I’m fortunate to have a modern 586 Classic (purchased last year) and a new Python and thought I would give a brief rundown between the two based on my own observations.
![719318]( "719318")
The trigger is one of the biggest differences that I’ve noticed. The Python has an incredibly smooth double action pull but the single action pull is heavy. The S&W is the complete opposite with a double action pull with considerable stacking but a hair trigger in single action. I find this ironic when looking at the hammers on the two. The Python has the iconic, wide target hammer that is easy to get to. Meanwhile the 586 has a small nub hammer that makes single action seem more like an afterthought.
![719319]( "719319")
The grips are another difference. The Python has thinner laminate grips and the S&W has wider full grain grips. The S&W also has sharper checkering that gives a better purchase
![719320]( "719320")
The rear sight is another difference. Colt kind of dropped the ball on this one. The windage is non click adjustable and has to be locked down with a small Allen key after you zero it. Not a dealbreaker though, once you lock it down it seems to stay and you shouldn’t have to mess with it again. The S&W is click adjustable like the older pythons and has a white outline.
![719323]( "719323")
The Colt did a nice job on the recessed crown. S&W made no attempt on the 586.
![719326]( "719326")
The fit and finish is excellent on both of these quality revolvers, but I have to give a slight edge to the Python. The machining on the crane and frame matchup is impressive compared to the 586. Although, I will say that Smith and Wesson has done a good job on the polishing and bluing. Something that Colt seems unwilling to even attempt these days.
![719327]( "719327")
In closing, I love both but prefer the Colt. The double action trigger is something to behold. Also, the classic lines on the Python just draw you in. The Hillary Hole in modern S&W’s is also kind of a killjoy. I would be interested in hearing the other members observations between modern Colts and S&Ws.
The trigger is one of the biggest differences that I’ve noticed. The Python has an incredibly smooth double action pull but the single action pull is heavy. The S&W is the complete opposite with a double action pull with considerable stacking but a hair trigger in single action. I find this ironic when looking at the hammers on the two. The Python has the iconic, wide target hammer that is easy to get to. Meanwhile the 586 has a small nub hammer that makes single action seem more like an afterthought.
The grips are another difference. The Python has thinner laminate grips and the S&W has wider full grain grips. The S&W also has sharper checkering that gives a better purchase
The rear sight is another difference. Colt kind of dropped the ball on this one. The windage is non click adjustable and has to be locked down with a small Allen key after you zero it. Not a dealbreaker though, once you lock it down it seems to stay and you shouldn’t have to mess with it again. The S&W is click adjustable like the older pythons and has a white outline.
The Colt did a nice job on the recessed crown. S&W made no attempt on the 586.
The fit and finish is excellent on both of these quality revolvers, but I have to give a slight edge to the Python. The machining on the crane and frame matchup is impressive compared to the 586. Although, I will say that Smith and Wesson has done a good job on the polishing and bluing. Something that Colt seems unwilling to even attempt these days.
In closing, I love both but prefer the Colt. The double action trigger is something to behold. Also, the classic lines on the Python just draw you in. The Hillary Hole in modern S&W’s is also kind of a killjoy. I would be interested in hearing the other members observations between modern Colts and S&Ws.
