RIDE-RED 350r
New member
Nice 29 Classic Bob Wright!
That one's on "the list"!
That one's on "the list"!
The Python vs. the 586--a bit of history
- Thread starter UncleEd
- Start date
Mike Irwin
Staff
" just as some prefer a Chevy to Cadillac. That doesn't make the Chevy a nicer car,"
Two words...
Cadillac Cimmaron.
Two words...
Cadillac Cimmaron.
Mike Irwin
Staff
It's really pure speculation that the L frame was somehow a "poke in Colt's eye." No one from the company has ever claimed that it was.
It was, in fact, never a direct competitor with the Python.
By the time S&W introduced the 586/686 series of guns, Colt had surrendered the civilian/police revolver market to S&W to concentrate on its military armaments programs, and the Python was entering boutique status. No police forces were choosing Pythons as their standard issue side arm -- quite a few were choosing K frames and subsequently the L frames.
The dimensions of the 586/686 were chosen to keep the K frame's grip size while bulking up the frame dimensions to add strength to the gun BUT not make it onerous to carry like the N frames could be.
The full underlug was chosen not to make the series "all Pythony!" but because one of the major complaints about the K frame .357s was recoil and muzzle flip. The extra weight of the full underlug helped negate both recoil and muzzle flip.
It was, in fact, never a direct competitor with the Python.
By the time S&W introduced the 586/686 series of guns, Colt had surrendered the civilian/police revolver market to S&W to concentrate on its military armaments programs, and the Python was entering boutique status. No police forces were choosing Pythons as their standard issue side arm -- quite a few were choosing K frames and subsequently the L frames.
The dimensions of the 586/686 were chosen to keep the K frame's grip size while bulking up the frame dimensions to add strength to the gun BUT not make it onerous to carry like the N frames could be.
The full underlug was chosen not to make the series "all Pythony!" but because one of the major complaints about the K frame .357s was recoil and muzzle flip. The extra weight of the full underlug helped negate both recoil and muzzle flip.
Mike Irwin
Staff
"but Ruger was able to field a .44 Magnum at almost the same time as Smith did its Model 29."
Ruger actually BEAT Smith & Wesson to the market with a .44 Magnum.
The story is that some Ruger employees were using the same range that S&W occasionally used for testing when they found some interesting new cartridge cases marked .44 Magnum. Apparently they had been dropped and overlooked, because neither the new cartridge or the gun had been announced yet.
Ruger engaged in some reverse engineering and more than a bit of speculation on what the ballistics for the cartridge might be, started planning and developing, and when the cartridge and S&W were finally announced, had made the right decisions needed to get their Blackhawk to market several months before S&W started shipping their .44s.
Ruger actually BEAT Smith & Wesson to the market with a .44 Magnum.
The story is that some Ruger employees were using the same range that S&W occasionally used for testing when they found some interesting new cartridge cases marked .44 Magnum. Apparently they had been dropped and overlooked, because neither the new cartridge or the gun had been announced yet.
Ruger engaged in some reverse engineering and more than a bit of speculation on what the ballistics for the cartridge might be, started planning and developing, and when the cartridge and S&W were finally announced, had made the right decisions needed to get their Blackhawk to market several months before S&W started shipping their .44s.
, not many at classic car shows. It's kinda hard to imagine the average police officer shelling out the money for a Python back then.High polish and Royal Blue vs. a superior action?
The overwhelming choice of the majority of top-tier revolver competitors - people who will spend ANYTHING for a competitive advantage - is, and has been, the S&W revolver.
Not the Python.
Praising the "fit and finish" of the Python is a little like "ooh-ing" and "ah-ing" over the chrome and paint on an old car, whilst ignoring the mechanical shortcomings. (Especially when much of the snake's "hand fitting" was required due to the sloppy tolerances of Colt's machine tools.)
I'll grant that Pythons had good barrels - which is why, for a while, people were taking Python barrels and putting them on S&Ws. The barrel was the only thing they liked!!
The overwhelming choice of the majority of top-tier revolver competitors - people who will spend ANYTHING for a competitive advantage - is, and has been, the S&W revolver.
Not the Python.
Praising the "fit and finish" of the Python is a little like "ooh-ing" and "ah-ing" over the chrome and paint on an old car, whilst ignoring the mechanical shortcomings. (Especially when much of the snake's "hand fitting" was required due to the sloppy tolerances of Colt's machine tools.)
I'll grant that Pythons had good barrels - which is why, for a while, people were taking Python barrels and putting them on S&Ws. The barrel was the only thing they liked!!
Bob Wright, your picture has me a bit perplexed.
You reference a Model 29
and you show a beautiful, full-lug Smith & Wesson revolver with a pinned barrel!
I am aware of the Model 29 "Classic" with the full lug barrel, but those are all post-1982, or so I thought. And as far as I remember, even the earliest of the 586's with full-lug barrels aren't pinned barrels.
Futhermore, that looks like a five inch barrel, unless my eyes are playing tricks on me.
Please tell me more about the pictured revolver -- it's vintage and when/where you acquired it. Pinned barrel -AND- full lug barrel?! That seems not at all common to me...?
You reference a Model 29
and you show a beautiful, full-lug Smith & Wesson revolver with a pinned barrel!
I am aware of the Model 29 "Classic" with the full lug barrel, but those are all post-1982, or so I thought. And as far as I remember, even the earliest of the 586's with full-lug barrels aren't pinned barrels.
Futhermore, that looks like a five inch barrel, unless my eyes are playing tricks on me.
Please tell me more about the pictured revolver -- it's vintage and when/where you acquired it. Pinned barrel -AND- full lug barrel?! That seems not at all common to me...?
Mike Irwin
Staff
Companies of all stripes fail to see the future all the time.
It's business.
It's business.
I am surprised to read the claim that so many police departments issued the Python; I never knew of any, and doubt that such existed. The Python was simply too expensive and no police chief in his right mind would ask the money folks for enough to buy Pythons for his department when other revolvers (Colt or S&W) were available for half the price. Besides, despite the mystique, the Python is nothing more than a worked over .357 Magnum, which in turn is a worked over Trooper, which in turn is a worked over Officers Model. They all use the same frame and lockwork. And Pythons, in spite of all the tuning by Colt's best workmen, still stack in DA, which the "inferior" S&W's do not. And no, Pythons are not any more accurate than other Colts or S&W's.
The Python was always a gun for the "gun nut", someone who wanted something special that was better than what his buddies had or could afford.
Jim
The Python was always a gun for the "gun nut", someone who wanted something special that was better than what his buddies had or could afford.
Jim
Bob Wright
New member
Sevens asked:
That is indeed a Model 29 S&W. I had contacted S&W about making me a 5" Full Lug .44 Magnum. S&W would not make special order guns at that time, but if I were to buy one and return it to the factory, they would do the work. I bought the gun in December 1991 and got it back a few months later.
Just before that I returned a 6" Model 29 to S&W for installation of the endurance package, and while they had it asked them to fit a full lug barrel to it. They gave me an 8 3/8 Full Lug barrel, which I later had cut back to 6". It was this gun that prompted me to try to get a 5" barrel.
Bob Wright
That is indeed a Model 29 S&W. I had contacted S&W about making me a 5" Full Lug .44 Magnum. S&W would not make special order guns at that time, but if I were to buy one and return it to the factory, they would do the work. I bought the gun in December 1991 and got it back a few months later.
Just before that I returned a 6" Model 29 to S&W for installation of the endurance package, and while they had it asked them to fit a full lug barrel to it. They gave me an 8 3/8 Full Lug barrel, which I later had cut back to 6". It was this gun that prompted me to try to get a 5" barrel.
Bob Wright
Mike Irwin
Staff
According to Wikipedia, the Colorado, Florida, and Georgia State Patrol/Highway Patrol issued Pythons to their officers for some years.
The interesting thing is that S&W failed in that regard. While L frames do have the K frame grip size, the full underlug (while no doubt helping with recoil and muzzle flip) brought the L frame's weight up to exactly the same weight as the N frame with equal length barrel.
Perhaps people thought the L frames felt lighter, I don't know, but the published weights for L and N frames with the same barrel are the same. If it was the weight that made the N frame "onerous" to carry, the L frame did nothing to change that.
Personally, I don't mind the N frame weight (but then, I don't wear one 8hrs a day) and I dislike the L frame's feel. The balance just feels wrong to me. Others, naturally have different opinions.
Working as a precision machinist/gage maker/tool and die maker/locksmith for decades, I know that there are no 2 people on this Earth, who are the same.
Not even the identical twins are exactly the same.
Those gunsmiths who hand fitted those Pythons produced different guns too.
The same workers did different qualities at different time of the day/week too.
In the Summer heat vs. cold Winter sizes were different.
When I was lapping the faces of micrometers, few strokes more or less produced different results.
Therefore there are different Pythons......
We can have our own opinions, what we can't have is our own facts.
As Paul Harvey used to say, Good day gentlemen.
Not even the identical twins are exactly the same.
Those gunsmiths who hand fitted those Pythons produced different guns too.
The same workers did different qualities at different time of the day/week too.
In the Summer heat vs. cold Winter sizes were different.
When I was lapping the faces of micrometers, few strokes more or less produced different results.
Therefore there are different Pythons......
We can have our own opinions, what we can't have is our own facts.
As Paul Harvey used to say, Good day gentlemen.
Bob Wright
New member
One more thought on the L-Framed S&W. While its weight is equal to, or may exceed that of an N-Frame, its size feels more like a K-Frame. I've never been especially bothered by the weight of the gun so much as its size. Even the slight difference of the N-Frame, larger diameter cylinder, etc., make it seem larger and morel likely to bump or snag when carrying.
I have carried a Model 586 with 4" barrel comfortably, and currently carry a 4 5/8" Ruger Blackhawk .44 Special, and neither seem unduly heavy. Choice of belt and holster are of improtance here.
Bob Wright
I have carried a Model 586 with 4" barrel comfortably, and currently carry a 4 5/8" Ruger Blackhawk .44 Special, and neither seem unduly heavy. Choice of belt and holster are of improtance here.
Bob Wright