BREAKING: Colt Brings Back the Python .357 Revolver

Colt Python .375 Revolver

Courtesy Colt

Years ago, John Butler wrote a popular post here explaining why Colt would never again build another Python revolver. But John probably knew that his prediction was in trouble when Colt got back into the snake gun business in 2017.

If you read Jon Wayne Taylor’s review of the excellent King Cobra, it didn’t take Kreskin-like prognostication abilities to conclude that it was really only a matter of time before Colt’s revived snake gun line included a resurrected Python.

Now that day has finally come.

Colt Python .375 Revolver

Courtesy Colt

Colt has announced the new-again Python. As Colt describes the wheel gun . . .

The Python is back.

Building on Colt’s Snake Gun legacy, the legendary double-action revolver returns in stainless steel in 4.25” and 6” barrel lengths. The 2020 Python features modern stainless steel alloys and a re-designed rear sight. Thirty percent more steel beneath the rear adjustable target sight gives you a stronger revolver and more robust shooting experience. A recessed target crown, user-interchangeable front sight, and Walnut grip with the iconic Colt medallion make this a gun you’ll want to shoot AND show off. The Python is chambered in .357 Magnum and also accommodates 38 Special cartridges.

MSRP = $1499

Want one?

comments

  1. avatar Ross says:

    Outstanding now I can afford to get my Rick Grimes on.

    1. avatar Green Mtn. Boy says:

      Perfect opening for the reintroduction of the Python.

    2. avatar C L says:

      Amen brother

  2. avatar Joatmon says:

    Have an older one that was left to me from my godfather in his will. BNIB and never fired. Have never shot it.
    Might have to purchase a new one to have one to shoot.

  3. avatar PavePusher says:

    $1500?!?!

    Colt just doesn’t want to be competitive, do they?

    1. avatar Jeff the Griz says:

      You get what you pay for. Took me 36 years to find that out.

      1. avatar Scott C. says:

        To a point you are correct. But when I can get a S&W 686 or 586 for 1/2 to 2/3 of that and I know they are great, I’ll stick with them. Colt has been hoping that people will pay a premium for the name for years and it blown up in their face time and time again, maybe this one will be different but I’m skeptical.

        1. avatar Eric in Oregon says:

          You’re not wrong, I’m skeptical that Colt in its current state is willing to put in the effort required to make this worth the premium price. Even in the pics above you can see the cheapening in the trigger and hammer and the lack of polish compared to OG Pythons.

        2. avatar M10 says:

          The Colt model doesn’t come with a Hillary hole though…

        3. avatar Thixotropic says:

          S&W Revolvers and other firearms they manufacture contain numerous MIM parts. Particularly small or intricate parts that are difficult to machine.

          While the catastrophic failure rate of MOST MIM parts is not significantly higher than billet machined parts (roughly 2-3X the cost of MIM) they wear differently.

          My information from Gunsmiths that do trigger jobs and other work on these kinds of things tell me that they don’t stay timed and that they break in strange places/ways. When you leaste expect it, of course.

          Colt experimented with MIM parts in the early ’90’s but abandoned the effort when they saw the problems with their 1911’s. My SS M1991A1 that I “learned” to work on and eventually had fully customized by a renown gunsmith, HAD AN MIM EXTRACTOR.

        4. avatar Rick says:

          Precisely! Cost (and hence price) are driven by the Colt manufacturing process and the hand fitting required. It’s overpriced for what it is. We’ll see how many people are willing to buy it simply because it says Colt on it.

          I owned a couple in the day. I enjoyed them, but the triggers need work. The cylinder is too short. The cylinder yoke assembly wasn’t strong enough for sustained hot load shooting and lastly, the factory grips were probably the all time worst. A box of ammo would draw blood. Let’s hope at least the grips are better.

        5. avatar BusyBeef says:

          Hillary Hole.
          -drops the mic-

        6. avatar George says:

          Factor in the cost of a action and trigger job from S&W performance center, and the price gap narrows significantly. (You won’t need a trigger/action job on the new Python.) Also, I suspect the collector’s value of the Python will remain stronger than the S&W. (I have 2 S&W model 19’s.)

        7. avatar ElTejanoViejo says:

          #1 – How can you comment on the Colt Trigger without even so much as having tried it ???

          #2 – If desired excellent trigger jobs are available without the time and/or expense of returning either the S&W and/or Colt to their respective factory for a tune-up.

        8. avatar Kevin says:

          AMEN! I’ll stack my 6” 586-2 up against a Python all day long.

      2. avatar FunGunner says:

        In this case, what you pay for is the name.

      3. avatar neiowa says:

        And for that you can buy a decent 1911.

        1. avatar GomeznSA says:

          Or two 😉

        2. avatar Rad Man says:

          Yup, Dan Wesson bobtail commander classic.

        3. avatar Ed says:

          That revolver wont fail 99.999% of the time. You sure can’t say that about a 1911.

        4. avatar Ronald Pouch says:

          And for that price, you can buy two decent 1911s!

      4. avatar Hannibal says:

        But is what you pay worth what you get? Not always. If you are paying that much because you really want a gun with “Colt Python” written on it, cool. If you’re paying because you want the quality of the gun as it was in the past… well, time will tell.

        1. avatar Al Bondigas says:

          Nope. It just looks (somewhat) like a Python. I’m betting the internals are not even close to the original version.

      5. avatar Don from CT says:

        A $1500 Python that really had $1500 worth of high quality materials and hand fitting would be well worth it.

        But I fear that it will be a $800 gun with an extra $700 tacked on for the name and the pony.

        At $1400, the trigger had better be buttery smooth, the polishing mirror like and the wood fit perfectly.

        But as a CT resident who knows 3 people who have worked at Colt, one in the custom shop, one on the shop floor, and one in the office, I can tell you that management is just out to squeeze a few more sheckels out of the brand.

        1. avatar chad F says:

          you guys better sell your old ones while the value is up, once they get the kinks ironed out the price of the old one will plummet, my last Python was a 6 inch total blue, not that long ago really, I paid $600 for and I really thought that was all it was worth. just a few short years later they went through the roof. I predict they will be a thousand or less, mark my word. I agree, my 686 no dash 7and3/8 will shoot with or better than either Python, the only thing better on the Python is the double action.

    2. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

      I was thinking that price was too low. At that price I doubt it’s any more than a polished up GP100 or 686.

      1. avatar Green Mtn. Boy says:

        Back 10 years ago one of the Italian gun makers,Pietta was talking of producing a python copy but concluded it wold have to retail in the 1500 dollar ball park and that shelved that potential project.

        I own a couple of Pietta 51 Navy copies and while decent guns they are in No was comparable to a colt product. In fact because they handle and shoot so well I had a now retired smith convert them to cartridge also to Ruger spring and plunger instead of leaf springs. He also found the hand and bolt to be too soft as to hold up for long, so replaced them with colt SAA parts. He did fine work and they shoot better than any out of the box Ruger Vaquero but Colt’s they are not.

    3. avatar Dan W says:

      That’s half what I expected.

    4. avatar Red in CO says:

      Uhh… Colt Pythons routinely go for twice that. Partly due to rarity but also partly due to how fine the weapon is. Assuming this new version IS a true Python and not just called one 1500 IS a competitive price

      1. avatar Craig in IA says:

        Why does it have to be stainless steel? Oh, well, WTH? I wouldn’t look for the price of a nice 6″ from, say, 1975 to go down anytime soon…

        1. avatar Alaska George says:

          I’ve seen in two reports that it is offered in blue also… hope that’s true because I want a blue one like my older one.

        2. avatar Alaska George says:

          Never mind, I f’ed up. Just stainless… I’ll wait.

    5. avatar Bernard says:

      1500 is good for a quality revolver. After the first year or so these should be roughly at a grand in store. And these will be quality revolvers. The king cobra is a perfect example. A lot of the idiots here screaming about how many glocks and hi points you could buy instead don’t have a clue.

    6. avatar Allen says:

      I had one that I bought in the 80s, I paid $485 for it then. I kicked my butt for selling it 2 years ago…for $3000. I’ve got a Ruger Redhawk now, and have had S&W’s. They dont compare to my python. The balance, the weight, accuracy…colt cornered the market with the python. I’ll gladly pay $1500 to get it back in my collection.

      1. avatar PDM says:

        I carried while working in LE in the 80s both a 4″ and 6″ Python at different times. The problem was the stacking as you continue to squeeze the trigger on the Python. Colt claims they have one smooth pull all the way through now and the reviewers seem to be concurring. I have a S&W 586 as well, but have always preferred the Python (old stacking trigger) to the S&W as well as the general feel. I will buy one of the new ones to see how it is. I’m hoping not to be disappointed.

    7. avatar Arby says:

      Nonsense. Colt isn’t Taurus for god’s sake. These are guns that last through generations. Have you priced guns lately?

      1. avatar chad F says:

        it seems you put more stock in a company that doesn’t back its products with any warranty, at least a Taurus is thousands of dollars cheaper and not only stands 100% behind its product but to the gun no matter if you are 1st buyer or 1000 owner.

  4. Oh Boy! Time to breakout the old “Dirty Harry : Magnum Force movie ” from my video library for a rewatch!

    1. avatar Mr. Wick says:

      That was a Smith and Wesson model
      29 chambered in .44 Magnum

      1. avatar Peter says:

        The killer cops used Pythons.

        1. avatar Green Mtn. Boy says:

          Magnum Force.

      2. avatar RedEagle says:

        Hahaha

      3. avatar GomeznSA says:

        As another poster noted, Harry’s gun was indeed the S&W Model 29 – but they used a Model 57 (.41mag) as a ‘stuntman/substitute’ for many of the shots due to the scarcity of the 29. The bad guys did indeed use Pythons……………….

  5. Made they even make a limited edition run of the old Florida SP LEO model/Colt Python .357 mag. ultimate with mirror polished finish. I remember cops at the time carrying them. They looked rather snazzy $$$$!

  6. avatar Dude says:

    Cool but why couldn’t they do something a little different, like have 7 rounds? When was the last time Colt was innovative. They’re still surviving on their name.

    1. avatar John Boch says:

      They’re teetering on bankruptcy as they have been for at least a decade or two.

      This won’t save them.

      1. avatar Specialist38 says:

        They have jumped off the brink several times in the last 30 years. This would be the newest bankruptcy.

        And I tend to agree that they are just delaying the inevitable. I kinda hope I’m wrong if the current management is serious about guns……for armed citizens …not just government agencies.

      2. avatar Green Mtn. Boy says:

        Colt,historically has been in and out of bankruptcy since it’s inception.

        1. avatar Southern Cross says:

          For Colt, it’s almost a tradition.

        2. avatar GomeznSA says:

          GMB – ‘maybe’ if they do indeed finally go bankrupt someone will buy out the trademarks (and equipment) and move it lock, stock and barrel (puns intended 😉 to a gun friendly state.

      3. avatar Bernard says:

        That’s a lot of talk coming from a guy teetering on the brink of irrelevancy himself.

  7. avatar Duane says:

    Sounds like they fixed the problems that the old python had.

    1. avatar Gregory Peter DuPont says:

      Maybe they got away from the leaf springs? Coil springs? Might be a little less fragile

      1. avatar Anymouse says:

        I thought leaf springs were the key to the Python’s vaunted trigger pull. Other than a high polish finish, what else makes a Python special?

      2. avatar RGP says:

        I don’t think the design would allow that… Pythons had a V shaped leaf spring.

    2. avatar Specialist38 says:

      ?????. Like a tapered bore and tons of hand-fitting?

      Those were only problems for bean counters looking to squeeze another dime out of each gun.

    3. avatar BubbaOtis says:

      you are correct, not at that price..

  8. avatar Klaus says:

    Bad move. If they match the quality of the originals nobody will want to pay for it. If they make them so people will buy them the they will be considered junk compaired to the originals. No winning for Colt.

    1. avatar Username says:

      Lol no. It’s Python enough to scratch the itch for the majority of folks. The collector market isn’t their target.

    2. avatar Setarip says:

      I disagree. If it matches the quality than it’s a steal. $1500 msrp means $1200 or less street price (after the price gouging ends). Right now you can’t get a LNiB python for less than $2k, and are you really going to carry and shoot it much?

  9. avatar Matt Williams says:

    Zombies hardest hit.

  10. avatar John Boch says:

    You’re paying for the name. And frankly, in this day and age, the name isn’t what it used to be.

    Just as their overpriced for what you got ARs didn’t support the company, neither will this over-priced revolver. Sure, a few buyers nostalgic for the olden days might buy one as a safe queen. A couple might actually carry them. But they aren’t going to compete to a tiny fraction of sales needed to support the has-been company known as Colt.

    And frankly, a $100-150 action job on a Smith will run rings around any snake gun.

    Instead of innovation, Colt’s desperate leadership goes back to the same old well. The only problem is that the men (and probably a few women) who helped build the snake guns that earned Colt its reputation have LONG since retired.

    For $1500 plus tax, a person could buy a P365, a LCPII, a thousand rounds of FMJ 9mm practice ammo, 200 rounds of JHPs and more ammo for the LCP II to practice with them use for self-defense. Along with carry rigs. And still have enough money for a class or two – to learn how to use both with some degree of competency.

    For those with plenty of spending money, they might buy it as a status symbol, but the number of people who appreciate Colt’s premium revolvers are trending down as they are dying off.

    GIANT PASS.

    John

    1. avatar No one of consequence says:

      So, to paraphrase, they’re selling nostalgia rather than capability.

      That can work to a point, but such markets tend to be fickle and not long-term stable. It also seems to me that for that price point the aficionados will demand perfection, while the broader “casual fan” market might be priced out.

      But I would be curious to see their internal market research reports on this.

    2. avatar Kahlil says:

      Then you’re not the target consumer. If you’d rather have a cheap 9mm plastic gun, it’s your right and prerogative. There is room in the market for more than compact, striker fired pistols ya know.

      1. avatar neiowa says:

        The target being fools with more $ than sense?

        1. avatar Mike V says:

          It’s 1,500, not 15,000. You guys are embarrassing yourselves.

        2. avatar kahlil says:

          Would I pay that much for it? Not likely, but it isn’t out of the range that some people would consider affordable. If I am going to spend that much for a handgun I’ll save up a bit longer and get something more unique and interesting, like the 6 Unica or give the Laugo Alien a whirl. If you don’t like it nobody is twisting your arm to purchase it. If someone’s going to go broke buying one, then that’s on them. if plastic striker fired guns are your thing, then have at it, your money. I’d like a 5″ or 6″ Rhino, but don’t want to shell out the cash for the new one my LGS has, a bit too pricey at this time in my life. If I found a nice used one, perhaps. See…self control, and I am the one that can comfortably decide what my personal budget is and what I want to spend on something like that.

        3. avatar I am not sure I can afford something so classy as the Ford Taurus says:

          That’s what I was thinking, Mike V. MSRP is $1500. The gun will go for $1299. That is not a huge price for a quality revolver. The people who are saying this is a status symbol have just told us the quality of their gun cabinet, lol. $1299 used to just be the standard price for a gun you could pass down for more than one generation. These guys with their closets full of Ruger Americans in .270 and four different calibers of the same pig-nosed Glock pistol are sort of outing themselves here, haha.

    3. avatar Bernard says:

      Dumbest comment from TTAGs dumbest contributor. Big surprise. No one cares what you think John.

      1. avatar Phil says:

        I second that. Dumb move to leave civilian rifle sales but when you have guaranteed money.

    4. avatar Tejano Viejo says:

      Sounds about Right to me !!!

    5. avatar J. W. Fincher says:

      Cool more Colts for me!!!

    6. avatar ChanceMcCall says:

      John

      All of my original snake guns went to RIA earlier this year and drew great prices. I suspect this new one will drive down the prices on the collector originals so I’m glad I unloaded when I did.

      That said, I might buy one of the new ones as a Bar-B-Que gun along with a belt rig from Mernickle Custom Holsters which will add another $4-500.00 to the package. It would look great in open carry states at parties.

      Different guns have different uses.

  11. avatar James Cox says:

    If the quality and smoothness of the action and the frame updates are what they say I want one.Hopefully Colt will send Hickock 45 one to demonstrate and he likes it They won’t be able to keep up with demand for them.

  12. avatar Tom in Oregon says:

    Nope. Not in stainless.

    1. avatar enuf says:

      Exactly.

      A classic revolver should be a beautiful, deeply blued steel, not shiny stainless like a brand new cooking utensil.

      1. avatar Geoff "I'm getting too old for this shit" PR says:

        “A classic revolver should be a beautiful, deeply blued steel,…”

        This in polished stainless is a *lot* cheaper than a properly-blued one done the old way.

        Anyone care to speculate how much more expensive? I’ll take a WAG at five hundred more for that foot-deep python blue…

    2. avatar LarryinTX says:

      Me, too, Tom. I have owned 4, all Royal Blue, and am a hard pass on previous stainless models, I would look at one of these from curiosity, but cannot imagine buying one.

  13. avatar No one of consequence says:

    Simply, no.

    My .357 needs (well, okay, wants) are – and have been for some time – met by a S&W TR-R8, fits my hand well and shoots like a dream, and MSRPs for about $150 less than the Python. While giving me 8 rounds rather than 6.

    If you want one buy one … I personally just don’t see the appeal. Apart from that, Colt missed my revolver-buying window.

    1. avatar ll says:

      My .357 needs (well, okay, wants) are – and have been for some time – met by a S&W TR-R8

      Spoken like a man who doesn’t own a UDR

  14. avatar MouseGun says:

    “Want one?”
    For $1500? No, at least until i know what the build quality is.
    I said it with the 4” Cobra; what does this offer that a Smith or Ruger doesn’t other than a higher price tag?

    1. avatar Bob h says:

      What products does Ruger make in that size with a comparable trigger? What non performance center gun does smith make that has an 8-9 pound DA trigger pull? The Colts ARE a cut above cheaper revolvers, not to mention that the King Cobra specifically has no direct competition from those 2 brands.

  15. avatar Vlad Tepes says:

    Don’t get excited just yet. I bet the frame is made from a junk modern casting and the internals are more than likely made of junk MIM cast parts. The price seems way to low for Colt to be making the gun of quality parts and have any semblance of workmanship.

    Another question: Is the bore made like the originals? The original barrel had a squeeze bore.

    Will the finish be in the old Colt Royal Blue or a quick dip which Colt will say “good enough”.

    The originals were put together with quality forged parts that took a lot of hand fitting and Colt is not about to spend even 1 penny training new people on how to properly fit these parts when they can use drop in junk MIM cast parts. This of course will result in trigger pulls that will be a joke compared to the original Pythons. All this sounds to me like it will be on gigantic rip off. A lot of hype for fools to blow their money on.

    1. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

      ‘I bet the frame is made from a junk modern casting and the internals are more than likely made of junk MIM cast parts.’

      Funny, but that describes the .357 that everyone describes as being ‘built like a tank’ (despite weighing the exact same as the forged S&W), the GP100. Modern castings (and heat treatments) and MIM have come a long way.

      1. avatar Anymouse says:

        The tank-like build and lack of a side plate are because Ruger uses a cast frame. The casting needs to be thick enough to allow the metal to flow properly, and a side plate would need extra machining.

        1. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

          The lack of a side plate greatly increases the strength of the revolver whether the frame is cast or forged. But modern heat treatment (and alloys) has made cast vs. forged virtually irrelevant. In this case casting allows for a stronger design that would probably be impossible to mass produce with forging, so casting is the better option if strength is the priority.

        2. avatar Vlad Tepes says:

          Castings are basically pure junk.

          They have millions of air holes in them called posterity. In order to make a casting as strong as a heat treated forging it usually must be made thinker and harder. The forging can be made much thinner and if given the right heat treatment is actually much stronger than a casting because if both are the same thinness there is no casting made that will equal the strength of a heat treated forging.

          Castings do not give when they reach their strength limit while a forging will. Its designed to be glass hard on the outside and soft on the inside so it flexes with out cracking or disintegrating.

          Ancient sword makers were well aware of this and made cast swords only for decoration but they heat treated forged swords to 3 different hardness’s. The edge of the sword was made super hard and sharp, the body slightly less hard and the core left soft so the blade would not shatter on impact. One popular sword made in England had to have the makers name and “original” engraved on it because so many rip off artists were making cheap ass copies of it in Europe. Fake merchandise of famous brands is not a new internet phenomena its as old as time itself.

          I HATE CASTINGS WITH A PASSION AND HAVE SEEN SO MANY CAST PARTS FAIL I HAVE LOST TRACK OF ALL OF THEM. MAY THE FIREARMS MANUFACTURES WHO USE THEM ALL BURN IN HELL FOR AN ETERNITY. AND AT THE TOP OF THE LIST IS SMITH & WESSON. ROT IN HELL SMITH & WESSON.

        3. avatar Vlad Tepes says:

          Corrections I meant to say porosity.

        4. avatar Mike V says:

          Vlad…Castings are pure junk? Why is everything that flows from your cranial cavity pure bullshit?

          Casting may not be the superior method if ease of manufacturing or profits are not taken into account. But the notion that they are all pure junk is ridiculous.

          As I’ve said before, why do you insist on being preposterous, it’s only obnoxious, has to annoy even you.

        5. avatar Tejano Viejo says:

          Yeah, vlad . . . if your intent is to annoy folks hereabouts, then you’re a smashing success !!!

        6. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

          Funny how I bring up modern casting and heat treating methods and alloys and Vlad counters with ancient sword making. Yes forging is far superior to non heat treated sand castings. But even if Vlad’s ignorant opinion wasn’t complete idiocy, in the case of the GP100, you couldn’t make a forged GP frame. Forging requires you to use a weaker design. Casting allows for superior design.

        7. avatar ElTejanoViejo says:

          vlad is an ignorant, idiotic troll !!!

    2. avatar Southern Cross says:

      And today Vlad the Fudd is back.

      1. avatar Phil says:

        Yes why people continue to feed this troll is beyond me or any of his other personalities.

  16. avatar Vlad Tepes says:

    Unfortunately at today prices for originals in excellent condition there are only two classes of people. Those who already have the elite of the .357 Magnums and those who never will.

    After decades of remorse for having sold two pythons I bought in the 60’s a couple of years ago I bought two more and for big bucks. One was junk and was sent back and the other was pristine and like new which I kept. I have only shot a couple of boxes .38 specials out of mine. Its in too nice a condition to start using full power .357 magnum ammo out of. I shot it once and put it back in the safe for future generations to admire and or drool over.

    1. avatar Bernard says:

      You’ve never even held a gun, none the less shot or owned one.

      1. avatar Chad C. Mulligan says:

        But he’s read about them in checkout counter magazines.

  17. avatar GS650G says:

    If the build quality and performance match or exceed the originals 1500 is a steal. If you want a gun made from metal finished to exact tolerances with wood grips you’re going to need to dig deep. I’ll watch reviews on this gun and if it meets the demands of a very skeptical gun public I’m in.

  18. avatar jwm says:

    I’m not a collector. This does nothing that a Smith or Ruger can’t do. I’ll pass.

    1. avatar Arc says:

      or… to everyone else’ outrage… A Glock.

      YEET!

      1. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

        You’ve never actually held a revolver in your hands, have you?

        1. avatar arc says:

          A few of them, some extended family are into that sort of thing.

        2. avatar Gov. William J Le Petomane says:

          You should try shooting one someday.

    2. avatar Peegeetwo says:

      Agree with you on something. Happy New Year!

  19. avatar possum, and the "Coons of Doom" says:

    Well hell, it’s not a Python after all. Just make them like they used too, that’s all we ask. New and improved now days seems like it means, ” short cuts cuts cost” Improved. I certainly wouldn’t like to have one, but skip new and improved.

    1. avatar Geoff "I'm getting too old for this shit" PR says:

      The crafts-people who made the old ones were paid to retire early or are dead of old age.

      That institutional knowledge is *gone*, likely never to be seen again in mass-production, I’m afraid…

  20. avatar former water walker says:

    I’m up for a 4″357. This ain’t it…

  21. avatar jonndoe says:

    I’m sure street price will be several hundreds less but, It’s just a Colt and let’s be honest with ourselves…..the name doesn’t mean as much as It used to we’ll see If they can earn our trust back.

  22. avatar Shire-man says:

    I’m into it just for the balanced look. 4in smiths don’t look right. 3in ones do however. And this has no Hillary hole.
    I’m willing to pay to get the look I like if it functions well enough. Too bad Taurus’ are still hit or miss since I like how most of them look too. The Colt brand to me represents Fudds, boomers, elitism, mismanagement and customer disdain on par with HK but I wouldn’t buy this for the name. If Taurus or anyone else made a revolver that looked like a Python and didn’t explode in my hand Id give them my money instead of Colt.

  23. avatar Jay in Florida says:

    I would pay for a quality gun. But never for a name.
    Ruger and S&W even Kimber has the cache Colt might try to. At this price not many will buy it to shoot or just to look at it.
    Sorry.

  24. avatar CD2 says:

    I’m interested. Put a reddot on it and kill yotes and deer.
    Not gonna do that to the 4 digit E series (whch has taken critters).
    IMHO 6″ blued the only way to go.
    Others don’t look as nice.

    Quit supersizing your McD lunches and you can afford a new Python.
    Quit doing that, and going to the movies, and you can buy an old one too.

  25. avatar Kendahl says:

    Clark and Cylinder & Slide want about $1,750 for custom GP100s. If Colt can match their quality for $1,500 or less, they have a winner.

  26. avatar Mike says:

    That’s a decent price given how the Python is built like a fine watch. They never fit my hand correctly, so I sold mine, a 6″ barrel version. I always regretted it. I’m not sure I like the idea of SS though. What I’ve really been hoping for is a new Diamondback in .22.

  27. avatar Specialist38 says:

    I have owned two Pythons and was never fan of the action or the weight.

    That said, they were works of art that also launched projectiles.

    I am surprised by the MSRP. Makes me question whether the new iteration will equal older specimens.

    If they are well made, I might consider a 2.5 inch stainless version with service stocks
    ( fitted with a T grip). This does away with the extra weight of that underlug that I hated on the 4 and 6 inch models.

    If they are equal to older specimens, the MSRP is a bargain.

  28. avatar Timothy Toroian says:

    Never owned one but the couple that I have shot had the smoothest factory triggers i ever felt on a .357.

  29. avatar MLee says:

    One of my great regrets in life was letting my Colt Python in nickle slip through my fingers and not own. If we only knew then what we know now. Two weapons that I KICK MY ASS OVER was my Galil ARM .308 and my Colt Python. Now if the new Colt is as nice, we’ll see. It really was a beautiful revolver that I dearly miss owning.

  30. avatar Stan says:

    Thete are no MIM parts, its all forged according to Colt. I’m in for two, 357 and 44.

  31. avatar Dyspeptic Gunsmith says:

    There were three things that made the Python what it was:

    1. The fit. The parts, especially the lockwork parts, were hand-fit.

    2. The finish. The finish was achieved by polishing the gun on leather-bound wheels to a very high level of finish before blueing, creating the legendary blueing job on the Python.

    3. The lockup. If you test a Ruger or S&W revolver in full lockup, you’ll feel very slight wiggle room. If you test a Colt, especially an original Python, in full lockup, you feel nothing, absolutely nothing. Nothing moves, wiggles, shakes, etc. There is no “slop” at all. This is the Colt “bank vault lockup.” This was a result, in part, of the hand-fit parts.

    I stand by my prior estimates that for a manufacture to make a Python as they had been made (with the previous finishes, especially the blueing) would cost over $2500 for someone to make a profit doing it. There have been some cost-cutting measures done here, one of such is to not offer the gun with the legendary blue job that Pythons had.

    1. avatar Jeff the Griz says:

      If this gun is nearly as tight as the original it is worth the $1500, even with the stainless finish. The last Colt revolver TTAG reviewed had some machine marks and wasn’t as nice as the old Colts I’ve been lucky enough to handle.

    2. avatar Vlad Tepes says:

      I agree. What Colt is currently offering has got to be a cost cutting rip off. It will blaspheme the Python name and go out of production in less than a year.

      1. avatar Mike V says:

        Vlad aren’t you late for your struggle session?

  32. avatar Charlemagne says:

    I really want one but for the foreseeable future it will be hard to justify the extra cost over a good GP100!

  33. avatar Ralph says:

    Hey, Colt, make it in Royal Blue and take my money.

  34. avatar Del says:

    My 21st birthday present, to myself, was a 8” nickel Python in 1981. $450.

    What shall I get for #60?

    1. avatar Dude says:

      Badass. I hope you kept it.

    2. avatar Jeff the Griz says:

      Inflation from 81 to today $450=$1,310.02.
      $1310 buys some nice things.
      If you want a new retro rifle I’d suggest the PTR91 or DSA Fal, or maybe a Remington model 8 or Savage 99.

      If you want a pistol there are too many options to list.

  35. avatar Ken says:

    “Want one?” Why, yes! Yes I do!

  36. avatar Bob bobb says:

    wait till rock island makes one for $399. They just came out with 9mm revolver that looks interesting

    1. avatar Mike V says:

      Go paint a yellow X on the nearest wall and pound your head on it a few times…

      C’mon, Rock Island?

  37. avatar Jim McKinney says:

    Other than the “Golleee” / “Gee-Gaw” factor … why anyone would prefer and/or pay more for the Colt over the out-of-the-box, tried & true, S & W Performance Center Model 327- TRR8 (Eight-Shot) .357 Magnum Revolver with its factory “smooth as silk” 8 (-) # DA & 3 (+) # SA trigger is way beyond me!

    1. avatar Vlad Tepes says:

      Yeah sure with its junk MIM cast parts, and its two piece junk barrel and its edm torched in rifling, I can hardly wait to get ripped off.

      1. avatar Tejano Viejo says:

        vlad, vlad, vlad . . . we all know that you’re not as tuff as your phony namesake pseudonym implies, so . . . just tone down the sarcastic rhetoric – ok???

  38. avatar Big Rob says:

    I have a Python from back in the early 70’s with 6 in barrel in blue. That was my first handgun I ever bought. I love shooting it and always will. It’s almost perfect and I get people offering to buy it whenever I go to a range with it. I’ll never sell it. These new ones won’t have the quality and the fine hand finishing the old ones do.

  39. avatar Minuteman says:

    They introduced one model so far. Only a fool would think they won’t offer up a blued one down the road. What it would look like remains to be seen. I have also heard the frames are forged, like that really matters. The high end market has always been a nitch market. Not everyone buys pistols over a grand. Colt knows that. I hope they do well with it. Their Cobra line must be doing ok. There are several models available now. That vent rib has always been cool. Time will tell. There may be a Python down the road in my future. I have several trade off guns to get there.

    1. avatar Minuteman says:

      Supposedly the old Pythons stacked horribly when shooting double action. They supposedly have made them mucho better.

  40. avatar John Hull says:

    They stopped making the original Python because it cost too much to make for a decent profit at the price they had to charge for it. Nice gun, but not one that ever grabbed my interest the way a Model 29 S&W did. The grip didn’t feel right either, being too fat at the bottom. Mechanically, they also had a tendency to get out of time with heavy use. Even if I had a spare $1500 to spend, I would not spend it on a Python, or even a .357 for that matter. Ruger has a new Redhawk 8 shot .357 for a lot less money, and a lot stronger gun. After the initial excitement on this wanes, I don’t see Colt selling all that many of these.

  41. avatar DoomGuy says:

    I wonder if they’re gonna bring back the Anaconda as well.

  42. avatar Hannibal says:

    It’s nice to see more wheelguns being made. Right now it’s Taurus, Ruger and Smith. Taurus is Taurus and you might get a perfectly serviceable gun… or not. Ruger’s are generally overbuilt- heavy but ‘sturdy’ (although I’ve not had good luck with their QA). Smiths are not what they should be and many of their models still have the you know what.

    If this manages to be nearly as good as their namesake or even as good as S&W models from before 1990, it’s probably worth it to those that want a big iron.

  43. avatar Frank says:

    I’ll keep my S&W model 19 pinned barrel recessed cylinder thank you.

  44. avatar Greg says:

    Yay! Now the vintage ones will drop in price.
    I always thought they were nice but overrated.

  45. avatar Derek says:

    Looks purdy.
    Hope I’ll get some more info during shot show.

  46. avatar irongrampa says:

    Long time back I shot a Colt Python and remember it as a sweet shooter. But I was raised on pistols, so yet carry and shoot my Dad’s 1911.

    FWIW, apparently that pistol was designed with me in mind. It simply FITS. But so does the Garand (also carried in service) plus the M1A.

  47. avatar Don Ward says:

    Good news from Colt,
    But I’m just here to laugh at the gloomy Eeyores in the comments p i ssing in their Cheerios over the news.

    1. avatar Minuteman says:

      I never understood the hate either. You would think that Colt just ran out and ripped off everyone of these idiots. It maybe a jealousy thing. Colts are expensive not just everyone is going to buy one. It’s almost like people are angry their so expensive. Then again top end Rugers, Kimbers and Smiths aren’t cheap either. I hope Colt does well.

  48. avatar bulletlauncher2020 says:

    I always liked the design but who wants to spend 2X or 3X on a revolver that’s outdated? Sorry but it’s nice to see it but it’s not going to save Colt.

  49. avatar Mark N. says:

    Most new revolvers I see out there are $800 and up. The Kimber K6 starts at around $700 and goes up to a grand–and that is a Cobra competitor. And we could always be talking Korth prices north of three grand. For the market, and the cost of Colts other guns, the price really is not out of line with the market. Now their 1873s, however, a much simpler gun that requires minimal fitting, is outrageous! Those now start at $1800 with the classic Colt black rubber grips. (Even then, they are always out of stock–maybe they keep them on their web page just for show.) There is always the King Cobra Target that costs “only” a grand for all you complainers.

  50. avatar Marinedoc says:

    Funny how some just keep harping about getting something cheaper. And that’s exactly what they get. Something cheaper. Have two Pythons from the 60’s that are new in the box (blue) and a SS that I have shot the hell out of including a boar hunt where I killed a fine European Boar that provided pork for some time.

  51. avatar bryan1980 says:

    Those who are hoping for the second coming of the original Python are going to be disappointed. First of all, it’s not possible at that price point. Secondly, it’s not possible at any price point in today’s world, because the craftsmen that made the original Python as great as it was are long gone, with no one to replace them.

    Now, a remake of something like the Trooper is entirely possible today. Wonder if they’ll do that?

  52. avatar jwtaylor says:

    If this is nothing more than an upsized King Cobra, then it is a solid price point for a great revolver. I’ve shot and reviewed most of the competition, and the Cobras are just as good if not better than any of them.
    My King Cobra now has well over 2K rounds through it (one of my kids is learning to shoot with it). No discernable change in end-shake or other obvious wear. The vast majority of the rounds out are .38SPL.

    I’ve already ordered a 4.25″. We’ll see how it turns out. If I like it, I’ll buy more. If it don’t, I have no doubt I’ll recoup my money.

    Making the grips interchangeable with the old Python’s was a very wise choice.

    For the folks that continue to say that Colt is unable to reproduce the original quality, or finish, of the Python, you’re demonstrably wrong. Take a look at the finishes coming out from Colt on the Single Action Army. Take a look at what is coming out of the Colt Custom Shop (where the original Python was born.) The work and finish on those guns are just as good as the Pythons ever were. Although, I am wondering if these will have the same tool marks under the top strap as the Cobras and King Cobra (my only big disappointment with the gun).

    The Cobras and King Cobras are selling out faster than Colt can produce them. Dealers and distributors can’t keep up with the orders. It’s nowhere near as bad as the SAAs, but they are selling out and are all successes for Colt. As much as I would much rather have a Royal Blue new Python, it would be stupid for Colt to change what is obviously a winning formula. Hopefully this will be an option in the future, or maybe from the custom shop.

    In short: review pending.

    1. avatar Al Bondigas says:

      For $1500 I’d want to see 1″ – 1.5″ groups at 25 yards (from a sandbag rest). Anything larger would just be a waste of $1000, considering that good used Smiths and Rugers are available for $500 or less. Sure, they’ll give you +3″ groups but (unless you’re being highly paid to shoot the balls off of gnats) who cares?

      1. avatar jwtaylor says:

        Since the smaller 3″ Colt King Cobra was able to accomplish that, with the right ammo, I would be surprised if the larger (and longer sight radiused) Python would not match that feat, again, with the right ammo.
        Especially on the 6″ version, precision means a whole lot. If you are buying a 6″ gun, you are likely target shooting or hunting with it. In either case, sub 3″ 25 yard groups from a rest are an absolute requirement. 3″ from a rest at 25 is more like 8-10″ kneeling at 50 yards. And that’s too big for game.

  53. avatar raybiker73 says:

    I’m glad to see the Python back, although I’m more of a S&W Highway Patrolman kind of guy myself.

  54. avatar David says:

    Where can you purchase this gun

  55. avatar Bill A says:

    I have a couple Pythons. IMHO they were always somewhat overrated: they are pretty, but the SA trigger is usually not as good as S&W triggers of the earlier (up to the 80’s) periods. The blueing is nice, no doubt. And yes, that Python action (the same action as the old OMT and OMM) can go out of time. But having said all that, the original Pythons are nice revolvers to own, and Ill probably never sell mine, even at the ridiculous prices that they seem to go for today. But. . . I’d bet a lot of money that this new “Python” is a far cry from the original.

  56. avatar Dave Jones says:

    Already ordered my 6 inch in Canada. $2200 up here! Wow! Oh well always wanted one but didn’t want to pay asking price for old ones.

  57. avatar Danny says:

    I paid $235 for my new Colt Python in 1982. I think I have a good investment!!

  58. avatar Lieutenant Fire Fighter Guy now says:

    When I started police job, 1972, Python was THE gun to carry. I chose a Smith & Wesson model 25.5 chamberd in 45 long colt round. 6 inch barrel, chromed. Carried in custom made Buscalero gunbelt. Shot Master every time,30 years.We could carry anything we wanted.

  59. avatar Fred says:

    I own 2 stainless 4″ made in the early 90’s. One shot maybe 50 times. One non fired other than factory checked. Have all papers, box, and cardboard shipping box. Guess I will keep them as paid around $600 for each one. These are originals. Hand fitted. I am sure the new ones will not compare with these.

  60. avatar Will Drider says:

    When your Company is mismanaged, raped and leveraded by conglomerate cash miners, bring for a few failed models to the market, fail to win price/value based contracts, kill sales to your overpaying civilian AR customers, declare bankruptcy a couple of times: what’s the fallback Plan? Bring back production of overprices revolvers that were previously killed due to stagnant sales! How about some no transfer bar SAA before they go ynder again.

    1. avatar jwtaylor says:

      ” How about some no transfer bar SAA before they go ynder again.”
      The currently manufactured Colt SAA made by Colt does not have a transfer bar. I don’t think the Colt SAA has ever had one.

      1. avatar jim mckinney says:

        Nooo, not the “Standard” SAA per se; however, but its offshoot/semi-clone, Colt “Cowboy”, most certainly did !!!

      2. avatar jim mckinney says:

        Nooo, not the “Standard” SAA per se; however, but its offshoot/semi-clone, Colt “Cowboy”, most certainly did !!! . . . https://www.chuckhawks.com/subscribers/product_review_page/colt_saa.htm

        1. avatar jim mckinney says:

          https://www.chuckhawks.com/colt_saa_revolvers.htm

          See Last Paragraph Below ~ RE: Colt “Cowboy” !!!

  61. avatar KADAR says:

    Greetings, how many new Pythons will be produced? Any clues?

  62. avatar Q2 says:

    excellent publish, very informative. I ponder why the other experts of this sector don’t notice this.
    You should continue your writing. I’m sure, you have a huge readers’ base already!

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email