Colt Forum banner

1 - 20 of 26 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
73 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Nobody likes a whiner. I don't want to be one, but the April 2020 issue of Guns & Ammo had a review of the new Colt Python (by Keith Wood) that has given me reasons to whine. I am of the opinion that many younger gun writers are not qualified to do the job. Sure, they can construct artistic sentences and provide accurate assessments of plastic pistols but sometimes beyond that, they are not qualified. I believe the Guns & Ammo review of the new Colt Python is a prime example of modern-day unskilled gun reviewing.

To review a gun properly, you need to thoroughly understand it. Keith Wood obviously does not understand Pythons. I'm sure he's a nice guy, but if I was a Colt Rep or Exec, I would be madder than all hell about this review, which essentially tells us, nothing.

Rather than wax poetically about the review's shortcomings, I will provide an itemized list.

1) He states that the reason for the original Python's demise was the buying publics' preference for semi-automatic pistols.

2) The TV Series "The Walking Dead" was a big part of the skyrocketing used-Python values.

3) He mentions the updated lockwork kind of in passing. The main fragility issues (it would appear) were blown top straps. The fragility apparently wasn't timing, timing, or timing, it was blown top straps. So, the big news is that Colt increased the top strap by 30% and is using a stronger stainless alloy. While this is true and beneficial, rather than providing key details about the lockwork improvements, his descriptions make the new Python sound more like a "Python Replica" as opposed to what it REALLY is, an evolved Python.

4) He mentions that Colt didn't skimp by using a sleeved barrel. Well no, they didn't. His explanation behind the "sleeved barrel concept" makes it appear that the only reason for a sleeved barrel on a revolver is to slash costs. He is wrong. The typical reason for a sleeved barrel is to provide lengthwise "tensioning" which can theoretically increase accuracy. It was stupid to even bring it up.

5) He compared the action feel of the new Python action to..... an Anaconda. TOTALLY different animals. Right now, you compare a new Python action to an old Python action, or you don't bother.

6) A contributor to the superior double-action trigger pull are the long bolt stop leads. What???

7) He noted play in the cylinder, which he says, quote: "Isn't always a bad thing". Mr. Wood; pull the trigger, keep it pulled, then attempt to wiggle the cylinder. It's called "Bank Vault Lockup".

8) I guess the grips don't have "Rampant Colt" medallions but rather "Prancing Pony" medallions. Hey; read the article. You can't make this stuff up!

9) "Surprisingly, the heavy 158gr bullets shot best". Um, yes Mr. Wood. Pythons have always preferred heavy bullets due to the rifling twist.

10) In the end, he heaps lavish praise onto the Python, then said "However, this isn't the same Python from 1955". I really feel that it's safe to ask: "How in the hell would he know?"

11) THEN he says: "Not to offend collectors, but the new Python is in many ways superior to the original". At last, he did get something right, but I really don't know how he did it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,319 Posts
There are no standards required to be a journalist. Sadly...that holds true throughout the journalistic profession...not just gun writers. All you need to do is to generally be able to conjugate and string some words together and look good if you have a job on camera.

Also...keep in mind that gun magazines...like others...have to make a profit to stay in business. If they say bad things about an advertiser's product the ad money could disappear. If the writer says something good about an advertiser's product the inaccuracies don't matter as long as the publicity is good. Besides...do you really believe some of the management at Colt really understand their product? They're businessmen first and gun people last.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
149 Posts
Snidley is right,in my opinion...from what I can tell this new Python is a winner...no, its not an orig. python, but in a lot of ways may be better! time will tell.....I love my old guns, but will own a new Python, and hopefully a .22 will be coming soon
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
73 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
There are no standards required to be a journalist. Sadly...that holds true throughout the journalistic profession...not just gun writers. All you need to do is to generally be able to conjugate and string some words together and look good if you have a job on camera.

Also...keep in mind that gun magazines...like others...have to make a profit to stay in business. If they say bad things about an advertiser's product the ad money could disappear. If the writer says something good about an advertiser's product the inaccuracies don't matter as long as the publicity is good. Besides...do you really believe some of the management at Colt really understand their product? They're businessmen first and gun people last.
I truly do understand what you are saying. My frustration originates from my experiences with Colt revolvers over 30+ years in business and my experiences with the new Colt Python due to owning a 4.25" and a 6" plus performing action jobs on several. The Python is a revolver with numerous features that set it apart from the rest. None of these were really mentioned and this clown didn't even understand how the basic lockup of a Colt Python worked. The new Python is an excellent revolver. I want to see it succeed and I want to see Colt succeed. This review was so incompetently executed it presented virtually no reason to purchase a Python over a 686, which to the connoisseur, there is plenty of reason to do so. This article fails to inform average shooters OR connoisseurs of the essential differences that justify $1500.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,319 Posts
I get your point...believe me, I really do. But do you think the new generation of gun buyers who have been brought up on Tupperware guns in movies, TV shows and computer games are any more knowledgeable? Even if they are, I doubt if they care. Look at Gunbroker ads in how retail sellers describe not just Pythons but other Colts and many other guns in general...they're no more knowledgeable or using hyperbole to convince potential buyers or outright lying in their ads. The amount of disinformation is staggering. Far too many sellers think that because the gun says "Colt" on it that have a bar of gold in their hands.

Speaking for myself there's a lot of information I always assumed was correct about the Python and other Colts was wrong and I discovered my error here on the Forum from those who are genuine experts and have knowledge from having "been there and done that" when I generally only read about it.

Essentially...when you're bent out of shape due to such a review...write a letter to the editor of the magazine. Maybe it will be printed...maybe not...but you're trying to get your point across. If the editors and publishers don't know the article was missing correct information things will never change.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,272 Posts
I feel your pain and that's why I stopped subscribing to G&A and a couple of others. If it's not black plastic or the latest and greatest AR knock-off, it is relegated to the "Oh yeah, this" columns.
I still glance through some of them from time to time when a friends gives me his old copies but I just don't read them like I used to.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
93 Posts
I fear the OP does not appreciate that ALL magazines are simply folders to hold adverts. Does not matter the subject, they are beholden to their advertisers and no doubt all "stories" are written by and in close coordination with the sponsors. The articles are simply expanded ads written by the manufacturers. There are a few non-advertising sponsored exceptions, gun-tests.com, practical-sailor.com, etc....
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
222 Posts
Hey Y’all,

Colt Collector 67, EXCELLENT review of the Guns and Ammo review. I was equally underwhelmed with the review. Love the way you listed the deficiencies in Mr. Wood’s prose. I purchased a new Python (6” barrel - as it was the only pistol available when my wife suggested it as a belated Christmas present from her) and am seriously impressed with this new Colt. I have fired Pythons since the early 1980’s and think the 2020 version is superior In many ways to the Pythons of days gone. The double action is amazing in my opinion. I also own a 6” S&W 686 that has had a lot of custom trigger work done on it . . . the new Python is better out of the box.

Take Care!
Tom
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,556 Posts
It's all subjective....
I have six Pythons and two of the new ones.... the other day I took out my 59 python and thought eh this gun isn't amazing it is cool looking but hardly amazing. Then I took out my pre-model 27 and a registered magnum...two hand built brick-sh*% house feeling guns fit and finish amazing. But its my opinion subjective....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
587 Posts
I fear the OP does not appreciate that ALL magazines are simply folders to hold adverts. Does not matter the subject, they are beholden to their advertisers and no doubt all "stories" are written by and in close coordination with the sponsors. The articles are simply expanded ads written by the manufacturers. There are a few non-advertising sponsored exceptions, gun-tests.com, practical-sailor.com, etc....
That about sums it up and it is true. In the modern world where the rags are on the way out (most are working on a digital presence) with falling sales it is especially true.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
73 Posts
Discussion Starter #13
I get your point...believe me, I really do. But do you think the new generation of gun buyers who have been brought up on Tupperware guns in movies, TV shows and computer games are any more knowledgeable? Even if they are, I doubt if they care. Look at Gunbroker ads in how retail sellers describe not just Pythons but other Colts and many other guns in general...they're no more knowledgeable or using hyperbole to convince potential buyers or outright lying in their ads. The amount of disinformation is staggering. Far too many sellers think that because the gun says "Colt" on it that have a bar of gold in their hands.

Speaking for myself there's a lot of information I always assumed was correct about the Python and other Colts was wrong and I discovered my error here on the Forum from those who are genuine experts and have knowledge from having "been there and done that" when I generally only read about it.

Essentially...when you're bent out of shape due to such a review...write a letter to the editor of the magazine. Maybe it will be printed...maybe not...but you're trying to get your point across. If the editors and publishers don't know the article was missing correct information things will never change.
Great Point
Snidely!
Hey Y’all,

Colt Collector 67, EXCELLENT review of the Guns and Ammo review. I was equally underwhelmed with the review. Love the way you listed the deficiencies in Mr. Wood’s prose. I purchased a new Python (6” barrel - as it was the only pistol available when my wife suggested it as a belated Christmas present from her) and am seriously impressed with this new Colt. I have fired Pythons since the early 1980’s and think the 2020 version is superior In many ways to the Pythons of days gone. The double action is amazing in my opinion. I also own a 6” S&W 686 that has had a lot of custom trigger work done on it . . . the new Python is better out of the box.

Take Care!
Tom
Thanks Tom!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8 Posts
I couldn’t agree more. Unfortunately given what we are watching in our cities today it is painfully obvious that our education system needs to be totally rebuilt. Personally I’m surprised Keith spelled Colt correctly in his article.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,272 Posts
I couldn’t agree more. Unfortunately given what we are watching in our cities today it is painfully obvious that our education system needs to be totally rebuilt. Personally I’m surprised Keith spelled Colt correctly in his article.
I respectfully disagree.
The educational system is in need of some tweeking but not torn down and rebuilt. What we have now is a system that is the result of years of people who have never done the job making decisions about how it can be done better.
I am also unsure how the flawed education system relates to gun magazines in general and the original Python review.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
45 Posts
I know. Most writers aren’t old enough! When I’m at the range, most shooters have never seen one and some never heard of it. Mine’s a 4” nickel from ‘75
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
383 Posts
Blame the Internet. Writing and photography used to be paying jobs. Now that the Internet is filled with free content, blogs, videos, etc, print publications are struggling to stay afloat and cut their staff and the pay. I have been writing for magazines since the late 1980s and it's to the point I have told a few magazines to take a hike. The pay is low and the demands are high. For $200 I had to do dozens of hours of research, interview biologists, contact successful hunters, and then write a 2,000-word article on a deadline. That kind of stress for that kind of money isn't worth it. In some cases, I was making $5 an hour. The crazy thing is that $200 was high pay compared to other markets. Some magazines pay $20-$35 for a piece.

In reality, some editor probably approached someone like me and asked if he could write a piece on a Python if they sent him one to play with for a few weeks. In my case, I would do some research, talk to folks like you, if I could find someone like you, shoot a few hundred rounds, take some photos, and write the piece based on my limited knowledge. And no, gun writers don't get to keep the guns. I have to buy any I want to keep at prices slightly below what you can buy them for on Bud's.

It is true that gun manufactures will pull advertising from magazines over a bad review. If the review gets pulled before publication, the writer gets zero pay. I have seen it. In today's market, gun magazines aren't swimming in ad revenue so it's either shut down the presses and lock the doors or do what the gun manufacturers want.

In all seriousness, who really reads an article to decide if they should buy a gun? The biggest reason folks buy a gun magazine is to read articles to justify their recent purchase or their next purchase.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
242 Posts
A question re "sleeved barrels" - certainly true that tensioning is the intent with respect to Dab\n Wesson use of the set up - my 8" Model 15 DW does more than hold its own against my 8" nickel Python 38 Target model. I'm not so sure of Smith & Wesson use of the two piece sleeved barrel. It certainly came out with Smith's economizing on things such as finish, MIM and extensive use of cold rolled pins and no groove top straps. If not for economy it may have created that impression.
 
1 - 20 of 26 Posts
Top