686 Vs Python - I'm lucky enough to have a modern Classic 586 (bought last year) and a new Python and I thought I'd give a quick overview of the two based on my own observations.
The trigger is one of the biggest differences I see. The Python has a very smooth double-action stroke, but the single stroke is difficult. The S&W is the exact opposite of a double pull with a lot of stacking but a feather in one action. If I look at the hammer on the deuce, I see that it is ironic. The Python has a wide target shaped hammer that is easy to reach. At the same time, the 586 has a small hammer that makes a single movement seem like an afterthought.
686 Vs Python
Another difference is the flu. The Python has a thin laminate rubber and the S&W has a fuller rubber grip. The S&W also has a sharp check which makes for a better buy
Model 686 .357 Magnum/.38 Special +p 4 Inch Barrel Satin Stainless Finish Adjustable Sight Internal Lock 6 Round
Another difference is the front sight. Colt kind of dropped the ball. The air can be adjusted without pressure and must be closed with a small Allen key after zeroing. It's not a deal breaker though, once you close it it seems to stop and you shouldn't mess with it anymore. The S&W is customizable like the old python and has a white outline.
The fit and finish is excellent on both revolvers, but I have to give the Python a slight edge. The crane and frame machining is amazing compared to the 586. Although I will say that Smith and Wesson did a great job with the polishing and blueing. Looks like Colt doesn't even want to try these days.
Bottom line, I like both, but I prefer the Colt. The double action trigger is something to look out for. The standard lines of Python just attract you. Hillary Hole on modern S&W's is also kind of a joy. I would be interested in other members opinions on modern Colts and S&Ws.
I collected old COLT Pythons and still have a few, during that time I owned a few S&W revolvers and still run a Performance Center Mod 627 8 Times in the area.
Colt Python Review: 4 Inch Version
In my opinion, you cannot compare Mod 586 with Python because I think they are too different and (at least here) belong to two different categories.
I like the comparison. It certainly shows S&W's value in the new Python, unlike its predecessor. The last important point is reliability.
As a new Python owner, I was hoping someone would write a trigger function. Spring, burning, etc. My only complaint is the SA transmission.
Unfortunately the Keylock prevented me from having it regardless of the achievement. You need to buy a 7 shot 686 keyless lock for an upcoming project.
Wheelgunwed: Colt Python & Sw 686 357mags
Three weeks ago I fired six rounds of E-nickel Python 1980 and then tried a nickel S&W 19-4 model that I had not yet fired. I didn't touch Python after that and I don't even remember how it came together. I just know that the 19 is my favorite double action of any brand. I've been thinking about selling Python locally, and now I'm feeling more confident about it.
Levinz11 said: As a new Python owner, I was hoping someone would write a starter function. Spring, burning, etc. My only complaint is the SA transmission. Click to expand... Same thing. I'm more than willing to play with spring cars. I don't know if Colt follows this forum. Hopefully the new Python source will be available soon.
I think 586 vs. Python is a great comparison. They are generally revolvers of the same size and also use the same velocity load. I had a 686 and thought it was the closest thing S&W had to a Python, and yes, I had boxes of S&W, K, L, and N frames!
Mbrincolt, thank you for taking the time to write a good written comparison and back it up with great pictures. Such comparisons are always instructive.
New 6” Python Vs Mr73
My take on the trigger pull between the 686 and my Python 1972 was the same as yours on the double action, but the single action of the Python 1972 still outperformed the Smith. However, the one-time event in Python 2020 is nothing to write home about.
Mxl said: It's the same here. I'm more than willing to play with spring cars. I don't know if Colt follows this forum. Hopefully the new Python source will be available soon. Click to expand... I don't think the spring function will solve the single action problem. The way the hammer recedes tells me that the angle of the single action line of the hammer is skewed and needs to be adjusted to clear the cam behind the hammer. This is NOT something that people without a lot of experience should do. I have been making guns for over 30 years and trained as a police gunsmith and without jig adjustments I don't think I would have even attempted to fix mine.
Pavia said: Is the barrel straight on the 586 or does it extend to one side? Click to expand... Mine looks straight forward. I saw some from far away, but luckily I got a good one.
Kerz said: I like the comparison. It certainly shows S&W's value in the new Python, unlike its predecessor. The last important point is reliability. Vic Click to expand... Vic, I wish I could give you a fuller view of the truth. Unfortunately, I entered 2020 with a limited supply of 357/38 and shot quite a bit this year. I only took the Python once to familiarize myself with it and it was very easy to shoot tight groups, especially with double action. I hope to find some 357 or 38 ammo soon and do an actual comparison with my review.
Old School Steel
The chunky ghost of the Smith seems strange to me, but the sight of the weapon is familiar.
Mbrincolt said: I'm lucky enough to have a modern Classic 586 (bought last year) and a new Python and I thought I'd give a quick overview of the two based on my own observations. View attachment 719318 The trigger is one of the biggest differences I've seen. The Python has a very smooth double-action stroke, but the single stroke is difficult. The S&W is the exact opposite of a double pull with a lot of stacking but a feather in one action. If I look at the hammer on the deuce, I see that it is ironic. The Python has a wide target shaped hammer that is easy to reach. At the same time, the 586 has a small hammer that makes a single movement seem like an afterthought. View attachment 719319 Another difference is the handle. The Python has a thin laminate rubber and the S&W has a fuller rubber grip. The S&W also has a sharper rifle that makes for a better buy. Colt kind of dropped the ball. The air can be adjusted without pressure and must be closed with a small Allen key after zeroing. It's not a deal breaker though, once you close it it seems to stop and you shouldn't mess with it anymore. The S&W is customizable like the old python and has a white outline. View Attachment 719323 Colt did a great job with the sunken crown. S&W has not tested the 586. View Attachment 719326 The fit and finish of both revolvers are excellent, but I have to give the Python a slight edge. The crane and frame machining is amazing compared to the 586. Although I will say that Smith and Wesson did a great job with the polishing and blueing. Looks like Colt doesn't even want to try these days. View attachment 719327 In conclusion, I like both, but I prefer the Colt. The double action trigger is something to look out for. The standard lines of Python just attract you. Hillary Hole on modern S&W's is also kind of a joy. I would be interested in other members opinions on modern Colts and S&Ws. Click to expand... (Hillary Hole) It's really unnecessary.
The response from Colt said that Colt owners tend to unload guns more often than S&W owners, hence the backwards crown😂.
Dbluefish said: (Hillary Hole) That's pretty pointless. Semoer Fi paul Click to expand... Tomato, Tomoto. Hillary Hole, Keylock. Call it what you want.
Smith&wesson357/ Python 357 Magunum Ctg ミリタリー
I haven't shot or handled the new S&W or the new Python, I can only speak to the makeup.
My niece bought a few
S&w 66 vs 686, s&w 586 vs 686, boa vs python, python vs tableau, s&w 686 vs 627, onkyo 686 vs 696, 686 ssr vs 686, b&w 686 vs 685, gp100 vs 686, 586 vs 686, vs code python, 685 s2 vs 686 s2
0 Comments