[paracord]

Checking my 4.25 gun, the SA trigger and movement is minimal. Mine actually is quite good and breaks crisply.

Your gun may be an outlier and have excessive travel. Seems to be a bit of randomness on these new Pythons. Overall, I am impressed and these new guns are excellent.

mine is exactly like the video in the link you sent.

 

[357Addict]

mine is exactly like the video in the link you sent.

Interesting. I don't think my 4.25 Python has nearly as much movement in the SA as in the video.

 

[paracord]

Interesting. I don't think my 4.25 Python has nearly as much movement in the SA as in the video.

That is interesting. For all that you hear about the accuracy of MIM and the whiz bang manufacturing processes they are employing today, you'd think there'd be VERY little variance in the dimensions of the hammer and sear surfaces from gun to gun. They obviously intended to have a big step in the sear to dumb down the SA pull. I've heard others say theirs doesn't have that much rearward travel too....you'd think they'd all be almost mirror images of one another.

 

[357Addict]

That is interesting. For all that you hear about the accuracy of MIM and the whiz bang manufacturing processes they are employing today, you'd think there'd be VERY little variance in the dimensions of the hammer and sear surfaces from gun to gun. They obviously intended to have a big step in the sear to dumb down the SA pull. I've heard others say theirs doesn't have that much rearward travel too....you'd think they'd all be almost mirror images of one another.

It looked to me like the SA sear surface is fitted/ground by hand and if so there can definitely be some variation.

 

[7.62Kolectr]

First time seeing the inside of one of the new guns
Nice.

 

[Alan Woodward]

Hope you can get that back together, lol.

 

[weagle99]

OP did you remember to put loctite on all the sideplate screws? A necessity for this model.

I wonder what this action could be if it were fine polished internally like the oldest Pythons.

 

[357Addict]

Hope you can get that back together, lol.

Was actually very easy. Internals have been much simplified.

 

[357Addict]

OP did you remember to put loctite on all the sideplate screws? A necessity for this model.

I wonder what this action could be if it were fine polished internally like the oldest Pythons.

Indeed I did use a very small dab of Loctite.

I have several S&W's that have very nice, smooth DA triggers and my new Python beats them. Most of the internal parts have a very high polish on them. Likely from being put in a mechanical polisher with ceramic polishing stones. But the stirrup and transfer bar are unpolished MIM parts which definitely could be improved with some hand fitting and polishing. The rebound lever (or whatever its called now) also is another area for improvement.

 

[DarkLord]

As a mostly retired gunsmith, I really like what I see under that hood. They look like they'll be very easy to work on. Now I kinda want one.

 

[paracord]

OP did you remember to put loctite on all the sideplate screws? A necessity for this model.

I wonder what this action could be if it were fine polished internally like the oldest Pythons.

This action is more polished than any of the old Pythons, believe it or not. At least if you're just talking about the smoothness of the surfaces of the parts.

I've done a side by side comparison with v-spring Pythons, OMTs from the 30s, etc.

 

[RevolverGuy38]

We (at Heffron Precision©) offer Precision Action & Trigger Tuning© for $195. All contact points are polished in jigs we designed and built to keep the parts true. We do alter part geometry in a couple of locations. We do NOT alter or replace springs. When the gun is complete it offers much smoother action cycling, a 2.75 - 3.00 lbs SA trigger pull that is CRISP. Zero creep. The DA trigger pull runs around 8.75 lbs. We have tuned well in excess of 1,000 2017 and later Colts with Pythons taking up 600+ of those. We constantly hear how our tuned 2020 Pythons are better than the originals in EVERY way. Check us out www.heffronprecision.com.

 

[azshot]

While it's impressive to see the inside of any revolver, and I'm glad Colt it doing them again, I'm not sure I'm so enthusiastic of the interior finish. Geometry and function, maybe. What I see is a lot of CNC routing chatter marks at worse, or unsmoothed interior at best. I see lots of mold marks from sintered metal castings. And I see a pebbly finish on the hammer and trigger that are visible to the handler. This from taking cast/sintered/rough parts and throwing them in a tumbler to kind of polish the flat places, while also rounding off the edges.

Compared to a pre-war New Service, or Army Special, or Officers Model, or legacy Python....a lot less hand finishing and fitting in these modern Pythons - built to be assembled with little human touch.
New Service:

New Python:

 

[azshot]

This action is more polished than any of the old Pythons, believe it or not. At least if you're just talking about the smoothness of the surfaces of the parts.

I've done a side by side comparison with v-spring Pythons, OMTs from the 30s, etc.

I do not concur.

Old Python interior:

New:

 

[smithnframe]

Have you compared it to a vintage Python? That would be interesting!

 

[RevolverGuy38]

Based on what I've seen in more than 32 years of working on Colt double-action revolvers, the new Pythons exhibit a better internal finish than the old Pythons. I have included a pic that is very typical of old Pythons with their wood-rasp internal finish. The old Pythons are beautiful guns, but the new Pythons are higher

tolerance, more consistent, have improved internal finishing, and are stronger. The few MIM parts that are used in the new Python use new technology so the hardness goes completely through the part instead of residing only on the surface. The design changes were done to improve strength and in my opinion, were long overdue. The new Colt Double-Action Lineup is a big leap forward. I just finished working on a 1957 Python. Nice, but not finished internally like the new Python.

 

[azshot]

I showed an old Python that looks better than the one you show.

 

[SnidelyWhiplash]

I think we need to remember the early Pythons were built by only a very few masters who made them as true custom guns rather than assembly line guns. When demand went up more and more assemblers built Pythons...maybe Colt's better and more experienced assemblers but still production line guns that might show more internal machining marks than the early examples. To compare against an older Python maybe we need to know what time period it came from.

The new Python is designed to be built by using machinery that is far more accurate dimensionally than most older guns by any maker and requires less fitting.

 

[sublimert70]

Does it really matter? The past is the past... Change is constant and, for me, it's a matter of hoping that Colt offers a blued Python. This is not a desire for the past but simply that I prefer blued over stainless, nickel, etc. Since I collect Colts by decade and it's 2021, I have 8 more years for it to appear... 😂. In the meanwhile, I'll shoot the '78 and '81.

 

[SnidelyWhiplash]

Does it really matter? The past is the past... Change is constant and, for me, it's a matter of hoping that Colt offers a blued Python. This is not a desire for the past but simply that I prefer blued over stainless, nickel, etc. Since I collect Colts by decade and it's 2021, I have 8 more years for it to appear... 😂. In the meanwhile, I'll shoot the '78 and '81.

I agree...nothing beats the appearance of a Royal Blue finish...superior durability of stainless notwithstanding. If Colt would release a new Python in ordnance steel with Royal Blue rather than a coating over stainless I'd rush to be first in line (at MSRP).