I don't disagree in the slightest.

Hell, apparently S&W saw the same demand, albiet in a larger size envelope.

quote:

Originally posted by crue-dell:

quote:

Originally posted by badcopnodonut!!:
Hickok45 did an evaluation on the new Python. He seemed to like it just fine until the cylinder failed to index and the hammer was falling on an already fired cylinder. It’s near the end of the video. Hickok45 new python

Sorry if this has been covered already.

Starting a little after the 30 minute mark, for those interested.

Wow. Definitely disappointing to see and just knocked my interest in one of these down a few notches to wait and see what happens out in the wild and if this was just some kind of fluke. Unfortunately though, his is not the only one out there supposedly having this issue.

Hickok45 is not the only one with cylinder problems.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y0dJPxXmhtc

Thanks for posting. Disappointing. Hopefully, they will fix the issue.

Well, everyone knows that Pythons are only supposed to be safe queens and 686's are for shooting I'm sure they'll fix it, I hope they fix it, as a Python has made it onto my short list of wants.

I have the new 2020 Python 6" serial number PY0001304 and it is precise and flawless with no issues and is a better shooter than my 12 older Pythons. Many on the Python list believe the "problems" are over blown. I have two of the 2020 Python 4.25" on order and Colt is now shipping.

Obviously a dead cylinder would suck. Past that though they sound like winners. (Easy fix is my guess for those two videos). Great trigger and purty as the day is long. I just can’t decide which length is best.

quote:

Originally posted by jimmy123x:
Well, everyone knows that Pythons are only supposed to be safe queens and 686's are for shooting

Don't forget those who'll wear their Rick Grimes hat while posing in front of the mirror .

As I posted earlier, I'm not interested in a Python, but I'm starting to step into the Single Action rabbit hole, a whole other can of worms...

quote:

Originally posted by oddball:

quote:

Originally posted by jimmy123x:
Well, everyone knows that Pythons are only supposed to be safe queens and 686's are for shooting

Don't forget those who'll wear their Rick Grimes hat while posing in front of the mirror .

As I posted earlier, I'm not interested in a Python, but I'm starting to step into the Single Action rabbit hole, a whole other can of worms...

Check out a Pietta. They're pretty reasonable, but a friend of mine bought one that we put 4,000 rounds of .357 through. The blueing, trigger, and action were incredible on that gun. He also had several 3 screw Rugers, which didn't hold a candle to the Pietta in any department.

Looks like there's not much chance of me getting my paws on a new Python unless I'm willing to get gouged on G.B. *Sigh.

^^^^^^^^^^^

Unless you absolutely, positively, must have one now, I'd wait until the hype dies down, and wait until Colt irons out the possible bugs in production. It's not a limited release, I'm sure they plan to sell as many as they can.

quote:

Originally posted by oddball:
^^^^^^^^^^^

Unless you absolutely, positively, must have one now, I'd wait until the hype dies down, and wait until Colt irons out the possible bugs in production. It's not a limited release, I'm sure they plan to sell as many as they can.

Holy smokes - how on earth does a company take a gun that they made for 30+ years, and a design that has been more or less perfected for, like, a century, and still muck it up?!? I'm trying to remember if any "new release" in recent memory has been done correctly.

quote:

Originally posted by ShneaSIG:

quote:

Originally posted by oddball:
^^^^^^^^^^^

Unless you absolutely, positively, must have one now, I'd wait until the hype dies down, and wait until Colt irons out the possible bugs in production. It's not a limited release, I'm sure they plan to sell as many as they can.

Holy smokes - how on earth does a company take a gun that they made for 30+ years, and a design that has been more or less perfected for, like, a century, and still muck it up?!? I'm trying to remember if any "new release" in recent memory has been done correctly.

A lot of it is a new design and they did away with 15 +/- different parts, in an effort to strengthen the old design (and probably make production cheaper). Like every new design, there are usually some hiccups until they get it right.

A python is on my hot list, but I will wait until there's a lot of inventory in the market and prices come down to normal and of course the bugs get worked out!

quote:

Originally posted by jimmy123x:

A lot of it is a new design and they did away with 15 +/- different parts, in an effort to strengthen the old design (and probably make production cheaper). Like every new design, there are usually some hiccups until they get it right.

I guess I'm not willing to give Colt a pass - defects I'm reading about are defects in the barrel crown, light strikes, and failures of the cylinder to rotate. This seems like mighty fundamental stuff. 15 redesigned components seems far short of a full rebuild, and there's nothing that can be convincingly called "revolutionary" in my book when it comes to the design and implementation of a double action revolver, especially one that had 40 years of production behind it already. Maybe this is really all stemming from statistically insignificant, anecdotal incidents of what is otherwise a failure of quality control practices and there's nothing inherently wrong in the design. But, damn... today it's looking like quite the stumble out of the gate on the biggest release Colt has had in how many years???

Para jinxed it. Yeah, that's the ticket... as Lovitz would say.

quote:

Originally posted by ShneaSIG:

quote:

Originally posted by jimmy123x:

A lot of it is a new design and they did away with 15 +/- different parts, in an effort to strengthen the old design (and probably make production cheaper). Like every new design, there are usually some hiccups until they get it right.

I guess I'm not willing to give Colt a pass - defects I'm reading about are defects in the barrel crown, light strikes, and failures of the cylinder to rotate. This seems like mighty fundamental stuff. 15 redesigned components seems far short of a full rebuild, and there's nothing that can be convincingly called "revolutionary" in my book when it comes to the design and implementation of a double action revolver, especially one that had 40 years of production behind it already. Maybe this is really all stemming from statistically insignificant, anecdotal incidents of what is otherwise a failure of quality control practices and there's nothing inherently wrong in the design. But, damn... today it's looking like quite the stumble out of the gate on the biggest release Colt has had in how many years???

I agree, they should work and they should hold up right out of the gate.

This is only information that has been reported on other forums or in videos that have been posted so take it with a grain of salt.

One source who has been in contact with Colt concerning the flaws found on the barrel crown has reported that Colt has traced that back to the fixture that is used to hold the handgun while the gun is being polished. I'm assuming that the pistol is held by some fixture that has a rod down the barrel to hold the frame while it is being polished. Supposedly that problem is being fixed or may have already been fixed.

As far as the light strikes and failure of the cylinder to rotate, supposedly the only known reports of that were made by a youtube reviewer GoldenWebb and Hickock45. They may be the only two, but then again they may be the only two that have reported it so far.

GoldenWebb's Python is on the way back to Colt for evaluation and so far the status of Hickock45's is unknown. He gets his firearms from Bud's Guns so they will ultimately be responsible for returning theirs to Colt. I'm sure that both of these parties will report any news once they have something back from Colt.

I agree with what everyone is saying, Colt should have worked out the bugs before releasing such an iconic pistol but I'm sure that they will eventually work things out, there's too much riding on it not to. It would be interesting to find out if these were just two isolated incidents or just how widespread this problem is.

None of this is surprising. Again, it's not a Python. It's a pistol with new lockwork and dimensional changes to the frame, which happens to look like a Python, and the result is as you see. Oh, but it's got a vent rib barrel! (jingling car keys furiously as a distraction)

Those issues should have been discovered and addressed before this revolver was released, but oh, gotta rush and get it out for the Holiest of Holies- THE SHOT SHOW!

Well, in my limited sample of one 2020 Python, mine that I purchased last week, it has functioned flawlessly in the 200 rounds I stated I fired earlier in this thread. I hope to be able to fire a couple of hundred rounds more this weekend if I'm not snowed out of accessing our property.

I have not found any cosmetic flaws in mine, either, at least with the naked eye. I suppose if I took a magnifying glass to it I'd be able to find some.

This gun has hands down the best trigger I've ever pulled on a DA revolver, certainly much better than the original Python, which I once owned. For the closest comparison that comes to mind, think of a Beretta 92FS with the D spring installed. Though, with my Lyman electronic gauge this revolver has a pull about 1 lb. lighter.

I don't know if it's worth so much more than a S&W or Ruger revolver, but it doesn't have a lock like the S&W and it has a better trigger pull and a tighter lock up than the Rugers I have. I guess one has to decide for himself whether those differences are worth the price difference.

Not a Python.

And anybody who thinks it is can come on out and see my band, The Beatles. We're playing all our hits. Tickets are very reasonably priced when you consider that we are The Beatles...