Colt Python vs S&W 19/66
- Thread starter BJung
- Start date
Brownstone322
New member
To me that comparison is apples and oranges. The Model 19/66 are K-frames, and the Python might better be compared to the larger, heavier S&W L-frames (586/686). The 586/686 might not have the mythical reputation of the Python, but people seem to love them.
I would think your Model 66 would approximate the Colt King Cobra Target.
I would think your Model 66 would approximate the Colt King Cobra Target.
Burbank, I have a hunch that (all things being equal, round count, load power, etc.), your lockwork will last longer than his Colt. Just my opinion having owned and shot lots of both makes and their various models over the years, but S&W double action lock work has always been far more durable over the long haul, as compared to the Colt double actions. The Colt Python is an awesome gun, but there is Nothing wrong with a good S&W K or L frame revolver!
It's mostly personal preference. The old model Pythons (before the re-introduction of the Python this year) are almost all beautifully finished and have a lot of hand fitting (there were some that had more of a matte stainless finish when Colt factory workers went on strike). The Python triggers are usually smoother out-of-the box than Smiths, but stack some at the end of the pull. A Python will generally need its timing adjusted before a SW pistol. For sheer enjoyment of a revolver, I like Colts, especially the Python, better than Smiths. But, if I had to carry a revolver in the zombie apocalypse, it would be a Smith and Wesson.
I have three Pythons, three SW M19s, and a SW M65 (sort of the fixed-sight version of the M66).
I have three Pythons, three SW M19s, and a SW M65 (sort of the fixed-sight version of the M66).
Truth be told, I'm a Smith guy...but will say that the limited time I've spent with a friend's Python has left me with an elevated preference for a Smith M19 or 66. For carry purposes, the lighter weight of the S&W "K" frames is preferable, as is the better DA trigger on the examples I've shot. Too, as has been pointed out, if you need work on the gun, it's far easier to find parts and qualified armorers for a Smith. All that said, my Smith M27 (an "N" frame) with its 5" bbl. is a joy to shoot, easy to tote if you don't mind the weight, and has by far the best DA trigger I've ever shot. YMMv Rod
BubbaBlades
New member
You could combine the Model 19 and a Python like these guns. You get the easy to work on S&W action and the barrel weight and accuracy of the Python.
A Colt Python was my first duty gun. I switched to a S&W Model 66 when they became available in the 70s because my Marine Patrol duties caused damage to the Python's blue finish.
Both the Colt and the S&W had zero mechanical problems while shooting thousands of rounds of both .38 Special and .357 Magnum. (I was an active bullseye shooter and reloader for more than 20 years).
I would say Python is between 19 & 586. That is between K & L frame. No argument that the Colt Python is a fine revolver. It won’t take the steady diet of magnum loads anywhere near a L frame S&W. The S&W is more durable action wise. I would say same thing about the Colt Diamond Back 38sp. Very accurate and slick action. The J Chiefs Special Target is bit smaller and not as slick, m15 a bit larger but both S&W are as accurate and more durable than DB.
I had 4” Python bought new that I never shot a magnum in. Shot HBWCs and it was tack driver. Diamondback was most comfortable 38 I ever owned and very accurate. Long ago I went with S&Ws. No mechanical troubles and never got a lemon, all P&R era guns.
I had 4” Python bought new that I never shot a magnum in. Shot HBWCs and it was tack driver. Diamondback was most comfortable 38 I ever owned and very accurate. Long ago I went with S&Ws. No mechanical troubles and never got a lemon, all P&R era guns.
I was always a S&W guy, but admired the Pythons. Even back in the '70s though, when I bought I don't know how many new S&Ws, there was concern about the V-spring Pythons going out of time. I shot a Python or two, and while beautiful guns, didn't care for the DA trigger pull that stacked for about the last 3rd. of the trigger pull. FWIW, my V-spring gun at the time, a pre MK III Trooper, did go out of time. My current V-spring type Colt, a 3 5 7 model, is still in time but leads an easy, non-endurance testing, life.
I know the Pythons are considered .41 frame guns, and have the massive appearing lugged barrel. But did anyone notice they have a relatively thin forcing cone, similar to the K-Frame S&Ws, minus the flat cut across the bottom. Back in the day, I did see a fellow officer's Python with damaged forcing cone, as well as a S&W Model 19 or two. We were issued the now infamous 357 125 grain JHP ammo. After some of us started carrying L-frame revolvers, I never saw or heard of a damaged forcing cone with any of those guns. I admire the Pythons, and expect their ruggedness is similar to the S&W 19/66,etc. I don't believe the original Pythons are as durable as the S&W L-frame guns.....ymmv
I
I know the Pythons are considered .41 frame guns, and have the massive appearing lugged barrel. But did anyone notice they have a relatively thin forcing cone, similar to the K-Frame S&Ws, minus the flat cut across the bottom. Back in the day, I did see a fellow officer's Python with damaged forcing cone, as well as a S&W Model 19 or two. We were issued the now infamous 357 125 grain JHP ammo. After some of us started carrying L-frame revolvers, I never saw or heard of a damaged forcing cone with any of those guns. I admire the Pythons, and expect their ruggedness is similar to the S&W 19/66,etc. I don't believe the original Pythons are as durable as the S&W L-frame guns.....ymmv
I
If I weren't limiting the reply to .357 revolvers, then yes the 29 would be in there.
To be fair, I would also include the .357 Ruger Redhawk, if you can find one. I like large, heavy strong DA .357s, and don't know a better one than the S&W N frame 27/28.
Even though the Python was an outstandingly well done gun, I never thought what you got was worth the asking price.
In the olden days, Pythons were the only factory production .357 that did not require a trigger job out of the box. That was done by real skilled smithies in the Colt factory. It's also why Pythons have always been much more expensive. The current MSRP being $1499.00 vs the $893.00 for a Smith 19. The Smith needs a trigger job, but that doesn't cost $600. Which is the difference in MSRP.
"...L frame was introduced to..." Nope. It was actually to compete with the GP 100 and it's full under lug barrel. Pythons existed long before the 'L' frame was even an idea.
"...L frame was introduced to..." Nope. It was actually to compete with the GP 100 and it's full under lug barrel. Pythons existed long before the 'L' frame was even an idea.
Jim Watson
New member
Python may have been assembled by skilled workers but unless you like a double action that "stacks" like mad, it is not a good trigger. Cost of a Colt Custom trigger job was $90 when I got mine in the 1970s.
Frank Glenn now charges $360 to get the stack out of a Colt, $200 for a match trigger on a Smith.
Frank Glenn now charges $360 to get the stack out of a Colt, $200 for a match trigger on a Smith.
I've owned Smiths since the early '60's...better than a dozed of them, and shot literally dozens more as the head range officer on an Air Force qualifying range, shot Bullsyeye competition for over a decade, and have yet to fire a Smith K or N frame that needed a "trigger job" "right out of the box".
I'd opine and with a lot of support from other experienced shooters, that Smith's SA is good to go on 95+% of their guns even in today's offerings, and their DA triggers have always been the industry standard....YMMv but mine differs drastically.
'Bout says it all.
Rod
Last edited:
I've owned both of them over the years, and the only thing I really have good to say about a Python is they are pretty. I don't like the triggers on them, or the grips. I have seen many Pythons that spit like crazy out of the barrel/cylinder gap, and never had that problem with a Smith. I ordered a Python once to use for Silhouette shooting, and it was soon retired. I contacted Colt as mine had a barrel/cylinder gap of just over .010 and Colt just told me that was well within their specifications.
I'll stick with Smiths the rest of my life as something pretty is okay, but I'd rather have some that perform as I want them to.
I'll stick with Smiths the rest of my life as something pretty is okay, but I'd rather have some that perform as I want them to.
buck460XVR
New member
Iffin' my memory serves me right, the L-Frame was introduced in 1981 and the GP100 in 1985. Maybe those boyz at S&W had a crystal ball?