Colt Forum banner

1 - 9 of 9 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
144 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
What is the difference between the Trooper MkIII and the Python besides the lug? They look very similar
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,312 Posts
Trooper MK III has a plunger spring action vs V spring, side plate screw is farther forward than on the python, partial lug vs full lug, grips have different styles of checkering (not raised and goes all the way to the bottom vs raised checkering), thin hammer vs wide spur, elongated hammer, silver medallions vs gold medallions … just to name a few differences.
 

·
*** ColtForum MVP ***
Joined
·
14,670 Posts
These are two totally different designs with only the Colt name in common.
No parts can interchange between the models, and the frames and actions are totally different.

The Python was the last of the 1890's action designs, and the same as the 1908 Army Special design.
It used forged steel action parts that were installed by a Master fitter who stoned and even bent parts to assemble the gun.
It used the original action design that used a rebounding hammer and a safety block to prevent firing unless the trigger was pulled.
The action was a complicated design powered by a "Vee" shaped mainspring.
Each part served at least two totally separate functions.
Internal parts can often be refitted to correct wear, and can be further polished and tuned for a even better action feel.
The old Colt action design was noted for giving better accuracy, and the Python was designed to be the most accurate double action revolver possible.
The Royal Blue finish was the best ever done on a production gun.

The Mark III design was Colt's first transfer bar safety-ignition design, which Colt was the first to use on a modern revolver. Virtually every DA revolver designed since basically copies Colt's design.
The action was the first to use sintered, molded powdered steel action parts. In the Mark III both the hammer and trigger were sintered steel, changed to cast steel on the later Colt models like the Mark V.
These parts were given a glass hard surface, and were molded to such close tolerances they could be assembled by a lesser trained worker by simply pulling parts from a bin and test fitting until one fit and functioned.
This transfer bar action is far simpler then the Python action, and parts cannot be repaired, polished, or refitted. Instead, new parts are installed.
The action used all coil springs including the mainspring. This gives a much different feel then the Python.
The blued finish is not as polished as the Python's Royal Blue, but is still more highly polished then other brands.
Accuracy is excellent but not up to Python Standards.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
531 Posts
The responses you’ve received address the visual and mechanical differences. Personally, what I really notice is the “feel” of the action. The Python, for me, is so smooth compared to the Trooper. There’s nothing wrong with the Trooper, it’s good but not Python smooth.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
144 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
These are two totally different designs with only the Colt name in common.
No parts can interchange between the models, and the frames and actions are totally different.

The Python was the last of the 1890's action designs, and the same as the 1908 Army Special design.
It used forged steel action parts that were installed by a Master fitter who stoned and even bent parts to assemble the gun.
It used the original action design that used a rebounding hammer and a safety block to prevent firing unless the trigger was pulled.
The action was a complicated design powered by a "Vee" shaped mainspring.
Each part served at least two totally separate functions.
Internal parts can often be refitted to correct wear, and can be further polished and tuned for a even better action feel.
The old Colt action design was noted for giving better accuracy, and the Python was designed to be the most accurate double action revolver possible.
The Royal Blue finish was the best ever done on a production gun.

The Mark III design was Colt's first transfer bar safety-ignition design, which Colt was the first to use on a modern revolver. Virtually every DA revolver designed since basically copies Colt's design.
The action was the first to use sintered, molded powdered steel action parts. In the Mark III both the hammer and trigger were sintered steel, changed to cast steel on the later Colt models like the Mark V.
These parts were given a glass hard surface, and were molded to such close tolerances they could be assembled by a lesser trained worker by simply pulling parts from a bin and test fitting until one fit and functioned.
This transfer bar action is far simpler then the Python action, and parts cannot be repaired, polished, or refitted. Instead, new parts are installed.
The action used all coil springs including the mainspring. This gives a much different feel then the Python.
The blued finish is not as polished as the Python's Royal Blue, but is still more highly polished then other brands.
Accuracy is excellent but not up to Python Standards.
Was the old Colt Officer's Model on the same design? I think the first of those used a counterclockwise rotation of the cylinder. I know the Officers Models were highly finished Colts as well. I have one of the old ones made in 1923 with a 7 1/2 barrel.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,327 Posts
The old Officers Model used the same action as the Python, Army Special, Official Police and original Trooper. All using this action had a clockwise cylinder rotation...as do the Mark III revolvers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Straycat23

·
*** ColtForum MVP ***
Joined
·
14,670 Posts
The first Officer's Model made from 1904 to 1908 used the old Colt New Army & Navy model as the basis.

Beginning in 1908 all Colt medium frame revolvers, including the Officer's Models used the Army Special frame and action, including the Python.
 
1 - 9 of 9 Posts
Top