Previous Post
Next Post


Let’s get this out of the way. The Korth/Nighthawk Sky Hawk starts at $1699. The Mongoose [above] retails for $3499. The Super Sport .357 runs $4799. In their defense, a box-fresh Smith & Wesson Model 687 V-Comp costs $1559. And lists an “investment-grade” 8″ Colt Python at $4399. You want an heirloom quality revolver, you gotta pay big bucks.

I shot Korth’s lineup at SHOT Show media day. I’ve never fired a smoother, more accurate and solid revolver. I’m delighted that Nighthawk has partnered with Korth to offer these firearms for sale in the United States. As reports, the Korth/Nighthawk wheel guns will ship “this month or next.”

“These will be Korth-built with a Nighthawk influence,” said Travis Noteboom, vice president of sales and marketing at Nighthawk, a locally owned gun manufacturer in Berryville. “The actions of these guns is like nothing built in the U.S. It’s like a Swiss watch.”

[TTAG writer] Ashley Hlebinsky, the Robert W. Woodruff curator of Cody Firearms Museum in Wyoming, said that while she couldn’t comment on Korth pistols specifically, European firearms in general, from pistols to rifles and shotguns, have a time-tested lineage that some American consumers find alluring and desirable.

“Germany has been making really good guns for a really long time,” she said.

All the Korth revolvers Nighthawk will sell have laser-etched Nighthawk logos with parts machined from billet steel and aluminum. The handguns can be customized with a variety of options including an additional 9mm cylinder for the .357 Magnum models. The revolvers will be sold directly through Nighthawk and through Nighthawk’s network of authorized dealers.

Plans are for Nighthawk to receive about 100 guns a month with the ability to go up to 200 monthly. Noteboom said that as of early August there were nearly 400 customers on the waiting list for a Korth revolver.

Before financially-focused TTAG readers scream bloody murder, I submit the following quote from none other than Giorgio Armani: “The difference between style and fashion is quality.” Korth revolvers have style.

Previous Post
Next Post


    • Not being willing to spend $4,799 on a revolver doesn’t make you a cheap bastard.

      The Super Sport really is amazing, though. Some pics and details were in the 2016 SHOT Show Roundup post not too far down the page (easiest probably to control+F search for Korth though). That gun is intense.

      • These are beauties. Like Colt Pythons. I don’t do collectibles. I carry a streak of old school practicality in me. So no 4700 dollar revolvers regardless of name tag.

    • And there you would have the exact representation of fashion as opposed to style.

      These are some beautiful pistols, but at that price point I think I’ll stick to my S&W 686. Paid $276.00 for it brand new in the box in 1987. New ones today go for somewhere in the $650.00 range. It’s a sweet shooter and a piece of art in itself.

      Perhaps it could best be considered that the 686 is like owning a Dodge Viper instead of the Korth Ferrari.

      • Nah, the 686 is more like a Mustang or Camaro. If the Viper was a revolver it would be a .500 S&W unported 4″.

        I get the appeal of the Korth though. Some people want lots of quality guns and for $5k you can get a pile. But if you only want a couple, or have very deep pockets, why not get top shelf?

  1. One of these days, people will start to realize what the Federal Reserve has done to their currency. Hopefully that day comes before we’ve completely emulated Zimbabwe.

    • Considering that a dollar has the same buying power as 4 cents did for most purchases (food, energy, shelter) did 100 years age (when Fed was bought through congress), I think the Fed has a lot to explain. Not that I’m expecting any. The Fed has failed on every aspect that it was touted to fix.
      /sarc/ Just wait until negative interest rates and helicopter money comes to really get the economy back on its feet. /sarc off/

      • I do understand the sarc, but to be honest, there are those economists who would tell you that it really is better to Fedex a bunch of families a stack of C-notes, than the inevitable next round of QE.

        The indicators are the same as the ones in 2008, except they’ve been inflated even beyond where they were last time. The bursting of this latest bubble is as predicable as the sun rising in the east. We may be able to tun on the electronic printing presses and QE our way out one more time. Maybe.

        That would be the one good thing about a Clinton presidency – the collapse would come on her watch, after 8 years of Obozo, and the public holds the Pres accountable – despite the fact there’s generally nothing they can do about it.

      • So you think people were better off 100 years ago?

        You suffer for what is called money illusion.

        • I am not sure anyone would argue that things were better 100 years ago. What is being said is that the purchasing power of the dollar for like goods has declined 96% over the past 100 years, with the largest decline coming after the abolition of the gold standard by Nixon.

      • It is actually $0.05 but tomatoe, tomato. That equates to an inflation rate of 3.09%. Which is about what population growth has been during this period. Which is exactly what should happen if you understand money supply.

        Since we are on it, by mandate, the Fed’s job is to ensure price stability, which is another way of saying that the long term inflation rate = long term population growth = nominal GDP growth. It has done a pretty fucking good job if you think about it, despite what Glenn Beck, Ron Paul, and the rest of the know nothing cranks have to say.

        • Yeah right. Please go read Thomas Picketty’s work and get back to me on how much you really understand v. what you have been forcefed and swallowed with glee.

        • Um….

          No offense but it is kind of clear that you do not understand Pikkety’s work or I totally totally miss the reference. He studies income inequality; if you could boil his thesis down to one sentence it would be that capitalism eats itself because the rate of return on capital is so much greater than the rate of return on labor. To counter this, he argues for the redistribution of wealth. Not sure what this has to do with monetary policy. Coincidentally, very few of those that say they have read his book actually have. There was a funny article about this that took data from kindle and cross referenced with amazon reviewers. Only like 15 percent of those that reviewed it had actually completed it.

      • The Fed has actually done quite a good job at what it was tasked with. Yes, inflation has given the dollar less purchasing power, that is because of a constant low level of inflation being maintained, which is a good thing ad it means the Fed can reduce the money supply if necessary without causing deflation. In the meantime, we have become a far wealthier society than what we used to be.

        The Fed’s adhering to the gold standard is part of what caused the Great Depression, as they let the money supply contract.

      • Printing more money, now there’s a good idea! Why hasn’t anyone thought of that before?

        Following WW I, in 1919, the value of a Reichsmark was pegged at 20 per 1 British Pound in order to allow for the reparations Germany owed to be paid in an orderly manner. The Weimar Republic, in economic difficulties, began printing Reichmarks in an attempt to cover its debts and by 1929, just before the U.S. stock market crash, the exchange rate between the Pound and the Reichsmark stood at 13,000,000,000:1 (Thirteen trillion to one). People in Germany were burning Reichmarks in their fireplaces because it was cheaper than using them to buy coal.

    • In 1971 when we were still on the gold standard one dollar had the buying power of one dollar.

      Last week that same dollar was worth eighteen cents..

      • Gold is a religion, not an investment. It has no yield, the cost of carry is significant, and is worth only what the person that sold it to you tells you. Remember how all the goldbugs were squawking at the beginning of QE? Guess what, the US did not turn into Zimbabwe and if you sild your stocks and bonds a went to gold, you got destroyed. If you think hard money regimes are so great, just ask Greece and Spain, which are currently fucked precisely because they have no control over monetary policy. Additionally, if you think life was so great before the Fed, do some research into what economic volatility looked like in the late 1800s and early 1900s. There were six depressions in 25 years immediately preceeding the creation of the fed. If you want to criticize your political bogeyman, go ahead, but there is no surer way to lose money than to mix politics and emotion with financial decisions.

        • Geez…The Gold Standard had little to do with tying the USD to a wondrous metal, but had everything to do with limiting the $$$ that the Federal Reserve could issue/print.

          The reason that a 2016 dollar is worth only .18 in 1970 dollars has everything to do with the fact that the printing presses have been rolling non stop to cover the checks Congress has been writing. Why do you think the National Debt is over 18 trillion? Has EVERYTHING to do with the abolition of the gold standard.

        • And the only reason the USD is still stable is because it is the reserve currency of many other nations and most international contracts are denominated in USD. Just wait, China is trying to get out from the USD, and when they do it will not be a pretty picture.

        • Not sure where to go with that one. If the point that you are trying to make is that USD is a reserve currency, then yes, you are correct. Not sure what you are referring to in that “when China gets out from under the dollar?” Do you mind elaborating?

        • Right, that is the point. The gold standard was a hard money policy, which put a limit on dollars, but also limited monetary policy. Again, if you think hard money is great, ask Greece. They are fucked because they are on the euro and have no control over monetary policy. They cannot devalue because they are beholden to the ECB and the cost of their goods and services are not competitive as a result. There is a reason why no credible economist is supportive of hard money. It is retrograde and simplistic. Do a bit of research into life before and after the gold standard and be sure to look at things like productivity and GDP per capita if you think I am lying.

        • Ad, Ugh. When it all comes crashing down – which it certainly will, hard money is all that matters.

          Been this way since the invention of ‘money’ and the acceptance of ‘fractional banking’ as somehow sustainable.

        • So you think fractional banking is somehow a bad thing? Which is another way of saying that credit is a bad thing. You are an active participant in fractional banking if you have a mortgage, a car payment, credit cards, health insurance, life insurance, financed your kids college tuition etc. etc. It is how banking has always and will always work. It is the very definition of banking. Think of what your life looks like without these things. You would be a fucking serf.

  2. If I want a 6 shot snubby I’m going Rossi. Really really like the new Kimber snubby…THAT I may be able to afford.

    • I got to inspect and handle one of the new Kimbers this past weekend. I have to say I was impressed. If I would have brought more money with me, I would have left the store with it. $850 out the door.

  3. I sure wouldn’t turn one down as a gift, but if I had to spend my own money on a European revolver, personally, I’d rather have a cherry Manurhin MR-73. Style and history in one.

  4. My all-time favorite revolver trigger is a S&W 686+ Performance Center, 7-shot, that my local LGS has for $999. I think it’s so good, I don’t even think a revolver trigger for SD use needs to get any better. These Korths are way over-priced and I’m not sure the comparison with a mint Python is on point. No Korth is ever going to be as iconic as a Python.

    • I’m a huge fan of my eight-shot S&W Performance Center Model 627. The trigger is as good or better than any other handgun trigger I’ve ever fired.

      If the Korth/Nighthawk is as better than a Performance Center revolver as it’s price seems to indicate, I can only image what a treat it must be to shoot.

      Now if only they built it in a seven or eight-shot configuration…

      • i love my pc 627’s…thought the performance shop meant they came with “trigger job’s” – until i replaced springs and polished parts , now DA down to 6.8lbs…very nice

    • My all-time favorite revolver trigger is a S&W 686+ Performance Center, 7-shot

      @JohnF, independent of price, I’d rate the 686+ PC just slightly behind the revered Colt Python. I’ve shot them side-by-side and the Smith & Wesson more than holds its own.

      On a price-dependent basis, IMO the 686+ PC outshines every revolver available today. Period. It’s simply great.

      • Spot on.
        A 686 is very high in my list of “must haves”

        These korth/nighthawks sure have my attention.

    • Going to stick with my absolutely reliable AMERICAN MADE RUGERS–I have had my fill of expensive over rated German crap in the past

      • I’ve had two lemon SP101s in a row, I’m starting to look around for some older S&Ws to try and break my streak…

        • Two lemon SP101’s?–I have never seen even one–in the very unlikely chance you did get one sub par, Ruger would absolutely make it right–I have known several people that would take a brand new gun apart, regardless of brand, to go over to make it better–they never did work right–

      • I have had a handful of Rugers and they all sucked balls. As the guy at my LGS would say, they are 15 percent cheaper because they are only 85 percent done when they come out of the factory. I doubt there is one single buyer in which the decision comes down between a North and a Ruger gp100.

  5. Way too much money for what you get. I could buy a tool box full of Smiths that are as good. Or a few Smiths and one Colt Python. Why would I pay that kind of money for this gun? Over priced.

    • Things are worth what people are willing to pay. Just because you don’t recognize or appreciate the value of something, doesn’t mean it isn’t worth the asking price. I’m sure Korth will do just fine moving these revolvers as quickly as they can be produced.

      • I think Jim is talking about value based on utility, rather than worth. I tend to agree with him. Value based on utility is more stable and dependable. Worth based on today’s selling price is often fleeting and unreliable. I think the financial crises of 2007-2009 illustrates that.

        In a SHTF situation or financial collapse, the fetish/collectible gun bubble is going to burst, and guns will be valued as tools, based on their ability to reliably and accurately send bullets downrange. Will a Korth be worth more than any good Ruger or S&W then?

        • An Ikea rocking chair does the same thing as a Sam Maloof rocking chair. One will retain its value, even if it dips for a while, one will not.

        • Very,very true, RF. But in a real SHTF situation(fingers crossed it never happens) which would you rather bust up and feed into the fire you’re heating and cooking with?

        • Personally, I’d rather cook over a burning Maloof chair than an Ikea one. Hot dogs roasted over burning particle board and polyurethane taste funny and the fumes make me feel woozy.

    • I have a 686-1, a 686-4, a 3″ Talo GP100, a Dan Wesson Model 15 and 15-2, and an old 3″ Manurhin MR 73. I’ve had them all apart and done polish and spring jobs on the Ruger and Dan Wessons.

      The Manurhin however simply outclasses them all in terms of build quality, trigger smoothness and pull, balance and ergonomics, and consistent accuracy. There really isn’t a comparison – none of the other revolvers even come close to the MR 73. And mind you, this an old police gun from the ’70s, parkerized and in many areas worn down to the bare metal.

      I’ll be placing an order for the $1699.00 Sky Hawk.

  6. Those are beautiful revolvers. I’m curious, though, why not design them with seven or eight shot cylinders? S&W has clearly demonstrated that this is possible. I don’t know why any modern manufacturer would engineer a new revolver that was -1 or -2 capacity out of the box.

    • For that kinda bank I’d be hard pressed not to look at say an R8, some action work and a couple other revolvers or w/e to go with it.

  7. “I shot Korth’s lineup at SHOT Show media day. I’ve never fired a smoother, more accurate and solid revolver.”

    My feelings from a SHOT Range Day a few years back… I never considered owning a revolver of this price until I fired one.

    • Are they really that much better than a Smith and Wesson or a Ruger revolver? As in almost 8 times better since they are about 8 times the price?

      How much more “smooth” is the trigger in double action mode? And what does that mean in more descriptive, technical terms? Is the double-action trigger a constant 5 pounds without any stacking and a surprise break?

      • Some of these evaluations are much like food or wine.

        Yes, there’s a bunch of pretentious wine snobs out there, but hear me out on this.

        20 years ago, I would have been right there with you, saying “a revolver is a revolver is a revolver. S&W, Colt, Ruger, who gives a rat’s rear end? One spins this way, other other spins that way, it’s all 19th century nostalgia.”

        As I learned more and more about guns, I came to appreciate the differences in them. As I learned more about gun finishing, I appreciated yet more aspects about the perennial Colt vs. S&W tiff in revolverdom (Ruger doesn’t play into the game until you get into single action revolvers, and then the brutally tough construction of Rugers wins big).

        As I learned more, I came to appreciate the unparalleled refinement of the finish and lockup on Pythons – yet learned to also recognize that the Colt action could be knocked out of time pretty easily (want to untime a Colt? Use it to pistol-whip someone… there ya go). Want a really reliable revolver, but still have some refinement? Get a S&W. Want a really reliable revolver that is all utility and no refinement? Get a Ruger.

        And so on.

        Just as there are wines that go better with dessert vs. a steak dinner or vs. an fine Italian dinner, there are different guns for different folks’ considerations. I’m sure the fit and finish on the Korths is every bit as exquisite as the other Korths I’ve seen, and since I know what it takes to fit up a revolver to get that lockup and finish, I’d appreciate it.

        Some people really like mechanical refinement. There’s a British “best gun” that has lockwork you can drop out of the bottom of the action – and sit there in front of your fire, with a snifter of fine single malt whisky by your side, oooh’ing and awwing over the locks. Do you need to be able to remove the locks out of your SxS shotgun for regular cleaning? Heck no. Do your locks need to be jeweled and gold plated? Pfffft.

        But at least one best gun company makes such a thing, because that’s what their customers want.

        Same deal with Korth. They’re making a gun for a particular customer base – and I’ll wager that customer base probably also owns a brace of Lugers with matching numbers.

        • Dysepctic Gunsmith,

          Thank you for the detailed response. I guess I would have to hold one and dry-fire one to fully appreciate it.

          For now, I am stuck with a Ruger GP-100 and a Taurus Raging Bull (in .44 Magnum). Note: the double-action trigger on the Taurus Raging Bull is FAR superior to the double-action trigger on any other revolver that I have ever had the privilege of handling.

    • I would say your figure is way off. Just because you don’t have disposable income to afford something like this doesn’t mean the rest of the folks here don’t. Want an example? Look around and see how many folks have bigger homes and nicer cars than you. Quite a few right? Solution? Make more money and stop bitching. Problem solved.

      • Re the look-around test, wouldn’t that require knowledge of many TTAG commenters’ home addresses and personal situations?

        • Actually it wouldn’t. He could take a drive around town in his Ford Fiesta and gaze upon the gated communities which he can’t enter. Likewise he could look left and right at any major intersection and see $60K+ cars. Not really that hard.

      • I made it up. The point of my comment was not to debate numbers but the fact that TTAG seems to only care about those guns that your average joe can’t just go out and buy without taking out a 2nd mortgage. As an average income american want to know what affordable or budget guns work the best. I guess the best question is “How can I build my arsenal for the lowest price and still be able to count on those guns when I need them?”

        • Average is a relative term kind of like your made up 70% number. You want bargain gun reviews then go subscribe to Nutnfancy’s YouTube channel. You can have the latest 2 hour review on Kel-tec’s, Glocks, and other cheap guns. Some folks like and can afford the finer things in life. Maybe you will get there some day.

        • Actually average income for the “doing well” american is 40k a year. THAT is not a made up number.

        • Yeah that’s a household income. Not an individual income. Is there a reason you’ve got a problem with what I say? Could you not buy your talent or something? You strike me as the kinda mall ninja that thinks “Oh if maybe I buy better gear it will make me an operator” when in all reality you can’t fight your way out of a paper bag/

        • Yes, my problem is with your original comment lamenting of another TTAG “expensive” gun that the average joe can’t afford. The fact is no one wants to see reviews on average or cheap gear (cheap meaning garbage quality) although TTAG does a pretty good job of mixing it up and reviewing firearms at various price points. Your original comment came across as someone butthurt that he can’t afford a product in a review. You further cited made up facts on “average” individual income as well as how many TTAG readers could afford a firearm such as this. This makes you look like a fool, which may explain your personal income struggles.

          One of the things folks who have experience with firearms and accessories/gear will tell you is that if you buy cheap you will buy twice. Everyone wants a bargain but in the world of guns you get what you pay for in many regards. Pony up and buy quality gear and it will serve you well for years to come. You don’t have to be rich or affluent to afford nice things, but you do have to have common sense about money, savings and personal finances.

          I don’t buy cheap gear due to knowledge, experience, as well as a fair amount of disposable income. In time you may learn the same but maybe not based on your piss poor attitude. The mall ninja insult was laughable…much like your ability to quote facts about income and what people can afford on the Internet. Now run along and go pull that last tooth you have and place it under your pillow. I hear if you are good the gun fairy will bring you a nice shiny hi-point. High speed, low drag….for trailer park operators.

        • Oh right, i forgot that when I buy a glock that I have to buy them in pairs because my first one will fail me. You are the biggest idiot i have seen on this website. I’ve seen multiple Taurus 1911’s out perform a Kimber. But Kimber is more expensive so it has to be better. Need i even bring up H&K? They prove that a high price tag and a name doesn’t make something better. I assume that your “experience” consist of some wicked hall monitoring and vicious keyboard typing. Don’t you have a Chris Costa video to pleasure yourself to or something?

        • I agree. I do not want expensive, OVER RATED European crap. My experience with the so-called wonder crap out of Europe, Germany in particular, is that their stuff is NOT worth it. Plenty of top notch USA made firearms to choose from.

        • Mr. Woodcock tells it like it is.

          Christian, if you can manage to save $50 a week for nine months you’d be able to afford a Korth-Nighthawk Sky Hawk. If you buy one I am certain you’ll never regret it.

        • Would rather spend the same amount on a bunch of American Made Rugers. Better gun, better value.

        • Geez Christian, get out of this thread with all your poverty. You’re making the rest of us look bad by association!

    • I suspect that most of us could buy one and still survive the winter. The question is, for how many of us is it worth the opportunity cost.

      • I could buy one right now but wouldn’t. I’m happy with my S&W 686 .357 magnum which was ~$700. To each his own though. Some people dig expensive wheel guns which is fine with me. The great thing about guns is there is a flavor and price for just about everyone out there.

        • “The great thing about guns is there is a flavor and price for just about everyone out there.”

          The crappy thing about guns is that, no matter what flavor you prefer or what price you pay, there’s never a shortage of assholes waiting to tell you how much you f*cked up with your purchase.

  8. Not to continue the pile on, but if Kimber can demonstrate the effectiveness of modern metallurgy by making a six shot snubby with a shaved cylinder, there is no excuse for a high-end piece like this to not be 8 rounds.

    …and $1500 less.

  9. Meanwhile, I “suffer” with my Ruger gp100, and think of the 3k worth of ammo I can use in lieu of the price difference.

  10. As purty as these look, I’m glad I was able to get a S&W 686 and a GP100 when I did, and only paid 1/8 (each) of the price of the Mongoose. 😀

  11. How much trouble would I get in if a bought one and put a red dot on it? I mean the Mongoose, not the one with rails.

  12. I saw an article recently where you could sell a testicle for $30K, or something like that.

    Just throwin’ that out there…

  13. I need one of these Korths like I need a $500 German-made screwdriver that is too pretty and expensive to actually use for driving screws.

  14. Even 30 years ago when Colt Pythons weren’t prohibitively expensive, a Korth revolver was outrageously expensive. If I lost my mind and decided to spend that kind of money on a revolver I would want a straight Korth, not a Nighthawk/Korth that will undoubtedly have less collector value.

  15. More power to the Smith fans. The revolvers they love are surely as good as they say they are. I have a Nighthawk-Korth Super Sport that is, yes, crazy expensive and, yes, a pleasure to have and to hold. It’s made of the world’s best steel alloys and the workmanship is superb. Do I shoot six rounds thru one hole with this instant heirloom? Only in my dreams. I’m a mediocre shot but one hell of a proud owner.

  16. Robert- thank you very much for writing this article; I would not have found out about the Korth/Nighthawk offerings initially if it were not for your TTAG article. I’ve ended up with a Mongoose and a Skyhawk and could not be happier with the quality, accuracy and performance of both these revolvers. I’m also grateful for the folks at Nighthawk for their investment to bring Korth to the US. Thank you again-


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here