Why Colt? $200 more just boggles the mind...

1

100W_Warlock

New member
Alot of folks here have written volumes on why thy still buy "BRAND X" of gun, but, I am perplexed at why Colt has such a following.

I saw a "new" Colt Python, and it was a nice looking revolver. $749 for a 6"

I saw right next to it a brand spanking new 686 as well as a Ruger GP100 (stainless)

Both were right around $500.

I have to ask, will the Colt be $200 more accurate? Will it be $200 more reliable? Will it be $200 easier to clean and serviceable?

I am not trying to pick a fight with Colt owners, but, what makes the Colt so much bigger on the sales price? I guess as an owner of several S&W, Rugers, and Taurus revolvers, I have a REALLY hard time seeing eye to eye with what others percieve as "value" in Colt.

I have placed emails and calls to S&W, Taurus, Springfield, Ruger, and Remington for this and that. (thank God, never for a service issue...only custom work or sales issues)

I have never heard anything good/bad/otherwise about Colt service.

I have friends who were in the service who refuse to buy Colt, as that is all they were issued (M-16s) for duty and considered them "jam-o-matics". These same friends have bought Bushmasters and DPMS rifles.

So, the question is, what value (real or percieved) makes folks buy a Colt?
(coming from someone who has only owned 1 colt taken in trade years ago and I got every penny out of it when I used it to help fund another gun purchase)

[Please, no flame wars...]
 
I have to ask, will the Colt be $200 more accurate? Will it be $200 more reliable? Will it be $200 easier to clean and serviceable?
Click to expand...

1) Yes, if the user can take advantage of it.
2) Probably.
3) No.

The extra costs that go into a Colt probably have a lot to do with the level of tolerance specified in the manufacturing process and/or better testing for quality control. Assuming the design is sound in the first place, tighter tolerances in the manufacturing process lead to a tighter distribution of products behaving according to design requirements, especially if those requirements are stringent. Better testing for quality control means that when you buy a Colt it is less likely to be a lemon; although at times lemons will make it through the testing process.

Also, types of manufacturing processes simply cost more than others. If Colt parts are machined rather than cast then cost will be added to the product.

My viewpoint is based on my experience as a mechanical engineer, not as someone who has knowledge of Colt's internal processes. The first gun I bought was a Colt Python .357, and have been impressed by it. As an inexperienced shooter I was able to hit a 4 ft round target at 300+ yards with it, which I could not do with any other handgun (I wasn't using a bench or leaning on anything either).

I've also had some bad experiences with cheap guns, but all of those were semi-autos. Still, I think you get what you pay for.
 
People buy Colt for the name and perceived quality

I own a Colt Trooper MKIII 357 mag, a Ruger Redhawk 44 mag, and (soon) a S&W 29 44 mag. I think the Ruger is just as well built as the Colt and the Smith (in fact I believe the Ruger is generally stronger than both makes). But particularly the older model Colts and Smith 29 have have almost an elegant feel to them. They seem to shoot nicer, the actions seem to feel smoother. They're more handsome in their wood grips. I think to some degree this is all true. But the fact that they're a Colt or an older Smith just seems to give them a special feel. And people are willing to pay extra for that.

Lou
 
The Python will probably be more accurate, but I doubt it will be more reliable than the Smith - it is more complex and finicky than a S&W action. Colt is still living on its past glories and you'd do better to buy used, from a time when it was justified.
 
Simple. Rugers have been made by robots, they have fair quality control and feel fragile. S&Ws are made by robots, have no quality control in my opinion and the 686 does have fair human inspection before they are shipped. Colts are hand made, hand assembled, custom shop and Swiss watch tuned revolvers. They are excellent and Colt will repair anything that goes wrong. Colt Pythons are simply made just like granddads Colt New Service.
 
Colts get discussed now and then and the above posts are about what I recall others saying.

One thing I found interesting in one thread was how most gunsmiths could work on rugers in their sleep, they needed a cup of coffee brewing for a smith and wesson, and for a colt they had to wait for a full moon and sacrifice something.

I don't pretend to speak for gunsmiths so hopefully someone with actual knowledge of the internals will speak up and say if it is really that much harder to work on a colt that is out of time or whatever would be something a gunsmith might repair vs. what a gun owner would have colt repair.

I do know the colt barrels of old were considered great because you still find people posting about a gun from smith and wesson having a colt barrel, I think those guns are called smolts after that.
 
The answers to your questions from my experience is no, no and no.

The Python has a nice action out of the box if you don't mind the stacking feel. A little polishing on a Smith has it just as smooth and no stacking. The Smith and Ruger will be FAR more durable if you shoot fast DA. If you fire single action or double action in a deliberate mode the Colt will last a long time, probably a wash for durability in that case. All three brands have examples that are amazingly accurate, and all have some that aren't anything to brag about. Odds are very good that with all three brands you will get a well made and accurate revolver, more accurate than all but a few can really take advantage of without a rest and a scope.

The Python is one of the most over rated guns ever. I have been there and done that, and will stay with my S&W's thank you very much.

Colt in general makes some fantastic guns, current 1911 production quality is some of the best ever.
 
Actually smithing Rugers is fairly difficult. Colts and Smiths have sideplates, but with Rugers you have to do a lot of the work in your head because you can't see how the parts match up. The good thing is that the action is simple so that is still possible.

That said I think the comment that Rugers are fragile is hilarious. You could pack one hiking, use it to shoot stuff, and hammer in your tent stakes with it.

Pythons are beautiful guns. They're accurate with smooth triggers and that royal bluing. Wow. But they're a lot like beautiful women really. Things are going great until something bad happens you can't quite figure out. Then it costs you a lot of money to get back on their good sides again. :D
 
Why Colt +$200

Just my opinion.
First, please know that I own about 7 Smiths and compete with them (pathetically) and own no other brand of revolver.

Colt has been outsold by S&W so completely over the last three decades and undercut by companies like Ruger and Taurus that there is now a scarcity of Colt revolvers. Basic economics. Scarcity raises the price.

Most of the Colts in existence are older guns made when guns were made by craftsmen rather that robots and they are stunningly beautiful compared to today's guns.

Colt's reputation: When I went back to Wyoming in the 50's to visit my mother's side of the family, the Uncles who were all law enforcement/game warden types would not own a Smith, only Colts. The SAA and double action revolvers had the reputation of durability while the Smiths had, and still do, have the problems of the screws coming loose, the sights coming loose, and the strain screw loosening. Cops want a gun to go bang and shoot to aim everytime they call on it and Colts were perceived to be the gun that did that. Anyone who has competed with a Smith knows that he has to check the screws, tug on the sights, and twist the strain screw or risk ftf, errant shots, or, the cylinder ending up in their hand during a speed reload. I love my Smiths, but, this is the truth. Meanwhile, the Colt legend lives on with a hard core following and comes from a time when excessive speed firing was not part of the training of any law enforcement officer, so, the timing problems from such use never became an issue.

Also, the rampant Colt is cool
 
Opinions... everybody has one.

If you have to ask if the deluxe Python is worth $200 more than the service-grade 686 and Ruger then you should not waste your money buying one. The latter two guns will serve your needs nicely.

The Python features a much higher degree of hand-fitting than the two other guns you mentioned. The Colt is also superior in finish quality. Not everyone thinks these things are worth extra money. Your choice.

S&W shooters often complain about the "stacking" feel of the Colt trigger system. Never bothered me much and I shoot both. The Colt action is a little more delicate than the S&W but not as much as we are led to believe. I have an Officers Model Target made in 1930 that was used for decades in competition shooting and the action is still tight and the gun shoots very well. But it should be noted that some older Colts are found to be out of time and need repair.

Have you ever actually shot a Python or are you basing your criticism solely on the sticker price? You ask us if the Python is worth the extra money but that's something you have to decide for yourself.
 
"...what value (real or percieved) makes folks buy a Colt?"

They make some nice guns. I like Pythons and I like their autoloaders. Heck, I paid $999 for a WWI repro just because I thought it would make a nice plinker. It did.

I own Rugers and Smiths, too.

John
 
Well, it used to be that you were paying that extra money for the beautiful royal bluing job and the Douglas premium grade barrel.

Blued 4" Pythons were the issued revolver at my agency until just before I was hired. I ended up with a 4" M66. I was a bit envious of the folks carrying the issued Pythons, but noticed a lot of guys carried S&W N-frames. By the time my M66 was replaced with a new 4" M686, I was glad I'd missed being issued a blued Python.

For close range defensive use, especially with Magnum loads, the Colts didn't have the reputation of exactly being the most reliable. The revolver armorer (who liked Pythons for target work, BTW) said the Colts were more likely to go out of timing than the S&W's.

Personally, I've never cared for the Python's DA trigger. Accurate revolver, though ...

For someone who fancies Colt Pythons, there's no substitute.

For a work horse Magnum revolver, for the money it's hard to beat a Ruger, and their customer service is very good.

S&W makes an excellent revolver, and their customer service is very good.

When it comes to length of ownership, presuming the original owner keeps it for his/her lifetime, the cost of a couple of hundred extra dollars isn't much of a consideration when spread out over years.

Pride of ownership is its own reward ... (Well, okay, as long as you're not completely delusional) ;)
 
Rugers DA revolvers DP feel fragile to me. Open up a SP-101 or a GP-100 and slap the ejector as if to clear the empties. I prefer Colts even without ejector shrouds or forward locks. S&Ws feel just as solid. My Dan Wessons are equally solid. The Rugers feel like old H&R 32s to me. I don't care for Ruger cylinder releases either. Ruger makes a great security service revolver. I simply don't like them. There are action parts that can be installed in reverse and cause one to have to be returned to Ruger for repair. I have owned several Rugers and competed in PPC, SASS and pin shooting with them. I am not a fan. I don't own a Ford either. I don't own a Chevy also. I do have a black sedan, just like Henry Ford demanded.
 
FWIW, I own a 6" SS Python "Elite." It had a pretty mediocre barrel/cylinder gap and seemed pretty accurate on 4 out of six chambers. It has a lousy trigger for such an expensive gun and the fitting seems no better than the average S&W from the same time period (six years ago).

It currently sits in its box and awaits the day I decide to spend money to fix it with Cylinder and Slide, rather than buying another gun. I sent it back to Colt twice - once to fix the barrel gap and once again to get the barrel put back on straight (it was sent back improperly indexed; the barrel gap was halved, though :rolleyes: ); it was also out of time, out of the box, according to Colt's repair order. I decided not to send it back for anything else, even though they "oversprayed" it when re-bead blasting the topstrap.

A lot could've changed in six years, but I won't spend a dime to find out and would be hard pressed to believe the apologists for Colt. If the current Pythons are any good at all, I firmly believe it is because the bar has been dropped so low by the competition.
 
Finally, an answer...

Someone posted how they like the grip angle...which makes sense.

I bought a Springfield XD over a Glock 17 years ago because I like the grip angle on the XD over the 17. The Glock just didnt' feel right in my paws no matter how I held the darn thing.

If its something ergonomical, I can apprecaite that fact. Seriously. That is one reason the 1911 has stood the test of time...to ALOT of us, it just "feels right".

Again, this is not meant to be a flame war...
 
The Python is a target revolver built on the old Colt action that requires a lot of hand work that drives the price up. Colt did also make service grade revolvers. The King Cobra is such a revolver and it compares equally to the GP-100 and the M686 in durability, performance, and price.
Colt, like other makers, built various models to fill the various roles people had planned for them and people buy what pleases them. For me I prefer the Colt action for the medium and small frame revolver over what else is on the market.
 
"For a work horse Magnum revolver, for the money it's hard to beat a Ruger..."

Now that you mention it, I bought a 4" Police Service-Six in '85 and it is my work horse. It's also exceptionally accurate with $18/box wadcutters. A couple of years ago I put a spring kit in it and it made the pull heavier. :confused:

John
 
and to me in single action revolvers.

the blackhawk while it can handle much hotter loads

feels a lot clunkier. its akward in my hand (sorry to early in the morning for clear typing).

The Colt SAA fits my hand, and points true, aims just like pointing a finger.

and the diffrence in price there is more than $200 but i will take Colt hands down.

PLus the colt has the 4 clicks that just sound so smooth when thumbing the hammer. thats worth alot right there.
 
I would like to see someone take a S&W 686 a Ruger GP100 and the Colt Python and shoot them till the last one was standing.I would bet it wouldn't be the Colt the other two ????????????:p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top