From: pes3@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Paul Eric Stoufflet)
Newsgroups: rec.guns
Subject: Colt vs Smith & Wesson - SUMMARY
Date: 30 Dec 92 20:51:53 GMT
Organization: Columbia University


A few weeks ago, I asked the rec.guns crowd to compare a Colt
Python and a Smith & Wesson 686, as my wife decided that she
would get me one handgun for Christmas.

I would like to thank all of the people that replied:
  The Moderator
  Henry Schaffer
  James D. Del Vecchio
  Mike Hejl
  Randy Lyman
  Ralph Palmer
  Ken Mudge
  Erik Scott
  Russell Spence
  Bruce D. Woods
  Jamie Gray
  Brad Isley
  Pete Bellas
  Jerry Hollombe

There was quite a diversity of opinions, but a recurrent theme
was that the Python, while it had a nice trigger, wasn't worth
the extra $300 or so.
Several people recommended Rugers, but I preferred not to patronize
Bill Ruger's shop, for political reasons.

I sincerely hope that none of the above people are offended that I am
reprinting their comments below, but I did say that I would post
a summary, and I did not receive any letters asking me not to post
their thoughts.

Again, thanks for all the input.  Last December 24th I stopped by
a small gunshop in Darien and purchased a Smith & Wesson 686 with
a 4" barrel.  As soon as THE STATE decides I can exercise my 2nd
ammendment rights (8 days and counting) I will get it and start looking
at alternate grips and other goodies.

(I have left in my original letter fragments where necessary for clarity)

***********************************************************************

For what its worth ... I can't say enough good out the 686.
I *can't* give a first hand comparison with the Python, but
I don't think you can go wrong with the S&W.  My wife's is
tuned up, has aftermarket grips, and has now been ported.
If I fail to load up 500 rounds for her to plink with at the
range each afternoon out, then she threatens to plink with
all but one round, saving the last for me ... :-)  She is 
very content to drive lead through a little tiny hole, time
after time with this pistol. 

********************************************************************

  My wife and both shoot a 686 (4" barrel, we've added Pachmayr
grips which *really* helped) and it is a wonderful gun.  Its
trigger action was excellent out of the box, and has improved
while firing 17,000+ rounds through it, plus some dry firing.
Most of these rounds have been 148 gr.  wadcutter target ammo 
in .38 Special.

  My experience with the Python is less, but favorable.  It
uses a different spring mechanism, has a lot of hand finishing,
and is a lot more expensive.  But it does have a wonderful
trigger feel.

*********************************************************************

I don't like the S&W 686 at all.   I'd get the GP100 before that.
I don't know about the Colt.  It looks nice, but I doubt it's worth
the price.

**********************************************************************

#My wife has decided to buy me any handgun I want for Christmas
#with her Christmas bonus money (I think I'll keep her).

Shees, I wish my wife was so understanding ;-)

#Since she can't really handle a .45, I have decided to get a
#.38/.357 revolver.  I initially wanted a S&W 686, but now that I
#might actually get one, I want to explore more options.

If your wife agrees to the $600 price, by all means go with the Python.  On
the other hand, you can buy *two* 686s for the same (well, almost) money.
New bright stainless Pythons run $600 and NIB 686s run $310 at the local gun
shows.

About the only thing a Python has over a 686 is a wonderfull DA trigger
out-of-the-box.  However, a NIB L frame is no slough either.  A simple
install-it-yourself Wolff spring kit with reduced power "Power Rib" main
spring and 13-15# rebound slide spring will do more for a Smith's action than
any gunsmith and for only $15.

On the other hand, *very* few 'smiths will work on Pythons while everyone and
his uncle works on 686s. Further, all the "PPC" parts are for K and L (ie 686)
frames. You'd have a *real* hard time finding a match barrel, for example,
for a Python while match barrels (and other parts) abound for Smiths.

Personally, I'd go with a Smith simply because I know how to work on them
(and so does about every 'smith) and the aftermarket mods are limitless.
Although the Python has a wonderfull action, I've grown accustomed to Smiths
and the Python's stack bothers me.

Shees, its getting late, gotta go home...

*************************************************************************

 
# My wife has decided to buy me any handgun I want for Christmas
# with her Christmas bonus money (I think I'll keep her).
 
Nice wife.  Mine has purchased three revolvers for me so far  :-)
 
# Since she can't really handle a .45, I have decided to get a
# .38/.357 revolver.
 
I assume this means that the .45 ACP kicks too much for her,
in which case you will be letting her shoot the future .357
using ONLY .38 specials, no?
 
# I initially wanted a S&W 686, but now that I
# might actually get one, I want to explore more options.
# 
# I am looking at the Colt Python, which I examined for the first
# time yesterday, and which struck me as a well made gun.  I don't 
# know about the ventilated rib, it still looks funny.
 
That ventilated rib has contributed to one of the most sought-
after looks in a revolver EVER.  I've heard the vents weren't
placed there for cooling (my theory) but to shave down some of
the weight.  This theory seems silly to me since they could have
made the underlug smaller.  I subscribe to the notion that after
you run, say, a box of .357s through the gun, the top of the 
barrel is so hot that heat waves interfere with a good sight 
picture so the vents help dissipate heat.  An added benefit is 
after-market scope mounts that use the vents as an attachment 
point.
 
# If anyone can comment on the differences between these two
# guns, and why I might prefer one, I would appreciate it.
# Or should look at any other makes?
 
I'm not sure what your wife is willing/planning to spend on this
purchase.  The Python is typically twice the price of the Smith
& Wesson you mentioned (new, anyway) and used values for Pythons
are much higher than used Smiths in comparable condition.
 
Other similar revolvers are made by Dan Wesson, Taurus, and
others.  My perception of the quality of each of these (in 
descending order) is:
 
		1) Python
		2) Dan Wesson Arms
		3) Smith & Wesson
		4) Colt King Cobra
		5) Ruger
		6) Taurus
		7) Rossi
 
I own or have owned .357s in all but #4 thru #7 (above).  It's
a toss-up whether the Dan Wesson or my stainless Python have a
better trigger (they're both very nice).  I sold both of my
Smith's to my brothers (a 586 and a 686) and love all four of
them (the guns and my brothers!)  They are fine revolvers.
 
Taurus has a "lifetime warranty," which in my first-hand
experience means that you'll be sending the gun back to them
over and over during your lifetime to get it fixed  :-(  .
I have no experience with numbers 4 - 7 except for handling
them in gun stores.  Ruger single action revolvers have
fine triggers, but I've been unimpressed with all their
double action revolvers (I have several Ruger single action
revolvers, but I believe you're interested in double action,
right?).
 
A warning about Colt:  Their quality is variable, and their
service atrocious.  I've contacted them at least twice for
help with a couple of their revolvers (one a blued Python,
the other an old .22 LR target gun) and received very poor
assistance with my requests.
 
Smith, on the other hand, has always served me well, although
they charge good prices for their gunsmithing services outside
the warranty period.  Ruger has never charged me for any work
(and they have not warranty!)  Neither has Dan Wesson, even
though I was at LEAST the third owner of my DW model 15 .357.
 
Any other questions?  Hope this helps!
 
*********************************************************************

I bought my mom a Ruger SP101, 5 shot 2" .357.  She
has trouble with the .357 loads, so she uses a .38 +P
load.  The gun was fine out of the box, but I polished
up the hammer and hammer strut to smooth out the
double action.
  

I don't know what size you are looking at but Ruger 
makes a nice full size, 38/357, the GP100 and the
more compact SP101.  You should definately take a 
look at them.

*********************************************************************

Paul, I've never owned a Python, but have fored one, and they're fine guns.

Smooth, accurate, reliable, and beutifully finished. And expensive.

I owned a 6" S&W 686 which I carried on duty as a reserve Police Officer
in the town where I live.  The gun was extremely accurate, and never gave
me a moment's trouble, except for the first time I tried to adjust the 
sights, they were a bit stiff and bent the tip of the screwdriver.  They 
started to move and never hiccuped after that.

The stock trigger on the S&W was a near match to the Pythons I'd handled,
and it pointed just as well for me.  I changed to Pachmayr grips, and that made
the gun more comfortable to shoot, especially with warm .357 loads.

I'd probably lean toward the S&W, and spend the difference on ammo and possibly
a new set of grips.

That's my $.02 worth.

****************************************************************************

I guess by now you've gotten a ton of mail, but just in case you haven't...:-)


You really can't go wrong with a 686 or a Python.  The Python costs about
twice as much, though.  It's a nicer pistol.  You can learn to live with the
vent rib.  After a while it starts to look cool.  Right up until it's time to
give it a good cleaning.  The aerosol Break Free and Gun Scrubber products
work well, though.

Stainless Pythons are pretty rare right now, but 686s are everywhere.  I like
stainless for harsh environments, like camping trips, truck defense, and
canoeing.  Especially canoeing. :-)  That might make the decision for you.

Don't rule out the Smith & Wesson model 66.  It's a K-frame .357 which is a
lot lighter than a 686 or a Python and is a lot more comfortable to carry. 
They aren't as accurate, but you're taking about 1.25 inch groups instead of
1" at 15 feet.  It weighs so much less than a 686, though.  For defense, and
not target shooting, and not plinking, where the higher recoil and shorter
frame life would get annoying, it's my favorite Smith.

You might want to stay away from the Colt Trooper series.  They aren't
terribly durable from what I've heard.  The weak link, so to speak, is the
cylinder hand which seems to wear out quickly.

Colt has probably gone into their final death-dive in bankruptcy and civil
court.  No one really expects them to survive this one.  Pythons could become
instant collectors' items, along with the 1991/Gold Cup/Double Eagle/Delta
Elite autoloading pistols and the Colt Sporter formerly AR15 rifle.

The Smith Model 19 is a very nice pistol as well.  I've put close to a
thousand rounds through a  friend's 19, and it gets two thumbs up.  His came
with a 2" barrel, and the accuracy is amazing for a belly gun.  The 586 and
686s that I've shot have made 1" groups at 15 feet, which is better than most
pistols.  I have a 2" Python (made circa 1958) and a 4" (made in the early
70s).  The 2" certanly shoots better than I do, with my best groups about 3"
at 15 feet.  The 4" makes a really ragged hole at 15 feet.  The same friend
with the 19 has a 6" Python that with our handloaded .38 LWC punches one fuzzy
hole at 15 feet.

Both the Smiths and the Python have "near perfect" single action triggers. 
The Python gets the nod for a lighter pull.  In double-action fire, the Python
beats out the Smith for smoothness in the pull, but the Smith has a lighter
pull by far.

You'll catch a lot of flak about buying a .357 instead of a .45, but I think
you're doing the right thing.  It takes a *lot* of training time to get
proficient with an autoloader.  

It sounds like you _may_ be worried about your wife and the size of the pistol,
in which case I respectfully submit the Ruger SP101 in .357 mag.  Sure, it's
only a five shot, and it's too heavy to conceal, but it's built like a brick.
It has one of the best factory grips I've ever handled (supposedly Pachmayer
is ticked off:  they used to make a lot of money off of replacement Ruger
grips) so recoil is very pleasant.  It's small enough to not only be shootable
but even to feel good in very small hands, such as 4'10" women like my mother.
If the recoil bites a little, run .38 +P or plain .38 in it, but you already
knew that...

Of course, the GP100 is nice, too, and carries an extra shot and is so heavy
that if she can hold the thing on target she should be able to handle Federal
Hydrashocks or the most bone-jarring handloads you could cook up.  The thing
really is a brick.  Ruger has gunsmiths, not engineers, so they make
everything twice as heavy as they should.  It does result in a very-low-recoil
pistol that lasts forever, though.

So, In order of nice, my votes:  Python, Smith revolver of some kind, Ruger.
In order of price, you'll probably see Ruger, Smith, Python.
So, throwing out the outliers leaves Smith, and since you mentioned it first,
I fugure that's what you really wanted to do anyway.  Look at it this way: 
There isn't a Trooper in NC that wouldn't want to trade his or her
piece-o-crud Beretta 92 "Face Remover" back in for the 19 they used to carry.
That was a pistol that hit what you pointed it at, hit it *hard*, and wouldn't
blow up in your face.  Get one.

*************************************************************************

	I've never fired a Python, but everyone that I ever knew that had
	one just raved about them.  One of the main selling points is the
	smoothness of the action.  The internal parts are hand-honed at
	the factory.  That is also one of the main detractions from the
	gun also.  It costs twice as much as the S&W :-(.


***************************************************************************

Get the S&W 686 and spend the remainder on a Dillon reloader.
{The Python isn't worth the extra big bucks.}

***************************************************************************

Does she have any sisters?  ;-).

Seriously, my officemate and I got the wheelgun bug a few months
ago, after finding, to our surprise, that they could be a real
pleasure to shoot, and gave us great groups.  He bought a
beautiful blued Colt Python, and I followed a little while later
with a stainless 686; both are with 6" barrels.  Having
shot both now (mine considerably), I'll compare and contrast.

Pluses and minuses of the Python:

+ Noticeably smoother trigger right out of the box.  That careful
  hand-crafting that supposedly goes into this gun does show.
  There's just a general feeling of smoothness and polish around
  this gun.
+ Wide & comfortable hammer; cocking for single action is easy
  and oh-so-very smooth.
+ Beautiful.  The finish is rich & glossy; you might not like the
  ventilated rib, but both of us think the Python looks better
  than the solid-ribbed 686 (I just didn't want to pay another $200).
- "stagey" double-action trigger - there's a noticeable build-up
  in pressure required as you get toward release.  Some may like
  this, as it gives a little extra control, but I need all the
  help I can get in obtaining that elusive "surprise break".
- The rubber combat-style Pachmeyr grips that came with Alan's Python 
  were far too narrow for comfortable shooting of heavy loads.  Some Packmeyr
  "Presentation" style grips solved the problem nicely, though (<$20).
- Expensive.  Alan shopped around heavily and found one for about $550;
  most shops around here sell it for well over $600.

Pluses and Minuses of the S&W 686:

+ While not as smooth as the Python's, the 686's trigger doesn't seem
  to stage at all in double action firing -- the pressure increase is
  steady until the hammer drops.
+ A very common, well-respected gun.  It's easy to find accessories for, and
  it should be very easy to find a gunsmith experienced with working on it.
  While the Python is well-known, it's not as common.  A friend who
  shoots in a league tells me that just about everybody in it has a 686.
+ Stainless construction - while I tend to take great care with my firearms, it's
  nice that I don't have to worry quite as much about cleaning it, or
  about scratching off the blueing.
+ Lots cheaper - I paid $350, and didn't even shop around much.  $200
  buys a lot of .38 special semi-wadcutter...
+/- The stock wood grips.  My hand never quite seemed to fit the same way
  on these grips, but they were still reasonably comfortable, even when shooting
  heavy loads.  I wanted to try some rubber ones, though, and bought some
  Hogue grips that had the same narrowness problem as the Python's original
  grips.  I finally got some Pachmeyr presentation grips, though, and they've
  been great, both for holding and for shooting. 
- Trigger isn't as smooth.  This should easily be fixable by a gunsmith,
  though; I just haven't had it done yet.
- Uglier than the Python.
- The hammer is smaller, and has an almost painfully rough surface.
  (Should be easy to smooth out the sharp checkering, though).


It remains to be seen as to which of our two guns is more accurate,
but we've both been able to improve continuously with them, and have
no reason to believe that we're getting anywhere near the innate
accuracy limits of the guns.  (We're getting close to being able to 
keep 20 rounds in a six-inch circle at 25 yards.)  

There's definitely a difference in how the guns fit the hand; 
the trigger in the Python seems farther forward.  Both feel fine
for me, but you should make sure that both of you take both
guns in hand to make sure they work for you.

The Colt's cylinder release is pulled backward, while the 686's
pushes forward, in what is probably a much more common configuration.
Can't say which is better, but I'd rather develop habits based
on the more common cylinder release, even though the Colt's
release is a little easier for me, as a left-hander.

I didn't consider Ruger for political reasons, but you
might feel differently; they do make some good .357 revolvers.

With the 6" barrels and full underlugs, both guns are big & heavy
enough to help absorb a lot of recoil.  Shooting .38 wadcutter
target loads through these guns is truly a pleasure, with no
unpleasant edge to the recoil; you'll get tired of holding it
up long before the recoil kick starts to hurt your hand.
Heavy duty .357 defensive loads, like Hydra-Shoks, are still 
quite a handful, though.  We've heard contradictory reports
as to which of these guns is better-suited to handling a steady
diet of magnum loads.

In summary, I'd say they're both excellent guns; it's a matter
of how much extra you want to pay for the extra smoothness
of the Python, as well has how you feel about the various
other differences, like the staged trigger of the Python,
ribbed vs. non-ribbed barrels, etc.  I suppose it also
makes a difference whether or not you're the one paying
for it :-).

Happy Holidays,

***********************************************************************

Can't comment on the Python, but my 686 is my favorite ever gun.  I have
several.  The trigger was really sweet straight out of the box.  Never
knew I could shoot so good.

**************************************************************************

Having used both I vote for the S&W. I liked the trigger on the S&W much
better than the Colt and balance felt better (but this is very subjective).
I also like the way the cylinder release works on S&W revolvers better. I
believe that you would be happy with either as they are both fine guns and
the differences are a matter of degrees.

Good Luck

************************************************************************

Take a look at the Ruger GP100.  IMHO, it's better engineered than either
the S&W or the Colt.  They have a reputation for rugged indestructibility
and may be slightly more accurate as well.

When I bought mine it was a _very_ close decision between the Ruger and
the S&W.  Ruger won by a hair and I've never regretted it.

FINIS
  / \ / \     Paul Stoufflet                          / \ / \
 |  / \  |    Columbia Presbyterian Medical Center   |  / \  |
 |  \ /  |    internet: pes3@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu  |  \ /  |
  \_/_\_/     All opinions are my own                 \_/_\_/