Colt Forum banner

Anaconda's coming back

11K views 102 replies 40 participants last post by  BusaDave 
#1 ·
Just saw this on Colt's FB page.

More snakes!
Gesture Font Screenshot Communication Device Thigh
 
See less See more
1
#8 ·
Yes...it uses the Python action only somewhat scaled up for the larger frame...and it uses the same grip frame as the Python so stocks are interchangeable. That is a big plus!

It looks like Colt did it right...but time will tell but it's probably safe to say the new Anaconda will be a great seller if only Colt can maintain production and quality control.
 
#16 ·
I like V-frames, and the Anaconda I owned long ago was a performer. But I always thought it looked like a V-frame swallowed a goat and only partially digested it. The new one looks much better to me, with a more balanced, universally large appearance instead of big on the top and medium on the bottom.
 
#25 ·
Same price as the Python. Ouch!
 
#31 ·
I hope they do better on the new ones than they did on my old Anaconda in .45colt. It would not accurately shoot .452 diameter bullets worth a hoot. The reason I got such a good deal I guess. I tried heavy, light, jacketed, lead and different loadings with no success. A friend gave me some .453 plated lead bullets and suddenly I had a group. Compared it to my 625 smith. The difference was in the cylinders, I could see light around a .452 bullet sitting in the colt cylinder freebore but not in the smith. Turns out it needed .454 to be accurate. I assume that the .452 bullet would leave the case, bounce around the cylinder and hit the forcing cone at a random spot. When it left the bbl it might go high-low-rt-lt with no rhyme or reason. The .454 bullets don’t bounce and stay centered entering the cone the same way and hit the target in the same spot. It shot well enough that I used it in bowling pin shoots along with my 625. A beautiful Colt revolver.
 
#33 ·
From what a Colt honcho said, due to the larger frame they had to change the trigger geometry slightly which, in his opinion, made an improved trigger compared to the Python. That's a subjective statement...maybe even promotional hype. We'll see when new examples get into the hands of the public.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BusaDave
#40 ·
When you go from medium to large frame, either the trigger or the hammer has to be different (or both I guess, but that would be dumb). S&W went with making a larger hammer, so triggers are interchangable between K and N frames. So Colt goes with the different trigger; this makes more sense to me. Hammers get broken WAY more than triggers do.

Not that Colt followed that logic when deciding which to make bigger...Probably comes down to, which part costs less to make...you know, bean counters.
 
#39 ·
I imagine Colt did some market research before deciding on a 6" and 8" for the initial release. I would've preferred a 4" and 6" but that's just me. My preferences are not based on marketing research.
 
#41 ·
I happen to be a fan of MIM. Yeah, it's not as pretty, but it works REALLY well. When S&W went to MIM internals on their revolvers, the actions were smoother than any made before WW2, and more importantly, factory returns plummeted. That's because MIM parts come out of the molds dimensionally perfect, and that's a very handy feature. My MIM S&W 617 has a smoother action than my Python or OMT.

When customers bring me S&W's with MIM internals for action jobs, I never even have to touch the hammer or trigger. If there is any hitch in the action, it's likely the cylinder, not the MIM internals. S&W's MIM internal parts are pretty darned good...just not real pretty.

Anyhow, I thought the hammer and trigger were EDM, and only the small parts were MIM on the new Python?
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top