The new model 3″ Colt Python is the same exceptional revolver as the 4.25″ and 6″ Pythons released in 2020, but with a 3″ barrel. I wasn’t entirely sure that would be the case.
Since Colt re-released the famed Pythons, the American icon was sold to Czech Ceska Zbrojovka Group, aka CZG, or affectionately known around the world simply as CZ.
Lots of people lamented the “fall” of an American firearms manufacturer, but most long-time Colt fans, (and I certainly fit into that category) were happy to see the change. CZ has made quite the reputation for breathing new life into failing, sometimes obsolete brands and if there was any company to pick up Colt and get them on the right track, it’s CZ.
In picking up the new shorter barreled Python, CZ chose to change nothing about the design or apparent execution of the pistol. They’ve been putting out the new model Pythons that are every bit as good, (and unfortunately at similar slow rates) as Colt did on their own. Instead of changing things, they put the focus right where it should be…getting this one right. It shows.
The only difference between these guns and the ones released in 2020 is the barrel length. The shortest barrel released so far, the 3″ Python has but one lonely “vent” over the barrel, unlike the two atop the 4.25″ and three on the 6″. The barrel sports the same gorgeous recessed crown and bright rifling.
The 3″ barrel was an offering with the original Colt Pythons released decades ago, but it was a fairly rare one. Not as rare as the 3″ King Cobra, which wasn’t offered for sale until the new model King Cobra was released in 2019.
That begs the question, since there’s already a bright stainless double action 3″ .357 Magnum Colt revolver that was released three years ago, why another?
Because the King Cobra isn’t a Python. Although the internals may be extremely similar, the King Cobra is very much a concealed carry revolver. That’s exactly how I carry it. It’s ease of carry and magnum-powered capability make it a great all day, everyday revolver.
The Python was never built to be a concealed carry gun. The Python was built — then and now — as a crossover between a target revolver and duty gun. It absolutely excels in that role. The 3″ version blurs the lines even more, with a shorter, but still fairly heavy front-end.
Sitting atop that muzzle is Colt’s high-visibility changeable front site. All of the factory versions come with an orange ramp, but other inserts are finally starting to become available. The same adjustable rear sight sits on the 3″ version as on the other Pythons. This one moves well, not too easily, and with solid clicks between each setting.
Since the frame is exactly the same as the other new Pythons, the action and trigger remain the same as well. That’s a very good thing. The new model Python’s trigger is just as good, if not better than the originals, with less stack and less weight.
This 3″ Python’s double action pull measured slightly heavier than the previous versions, at 8 lbs. 8 oz. even. The single action pull, on the other hand, measured right along with the 4.25″ and 6″ versions I’ve previously tested, at 4 lbs. 4.3 oz.
Cylinder end-shake measured at .003″ with a feeler gauge. Each cylinder throat measured at .358″ on a minus pin gauge set and the major bore diameter was .357″.
You might think the full walnut grips would look out of place on a 3″ barreled revolver. But the same grips that looked great on every other Python look just as good here. And they feel every bit as perfect. Colt must have secured a very solid supply of these checkered walnut grips, as they consistently put out great examples on each of the guns I’ve seen. This one is no exception, with deep checkering and rich colors throughout the wood.
That full grip and the weight and shape of the traditional target style frame are responsible for the relatively easy shooting of the 3″ Python. Short-barreled .357s are well known for their recoil and blast. The 3″ Python really only suffers from one of those issues, as recoil is significantly diminished when compared to the King Cobra.
I like the King Cobra now even more than when I got it years ago, but the Python easily bests it for all-around shootability. Long strings of heavy .357 Magnum ammunition with the 3″ Python will test your ear protection, but not your hand.
With a solid double-crush grip, fast follow-ups are very doable. The Python has the grip, the sights, and just enough weight to keep the muzzle down and firing, as long as the shooter is doing his or her part.
It was easy putting 200 rounds of .38 Special and another 100 rounds of .357 Magnum through the 3″ Python prior to accuracy testing. I cleaned the packing grease from the gun prior to shooting and gave it a bit of Lucas Oil, but never cleaned or lubed it again until the review was over. The gun never failed to fire, the cylinder never failed to advance in time, empties never failed to fall from the cylinder with a push.
In short, I had zero reliability issues with the gun whatsoever. With the exceptional reliability the previous new model Pythons I reviewed showed and continue to show, I have no doubt as to the longevity of this version.
The 4.25″ and 6″ versions I previously reviewed both showed outstanding accuracy, printing 1″ groups and better at 25 yards. I couldn’t quite match that with the 3″ version. With everything else the same other than the barrel length, I’ll attribute the slight loss in perceived precision to the shorter sight radius.
That said, the 3″ Python will shoot very good groups with a range of projectiles. Sadly, I didn’t have any of the Barnes 140gr XPB rounds the other Pythons liked so well, but the same 158gr Armscor 38 SPL FMJ shot 1.5″ five-round groups at 25 yards untimed and off bags averaged over four shot strings.
More fun was the Buffalo Bore 180gr JHP round moving at an advertised approximate 1,350 fps from the 3″ Python. This very capable round printed 1.8″ five-round groups under the same conditions.
The best shooting round was a home-rolled round made from Cast Performance’s 180 WFNGC hard-cast bullet pushed by 5.5gr of CFE Pistol, moving about 950fps. That round scored 1.4″ on average. All groups were shot in single action on a fouled bore.
Again, still, no other major manufacturer does a factory finish like Colt. Like the previous new model Pythons, the 3″ comes with Colt’s “Semi-Bright” stainless finish. For those of you Python aficionados out there, it’s much closer to the old “Ultimate Stainless” on the original models. It’s the kind of finish you’d send other factory revolvers to the gunsmith to achieve.
Put it all together — Colt’s “vented rib” short barrel, the full walnut grip, and that gorgeous finish — and the end result is a revolver that’s every bit worthy of the Python name.
Specifications: 3″ Colt Python Revolver
Caliber: .357 Magnum
Barrel Length: 3 in.
Finish: Semi-Bright
Frame Material: Stainless Steel
Grips: Walnut Target Stocks
Height: 5.5 in.
Overall Length: 8.5 in.
Weight: 42 oz.
Width: 1.55 in.
Capacity: 6 rds.
MSRP: $1499
Ratings (out of five stars):
Style and Appearance * * * * *
I’m not usually a fan of 3″ .357 magnum wheel guns, but this Python does short without being snubby. The style’s great and the finish is exceptional for a factory stainless gun.
Customization * * * *
Front sight options are finally available, as are a wide range of grips.
Reliability * * * * *
Perfect.
Accuracy * * * *
For a 3″ gun with a relatively short sight radius, accuracy was very good with a wide range of bullets and charges.
Overall * * * * *
CZ has knocked it out of the park with their first Python. The 3″ new model Python handles the magnum cartridge with style and grace. I looked for something to knock this gun out of 5 star category and I just couldn’t justify it. I have no need for another Python and no desire for a 3″ .357 Magnum, except for this one.
Excellent review, but the OAL must be a typo. Colt’s online manual doesn’t list this barrel length yet, but shows the other models as barrel length + 5″.
measured from the dingus to the hoohah.
Both of which are best carried concealed on the far side of the gracht…
It is! Big thanks for the catch.
JWT,
No problem!
Could you chronograph test the 3″ vs the 4.25 and 6” versions?
Nope. Don’t have the 3″ anymore.
Meh!
Can’t compete with my Rohm 357mag.
A Rohm? Fer real?
To be fair, they do have two redeeming features. They help you get really good at failures to fire, and they disassemble for cleaning during the range session — no special tools needed (except for the one holding the gun, natch).
I have some trigger time on 3 inch barreled revolvers. I’ve never owned one. I’m always surprised at how much more capable the 3 inch tube is over a 2 or 2 1/2 inch tube. I’ve never owned a Python. I’ve shot a few but I never cared as much for the Colts as I did the S&W and the Ruger. For .38 special I still think the K frame Smith is the tops and for magnums I prefer Ruger.
My BIL is a retired cop. He started with his Python and during his tour the department mandated semi auto’s. As soon as he retired the Python was back on his belt. It’s one of those guns. A rabid, dedicated following.
my ss security six was 2.75″. it’s was a sad story involving dementia and police.
this was a nice review of well done revo.
My primary EDC is a 3″ GP100 (Wiley Clapp). I also occasionally carry 4″ stainless GP. The 3″ weighs in about 5 ounces lighter than the Python (pretty sure the King Cobra is lighter) and while I don’t doubt the Python has a better stock trigger pull, a 10# hammer spring and an 8# trigger return spring dropped pull weights down to 9# (3″) and 8-1/2# (4″) in DA and 2-1/2# and 3# respectively in SA. The Altamont grips (rubber w/ checkered wood side panels) have a great feel and don’t protrude so much for CC.
I wouldn’t mind picking up a Python someday but for carry (unless I get butt implants) I think I’ll draw the line at the 40 ounce 4.2″ GP100.
Its a nice gun, I’ll give you that, but I’m kinda over 357 at this point. If you want 357 power, get a 10mm. You’ll get 357 power, less recoil, larger diameter bullets, much higher capacity, and the ability to mount lights and lasers at a third of the cost.
But I don’t need or want any of those things? A 5 shot revolver is fine for me. And if I wanted more I could go .41 which knocks 10mm’s dick in the dirt.
Numbers look good except for price and availability at which point I see 45 gap and 5.45 x39 more often (well ever really) than 41. Neat round but reloading only up my way.
10 is certainly the nearest pistol round to .357. As far as performance the .357 has a slight edge when loaded to the max, but the bigger difference is higher SD bullets. On 2 legged critters the 10’s lower SD bullets might be an advantage although the higher velocities from the .357 should mitigate that. When it comes down to big 4 legged critters the .357 has a distinct edge.
Otherwise it’s all down to revolver vs. semi-auto with all the same advantages and disadvantages as any other round – pistol wins on round count and the amount of flair you can pin onto it (to borrow an Office Space reference) revolver wins on most everything else.
Most off the shelf 10mm is watered down though. Off the shelf .357 is not.
*Less off the shelf 357 magnum is watered down but aside from sig most 10 I have seen for fmj is watered down and more than a few “defense” loads from major companies are only marginally better than their 40sw options. Most of what we see up here is magtech and seller & bellot but need to get my hands on a chrono to get a better idea on where those fall.
I’ve shot quite a bit of .44 mag, magtech and it seems fairly adequate to me. Don’t have a chronograph, but judging by recoil/rapport and things I’ve shot with it, it seems to be a pretty decent load.
Stuck with winchester white box for the 44 mag rentals but when I go that route I will look for it. I just know that for 10 the Underwood/Doubletap/Buffalo bore feel one way, the Magtech/Seller & Bellot feel a good bit less that way, and the Hornady (Critical Defense so who knows) felt even less so. Need a chrono to get a better handle on how much is perception/expectation vs actual differences.
The only max (not +p) loads you’re likely to find on a shelf in .357 magnum say Buffalo Bore on the side of the box.
I thought watered down 10mm was called .40 S&W.
Lights and lasers!
I like a 3″ revolver and a Python. My favorite S&W .357 is a model 65 3″ round butt w/pinned barrel and counter sunk chambers. Factory red insert front sight. I put a set of Pachmayer Professionals on it. It’s damn near perfect. I still have my 6″ stainless Python that I bought in ’84. We have a long history. This 3″ Python is interesting. I want to hold one. Good “follow up” review to the original.
I have a S&W .357 model 65 4″ that wish was 3″ and it sports Pachmayer grips with one of the smoothest trigger I have ever seen. I’ll trade it for a 3″!
Hush, no deal. I did have a second 3″ 65 that a best friend finally now has. He wore me down, but at least it’s still in the family. Keep that 4″ 65. It’s a great revolver.
Gadsden, well that is strike 2. A range officer at the local sheriff’s range has two(2) Sig Sauer P210s, aka P49, and he won’t even talk about selling either one. The old 65-7 is a keeper for sure.
“..to pick up Colt and get them on the right track…” They survived off of military/ LE contracts but continued to sell expense yet obsolete (due to advancements in today’s competitive market) firearms to the public. Outside of the new python they haven’t had a new firearm press release in over a decade? Why would you spend $900 on an A2 AR15 when you can get a full furnished AR $800 from S&W, Ruger, PSA, Davidson, Bushmaster, Adams Arms, American Tactical, etc.
The 1911 market has gotten tighter too with match grade offerings hitting the shelf at $1200. Colt has remained expensive and selling the same products since the 1980’s.
While I generally agree with your sentiment, no firearm that uses readily available ammunition is ever ‘obsolete’.
Thinking about it my greatest regret is not a woman. It’s letting go of that S&W Model 24 3″ round butt Lew Horton in .44 Spl. That was a revolver.
You did what?
Were you running a fever on that particular day?
I shot my first 357 revolver last month. Boy the recoil was incredible!!! It was a Smith and Wesson with a 6 inch barrel. I’m glad I took the chance to test one out. And I will not be getting that gun. It’s not for me. I didn’t even try using 38 specials.
Chris T in KY,
A full-size revolver with 6-inch barrel should not be a problem for recoil. Perhaps you were using an improper grip? And shooting .38 Special out of a full-size revolver is downright fun.
F.Y.I. I instructed two teenage gals who were average height and strength and weighed about 125 pounds how to shoot .44 Magnum. They loved it and asked for more. The key was proper grip and technique.
I have an original 6″ stainless Python, early ’70s vintage, which I don’t shoot all that much with full house loads, for obvious reasons. I’d hate to break it. I picked up one of the 3″ King Cobra’s a couple of years back for use as an every day shooter, and it’s a dandy little revolver. I highly recommend it. It’s every bit as good as revolver as any of my Rugers or S&Ws. Based on Mr. Taylor’s review, it sounds like the 3″ Python is even better than the 3″ King Cobra. That’s a good and happy thing. A plethora of good wheel guns on the market are a sign God loves us and wants us to be happy. 🙂
Tracy, I think you had a typo. The stainless Python was introduced in the early 80s. I remember buying the Guns & Ammo magazine with a 6″ stainless Python on the cover in the PX. i think that was sometime in 1982. I ETSd in October of 83. Just in time for hunting season. Bought myself a present of a 6″ stainless Python because I thought I deserved it.
Actually, it was 84 when I bought that Python, but hunting season straddles New Year’s in N FL.
83 was the first stainless Python, with the Ultimate Stainless finish released in 84.
HAVE S&W 6″ B AND YES , ALSO 357 IS HIGH PITCHED HARD ON THE EARS IF NO EAR PLUGS .
HOWEVER CAN’T KEEP MY HANDS OF IT USING 38 CAL ROUNDS . MORE AMMO PLEASE .
THINK YA MISSED OUT NOT SHOOTING SOME 38 ROUNDS THROUGH IT . SMOOTH RECOIL .
KMOW COLT MAKES QUALITY PISTOLS .
THANKS FOR INFOR , ALWAYS .
Bought my first Python in the late ’60s, always a fan of the 4″, would never even consider a 2 1/2″, but this 3″ looks like it might be doable. My big gripe about the new issue is that I was and am crazy in love with the “Royal Blue” finish from the Custom Gun Shop, stainless always seems like a cheap imitation. I think I’d still go with the 4 1/4″, but at 76 I’m sort of beyond new guns anyhow, the family doesn’t even want me to buy a new Porsche! Can you imagine?
3″ S&W model 60, with .38 +P loads, is a nice CCW revolver for seniors with limited hand strength. A slightly heavier 3″ .357 revolver would allow the use of full power .357 mag rounds, without the resulting felt recoil issues of a “light” revolver. YES – that extra inch or so of barrel does make a difference in CCW performance, without the hinderance of an even longer barrel. Longer barrels on a .357 are better suited for handgun hunting or home defense use. The 3″ PYTHON appears to be in that “sweet spot” for a full power .357 load size CCW revolver.
They are still located in the anti state of Connecticut? Pathetic.
Pretty but not gonna be a thing for me. Nothing less than 4” in that caliber of for nothing else hunting. It’s sure not an edc that I’ll carry. That long barrel is on a wish list though
For gloss, I prefer blued. I’ve handled only one Python, some 40 years ago, a blued 6 that was so smooth it brought tears to my eyes. As for CZ’s Pythons, I’ll take your word for it–and that is one sharp looking revolver, despite my preference for bluing. They recently sent me a 4″ accessory barrel for the Dan Wesson 445, and it looks great on that big frame but I haven’t had a chance to burn any powder through it yet.
Was it Colt that made the insanely beautiful blued finish? I remember seeing a handgun with a blued finish that looked almost opalescent–having varying subtle colors embedded within the blued finish. (Instead of a uniform super dark bluish-gray bluing, it had dark blue with hints of reds, purples, magentas, and other colors.)
If Colt made that bluing, any wild guess whether Colt would ever release their snake-gun remakes in that beautiful blued finish?
That’s the famous Colt “Royal Blue ” finish. And no, don’t expect one to roll off the line anytime soon.
I’ve had a thing for revolvers since I was a kid and shot my Dad’s. 22, the first gun I remember firing. My first handgun purchase was a Ruger Blackhawk and I thought it was the coolest thing ever in it’s Uncle Mike’s holster. Now I have a new 4in. Python and it’s the highest quality handgun that I own. It’s impractical in every way but it feels like what I always imagined a great revolver would feel like. Guns like this are what make collecting and shooting fun. Hopefully my kids will remember shooting the Python and dream about owning a Manurhin when they grow up.
I pray all our kids will get to enjoy shooting. Let’s keep the right to have our fun!
Let us get things straight, colt is not making the Python again, its just capitalizing on the name. The new gun has cheapened lock work, which is by the way completely different. Gone is the leaf spring replaced by a coil spring and of course this makes the trigger pull much heavier than the original “real pythons”. The internals are all junk MIM Castings and the frame is a junk casting and it has a two piece barrel.
The new fake Pythons should not cost any more than a currently made cast iron Ruger. Even at todays outrageous scalpers prices you can still buy a Ruger GP for half the price of the fake Colt Python.
If you look at the picture of the muzzle you will see the barrel is a two piece barrel which makes the barrel lighter in weight and of course less accurate. Do not expect the fabulous accuracy you got with the “original Pythons”.
If you look at the wood grips they are a far cry from the really nice wood that was put into the original pythons.
And despite the hype in the article this new fake python has not yet been tested with a lot of lengthy high round count shooting so whether it will hold up compared the longevity of the much cheaper Cast Iron Ruger GP is still to be learned.
The smart gun buyer never buys a newly designed gun unless it is been on the market at least 2 years because most gun companies today find it cheaper to test their gun on the public rather than test it themselves as the greed monger C.E.O’s and stock holders are clamoring for more money.
Colt is banking on what P.T. Barnum once said “There is a sucker born every minute” and that goes double for the gun crowd.
Well, my FIL was issued a Python by the FHP and he seems to think the new one is every bit as good as his issued version from the early 80s. The older versions weren’t exactly perfect either. They went out of time, dragged, and would eventually lock up and require a skilled gunsmith. Just because they aren’t the exact same doesn’t mean it’s not as good or better, it’s just different and time will tell. I won’t lose my shirt if the new Python starts breaking down, but it’s been worth the price to me so far. It would be nice if they could do a royal blue finish though. 3 inch in Royal Blue, show me the pre-order list.
“P.T. Barnum once said ‘There is a sucker born every minute'”
He was speaking about anyone who believes anything that you say, you cowardly lying asshole.
“…replaced by a coil spring…”
Folks, this what happens when you have no idea what you’re talking about and are dumb enough to cut and paste other wrong things people say. You spout dumb shit that is easily proven wrong by hundreds of images online, including reviews actually included in the article.
Don’t do drugs kids.
Yeah, I cracked open my 2020 Python to troubleshoot some stuff and that thing had a leaf spring, not a coil spring. What a dingus.
“…it has a two piece barrel.”
Dacian, if that’s even true, why is it a problem? My LCR has a “two piece” barrel. My Dan Wesson has a “three piece” barrel! 🫣🤯
CAn you even acquire a Python in Armpit, Ohio?
Cool story, bro.
Meant for dacian the dumb.
Still a cool story for real lol. If I’m in the market for a Python, I’d just go for the 6 inch. I’d say there’s a limited market for a 3 inch range gun. If I was carrying it, I’d get a 3 inch, 7-shot Ruger.
I have the Ruger 7 shooter but I got the 4,25 inch barrel. Here in CA we have a minimum barrel length for carrying while hunting.
I bought the magnum as a boonie gun, mostly. It’s also a decent range toy.
Ohio requires at least 357 caliber, straight-walled cartridge, and now a minimum 5 inch barrel (was 6 years ago) as measured from the front of the cylinder or chamber to the end of the barrel. I can’t use my 357 sig pistol, but I can use my 350 Legend AR pistol–go figure.
I have an OG Python, the 4.25″ new Python, and a King Cobra. Love ’em all, and for me the new Python outperforms the OG. I carry the King Cobra in cool weather, it’s significant smack to your palm when shooting hot loads. But it has me covered in the short barreled .357, and I also love my 1989 Smith 686 4″ and my Dad’s Ruger Security Six. My Super Redhawk took down a nice buck when I couldn’t shoot my rifles after heart surgery, so obviously there’s a fondness there. And the Ruger Alaskan is just a blast.
Those are some of my favorite wheelies, but what I’m REALLY currently in love with on the revolver front is my recently acquired S&W Model 29-2 in mint condition, in the box, with tools. Barely fired.
I just stare at it.
Shoot it!
I reckon. That’s my normal inclination. I had a 29 but not a dash-2, and, man, it’s pristine, barely has a hint of a turn line. Built in 1975, according to serial number. Deep, deep blueing. Can’t even tell if it has been fired, the man I got it from has stacks of blue boxes acquired over the past 30 years or so, and he’s starting to turn some loose to friends–for lots of money.
I’m getting a Highway Patrolman from him next. Or something.
@JWT:
“ That begs the question, since…”
You used “begs the question” incorrectly. Begging the question is assuming the initial point, like circular logic… not raising a question again.
You may resume being an Israeli-government shill.
Such jealousy. JWT has the life you fantasize about so you lash out at him from the sidelines.
Maybe English isn’t your first language? Or maybe dropping out at 15 wasn’t such a good idea for you after all?
From Webster’s: to ignore a question under the assumption it has already been answered.
Which is why you see the “Because the King Cobra isn’t a Python.” as a “well…duh” answer.
But I thought I was the resident Israeli government shill! No fair!
But Seriously Folks, if you get a chance to visit, it’s a nice place. Don’t believe all the headlines. The Tel-Aviv beaches are lovely, the architectural sites are fantastic, and the scuba diving in the Red Sea is top notch. Just don’t touch the fishes in the Red. Some are venomous, some have sharp spines, some are both of the above, and some are just plain bad tempered. But if you don’t bother them they won’t bother you.
Below are quotes from Guns and Ammo who is and has been a prostitute of the Gun Industry and even they ran it down.
Take a look at the picture, the hand is not a double stage hand and the article already tells of the gun not locking up dead nuts like the original. Loose lock up means less accuracy because the cylinder is not in line with the barrel forcing cone.
quote———–With the Python cocked, there is some play in the cylinder,——–quote
The barrel-to-cylinder gap measured .004 inches,
Note: The original Pythons had .003 gap
quote———The single-action trigger on our sample required 5 pounds, 7 ounces of pressure with a little evidence of creep.———–quote
Note: The original Pythons had on average 3lb trigger pulls.
I stand corrected on the coil spring but take a look at the difference in trigger pulls between the old and the new. Even though both have leaf springs there is vast difference in the trigger pulls. Lets face facts even the cast iron Ruger has the same weight of pull in the 5 lb range and its again half the price.
I stand double by my original statement. Anyone who pays $1,500 for this fake Python is a complete fool. Lets face facts the gun shortage is not going to last forever and when things get back to normal the resale value of a used new fake Python will be very low compared to the constant rise in price of the original “real pythons”.
Two years ago I bought my last Python for $1,200 and it has already gone way up past what I paid for it to an average of $2,500. There is a 3 inch Python on auction right now for $12,000 My first two Pythons I paid $260.00 for pack in the early 70’s. You will never get this kind of return on the new Colt Python.
https://www.gunsandammo.com/editorial/colt-python-review/375565
You were not around in the early 70’s. jerry p. from canton ohio. You are a mentally ill fascist and a pathological liar.
Have nice day.
My Lord, you know so little you don’t even understand how much you have wrong in just one simple comment. That was staggering.
Everything is relative. I kind of think that people who pay for 1st class on domestic flights are fools, but they probably have enough money to justify wanting and paying for it. $1500 isn’t really that much, if we’re being honest. Most of us probably got more than that in “stimulus” payments over the past few years.
Accounting for inflation, Pythons cost just as much as they used to. I went over that in my original 2020 Python review.
I have heard that comment so many times it sounds like a broken record but in reality our purchasing power is not the same as it was in the 70’s. I bought two Pythons for $260 apiece in the 70’s, now try and tell me I could just as easily come up with $3,000 for two Pythons today.
Just as an example gasoline was 21 cts a gallon and I rented an apartment for $30 a month with all utilities paid. We now have gas at over $4.00 a gallon and a cheap apartment in my neck of the woods can easily cost you $1,000 a month and some have raised their rents to $1,500 a month. Wages have stagnated over the last 50 some years for the working man while the rich have increased their income by 900%
As one can see the Python at $1,500 today is way out of the price range for most working people today and especially for retired people.
dacian. Unlike you I was around in the 70’s. 21 cents a gallon for gas? 30 dollars a month with utilities paid?
You are out of your mind.
Gasoline was not 21 cents a gallon in 1975. It was closer to 60 cents and in just a few years it spiked to over 1 dollar. If you could find a decent apartment for $30 a month it must of been in a very small town, because in most of California that would of been impossible, except in a flophouse in the ghetto. By the way you can thank your senile leader for gas that is now close to $6 a gallon in California.
I hate to pile on, but who are we supposed to believe, you or our own eyes? If you long for recognition as an authority (and apparently you do), then gain some actual authority first. You can start by Googling critical thinking and applying it’s principles.
Dacian:
I’ve seen a lot of cast iron in my time. Many machines that I worked on in my career had cast iron frames. Trust me, Ruger revolvers are NOT made out of cast iron. Yes, they have frames that are investment castings, but the material is STAINLESS STEEL (with some models in carbon alloy steel). Referring to an investment cast steel frame as “cast iron” has the same kind of effect on me as would running your fingernails against a chalkboard. You should be ashamed of yourself.
Ruger has a whole subsidiary devoted to investment casting of precision parts:
https://beta.ruger.com/casting/PDF/PineTreeCastings.pdf
You can see from the alloys you can specify that only two of the alloys they cast are iron, and one of those isn’t suitable for much of anything in guns.
None-engineers who spout this stuff are really annoying. Then again, non-engineers who spout off on stuff like energy policy, solar power, wind power, electric cars and “smart grid” nonsense also are really annoying.
Can’t afford one?
Colt has been a dumpster fire of a firearms manufacturer for 30 years.
They somehow managed to go bankrupt during crisis driven runs on firearms . . . TWICE.
Colt was “led” by a management team that was primarily interested in extracting as much cash from the company into their own pockets as possible.
As a resident of CT I have known people who have worked on the shop floor, in the custom shop, and in the office. All have shared stories of absolute abysmal management.
In contrast, I’ve also known people who have worked with and for Sturm Ruger. Ruger is the antithesis of Colt. Ruger has never taken a loan. They have always funded expansion through free cash generated by normal business operations. They’ve obviously never filed for bankruptcy. They never even laid off a worker until 2017. For the first time.
For years I’ve hoped that SR would take over Colt. But this is just as good. I am sure that NOTHING but good will come from CZ’s take over of Colt. Its about time the company had a management team that actually cared about building a business.
I’m surprised CZ hasn’t improved Colt’s shabby website.
Dude:
Plus, one!
As for the Ruger facility in Prescott the employee turnover rate is abysmal. Just because you make a lot of money does not mean you know how to treat employees decently.
Man does that gun photograph well.
JWT’s secret to the photos is right there in some of the photos’ background. He’s working from an area with lots of indirect light.
Most people who photograph guns need to get indirect light on the gun from all sides to get better pictures. People need to look into using a light box to photograph guns. A large cardboard box with white shelf paper and a light aimed at the shelf paper, not the gun, can help many people take better photos of guns, especially blued guns.
Give me back the 4″ barrel version of the Colt Diamond Back in .38 spl. That is a gun worth owning.