In the first part of the 20th century S&W and Colt went two different directions. Colt opted to produce high end handguns with extensive handfitting, polishing, blueing etc. They turned out some beautiful products (the Python) and folks paid more for them. S&W choose to go the more economical route and invested more into mass production and industrialization. As a consequence Smith and Wesson turned out handguns that weren't as "refined" as Colt's, but they were solid and cost less.
I suppose that during the first few decades of the last century S&W was the equivlant of Ruger. Back then and especially in the fifties most handgun shooters were either Colt men or S&W men. There wasn't awhole lot of room for anything else.
I own a Colt Detective Special 3rd generation that was manufactured in 1973. The DS was alwasy considered a "duty" gun and didn't have the high polish or handfitting of the Python. However the DS is beautifully made. Even the grip frame was polished - unlike the grip frames on my Smiths and the blueing is very deep and rich. For a "tactical" handgun intended to be carried in holsters for years on end and in homeowners underwear drawers it's quite a piece. And that's what hurt Colt. Smith, Ruger and Taurus focused on affordable, solid, but not as pretty handguns. Colt didn't and they couldn't compete.
Pythons are great and you will pay more for one. Is it worth it? Well I guess that's up to you isn't it? But there is a very good chance that it's a well made example, but there is always the exception isn't there.
