what would have been their top 3 viable choices? Today if a LEA wants to add a 5.56 rifle to their arsenal - can it even be narrowed to just 3 choices? There are at least five manufacturers that make top-notch AR-15 rifles, it would basically come down to pricing.
I know they get five whole dollars for every M4 that the military doesn't buy from them... I just don't see that as a great business plan.
On the other hand, they were on the brink of insolvency, so for a company that was that close to shutting their doors, they aren't doing that bad right now...
bigkrackers
New member
I’m not a collector and I typically view guns as tools. My question is, what significant impact has Colt had on the civilian handgun market in the last 30 years? Please don't say Gold Cup or I'll have to throw down a Colt 2000.
Colt has been all about the US defense market and has ignored everything else. They have not been an innovator; they have not had any focus whatsoever on anything other than Uncle Sam.
While HK, Glock, Sig, Ruger, SD and S&W have all contributed to innovations and continue to produce new ideas, Colt has done nothing and it doesn’t appear (at least from their latest retreads) that they have anything.
My second question is; how is Colt going to survive or improve?
I understand that people are buying the inventory that Colt is producing but what are they producing other than 1911’s and M4’s? What branch of the military or LEA is putting out contract bids for 1911's? Bushmaster sells more M4’s than Colt.
How many gun owners under 30 are buying Colt made 1911’s these days? Not even close to the numbers that are buying HK's, Glocks or Sigs.
I think Colt is very vulnerable and in real trouble with whatever their current strategy is. I foresee what happened to Winchester in Colt’s future if they can't pull a rabbit out of their hat; a competitor will by the Colt name and slap it on a higher end line of guns.
Colt has been all about the US defense market and has ignored everything else. They have not been an innovator; they have not had any focus whatsoever on anything other than Uncle Sam.
While HK, Glock, Sig, Ruger, SD and S&W have all contributed to innovations and continue to produce new ideas, Colt has done nothing and it doesn’t appear (at least from their latest retreads) that they have anything.
My second question is; how is Colt going to survive or improve?
I understand that people are buying the inventory that Colt is producing but what are they producing other than 1911’s and M4’s? What branch of the military or LEA is putting out contract bids for 1911's? Bushmaster sells more M4’s than Colt.
How many gun owners under 30 are buying Colt made 1911’s these days? Not even close to the numbers that are buying HK's, Glocks or Sigs.
I think Colt is very vulnerable and in real trouble with whatever their current strategy is. I foresee what happened to Winchester in Colt’s future if they can't pull a rabbit out of their hat; a competitor will by the Colt name and slap it on a higher end line of guns.
gunsmokeTPF
Moderator
True, they were at the brink, but that was all their doing. It's true that there are more manufacturers out there today, but that too was their fault and S&W and Winchester is included as well. I always have to mention the others, cause I can't keep from buying any of their old products.
In sales the name is what sells no matter how many there are to compete with, though after screwing up all these many years I can't ever see a return to their formerly great reputations.
Some years ago I broke down and bought a colt clone, the Cimarron Flat Top Target Bisley 44-40. I was thinking about searching for an original, but with all I have my wife would've murdered me, so I settled. Guess what? I love that gun and think quality wise it's better than most 3rd generations and is 100 fold better than the Cowboy, which should be used as a paper weight. For cry'in out loud when I bought a 2nd generation colt 51 navy back in '72, I didn't know it was an Uberti. Imagin that a colt was made in Italy. I traded it for a Thunderer, but it was well made and pretty in the case. Maybe if colt can make their guns as well as that one, even with Uberti, I think I'd consider buying a new one. Hell, I'd sure like a 1872 open top, with the colt name on the barrel of course!
In sales the name is what sells no matter how many there are to compete with, though after screwing up all these many years I can't ever see a return to their formerly great reputations.
Some years ago I broke down and bought a colt clone, the Cimarron Flat Top Target Bisley 44-40. I was thinking about searching for an original, but with all I have my wife would've murdered me, so I settled. Guess what? I love that gun and think quality wise it's better than most 3rd generations and is 100 fold better than the Cowboy, which should be used as a paper weight. For cry'in out loud when I bought a 2nd generation colt 51 navy back in '72, I didn't know it was an Uberti. Imagin that a colt was made in Italy. I traded it for a Thunderer, but it was well made and pretty in the case. Maybe if colt can make their guns as well as that one, even with Uberti, I think I'd consider buying a new one. Hell, I'd sure like a 1872 open top, with the colt name on the barrel of course!
There's no way any of us are going to know what truly inovative guns Colt might be working on. All it takes is one great inovation. You don't have to be a big company to do this, in fact, its usually small companies that are most inovative. Look at:
Glock, in the beginning;
Rhorbaugh;
DiamondBack Firearms
Kel-tec
STI
None of these are near the size of Sig or HK (excpet Glock, but not in the beginning). Yet, they have all produced some real winners, IMHO.
So, Colt produced the 2000 - yep, it was a loser. But, who's to say they don't have another winner in the pipeline? As long as they are profitable, don't write them off as being unable to produce another "winner" comparable to the Python....maybe not as pretty as the Python, but perhaps something as respectable in its own right.
Skans,
You bring up another issue.
New Pythons would create the inevitable collector split into factions who'd only want the older Pythons & those who'd be happy with ANY Python.
How that would affect the price tiers would be unpredictable. New gun availability could depress the old gun prices, or the old gun prices could continue to rise independently.
Guns,
You & I (and Colt) have differing views on the market for Pythons.
Yes, if Colt built it buyers would come. We agree there, but the difference between us is the NUMBER of those who'd come.
I disagree on your assessment. There simply are not enough of your "very many" people around the world who'd spend the money.
One factor you're ignoring, besides the fact that the Python was never a big seller overseas, is that the gun would not only be prohibitively expensive here in the US, but the current & projected exchange rates between our currency & those of nations with prospective buyers would make it even more expensive outside this country, and import/export fees & shipping would add additional costs.
Re your Black Army- My 1918 was built earlier in the year & has the better finish. The overall craftsmanship IS better than current Colt 1911 production, but the metallurgy in 1918 was inferior to modern guns & mine remains unfired since I got it. When I want to shoot a 1911, it's a modern gun that's stronger, more durable over the long run, and less expensive if lost or if something breaks on it. Not as well finished, but more practical as a shooter.
The same analogy (as mine, not yours ) can be applied to most of todays revolver shooters. More durable and cheaper is what's selling to new people, and the mainstream firearms industry on the whole is not catering to a limited market of people who want to buy new guns made expensively with old technology.
I could tell you how much better Colt's new 1911s are compared to a Black Army, IN KEY FUNCTIONAL AREAS aside from not being crafted as nicely, but I won't waste the time here to do it.
S&W has been able to repeatedly adapt their old DA revolver designs with new materials & methods over the past 100 years with success because of the nature of the design.
Colt has not, also because of the nature of their design.
People pay $2000-$3000 for a fine 1911, so why wouldn't they for a fine revolver?
Because the revolver has fallen behind the auto in general popularity, and the 1911 is one of the most popular handguns in the nation.
Remember this: At the time the Python was finally dropped, it was not selling.
What makes you think it would today in the hi-cap auto and plastic snub-nosed revolver era?
Shaun,
You illustrate the basic problem inherent to ALL Colt V-Spring DA revolvers. They are shooting themselves into wallhangers.
Can't expect a company to support discontinued guns forever, and if people keep shooting the old Colts there will come a time when only aftermarket parts MAY be available.
Even there, quality not be equal to original Colt standards.
We're lucky in having high quality sources for First Gen Peacemaker parts to keep those going, but older Colt DA owners are much less fortunate.
I have six, ranging from a 1994 DS back through a Trooper .357 & an OP to a 1917.
None are or will be fired much.
Much as I like & admire them, there are other guns for regular use.
Denis
You bring up another issue.
New Pythons would create the inevitable collector split into factions who'd only want the older Pythons & those who'd be happy with ANY Python.
How that would affect the price tiers would be unpredictable. New gun availability could depress the old gun prices, or the old gun prices could continue to rise independently.
Guns,
You & I (and Colt) have differing views on the market for Pythons.
Yes, if Colt built it buyers would come. We agree there, but the difference between us is the NUMBER of those who'd come.
I disagree on your assessment. There simply are not enough of your "very many" people around the world who'd spend the money.
One factor you're ignoring, besides the fact that the Python was never a big seller overseas, is that the gun would not only be prohibitively expensive here in the US, but the current & projected exchange rates between our currency & those of nations with prospective buyers would make it even more expensive outside this country, and import/export fees & shipping would add additional costs.
Re your Black Army- My 1918 was built earlier in the year & has the better finish. The overall craftsmanship IS better than current Colt 1911 production, but the metallurgy in 1918 was inferior to modern guns & mine remains unfired since I got it. When I want to shoot a 1911, it's a modern gun that's stronger, more durable over the long run, and less expensive if lost or if something breaks on it. Not as well finished, but more practical as a shooter.
The same analogy (as mine, not yours
) can be applied to most of todays revolver shooters. More durable and cheaper is what's selling to new people, and the mainstream firearms industry on the whole is not catering to a limited market of people who want to buy new guns made expensively with old technology.I could tell you how much better Colt's new 1911s are compared to a Black Army, IN KEY FUNCTIONAL AREAS aside from not being crafted as nicely, but I won't waste the time here to do it.
S&W has been able to repeatedly adapt their old DA revolver designs with new materials & methods over the past 100 years with success because of the nature of the design.
Colt has not, also because of the nature of their design.
People pay $2000-$3000 for a fine 1911, so why wouldn't they for a fine revolver?
Because the revolver has fallen behind the auto in general popularity, and the 1911 is one of the most popular handguns in the nation.
Remember this: At the time the Python was finally dropped, it was not selling.
What makes you think it would today in the hi-cap auto and plastic snub-nosed revolver era?
Shaun,
You illustrate the basic problem inherent to ALL Colt V-Spring DA revolvers. They are shooting themselves into wallhangers.
Can't expect a company to support discontinued guns forever, and if people keep shooting the old Colts there will come a time when only aftermarket parts MAY be available.
Even there, quality not be equal to original Colt standards.
We're lucky in having high quality sources for First Gen Peacemaker parts to keep those going, but older Colt DA owners are much less fortunate.
I have six, ranging from a 1994 DS back through a Trooper .357 & an OP to a 1917.
None are or will be fired much.
Much as I like & admire them, there are other guns for regular use.
Denis
gunsmokeTPF
Moderator
Shaunpain, Your comment illustrates the importance for companies to at least be able themselves to make reasonable repairs on older guns, thus not supplying parts to others and putting the money in their pockets. Maybe not fair, but at least the work gets done. It's important for many to have their guns repaired regardless who does it.
I looked forever for a replacement hand for a new service from the early 20's. It may not be feasable for the companies to keep well stocked parts for a hundred year old gun, but they could certainly duplicate a small part, such as the hand without depending on million dollar equipment.
Repair work went to the extreme during the depression in the 1930's. I think an extreme change in attitude is called for today.
I looked forever for a replacement hand for a new service from the early 20's. It may not be feasable for the companies to keep well stocked parts for a hundred year old gun, but they could certainly duplicate a small part, such as the hand without depending on million dollar equipment.
Repair work went to the extreme during the depression in the 1930's. I think an extreme change in attitude is called for today.
Last edited:
gunsmokeTPF
Moderator
Dpris, I'm sorry to disagree, but maybe we travel in different circles. Even though I'm a serious collecter, I"ve been packing concealed for 44 years and use my gun as an important tool of my trade, as well as for just plain protection.
There are more people into revolvers than you realize. I don't count numbers from any statistics, which I don't really go by anyway. All you have to do is just look around on TV and different publications and see all those into the SASS type of shooting and the guns they use as well. You don't have to be rich to buy very fine revolvers of all types, just have the intelligence to be patient and save a little.
There are many people across the world with tons of money to spend. I know cause I have my stepfather's family in Scandonavia and my daughter lived in England for over 2 years before she brought home my Brit son in law. Winchester made a pretty nice living selling some of their rifles to europe and not making them available to the U.S. market like their one of a thousand that I'd like to get my hands on. The world includes other places besides europe.
I sent towboat_er photos of some old DA's that I own and their value is starting to go through the roof, but some parts are delicate and care must be used in firing. It would be nice to know that the original manufacturer could help repair them if needed, or at least supply some parts. Some I won't shoot for fair of breakage, or just plain too valuable. But these are very old and were the beginning of modern type revolvers.
It's true the metallurgy is far superior today, but normally makes no difference. That black army will still do as well as any 1911 around for the purpose it was designed for. I'd put a vintage goldcup up agaist anything out there today. I had previuosly mentioned that the 2nd generation SA's were the finest ever produced. That is a fact and it's metallurgy is part of it. As a matter of fact the frame of the original BP SA's were not steel, but actually cast iron. The barrel and cylinder were steel, but I love them. That gun was refined to perfection and in the famous words of the great inventor Thomas Crapper "Flush it down the toilet!" That's exactly what they did when they brought out the 3rd generation.
There are more people into revolvers than you realize. I don't count numbers from any statistics, which I don't really go by anyway. All you have to do is just look around on TV and different publications and see all those into the SASS type of shooting and the guns they use as well. You don't have to be rich to buy very fine revolvers of all types, just have the intelligence to be patient and save a little.
There are many people across the world with tons of money to spend. I know cause I have my stepfather's family in Scandonavia and my daughter lived in England for over 2 years before she brought home my Brit son in law. Winchester made a pretty nice living selling some of their rifles to europe and not making them available to the U.S. market like their one of a thousand that I'd like to get my hands on. The world includes other places besides europe.
I sent towboat_er photos of some old DA's that I own and their value is starting to go through the roof, but some parts are delicate and care must be used in firing. It would be nice to know that the original manufacturer could help repair them if needed, or at least supply some parts. Some I won't shoot for fair of breakage, or just plain too valuable. But these are very old and were the beginning of modern type revolvers.
It's true the metallurgy is far superior today, but normally makes no difference. That black army will still do as well as any 1911 around for the purpose it was designed for. I'd put a vintage goldcup up agaist anything out there today. I had previuosly mentioned that the 2nd generation SA's were the finest ever produced. That is a fact and it's metallurgy is part of it. As a matter of fact the frame of the original BP SA's were not steel, but actually cast iron. The barrel and cylinder were steel, but I love them. That gun was refined to perfection and in the famous words of the great inventor Thomas Crapper "Flush it down the toilet!" That's exactly what they did when they brought out the 3rd generation.
Last edited:
Guns,
TV, gunmags, and SASS (which does NOT typically use expensive high-end handguns) are hardly indicators of worldwide market trends.
Yes, people outside the US buy US-made guns. But not in huge numbers.
US guns are, as I said, even more expensive outside our borders.
I was living in England in 1975 and I recall being outraged to hear that the Python had just gone up to $250!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
That was the US price, by the way. Markedly higher in the UK & there were just not a lot of them there back then. Today, if the Python were re-introduced, there'd be even fewer new ones than then.
We'll just have to differ on your assessment of a Python market.
The 1918 will NOT do as well as any modern 1911 in the purpose it was designed for.
The metallurgy wasn't the only change that came about with the A1 and later developments.
And as I said- you can't expect Colt or any other maker to carry parts & service indefinitely. Certainly not for guns discontinued 50 or 100 years ago.
Ruger is finally unable to support their Security-Six any longer, and those popular guns are much more recent than what you're talking about.
Colt will try to keep servicing the existing Pythons, but that won't last forever, either.
Denis
TV, gunmags, and SASS (which does NOT typically use expensive high-end handguns) are hardly indicators of worldwide market trends.
Yes, people outside the US buy US-made guns. But not in huge numbers.
US guns are, as I said, even more expensive outside our borders.
I was living in England in 1975 and I recall being outraged to hear that the Python had just gone up to $250!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
That was the US price, by the way. Markedly higher in the UK & there were just not a lot of them there back then. Today, if the Python were re-introduced, there'd be even fewer new ones than then.
We'll just have to differ on your assessment of a Python market.
The 1918 will NOT do as well as any modern 1911 in the purpose it was designed for.
The metallurgy wasn't the only change that came about with the A1 and later developments.
And as I said- you can't expect Colt or any other maker to carry parts & service indefinitely. Certainly not for guns discontinued 50 or 100 years ago.
Ruger is finally unable to support their Security-Six any longer, and those popular guns are much more recent than what you're talking about.
Colt will try to keep servicing the existing Pythons, but that won't last forever, either.
Denis
bigkrackers
New member
I don't see how Colt will be able to stay competitive or profitable in the civilian world without a double stack poly. They could do a higher end double stack alloy frame and compete with HK but if they're not going to produce what civilians and LEAs are buying then they might as well lay off 150 of their 180 employees and just do 100% custom 1911's.
I doubt very much the civilian side of Colt could survive as it is without the military side. And from what I have read I think that Colt pulled out of the current US military contract competition so what now?
I understand Colt fanboys want to think that Colt is selling enough 1911's and AR's to be relevant but they don't and right now, as someone who does not have a particular loyalty to a manufacturer, I have no reason to by anything Colt currently makes. And I am not the exception but the rule IMO. If I was a collector that would be different but Colt doesn't get any money from the collector market.
When I was looking for an AR there were several companies that put out a product that not only was as good as Colt but offered actual options. I bought a BCM.
When I was looking for a 1911, I bought a Springfield. In the last year, 7 people in my office have bought 1911's. None were Colts. A couple Kimbers, a couple STIs a Ruger, a Remington and a RIA.
The point is, the guns that Colt produces right now, their are manufactures that do the same thing. Maybe they don't do it as well but the average Joe doesn't appear to care and Colt doesn't seem to care either.
I doubt very much the civilian side of Colt could survive as it is without the military side. And from what I have read I think that Colt pulled out of the current US military contract competition so what now?
I understand Colt fanboys want to think that Colt is selling enough 1911's and AR's to be relevant but they don't and right now, as someone who does not have a particular loyalty to a manufacturer, I have no reason to by anything Colt currently makes. And I am not the exception but the rule IMO. If I was a collector that would be different but Colt doesn't get any money from the collector market.
When I was looking for an AR there were several companies that put out a product that not only was as good as Colt but offered actual options. I bought a BCM.
When I was looking for a 1911, I bought a Springfield. In the last year, 7 people in my office have bought 1911's. None were Colts. A couple Kimbers, a couple STIs a Ruger, a Remington and a RIA.
The point is, the guns that Colt produces right now, their are manufactures that do the same thing. Maybe they don't do it as well but the average Joe doesn't appear to care and Colt doesn't seem to care either.